To: Brisbane City Council
From: Dana Dillworth
RE: Special Meeting, Minimal-Notice
January 4, 2024
Dear Madame Mayor,
I find this discussion to be premature and as such, object to the use of Public funds to conduct a Special, minimal-notice meeting wondering if it is o.k. to negotiate privately with developers before any accepted environmental review by State, County, Regulators, and community input has taken place.
It is absurd to utter the appearance-of-conflict-of-interest language and leave it up to the FPPC to arbitrate whether individual council members can serially bypass the Planning Commission, City’s Commissions and Committees, and the Brown Act Public process our General Plan affords us. Check the General Plan, there is a process for negotiations, you have discretion, there is a precedent; uphold the General Plan.
The EIR’s for these, now urgent, proposals should be given equal community review as the prior “concept” FEIR was allowed on the Baylands project. If anything, you should circulate an independent review of the difference between the concept plan and newest proposal on the Baylands and have more than a 1-hr. Zoom meeting on the quarry development. The citizen’s right to referendum and redress has been problematic to developers in the past, perhaps time working with the community is more important.
State Public Records requirements have rules for full documentation or recordings of all meetings conducted on behalf of the citizens. City employees have to document. Rather than report in mayor council matters, which is often abbreviated due to time considerations, the city should have an active posting of the community’s wishes and thoughts.
Before you negotiate away our River Park, our wetlands, our clean up and miss details like bird-strike language embedded in the documents… please let the Public, OS&E and Planning Commissioners, who have reviewed prior documents, have their input… then negotiate.
Thank you.
Happy New Year!