HomeMy WebLinkAbout4/18/2017 Item 1, Mourenza
From: Lydia Mourenza \[ ]
Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2017 9:27 AM
To: E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org>
Cc: Christianson, Carlyn <cchristianson@slocity.org>; Gomez, Aaron <agomez@slocity.org>; Pease, Andy
<apease@slocity.org>; Harmon, Heidi <hharmon@slocity.org>; Rivoire, Dan <DRivoire@slocity.org>
Subject: City Council 4/18/2017 APPEAL FEES, PLEASE POST AGENDA CORRESPONDENCE
The fee you establish for Appeals to the City Council is a testament to
your commitment to open government and citizen participation. The
higher the fee the lower your commitment. Residents Appeals related to
development projects have typically centered on the failure of Advisory
Bodies to follow the general plan due to their reliance upon recommendations
by your staff, whether they be at will (City Manager or City Attorney) or
employees. Over the last few years the Community Development Department
has increasingly taken on the role of advocate for developers. The staff reports
present the developers case without including an analysis of the proposed
project with reference to City policies and matters to be determined.
Significant issues are frequently omitted from reports, others are presented as
facts when actually representing the staff members opinion. Staff frequently
provide inaccurate (alt facts) information to Advisory Bodies at their hearings
where there is no opportunity for public response to correct such assertions.
You, via staff, have worked with developers in avoiding compliance with
procedures, have consistently failed to the utilize the Public Engagement
Manual. Untimely notice complaints have been met by response from your
legal department that compliance with the Brown Act requires the agenda be
posted 72 hours in advance and there is no actual entitlement to provision of
staff reports or supporting documents prior to meeting. Advisory Body
agendas have been manipulated, removing items scheduled at public hearings,
and going so far as to alter minutes to eliminate the discussion and action
taken.
The CITIZENS OF SAN LUIS OBISPO are being required to monitor our
own City to enforce compliance with our Municipal Code, General Plan, Land
use, Zoning, multiple Ordinances and Regulations etc. etc. etc. It is
unconscionable Charging City Residents to perform the job of the staff, who
are paid by our taxes. The City Council is reportable to the Residents, the staff
1
is reportable to you. As the Council it is your responsibility to direct the staff.
You need to be able to rely upon your staff. Unfortunately the current culture
of the CDD, with the extensive power placed in the hands of the director, is
disregarding the protections of the stated human and natural communities,
urban forest, community designed guidelines, cultural heritage, safety
standards etc. to promote the cause of developers.
Why aren't Residents afforded Consideration and dare we claim Respect
when demanding compliance with the General Plan? We are written off with
the rote response "Change is hard" and referred to as NIMBY's. When public
engagement, adequate notice and unbiased staff reports become the NORM a
nominal fee may be appropriate. So long as the City Citizens are performing
the work of the staff they pay, it is inappropriate to charge an Appeal filing
fee.
OPEN GOVERNMENT AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION serve the best
interests of the CITY and its RESIDENTS. DEMONSTRATE YOUR
COMMITMENT and PLEASE ELIMINATE or REDUCE the APPEAL
FEE to $100.
LYDIA & BOB MOURENZA. Anholm
Sent from my iPad
2