Auburn Mayor Bob Snyder well knows the political adage that perception often becomes reality.
Snyder and his city council colleagues had a standing-room-only audience for their meeting this week as they tackled two items of intense public interest, one of which touched on the perception/reality notion that evolved from the recently adopted amended redevelopment plan.
The consultants who prepared the report on the redevelopment plan used
the word “blight” to describe a small portion of the storied Eisley’s
Nursery on Nevada Street — and it touched off a firestorm of protest
over the inclusion of eminent domain (the power to condemn property) in
the plan. The Eisleys and many others had visions of the nursery
property being demolished and replaced by something along the line of a
Trader Joe’s.
During previous meetings and again this week, Snyder repeatedly
insisted that Eisley’s is not the target for takeover by eminent
domain. “And that’s the God’s truth,” he declared this past Monday
night.
But the eminent domain thing had legs of its own by this time and a
stream of people -- and not merely friends and customers of Eisley’s --
again spoke out against eminent domain.
For example, Dr. Bill Kirby called it unconstitutional. Ray S. Thompson
III labeled it a dilution of property rights. Earle Eisley called it a
devastating power. Earlene Eisley Freeman said eminent domain was a
monkey on her back that impeded future planning for the nursery.
And Harvey Eisley, a former mayor, fingered City Manager Bob Richardson
as the culprit pushing the plan, a charge denied by Councilwoman
Bridget Powers in her vigorous defense of Richardson. Snyder also went
to bat for Richardson, claiming the council and not the city manager
makes the decisions.
Virtually all the dozen or so speakers favored Councilman Kevin
Hanley’s push for a ordinance stating that eminent domain will not be
used in the amended area, and they got their way. Even Snyder and
Powers joined in the 5-0 vote. Councilman Keith Nesbitt spoke of the
flak he’s taken from friends and economic development colleagues for
declaring his support of the ordinance a few weeks ago.
The ordinance, which was moved by Hanley and seconded by Mike Holmes,
states that the Auburn Urban Development Authority (the redevelopment
agency whose directors are city council members) “may exercise its
eminent domain authority to acquire property only if the property to be
acquired will be used either by or on behalf of a public agency or a
public utility, and for a public purpose...” However, the council’s
eminent domain power will remain an ingredient of the 20-year-old
original redevelopment plan, although it’s never been used.
The council spent about 90 minutes on the eminent domain matter, which
followed a two-hour hearing on an appeal by Michael Walker of the
planning commission denial of his request to split a .85-acre parcel at
230 Live Oak Street on historic Prospect Hill into three parcels.
More than a dozen owners of neighboring properties spoke in opposition
to Walker’s appeal, citing a multitude of concerns over drainage,
narrow streets, density and sewers.
Walker’s lawyer, Monti Reynolds, called it “a case of neighbors wanting
to dictate what they (Walker and his wife) do with their property.”
Reynolds described the Walker’s plan for two cottage-type homes on the
property (there’s also a century-old Victorian house on the site) as “a
classic case of in-fill development.”
The council agreed and voted 5-0 to overturn the planning panel’s ruling.
Discuss this article on the forums. (0 posts)
 |
Subscribe to this comment's feed