Develpment of city facilities should first go to the people to define the desired scope of the project. After that input, it then goes to staff to develop alternatives for further review and commentary. The current process avoids this step and limits the choices.
When the city was formed, the council went to the people to set the goals for the city. After all, the city belongs to the people not to the city staff or the council. Our city's General Plan was a result of the Goals Report of 1974 prepared by over 200 of our residents. In 2002, when the city was looking to do a major update and revise the General Plan, it formed a committee of some 15 leaders in the community to take on the task and make recommendations to the council. I had lobbied to go back to a resident committee and update the Goals Report first. In this way the residents would have the opportunity to express their views on their city General Plan update. Because this approach was rejected, I formed a volunteer group of over 200 residents to take on the Goals Report review task. The result was a reaffirmation of the original goals.
Over time, the city has moved away from the early involvement of our residents in the planning for the city and its properties. I want to return to our roots in the process and reconnect the people to the process. This need not be a formal city sponsored group with all the restrictions of Brown Act formality. After all it is only an advisory group much like the 2002 group I formed that revisited the city's Goals Report. The Council Of Homeowner Association could be the lead in this effort. This would give the council and staff a sense of what the people want for their city.
The city has a number of properties it can consider for some improvement, such as Grandview Park, Ladera Linda, Abalone cove just to mention a few. The current approach is to have staff suggest development of these properties, contract with a design firm and present alternatives to the public for review and comment. This leaves the impression that variations on the theme are the only options. I would like to see the process change. Start with a workshop wherein the city merely indicates it has the money and the desire to address a particular parcel. Get the input from the people as to what they would like to see on the property. It should include an opportunity for all the city residents to participate. However, the emphasis should be on the desires of the surrounding community. After all, they are the most likely users and the most affected. From this effort, alternatives can be developed and perhaps ultimately implemented.
|
