 |
|
|
Thoughts
on the upcoming workshop to discuss the 'Master Plan' on July
29th, 2002 When I heard about the meeting that is going to be on July 29th to review the master plan I decided to take a look at the books and review what was there. I kept going back to the mission statement for our town; nothing has changed that I could see. We still need to be the stewards for ALL the natural resources that god gave this town. We need to think long and hard before we impact these long-term goals with petty self-serving opportunities. The conclusion I came to was we don't need to review the master plan. We need to review the job descriptions of the boards and the time frames they work in and Doug Staley's role. (Doug is the Code Enforcement Officer) The mission statement and the planning book itself have a solid and legally strong foundation. If the town board takes action to chip away at its core then they are on a personal mission to proceed at something that the town (after years of hard work by all in the community) has already said they don't want. Altering these documents will not alter the fact that the town board will be deliberately dividing the town and making the quality of life stressful and unpleasant as well as pitting neighbors against neighbors. What the town board needs to be is more active in the planning boards business. Discuss - review - and SIGN OFF ON at the town board meetings all major and minor sub division and land use changes, etcetera and ALL members of the town board should be well educated on what the planning board is doing and the impact the planning boards action will have on the town and the quality of life of it's citizen
They also need to increase the size of both boards back to seven and balance the representation so all area's of the town feel they have a voice, even if it is not one some town board members don't want to hear. As for the ZBA book and the ZBA board, the town board jointly with the ZBA board needs to do the interpretations - not Doug. It is not his area of expertise and it cost the town too much money to defend his point of view, leave Doug to the building code stuff and change the process of when he is involved. Large issues should always have a public hearing and be reviewed by the ZBA attorney and the ZBA board before an interpretation is made and then finalized by the town board. The zoning book is solid and we need to be careful if we make any language changes and these need to be reviewed by the ZBA attorney, not by the town board attorney Don Armstrong. Remember it is always good to get county planning's ideas on how we are doing before we start. Dan Daneen & Dick Martin was part of the original process. Keep in mind that the county does not always have our best interests at heart, they look out for the majority and money is a big motivator. The land use plan took decades to create, the ZBA book took years. Changes that are not thought out carefully will be disastrous, put the town board in a reactionary mode and cost the town in legal fees. Have the supervisor read out loud the mission statement before every change the town board thinks they need to make. Board members should have plenty to say both pro and con. Then these changes should all be put into writing and reviewed by the members of ALL the boards. Then they ALL can think about if these changes were to be implemented, where else will their impacts be felt and do these changes contradict or confuse or do they enhance and clarify what the people of Preble have already approved. The town board voted themselves a nice pay increase; I hope my tax dollars were not wasted. We are paying them to do a job, I expect them to be well informed and working hard for all of us even if they don't agree with us or like us, they are still paid to represent us. Barbara A. Frier |
Maintained by Frank Hogg ~ Problems or questions about this site contact the webmaster
