Let’s see...City offers property. City selects Developer. City has Developer agree to certain terms including funding City staff and consultants for the planning process. Developer and City plan together for development. Okay so far...
Developer working in worst economic economy since the 1930’s. Developer apparently does what they have said they would do, including funding City staff and consultants. Developer, with City support, produces plan that incorporates years of community comments and the latest in city planning expertise. Because changing the City’s restrictive charter amendment prohibiting building anything residential beyond 2 (two!) units requires a voter initiative to allow condos, apartments, triplexes, etc., Developer gathers signatures and files required initiative for plan. Still okay...
Previous City staff leaves or is reassigned and new Interim City Manager begins process at ground zero and uses more conservative assumptions than the professionals have used. Voila! Discrepancies appear. Alarms are sounded! Misstatements issued! A process for discrediting Developer flowers. NOT OKAY!
So what is missing? Apparently people negotiating in good faith. Why is the City and its agent (the Chamber of Commerce) doing everything it can to discredit the plans of the Developer/City partnership and all the work done prior to the ICM’s evaluation? Doesn’t seem to make sense, eh? Why repudiate the work done in partnership? It seems what’s missing is real expertise applied to the process. Or is it transparency?
One can only conclude that the City has some other scheme in mind. The one that seems most likely is to milk the Developer for an additional $2 million to do an EIR now on this unapproved plan and use the results for the City’s future Plan? One doesn’t like to attribute such chicanery to our elected officials, but if this isn’t the obvious conclusion then what is the cause of such inconsistency?
