Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-22-23 Public Comment - M. Brown - An apology and other concerns on transparency, cancelled voices, and budgetingFrom:Marilee Brown To:kelly pohl; Bryce Gordon; christine roberts; Courtney Oyler; DeeJay Newall; Paul Reichert; Shannon Mahoney Cc:Agenda; Nicholas Ross; Cyndy Andrus Subject:An apology and other concerns on transparency, cancelled voices, and budgeting Date:Wednesday, March 22, 2023 10:23:32 AM Importance:High CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Transportation Board To save time tonight, I am making some general comments in writing. 1) Please accept my formal apology for interrupting your motion at the end of the last meeting. I knew better and should not have interrupted. My only excuse was that I could notcontain my fear that no deadline had been set on sending your comments to the Urban Forest and Parks Board in time for their review the next night. No-one in the room had been takingnotes on your comments and the Parks Board was to make it’s decision the following night on active transportation. You held no discussion on the motion. My fears proved correct - theydid not receive your comments in time. But I was still out of line. It will never happen again. 2) Public Transparency. I am also concerned that to save time your Chair prior to the last meeting asked for private written comments from the Board on what should be included in theactive transportation plan and then consolidated them without showing who said what. Your letters and comments were not on record. That is very efficient for private business but in apublic forum allows for no transparency. I could see that some of my written comments had been carried forward in that document but have no idea who championed them or what any ofyou individually said. This is worrisome and probably against all rules. 3) Verbal comments not carried forward even when agreed on. When I comment on individual agenda items I try to keep my comments very short. Often I have only commentedfor one minute. It has been frustrating to me that you will sometimes shake your heads in strong agreement with what I am saying but never carry my message forward verbally intopolicy. With the exception of Frontage Pathway, 100% of my comments have not been verbally recognized or carried forward in the meetings for the last year and a half. That is astatistical improbability so there must be some sort of a glitch in how you recognize viable comments from each other or the public and how consensus is met. Unless you state someagreement (or disagreement) with other voices in the room (including your own), or the chair acknowledges the head nods, there will be no consensus. When comments are written, it is obvious that you have had time to consider them and adaptthem into your personal views when appropriate. Unfortunately, for the most part, Staff is very vague on the agenda as to what you will be tasked with in advance of a meeting andcomments can't be effectively made by the public ahead of time. There have even been times where an item was discussed that was not on the agenda. It is very appropriate for the publicto wait until they have heard a presentation and discussion to make comment. Then it is up to you to agree when appropriate. 4) Public voice being eliminated. Your Chair has made it very plain to me that she views mybrief input as being interfering and time consuming. And as a result, I got a call last night stating that the public will only be able to comment once in an entire meeting. This was takenfrom the written preamble read at every public meeting that states "the pubic will be given time to speak on any agenda item but may only speak once”. The Commission has repeatedlystated that this means speaking only once on each agenda item. And the agenda for tonights meeting states that “Pubic comments will also be accepted in-person during the appropriateagenda items”. Tonight you have two important subjects to discuss and I am being forced to choose which to comment on if at all. I was given the option of commenting on both of themat the beginning of the meeting prior to any presentation or discussion which is silly because I won’t have information to comment on. My assumption is that you do not find myinstitutional knowledge valuable and I should not even bother to help. Sorry I have waisted your time. 5) Budget for infill project pathways. I have stated repeatedly that there is no budget for themillions of dollars of infill path projects as identified in the TMP. The Transportation Director has stated that you will be reviewing the CIP in fall. But those projects do not qualify to beput in the CIP. You only have $100,000 for Bike and Pedestrian Projects in the general maintenance fund which gets approved in June. Last night the Transportation Alternativeprogram was approved to use some of those funds. In the past, the general maintenance fund has prevented paths from using the money unless it was an on street “between the curbs”project . Right now, the City Staff is working on budgeting the General Fund for presentation to the Commission in May and June. It is being based on what is has been done in the past,how often comments are made on a particular subject on line, Department requests, and old and new policy. The bottom line is that unless you put it on the agenda and ask theCommission for a new funding source for infill projects, the management and Commission can not plan to even try to accommodate it. It will simply be business as usual. Please letyour chair and director know what you want. You have to ask to get something on the agenda. Thank you for hearing my concerns. Good luck on your endeavors. Sincerely, Marilee Brown P.S. I will make myself available to talk to any of you at any time if you need input.