Tag: Healdsburg city council

Last Monday night marked the conclusion of what City Manager Jeff Kay called “a long and really involved journey” in Healdsburg’s civic history, as the City Council voted to approve a new map for selecting council members by district voting, beginning in 2026.

The Healdsburg City Council will have a lengthy goal-setting meeting on Friday this week, an annual discussion that assists the body and its members in prioritizing their efforts for the coming year. The following Monday, April 21, the council will hold its second regular meeting of the month, one which is likely to have its own challenges in light of the April 7 meeting and its revision of the 5-district map for City Council seats. Buckle up...

After having reached consensus at the fourth public hearing on March 17 that what has been termed Map A best represented the interests of the city in crafting five separate districts, the expectation was that the council would make a final perfunctory review, then move to adopt and accept that finalize the map. Mayor Mitchell had other ideas.

Given all the angst and opinion voiced in previous public hearings (and social media) about the city’s transition to District Elections, Monday nights’ meeting took place in a desert. Fewer than half a dozen members of the public were in the room when the hearing, fourth in a series of five, got underway at the posted “time certain” 6:45pm on March 17. But the meeting set forth the future of Healdsburg district elections for years to come.

The third public meeting held in the effort to split Healdsburg’s electorate into districts, to satisfy the requirements of California’s Voting Rights Act, led to a general consensus among the council members to stick with their original preference: five districts each to elect a councilmember, with the mayor’s role rotating between them.

“Can you speak to how this project does or doesn’t comply with what the recommendations are in the Active Transportation plans, or what the proposed bike and ped [pedestrian] improvements are that people have been emailing us about?” Councilmember Ariel Kelley asked. “I think there’s a disconnect between what you guys are proposing and what the community [believes] is included in the project.”

Retired attorney Jon Eisenberg filed civil suit against the City of Healdsburg, charging multiple Brown Act violations in two recent cases that demonstrate what he calls “a pattern of misbehavior that is deeply embedded in the culture of Healdsburg’s city government…” His action focused on what he called the “tainted decision making” in the effort to get Measure O on the ballot and the campaign to get it passed; and the transition to district elections now underway.

Healdsburg last week added an Active Transportation Plan (ATP) to its library of planning documents that outline future projects and growth in the city, after more than a year’s study, conversation and preparation. The final plan ATP was presented by Public Works Director Larry Zimmer and Senior Project Manager Michael Harrigan to the City Council on Jan. 21...

It was Assistant City Manager Andrew Sturmfels' last meeting in Healdsburg before he begins work for Sonoma County, but the same old City Council was on the dais to double-down on their controversial decision to set a 5-district limit for Healdsburg's new government....

The grumbling attained legal emphasis  just after Christmas, when on Dec. 26 Healdsburg attorney Jon Eisenberg filed a letter with the city that raised a number of alleged Brown Act violations during the lead-up to the Measure O vote in November, violations he clearly is prepared to take to court. He then raises concerns about the Dec. 16 City Council meeting itself, suggesting that additional Brown Act violations took place in that process as well...