Dear Maria:

 

As you requested, I am sharing this with my email distribution list.

 

I don’t think parliamentary procedure is the issue. I have long since given up on either the mayor of the city attorney being able to effectively interpret or apply anybody’s rules of order. Not to mention allowing people who have the floor to speak uninterrupted.

 

What the issue was in this case is allowing a councilmember to speak on an issue that was properly agendized according to the Council rules. All of the arguments about procedure related to whether or not a motion could be made and voted on that altered previous direction given by the Council. I neither made a motion nor intended to make a motion. I just wanted to speak.

 

The video tape shows that once Mayor Anderson gave me the floor to show the PowerPoint, you and other unrecognized Council members continued to protest, interrupt me and complain about the reconsideration issue. That was inappropriate and rude, even though it was business as usual for this dysfunctional Council. I just didn’t want to have to deal with it anymore.

 

What you all collectively did was foreclose the public’s right and interest to get information about a public policy issue that has attracted attention from not only Richmond residents but also from a number of other public agencies and respected regional public interest organizations.

 

Regarding the blue ribbon committee, I agree that it was a bad idea. I would not have voted for it had I stayed around. We are in the middle of a general plan update, and we already have a citizens advisory committee for that effort. It should be part of the general plan update to decide what the future uses will be of Wildcat Marsh. This is not an emergency issue by any standard, and there is no compelling need for the city to take extraordinary action to deal with it, like a moratorium on crematoria.

 

I still believe this container port study is an unprecedented folly, and I just don’t understand your infatuation with it. What if some group of private individuals from outside Richmond  proposed moving the Raiders to Richmond, building a state prison here, dredging Macdonald Avenue to create an American Venice, etc. You get the picture. Would we allocate staff time to help move it forward? Would we initiate a partnership to study it even before any credible information is developed?

 

I doubt it.

 

There is absolutely no constraint to anyone using whatever resources they can muster to study this container port project or any other project. I just don’t understand why the City feels compelled to get involved with City resources (staff time) now. Richmond owns no land in the proposed container port location and has no tangible interest in it at this time. As proposed, it is contrary to the Richmond General Plan, the Richmond Zoning Ordinance, the San Francisco Bay Plan, and dozens of other public planning and regulatory documents.

 

At last Tuesday’s City Council meeting, you said you simply wanted to learn more, but you were unwilling to accept that you might learn something from me or anyone else other than City staff or some outside consultant. City staff doesn’t exactly have a stellar record in dealing with controversial long term planning issues, and the consultants they choose are not far behind. Note that the Planning Commission recently rejected an EIR prepared by one of the City’s high paid consultants.

 

At the end of the day, I just want the public to be informed, and I don’t want the City to waste money pursuing fantasies.

 

Tom