More than a few jaws dropped when at the last Town Council meeting I stood up and spoke in favor of a development for an ‘elder housing’ development.
First off, the developer in question did strive to address all of the issues brought before Council during the Joint Public Hearing on the matter. The only issue that there really wasn’t much they could do about was the one raised by citizens who had noted a concern about traffic, in particular, the traffic that would increase significantly should other properties closely associated with this property would be developed.
That’s where the weight of the matter fell directly into the hands of the Planning Commission and the Town Council. Both of those groups acknowledged the concern of citizens yet noted that nothing else could be rezoned without the Planning Commission’s review and a vote by Town Council.
Ah…rhetoric, sweet rhetoric. Rhetoric according to wikipedia is:
- using language effectively to please or persuade
- grandiosity: high-flown style; excessive use of verbal ornamentation; “the grandiosity of his prose”; “an excessive ornateness of language”
- palaver: loud and confused and empty talk; “mere rhetoric”
- study of the technique and rules for using language effectively (especially in public speaking)
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
Rhetoric is effectively a way of saying something in order to get people to think they are hearing what they want to hear when, in fact, the speaker is not saying that at all.
In this situation, the rhetoric occurs when elected and appointed officials profess to acknowledge a problem and be capable of keeping it from developing. That, in and of itself, is true. However, does the listener hear that as a promise that those officials will CHOOSE to keep that problem from developing. Will the Planning Commission recommend against or the Town Council vote against a development adjacent to or close enough to the proposed development in the near future? History says no.
Review the minutes of the Town Council meetings. Look at the number of times where issues have been addressed and similar statements have been made, then months or years later, they have been faced with another change and they have listened to the same arguments, made the same allusions to having the power to prevent it, then chosen not to exercise that power when the opportunity was before them.
With the elections coming in May, expect the rhetoric to be hot and heavy. Expect to see a sudden surge of activity showing that response to citizens is crucial. This pattern has been true in the past and has usually been followed by more of the same until 4-6 months before the next election cycle.
Part of being an ethical public official is being honest with people. Rhetoric should not be a part of the equation. Don’t get so caught up in the current issues that you forget about the past patterns.
There is nothing wrong with growth so long as it is done in an organized fashion that insures infrastructure and resources are sufficient to meet the demands OR that sufficient funds are available for making that happen. In the above mentioned scenario, access would be the primary issue and it has been well noted that access cannot be altered from what it is today. Existing roads are as wide as they can be and alternate routes are not viable due to the slope of the land.
Perhaps, in this instance my concerns about Rhetoric will be unfounded. Perhaps the Planning Commission and the Town Council will hold to their rather evasive acknowledgment that further growth along that same route would not be advisable. Sigh…I hate to say this … but if Town Council passes this rezoning on Tuesday night, we will have to wait and see. I will be watching with equal parts of hope and skepticism.
CAMBRIA DEPOT MUSEUM
Alternate routes not viable due to slope? That’s crazy talk. Have you seen the slope on those roads? It’s just a smokescreen by the developers, readily accepted by the PC so they don’t have to deal with the problems. There is no interest in holding the developer to any of his promises. I think it’s time for Cburg to get a dose of Bburg politics…if only some TaliBURG lived over here.
Hey! I didn’t say I necessarily agreed with the assessment. I am sure that something could be done concerning those slopes but they are likely to be cost prohibitive to a developer. But hey, looking at possibilities is what those engineers get the big bucks for…..My argument throughout this is that the developer has done everything required. The determining factor is the Town Council. Will they make commitments and stick to them? If these issues are ‘insurmountable problems’ now…aren’t they likely to remain insurmountable in the future. If there is any possibility that alternative access would be required in the future, has the Town taken steps to make sure that the developer pays a fair share in that in the future since this development would affect that decision? Will the Town taxpayers be forced to pay for any such future modifications? Or, will developers be expected to foot the bill? How will this current decision affect the as yet undeveloped properties near this? There are a lot of things to look at and consider. I haven’t heard Town Council or Planning Commission really discuss any of these issues so one could assume that the Town Manager and Planning Dept. have addressed these and provided the Town Council and Planning Commission with the information needed to make informed and appropriate decisions.
But no matter how well the material is researched and how the votes are cast, unless the Town is willing to follow through on those commitments, to enforce any regulations in place, it becomes a moot point. Maybe if I use the golf analogy that “follow through is crucial” it will make more sense to some of them. We’ll just have to see.