EMAIL SENT TO SULTAN CITY ADMINISTRATOR RICK CISAR 6:45 a.m. Friday 12/23 Re noticing of Legals:

Dear Rick,

1.      My thanks to you for requesting that (staffer’s name withheld) email me the two Garth York subdivision notices on which I was not previously copied (despite numerous and ongoing requests that I receive such notices).  I have received them in good order. However, I still do not have (but have requested from her, as well as, previously, from you) the City's DNS on the PUD lot sizes.  Please forward.

2.      WEBSITE PUBLICATION ISSUES:

The 2006 proposed fee schedule is still posted on the City's website.  This would not be any problem except for the fact that it is not noticed as a PROPOSED schedule.

The two Garth York notices of Application (dated Dec. 19th) for his proposed Steen Park subdivision on the Sultan Basin Road south of Sky Harbor, and his Cascade Breeze subdivision (east of 8th St), have not been posted on the City's website.

3.      TIMING OF PUBLICATION OF LEGAL NOTICES

I question the City's timing on noticing important issues which reduces by 50% the legally-mandated 14-day comment period (expires 1/4) during the most-intense holiday & vacation period of the year, when agencies are closed, and agency staff and "regular" citizens are highly distracted and taking time off to be with families.

Not counting the actual publication dates, in the case of the 12/21/05-noticed PUD DNS, the January 4th deadline offers only SEVEN (7) working days in which agencies can review and comment, assuming these agencies receive the notice on the legal-noticing day, which is highly unlikely. In the case of the two York subdivisions noticed 12/19 (with a Jan. 3rd comment deadline), agencies and citizens are given EIGHT (8) days in which to comment.

Additionally, these notices were not sent to me, as repeatedly requested on countless occasions. They were not, and are not posted on the city's website.  They have not been noticed in the Herald.  I only became aware of these when I read the city's downstairs bulletin board on the morning of 12/22.

Of perhaps even greater importance is the amount of time it has traditionally taken either an agency or private individual to obtain information from the City on pending land use actions, even when the city is not short-handed. By way of example only to support this claim, I offer the following:  My visit to City Hall Thursday morning (12/22, approx. 9:30 a.m.) revealed no public information on York's proposed subdivisions, with the exception of the  Notice of Application in the downstairs bulletin board.  There was no information on the public info table(s) or the city hall counter(s). When I asked staff where this information might be located, they could not find it, and appropriate personnel were not present in city hall.

Due the above situation, I am hereby making two requests:

1.      That the legal actions discussed herein be RENOTICED on January 3rd or shortly thereafter.
2.      That the content which comprises/deems the two York subdivision Application complete be copied and given to me (In accordance with all laws of Washington's Public Disclosure Act).  The Acrobat/pdf file attached contains two separate Sultan Public Info Request Forms.  I will drop off the originals to the City when I am advised that the completed requests are ready to be picked up.  (Recently, I have not been called or advised by staff that requests are ready for pick up.)

To support the claims of inadequate notice I have made herein, I offer this real-life scenario: Because the city will be closed today and Monday, and the City legally has five days in which to produce this public information for me (assuming they produce it in a timely manner), that means that I may/will receive this information on the same day the comment period ends, Jan. 3rd, which is the 5th day in which this PUBLIC INFORMATION REQUEST needs to be legally fulfilled (unless it begs additional time for a valid reason).  And because it takes several days of reading, study and research to review one land use application (much less two), clearly, the comment period is inadequate.

Thank you for your assistance.

Loretta
(phone numbers omitted)