During two recent meetings, county supervisors Ryan Sundberg and Rex Bohn expressed confusion and being overwhelmed about the draft General Plan Update (newspapers). It’s just “so big,” according to supervisor Sundberg. As board members, both should have the intellectual capacity to comprehend this document, its history, and how it differs from the 1984 plan. Supervisor Virginia Bass bravely piped in that she’d never seen such a lengthy plan.
Supervisors Sundberg and Bass have had ample opportunities to ask staff for clarification. Before he retired, supervisor Jimmy Smith provided an orientation to incoming supervisor Bohn. Because the draft GPU is such a critical document, I assume an in-depth review was a training topic for supervisor Bohn before he was sworn into office.
When Planning/Building Department staff is assigned extra work, such as on the draft GPU, as seemingly directed by supervisors Sundberg and Bohn, it takes staff away from their usual work for the board members’ constituents.
When their constituents complain, who will they blame? Of course, it will be the Planning and Building Department administration and staff.
I urge voters to follow the money donated to the campaigns of supervisors Bass, Sundberg, and Bohn to understand from where these new questions have arisen, and who is behind their attempts to change and/or postpone the approval of the new GPU.
When Ms. Estelle Fennell is on the board this January. I expect her to join the majority of supervisors in opposing the draft GPU, in accordance with her campaign’s funding sources. Thank you to supervisors Lovelace and Clendenen for explaining that a comparison of both plans is included in the current draft. It has been previously reviewed and publicly vetted during innumerable meetings.