General Plan Update: Uncertainty Prevails

From the 12.26.12 edition

 

By Daniel Mintz

Press Staff Writer

 

The General Plan Update’s future continues to be hazy and there’s doubt that a staff-recommended schedule that charts its completion in late spring will be followed.

The ever-changing update process was again revisited at a Dec. 17 Board of Supervisors hearing. A recently-formed ad hoc stakeholders group is being increasingly called upon to review the update but its members are still working on the update’s Circulation Element after several weeks and they’re unsure if they’ll continue with other sections.

Their work is now driving the update’s course and supervisors again held off on decision-making to allow them more time.

The group’s work on the Circulation Element mostly involves re-wording policies for clarity but the creation of a countywide transportation plan is also recommended.

Board Chairman Virginia Bass said her decision-making would be helped if the group continued its work. She asked Dan Ehresman of the Healthy Humboldt Coalition, one of the group’s members, if there are plans to review other sections of the update.

“We’ve talked about that quite a bit and we have concluded that we’re not going to make that decision until we are completely done with the Circulation Element,” he responded, adding that “this has been a monumental amount of work for all of us.”

“So that’s not a ‘no,’” said Bass.

“It’s not a yes,” said a member of the group from the audience.

Supervisors had originally asked for a so-called short list review focusing on the limited number of policies that drew split votes from the county’s Planning Commission. The stakeholders group has done a policy-by-policy re-wording of the Circulation Element, however, and outgoing Supervisor Clif Clendenen suggested a more focused approach “rather than retread what wasn’t contested at all in front of the Planning Commission.”

Doing that may “allow the county to have a General Plan by the summer,” he added.

So far, supervisors have spent as much time talking about the update’s process and its schedule as they have on its contents. After a staff presentation on the ad hoc group’s work, supervisors discussed scheduling but resolution was elusive due to the group’s uncertain status.

Saying he wants to be a “realist,” Supervisor Mark Lovelace commented on the numerous update completion schedules that have been unfulfilled. “I will be greatly surprised if we’re not still here this time next year,” he said.

“I want to see it get done also but I’m more concerned with getting it done right and having as many groups represented in the final plan,” said Supervisor Rex Bohn.

Supervisors agreed to discuss the update’s completion schedule further at their regular meeting on Jan. 8. The next update hearing is set for Jan. 14.

 

About these ads

2 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

2 responses to “General Plan Update: Uncertainty Prevails

  1. "Henchman Of Justice"

    “I want to see it get done also but I’m more concerned with getting it done right and having as many groups represented in the final plan,” said Supervisor Rex Bohn.”

    Response: Hmm, groupees represented only? Funny thing is, more than just a few of these groupees are not as smart as they lead people on to be, but plagiarize individuals’ thoughts they do, for the real benefit and gains are what the groupees barter and exchange together AFTER they already had their moments over the past decade plus. Apparantly, groupees get “extra kickbacks” never mentioned anywhere in this GPU process from its inception. Everyone who has commented up to this date should be allowed to re-comment again, “JUST LIKE THE GROUPEES!” Yet, the dishonest, dishonorable and insincere supervisors (ALL FIVE) are not including “NON-GROUPEES”. BACK-STABBERS!

    Rex turns his blind eyes to the “little people in the community better referenced as INDIVIDUALS” and says, “Shut the hell-up, quit whining, you don’t count worth jack!” – HOJ

  2. Anonymous

    “Supervisors had originally asked for a so-called short list review focusing on the limited number of policies that drew split votes from the county’s Planning Commission.”

    Never happened…. It would be nice if our local journalists could stick to the facts rather than interjecting their own opinions and biases.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s