STORYLINE Sacramento City Hall / Politics

This storyline has only one article

Viewing thru of

Close timeline

City Attorney finds "additional issues" to investigate

by Kathleen Haley, published on November 24, 2009 at 10:23 PM

No high resolution image exists...

Progress bar

Loading images
Slideshow image

The Sacramento City Council’s audit committee will be busy for awhile.

During a Tuesday night briefing on an investigation into the city’s approval of 35 building permits in a Natomas flood zone, City Attorney Eileen Teichert told the City Council there are more issues to address. She identified one of the issues as the Facilities Permit Program (FPP), but declined to specify the other issues.

“During the course of these initial interviews and documentary review, additional issues have arisen,” Teichert told the City Council.

The FPP became controversial in a recent debate over Nestlé’s move to set up a bottling plant in Sacramento. In three weeks, the city attorney’s office will deliver a report to the City Council on issues related to the FPP, Teichert said.

The office will also give recommendations on how to revise the program to align to related laws, she said.

In addition to the FPP, the city attorney’s office has found other issues, according to Teichert. In response to questions from reporters after the meeting, she did not describe the new issues. However, she said information about the issues would be reported back publicly to the City Council as “as soon as we’re ready to reach some conclusions on them.”

The City Council’s audit committee will analyze some of these additional issues “where it’s appropriate, where it’s more of a systemic or a process issue,” Teichert said

Members of the audit committee include Councilmembers Steve Cohn, Ray Tretheway, Lauren Hammond and Robbie Waters. The committee is currently working on an audit of the Community Development Department; the new issues will be added to the committee’s plate, according to Teichert.

The briefing Teichert delivered Tuesday was not her final opinion on the Natomas building permits issue — it was an update on the investigative work being carried out by her office and Renee Sloan Holtzman Sakai, a third-party firm. The city attorney’s office and the outside firm are reviewing documents and a database and holding interviews. Teichert’s office and the third-party firm are trying to find out if the 35 permits in question are an “isolated incident,” Teichert said.

“We still have some additional legwork to solidify that conclusion,” she said.

Bikes on K Street

The City Council likes bikes on K Street.

Councilmembers unanimously approved a rule change on Tuesday that will let bicyclists ride on the K Street pedestrian mall.

“If you want people to try alternative modes, you’ve got to make it a little more convenient for people,” said Councilman Steve Cohn.

Councilman Ray Tretheway praised the timing of the rule change. “It really seems like the time is right to put bicycles back on K Street,” Tretheway said.

Specifically, people will be able to bicycle on K Street from 13th Street to 7th Street and from 4th Street to 2nd Street. The Westfield Downtown Plaza will continue to be a no-bicycle zone.

Photo by Anthony Bento.

Kathleen Haley is a staff reporter for The Sacramento Press.

Liked this article? Share it with your friends:

Conversation Express your views, debate, and be heard with those in your area closest to the issue.RSS Feed

TAB
Author thumbnail
November 25, 2009 | 5:11 AM
Thank you city council for approving bikes on K street near the mall and to Steve and Ray for their comments regarding allowing bikes. This is awesome news.
0 0
REPLY
November 25, 2009 | 9:48 AM
When the pedicab industry was getting started in 2006, we lobbied city officials for permission to operate on K Street between 2nd and 4th, and 7th and 13th. To their credit they said "yes". Allowing all bikes here is another positive development. Little steps ...

To K Street cyclists: beware the tracks and yield to pedestrians.
1 0
REPLY
November 25, 2009 | 10:21 AM
Chris Dougherty, an associate planner in the city's Transportation Department, said that signs for bicycling will need to be set up on the K Street Mall. He said Wednesday that he aims to have the signage ready 60 to 90 days from now. Once the new signs are up, bikes on the Mall are legal. Dougherty said the new signs will replace existing ones that prohibit bicycle riding. The signs will include safety information, he said, noting that bicyclists will need to follow a 10 mph speed limit and yield to pedestrians and trains at all times.
0 0
REPLY
November 25, 2009 | 11:16 AM
Thank you for this report. I was unable to attend or watch the meeting last night. The Bee's coverage only highlighted the Bikes on K issue, and NOT the 'additional issues' found by the City Attorney...

I feel the only link with the truth these days at City Hall is through the City Attorney, and the council members NOT on the audit committee...
1 0
REPLY
November 25, 2009 | 11:41 AM
Good for Teichert, I hope that there is a complete independent and thorough investigation.
2 0
REPLY
November 25, 2009 | 12:59 PM
I'm confused. The Bee this morning made it sound like the 35 permits were a non-story and called it an isolated incident?? What's the real story here? IMHO, no homes should have been granted permits and built in the Natomas flood plain. Look to Rudin, Serna and/or Fargo for allowing this crazy home-building scheme that endangers lives.
2 1
REPLY
November 25, 2009 | 1:21 PM
Hi Oracle, Thanks for your comment. If you would like to watch the hearing, it's available on the city's website under the heading "video" for Nov. 24.
http://sacramento.granicus.com/ViewPublisher.php?view_id=8
0 0
REPLY
November 25, 2009 | 1:25 PM
yay to bikes on K - now how about a few more bike lanes, especially on roads around K st - there are actually not many and my route from work (I St/10th) to home (Curtis Park) needs looking at.

A little anecdote to demonstrate: While riding home last night, I heard a 'Meeep' from a car behind me. I slowed down, got off my bike and went back to see what the problem was, thinking maybe a light was out, my tire was flat, my backpack open etc.
None of the above. The Lone Female motorist wanted to let me know that (a) I was taking up all the lane with my bicycle and (b) This wasn't a bike lane.
My esprit d'escalier failed me again but left me mad all night.
0 0
REPLY
November 25, 2009 | 4:02 PM
I've experienced bike riders pretending they were cars and taking up a car lane, many times at a stop light, where bikes cannot generate the speed necessary to move fast enough before the light turns red again. I can't help but feel they do so for some pathological need for attention. I feel this is just plain rude.
3 1
REPLY
Leave a Comment
User icon
Type your comment in the box below Edit your comment in the box below

Type tags into the box below.
Use commas to separate your tags.

Cancel Submit

Please Log in or Sign up

Existing Members

Sign In Progress bar Forgot Password?

New Users Create an Account Here
Progress bar
Verification email has been sent. To validate your account open the link provided in the message.
There was a problem sending your verification email. Please contact support@sacramentopress.com
Progress bar Login background Tag cloud top Tag cloud background Tag cloud bottom Login manager background