| Author | Post |
|---|
grolfe
Member
| Joined: | Mon Nov 6th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 696 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu May 21st, 2009 06:44 pm |
|
By Glenn Rolfe
Leader & State Register
SEAFORD – Annexation remains a hot topic in Seaford.
City council May 12 approved a proposed charter change impacting annexation that with General Assembly approval in many cases would remove voting by residents and place them in the hands of elected council members.
“This (process) is nothing new,” said councilwoman Pat A. Jones. “They do it in other communities.”
Non-city residents from the Hearns Pond area led the opposition wave challenging the proposal.
H.A.P.P.E.N. (HearnsPond Assocition for its Protection, Preservation, Enhancement and Naturalization), a cit’zens organization, opposed proposed annexation requests in 2006 and 2008 that were defeated in voter referendum.
Under the amendment proposal – modeled after that in Millsboro – council would be empowered to vote on annexation culminating a process that begins with landowner requests, reasons and zoning designation, review by a mayor appointed committee of council members and a public hearing.
“It appears you are taking the voting rights away from the people,” said Hearns Pond Road resident and H.A.P.P.E.N. member Susan Messick.
“We all have Seaford addresses. We may not pay the taxes at this point in time,” said Hearns Pond road resident Brenda Stover. “We are not adversaries. We are your conscience. We believe that the right to vote is very critical.”
In April 2008, voters rejected annexation requests for Ray S. Mears & Sons, Inc., and Morris Properties LLC Wilmington along U.S. 13A bordering Seaford’s northern boundary.
Those properties were part of a six parcel package of more than 600 acres that were overwhelmingly rejected in September 2006.
In opposing annexations, H.A.P.P.E.N. stated it does not oppose responsible and managed development, but cited uncertainty as there were no specific plans for the land.
“We really respect you very much. I know you think that because we think differently we don’t. But I know many of you on a personal basis and I think you’re terrific people,” said Ms. Stover, who said by eliminating citizen voting rights “the life of this town will be sucked out. I have one question: Can you the mayor and council live with that guilt on your conscience?”
“The charter of the town is the equivalent of the Constitution,” said Howard Dhondt of Hearns Pond Road. “You don’t change a constitution … town charter simply by snapping your fingers. The people’s will has been very clearly expressed – they said ‘no’ twice.”
“If this gets approved I am moving out of the city. This is not an idle threat,” said city resident Jerome Love, who said there was very little public notice. “The council is not being honest. They are going around the backdoor. The voters have already said ‘no.’” They are trying to change the charter to do what they please.”
“Personally I don’t want to see any rights of the voters, the citizens and taxpayers of this city taken away,” Mr. Love said.
City Manager Dolores Slatcher told the audience that as elected officials council members make many important decisions that impact the city and its citizens.
“The community has voted these members to represent them. They have empowered city council to make those decisions on their behalf. If they dislike it, then the next election, somebody else can run and they can vote them out,” said Mrs. Slatcher. “It seems like you are trying to portray that this group works in a vacuum and in darkness, and that is not (the case).”
Councilwoman Jones, who engaged in several semi-heated verbal exchanges with speakers said “you can’t expect other people to run city government. You can’t be on the outside looking in thinking you know what is better for the city when you really don’t know all of the facts. Let me hear from somebody in city limits.”
Hearns Pond resident Erroll Mattox said such a proposal will benefit only a “special class” adding that there is an appearance of “impropriety.”
“Taking away the vote of people is an absolute travesty,” said Gabriel Zepecki, adding it gives the appearance that “the council is in bed with commercial interest.”
Mrs. Slatcher said the charter does provide a public vote for annexation requests that could create an enclave or extension.
“If you had an area petitioned surrounding an area that did not want to be annexed and they did not petition – that would require having a public vote,” said Mrs. Slatcher. “If anybody that were to be included in an annexation that did not want to be annexed it would have to go to a public vote. The city generally does not annex anybody that does not want to be annexed. But there could be certain instances.”
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 10:45 am | |
|
|
|