Decision to Rescind, part 4.

Evolution of the Plan

I was not a fan of the project being proposed along with the rezone request that was approved by the Council on December 1st. But far more than that, I was upset at the irregularities in the approval process. I will go into the details of my concerns in a later post, but I walked away from that meeting convinced that we must figure out what went wrong and find a way to fix it so that it doesn't happen again.

The next day I spoke with a current Councilor on the phone. We both vented about the various aspects that we were upset about. We talked about "reconsideration," which is when a Councilor requests that a item that was voted upon be brought back to the Council to be reconsidered. It can only be done in the two subsequent meetings after the vote, and can only be asked for by someone who voted with the majority. One difficulty was that two of the Councilors who voted for the rezone would be leaving office before the next meeting, so it seemed unlikely that they could call for a reconsideration even if they could be persuaded that it was the wrong decision.

That evening David Knecht sent an email to all Councilors and Councilors-elect laying out why he thought it was the wrong decision and asking the four to consider "reconsidering."

The following day, Thursday the 4th, I attended the full day Zoning Summit, sponsored by Hal Miller and put on by Community Development. Much of what was presented drove home over and over again to me that the December 1st decision was a mistake. I sat next to Gary Winterton and we discussed some of these points. I also talked with the Mayor during one of the breaks and we discussed the decision and how the process could be improved. I was determined to work to improve the process, but I was also moving past just hoping that one of the four would move to reconsider, and was wondering if there was something I could do to fix what I considered to be a mistake.

I met one-on-one with David Sewell, Gary Winterton, and David Knecht the following week. The rezone authorization was one of many topics discussed with each. Mr. Winterton had concerns and was also interested in improving the process. My conversations with Mr. Sewell and Mr. Knecht went further, wondering if there were options to revisit the rezone. I had also met with non-Councilors from both the private and public sectors. It was helpful to get other opinions on both the project and the process. I don't believe that the idea of revisiting the decision was discussed with anyone outside Councilors and Councilors-elect. 

I was the first one to arrange a discussion between more than two people: By the 10th I felt comfortable that both Dave and Dave felt similar to me about exploring options, and we discussed this together. As Mr. Sewell was on the Council, he approached the Council Attorney about the subject. I never talked with George Stewart about it until the morning of the 4th of January, but he was copied on some of the emails discussing options.

By the middle of the month there was consensus that a majority of the upcoming Council would like an opportunity to revisit the rezone approval. More serious counsel was sought from the Council Attorney, and we agreed that the cleanest option to consider overturning the decision, outside of mayoral veto or a call for reconsideration from the re-elected Councilors, was to move to consider rescission. A reconsideration request was less legally clear. A second legal opinion was obtained, which agreed with our Council Attorney. At this point the conversation pretty much died down. After Christmas, Mr. Sewell circulated a memo to the five who signed, drafted by the Council Attorney at our request. This is the memo which we ultimately signed on the 4th. There was more interaction after the new year, including with Gary Winterton, but the subject at that point was Council leadership.

I requested a final meeting with the five who signed to lay out all of our arguments and to consider the potential costs of moving to consider rescission. This was the first time in over a month that I had spoken with one Councilor on the subject, the first time I had spoken about the topic with George Stewart at all. It was also the first time I had met face-to-face with more than one Councilor or Councilor-elect. The meeting was legal because only two of the attendees were Councilors at the time. After discussing the issues, we agreed that it was worth moving forward.