By Jim Sack
Money talks and council members listen. Simple as that.
The parking lot at the city county building last night was unusually filled with Lexus, Mercedes, Audis and the other rolling status symbols of wealth. Inside the chamber was filling with the well-to-do who were up in arms about a developer planning to building on his, the developer’s land. The citizens, most representing Cherry Hills, a golf-community on the city’s suburban north side, argued against the office complex that the plan commission had recent approved. Their rambling arguments were simple: not in my back yard, we were promised verdant vistas forever and the tired saw of traffic problems. Council members buckled to the will of the people. Six members publicly stated they would vote against the change. Done. So, the sprawlites get their way. They do not want the owner of the land, a developer, a businessman, a taxpayer, etc, to ruin their view. These are people who bought land at a premium, they lament, and demand that their semi-rural setting remain same for perpetuity. No change in my backyard, no progress unless it is progress I approve of. The mob won. No pitch forks or torches, mind you, but a mob, the public, taxpayers, involved citizens just the same. The sort of neighborhood “intrusion” into policy making that makes Liz Brown testy.
A few weeks ago the same event occurred with significantly different faces: most from the Pontiac Street neighborhood, few driving Lexii, all of them putting pressure mostly on one council member, Glynn Hines, to kill a garbage recycling center near their neighborhood. They complained of rats, the bunch last night was concerned with aesthetics. So, the builder is not going to put up his office structures. The sprawlees get their way, for now, and I hope they get it forever. Fort Wayne is huge in physical size and relatively small in population. There are scads and scads of acres of ground within the city limits that lie fallow because it is simply easier for a builder-developer to buy acreage from a farmer, sub-divide and sell to young families searching for their own pied de terre de sprawl. So, you and I pay through the nose to run water lines out to them, we build and widen roads, new schools go up, and, as was the case last night, a few hundred thousand of your tax dollars are spent to “upgrade” a drainage pipe because the state is widening the road to keep up with sprawl. Meanwhile, in the rest of the city schools are under used and being closed, streets beg repairs, sewer lines collapse, alleys go unrepaired, sidewalks wait forever for repair and homes lose value as the new slums are built in subdivisions with pretty names like the Bay of Eagles Net Run or Beaver’s Creek Estates. Usually, there are no eagles, no beavers and the the only streams result from drainage problems. As for estates, well…
So, let us hear it for the sprawlees who want their scenery undisturbed forever. Perhaps, if sprawl stops at the border of their neighborhood there will be a little left in the city budget to repair sidewalks and streets in my neighborhood, and on Pontiac Street.
And, then there was Rusty York. Ten years on the job, a long time for a police chief, a guy that most people like and many admire for the job he is doing of modernizing the FWPD. Not everyone, however, to be sure. Last night Rusty offered a power point showing year-over-year crime stats and trends over the past 20-30 years in Fort Wayne. Bottom line: most crime was down a lot in Fort Wayne, despite hard economic times. As for the trends, they are also favorably trending down from highs in the early 1990s. Chief York said that data-driven crime fighting, that is the analysis and then tailored response to crime, had much to do with the improvement. He noted that the crime families in Fort Wayne are also targeted…there are families who are known for their specialties. Think of it is as the 80-20 rule. He applauded the work of the East State Street (apologies to Ben Lanka) Outpost for dampening crime in that area and a few other things. But, Rusty added that many other factors come into play that also have significant, if immeasurable and perhaps invisible effects. Council liked what it saw on the charts.
Tom Didier also dropped a bit of a bomb on Karen Goldner’s lap last night. He had asked for “higher guidance” from former Bishop D’Arcy concerning Councilwoman Goldner’s proposed trans-gender ordinance. He said he had circulated the letter for the other council members to read and had made it available to the media. Goldner was not pleased. She believes, however, despite the encyclical from on high and out-of-town, that she has the five votes to introduce the measure. She expects council to discuss the matter openly, pros and cons, up and down, in March.
Last week, by the way, I forgot to tip the hat to Pete Kelly, the fire chief. He made a management decision to buy a multi-purpose fire truck for a station, rather than two new, single-purpose trucks. Savings to the community: a few hundred thousand dollars. Council was skeptical that giving up one vehicle would reduce protection in that area. Kelly added that he had restructured command coverage so other trucks could provide quick back up, if needed. He explained new management systems that keep trucks more active and ready to respond more quickly. It sounded pretty good to council and to the layman. Council especially like the dramatic savings.
Again, I highly recommend attending council. There is drama, they are playing with real money, significant public matters are on the table and it is free.
If you find this article informative? Consider donating any amount you choose.
Related posts:
- The Sound and Fury It was quite a show at council...
- Government is the problem Well, that is what Mitch Harper said...
- Better than a Soap Opera, Your City Council! City council is more interesting to me...
Entries (RSS)
Jim:
We drink from similar vwells this morning.
It's funny to see other neighborhoods turn away development for their own (and oft times selfisj) reasons…
It would be nice to see anything close to such REAL development down in this SE quadrant, but to do so would displace some of the riff-raff currently enjoying their gravy-train entitlement ride to Freebietown, right?
I'd much prefer development that would enhance my "view" from what I currenly see to something a bit more approaching a level of normalcy.
And I also want to see pigs flying…did I mention that?
Yeah, that's asking WAY too much from this city.
Hasn't the city been trying to annex every subdivision it can get it's hands onto to grab more property tax money? Some of these developments are built with an agreement to connect with city utilities so they will be annexed when they get hooked up. Now you make it sound like this may not be a good deal economically for the city. People in these subdivisions, many of whom wanted to be outside of the city limits, are now going to try to get everything out of the city they can while obstructing everythihg they don't want. They moved out there for a reason and now we're surprised that they're upset.
1. Perhaps the best way to prevent sprawl is for the city to refuse to provide services to any new development. You can have your cookie cutter cottages as long as you use a septic tank and rely on the county for police protection and the township for fire and EMS.
2. It is actually normal for crime to decrease during a recession.
Decaying central cities, increased urban crime, and fear for the safety of loved ones are entirely valid reasons to leave densely populated areas. Economic growth, both personally and in the community, has fired up the speed of the exodus. So has intrusive government demanding higher taxes for unwanted and often poorly performed services.
Moving to where the jobs are located is also a driver. Aboite Township grew in population because GM located Southwest. Poor school systems are causing new city residents to pick the suburbs with the best educational reputations.
Mostly however, suburban living is the American way. All the environmentalists who fear the paving of the planet will just have to find another world to live on. Suburban homes sell because buyers want to live there . . . period. No apologies necessary.
Oh to have such problems in the SE.
Set aside the fact that the Deumling clinic should have already been demolished if the city actually executed the legislation they are so fond of, and I'm sure any office park could have it for a song.
Ten years is too long for a police chief. Current police work has not changed much from 39 years ago. One can appear before a council and talk up a storm that sounds better than it really is.
I am not alone in the opinion that urban decay and crime are a result of suburban emigration. I dont find fault in suburbs themselves, there is a place for them, however I think city planning can do a better job at makiing good decisions with regard to the suburban developments they allow, paying particular attention to the impact of a development on existing city services.
Dear Gad,
I get your points. Part of the reason central cities decline is the drift to the suburbs. Instead of maintaining properties they are converted to rentals over time. I don't care if people move to Greenland, I just don't want to run a sewer line to them at my expense in the name of "progress." Instead of striving for growth shall we instead strive for improvement?
Jim
Guest,
Fundamentally, you are right. Police work now has much in common with police work a hundred years back, except techology, methodology and the education level of our officers has changed dramatically. When Chief York reports on crime he is reporting on his work, the work of his district chiefs, his officers, his system and the involvement of individuals and neighborhoods. He was especially laudatory toward involved neighborhoods where he said the biggest crime drops were reported. Prevention, he paraphrased, is worth a pound of cure.
Jim
Guest, I would also add that our best ever fire chied, Heinrich Hilbrecht, was in the saddle some 39 years. Why is an arbitrary like ten years "too long." Cite your rationale and evidence, please.
Jim
Jim, this is a good point. Likely the right answer is in a balance of the two. The unfortunate reality is that there are individuals that decide to improve rather than be part of the expansion, and to a degree these individuals depend on city services (NHC, DPS) to help them in their efforts. When these key services are neutered by funding or perpetual computer 'upgrades,' the tools necessary for 'improvement' no longer function. Frustration breeds cynicism.