|
1. MONDAY AT THE END OF THE DAY IS THE LAST
CHANCE TO REGISTER TO VOTE. DO IT ONLINE HERE: http://registertovote.ca.gov
2. This Tuesday there is again the General
Plan (GP) and the Planning Commission is on the hook to get it right.
So far, the Council and the PC have ignored many State General
Plan Codes and deadlines but now it seems they must meet a deadline in
Nov. Check this doc, proof of their last snubbing of the State.
It is the last mandatory SH General Plan Progress Report which
the City is supposed to file annually -- not filed since 2010! So
much for deadlines.
The GP is loaded with "substantial"
changes and errors, guaranteed to generate controversy, lawsuits, legal
letters, neighbor fights and citizen action for years to come, like:
¥ Listing
available housing locations in the new Housing Element when they have
prevented streets from getting to them -- impossible. The Housing Element
and the changed GP are not consistent since the Council did not even have a
Housing Element when they changed the GP!
¥
The Council revised the Water
section to state that our contract with Napa was take & pay when
it is take or pay, as it was in the prior draft. See this invoice which shows that SH paid
for water it did not use. They don't get it and have made a costly mistake
that should not be built into the GP.
¥
Admit that SH does NOT have
an agreement with the Wine Train or the PUC as stated in the GP Draft. They
have a ruling that says the Wine Train is not
a public transportation utility but is similar to the Skunk Train -- that's
a different ballgame when the Council decides to make it part of the GP
Circulation Element for a City.
¥ Pretending
that bike travel will replace automobile travel here -- a fantasy. With Council
changes, there is now little in the GP, such as parallel streets,
connected neighborhoods, housing near downtown or more businesses on side
streets, to help with our horrendous traffic. The Council changes dump
all the traffic on 29 which produces gridlock. Some changes even create
more traffic, like new tourist attractions.
Staff must identify all changes, indicate which
they believe to be substantial and why and publish them clearly for
everyone. It is the City Staff's professional responsibility to do that.
City politicians are not professional planners. If Staff cannot do that
they should ethically recommend passage of the 2010 GP. If the Planning
Commission approves such a flawed document and saddles the City with the
consequences, many issues will probably end up in court -- gets expensive.
3. Cornwell on Sculatti.
Sandy
/
|