Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Redevelopment Boards topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
CRA debates future of east side, west side and urban core redevelopment boards; consultant review set
Summary
Board members discussed options for three redevelopment advisory boards, including whether to merge them, keep them as sunshine boards, or convert to working/community engagement groups. Several members and staff said the urban core board has not met for about two years; staff expects consultant recommendations in early February and a March CRA
Board member Breyer asked the Community Redevelopment Agency to reconsider how the east side, west side and urban core redevelopment boards should be structured, saying the urban core advisory board has not functioned for roughly two years and that residents in that area have lacked representation during the redevelopment-plan process.
"We've essentially not had an urban core board for 2 full solid years," Breyer said, arguing that the board's absence left a large portion of the CRA area without public representation during important planning work.
The discussion focused on several recurring options: keep the three boards as currently constituted (a sunshine board structure with open, noticed meetings), merge boards to ensure quorums and broaden membership, or replace one or more with a non–sunshine working or community-engagement group that could meet informally and conduct outreach. Miss D'Angelo (title not specified) described the distinction: "So a working board would be able to work together whereas a sunshine board cannot meet and cannot do anything outside of, you know, a duly noticed meeting." She said many variations are possible and that staff is waiting for the consultant's formal recommendations.
Several board members said they wanted any successor structure to remain transparent and subject to public notice. One member noted concern with non–sunshine groups because they cannot make formal recommendations and could obscure how input was produced.
Staff told the CRA the redevelopment-plan consultants will provide one-on-one meetings with board members in early February and present an overall briefing in March; staff proposed bringing a discussion item back to the CRA after the March presentation so the board can consider changes if desired. Tiffany (staff member) and other staff said current urban core board members would receive the draft plan and be able to provide input; staff clarified that, without a quorum, those bodies cannot take formal votes but can offer feedback.
Board members also raised operational points: the ordinance creating the urban core board prescribes membership by neighborhood and requires a minimum of four meetings per year, which board members said makes it difficult to maintain quorum and fill neighborhood-specific slots. Several members recommended revising membership criteria to be less prescriptive so appointments are easier.
Why it matters: the board structure affects how public input is collected and how recommendations reach the CRA and City Council during the redevelopment-plan adoption process. Board members urged staff and the consultant to produce recommendations quickly so any ordinance changes can proceed with the appropriate two readings by City Council if needed.
Ending: Staff said they will distribute the draft plan to redevelopment-board members, schedule consultant one-on-ones in early February and return to the CRA in March with consultant findings and next steps for potential changes to board structure.
