Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Jack W. Golden <br />September 16, 2004 <br />Page 3 of 20 <br />meeting, I expressed concern about the imminent expiration of the 60 -day <br />determination period under which ALUC must act on the City's application. <br />° <br />i <br />13. On June 23, 2004, I informed you during a telephone conversation of all of the <br />above information. You informed me that if the City was going to enforce the 60- <br />day rule then ALUC would instead hold a special meeting and, in that case, the <br />AEE would likely be found inconsistent. <br />14. Despite this discouraging information, City staff continued to address amendments <br />ALUC was requesting in order to obtain a positive staff recommendation. In fact, <br />the City continued making requested changes up to immediately prior to the special <br />meeting. In order to facilitate the Commission's review of the proposed 2004 AEE, <br />City staff also prepared a redlined version of the AEE incorporating ALUC staff s <br />comments.5 <br />15. On July 12, 2004, the ALUC convened a special meeting. At that meeting, the <br />ALUC expressed displeasure with the redlined submittal, even though the changes <br />were minor and were made solely to satisfy ALUC staff. Unfortunately, ALUC <br />staff chose not to explain its role, and allowed the Commission to act under the <br />mistaken belief that this redline version was a new, last minute City - generated <br />submittal. Despite these misunderstanding, the City was told we were close, but <br />that staff wanted an opportunity to review the language to make sure their concerns <br />were captured by the added language. <br />16. Since the jurisdictional 60 day period was about to expire, and in the face of a <br />negative staff recommendation on the May 13, 2004 submittal, the City withdrew <br />the May 13, 2004 AEE submittal and resubmitted the redlined version of the AEE <br />incorporating the ALUC staff s changes. The City was informed we would meet <br />with ALUC staff in late July, which would allow the ALUC staff report to be <br />finalized the first week of August. <br />17. On August 3, 2004, Mr. John Leyerle called Mr. Trevino to set up a meeting for the <br />following day with ALUC staff and City Staff. City Staff and I cleared our <br />calendars to accommodate the meeting. <br />18. On August 4, 2004, at around 12:00 p.m. Mr. John Leyerle called Mr. Trevino to <br />cancel the afternoon meeting allegedly at yollr request. Now, for the first time, 84 <br />There was still time under the Brown Act to add this item to the June Agenda, but ALUC staff chose not to <br />do so because the agenda was already "full." Also, the City could have simply kept quiet so as to let the 60- <br />day determination period expire and thus become a consistent agency. The City chose not to do so. <br />5 It should be noted that the City does not believe any of these minor edits were necessary for a finding of <br />"consistency" by ALUC (the definition of the word "consistency" is discussed below), but in an effort to <br />cooperate with the ALUC and its staff, these minor edits were made to the AEE. <br />