|
|
|
|
|
Vol.
I No. 8 Retail Ordinance Rebuffed By Charles Douglas
On a 3-0 vote with Mayor Michael Machi and Councilmember Mark Wheetley abstaining, the Council sent the language back to the drawing board of the Committee on Democracy and Corporations, along with review by the Economic Development Committee, the City Attorney and a Town Hall meeting. All five, however, agreed that an election for every permitting decision was not in the best interests of the city. “I’m still not quite sure on the voting part of this…it would really be underestimating the vulnerability of the community, somebody could come in here and a sales job could be done,” Wheetley said. “We need broader community participation in this to flush these issues out before we spend City legal time.” Through structuring the vote as whether the public would approve their business license, the ordinance may provide an end-run around the City’s normal regulatory process. “Right here it says that if [retail businesses] get their permit, they can do whatever they want,” Machi said. City Attorney Nancy Diamond wasn’t prepared to render a final opinion on the measure, although she and other city staff questioned whether the decision being called for with a store-specific election was based on administrative or land use law. Also in question is the role of Proposition 218, the state measure approved by voters in 1996 which requires a two-thirds majority to approve any new tax assessed by local governments. “We might need to restructure entire business license ordinance, which might trigger an election under [Prop.] 218 itself,” Diamond said. “I think we just need a little more review as to whether its zoning or not…virtually all the other examples come up in a land use context.” Corporations Committee member Sean Armstrong, who drafted the ordinance along with fellow non-attorneys Ryan Emenaker and Michael Twombly as staff admitted to having a “very limited exposure” to its development, disagreed with taking a land-use perspective. “We don’t think it’s appropriate to allow any part of Arcata to suffer from an erosion of democracy,” Armstrong said. “[The Planning Commission] is not a democratic process.” Groves called instead for a special permitting process through the Planning Commission for any new chain, despite the call by Armstrong to let the people vote. “People say that businesses meet needs, they don’t, they make money…they advertise businesses that do ruin small businesses, that do put small people in the poorhouse,” Armstrong said. “We saw there was quite a bit of debate over the formula restaurant cap, there was a concern that people didn’t have a choice.” The chain restaurant limit was approved in 2002 and allows for no more than eight such establishments to exist in Arcata at any one time. Restaurants would be excluded from the new ordinance, along with institutions such as banks which do not focus on selling goods. Public comment, while vague on the details, was sympathetic to the idea of protecting local businesses. “Our country has become a strip mall and its become depressing,” Northern Humboldt High School Boardmember Kathy Marshall said. “We need to make a strong statement that we’re not going to allow that to happen in Arcata.” The owner of a local Napa Auto Parts store struck a chord of dissent though, as Chuck Giannini said the money he made mostly stayed in the community. “We’re locally owned, the five people we employ were all born in this area, the owners are in this area, how does that qualify as a chain store?” he asked. “I think when you’re buying from us, you’re buying local.” Womens’ International League for Peace and Freedom organizer Becky Luening said such an ordinance would put the city in a better position to attract tourists. “This is a really wise way to approach development in this community,” she said. “There’s something really attractive about a town that retains a unique character by promoting more independent small businesses.” While the City already has procedures in place to put the brakes on the development of a big box exceeding 30,000 square feet, Councilmember Dave Meserve said requiring a full environmental impact report would be appropriate in the establishment of any new formula business. “An outright ban would be really nice, but I don’t know that it’s legal,” Groves said. In addition The Council voted 5-0 to revise the implementation plan for their Redevelopment Agency after staff advised of significantly fewer revenues likely to be generated over the next five years. The Housing Set-Aside Fund estimate was reduced from $296,000 to $124,000, and interest revenue projections were reduced from $1.7 million to $786,000. Of the 643 units the City promised to build by 2008, 231 remain un-built. “We’re on track to build those, but it’s not like it’s going to be easy,” Deputy Redevelopment Director Larry Oetker said. Oetker said 189 units were currently either permitted or in the pipeline, with 271 more planned by 2010, 73 of those affordable. Councilmembers also voted unanimously to approve an annual Disadvantaged Business Enterprise plan, which gives small businesses owned by minorities, the disabled or veterans to receive extra consideration. Arcata Bike Library Director Bill Burton called for raising the participation goal from 11.6% to 18%, as well as to add a preference for locally-owned businesses. “They need to show a good faith effort to try to achieve this goal,” he said. “We can do that without a significant increase in staffing.” Public Works Director Doby Class replied that he would be willing to explore the issue for next year’s plan, although the point was mute for 2006 as no federally-funded transportation project were expected in the city. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copyright © 2005-06, Humboldt Sentinel. All rights reserved. |