RE: [nndl] NLNPT's RoleMaybe related
very planning team has been shot down rather painfully by the planning commission in the past. I doubt the commissioner who told you that meant that to sound like a planning team has any power outside the boundaries of the plan process. Believe you me, I’ve never felt we’ve been granted any extraordinary powers and corresponding responsibilities. If I had, I would have demanded a new identity, a paycheck, and a bodyguard. ;-) pretty small semantic difference. Representing the plan should ideally be representing the views of the neighborhood. In that the plan can be changed, it is hypothetically doing this. It’s just that folks haven’t chosen, for whatever reason, to pursue that avenue in favor of momentary panic and outrage. I don’t see a problem with that; I think a deliberative process should exist. I doubt that planning done my crisis management would be a pretty thing. more go in front of commission and say: “Well, the plan says this, but we don’t feel like that this week..” than we can go up and just fabricate ideas or neither we nor the plan would have any credibility whatsoever, kind of rendering the whole process a waste of time. To my knowledge, neither of these has happened or I wouldn’t be a part of it.
[mailto: Clinton Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 3:54 PM To: Kirsten Cc: NNDL Com Subject: Re: [nndl] NLNPT's Role argument that the planning team's voice is not intended to reflect, or viewed as reflecting, the preferences of the neighborhood, that viewpoint is incorrect for the very reason you point out: the plan is intended to reflect neighborhood preferences, and the planning team is intended to advocate for the plan. Thus, in practice, at least in the one neighborhood battle I got involved in, the Planning Commission believed that when the planning team spoke, the neighborhood spoke. I was told this directly by a member of the commission. And the specifics of my experience are telling. On the issue, the neighborhood plan was silent--- it said nothing. But the planning team members communicated to the commission that had they thought of the issue when they wrote the plan, they would have indicated in the plan a position that was contrary to the views of the adjacent homeowners. A member of the Planning Commission told me that he appreciated the objections to the proposed project, but that he had to go with the advice of the planning team because they best represented the views of the neighborhood. So I respectfully and strongly disagree with your conclusion. Our planning team's leadership matters, and the voice of the planning team is viewed as communicating the preferences of the neighborhood. Regards, Ryan wrote: consequently, who the chair of the planning team represents. Neither the team nor the chair represents you, the neighbor. When we are asked to vote on an issue, for example the opting in or opting out of properties for VMU designation, we are not doing it as representatives of the thoughts and opinions of any of our neighbors - we would not be so presumptuous. The planning team's role is to serve as a watchdog for the neighborhood plan. Any votes we take on zoning and planning issues in our neighborhood are based on the intent and the dictates of the plan. The chair then represents the NLNPT in any instances where a contact person is needed, a letter is required, etc. - he or she is not your representative elected to speak for your "collective preferences". The neighborhood plan, on the other hand, should reflect the neighborhood's "collective preferences". If it does not, then we need to go through a plan amendment process - a process that involves not just the planning team but the Planning Commission, the City's planners, and, ultimately, the City Council. The downside of this is that it's tedious, requiring phenomenal amounts of time and effort. The upside is that you, the neighbor, have many bodies with which to voice your opinion to - the planning team cannot dictatorially and whimsically determine the fate of your property all by their little lonesome. Oh dear, I hope I haven't discouraged anyone planning to join the NLNPT in the hopes of partaking in the vast amounts of power it (mistakenly) wields? :-) Kirsten Ryan Clinton wrote: you like Patrick, how long you've been best friends, how experienced he is, or how brilliant and insightful he is. It is not okay for someone elected to represent our collective preferences to drop f-bombs in e-mails to neighbors with whom he disagrees. I would implore you, Patrick, to please tone down the acrimony in your e-mails to the group and individual neighbors. Everyone should tone down the rhetoric, sure. I'm not defending anyone else's behavior. But not everyone is elected to represent us and speak for us. Thanks, Ryan wrote: To me
It is
And…
About
The
If you
Come on
Trust me,
Look
Everyone
-D.
From: To me
It is them more
The message If you
If you
So what You are
-- Give Austin's Homeless Pets a Chance at Life www.FixAustin.org -- Give Austin's Homeless Pets a Chance at Life www.FixAustin.org |
Post new comment