« I've Got Good News, And I've Got Bad News | Main | The Trial Run »
June 26, 2007
Grand Jury Reports on Chico
 |
| A couple of months ago I wrote a blog about the fact
that the Butte County Grand Jury was investigation Chico's planning apparatus.
Well, the report is out and can be downloaded from
this web site. In the report there was another "Chico" issue of interest that I found enticing. That was an investigation into the City Plaza project that uncovered some minor irregularities in some of the no-bid contracts handed out for the project. But more striking to me were a series of comments attributed to Park Commissioners on the subject. The Grand Jury report reads like a soap opera, or at least a really good blog. I've pulled out some of the more "interesting" comments as examples of what's in the report. The sections I've pulled out are not the "summaries" on each topic, which are generally more benign. I recommend everyone read this report, it's pretty much what a reporter would write if they never had to worry about naming sources. |
| Regarding the Planning Staff Morale and New Planning
Director: Several staff members expressed concern that the current Planning Director “dismisses professional opinions,” is “condescending and disrespectful,” and “lacks a sense of teamwork.” Other comments indicated that communication within the PSD has become “difficult” and has “diminished in quality and effectiveness.” While the Grand Jury generally does not become involved with personality issues, the frequency of such comments from all levels of the PSD and the city at large led us to be concerned for the efficiency and overall well-being of the entire department. We learned that due to the current conditions within the PSD, several of the most experienced city planners have applied for jobs with other departments or possibly plan to leave the city altogether. The previous loss of “ institutional memory” caused by the retirements of key planning managers earlier in the year coupled with the loss of several experienced planners could prove to be a heavy blow to the PSD and the City of Chico. |
| Regarding the Planning Commission: In the beginning of its investigation into the planning process, the Grand Jury consistently heard many complaints about the Planning Commission. Both the development community and planning staff had concerns about “being caught in the middle of politics.” Several staff members suggested that the commission was “overzealous” and “did not understand all the ramifications involved in the work of planning.” Another issue concerned the qualifications, expertise and training of members of the Planning Commission. A final concern, as stated earlier in this report, was the high number of appeals resulting from decisions of the Planning Commission. |
| Regarding Park Commissioner Comments on City Plaza: With regard to the City Plaza project, overwhelmingly, the Park Commission indicated that it approved the City Plaza project “in concept” but after that, all of the details were left to city staff and their hired consultant. When asked about the escalating cost of the City Plaza project, one commissioner commented, “We were never told prices. When things were brought up and we asked, we were told it was secret, ‘not for public knowledge.’” Other comments made by commissioners included: “They allowed too many ‘conceptual approvals.’ There should have been more public involvement.” “They were not publicly vetted decisions.” Another commissioner felt there should have been a better estimate of costs up front. Likewise, the Park Commission was advised in a “’benign way’ regarding the rising costs, but that cost was never made an issue.” On a positive note, one commissioner stated: “As for its purpose it [City Plaza] is an unqualified success.” Another commissioner commented “the process that brought the artist of the chess table stinks.” The last comment referred to the fact that the artist who proposed the chess tables to city council was awarded a no-bid contract for the project, at a billing rate of $125 per hour to a maximum of $68,000. |
Posted by Lon at June 26, 2007 09:00 PM
Comments
One odd note about the two comments -- it seems that they are at cross purposes. For the planning process, there is too much planning commission input; for the park process there was too little park commission input. I wonder where the happy medium is?
Dave Brobst
Posted by: Dave Brobst at June 27, 2007 10:27 AM
Hey Dave,
The comments above were taken out of context from the entire report. There's a depth of information in the report that deserves attention, and clarifies where the problems are with regards to the Planning Department. The problems expand beyond the Planning Commission generated work and re-work of projects. The Grand Jury's findings do seem to point to significant problems within the department, a non-representative Planning Commission that sometimes exceeds its authority, and unclear direction from the City Council.
In most other communities 1/3 of proposed projects come before a Planning Commission, and 2/3 are processed solely by a Planning Department. In Chico those number are reversed, so the Planning Commission has its hands on twice the normal number of projects, which dramatically increases the workload and delay of projects.
On the Park Commission front, there were additional issues that were discussed, and I think that commission feels like it may have been ingored, or had its authority watered down, for quite some time now. Comments were also directed at Ringel Park and Children's Playground improvements that were directed around the Park Commission.
I attended some of the Council/RDA meetings where decisions were made to improve Children's Playground. CARD, the Park Department, Police Department, City Council-RDA, and others all took part in intense discussions complete with detailed reports. At that time I'm not sure the Park Commission was even aware of those meetings.
Lon
Posted by: Lon at June 27, 2007 11:26 AM