Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Process topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee and planning commission clash on final-edit authority for general plan draft
Summary
Members debated whether the Community Development Committee must incorporate planning commission chair Wayne’s requested edits before forwarding the draft; staff said committee recommendation, planning commission review, and separate council review are all part of the normal process.
The committee spent substantial time discussing process: what changes the community development committee should make before sending the draft general plan to the planning commission, and how much final editing authority the planning commission and city council should exercise.
Wayne, chair of the planning commission, insisted the commission should receive a version that includes the specific corrections he requested before the planning commission’s review. Committee members including Carrie and others argued the committee has autonomy to forward its own recommended draft and that the planning commission and council can each propose further edits; staff advised that it is common for planning commission and council members to introduce edits when the draft reaches their bodies.
Daniel, the staff member, described the standard workflow: the committee makes a recommendation, the planning commission reviews and may redline, and then the council makes the final decision — and staff will provide the council with both the planning commission’s recommended version and the committee’s recommended version if council members request them. Committee members urged transparency and recording of who proposed which edits at each stage.
The committee agreed to continue working through wording and goal edits, to circulate a consolidated updated document after staff incorporates the agreed changes, and to meet again (tentatively Nov. 17 at 5 p.m.) for final review before sending materials to the planning commission.
