Laserfiche WebLink
249 <br /> <br /> Mr. Wallace Reed, 1531 Rugby Road, said that over the last few years, 3,000 <br />citizens have asked that the reversion issue be studied, and while the studies could be <br />repeated, he feels they would yield the same result. Mr. Reed supported the .proposed <br />resolution, noting that citizens who did not sign the petition have not had the opportunity <br />to support remaining a City. Mr. Reed said Council has studied the issue, and, as a <br />representative government, have chosen to take action. Mr. Reed agreed with comments <br />made by Mr. Kevin Cox. Mr. Reed said he chose not to live in the County because of the <br />services provided by the City, and while he has many friends in the County, he does not <br />want them making decisions for the City. <br /> <br /> Mr. Ben Bates, 106 Cameron Lane, expressed agreement with many of the <br />speakers. Mr. Bates said it makes no sense to have separate City and County <br />governmenls. Mr. Bates said prosperous times are temporary. Mr. Bates requested that <br />Council withdraw the resolution or take action to not bind future Council with a five year <br />moratorium on reversion, Mr. Bates said he shares concerns about the process. <br /> <br />As there were no further speakers, the public hearing was closed. <br /> <br /> Ms. Daugherty said that Council purposely did not put the resolution on the <br />agenda for action at this meeting in order to consider comments and action by the town <br />reversion committee and other citizens. Ms. Daugherty said an itemization of <br />expenditures is available to the public. Mr. Daugherty said the issue was not decided <br />behind closed doors, but each Councilor has come to make a decision about the process <br />in their own way. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cox said when he first got on Council, he thought reversion was a wonderful <br />opportunity to look at a new government structure, and new way to look at schools, <br />planning and transportation. Mr. Cox said that every community he has studied and <br />admired has one government, and that it has not happened is a great disappointment to <br />him, and without a formal structure he does not thh~ it will- happen. Mr. Cox said he <br />supported the petitioners because he feels that citizens have a right to petition local <br />government, and feels that attempts to derail that are undemocratic. Mr. Cox said he <br />appreciates that the petitioners are willing to file a non-suit, but if doing so does not spur <br />a feeling of cooperation with the County, he thinks it should be put right back on the table <br />either by litigation, facilitation or negotiation. If it is taken off the table, he will pursue <br />structured negotiation, but feels the onus is on Council to make it happen. <br /> <br />Ms. Daugherty said she is interested in revising the resolution. <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati said that he cannot imagine voting for reversion in the short-term, <br />though he did sign the petition. Mr. Caravati said the City and County need to work <br />toward efficient cooperation. Mr. Caravati said he feels the mediation portion of <br />reversion would be beneficial, and would provide a way for the two communities to plan <br />for the future. Mr. Caravati said he appreciates what the citizens have done and he does <br />not feel the resolution should include anything that would take reversion off the table for <br />five years. <br /> <br /> Mr. Toscano said it is important for people to recognize the amount of time the <br />Council has put into the reversion:issue over the past five years, and it has probably been <br />the defining issue since he has been on Council. Mr. Toscano said that the issue has <br />challenged Council to ask basic questions, such as what does it mean to be a City, how <br />can the City survive, how can it be most efficient, how can you build a community across <br />jurisdictional lines. Mr. Toscano said such issues cannot be defined in a courtroom. Mr. <br />Toscano said because the town reversion committee and some Councilors disagree on the <br />issue, does not mean that anything sinister has occurred and that one is right and one is <br />wrong, they just disagree. Mr. Toscano said some support reversion because they feel it <br />is the best way to consolidate governments and others support it because they feel it gives <br />the City an ax over the County. Ma'. Toscano said he does not agree. Mr. Toscano said <br />no one has ever questioned the petitioners' rights, but at least three Councilors at this time <br />feel differently than the reversion committee. Mr. Toscano noted that the Council had <br />asked the petitioners not to file their petition so the Council could work with the County, <br />but the decision as made by the petitioners to file. Mr. Toscano said it is up to the <br /> <br /> <br />