|(Feb. 17, 2018, 9:20 p.m., updated Feb. 19, 8:55 a.m.) -- Third district Councilwoman Suzie Price has enumerated for LBREPORT.com a number of Land Use Element (LUE) map changes she plans to seek at the
In a one-on-one on-the-record conversation at Dan Pressburg's annual
But we hadn't asked about a "summary." We envisioned an analysis of several of the complex bills including SB 35...so we followed up:
[Scroll down for further.]
LBREPORT.com: Do you think it would be prudent to go forward with a vote on March 6 on the LUE without having that [City Attorney analysis] disclosed publicly and the public having a chance to see it and comment on it, as well as the Council?
When we noted that 3rd dist. Council candidate Gordana Kajer has said the Council and the public should see and have an opportunity to respond to such an analysis before Councilmembers vote on the LUE, Councilwoman Price replied in pertinent part:
Councilwoman Price: I believe I have the information that I need to make the decision that I need to make on the [March] 6th and I believe that my office has done a really great job of summarizing some of the statewide legislation through our newsletters and at our community meetings. We've had several opportunities to talk with the public regarding some of the legislation. We've talked about my position on SB 35 for example. We've talked about my position on [SB] 827. So I think that the community members with whom I have met and the community meetings that I've been at we've certainly talked about state legislation and how that affects local land use decisions...
As to how she intends to proceed at the March 6 City Council meeting, Councilwoman Price said that after meeting with several neighborhood associations in regards to their preferences:
LBREPORT.com also asked Councilwoman Price if she knows why the City didn't oppose SB 35 despite a City Council-approved "state legislative agenda" that stated [details below] that the City would oppose legislation reducing local control. Has city management explained to Councilwoman Price what happened? "No, I haven't asked," Councilwoman Price said. "I'm sure if I asked, they would give me an explanation" she said.
Background: On April 4, 2017, the Council voted
Councilwoman Price said she personally took a position opposed to SB 35 and stated her concerns (consistent with those of the League of CA Cities on local control) prior an early September community meeting (the latter reported at the time by LBREPORT.com.)
Councilwoman Price said she has no information on what happened regarding the City's stance SB 35 but offered this view:
"We [the Council] took a position that broadly defined our values and our core principles in regards to state legislation... That doesn't necessarily mean that that broad statement regarding our values has a specific directive as to individual [bills]. You and I can agree to disagree on whether a broad directive results in a specific directive as to particular legislation. I don't believe that it does. You believe that it did..."
So if Councilwoman Price was specifically opposed to SB 35 early on, why didn't she agendize a Council item specifically to oppose it? "I didn't do it. I don't know what to tell you. You cracked the nut on that one."
[Updated text Feb. 19, 8:55 a.m.] Councilwoman Price informs us: "Prior to joining the OC District Attorney's office I was an associate at a public entity law firm called Woodruff, Spradlin and Smart. While at Woodruff, I represented 17 cities as the Deputy City Attorney. I drafted legislation for cities like Placentia and Tustin and also staffed city council meetings for several cities."]
blog comments powered by Disqus
Recommend LBREPORT.com to your Facebook friends:
Follow LBReport.com with:
Contact us: mail@LBReport.com
Hardwood Floor Specialists
Call (562) 422-2800 or (714) 836-7050