‘The price of democracy:’ Lengthy appeals process in Petaluma

Filing an appeal was never something Renee and Bill Tomrose expected they’d be doing when a sprawling residence was proposed for the vacant lots behind their home.

When they bought their west Petaluma home in 2003, they did it knowing that area would eventually be developed, and their pristine city views and panoramic vistas of Sonoma Mountain would be reduced.

Then the story poles went up in February, and what was proposed was far from what they expected. They claimed specific provisions in the planning guidelines for their neighborhood were not adhered to, and their requests for what they saw as reasonable alterations to preserve their privacy fell on deaf ears. On March 12, despite their objections, the planning commission approved the project.

“It just felt wrong,” Bill Tomrose said. “It felt like we didn’t even get a clean shake.”

Two weeks later, the Tomroses filed Petaluma’s third appeal of a deliberative body’s decision in the last nine months.

Before the planning commission’s approval of a Safeway gas station project, which provoked the first of the spike in appeals since last June, it had been more than three years since a citizen’s rebuke of a committee verdict.

Suddenly, this trend has raised questions of whether Petaluma’s guiding documents and policies are at odds with the wishes of the public, and if local officials can accurately mirror the constituents they’re entrusted to serve.

“This is our first experience (with local government), so we didn’t know what to expect,” said Renee Tomrose. “But we did expect more than we received.”

Under Chapter 24 of Petaluma’s Implementing Zoning Ordinance, a 226-page charter that guides the city’s development practices, citizens are granted the power to appeal to the city council municipal decisions made administratively or at a public hearing.

Before the Tomroses, three separate appeals were filed against the Petaluma Public Art Committee’s Feb. 28 decision to approve the final concept of the polarizing Water Street public art project, “Fine Balance,” known by many as “bathtub on stilts.” The council is scheduled to discuss the appeal on May 6.

An outspoken group has voiced concerns for the past year, and mobilized against the PPAC’s site-specific installation for the downtown promenade. Still, the public art committee has continued to move the project forward since it has complied with regulations, and every step of the process has been taken as mandated.

Earlier this month, after months of delays and contentious public debate, the council denied the appeal of the Safeway gas station project for South McDowell Boulevard. The project satisfied every municipal requirement and was sited correctly based on zoning rules, but led to a raucous public outcry due to its close proximity to multiple schools.

After the Safeway hearing concluded, the council called for changes to the zoning ordinance that could allow for more discretion with gas station developments, acknowledging a regulatory shortcoming that kept them from making a decision the community wanted.

To keep it current, the city makes amendments to the ordinance often, and Mayor Teresa Barrett is open to tweaking its procedural process if it restores the public’s faith in its institutions.

“Having to come to an appeal means the process is broken and people aren’t happy with the outcome,” she said.

Councilman Dave King said constituents believe the council has more power than it actually does when it’s fulfilling its judicial role at an appeal hearing. The recent Safeway decision is one example of that, he said.

And while forcing the council to rehear issues decided by its lower bodies burdens city staff with more time spent on single issues, so be it, he said.

“I think it comes with the territory if the city is going to establish an appellate process, which I think is fair,” King said. “Occasionally, the staff is going to be tied up on that. It’s the price of democracy, and it’s worth paying.”

Patty Paula, a longtime resident and one of the appellants of the Water Street project, agrees.

Like countless others, the rise of Donald Trump has compelled citizens like Paula to reengage with government, and ensure that the complacency that has fostered political gridlock nationally gets rooted out locally.

For her, aside from getting the art installation moved from a cherished site that she’s been running along for more than three decades, it’s about using her voice to move the needle on an issue she cares about.

“If you can do something locally that you feel passionately about, that’s what you should do, and that’s what we can do,” Paula said. “If everybody has that attitude, then the change occurs. I look at this in a really positive light, and I don’t look at it as us versus them. Let’s just talk about it more.”

(Contact News Editor Yousef Baig at yousef.baig@arguscourier.com or 776-8461, and on Twitter @YousefBaig.)