Lea este artículo en español aquí.
A little over a week after a proposal to terminate San Juan Bautista’s Urban Growth Boundary Committee was defeated at the Aug. 20 City Council meeting, the committee members met Aug. 28 to discuss the way forward. The group is finalizing a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the city and the San Benito County Board of Supervisors.
The MOU is intended to give San Juan some control over possible developments submitted to the county that are directly outside city limits in its designated planning area. It was agreed by the council that a final draft of the MOU would be ready for their approval by the end of November, after which it would be submitted, and the committee would be dissolved.
The meeting’s first order of business was a unanimous decision by committee members Dan DeVries, David Medeiros, Jackie Morris-Lopez and Chairman Chris Martorana to increase the number of remaining meetings from one a month to two a month to guarantee the MOU would be finished in time.
The committee then began considering a revision of the MOU prepared by City Manager Don Reynolds, who said he had consulted with Martorana and DeVries, the authors of the original proposal. Reynolds said they told him the language in the draft MOU the council had last considered “was far too detailed and different than they had anticipated.”
The committee had previously agreed to return to its original notes and revise the MOU to be easier to understand and implement, which Reynolds was presenting as a starting point for further committee discussion.
The most significant revision removed language requiring San Juan Bautista Planning Commission and City Council approval for any proposed development in the area designated as the First Tier, with no means of appeal if they do not agree to the project.
The revision still requires Planning Commission approval but allows for an appeal to the City Council and the supervisors if a project is initially rejected.
A similar approval process would apply to the next concentric area of interest, the Second Tier.
The Third Tier, the planning area furthest from the city, would only require a review by the Planning Commission, which would forward a nonbinding recommendation to the county.
Reynolds said that one flaw in the plan was that approving or rejecting proposed development projects was not a black-and-white decision, as the MOU implies.
Reynolds said, “It’s really the county saying, ‘Hey, we got this application. What do you think? Let’s talk about under what conditions would you approve this.’ It is not a matter of denying or approving but to have a conversation with the county and the applicant.”
Morris-Lopez agreed, saying there may be a high-merit development proposed for the First Tier that would not be acceptable as presented, but might be acceptable with amendments.
“It’s not like we’re just going to say, ‘No, we don’t want it’ because it’s in this tier,” she said. “There needs to be a discussion, and there’s always room for modification if we feel like this is a win-win development.”
DeVries suggested discarding the three tiers and defining a smaller area of concern. Any potential development projects in that area would need to be presented to the city for its consideration and feedback.
“The project applicant would offer their proposal, their pitch,” he said. “I think that would give us the best opportunity to hear what’s being proposed and then have an opportunity to provide feedback.”
Morris-Lopez said that she thought what DeVries was suggesting went beyond what was in the revised memorandum.
“Does the chair think it’s appropriate to say, ‘Okay, we need to go back to the drawing table?’’ she said. “Because this is not the product I’m reviewing and looking at.”
DeVries said what he took away from the Aug. 20 City Council meeting was a clear impression that they wanted things simplified.
“What I have suggested is a very simple process which I think still accomplishes our goals and objectives,” he said. “I would be horrified to try to torture this new draft into fitting a new approach.”
Martorana said that he understood Morris-Lopez’s “very strict” reading that the agenda item was to review and discuss the draft memorandum but that, keeping in mind the City Council’s objections to what had already been presented, no options should be taken off the table.
“It does sound like we are starting from scratch,” he said. “The fact that it is not absolutely on the agenda does not, I think, preclude this discussion.”
DeVries said he had been grappling with the framework ever since the council demanded revisions and was ready to listen to any ideas the other commissioners had.
“What we would want as a city at the end of the day,” he said, “is for someone applying for a project within our area of concern to come give their pitch to us. We want them to really, really want our ‘in favor of’ to the extent that they may make concessions.”
Reynolds said he would prepare two versions of the MOU for the next meeting in about two weeks: one addressing concerns with the revised memorandum and one incorporating DeVries’ suggestion of defining a smaller area of concern instead of the three tiers.
We need your help. Support local, nonprofit news! BenitoLink is a nonprofit news website that reports on San Benito County. Our team is committed to this community and providing essential, accurate information to our fellow residents. It is expensive to produce local news and community support is what keeps the news flowing. Please consider supporting BenitoLink, San Benito County’s public service, nonprofit news.
