a response

It is my belief that the potential for pollution, paying high mitigation fees, zoning and generally doing DUE DILIGENCE before making a major move such as annexation SHOULD be of interest to ALL people who are concerned about the welfare of MS. All of those issues are relevent to the annexation issue and should be explored in detail before making ANY decision. I have met at least one real estate person in town who do NOT care if we annex polluted property, pay mitigation fees that are sky-high and unreasonable, or have ANY control over the zoning- they believe that annexation will put a LOT of money in their pockets and THATS all those individuals care about. They told me so, in those words. That is a narrow, self-centered approach to annexation that disregards the best interests of the rest of the residents that live here. I am concerned that perhaps the police have not thought this process thru completely and looked at ALL sides of all the issues before they have taken this stand. Dr. Mel P. Johnson

annexation issues

Any area we might annex without control of the zoning would NOT be in our control and we would be vulnerable to whatever the County wants to allow there. The wants and needs of the County are not always in alignment with the wants and needs of MS. How could we control the QUANTITY and QUALITY of the businesses in the annexed lands if we cant control the zoning? How would we know that we are NOT annexing polluted lands? Does paying the County $338,000 a year for mitigation fees for FOREVER make any sense? Too many questions; too little DUE DILIGENCE done.

annexation issues

While its not difficult to outperform the Springs Council at almost anything, neither they nor VG has really done anything close to due diligence on this annexation issue. There has been little or no mention of zoning, possible pollution, or mitigation fees so far by either entity. If the County at some point in the future decides to dump all their peep shows,sex motels, and/or low income housing into these unincorporated areas because they are out of the way, what redress will the municipalities have if they have NO control over zoning? If the County is sure the pollution concerns are minimal, they should put it in writing that THEY will be responsible for any cleanups necessary, or take out a multimillion-dollar insurance policy against that possibility. Equitable boundaries are still an issue and the development potentials, and lack of same, are concerns that need to be addressed still. What about the 100+ million dollars in infrastructure needed and planned for by the County from 36 st to 58 st? Are there similar plans for South of 36 street? Area 9? What about the MIA developments? For anybody to compare themselves with the MS Council and management is not setting the bar very high as they have a LONG history of VERY expensive projects, fiscal irresponsibility, disorganization, waste, lack of transparency,questionable numbers, and mismanagement throughout the city administration. While they are surely not the only ones with these issues, this ineptitude and incompetency affects us directly and comes out of our pocket, at the end of the day. Larry, Moe,and Curly make a lot of people look smart.

wishing and hoping

What about the pollution, zoning, and mitigation costs associated with the annexation? Is there ANYBODY who is suggesting that those are trivial concerns? Wishing and hoping that there is no pollution, mitigation costs will be little or none, and that the County will keep the zoning as it is, doesnt make it so. Of course, actually addressing those issues would require DUE DILIGENCE, a process which is alien to City officials. Due DILIGENCE is their right as elected officials, and their responsibility to the residents to look into ALL aspects of any proposed project in order to get the best deal for the PEOPLE, not to pad their pockets and/or realize their personal and political agendas. They DONT, and WONT, do DUE DILIGENCE because it may interfere with their personal agendas. And they dont care if we know what they are, or arent, in the case of DUE DILIGENCE, doing. How do you spell arrogance? self-centered? smug?irresponsible? corrupt? deceptive ? incompetent? horribly mismanaged, at best?(your choice, any or ALL of the above).

annexation issues

IF we annex WITHOUT control of zoning we DONT have control. IF there are significant cleanups to be done the voters SHOULD be scared as they will be the ones to pay for those cleanups. Who knows why VG, Doral, and Medley do what they do? Perhaps they are just as incompetent as MS is. Who really has a good handle on the pollution issues there? Until we get an unbiased and independent report on those issues we are just talking about buying a pig in a poke, an unknown entity, and NOT something in which to make a MILLION dollar gamble. Believe it or not, but Council is SUPPOSED to do something called DUE DILIGENCE, which entails gathering ALL the best available information about ANY project so that a well-informed decision can be made. We have hired many consultants in the past to do that for us. The Council usually DOESNT LISTEN to them if they dont come to the same conclusions as the Council would like, but that IS the theory. We need an unbiased, independent authority to tell us their current opinion of the possible pollution issues involved here. AGAIN, due diligence will NOT be done, all the facts will NOT be collected, and the Council will proceed with their own personal and political agendas with NO regard for the residents who will wind up paying the bills. Its becoming a pattern of neglect, irresponsibility, and disregard by City officials. HOPING there are no serious cleanup issues doesnt make it true, and isnt the basis for sound decision-making.

annexation issues

The City Manager isnt telling us ALL the truth. One example, when he says that state law says that whoever made the mess has to clean it up, he is half-right. What he DOESNT say is that if the owners are no longer in business- Aerodex, or unable or unwilling to pay for the cleanup, who DOES pay for it? It appears that the county and the municipality split the costs 50/50. This could cost us MILLIONS. Also, when he says that the Council has no intent of changing the zoning to make it residential that may be true BUT has ZERO, NONE, ZIP impact on whether it will happen if the county maintains the zoning powers. The County will have the powers to decide whether any zoning changes are to be made there, NOT MS Council. If the wants and needs of the County come into conflict with those of MS, who do you think will win THAT battle? If the County decides to put up high-rises, condos, or low-income housing there there will be NOTHING MS can do about it. Add to it that NINE of the County Commisioners arent in favor of allowing any more annexing at this time, the 41st street vs 36 street boundary dispute, mitigation fees, the terminal ordinance, and other pollution cleanup concerns and annexation doesnt work for MS. DERM is not to be trusted to decide on the pollution concerns and the potential costs as they have regularly sided with the County in the past. We need an independent, experienced, and knowledgable consultant with NO ties to the County or any municipality.