‘Shakeup’ considered on City of Sonoma’s commissions

The Sonoma City Council wants to narrow the focus of its multiple city commissions and committees — and, in two cases, disband them altogether.

The council on Wednesday considered redefining the roles and responsibilities of four of its commissions, including the Design Review & Historic Preservation Commission, the Community Services & Environment Commission, the Traffic Safety Committee and the Tree Committee.

Among the changes the council considered at the Nov. 3 meeting were:

∎ Reassign the “design review” aspect of the DRHPC’s purview to the Sonoma Planning Commission, allowing a more succinctly named Historic Preservation Commission focused primarily on preserving the city’s historic resources.

∎ Redirect the Climate Action Plan responsibilities from the Community Services & Environment Commission to the Joint Climate Action Subcommittee, which consists of two council members and two CSEC members.

∎ Disband the Traffic Safety Committee and turn its authority over to police, fire, engineering and public works administrators.

∎ Disband the Tree Committee and base tree-removal decisions on recommendations from arborists and city administrators, following public feedback.

City Manager Garrett Toy described the benefits of the commission changes as a way to streamline city processes – resulting in fewer meetings, fewer staff reports and fewer duplication in effort between the various committees, commissions and city administrators.

The council members first discussed a possible realignment of commission responsibilities at a Sept. 10 City Council retreat, according to a city staff report.

While no final decision on the fates of the commissions were made at the Nov. 3 meeting, all four council members were amenable to the recommended changes.

In expressing his support for separating design review from the responsibilities of a Historic Preservation Commission, Councilmember Kelso Barnett said it would allow commission members to focus on the town’s history and potentially creating special districts to preserve it.

“As a former Design Review & Historic Preservation commissioner, I would get frustrated because we would want to focus on historic preservation,” said Barnett. “But every meeting we would have design applications and sign applications and we would never get to the historic preservation aspect of the committee.”

Council members held similar support for relegating climate-action policy from the Community Services & Environment Commission to the Joint Climate Action Subcommittee, so the two boards can keep from doubling up on their efforts.

In reassigning the responsibilities of the Traffic Safety Committee and Tree Committee, the council conceded that issues which come before such committees are often subject to technical knowledge or state policy and those decisions would be better handled by internal safety experts and administrators to avoid exposing the city to legal liability.

Still, Barnett said he’d like the public remain involved to some degree in the process of tree removal.

“I would like an arborist to still have a role in that and I would like a (tree removal) notification process,” Barnett said. “And similar to if a building is historic or over 50 years old it has to have a historic resource evaluation, I assume a tree that needs to be removed will have to have a certain certification and at some point come before the public.”

Councilmember Bob Felder said he supported the staff recommendations for the changes to the commissions, but felt that, as a matter of courtesy, the council should meet with the various commissions to explain the changes before making a final decision.

“This is a big step to do this kind of shakeup to commissions and committees and I think it would be unfair of us not to consider input from those commissions and committees,” said Felder.

CSEC chair Fred Allebach cautioned the council against eliminating public-service opportunities in the rush to streamline processes.

“Being able to participate on commissions and committees is a way to get involved in the city and it also trains people to gain expertise in government process,” Allebach said. “These are fun opportunities; they might not be that efficient, but they allow people to get in the pipeline.”

If getting more people in the pipeline to government participation is the goal, the council had an answer for that as well.

Barnett said a 14-year-old student had recently suggested the City of Sonoma create a youth commission, which Barnett described as “a great idea” and suggested making it school-district wide to allow for participation beyond the city limits.

Vice Mayor Jack Ding thought that would be a good opportunity for the “young generation” and said the council could assign research projects to the youth commissioners, or they could submit their own project ideas to the city.

Felder and Mayor Madolyn Agrimonti also supported the formation of a youth commission, both saying the council would have to define the role of the commission and provide clear direction.

Resident Peadar Dalton, a local reverend and member of the Sonoma Valley Ecumenical Ministerial Association, described a potential youth commission as a “fantastic idea.”

“Anything we can do to empower the youth to feel part of the community at the decision-making level and to feel they have a voice to express their opinions -especially to political power - I think is awesome,” said Dalton.

Agrimonti noted that the idea for a youth commission was floated by former Councilmember Amy Harrington in 2017, but such a commission never got off the ground.

In the end, the council directed staff to schedule joint meetings with the various commissions affected by the shifting responsibilities. Additionally, city staff will study how other nearby cities operate youth commissions and return at a later meeting with options for creating such a commission for Sonoma Valley.

Email Jason Walsh at Jason.walsh@sonomanews.com.