It was just a short aside in the discussion on the future of Evansville and its Smart Growth Plan, but to The Observer, it was a matter worthy of further discussion.
In her remarks about the Smart Growth Plan, Sandy Decker referred to the long process of creating it, and said that there should be limits to quick revisions that circumvented the type of deliberative process that created it.
The Observer notes on the future agenda of the City meetings that they will consider amending the Smart Growth Plan prior to the annual target that was scheduled. Why? Just because it became commercially attractive to change some land from R1 to Commercial on Union Street. Why was not this a reasonably forseeable event when the Smart Growth Plan was designed last June?
Should revisions be a)weekly b)monthly c) yearly or d) any time one sees fit.
The deeper issue is whether a person could simply give 24 hours notice, modify an agenda and with little public input get a change in the smart growth plan that did not allow the public adequate time to get involved and express their view. This is no small matter. The essential core of Smart Growth is that the public has a right to participate in the decision, and quick modification of the plan that avoids public scrutiny is contrary to the intent of the law.
So---it was just a few words by Sandy Decker at the Bauer Haus. However, it might deserve further discussion.
This is your city. This is your election. What do you think about this issue? You make the call.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment