May 16, 2003

Paul Kelly and Tim Smith

The May 5th full Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) meeting had two surprise guests, Supervisors Paul Kelly and Tim Smith. Kelly and Smith sit on the Ad Hoc Committee that oversees the CAC and its work. Their surprise appearance was to hustle the CAC and tell them to move on the document destined for the General Plan before they see any more studies like the Kleinfelder report.

H.R. Downs remembers the meeting.

Most people who went to the May 15th CAC meeting expected to discuss the Riparian Rights Element of the General Plan update, and the meeting did eventually discuss it. But the real show took place during the public comments period "for things not on the agenda".

As the audience filtered in and began taking seats, who should appear but Supervisors Tim Smith and Paul Kelly? They floated in on smiles and hand shakes generating the unmistakable aura of authentic politicians. Their august presence sent shivers through the crowd as if great nabobs or mini-maharajas had suddenly incarnated among the unworthy. Smith spoke first claiming seniority and Kelly quipped "age before beauty", a cliché that like so many others that night elicited a deferential titter from the dais.

Smith on first

Tim Smith is a pro. He grabbed the microphone with all the confidence of a news anchor and projected a stentorian voice that filled the room to the farthest corners. His speech was an uninterrupted flow of congratulations, flatteries and admiration for the "work" that the CAC had done to date. He said they did the "heavy lifting" and the "pick and shovel work" and that the Board of Supervisors would "really value" their "input, counsel, advice" and their "suggestions".

But.

"There's always the good side and the down side", Smith said. And one thing he had learned from 16 years of hearings is that there always "seems like there's one more piece of information that would make our job of decision making a lot easier" but basically they could forget about seeing any more information. He said they probably won't see the EIR. Of course the great unspoken subtext of his lecture is that they should forget seeing the Kleinfelder report.

Tamara Boultbee had mentioned at the very beginning of the meeting that she had spoken to Pete Delavallee at Kleinfelder and that he assured her there is nothing in his report that could affect the CAC's decision regarding water policy. He also assured her, Boultbee said, that he had not yet "formally" sent the report on.

But Kleinfelder's study of the Joy Road, Mark West and Bennett Valley water-scarce areas has profound implications for water use in Sonoma County. These are populated areas with some of the most serious groundwater problems in the County because they are on the ring surrounding the City of Santa Rosa that drafts enormous amounts of water.

Also, the Board of Supervisors has indeed seen this report. Supervisor Mike Reilly saw it, he said it had "information gaps", which may be one reason why Greg Carr said that the version was deemed "unacceptable" and had been sent back to Kleinfelder. The only thing unacceptable about the Kleinfelder report is that it, like the PES Environmental report, scientifically demonstrates that Sonoma County is metaphorically looking down the barrel of a water catastrophe.

Smith told the CAC that the schedule that they had agreed to had "slipped, some", in other words they were late; and that he appreciated how conscientious people trying to make "good policy calls" always "want more information" on which to base those decisions. Apparently they can forget about seeing the Kleinfelder report.

Humorous asides peppered Smith's admiration of CAC members, even likening Chairmen Don Marquardt and Dick Fogg to the "Rowan and Martin" comedy team, except that Rowan and Martin were Dan and Dick and not Don and Dick, but that didn't matter, everyone laughed and Dan and Dick guffawed and blushed.

The bottom line? They were late and Supervisor Smith wanted the CAC to get a move on. "We need to get this document moving along" he said. At another point he told them outright "Don't be so concerned". The CAC membership dutifully squirmed like schoolchildren.

Kelly admires the window dressing

Supervisor Paul Kelly is as professional a glad-hander as Smith. He told the group in no uncertain terms that they (presumably the Board of Supervisors) "were happy with our General Plan", which he described as being "generally satisfactory" and that the Board of Supervisors had had no intention of "rewriting" it.

Kelly explained to the CAC that all the Board of Supervisors wanted them to do was to add "some minor changes, updates, some tweaks, [and] consistentcies" and not to to give them a "new" General Plan. With a thinly veiled reference to groundwater studies like the devastating Kleinfelder report he advised members of the inexpediency of trying to "count all of the grains of sand". As if the Kleinfelder report is just another grain of sand.

Kelly, like Smith made several references to the tardiness of the CAC's document and said that he "didn't expect it to take so long". He said the process should go "as quickly as possible".

Then Kelly bluntly informed them that "there was an expectation on the Board that your work as an advisory committee was to [make] recommendations and recognizing that the Board makes the policy calls." He promised them that no matter what they put in the Draft Elements the language "will see changes at the Board level". So there.

I guess that means that the Citizens Advisory Committee is really window dressing. They can advise all they want, but they really don't make policy, it just looks like it.

So the message seems to be that it doesn't matter if the CAC, in the course of collecting information upon which to base an update, discovers a water disaster that can be remedied by good water policy. The Board of Supervisors is perfectly happy to keep their "satisfactory" GP pretty much they way it's been for the last 12 years, thank you very much.

Briggs goes for the jugular

If that were not upbraiding enough, after the two Supervisors left the building, Scott Briggs addressed the members and explained that the job of CAC members was merely to provide an "over view" of the Plan and that not only were they not supposed to make new policy, the Board of Supervisors would "not let" them make new policy.

All that the CAC is supposed to do is ensure "internal consistency" of the elements. So that, for example, if one element "says paint the house red" and then another element refers to the same house as blue, the CAC are to make the colors consistent, a process that reduces the CAC to little more than glorified copyeditors.

Briggs said that there was no reason why the CAC couldn't attach a memo to their document saying "Gee, we wish we had the Kleinfelder report." That's right, they may be allowed to wish for the Kleinfelder report but they can't have it. The County now appears to be covering up the Kleinfelder report and hiding its findings which would trigger a groundwater management plan or some or responsible water policy.

Their job now? Just "pass" the document on to the next level.

Got that? "Pass" it on.

You bet it's late

Of course none of the hectoring members of the Ad Hoc Committee mentioned why the CAC is running behind schedule. Diligent observers of these meetings will remember that after the Water Resources Subcommittee submitted its completed document, the Water Resources Element (WRE), to the full CAC it was found to lack the necessary "teeth" to protect Sonoma County's groundwater. The entire WRE did not have to be rewritten but it had to be substantially reformed.

So much new language was needed to protect groundwater that a group of private citizens engaged a water-rights attorney to help the CAC do the job that the subcommittee had shied from doing. Furthermore, members of the public revealed that all three subcommittee members had substantial links to development concerns or municipalities intent on development raising serious conflict of interest concerns. For this revelation, or perhaps for other reasons, the subcommittee voted to dissolve itself.

The full CAC went through the WRE line by line and, assisted by attorney Ed Casey, crafted a completely revised WRE. Then, after spending only a few total hours on writing the draft (compared to the whole year the subcommittee took) the Chairmen insisted that the CAC "vote" and pass it on. Of special interest at this vote was the appearance of Steve Butler. Butler (Tim Smith's hand-picked man) is a land use attorney specializing in procuring permits for shopping malls, housing developments and other large-scale water users. He had not attended any meetings since his connections to development were made public. He showed up for this meeting however.

Most importantly, when it came his turn to vote, Butler went on record asking to clarify what exactly the vote was for. Specifically he wanted to make sure that a "yes" vote meant "no recommendation". The Chairmen assured him that this was indeed true. In other words, the CAC vote didn't count, or put differently: all the work they had done to put some "teeth" into the document to protect groundwater was invalidated. All they voted on was to pass it on.

The CAC

The Citizens Advisory Committee is supposed to advise and recommend to County Supervisors specific details of the General Plan. They are members of the public who, it is assumed, are closer to everyday activities and have firsthand knowledge of the community's problems and concerns. The Supervisors are required by law to establish a CAC; but apparently they are not required to heed any of the advice they proffer.

When it comes to further expansion of urban sprawl, an activity fueled by water, the Supervisors seem to think they can tell CAC members: "don't be so concerned" and they may make recommendations, but that the Board of supervisors make policy.

At least some members of the CAC are very concerned that there simply is no more water to fuel the foolish extravagance of more urban sprawl.