[OldNorth] Re: Sycamore/Cornell Q Zone Lessons

[Tracy-Marshall]

Neighbors.

Sue Greenwald isn't conflicted on the 5th Street project.  Her rental 
property is 550 feet from the 5th Street right of way.

Steve Tracy.
On Wednesday, September 15, 2004, at 03:56  PM, Valerie Vann wrote:

>
> John Lofland wrote:
>>
>> Even worse, the one Council member we can rather count on owns 
>> property in
>> the Old North and cannot participate in Council decisions regarding 
>> our
>> area. So, we are essentially without a Council person on our side. 
>> (Argument
>> here for district elections?)
>>
>
> I'm beginning to have a real problem with the above, both for council
> members and city staff.
>
> What actually is the rule on "conflict of interest"?
>
> I can see a need for recusal if the council is voting on a property
> that belongs to a member (council or staff), or within the 500 foot
> notification limit even, so that the member could be assumed to have
> a direct financial interest in the matter, but I really can't see it on
> issues affecting a whole neighborhood or district, just because
> the member lives there; still less if a meeting doesn't involve
> a vote, but is a workshop, or for informational purposes, etc.
>
> The same logic that is invoked against a member voting on
> an issue in their neighborhood would prevent anyone from voting
> on an issue affecting the whole of Davis, if they live in Davis.
>
> The problem I'm having is this: I vote for certain individuals because
> I think they will support what is in my interest, as well as the
> general public interest. But if the representatives I vote for
> can't vote on those issues of most concern to me because they live
> in the same neighborhood, what's the point of my supporting them
> with my vote, etc.? They're forced into recusal when we need
> them most. We end up NOT be represented by those we elected to
> represent us.
>
> So an issue can end up being voted on by members who would oppose
> such an issue in their neighborhood, regardless of how our
> neighborhood (and a council member living here) feel about it.
>
> In the current Council, one recusal is enough to lose a vote on
> a crucial issue. We could be "strong supporters" of like minded
> Council members, and what good would it do us? What would happen
> if a whole council just all happened to live in the
> same "neighborhood"? Flip a coin?
>
> Similarly, it is ridiculous that a staff member can't attend
> a meeting or make a staff presentation because of living in
> the neighborhood in question, whether or not that person may
> have more experience and expertise on the matter or not.
>
> Maybe we do need district representation; or a bigger council,
> so that where members live would be less important.
>
> Valerie Vann
> valerie at vanngroup.com
>