The Carmel-by-the-Sea City Council has a record of approving and funding studies and surveys, and then either not implementing the studies recommendations expeditiously or using studies/surveys as ruses for further procrastination and inaction. As examples, three case studies, as follows:
CASE STUDY I:
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
CITY COUNCIL
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, November 7, 2006
VII. Consent Calendar
E. Consideration of a Resolution entering into an agreement with Ralph Andersen & Associates for the preparation of a City Library operations study.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA ENTERING INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH RALPH ANDERSEN & ASSOCIATES FOR THE PREPARATION OF A CITY LIBRARY OPERATIONS STUDY
Overall Cost: City Funds: Estimate of $14,000
COMMENT:
In June 2006, the City Council approved an additional $35,000 to the budget for “library services.” Five months later, in November 2006, the City Council approved a Ralph Andersen & Associates Library Operations Study to “determine the best use for the additional funds.” Despite overwhelming public testimony at public hearings to implement the $35,000 towards the restoration of library hours at Harrison Memorial Library and the Park Branch, the City has failed to act.
CASE STUDY II:
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
CITY COUNCIL
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, March 13, 2007
VII. Consent Calendar
C. Consideration of a Resolution entering into an agreement with Nichols Consulting Engineers for a 2007 Pavement Management and Truck Impact Fee study in an amount not to exceed $60,300.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA ENTERING INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH NICHOLS CONSULTING ENGINEERS FOR A 2007 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT AND TRUCK IMPACT FEE STUDY IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $60,300
Overall Cost: City Funds: $60,300
COMMENT: In 1997, Nichols Consulting Engineers performed a pavement management study for the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea; this study was updated in December 2003. Yet today, at the 13 March 2007 City Council meeting, the City Council is to consider another update because only another update will provide City staff with information “to make cost effective decisions concerning the maintenance and rehabilitation of City pavements.”
QUESTION: Wouldn’t $60,300 be better spent on the paving of those city streets in most need of paving, as described in the December 2003 updated study?
CASE STUDY III:
CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
FOREST AND BEACH COMMISSION
Special Meeting
Monday, March 5, 2007
VII. ORDERS OF BUSINESS
Consideration of a Forest and Beach Commission Goal to be forwarded to the City Administrator for consideration in the FY 2007/08 budget.
The Forest & Beach Commission members decided one of their goals for fiscal year 2007/08 would be a request for $6,650 to fund a commercial district tree survey by arborist Barry Coates.
COMMENTS:
In the opinion of an informed Carmelite, the scarce dollars allocated to the Forest, Parks & Beach budget would be better spent on “substantive improvements,” not yet another survey.
As required by the city’s Local Coastal Program (LCP), the City Council should annually budget for a tree survey. Budgeting for the required items in the LCP should be assumed by the City Council, thus allowing the Forest & Beach Commission members to focus on long-term forest regeneration issues which are paramount if the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea is to remain a village in the forest.
Reference:
P5-53 Complete a Citywide survey and database update every four years. Compile the data by size of tree and species in an electronic format. Also survey replacement trees required by permit conditions of approval. Report survey information and the status of replacement trees to the Forest and Beach Commission and Planning Commission at the conclusion of each yearly survey. Continue to monitor replacement trees for at least one survey cycle (i.e., 4 years). (LUP)
3 comments:
It's typical for a government agency to use "expert" consultants to do studies or surveys at tax payers expense. Then if the results do not agree with the agency's preconceived notions the results are disregarded or discredited. Why is there a staff or commission if not to do some of these studies or analyses?
BTW, for readers to get an idea of how many folks read this blog, why not write a comment if only to say "I read this blog."
With all of Sue's additional closed and open meetings, with all of her interference and meddling, with all of her unilateral actions, with her self-anointed status as "Carmel," why don't we just rename Carmel-by-the-Sea, McCloud-by-the-Sea.
Much of the public's disgust with government, local, state and federal, is the lack of accountability-no one pays any price for failure. As a matter of fact, some, like the mayor, are rewarded for failures.
Locally, the mayor, after years with the most unaccountable of bureaucracies, the CIA, brought the unaccountability mindset to Carmel. Her failures to comply with the city's municipal code, state open meeting law, failures of example, etc. Some failures are recognizable now, some will only become noticeable years from now.
Regardless, make no mistake about it, all leads to more and deeper distrust and cynicism of government.
Post a Comment