The spirit of a community was alive Tuesday, April 24, at City Hall as La Jolla residents gave more than four hours of their time and a piece of their minds to city council members and city staff in a debate centered on the community planning group’s official recognition.
Council voted unanimously to compromise with the La Jolla Community Planning Association (LJCPA) concerning its bylaws, despite arguments from Jim Waring, the city’s deputy chief of land use and economic development, that the group had violated Council Policy 600-24 by intentionally operating under a document unapproved by the City.
“The LJCPA voted its bylaws effective immediately to see what the city would do about it,” Waring said. “Everyone has special things that they believe are important for their community, but to get through this process administratively we need uniformity.”
After hearing more than 30 residents speak in opposition to Waring’s request to decertify the group, council approved a motion to let the LJCPA continue to operate under its new bylaws with all council policy deviations suspended until further approval.
The disagreement between Waring and the community began in January, when the LJCPA voted to approve a revised set of bylaws containing a clause that stated the document would be effective immediately before review by the city’s Planning Department and the City Attorney’s Office. That clause is a direct violation of council policy, according to Waring.
Over the last few months, several memoranda were issued by Waring to the planning group advising members to avoid decertification by going back to their old bylaws, which were approved by the city in 1992. The LJCPA chose to continue operating under the new document, causing Waring to recommend that the group no longer have authority.
During public testimony, many residents directed angry remarks to District 1 Councilman and Council President Scott Peters for not standing with his constituents in the bylaws debate.
Peters took a position similar to Waring’s, stating that he did not wish to continue the issue to a later date and that Waring’s plan ” to give the group until June 8 to come into compliance or else be decertified ” seemed to be the only option.
“This is not my favorite thing to have before me ” to have a planning group in my district be decertified,” Peters said. “But city staff has been spending an amazing amount of time on La Jolla and my concern is that it’s taking a toll. I have new communities along the 52 that need to get established, and when I talk to staff they say they have been spending all their time in La Jolla.”
To add to the confusion, all planning groups were informed by the city’s Planning Department in January to halt bylaw updates because of changes to Council Policy 600-24 regarding the Brown Act, a provision requiring all authorized city groups to properly notify residents of public meetings, according to Cecilia Williams of the city’s Planning Department.
The LJCPA continued its bylaws update, which had been in the works since October 2006. In settling a resident group lawsuit against the LJCPA last June, the city council set the condition that the LJCPA must update its bylaws to allow more community participation, according to resident Rob Whittemore.
Many residents stated that the city had wrongly denied the group due process by refusing to docket the bylaw deviations for city council approval and instead docketing the group for decertification.
The city did not docket the LJCPA’s bylaw deviations for council review in fairness to the other 41 planning groups that decided to wait until after May 1, when the council’s bylaw revisions should be complete, Waring and Williams said.
Whittemore, along with resident Ray Weiss, pointed out that council has not yet approved the city’s revisions to the bylaws and that all planning groups should still operate under the city’s old bylaws shell.
“It is the planning department who is out of compliance with 600-24,” resident Ray Weiss said. “Under current council policy, the deadlines set by this body for bylaws to be updated was by May 17. This is a clear breach between the executive and legislative branch. The legislative branch may make a suggestion but it is this group, city council, who makes the decision and that deadline has not been rescinded.”
City Attorney Michael Aguirre, who was present at the meeting, issued several statements of approval for the group’s bylaws at previous LJCPA meetings and at a recent press conference.
At Tuesday’s meeting, Aguirre told council members that the planning group had done nothing to violate its rules.
In addition, the Planning Department’s reasoning to suspend bylaw updates because of the Brown Act revisions was unnecessary, according to Karen Heumann, assistant city attorney. Because the Brown Act is a longstanding state law, it should always apply to city proceedings, Heumann said.
“We don’t have any findings “” no reasons “” for the group to be decertified,” Heumann said. “It makes more sense for the bylaws to be in front of you to vote on the deviations than for the group to be decertified.”
The crowd erupted in applause near the end of the lengthy meeting when District 6 Councilwoman Donna Frye questioned whether other motives were at play in bringing the La Jolla planning group to council.
“It seems to me their punishment was because they actually tried to follow the process and moved through when you asked them to stop “” not because they didn’t follow council policy,” Frye said to Planning Department staff, and Waring in particular. “That’s why I couldn’t figure this out. We’re here because you got angry, but you shouldn’t have said, ‘You didn’t listen so I’m going to decertify you.'”
The LJCPA will vote on council’s approved motion at its May 3 meeting. For more information about the LJCPA, visit www.lajollacpa.org or email: [email protected].