View of Speed Bump & Bump Sign with Arrow on Dolores St., south of Santa Lucia Av., towards Mission Ranch in the distance.
Vehicle traveling over Speed Bump on Dolores St., south of Santa Lucia Av.
Close-Up of Speed Bump over Dolores St. from the sideThe introductory section of the Brown Act, officially known as the Ralph M. Brown Act (California Government Code Sections 54950-54963) states, as follows:
“In enacting this chapter, the Legislature finds and declares that the public commissions, boards and councils and the other public agencies in this State exist to aid in the conduct of the people's business. It is the intent of the law that their actions be taken openly and that their deliberations be conducted openly. The people of this State do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments they have created.”
Unfortunately for Carmelites, after nearly eight years, the City Administrator and Mayor remain oblivious to the meanings and practices of open government and public service.
Case in Point: Installation of Speed Bump on Dolores St., south of Santa Lucia Av.
Chronology of Speed Bump Events:
• Autumn 2007: Jeff White presented a petition to the City signed by 23 individuals requesting a speed bump to slow traffic on Dolores Street, south of Santa Lucia Av., claiming the existing road conditions were unsafe.
• October-November 2007: The City contracted with Traffic Logix, Inc. for a Speed Bump at a cost of $2,832.00 and Robert F. Enz Construction Company for installation of the speed bump at a cost of $1,031.53. The City failed to notify residents of the installation, et cetera.
• December 2007: Charlotte and Peter Boyle, residents on Dolores St., protested the speed bump “as dangerous and unnecessary and said it was installed without due process.” The Boyles presented a petition signed by 19 households protesting the installation of the speed bump to the City. And the Boyles sent a letter to Mayor Sue McCloud and the City Council requesting removal of the speed bump.
• December 2007- January 2008: Franciscan Way resident John Graney sent a letter to Police Chief/Public Safety Director George Rawson saying the speed bump is a “hazard” and “out of character with Carmel.”
• 2007-2008: The “City” has stated that nothing can be done until the three-month trial is completed.
COMMENTS:
• “...councils and the other public agencies in this State exist to aid in the conduct of the people's business. It is the intent of the law that their actions be taken openly and that their deliberations be conducted openly.” Yet the City Administrator and Mayor oversaw the purchase and installation of a speed bump without notifying residents and without a public hearing.
• According to The Carmel Pine Cone, City Administrator Rich Guillen observed, “I have dueling petitions.” And he intends to meet with the neighbors to “discuss the matter.” If the Mayor and City Administrator had placed the proposed installation of a speed bump on a City Council agenda and held a public hearing, there would have been no need for “dueling petitions” and a neighborhood meeting to “discuss the matter.”
• According to The Carmel Pine Cone, Bob Evans, a Dolores Street resident and former City Council Member, stated that the City’s decision to install the speed bump based on Jeff White’s petition “suggests a curious disregard of normal due process.”
• And according to The Carmel Pine Cone, Charlotte and Peter Boyle wrote in a letter to Mayor Sue McCloud and City Council Members, “Our concern is that if this could happen in this manner on Dolores, it could happen anywhere in Carmel, and do we want a city full of speed humps?”
• In a February 8, 2008 letter to The Carmel Pine Cone editor, Mr. and Mrs. Don Tobin, residents on Dolores St., wrote the speed bump was installed with “no proper procedure, warning or discussion with the residents along Dolores Street, an overwhelming preponderance of which are opposed to the bump and the city’s tactics.” Furthermore, they wrote, the speed bump is “unnecessary, illegal and dangerous” and requested the city “do the right thing and permanently remove” the speed bump.
• All of this suggests the Mayor dispenses special favors to certain individuals and groups without regard to due process and public hearing.
4 comments:
I just finished reading that letter to the editor. I agree, the city's actions set a bad precedent as far as speed bumps in the village and as far as no public hearing on the topic. I am really tired of Sue McCloud burying all things she doesn't want seen by the public. This is just one more example. The hideous black and yellow squared bump is not Carmel.
I would argue that the Mayor and City Council (the City Administrator just does what he's told to do by the Mayor) understand the Brown Act very well. They would have to in order to violate it so consistently.
It is widely recognised that Mayor McCloud will violate the law to help friends and supporters and go to great lengths to stop any benefits from going to people she decides are her personal enemies, which means anyone who has publicly opposed her in any way.
The speed bump is a relatively small issue in the overall scheme of things in Carmel but is typical of how Carmel has been mismanaged over the last eight years.
Post a Comment