Print
Email
I've been tracking the City of Seattle's proposal to update the neighborhood plans since March in the series There Go the Neighborhoods. You wouldn't think I'd be caught unawares before the only currently scheduled public hearing before City Council's Planning, Land Use, and Neighborhoods Committee's special meeting. Guess what? It's scheduled for Monday, Sept. 8, 5:30 p.m. in City Council Chambers at City Hall. The agenda lists only one item: public comment.
How much public can be expected to comment with four days' e-mail notice? That's what I get for not checking the City Council home page while on vacation.
Neighborhood plans. Lauded by academics and embraced by other cities. Here in the their veritable birthplace, the City Council has been unwilling to lift a proviso on funding further efforts. The mayor's office first sent an update proposal to the council in July 2007 which has been the subject of public forums, council committee discussions, and much revision ever since. After a year of little progress (but much process), there is sudden movement as the biannual budget deadline nears. The recent push may also have more to do with preparing for light rail than neighborhoods. In another recent twist, the update proposal of July 30 [PDF] calls for establishing a Neighborhood Plan Advisory Committee to be seated by no later than Oct. 15. First order of business: develop a status report on all 38 of the neighborhood plans.
In announcing the special meeting on the City Council Web site, Planning, Land Use, and Neighborhoods Committee Chair Sally Clark is quoted: "Ultimately, updating the neighborhood plans is a chance for us all to recommit to the vision of safe, affordable, sustainable neighborhoods for ourselves and as a legacy."
Next time, please don't forget to invite the public.
Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism by becoming a member of Crosscut.com today!
Twitter
Facebook
RSS Feeds
Comments:
Posted Sun, Sep 7, 7:50 p.m. Inappropriate
Something tells me the city doesn't actually want public comment... either that or they are woefully unaware of how to effectively communicate with their citizens. I don't like either option.
Posted Mon, Sep 8, 12:18 p.m. Inappropriate
What's the legal process?: I don't live in Seattle so am not familiar with its codes, and frankly I'm disinclined to spend a lot of time sifting through looking for the statutory notice period that I know must be there for public hearings!
The Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A.140) sets a strong expectation for public participation in planning, and the Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board has made a myriad of decisions around jurisdictions' failure to meet their public participation responsibilities (see p. 410-424 at http://www.gmhb.wa.gov/ central/CPSGMHBDigest8thEdition1992-June2008.pdf - leave the space out of the middle of the URL; I had to insert it so it would post). I'm pretty sure four days' notice wouldn't stand up. If City of Seattle wants to give would-be opponents an open door to walk through for an appeal, such a procedural violation would probably do it.
Posted Tue, Sep 9, 10:04 a.m. Inappropriate
The definition of 'public' under the constitution: One would think that the authority of government would be predicated on the respect for individual rights, but unfortunately, as this story illustrates, it is the opposite.
Your standing as a member of the public is dependent on your 'complienace' with the 'owners' of the constitution, the Judicial branch and their officers, first those in regulatory or public capital projects roles and second the banks.
Never mind if they've actually earned their business chops, the deficit will bail these obviously deserving folks out, after all they are better than the rest of us, yes?
-Douglas Tooley