Minutes 02-10-2015 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Commissioner Jacobs said he wants to make sure to keep the public petition process separate from the Commissioners' petition process. He said he feels that his job as a Commissioner is to get people answers to their questions. He said he has dealt with the fluoride issue before, and while he could not solve the problem, he could provide a response. He thinks it should not matter if one of the Commissioners is going to sponsor the question or not. Commissioner Rich asked about the resident who petitioned the Board regarding the impervious surface issue. Craig Benedict said this will come back to the Board, and there will be two options. He said Orange County is more restrictive on this than the state, and there are some questions about this. He said one option is a unified development ordinance (UDO) change, and the other option would be to ask the state about allowing impervious pavement. He said a memo will be coming to the Board in the coming weeks. Commissioner Rich asked if the resident knows that this work is being done. Craig Benedict said yes. Commissioner Rich referred to Commissioner Jacob's statement that it is the Board's job to provide people with information. She questioned whether this is happening. Bonnie Hammersley said the impervious surface question is an example of how the petition process works. She said the petition was submitted, and it was assigned to Craig Benedict. She said the department directors take these petitions seriously. Commissioner porosin asked if every petition that has been raised by citizens has received a response. Chair McKee and Commissioner Jacobs said yes. Commissioner porosin said it would be good to know that. He would like to see an update when residents are sent a letter or answers are provided. Commissioner Jacobs said the response letter that Commissioner's receive in response to petitions states that the item was referred to the planning director, who will follow through with the citizen, and it often gives a time frame. He said you will not see the actual letter, but you will see a reference to the fact that it is being sent, or that it has been assigned to someone. Commissioner porosin said he has seen the department references, but he does not recall seeing updates when a letter is sent to residents. Commissioner Jacobs said most of the time staff brings it back to the Board before answering the reference. Commissioner Rich asked if the issue is considered resolved if a letter has gone out to a resident. She questioned the process if a Commissioner wants to address an overall change versus just for an individual person. Chair McKee said to keep in mind that this situation does not happen very often, and the Board has to be careful to avoid a feedback loop that is too tight. Commissioner Rich said she just wants to make sure nothing slips through the cracks. Chair McKee said there is an effort going on right now regarding connectivity, and this was not initiated by a citizen or Board member petition. He said this came from a general email from a resident. He said this is not something he can work on, because it is an issue that information technology (IT) has to resolve. He said many issues that may seem to have slipped through the crack are actually just being slowly processed. Commissioner Rich said this issue is one that the Board knows about and updates are being received. She questioned whether there are other issues where this is not happening. Chair McKee said it is a rare occasion when this happens. Commissioner Price said a whole group of people came and petitioned the Board to name the senior center after a particular person. She said this went to agenda review and it