Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Code Cleanup topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board delays vote on sweeping code-cleanup ordinance amid concerns about scope and outreach
Summary
Supervisors continued a 308-page omnibus ordinance two weeks to give departments and stakeholders time to review proposed code cleanups, with critics calling the measure too large and opaque and supporters saying much of it is technical housekeeping.
President Mandelmann moved on June 30 to continue a broadly scoped ordinance that would revise multiple city codes, eliminate obsolete reporting requirements and defunct funds, and make conforming updates across administrative, planning, public works and other chapters.
The motion followed more than an hour of discussion on what proponents described as a necessary pruning of outdated reporting duties and what some supervisors said was a rushed, overly large package. "There are a ton of reporting requirements built into our codes," President Mandelmann said, urging more time for colleagues to parse the changes. "Many of those reports end up being read by no one. Some of those reports made sense 20 years ago but do not make sense now." (President Mandelmann)
Supervisor Chan said she was not prepared to vote for the measure today or in two weeks unless the ordinance is broken into more digestible, subject-specific pieces and accompanied by clearer outreach. "Should I be asked to vote for it today and even in 2 weeks, it will be a no vote," Supervisor Chan said, citing limited time and stakeholder consultation. (Supervisor Chan)
Supervisor Melgar acknowledged that much of the document is technical cleanup but urged care for provisions that have policy implications. "Our code is a Frankenstein. There are contradicting statements, there are obsolete things," he said, while asking for additional time to consult affected constituencies. (Supervisor Melgar)
Clerk of the Board Angela Calvillo and staff noted the city attorney prepared a detailed record explaining each change and recommended supervisors review that document. Members agreed to continue the item to July 14 to allow further review and potential amendments. The motion to continue was seconded and adopted without objection.
The continuance preserves the board’s option to amend or divide the measure before a final vote and gives departments and community stakeholders additional time to identify policy items that may need separate treatment.
