In latest response to critical Grand Jury report, City Council amends procedures
When Palo
Alto received an offer from developer John Arrillaga in 2012 to purchase a
7.7-acre site of publicly owned land next to Foothills Park, most officials
were surprised that the undeveloped site even existed in a city they often
refer to as "built out."
The City
Council's subsequent effort to learn about the site, which included private
tours and a closed session to consider Arrillaga's offer, elicited a stinging
backlash from the public and a scathing Santa Clara County Grand Jury report,
which criticized the city for not following its own rules about selling of
"surplus public land" -- a process that includes notifying other city
departments and public agencies.
On Monday
night, in its latest effort to address the June 2014 report, the council
amended its rules by adopting a section dealing specifically with unsolicited
offers. The change comes a month after the council adopted a policy calling for
a public council vote before going into any closed session, a rule change that
was also sparked by the Grand Jury report.
By a 7-0
vote, with Councilmen Tom DuBois and Greg Scharff absent, the council specified
that unsolicited offers that the city manager deems worthy of further
discussion will be referred to the full council. If the council chooses to
declare the site a surplus property, there will be an open council hearing and
public council vote. Furthermore, the amended policy includes a new statement
calling for city properties to be "broadly marketed using appropriate
modes of advertising, including electronic media."
The council
adopted the changes after a brief discussion and little debate. Vice Mayor Greg
Schmid was the only council member to express some concerns, arguing that the
new policy may not go far enough to facilitate an open and public process.
He proposed
a clause calling for the city to provide public notice of any deed restriction
or easement on the property (the 7.7-acre site, which was donated to the city
in 1981 by the Lee Family trust, was restricted to conservation purposes,
including park and recreation). The council agreed to adopt the additional
language.
Though
Arrillaga's offer to buy the former quarry site quickly fizzled, its
ramifications are still playing out. In addition to tweaking its rules for
unsolicited offers, the council is still trying to determine what to do with
the land that few in the city knew about before the offer. Last year, to comply
with Lee's deed restriction, the council officially dedicated the site as
public parkland.
At the same
time, the council remains uncertain about how to develop the newly discovered
open space. Last August, Councilwoman Liz Kniss said the site currently
resembles a "dust bowl" rather than a "pristine parkland."
And while a few of her colleagues advocated for reopening it to the public
sooner rather than later, staff is now urging a more cautious approach.
The Parks
and Recreation Commission was set to consider Tuesday, Feb. 24, a proposal not
to open the site to the public until a hydrology study is completed around
Buckeye Creek.
The study,
according to a staff report, would "analyze and find solutions to the historic
channelization and resulting down-cutting and erosion problems" around the
creek.
Community
Services Department staff recommended that the study "be completed before
developing permanent plans and investing significant funds to construct any
facilities on the site that might limit some of the possible recommendations
and solutions that will be proposed by the hydrologic plan."
February
24, 2015
Palo
Alto Online
By
Gennady Sheyner, Palo Alto Weekly
No comments:
Post a Comment