September
9, 2014
San
Jose Mercury News
By
Diana Diamond, Daily News Columnist
I waited for
a good explanation Monday night, about why the Palo Alto City Council and city
staff kept hidden for months a deal with billionaire developer John Arrillaga
to build a huge office complex at 27 University Ave.
I didn't get
one.
Instead, I
heard rationalizations, suggested changes for making the "process"
better, wordsmithing, a need to establish new procedures, and -- to their
credit -- good apologies from council members Pat Burt, Greg Scharff, Karen
Holman, Greg Schmid and City Manager Jim Keene.
The council
said Keene's response to the scathing Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury
report complaining about the city's secret meetings with Arrillaga needed more
clarification. Keene recently said that ultimately the withholding of public
information over that project and sale of 7.7 acres next to Foothills Park to
Arrillaga for a mere $175,000 resulted in "no harm done."
But there
was harm done, and the secrecy was persistent. I can more easily forgive a
person if he made an error of judgment once. I can less easily forgive the city
and council for carrying on private negotiations with Arrillaga for nearly a
year.
The fact is,
council members met with Arrillaga individually over both the 27 University
Ave. project and the land he wanted; the city also paid for an appraisal of his
desired land purchase, conveniently located next to his property adjacent to
Foothills Park. City staff also wanted to spend $250,000 of our tax dollars on
the feasibility of the project -- all before Arrillaga made a formal
application.
So far, no
one has been punished or admonished. Keene told the grand jury that the
individuals involved were no longer employed by the city. One of them was
deputy city manager Steve Emslie, who retired and then went to work for
Goodyear-Peterson, a public affairs consulting firm that lobbies cities and
works with developers.
What went
wrong? Too many things, including the months-long delay until this matter
became public. Certainly there were improprieties and even a lack of concern by
the council with the appearance of impropriety. And there was no cry about the
staff PR report that lauded this project instead of analyzing it.
On Monday,
the council response to the grand jury report, which was scheduled for 9:05
p.m., began at 10:50 p.m., following a protracted debate about a bike bridge. A
deliberate delay?
The
discussion started with Vice Mayor Liz Kniss moving to accept Keene's defensive
report to the grand jury as "appropriate and accurate." To its
credit, there were no council seconds on this cop-out motion.
Burt said
the report is a reminder that the city should keep its meetings public and
"a critique of our ethical conduct. We let down the community with our
process."
Holman had
to acknowledge the city's process "could have been better," adding
she was not "forceful enough" in her objections. Scharff described
this as a "really poor process."
Mayor Nancy
Shepherd, on the other hand, said she was "unaware" of the Foothills
property that the city owned. And "I don't remember 'deliberating' on
anything regarding Arrillaga. Only on being 'updated.'"
"This
does look like there were secrets and backroom deals, but I never participated
in those kinds of conversations," Shepherd claimed.
What should
be done? I suspect some council members have learned their lesson -- for a
little while. But the public and ultimately the council need to monitor the
relationships between developers and the city. What happened in the 27
University Ave. project should not happen again.
Diana
Diamond is a columnist for The Daily News. Her email is Diana@DianaDiamond.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment