| Author | Post |
|---|
grunk
Member
| Joined: | Sun Apr 6th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 7 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 5th, 2009 09:46 pm |
|
“City council apologizes for the confusion and misunderstanding in the public regarding its not making a statement to convey why they wanted to annex lands and believed based on many past annexations with the exception of the last two annexations, the citizens had confidence and trust in their decisions by having left their vote to only a few voters,” council’s statement read. “Never was it the intention to disenfranchise the rights of the citizenry to have a vote or was it even though this charter change would invoke such thoughts.”
The confusion and misunderstanding was with you and the Council, Ms. Slatcher.
"Council’s statement noted the benefits of annexations, including increased business and tax base, but said the council 'has heard its citizens and will act accordingly'.”
Do you see all the doctors leaving Middleford Road? Look at High Street lately?
Lower your taxes, cut your electric rates.
Stop making the Seaford taxpayers fund your retirement plan, Ms. Slatcher.
|
grolfe
Member
| Joined: | Mon Nov 6th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 696 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 5th, 2009 04:10 pm |
|
By Glenn Rolfe
Leader & State Register
SEAFORD – The voice of the people was heard.
In an abrupt turnabout, Seaford city council May 26 rescinded action taken May 12 to seek a charter change that with General Assembly approval would have removed voting rights of the public and placed them in the hands of the elected council members.
City Manager Dolores read council’s statement on rescinding previous action on the proposed change, which drew opposition May 12, mostly from non-city residents of the Hearns Pond area near the city’s northern border.
“City council apologizes for the confusion and misunderstanding in the public regarding its not making a statement to convey why they wanted to annex lands and believed based on many past annexations with the exception of the last two annexations, the citizens had confidence and trust in their decisions by having left their vote to only a few voters,” council’s statement read. “Never was it the intention to disenfranchise the rights of the citizenry to have a vote or was it even though this charter change would invoke such thoughts.”
Council’s statement noted the benefits of annexations, including increased business and tax base, but said the council “has heard its citizens and will act accordingly.”
The citizens’ organization H.A.P.P.E.N. (HearnsPond Association for its Protection, Preservation, Enhancement and Naturalization) opposed proposed annexation requests in 2006 and 2008 that were defeated in voter referendum. One major concern was there were no specific plans for the lands requested to be annexed.
As proposed the change would have placed voting decisions on “voluntary” annexations in council’s hands. Non-voluntary annexations, in which all landowners did not petition for annexation, would be up for public vote, said city solicitor James Fuqua, who presented information on annexation prior to council’s decision.
Council’s 5-0 verdict to rescind May 12 action drew applause from many in the standing room only audience at city hall.
“I am grateful that the council responded to the will of the people as was shown by the vast number of folks who attended this meeting. I don’t necessarily think it is put to bed,” said Gabriel Zepecki, a non-city resident of Hearns Pond Road. “I don’t think anybody here is not in favor of being able to annex properties appropriately into the city. What seems to be prevalent is the idea that what is done eventually with the properties are two separate issues. That is the area in which the citizens really need to have effective input.”
In April 2008, voters rejected annexation requests from Ray S. Mears & Sons, Inc., and Morris Properties LLC Wilmington along U.S. 13A bordering Seaford’s northern boundary. Those parcels were also part of a six parcel package totaling more than 600 acres that were overwhelmingly rejected in September 2006.
Charter changes requiring General Assembly approval are usually sponsored by the district representative. 39th District Rep. Dan Short, R-Seaford, indicated he would not support the amendment in the House of Representatives unless a referendum were held on the issue and the majority of Seaford residents supported the change.
“I think for all concerned we did the right thing,” said Seaford Mayor Edward H. Butler Jr. “Danny would not sponsor it as it stood. So there was no use in doing it.”
Middleford Road resident Mark Allen, who resides outside city limits, believes there’s a need for legislation empowering county residents with voting input on annexations.
“People live in a city because they enjoy the city – high-density population, stores …” Mr. Allen said. “However, our county is predominantly rural. So we have a rural area that is being absorbed by the city’s agenda. But yet in the whole scheme of things the county – the individuals – have no input in terms of whether or not a piece of property next to them changes density or zoning.”
News Editor Glenn Rolfe can be reached at 629-5505 or grolfe@newszap.com.
Click on “Reply” to express your views about this story.
|
Current time is 08:50 am | |
|
|
|