CATCH-UP TIME

MANY THANKS TO THE DOZEN OR SO CITIZENS WHO SUBMITTED TESTIMONY AT THE AGRITOURISM TEXT AMENDMENT HEARING!

They covered your backs! All the points raised on the last blog post were made again  The landowner even said maybe she didn't need a text amendment. All testifying supported Applewood Orchard and its activities; that wasn't the problem. All the added language and the infrastructure paragraph were.

Thankfully, Planning Commission heard us, the people. They recommended that certain terms such as "mechanized rides," "camping," "music," and "sports," etc. should be looked at and maybe eliminated from the proposed definition language. They recommended that the Township consider again the Agritourism ordinance language that was proposed in 2014. That task force included the late landowner of the apple orchard and qualified others.  

       

At the follow-up special Town Board meeting on the Thursday following the public hearing on Tuesday, the Board evidently realized they needed to be responsive to the Commission's recommendations and not dismissive, as many feared they would be, considering their premature support.

You may be interested in knowing that, at the special meeting, Chair Pete Storlie said, "I haven't looked at the [2014] ordinance." Are you prepared sufficiently for the discussion, Mr. Chair? In the past you have frequently said, "...doing our due diligence..." Seems missing this time around, especially for a Supervisor who inappropriately voiced his support of this change to our zoning ahead of the hearing and Commission recommendations.  He also (rather disdainfully in my opinion) said "if it [the 2014 ordinance which he admits he hasn't even looked at] was so good, why wasn't it adopted?"

Regarding the public's concerns about this proposed text amendment opening the doors for amusement parks, rock concerts, etc., Mr. Storlie said he thought "some of the concerns are 'the sky is falling'" issues. Perhaps Mr. Storlie doesn't understand the Pandora's Box he was so willing to support. You put that proposed text amendment into law as submitted, and those uses are ACTUALLY ALLOWED! No lie, Henny Penny! Remember that Supervisor Novacek and Supervisor Pope also indicated support prematurely at the last regular Board meeting. Can we logically follow through to conclusions?

Do we understand the implications of what we are doing here? Again who's minding the store?

The Board has scheduled a meeting to work on the issue for June 27 at 7:00 p.m. They have forwarded some info to the Township attorney for review/comment. Another meeting will be held in July to address the issue.

HERE'S A POINT OF INTEREST:

Under Hearings; notices, 57-2 in the Ordinance states that in the case of zoning or mining text amendment applications "Notification shall be given by first class mail to all owners of record with the Dakota County Department of Taxation of land located in the Township at the time the application was filed with the Town Clerk...The Planning Commission shall make its report to the Town Board at the next regular meeting of the Town Board following the hearing..."

This requirement was brought to the attention of the Commission before the hearing commenced, the Board regarding its special meeting and the Clerk. It is clear and unambiguous. It's black and white. AND IT WASN'T FOLLOWED! After being made aware of this language, Commission Chair Melanie Storlie still stated, "We're going to go ahead with the hearing." The Board still held its special meeting in defiance of the Ordinance. What do our ordinances mean? They are not "guidelines," as was once famously said by a Board Chair at the time, but our law. Following them is not optional!

One Supervisor allegedly told another citizen after the hearing that people don't understand that the Board can have a special meeting paid for by the applicant. There again, who's minding the store? That works for a landowner wanting to expedite a building permit due to time constraints. That affects that landowner's property. A text amendment affects the entire Township! The Ordinance is worded that way to give time for careful consideration of such wide-reaching legislation.