Light-up McIntosh December 15
Light-up McIntosh will begin at the Civic Center at 6:30 p.m. The event will host Santa Clause and an area choir from six local churches will sing.
09.13.07 LPA approves land rezone Wright,, Glass applications
Friday, September 14, 2007
Land Planning Agency chairwoman Charlsie Stott recommended to the council on Thursday night two rezoning applications that would rezone about 34 acres combined of agricultural and conservation land to residential.
The two zoning applications were submitted by Bill and June Glass for a 18.32 track of land and Danaya Wright for a 15.84 track of land on the south edge of town.
Earlier this year, Council Vice President Howard Walkup and Mayor Marsha Strange rezoned their land that runs alongside both the Wright and the Glass land for rezoning. Walkup had been turned down by a council led by Wright for in previous years for this rezoning.
The council will have two public hearings during a rezoning process. Since two council members are most not running again, the new council may have the final decision for this rezoning.
Check out the planning reports prepared for the council: Glass rezone Wright rezone
that the Wright and Glass rezones were approved
by the citizen committee while June Glass looks on.
(Photo by Cher Phillips)
Labels: agricultural land, Danaya Wright, Glass, Howard Walkup, LPA, rezoning
posted by Cher @ 3:02 PM,
,
03.27.07 -- BRIEF: LPA to recommend Historic 151 repeal, tree ordinance
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
By CHER PHILLIPS
The McIntosh Land Planning Agency will recommend to the town council that Historic Ordinance 151 be repealed and the old historic ordinance in place before 2006 be reinstated.
The citizen board also approved an ordinance that would give the council the power to remove citizen boards with the vote of four council members.
The tree ordinance went through yet another set of revisions before the LPA approved an amended recommendation of an ordinance, which will go next to the council.
Details including public records of the reports and audio files will be available Wednesday.
***
(Updated March 28, 2007)
MEETING REPLAY
Listen to the March 27, 2007 LPA public hearings:
(If you are using Internet Explorer, you may have to click the play arrow twice.)
Read the reports approved by that LPA that should be sent to the council at the April 12 meeting.
Citizen board member removal
Click here for the report on codes that would change the cause for removal of citizen board members.
(Curious about who the current citizen board members are, when their terms are up and how to contact them? Click here to check out a list of members with term dates recently approved by the town council.)
Switching out historic ordinances
Click here for the report that recommends Historic Ordinance 151 be removed and replaced by the old historic ordinance that predates 2006.
Amended new tree ordinance
Click here for the report that recommends approval of a Tree ordinance, with LPA suggestions.
Labels: citizen board removal, Historic Ordinance 151, LPA, Tree Ordinance
posted by Cher @ 9:17 PM,
,
03.23.07 -- REPORT: Council president re-examines public hearing decision, says rezone not a fast track agenda item
Friday, March 23, 2007
Editor's note: This is the second of two stories delving into resident concerns that rezoning agriculture land in McIntosh is being fast-tracked. Council President Frank Ciotti addressed issues in a Q & A e-mail interview with the Mirror.
The interview is posted verbatim with a brief added after the first question reflecting a phone interview this evening with Ciotti.
By CHER PHILLIPS
Council President Frank Ciotti answered questions about how a Town Council Public Hearing was scheduled for April 12 to discuss rezoning applications.
Mirror: From these emails, it looks like you made the decision to schedule the public hearing before the council, as a whole, receives receipt of the LPA's report at its next meeting. Is that accurate? Was this decision part of your role as council president? Why was this not a
full council decision?
Ciotti: It is the duty of the Council President or the Mayor to schedule any Public Hearings. In this case, due to her personal involvement, the Mayor cannot schedule the Pubic Hearing. I scheduled the hearing prior to a regular Council meeting so everyone may be involved. Town Attorney (Scott) will be there for questions and any needed legal opinions. I e-mailed the other council members and the attorney and asked for any questions or concerns. There were no replies, which indicates to me that we should move forward.
[Ciotti later said in a phone interview this evening that he has contacted Attorney Scott Walker about this issue. The McIntosh Town Charter gives the power to call special meetings to the council president and mayor. However, the charter makes no mention of public hearings, while the LDC mentions the town council making decisions regarding workshops and public hearings in the section dealing with rezoning. Ciotti said if he made a mistake in calling the meeting, it can be canceled, if necessary. He also said he would make a statement to the other council members before the meeting, but he pointed out that no one objected when the town clerk sent the e-mail out to the council members collectively. Ciotti wasn't sure when the public hearing posting was going to run in the Ocala Star-Banner. A concern he had was that it would cost the town more to advertise it, if it were canceled.]
Mirror: Why did you decide to drop the workshop step from the zoning process?
Ciotti: The workshop process is usually needed for large scale projects. Please don't think that the flow chart from WCPC is mandatory. It is just a guideline. If we were a larger city or a county, we would always hold workshops (Ex: the projects on 39th and 75 called Springhills). I don't think we have a need for a workshop on this item. Once the Council gets public input, the council can discuss and vote.
Mirror: Can you speak to the concern residents have that by cutting out a council workshop on this rezoning, residents lose a shot at voicing opinions and concerns about it?
Ciotti: I can tell you that everyone will be heard and have a chance to comment. Your printing this Q&A will help everyone get involved. The Council is always willing to listen to citizens who want to give input. The more input, the better for our town. Often we only hear from a few, but there are many folks who do not speak at meetings and are very aware of this re-zoning process.
Mirror: By scheduling the public hearing before the meeting, one month has been cut out of the time table for rezoning the AC land. In your opinion, has this process been fast-tracked?
Ciotti: Please be assured there is no "fast track." Yes, we are moving forward. You missed being involved in this process that started in 2005. We have been through this before and the process will be fair to all including the property owners who have filed and others who will file in the future. There is plenty of time for reflection and discussion of our town's future.
Labels: Frank Ciotti, LPA, rezoning, town council
posted by Cher @ 11:00 AM,
,
03.16.07 -- EDITORIAL: Be angry with me, but don't be thrown asunder
Friday, March 16, 2007
By CHER PHILLIPS
If you didn't notice, I touched a nerve this week, unleashing a literal firestorm in the forums denouncing me and the blog. Since a couple people I talked to were unsure about what one or two of the points in Tuesday's story meant, I'd like to recap and clarify.
See, I think this is pretty important stuff. Other people must too, or they wouldn't be so mad at me for pointing it out. And frankly, it's crossed my mind that all the hollering at me is meant to distract readers from the questions the reporting uncovered.
Florida's ethics laws and the January meetings:
Background: Florida statutes (112.3143) prohibit a municipal official from voting on an issue which might benefit him, or his family, with a special private gain or loss. When something like this comes before a board, a procedure has to be followed in which a statement is read into the record before voting and forms should be filed within 15 days.
In January, Council Vice President Howard Walkup put the issue of rezoning his land, as well as the Stranges and the Glasses on the agenda, and then he voted with the council to send rezoning these three parcels of land to the LPA, on which his brother Jim Walkup is a member. The procedure spelled out in Florida statutes was not followed during the January council and the LPA meetings.
Discussion: For all practical purposes, the January meetings regarding zoning were used to "feel out" the mood of the council and the LPA to see if this rezone would fly. If either Walkup had followed the procedure in statutes, the final decisions on those first votes would have gone the same way. Further, the current council has been open to land owners exercising their property rights.
By not following procedure, this process is into a questionable light. Walkup's rezoning had been voted down by a previous council in 2005. There was personal gain involved in the January votes, even if the meeting just served to test the waters.
The key question in this part of the rezoning issue isn't "Should Howard get his land rezoned?" -- but "Should a councilman use his elected seat to accomplish this?"
Need I mention that the penalties by Florida statute range from removal from office to a $10,000 penalty? Not to mention, the waters are further muddied by the fact that the rezoning process left other land owners, the Wrights, out in the beginning stages.
Going against the will of the council:
Background: In February, the council heard the LPA recommendation and voted to table the issue of rezoning to either a later meeting or a special meeting. The reasons given were that this is an important issue, and people will want to know about it. After the vote, Councilman Lee Deaderick told the land owners to see him if they wanted a special meeting called. The council tossed around the idea of paying for the rezoning of these parcels of McIntosh's agriculture land to residential. To her credit, Mayor Marsha Strange suggested that land owners pay for their own rezoning. Although, she suggested that Walkup not have to pay for his since he's pursued the process already. Nothing in February was decided by the council other than this was an issue that needed to come up with time enough to discuss it.
But by the March council meeting, applications had been filed and planning reports had already been finished by a regional planner, on the town's payroll.
Discussion: As someone pointed out in the forum, land owners can file for zoning changes if they want. I agree. They sure can. But don't expect the town and the taxpayers to pay for something if you aren't going to honor the wishes of a council that was both willing to hear the issue but wanted to do it when residents could be more informed about it.
By pushing this issue through, the residents were put at a disadvantage. Rezoning 20 acres of land in McIntosh is a HUGE issue. It's the tip of the iceberg. Rezoning was contentious for a long time, and rushing it isn't going to change the issues that were at hand in 2005 when Walkup's request was previously turned down.
My other concern is that ignoring the will of the council could become a trend. I look back to the repeal of the historic ordinance and see this is the second time inside a two-month period that this has happened. I've never been a fan of Historic Ordinance 151. But the fact is the council wanted the LPA and the Historic Preservation Board to work on 151 together, not for the LPA to repeal it the first time they met -- without even going through it as a board and addressing the concerns spelled out by council member. Especially since that was specifically stated in a February vote, making it the will of the council.
(I didn't mention this in my report (there is only so much space and story people will read), but Councilwoman Eva Jo Callahan did an excellent job of mediating by asking committees to at least try to work together before the public hearing March 27 to repeal the ordinance altogether.)
Public need versus private need, and future development:
Background: The McIntosh codes say that a public need should be justified to change agricultural zoning.
The other night, the LPA decided that the land owners stated need was sufficient for rezoning the Strange's and Walkup's agriculture land to residential. One board member said need was fulfilled because it was Walkup's need to have his family living close to him.
Discussion: One or two land owners' desires, or even needs, are not necessarily the same thing as the public need-- even if we really like those land owners. And let's face it, we do. They're good people who've given a great deal of service to this town.
But together, this is a whopping chunk of land we're talking about opening up for development.
And that brings me to the final question that I have not seen adequately addressed yet: What EXACTLY is going to go on this land after it's rezoned? A rezoning process should make this clear to a community, or public need can, in no way, be properly determined.
The planning reports show a potential for 36 homes. The 2000 Census reports show there are only 279 housing units in town. It doesn't take very many new homes to significantly increase this community. Does anyone else think that adding even the potential for 36 is something that McIntosh should seriously consider?
While building 36 homes may or may not be the land owners' actual intentions, if the land is zoned for that many homes, that kind of development would be possible.
However, if Walkup and the Stranges just want some land zoned for the purpose of building a few homes for their families, then why not create a zoning classification for that? Or, as Danaya Wright suggested the other night, why not rezone just enough land to allow them to do what they want and need to do?
Another thing that hasn't been considered is that these are only two of six large parcels of land on the southeast end of McIntosh. What happens if these two parcels are zoned at R1, allowing two houses per acre, and then the Burry's, the Glasses and the Wrights decide they'd also like to rezone their land to the same classification? Can the town's facilities really accommodate all six parcels? Or, what if they decide they oppose it? What will the other homeowners on Avenue H think of the kind of traffic that intensive development would bring to that end of town? Nobody polled those folks when they "tested the waters" in January.
It comes down to this: What does McIntosh want future development in the southeastern part of town to be like? I'm just not seeing that question seriously considered in this process.
And, folks, that's the key question residents in this town need to consider. Be angry at me for asking it, if you want. But don't let yourselves be thrown asunder.
Labels: editorial, Historic Ordinance 151, LPA, rezoning
posted by Cher @ 7:08 PM,
,
03.13.07 -- REPORT: LPA passes planning reports, questions surround rezoning process
Tuesday, March 13, 2007
By CHER PHILLIPS
Listen to the March 13 LPA Public hearing:
(Internet Explorer users may need to click the start arrow twice)
| Planner Bruce Day | 0:05:18 | ||
| Danaya Wright addresses Walkup's request | 0:09:40 | ||
| Frank Ciotti questions applications | 0:13:46 | ||
| Marsha Strange: we're paying R1 taxes already | 0:16:23 | ||
| Randy Brown: comments on no paperwork showing need | 0:17:55 | ||
| Vote to approve Howard Walkup's application | 0:31:22 | ||
| No urban sprawl | 0:42:50 | ||
| Danaya Wright: comp plan requires buffer | 0:43:40 | ||
| Stranges' application approved 4-0 | 0:51:30 | ||
The Land Planning Agency approved two applications for zoning plans tonight, passing them next to the council for approval and future public hearings.
The rezoning applications involved two parcels of land along the southern border of McIntosh. The first, belonging to Town Council Vice President Howard Walkup, is 9.2 acres of agricultural land that he would like to see changed to residential, R1. The second parcel, belonging to James and Marsha Strange, is for 10.29 acres that they are asking to be rezoned to residential, as well.
Agriculture land is zoned for one house per 10 acres of land. As residential, R1, these parcels would be zoned for two houses per acre of land. According to planning reports presented at tonight's meeting by a Planning Director Bruce Day, with the Withlachoochee Regional Planning Council, as many as 36 homes could be built on the two parcels if the zoning for both parcels is approved.
About 13 residents attended the public hearing, including three council members, Councilwoman Eunice Smith, Council Vice President Walkup and Council President Frank Ciotti. Among neighboring land owners, Danaya Wright, and her father John Wright, were present. The Wrights own a large parcel of agricultural land that borders Walkup and Strange's land.
Read the planning reports as originally drafted. Stranges' Planning report
Walkup's Planning report
Day presented the planning reports he'd prepared, and the LPA passed them with two minor amendments. The first was that the final recommendation for the zoning stand from the LPA upon approval. The second change dealt with the question of need.
Defining the public need:
Danaya Wright first addressed a concern during public comments about the need for rezoning.
Wright is a former council member and former council president. She resigned last summer after a recall petition was circulated in McIntosh against her. Walkup was among the residents on the recall committee who circulated petitions. In the past, these parcels of land have come before two councils that Wright served on as a council member. She was opposed to rezoning these land parcels, wanting a different zoning classification in place other than R1. Wright works for the University of Florida as a law professor specializing in property law.
She cited the McIntosh Land Development code, stating that there was not a clear need established for the rezoning.
The McIntosh LDC spells out the purposes and reasons land zoning serves and conditions under which that zoning can be changed. (Land Development Code, page 2-5)
The first purpose for agricultural land is to protect that land for agricultural use from other incompatible uses. The second purpose is to serve as a holding classification when proper future development of the land is uncertain.
The LDC goes on to explain the conditions that should be met when land is in a holding class. One of the reasons, which Wright referenced was: "it is the intention of this Code that such lands not be rezoned for more intensive uses without assurances that a clear public need exists for such rezoning."
While neither applicant said tonight what they intended to use their land for after it was rezoned, LPA members discussed the need for the applicants to be able to move their families close to them.
Wright said she would like to see the LPA approve two or three acres as opposed to a such a large amount of land.
Board member John Sapp interpreted the need for rezoning to be that Walkup's family live within walking distance of his home.
Yet, none of the board members hashed out what "a clear public need" was or was not.
Day had not interpreted need in his findings before the meeting. So, after discussion, the planning reports were amended to state that rezoning was "necessary based on the land owner's stated need."
Board member Randy Brown said when he looked over the paperwork, he did not see a need statement.
Following the money:
Another concern voiced by Wright was that the two residents seeking approval were elected officials and the town is footing the bill for the rezoning process.
In fact, nailing down who exactly is footing the bill for this rezoning is more convoluted that it seems.
During the Feb. 8 council meeting, the council discussed paying for the rezoning process with the Stranges, Walkups and the Glasses together. Then, at the continuation meeting on Feb. 12, (Feb. 12 audio file, 1:51 - 1:55) Mayor Strange told the council members she did not think it was right for the town to pay for the rezoning of any individual's parcel of land.
"Bill and I talked it over and we don't think it's fair for the town to pay for an individual's rezoning, and that includes Howard," June Glass said. She added that she didn't see a problem with everyone going together and paying their share.
At the time of this discussion during the Feb. 12 council meeting, council members decided they didn't need to take action on who would pay for rezoning.
But by the March town council meeting, Day had already been commissioned by the town to research and write planning reports for Strange's and Walkup's rezoning applications. When asked before tonight's meeting who was paying him for his work on these reports, Day said the town of McIntosh was and that he was working at the town's direction.
Ciotti confirmed this after the meeting.
In fact, on Feb. 9, the town council voted 4-0 specifically to table the whole zoning issue and to take it up at a special meeting or at another meeting. (Feb. 9, audio file, 00:01:25)
Councilman Lee Deaderick said that this was a big issue and that people needed to know about. He even invited land owners to speak with him following the meeting, saying he would call a special meeting if needed.
But by the March 8 council meeting, applications from two elected officials who were both present during the tabling vote on Feb. 9 had been submitted and Day had already completed planning reports.
Several questions remain.
If the town has hired Day and is paying him, who made that decision? If was not determined by council vote during the February meeting, when did that vote take place if it didn't take place at the February council meeting?
The next question is just as unsettling. Even if the individuals are paying for their own newspaper announcements of public hearings and for notifying neighboring land owners of public hearings, who is paying for Day's time?
To convolute the manner even further, John Wright asked the LPA tonight if the Wrights could join in the petition for rezoning. Their land sits directly between Walkup's and Stranges'. LPA Chairwoman Charlsie Stott said they could not. If they wanted to rezone their land, they would have to start on their own. Stott said that when the council decided that each individual pay for his own rezoning cases, the Glasses dropped out.
Yet, the question still remains unanswered, why were the Glasses included to begin with and the Wrights were not?
Conflicts of interest:
Before the public hearing tonight, board member Jim Walkup read a statement into the record, citing Florida statutes. He would not be voting on his brother Howard's rezoning petition, because this would be a conflict of interest under Florida law, (Florida Statutes chapter 112.3134.)
Yet, when the process began in January, both Walkup brothers voted on the boards they serve as either elected or appointed town officials to begin the process of rezoning three parcels of land, including Howard Walkup's.
In January, this issue appeared on the town council agenda under old business. During discussion, Debbie Miller, the town clerk, told council members the agenda item was added by Walkup.
The town council, in turn, voted to send the three parcels -- the Glasses, the Stranges and Howard Walkups' -- to the LPA. The vote was 4-0. (Jan. 11, audio file 2:11:38 to 2:16:00) Callahan was not present. Howard Walkup voted.
Then, on Jan. 29, the LPA voted unanimously to recommend that the council begin the process of rezoning those three specific parcels of land. (Jan. 29 LPA meeting, 26:00 - 44:00) There were no dissenting or abstaining votes. Jim Walkup voted.
The LPA will hold another public hearing March 27 regarding the repeal of the Historic Ordinance, passing the new Tree Ordinance and an ordinance regarding removal for citizen board members.
Labels: agricultural land, LPA, public hearing, rezoning
posted by Cher @ 11:07 PM,
,
03.10.07 -- REPORT: Public hearing to consider large-scale land rezone in McIntosh set for Tuesday
Saturday, March 10, 2007
By CHER PHILLIPS
The LPA will meet Tuesday at 7 p.m. to discuss rezoning that could open up agricultural land in McIntosh for the potential development of 36 new homes, according to planning reports.
The posting at the town office has been corrected to reflect that the March 13 meeting will be a public hearing, as opposed to the previous posting of an LPA meeting, to discuss rezoning of agricultural land.
Two applications to rezone agricultural land to residential use have been filed, and two planning reports have been completed by Bruce Day, Planning director with the Withlacoochee Regional Planning Council and provided to the LPA Chairwoman Charlsie Stott and town council members.
The applications from Council Vice President Howard Walkup and McIntosh Mayor Marsha Strange and her husband, James are for almost 20 acres of land along the southern town border of McIntosh.
The Stranges own 10.20 acres of land and the WRPC report says there is potential for 19 new homes, located on the south end of McIntosh.
The Walkups own 9.2 acres of land belonging to Howard Walkup with the potential for 17 additional homes, behind his home on the south end of McIntosh.
Day has prepared a list of considerations the LPA should be assessing at next week's public hearing in an e-mail to McIntosh town officials.
Those considerations include the impacts potential growth will have on the town's comprehensive plan, living conditions and traffic in the neighborhood, and ask if granting this change would extend "special priviledge to an individual owner as constrasted with the public welfare."
In January, Walkup initiated this process by asking the town clerk to place this zoning issue on town's agenda. He also took part in the council's vote to send this matter to the Land Planning Agency.
During the February monthly council meetings, the council discussed the town footing the bill for this process. The mayor suggested the individual land owners pay for their own land. However, this has not been voted on by the council.
After the LPA hears the zoning requests, if passed, the amendments to the comprehensive land use map will go to the council in which they can set a date for a public workshop or set a date for a public hearing for the first reading of an ordinance.
Labels: agricultural land, Howard Walkup, LPA, Marsha Strange, public hearing, public records, report, rezoning
posted by Cher @ 1:09 PM,
,
02.28.07 -- REPORT: LPA sets Public Hearing date for repeal of Historic Ordinance 151
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
By CHER PHILLIPS
Listen to the Feb. 27, 2007 Land Planning meeting. (Internet Explorer users may need to click the start arrow twice.)
The LPA set a date of March 27 for a Public Hearing to remove Historic Ordinance 151 from the town's code and place an amended version of the town's old historic codes in place.
Two weeks ago, the McIntosh Town Council voted to repeal Ordinance 151 and then immediately approved a motion for the Land Planning Agency and the Historic Board to hold a meeting to hash out an improved version of ordinance. The spirit of that motion would allow those who support the ordinance and those who disagree with it a method for revising the ordinance to a law that everyone could be happy with, or at least live with.
But the joint meeting, held during a noticed LPA meeting last night, was missing one vital element in the discussion: The Historic Preservation Board.
No one from the Historic Preservation Board showed up to represent their concerns with the ordinance. LPA chairwoman Charlsie Stott said the town clerk sent an e-mail to the board members. After the meeting, Council President Frank Ciotti - who just stepped in as the meeting was ending - confirmed an e-mail did go out to the members.
Also missing from the discussion were community members who might want to voice an opinion in how the ordinance is either reshaped or removed from the town's codes. This could be due to the nature of the public notice displayed in the shadowbox at town hall.
The notice advertised the LPA would meet, but it did not specify that this meeting was a workshop or that this was to be the joint meeting between the two citizen boards.
Further, no agenda was posted to let the community know that this issue would be addressed. This is the second time this year that LPA notices have not accurately informed residents about the nature of the business being discussed. Rezoning McIntosh land came before the LPA in January during a meeting that was not publicly noticed with an agenda.
Last fall, Adria Harper, from Florida's First Amendment Foundation, presented a Sunshine Seminar in McIntosh and said that while a simple notice of a meeting is sufficient, it is in everyone's best interest to post an agenda so people who would be effected by a policy or law change can have input.
Four of the LPA members were present at last night's meeting. Secretary John Sapp was missing. Half the board present last night were not in attendance at the last council meeting, in which the orders from the council were made in motion form on how to precede with the amending 151.
The LPA members discussed some parts of the historic ordinance they did not like. However, the objections from both Councilman Lee Deaderick outlined in detail two weeks ago in the council meeting, nor objections voiced this month about the ordinance's repeal from residents who support the current historic ordinance were heard.
The LPA will meet again on March 13 at 7 p.m. No agenda has been posted.
Labels: Historic Ordinance 151, LPA, public hearing, Tree Ordinance 155
posted by Cher @ 1:17 PM,
,
Editor
Editor and Publisher:
I'm Cher From McIntosh, FL I'm a graduate student at the University of Florida working on a master's degree in Mass Communication. While I was finishing my undergrad degree in journalism last year, I reported on McIntosh, Fla. for an in-depth reporting class. I figured that the reporting and the public record files should go somewhere people can access them. Reporters don't report to keep the information they find to themselves. Some of that reporting is included here in a forum that allows response. McIntosh suffers because with no news coverage, the local government and the rumor mill have too much potential to run rampant over residents. I moved to McIntosh in the fall of 1999. My profile
About This Blog
The primary purpose of this blog is to accurately reflect what happens in town public meetings and dispel rumors. I record the meetings and make them available for download. One of the goals of this blog is to offer residents a place to voice opinions. The comments, views and opinions expressed there are not necessarily those of the editor.
