Background
At the November 8, 2022, Planning Commission meeting, I spoke to the Commission with a request to modify the minutes of the October 25th meeting. I wanted the minutes for the Oral Communication to more accurately reflect what I had said.
The minutes show this: “Comment was made regarding Gateway Area Plan progress.”
Minutes that would better reflect what I spoke to would be:
“Comment was made regarding the lack of Gateway Area Plan progress and the lack of leadership.”
For starters, I do apologize to the Commissioners for the waste of time in how this occurred. All in all, it took about 10 minutes — with about half of that spent on reversing the previous motion to approve the minutes. My error was not speaking with the Chair in advance of the meeting of my intentions. This would have notified the Chair that a member of the public wanted to remove an item from the consent calendar for discussion.
As I said: “Briefly, I’m not requesting that the public comment minutes have to necessarily be lengthier. But I would like them to be accurate and accurately express the sentiments of what was said.” And then later: “But there must be a balance between brevity and accuracy.“
All in all, I wanted 8 words added to the sentence. And I wanted a sentence added regarding two letters to the Planning Commissioners not being published and available to the public because, as you know, this has been an on-going issue for this entire Gateway discussion — close to one year now.
Here’s what David Loya said:
“I would advise the commission that the minutes are intended to be high level action minutes. The minutes are not required to even reflect the content, per se, that the sentiments that were spoken by the public members, but that public members spoke on certain items.”
And here’s where things get interesting
The Brown Act is pretty silent on the matter of what is required to be in public meeting minutes. But the courts have ruled — consistently — that the minutes are required to have accuracy and specifically cannot exclude or add material with an apparent attempt to deceive the public.
What David Loya said is correct in a sense. According to the law, all that’s required is a mention that people spoke — not who they were or what was said. But according to the Court, that is not sufficient, and counters the spirit of the Open Meeting laws.
The actions of the Planning Commission are perhaps the most permanent of decisions made by any City body, and yet the minutes are insubstantial and at times inaccurate.
The minutes don’t have to be this way. Other City agencies are not this way.
I request the Commission direct staff to take and present minutes that:
a) Include the name of the speaker
b) Are representative of what is actually said.
Let’s look at how public comment is handled in Planning Commission minutes
These are extracts — word for word, exactly as printed — from past Planning Commission meeting minutes, in the section of “II. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS.”
As it turns out, the meeting of October 25, 2022, was exemplary in that there actual sentences entered into the record — even thought the what was written was misleading.
March 22, 2022
Public comment received in support of the Arcata Gateway Area Plan.
March 08, 2022
Public comment received.
April 12, 2022
(The minutes here are blank — there is nothing, not even the word “None.” In actuality, there were no speakers for Oral Communications, but it would be better to have the word “None” as has been done on other dates.)
April 26, 2022
Public comments received on the Gateway Area Plan.
May 10, 2022
None
May 24, 2022
Public comment received.
June 28, 2022
Public comment received.
August 04, 2022
Public comment received.
August 09, 2022
Public comment received.
September 13, 2022
Public comment received.
September 27, 2022
Public comment received.
October 11, 2022
Public comment received.
October 25, 2022
Public comment was received:
• Comment was given regarding the Redwood Trails.
• John Barstow was recognized for his work with the Planning Commission. Comment was made regarding Gateway Area Plan progress. A desire to see letters regarding the Gateway Area Plan on the City’s website and as part of Agenda packets was expressed.
• Thanks were given to John Barstow and the Planning Commission.
• Concerns were raised regarding the climate crisis and the need for a plan for the future.
• Further thanks were given to John Barstow and the Planning Commission. The Commission was asked to consider where to retreat due to climate change.
And how do other City Committees handled minutes for Public Comment?
They take care of things differently — with greater clarity and better for the public, certainly. Let’s look at some samples from recent meetings:
Transportation Safety Committee
June 21, 2022
IV. PUBLIC ORAL AND WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:
Anton – expresses concerns regarding the Arcata Elementary School neighborhood traffic issues
Genevieve – expresses support for “Open Streets” concept at the Arcata Plaza, closing vehicular traffic to support pedestrian access and safety
JoAnne – supports public transit, and would like to see the transit center relocated to dual hubs at the north and south of town
September 20, 2022
IV. PUBLIC ORAL AND WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:
A. Comments Received
1. Anton Souza – Arcata Elementary School neighborhood traffic concerns.
2. James Ottbecker – Requested feedback about traffic concerns on K St., near 7th St.
3. Cindy Wilcox – Requested information about 11th St. traffic calming.
4. Lisa – Vegetation blocking visibility concerns, lack of police enforcement for roundabout protocol, requested more lighted crosswalks and speed humps.
Various Committee Members inquired and /or commented about the following: Ross St. traffic calming measures. Clarification about guidelines and decision making to employ traffic calming measures or equipment. Speed hump installation policies.
Parks & Recreation
August 15, 2022
II. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Jim – asked for clarification on time limits for public comment and asked for staffs’ capacity to share screen/figures.
IV. OLD BUSINESS
A. CONSIDER THE GATEWAY AREA PLAN AND PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL
Public Comment:
• Fred – referenced pg 9 of packet and noted that a park intended to be within 200 yards of everywhere in plan area. If an area in an industrial zone is to become a park, it will take 20 years. Proposed L Street pathway.
• Jim – In reference to figure 5, recommended enhancing linear park by tying in wetland features.
• Patricia – glad to see some in-lieu fees intended for Gateway area – feels majority should be within Gateway area. Also, City should purchase land now for parks within GAP area. Also noted TSC does not support L Street couplet.
B. RECEIVE UPDATE ON PARKS AND RECREATION ELEMENT OF GENERAL PLAN FROM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF
Public Comment:
• Fred – Noted there aren’t enough parks in Arcata that are within walking distance. Questioned whether the acreage targets will be met within the GAP based on outlined ratios in the Parks & Rec Element
Wetlands and Creeks Committee
July 19, 2022
B. RECEIVE SUMMARY OF JOLLY GIANT RESTORATION PROJECTS AND TAKE ACTION AS APPROPRIATE
Public Comment:
• Scott McBain is interested in volunteering time to assist in developing JCG Creek restoration strategy and potentially monitoring. Noted the upcoming DWR Urban Streams Grant, and offered to assist in developing a concept proposal .
• Moonlight McCumber is interested in the presentation being share on the City’s website.
• Jim is interested in potential for exploring a linear park.
The City Council is best of all
Because the City Council has the wonderful Bridget Dory taking notes and taking care of the minutes.
November 2, 2022
EARLY ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Gregory Daggett announced that the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the development of the Craftsmen’s Mall had been released by Cal Poly Humboldt. He also said that Arcata’s policy of levee enhancement had negative environmental effects.
Cyril Oberlander, Board Chair of the Arcata Chamber of Commerce, introduced Anisa Escobedo, the new Executive Director of the Chamber of Commerce.
Fred Weis spoke out against the Westwood Gardens Apartments’ infill project that had been approved by the Planning Commission.
Joanne McGarry said there were zero days left to procrastinate to make the community more climate resilient.
The following speakers spoke in support of the re-election of Brett Watson: An unidentified speaker and William.
Gerardo Hernandez spoke against the re-election of Brett Watson.
Adam spoke against the re-election of Brett Watson and spoke against the design of the Westwood Gardens Apartments’ infill project that had been approved by the Planning Commission.
ORAL AND WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
Anisa Escobedo, Executive Director of the Arcata Chamber of Commerce, announced upcoming events sponsored by the Chamber.
Glen Colwell requested a monthly crime report for Arcata be included on the Council agendas for the first meeting of every month.
Joanne McGarry suggested Ceremonial Matters take place before the regular Council meetings.
Fred Weis described how the Planning Commission did not have to approve the infill project for Westwood Gardens Apartments in its current form.
James Becker put in a pitch for the L Street linear park and said the potential for this park could be part of the Great Redwood Trail.
Dana Quillman spoke against what she felt Arcata was becoming. She cited her dissatisfaction with the Gateway Area Plan, the expansion of Cal Poly Humboldt, and the high cost of housing.
The following persons spoke in favor of the re-election of Brett Watson: Two unidentified speakers, Donnie and Ryan.
The following persons requested the Council either waive the appeal fees or initiate an appeal of the Planning Commission’s approval of the Westwood Gardens Apartments’ infill project: Raelina Krikston, Adam, and Jane Woodward.
Anthony said Arcata should consider telling the University to develop student housing elsewhere.
Lorrie Waldorf requested the City postpone any work planned for the Alliance to Sunset trail, and to please put money into an unclimbable fence at the top and bottom of the trail, or compromise with a fence and gates to be locked at sunset. She noted the increase in crime in the Sunset neighborhood.
October 5, 2022
EARLY ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Gregory Daggett asked the Council how it could move forward with the wastewater treatment plant improvements without having reviewed the Coastal Commission’s report on the Coastal Development Permit for the project. He also noted that the City did not have jurisdiction to institute the Gateway Area Plan in the coastal zone areas as that was the Coastal Commission’s jurisdiction.
Joanne McGarry reminded the City Council of the climate emergency and said Arcata needed to start acting as if that were an emergency. She asked that every Council agenda include a climate action report stating what actions the City was taking to address the climate emergency. Finally, she asked that a written form of the Land Acknowledgment be placed in the lobby.
Anthony Deluca spoke about supporting local businesses. He announced he had created a website where people could add content regarding businesses, and that could be accessed at
rhapsodicglobal.org
An unidentified speaker spoke highly of Councilmember Watson and said people should stop trusting what the newspapers were saying.
Aaron spoke about unsafe conditions on M Street. He asked that the Council be more concerned about directing staff to make progress on citizen concerns.
ORAL AND WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
Joanne McGarry spoke of the Overview Effect which should remind the Council to focus on local issues, but keep the big picture in mind. She presented each Councilmember with an Earth flag.
Gregory Daggett asked why the Council thought it could put eight-story buildings in the Coastal Commission’s jurisdiction. Also, the City needed to talk about a new location for the wastewater treatment plant.
Anthony said he was surprised how the public had different opinions than how the Council usually voted. He expressed concern about how decisions were being made and the reluctance to involve the public.
