ANOTHER SCOOP FOR THE PALATE!

A Concerned Eureka Citizen Weighs In On Commercial/Industrial 

     A Eureka citizen who is a practicing property law lawyer

spoke at the January 14, 2019, Town Board meeting during the

Public Comment period of the agenda regarding the proposed

Commercial/Industrial zoning of the Township. The following
questions  are her comments:

                                       *******************
                                 
      I attended the open house hosted by the

"work group" (Butch Hansen, Mark Ceminsky, Al Novacek and
Ralph Fredlund) at the Eureka Town Hall.

I understood that a zoning change was going to be a long process

with multiple opportunities for public input. I understood one Eureka

citizen spoke in favor of the ability to use his land for Industrial/

Commercial uses, but while I was there, no one in the very full audience

of Eureka citizens seemed in favor of the idea. I was surprised to

see it show up on the Board's agenda so quickly. I hope before the

Board moves forward it will get answers to at least the following questions.

1. Which Eureka citizens are pushing for a change (and out of what

individual interest) and which Eureka citizens are opposed to change

(and out of what individual interest)?

     This transparency is important. It is important to know which citizens

are behind the change; what do they think they are going to benefit from 

it. Which citizens are against rezoning C/I and how do they think they

will be hurt?

     For citizens as a whole to evaluate if this is a good idea, the information

needs to be out there on the table.

2. What are the dollar and cents costs and benefits of a zoning change?

Will our tax burden or access to services go up or down?

     I am Not opposed to paying TKDA for a report submitted by 

a planner, particularly if it saves money for naught.

3. What are the quality of life costs and benefits of a zoning change?

Will the industrial sites cause pollution? Will the industrial sites

overload our roads? Will the MET Council's preconditions with respect 

to housing be good or bad for most of our citizens?

     It is not just C/I, it is also the dedication of, I think, 1,000 acres

for additional housing. Will this be good or bad for most of our

citizens?

4. Can we adequately police industrial zoning with the staff we have

(a Clerk and Deputy Clerk), and if not, what will be the cost 

of additional staff?

5. Do we have a mechanism for enforcing limits on industrial building

permits that do not involve lengthy law suits?
                                                                                                                                                   
 6. How lengthy and costly will be the administrative application

process required by the MET Council before it will approve

the change and what is the chance we will be successful?

     I have not done the admirable groundwork of the previous speaker (see

the previous blog) and do not know if it is possible to get MET Council

approval, but believe it is impossible to get the approval without a
SEISMIC shift in our land use on our northern border.

     I moved back to our family farm in Eureka. What will it do to our 

overall community if we meet the MET Council requirements? Zoning

changes are not inherently good or bad, the question for the

Board is, what serves the best interest of most of our citizens?

The citizens of the Township need more information and time, as well

as an opportunity for input before the Board can really answer the

question.

                                      **********************

(Once again, I appreciate the valuable and thought provoking

information and questions presented by this concerned and 

involved citizen. It is extremely important for citizens to be

involved in their local government and the decisions that

affect their community. STAY TUNED!)

Information was taken from the Jan. 14 CD and a copy of the

citizen's comments which was submitted to the Board.