Archive
| Develop or Be Sued? |
 |
 |
 |
| Written by Pete Theisen |
| Tuesday, 11 January 2011 03:24 |
|
It wasn't exactly a secret that in my last campaign for City Commission I was the "Anti-Growth" candidate. Within a week of my pre-filing this time I was getting told by the city attorney's office that "it would be inappropriate to discuss hypothetical possibilities for future development approval applications". "Inappropriate"? Never mind that the "i-word" is usually used by highly controlling people to refer to purely personal dislikes and hatreds, it turns out that the guy has a legal point. Growth hearings are quasi-judicial and the commissioners are legally prohibited from political considerations regarding the application being judged, but rather may only judge the application with regard to whether or not it follows the law. So if a couple buys the house next door to you and proposes to replace it with a mega-mansion to better accommodate their several unemployed kids, dozen grandkids and six in-common-laws a commissioner can only vote to deny the application if it violates the law? Basically, yes. I think this is what it meant when the man said "neighborhoods had to be an integral part of development projects" - that they get to develop right next door to you. The trouble is, that makes the neighborhood a place far different than the one you chose to live in, doesn't it? Can anything be done? Currently nothing is - the commissioners have been approving nearly everything set before them, quasi-judicial hearing or not. May as well just include the applications in the consent agenda! Last year there were four minor projects turned down. The refusals can be appealed, and most likely will be approved on the second try. Why? The City wants the "highest and best use" of all property, even if it is right next to your house. So the tax base goes up and more money comes in. Your taxes go up because the neighborhood includes that mansion! That and they still fondly seem to think that local workers might maybe build the project. Yeah, right. But what if someone - me for instance - started asking probing questions about whether certain aspects of an application truly were legal - and persisted asking until the answer was given? Would that help? Couldn't hurt. If you can't turn down the project because Sarasota is BUILT OUT for heaven's sake maybe a flaw can be found in the application. About all that anyone can do nowadays. |
Political Advertisement paid for and Approved by Pete Theisen for City Commissioner.
