Wednesday, January 15, 2020

QUICK BITE – Observation of the issues generated at the “Zoning Hearing / LPA meetings” held Monday, January 13, 2020 – I see issues and a glaring need for a reboot to survive court action or rejection by the State.

Monday night concerns - Should I watch college football or Palmetto Bay hearings? Tough choice. I tuned in to the Palmetto Bay Land Use/Zoning Hearings held during the evening of Monday, January 13, 2020, for a few minutes. However, I do admit that I was a bit distracted in my activities by the College Football National Championship game (as were most of us sports loving South Floridians).

Please help me. Did I see what I thought I saw? Specifically did I see a mayor and Village Council voting on an ordinance that affects an entire area, but apparently was noticed (or more correctly – mis-noticed) only as a specific zoning / LPA matter affecting specifically listed properties and not correctly listed as a reduction in vested property rights?

It appeared to get worse as I watched. It  seemed that Mayor Cunningham and the remainder of the Village Council did not know what they were voting on (well, 3 of the remaining 4 – as Council Member David Singer did recognize and raise the issue of notice and legality, that the proceeding - not the decision - was improper) – the density of this ordinance (again, that they had been ‘hard at work on for over a year’) was greater than the prior DUV. Again, this was after more than a year of ‘workshops’ and other meetings that involved ‘preliminary votes.’ Council Member Singer did tell me later on that he is in favor of the 2,500 cap, but that it must be put in place properly, as required by law.

Panic appeared to ensue and a reactionary and arbitrary cap of 2,500 units appeared to be placed on this downtown area. This, seemingly, without notice to all properties located within this downtown area or for the general population of Palmetto Bay.

So before we get all excited and applaud this arbitrary 2,500 unit cap for the downtown (which may or not be a good thing, if properly put in place), let’s consider whether this action is:

1. Likely to survive court challenge as there appears to be improper notice – both to the public as well as the affected landowners.
2. Arbitrary, not based upon any evidence – yet another “Palmer” litigation situation.
3. Legal – this appears to downzone properties without giving them notice (government does have discretion in areas to make land use decisions adverse to a property owner, but you have to at least give notice as to the action).
4. Liable to create yet another Bert J Harris Act issue (more on this in other areas, but think “LUXCOM”), and, finally (for now – there are other issue that I could, but will not address at this time),
5. Does this action create a conflict between the Palmetto Bay Zoning Code and Comprehensive Development Master Plan (CDMP)? – (but there are workarounds).

My prediction? At best, I see a re-do or re-boot in the future, or, at worst case, yet more Bert J Harris Claims. And, this is if this hastily and arbitrarily revised ordinance can even get the required review by the State - It may not get transmitted to the State for review.

Moral should be (if there is one for this group): Anything worth doing, is worth doing properly. As much as I wanted to watch and enjoy college football, it is clear that we all need to keep a watchful eye on this Mayor and Village Council.  Has this current Mayor and Village Council forgotten the hard lesson of arbitrarily picking numbers out of the air (for populist approval) from the Palmer litigation fiasco?

Quote by Hunter S Thompson: “Anything worth doing, is worth doing right.”

No comments:

Post a Comment