06/20/2000 Meeting Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Council Minutes of 6/20/2000 fields, primarily discussed were ball diamonds and soccer fields, we would have to obtain the neighboring properties. We have heard from some of the neighboring property owners who have told us unequivocally that they do not want to sell in the foreseeable future. In fact, the next generation stepped forward tonight and told us that he hopes to raise his family in his childhood home. Some city officials have assured these residents, neighboring residents, that they will not pursue eminent domain action on their properties. I can't justify buying one piece of property when others are needed and no strategic plan exists to obtain those properties. Will this property eventually be used as a park and ride lot, increasing traffic; sewer pumping station, increasing odors? I think there's enough back there already! Finally, our city is in an immediate need of six additional ball diamonds, not to mention the needs for soccer. I encourage this Council and the administration to work together in addressing this issue and, in doing so, utilize some of the available, city, county or school board property. This plan lacks foresight, justification and any strategic plan whatsoever, therefore I vote no." Roll calf continued: Nashar, no, with a brief comment. "I must admit, when this proposal was first presented for the Bradley Road property, this was presented to Council, and it sounded like it was a workable agreement. But after reviewing and listening to the concerns of the residents who would be affected and how it could change their environment with the long range unknown, I have reviewed the Law Director's letter dated June 4. He stated, as he did so earlier tonight, that the city must develop a comprehensive plan for the use of the land in the immediate area and to make provisions to acquire all the property in that area that is needed for the recreational use. After listening to the residents who live on both sides of said property, they are not willing to sell or have their property taken by eminent domain. They both said they have along-range potential. The parents want their families, their children, to own that property. I think this land, I think we should be looking at land in other areas other than what we have on Barton/Bradley. Over the past month, I have received over 28 calls at home opposing this and at least 10 in favor of the city buying it. In addition to that, I have approximately 20 letters that are opposing this particular piece of property, not one saying they would be in favor of it. My answer is no." Roll call continued: Kasler, no, with comment. "Mr. Koeth and Mr. Hatfield, I think you both know that I've worked with you to help the residents in this area on your July 4th soccer tournaments, making it more comfortable, more possible for that to take place. The gentleman in the back who works with the youth organizations, I have a great deal of respect for you there. My vote, and I've said it before and I hope that the words are just not words to you, is not an issue of not wanting the recreational space for this city. I think I probably have had a past that proves that that's not the case. What the problem is that I don't know if this is good for the future of the city. I don't know if it's a good idea for the city to purchase this. It may very well be a good idea for our children. My problem is I don't know what 'it' is. I don't know what it is. Pursuant to a memo that I wrote on April 19 and pursuant to the several occasions at which time I've written, verbally requested and been taped in requesting information about this project, I've received a response from my April 19 memo on May 25, an abbreviated response at that, and I'm still without the following information: I asked what specific code violations exist, if any, in the home to be 'donated' to the city; has the house been inspected by our Building Department?; if violations exist, what is the estimated cost of bringing the home up to code? A general response that I received was, that will be done after we 24