Residents opposed to the proposed Local Historic District ordinance (located near the bottom of this September 24 agenda) stood before the city council last night and shared their thoughts in kind.
I thank them for speaking.
But what happens when the planning and development committee and/or the full city council opts to amend the proposed ordinance? How will both opponents and proponents feel when the proposal — which every prior petition was built around — is edited to take those petitions into account? Will everyone remain steadfast in their support and opposition? Or, as I hope, might some residents realize the council is acting like the Great Negotiator and people will change their original statements to arrive at compromise?
The comments last night were from residents who urged me to vote no on creating a LHD. But they (and I) can only connect to a proposed LHD today. If the proposed ordinance is amended to give and take concessions from both proponents and opponents, will people change their minds? I wonder.
One more thing.
Roger Gagnon and others passionately stood in the council chamber and indicated the country was not built to take away freedoms from homeowners. I agree with them 100 percent. But I also refer back to the U.S. Constitution, where in Article I, Section 8, Congress has the power “to make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land…”
If the Constitution provides authority to the U.S Congress (and by trickle-down logic, the City Council) to make rules and regulations, what freedoms are being taken away?
Lend me your thoughts below.
Add a comment and let’s have a conversation.
P.S. Thanks to comments below, I misread the Constitution. Sorry.
- Public Apology to 5 Council Colleagues
- LHD Saga Continues On