48° SUNNY,
New planning commissioners may be seated next week
Last Modified: Thursday, October 29, 2009 at 5:00 p.m.
Petaluma City Council members on Monday are set to reconfigure a new Planning Commission in what has been billed either as a move toward efficiency or a power-grab by the slow-growth majority.
- 3rd time’s the charm for new planners
- Petaluma planning controversy returns to agenda
- New planning commissioners OK'd, but lawsuit goes on
- Council tweaks policy to OK new planners
- Future makeup of planning board hazy
- Planning Commission's first meeting canceled
- Ousted planning commissioners sue city
- New planning body to hold workshop
- 17 Petalumans apply for 6 planning seats
In June, the council dissolved its former Planning Commission and the Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee, combining them into one seven-member board.
But three former planning commissioners sued the city, saying they were illegally dismissed from their volunteer jobs because the council violated its own rules for replacing sitting commission members.
Since then, the council has passed four new ordinances that change those rules. On Monday, the council is set to reappoint a new, combined board that will consider development proposals in the city of 56,000.
"It's been frustrating. That's the best way of saying it," said Spence Burton, one of the three dismissed planning commissioners who filed suit. "None of us wanted to sue. The three of us are politically worlds apart, but we agreed on one thing. If you're a city, you do things legally."
Members of the council's 4-3 majority — a common vote along political lines in Petaluma development issues — say the consolidation will make planning more efficient and cost-effective.
Those who voted among the minority, though, say the majority simply wanted to do away with commissioners and committee members who think differently than they do. "A naked power grab," is how Councilman Mike Healy described it.
The changes also require that all large developments such as shopping centers and housing subdivisions automatically go to the City Council for final approval.
Petaluma had the three-tiered structure for more than 30 years. Several cities in Sonoma County use a multi-level planning approval, including Santa Rosa, Sonoma, Sebastopol and Cotati.
In the interim, a new board was appointed.
The new Planning Commission to be voted on Monday is billed as a "reconstituted" board.
"As kid, I had reconstituted orange juice. Reconstitution never made things better," Burton said. "What's most frustrating to me is that it's just not good politics. Now in the next election cycle, the new council could fire everyone again."
Sixteen Petaluma residents, including seven former members of either the Planning Commission or the Site Plan Committee, have applied for six vacancies. A city council liaison acts as the seventh member.
Terms are four years, but to stagger term-ending dates, as many as three members may be appointed for one, two or three-year terms.
You can reach Staff Writer Lori A. Carter at 762-7297 or e-mail at lori.carter@pressdemocrat.com.
Next Article in Community-News
-
Petaluma's former police chief DeWitt dies at age 65
Former Petaluma Police Chief Dennis DeWitt, 65, died Saturday of cancer.
...
search
Local Business Directory
post your stuff
Petaluma360.com is here for you to post your comments, photos, news and events with the community. Post it now!
Your Voice
Have something to say? Join the conversation!
Your Photos
Trying out photography? Show off your stuff here.
Your News Items
Want to report the news? Have an item to share with everyone? Send us your news so we can share it with the community.
Your Events
Submit your area events to encourage others in your community to attend.
For Your Mobile
Take us with you anywhere, anytime at http://m.petaluma360.comYou'll find a number of new technology features available from this site. With personalized news sent straight to your mobile device. SIGN UP
Email Newsletter
Sign up
for our e-mail services and receive your local news, sports, weather and more.
View Sample
Comments
Only moderator-approved comments are shown on this page. To see all comments, please visit the forum.Post a comment | View all comments on this topic.
October 31, 2009 10:12:02 am
RE: Link
Has the lawsuit been dropped since the council revised its policy to allow new appointees on fewer than five votes?
October 31, 2009 8:13:32 pm
October 31, 2009 8:13:58 pm
So this is how the county supervisor want-a-be will handle things at the county level. I guess being 2 million in the hole is nothing to worry about. We can just cut some more staff. May be close a fire station. Priorities!!!!!!!!!!
November 1, 2009 8:14:32 am
New article from the PD - Link
November 1, 2009 10:28:55 am
This is the most disgusting chapter in Petaluma politics I have ever seen. Our council majority has no interest in following laws which are intended to assure fairness and protection of the system. Instead, the operate by means of backroom deals to the detriment of the city. I can't wait to be rid of our mayor. I hate to admit that I used to be a supporter of hers.
November 2, 2009 9:54:19 am
observer.....there seems to be an echo in here I whole heartedly agree.......
November 2, 2009 11:18:05 am
DITTO
November 2, 2009 12:15:50 pm
I have a question, with the old system nothing made it through the system as far as new growth, so why is everyone so upset of now having a streamlined system? (as streamlined as govt. gets)
November 2, 2009 12:31:51 pm
and this new system would be called streamlined because why? our mayor say's so? come on now. the system was not streamlined before nor is it/will it be now. if this group truly wanted to streamline this process they would done one of or a combination of several things (1) let the folks who still had time left on their term with the experience fulfill their term instead of placing folks on there with no experience whatsoever (except for the few) (2) would have taken commissioner chris arras's suggestions that were part of his email to them (3) would have taken the advice of the dcac's recommendations for the development review process. instead they did none.....they did something that was discussed only within their circle. too bad really.
November 2, 2009 12:36:25 pm
ptlmafrnd, I completely agree with all 3 of your logical bullet points. The majority council wanted their own people in there because they do not support development! It was tactless how they handled this.
Post a comment | View all comments