CITY GOVERNMENT vs CITY RESIDENTS—The New Dynamic?

 

 Over the past months, the City Council and staff have belittled, ignored, lectured, and refused to represent city residents. Now, they are charging exorbitant fees to avoid addressing resident concerns. Is this what we can expect from our city government going forward?

 Earlier in the year in response to resident concerns a city council member texted, “Oh yeah, this is fun. Or at least it will be when we pass this with no fanfare.” Another text from a council member stated, “Smile through the BS.”  There were no apologies or any abominations from the mayor or other council members to these texts.

 Then, after spending tens of thousands of dollars, asking for community input in planning the city’s future, staff and the City Council have failed to stand by the commitments made to the community. When questions were asked about increased residential density in the city the mayor did not address the questions but expressed surprise that they were even asked.

 Another example of City Hall’s new attitude towards its residents is the Mary’s Landing project which doesn’t meet city goals, and which staff unilaterally determined should not go through a public review process.

 When asked to intercede in favor of a public process the mayor, responding for the entire council, told residents, “If you want to change the private property owner’s approach to the project, I’d suggest that you engage with him directly.”

 Facing an adversarial relationship with city staff and being ignored by the City Council, residents had to incur the expense of an attorney to try to get answers. Now, they are being charged an exorbitant fee by staff in an effort to avoid having to address legitimate questions.

 The Attorney representing the Fredericksburg Neighborhood Coalition has asked city staff for a zoning determination recognizing that the Mary’s Landing, “is a “Major Subdivision,” namely, “a subdivision of land involving more than 50 lots”, requiring a public review process including the consideration of proffers. It is also being pointed out the project is, “in violation of its UDO/Zoning Ordinance by approving lots and density that do not comply with the UDO/Zoning Ordinance.”

 Again, instead of addressing resident concerns staff submitted a bill for $4,944.00 to be paid before considering the arguments made for having Mary’s Landing project go through a public process.

The charge is based on a $75.00 charge per lot plus credit card fees of over $100.00. It is understood that the city can charge reasonable fees to cover staff time and related costs. However, the requested determination is based on the overall project, not individual lots, and staff cannot justify this as reasonable costs.

 The question that needs to be asked is who are City Hall and the City Council representing?

Zoning Determination Letter