I just got home from a special city council meeting called by Councilman Anavitarte. Its sole aim was to dismiss citizen Stuart Anderson from the city’s planning committee. The reasons given by Jason were as follows:
- Mr. Anderson has put the City in a tenuous liability position by speaking directly to developers of a proposed tower building about what was ‘wrong’ with their plans
- And further told same developers the community was not for their project
- Mr. Anderson has been told several times since April by the City Attorney, the PC is to review zoning and yet he continues to disregard this directive
- Mr. Anderson appears to have mislead the PC onto paths not designated nor condoned by Council such as making negative comments in public about the present City Planning Co. and personnel (Cat Sherlock’s comments, recent meeting)
-
Mr. Anderson has been told by Mr. Lawler, Independent City Planner/Advisor about proper behavior, etiquette expected of PC members yet he continues to disregard this directive.
- Mr. Anderson has been told by Council and responded in the affirmative he understood what Mr. Lawler told him and still disregards the responsibilities of a PC member
- Exhibits confrontational and antagonistic behavior towards some council members on public web site
- Has put the City in a tenuous liability position by speaking directly to developers of a proposed tower building about what was ‘wrong’ with their plans
-
Has shown uncooperative and antagonistic behavior in public and on a public web site towards the City Planning Co.
- Has wrongly accused or shaded facts concerning the Planning Co. on public web site about their invoicing to the City
- Has wrongly accused or shaded the facts concerning the Planning Co. on public web site of not properly providing Zoning Ordinance work
-
Has continued to act adversely and not in the City’s best interest regarding PC’s responsibilities in public
- Has taken part in promoting false information to businesses and citizens causing animosity and strife within our community
I have to admit that when this list was presented to me, I couldn’t quite understand why any of the above behavior required a special, last-minute meeting. Especially one that was announced with the absolute minimum lead-time required by state law, and that most citizens probably still have no idea happened.
I’ll post the video I captured from the meeting in a few days (once I get it off my camera & uploaded to the web). Unfortunately, I ran out of space on my memory disc, and wasn’t able to get the last 20 minutes.
Long and short of it: there really isn’t a whole lot of hard evidence about what Stuart Anderson has said or not said to developers. The city council (all of them, not just the mayor) has done a crappy job of letting the planning committee know exactly what its purpose is. In my opinion, the council would have been better off just voting to abolish the planning committee as a whole (which apparently hasn’t done jack since its inception), rather than conducting special hearings about particular members. All the meeting tonight did was push a deeper wedge into Doraville’s body politic than existed already.
The final vote about removing Anderson shaped up this way:
Jason Anavitarte, Marlene Hadden, Bob Spangler: Yea
Tom Hart, Ed Lowe, Donna Pitman: Nay
Mayor Ray Jenkins: Abstain
Final result: Nothing. Stuart Anderson is still president of the planning committee. The city is a little more divided than it was yesterday.
An open e-mail to councilman Anavitarte was mentioned several times over the course of the meeting, where Stuart Anderson overstepped the bounds of his position on the planning committee. For the benefit of those who did not have a chance to read it, I grabbed it off the Oakcliff Neighbors e-mail list, and am republishing it here for everyone’s benefit:
Jason:
All this e-mailing by you reminded me of something i foregot in “drafts”, back in August.
________________________________________________
This e-mail [below] is pasted at the top and bottom of my response; so the reader has reference to my concerns. And e-mails that came with Jason’s are in normal order at the very bottom of this.
sa
>From: “Jason R. Anavitarte”
>Reply-To: ona30340@yahoogroups.com
>To: ona30340@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [ona30340] Re: We need the zoning ordinance!
>Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 16:19:21 +0000 GMT
>
>The city council made a decision on this, it is the day to day
>responsibility of the Mayor to communicate with our city planners which we
>found out at Monday js meeting has only happened twice per the Mayor,
>despite any other excuses one may want to make, a fact is a fact, and it
>can’t be shadded into something its not no matter what anyone wants to say.
>Jason R. Anavitarte
>Mayor Pro Tem
>City of Doraville, Georgia
“No matter what anyone wants to say” is seldom a defensible position
As a professional; providing progress reports and asking / answering questions is part of my or any competent contractors relationship with a client.
How many times did Dan or Holly come by or call and in particular about the zoning re-write? On paper questions; or guidance?
What is the status of the work orders and format presentations by the Pond Co. that are part of their contract requirements?
Why was the first discovery session held August 21st? 6 months and two weeks into the process?
Why did three of the five [I call them chapters] provided by the Pond not apply to Doraville?
A, good CEO i.e. the Mayor; is involved in an idea’s inception, and then the department head / project manager [council person] follows through with oversight and reports to the CEO. This is a normal order of things; in business.
In that Anavatarti motioned and Hadden seconded the expenditure of $105,000 for a re-write of our zoning ordinances by the Pond Co. February 6th 2006 [now almost 7 months] It was and is their primary responsibility as generators of this project and good stewards of the public interest; to initiate follow up on there own. And report to the Mayor and populace.
If council man Hart can go on and on about the side walk; and Councilman Spangler worry about the bushes each meeting………”their own projects” . And yet not a peep about progress or proof of same; on one of the most expensive and necessary projects the city is engaged in, currently. Were you or Marlene not interested in this project? Or keenly interested, fully informed and trying to keep the other Council members, Mayor and the public from reviewing?
For what reason?
Marlene referd in some E mails to a stack of papers. The “proof of work done” [by Pond] after 5 months; was 54 or so sheets of paper; five chapters of the new zoning re-write were produced for the Council and who ever was interested on July 12th, Council meeting. Three of the five chapters don’t apply to Doraville.
Our zoning book has considerations for perhaps 19 – 23 Sections; [chapters] We got 5 chapters, from Pond on July 12th; [5+months] three of which don’t apply to Doraville, in that they are for the management of a PUD. [planned unit development] The city of Doraville voted the PUD out of our zoning ordinance book some months back; as being a difficult to manage and expensive for the city, as well as dangerous to the sovereignty of any city with one.
On august 21st, we had the Pond fact finding meeting that we should have had 4-5 months ago. I thought it went well but was rather preliminary in nature.
There are billing questions / irregularities / back and forthings
So the “shadding”…….. [ misspelled ] [Jasons e-mail] So the “shading” is that any professional group I’ve been a party to and or hired; initiated it’s own program of work order writing / fact finding /with reports to check for direction or validation as to direction. This is usually spelled out in contracts but if not is still part of any complex process.
You motioned and Ms. Hadden seconded this major expenditure; where were your reports to the City Council?
If you didn’t want to do your job you could have asked the Planning Commission to help with over site; since it’s of interest to them. They / we read the five chapters and were ready to answer / ask questions. THIS IS THE ONLY PARAGRAPH IN THIS NARRATIVE WHERE IN I SPEAK AS A PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBER.
AS A PRIVATE CITIZEN – NOT SPEAKING FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION. I was kept from reporting on the 5 “chapters” at the August 7th C.C. meeting. By you primarily, and an interestingly “packed” house. I was expecting an atta boy for extra effort. Actually, expecting the parents of the project to if necessary ; ask
focused question as to content or interpretation. Not personal attacks.
A little maturity would be appreciated; this is the city’s money and future.
Our Mayor responds to city council people daily; almost all of them each day and some time several times a day with some of them. Did you and he never consider discussing this zoning re-write? Did Marlene never bring it up? Our Mayor interacts with Chuck Entsmingers office each day. Deals with the administration / office issues during the day. Looks at all the accounts payable.
Deals with the day to day complaints and questions that Betty doesn’t take it upon herself to field. Receives 12 – 15 visitors each day Networks with other cities. GMA & DMA Works with department heads. Has or makes 30+ phone calls each day.
I find it reprehensible that you should state that a situation that is occurring; is the fault of the Mayor when you carry the prime responsibility for oversight and the professional company you brought to the city as a well paid contractor has not generated regular [or even irregular] reports on it’s own.
Strong note to follow.
sa
