Land Purchase Questions…Answered?
Following is an e mail exchange that I had with the Mayor of Portland concerning the purchase of property in Danby Township by the City of Portland.
Dear Mr. Mayor,
My name is Scott and I am a resident of the City of Portland.
I have followed with interest thus far the proceedings involving the purchase of land at the corner of Cutler Rd. and Grand River Ave by the City. If you had asked me what I thought before the purchase was completed I would have asked why we were buying it. That seems to have been answered with the City’s stating that the Danby Township zoning ordinance would have allowed development that was undesireable to the City. Did the City ever contact the Township with a request to change the zoning of this property?
Also, was the City Council aware of the possibility of detachment by popular vote before the land was purchased? Did we buy this property knowing full well that there was even the most remote possibility that it could be taken away by the township?
Thank you in advance for your time and I look forward to your correspondence.
Scott
Good Afternoon,
Thank you for your email and questions. Without discussing specific cases, I offer the following responses:
Any inquiry or request regarding the way a parcel of land is zoned is bound to spark curiosity on the part of the government entity involved and therefore the general public, including the seller.
Whenever the City embarks on a project, the City Manager who is an attorney and the City Attorney review the project to consider all legal implications.
I hope this information addresses your concerns and thank you again for your email and your questions.
Sincerely,
Jim Barnes
Dear Mr. Mayor,
Discussing the specific case of the land purchase by the city of vacant acreage in Danby Township:
Did we ask for any kind of change in zoning? Did we know about the possibility that the land could be detached by a vote of Danby Township and City of Portland residents?
Thanks,
Scott
Hello Again, In response to your questions,
No, the city did not ask for a change in zoning.
Yes, detachment is a process the city manager and city attorney are aware of.
Thank you for your interest.
Sincerely,
Jim Barnes
So, if I can make an inference based on the still ambiguous answer to the second question, I would say that the city purchased the land so that they could control the development of the land. Even though they knew, in advance, that there was the possibility that the land could be detached and restored to Danby Township. Effectively ending almost all control over the property. In my opinion this is a gamble that should not have been made with $1,200,000 of our tax money.
March 4th, 2007 at 7:17 pm
The email from Scott Frazee to Mayor Barnes, and ambiguous non-response speaks volumes about the attitudes at the Portland City Council. This group of 5 have taken it upon themselves to so ignore the residents of the community that there are currently 3 organized groups fighting against the actions of the council. Portland Concerned Citizens have formed this website, another group has hired a lobbyist to fight the actions in planning and zoning, and a group in Danby Township is working to regain control of the growth in their community.
Ask yourself a couple questions. And be honest. Would the Mayor have answered Mr. Frazee like this, if there were other people or a reporter present? Did Mr. Frazee deserve an honest and open answer, the same as every resident of Portland deserves when they ask an elected official who represents him? Was Mr. Frazee’s question somehow out-of-line or insulting?
Why does the Mayor refuse to answer his questions?
Or, does the Mayor now understand just how poor a decision it was to gamble with $1.2 million dollars of taxpayer money? Maybe he just doesn’t want to admit to the public what the consequences might be if the detachment is successful.
March 7th, 2007 at 9:44 am
As a member of the Danby Township Planning Commission, I would like to respond to the statement made by Mr. Dempsey at the 12/18/06 City Council meeting wherein he stated, and I quote from those minutes:
“He [Mr. Dempsey] stated one of the reasons discussed for purchasing the property was because in an Agricultural Zoning District in Danby Township the proposed uses for this property was for mini storage or a truck terminal. He stated we did not feel those were uses we wanted to see at the City’s front door. He stated we also felt there was no way we could control the zoning of the property because the zoning is up to Danby Township. He said, “If you want to control the outcome of the property the way to achieve it is to simply purchase it”.
First of all, the Township does not propose what to put on property, rather certain uses are allowed. And, contrary to what Mr. Dempsey would like the general public to believe, the statement that the “proposed uses for this property was for mini storage or a truck terminal” are absolutely FALSE. That property was zoned Agricultural. However, the only ALLOWED uses for it would have been: Anything related to farming operations (including crop farming, greenhouses, etc.), single family homes, State licensed residential care facilities, churches, roadside stands or a public park, playground, or recreational area.
Despite what Mr. Dempsey wants you to believe, any other use would have required a special use permit and would have had to come before the Planning Commission and a public hearing. This information was, and is, readily available in our Zoning Ordinances which are on the Danby Township website (www.danbytwp.org). I find it hard to believe that an educated lawyer would not have even attempted to obtain this information. After all, I am only a high school graduate and I found the information on my own. Obviously, he either didn’t attempt to obtain the correct information or he purposely misrepresented the facts. Either way, should a man like that be in a position of managing ANY city let alone Portland? I guess that is a question better put to the City residents and not me.