BLOG: Dixon General Plan/Housing Element Should Be Written by Residents

Dear Dixon City Council, 

I am writing to request a meeting of  Dixon's General Plan Committee. I was startled by the following information from Mike Smith, IBEW LU 180 Business Development Manager appeared in a local newspaper, dated January 27:

“The City of Dixon also has worked to perform as part of the development process for the studio (note: newspaper article author is referring to a proposed movie studio). The housing being displaced by the studio has to be accounted for elsewhere in Dixon so the housing element is in compliance. Part of Dixon’s general plan states development will pay it’s own way. Therefore, for the housing element work Dixon must collect from the developer. One of the easy ways to do this is via reimbursement agreement. I have been working on the housing element options and to get the project back on schedule, David Doswell recommended an approach and Morning View asked for approval of the reimbursement agreement so the City of Dixon can move forward.”

The Housing Element is part of the General Plan. California State Law Requires that there be a substantial amount of public input into the General Plan, particularly its housing elements. It seems to me that this subject requires immediate action to find out what is happening on the Housing Element which is due later next year. I have two major worries. The first is an appearance of a conflict of interest in having the developer revise the housing element. The second is a matter of reasonable timing.  That is all aspects of the Housing Element require citizen participation. I believe the General Plan committee must meet and develop an organized and scheduled public participation and comment process.

Other questions include: Who besides Mike Smith and Dave Doswell are working on the Housing Element. In other words, what is the status of the review? What is the city’s plan to get this item back on track? How will all citizens be involved?

Further, relevant to an appearance of a conflict of interest: the statement that  “The work for the Housing element work, Dixon must collect from the developer.” I understand that the General Plan requires that development pay is own way. This is normally done by the developer paying for permits, impact and other fees, etc.  It stands to reason that a developer ought not be charged with developing the goals or requirements that they are supposed to meet.

-- Shirley Humphrey