I will share my thoughts when not mobile but thought this was worthy of pushing out immediately. I will clean up the post here as well with formatting and such.
** Update – see the update at the bottom of the post from Albemarle County’s Lee Catlin **
Just received by email:
“Subject: [CCA] URGENT: Supervisor meeting tonight threatens CCAC purpose and autonomy
Tonight at 6:00 PM the Board of Supervisors may completely undermine the effectiveness of Crozet Community Advisory Council. Your immediate input is important.
Crozet and Western Albemarle citizens should be seriously alarmed by a proposal before the Albemarle Board of Supervisors tonight that says that the community representatives who volunteer to serve on the Crozet Community Advisory Council should not be allowed to hold votes or to express their views on development matters that are brought to them for evaluation and reaction.
The purpose of the advisory councils is to spare the Planning Commission and Supervisors from making decisions that defy the public’s understanding of what a master plan actually says. This new rule would nullify the reason for advisory councils and one must expect that the CCAC members would simply quit if it were enacted. Votes are necessary to forge consensus and a consensus community view is a valuable contribution to an official action by supervisors. The CCAC has shown that is willing to work developers on critical properties such as the Barnes lumberyard, where the CCAC has provided the developer with a description of positive attributes for the property.
County officials say this rule was not meant to be included in final language for the Supervisors’ consideration.
But the public should be forewarned. The matter comes before the board at 6 p.m. tonight in Lane Auditorium in the County office building. We urge you to attend and support your CCAC’s autonomy.
Update: from Lee Catlin with Albemarle County: (thank you for the quick response, Lee!)
“We have valued and continue to value the input of Advisory Councils and there is no intention on the part of the Board or staff to inhibit or stifle the important discussion and feedback received from these groups, including communicating their preferences on issues related to the Master Plan including land use and development topics.
Here is the cut and paste of the language that is before the Board for approval this evening, as you can see by the redline, the language about voting has been deleted.
The other reference to voting is here – again, absolutely no prohibition on voting, just an indication that it is not required or expected.
Update 12 March from Ann Mallek:
Just to put everyone’s mind at ease, below is the note I sent yesterday morning to the board members, advising them of the changes I planned to propose to correct the errors in the documents.
There were several current and former members of the CCAC who spoke, and the many emails were important to inform the board of the issue and concerns.
After a discussion, the corrections were adopted by the board.
Thanks to everyone for weighing in to preserve the good of the process. See you soon.
I plan to pull the cac papers from the consent agenda today to get corrections made, which were discussed last meeting.
I think some of the concern is that these documents do not stand alone but are being sent out to the cac members alone. Thus the CCAC does not have all the elements.
To make the rules sheet, attachment B very clear, two suggestions are made.
Into Attachment B
We should add wording which is now only in the attachment A about places 29 .
Repeat the first sentence of the charge… This rules out any concern about voting on non charge related issues.
In second paragraph of the charge, attachment A, copy this sentence into the att. B
Although councils/committees do not have a legislative role in the development process, Citizen advisory councils are an important venue for discussion and the council can provide feedback and indicate preferences related to development proposals.
The voting section needs this change.
5a. While the advisory committees are not REQUIRED to take votes…
Voting is a tool the committee may use to share their collective thoughts about an application or policy question under consideration…
(To expect unanimity is unreasonable, and to expect obeisance to the will of the current board when the view may be in opposition to their master plan is unreasonable.)
Just my view.
Ann Huckle Mallek
White Hall district supervisor