As the Daphne city council plods along on enacting a high-rise ordinance – a seemingly endless process, now well into the second year of revisions and near-decisions….
Think that you read this very same lead some place a month or so back? You might well have if you’ve visited the Lagniappe Web site. I wrote it over a month ago, but it is just as accurate today as it was then. However, there has been activity, if not real progress. In a pseudo-surprise move, council member Cathy Barnette introduced a not-on-the-agenda proposal that the high-rise zone be extended south beyond the planning commission’s Van Buren Street limit. In exchange for this expansion of the high-rise overlay, her proposal removed provisions that would allow applications for high-rise development outside of the approved area.
Good move Cathy – popular in your district and clearly orchestrated before the council meeting to ensure smooth passage. Nobody even feigned shock and it passed unanimously with virtually no discussion. Of course now that it is approved by the council, it has to go back to the planning commission. Once there, it will be considered, discussed (public comment needed?) and when all this is over, be voted upon. Only then can it be reported out to the council (isn’t this about the forty-twelfth time?) and…....ah, yes:
As the Daphne city council plods along on enacting a high-rise ordinance – a seemingly endless process, now well into the second year of revisions and near-decisions…....
Further down the Bay, 80 or so Fairhopeans were entertained by Mayor Kant’s annual “State of the City” address. The mayor’s message, bottom-line, up-front, no suspense: Fairhope’s future is fairly fine. Not great, you understand, but pretty good, considering the cash-flow problems that hurricanes cause.
The “Rainy-Day” fund has been blown-away and bridge loans are the quick fix. For the longer term, he mentioned a sales tax and went out a limb by prognosticating that he “suspects that a sales tax will happen one day,” but distanced himself from that eventuality by adding that it would happen only if the city council thinks it’s a good thing.
Mayor Tim also addressed red clay in the Bay (Against it) and the future of the (semi) historic K-1 school (Save it and reuse it). The civic booster organization, “Fairhope First” sponsored the luncheon event and the Q&A period was as polite and non-confrontational as a ladies’ garden club tea (at least I think that a garden club tea would be like that, but I’ve never actually been to one). The mayor allowed that traffic is a problem and maybe a “roundabout” should be built at US 98 and Veteran’s Drive and he is against splitting off from the Baldwin County school system (Unless educational quality drops).
Everything you needed to know about the state of Fairhope in two paragraphs. Try getting this kind of succinct Eastern Shore news coverage from that other paper. You know – the one that has vendors risking life and limb dodging traffic on Airport Boulevard just to move a few extra copies.
This love-in was in stark contrast to the special city council meeting organized to better advise the citizens of Fairhope about traffic and storm-water abatement studies associated with the coming of Wal-Mart. The meeting was billed as a chance for citizens to hear directly from the experts who did the studies. To help the concerned residents understand the issues and develop questions, the studies were to be made available at the public library well before the meeting.
In reality none of this happened. The people who actually did the work weren’t there; in their places were sacrificial lambs, thrown in at the last minute when “pressing business” or something similar prevented the principals from being present. The actual studies were not readily available; the library had only summaries and in place of questions posed by a well-informed citizenry, “experts” from their ranks lectured, debated and badgered those who were stuck defending work with which they had only slight familiarity.
As a spectator sport, it was entertaining, but not too enlightening. The questions started with a 10-minute monologue (not exaggerating) on how the citizens’ spokesperson did an independent analysis and arrived at very different – and much more disastrous – conclusions. Sometimes this had to have been by intuition, as they had no data of their own and they rejected that provided in the official studies. When the question finally arrived, it was in the form of, “Now tell me how you arrived at your (by implication, biased, inadequate, unprofessional) conclusions,” often followed by a contemptuous sneer.
The lambs bleated responses that usually started with “I am not really familiar with the study, but usually it would be done like this…” whoops, blood on the carpet. From where I sat, I could not discern any new appreciation of the facts or change in preconceptions. Aside from exposing an embarrassing level of arrogance on one side and utterly inadequate preparation on the other, nothing much was accomplished.
Actually, not quite nothing. Council President Bob Gentle noted, in trying to move things along, that some people in the back got a little sleep. While a quick glance at another council member’s notes revealed that the experience provided him with the insight: “Never do this again!”
However, those of you seriously trying to follow these run-off and traffic issues need to visit www.lagniappemobile.com. Lagniappe has summarized the written questions and answers that were prepared after the less-than- informative session reported above. And thanks to Bob Gentle for providing the Q&A documents.
Contact Pete Gleszer at jubilee@lagniappemobile.com.
Archives
Jubilee
