The Garden Plot Thickens...or not?

You be the judge


I really wanted to wait this out and see what develops when the staff report, describing the proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance regarding urban gardens, is delivered to the Planning and Zoning Commission and made available to the public but, in light of the recent news release from the Public Information Office, this posting at "busplunge," and Wednesday night's entry at the City's Web log, "CityConnect," I do have something to add.

The news release as well as the first paragraph of the "CityConnect" blog piece (which is quoted here) states:

"On Monday, City Council approved initiating a zoning change that would permit less-intense urban garden uses in all zoning districts, while requiring a conditional-use permit for higher-intensity gardens...."

On Monday, the City Council did approve a one reading, consent agenda resolution pertaining to urban gardens but, I'm not sure that the above paragraph is a fair characterization of what the City Council approved, at least not as far as the public might have been concerned.

On the agenda, which was available to the public at Monday's City Council meeting or can be acquired from the City Clerk's office, and online, ^ the bill summary read:

"A resolution to initiate an amendment to the Springfield Land Development Code, Article 1, Zoning Ordinance, Division IV, that all zoning districts shall permit urban garden uses. (Planning Staff recommends approval.)"

The bill originated in the Planning and Development Department.

The bill's stated purpose was:

"To approve a resolution initiating an amendment to the Springfield Zoning Ordinance to permit urban garden uses in all zoning districts. (Staff recommends approval)."

In my posting Tuesday, I quoted a part of the explanation to the bill Council passed on Monday night.

Following are the complete Staff comments under the explanation to the bill:

"This amendment would allow urban garden uses with certain conditions in all zoning districts. Urban gardens are considered a community or market garden where an individual or groups of individuals grow and harvest food crops and/or non food, ornamental crops, such as flowers for personal, group use, consumption, donation or to be sold for profit.

This amendment is being proposed to allow for more sustainable living in neighborhoods around the City. Municipalities across the country are recognizing the benefits of urban gardens and sustainability which ultimately result in an improved community or neighborhood environment. This amendment would allow these types of uses in all zoning districts either by right or with conditions.

Approval of this resolution will not amend the Zoning Ordinance but only begins the process of review and recommendations by staff and Planning and Zoning Commission. Staff will return to City Council with those recommendations at a public hearing at a later date."

Maybe I would be picking a nit to note there was nothing said about less-intense urban gardens versus higher-intensity gardens or about a requirement for a conditional-use permit for higher-intensity gardens mentioned in the agenda summary, or the bill's stated purpose, or the explanation to the bill the Council approved on Monday night.

I don't know, maybe it won't raise any eyebrows among the City Council to read such a characterization of what they approved on Monday night. They will be the ones who will consider and either approve or disapprove of any final amendment the staff brings to them at a later date but, this sort of a seeming discrepancy between what was presented for public consumption and the, later, news release and "CityConnect" characterizations of what the Council approved bothers me.


The information about what the Council was approving on Monday night that was provided for public consumption said nothing about low intensity versus high intensity "urban gardens," neither was their any mention of a required conditional-use permit for higher intensity urban gardening. The only words giving any indication that there would be conditions applied came within the staff's comments in the explanation to the bill.

Less than 24 hours after the City Council passed the resolution "to initiate an amendment to the Springfield Land Development Code, Article I, Zoning Ordinance, Division IV, that all zoning districts shall permit urban garden uses," the Public Information Office put out the news release which stated:

"The Springfield City Council Monday approved initiating a zoning amendment that would permit less-intense urban garden uses in all zoning districts, while requiring a conditional-use permit for higher-intensity gardens."

The news release also notes:

"Council Bill 2009-124 simply starts the process to consider this text amendment to Springfield's Zoning Ordinance."

Now, like I wrote in the introduction to this blog entry, I had really hoped to let this rest until, at least, July 2, when the report detailing the amendment is to be submitted to the Planning and Zoning Commission and made available to the public but, it seems to me what was presented for public consumption regarding the intent of this proposed amendment and what it is shaking out to be are two different things.

If it was so easy to characterize exactly what the amendment sought to accomplish through the Council's "initiation," in a news release on Tuesday, and a City Web log entry on Wednesday evening, why wasn't that terminology expressed in the summary, the stated purpose, or the explanation to the bill approved by the City Council Monday night?

Then, to find out on Wednesday that what has turned out to be a broad, general, proposed amendment to the zoning ordinance, which could result in affecting all citizens of all zones within the Queen City, originated as a result of a couple in west Springfield who, essentially, want to run a truck farm in the middle of a residential area of the City?

I am troubled by the presentation the citizens of this City were offered regarding this bill. If the bill/resolution the Council approved on Monday night was to initiate "a zoning amendment that would permit less-intense urban garden uses in all zoning districts, while requiring a conditional-use permit for higher-intensity gardens," then, it seems to me, that is what the bill's agenda summary, and the bill's stated purpose should have read, instead the summary and stated purpose mentioned nothing about conditions, nothing about low versus high intensity urban gardens, and nothing about a requirement for a conditional-use permit for higher-intensity gardens.

This sort of official presentation, versus what the City is really planning, is a perfect example of why, I believe, the citizens of this City are suspicious and feel they must keep a close eye on Springfield City government.


Note: All emphasis mine.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

When I'm feeling punchy

...anything and everything can strike me as funny

So, excuse me but I got a kick out of this.

Public Information Director Louise Whall published a summary of City Manager Greg Burris' proposal for fixing the police/firefighters' pension plan at CityConnect.

I skimmed over it as I scrolled to the end of the entry, having been present at the news conference, I didn't feel the need to read it closely. That's when I read, at the end of the entry:

Watch the entire presentation now.

I laughed, sounded a bit like a command to me, at the moment. Like I said, I'm feeling tired and punchy, I think it's the weather.

Watch the entire presentation and watch it NOW!

No thank you, Louise, but it was very nice of you to offer. :)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Springfield City Manager Finalists

What are their respective hometown papers saying about their job prospect in Springfield?

I thought it would be interesting to see what the City Manager finalists' hometown papers were writing about them concerning their finalist positions for Springfield City Manager and thought other people might be interested too.

Of course, since Greg Burris is local, I figured everyone has read the local print already.

Here's a link to Edmond, Oklahoma's "The Edmond Sun" - City manager finalist for Mo. job. An excerpt:

"Wayne Page, Ward 1 Edmond City Council member, said (Larry) Stevens told him about the development Wednesday. Page said he thinks Stevens has been an effective city manager and would be a sought-after candidate however this situation turns out.

“We’ll just have to wait and see what happens,” Page said."

Then, regarding Kent A. Myers, an article wasn't found in the "Hot Springs Sentinel-Record," which would be Myers' hometown paper, instead, this comes from the "Arkansas Democrat Gazette," City exec a finalist for job in Missouri. An excerpt:

“ If this works out for me, the city (Hot Springs) would have the opportunity to bring in a new manager with some new ideas and approaches. It would probably be good for both me and the community to move on to something else in the near future.” With a population of about 150, 000, Springfield has “a lot of activity going on there,” Myers said. “There is a lot of redevelopment in their downtown area and Mr. [John Q. ] Hammons is very active there developing hotels and is involved in developing a new arena at the college there. And, there is a minor league ball park downtown, so there is a lot of economic activity.” Hammons built the Embassy Suites Hot Springs adjacent to Summit Arena at the Hot Springs Convention Center.

“It seems to be a pretty stable community, and it’s growing, so it offers some growth opportunities for me and some new challenges,” Myers said."

A City news release, in its entirety, received just a moment ago:

The public is invited to meet the three finalist candidates for the Springfield City Manager position at two events on Monday, Aug. 4, 2008.

The first event is “Coffee with the Candidates” from 7:30 to 8:30 a.m. Monday at the Park Central Square Branch Library at the southwest corner of the Square.

The second opportunity is after work at an Ice Cream Social from 5:45 to 7 p.m. Monday at the Phelps Grove Park Pavillion. Phelps Grove Park is located between National and Kimbrough avenues north of Bennett Street, just west of the Springfield Art Museum.

The three finalist candidates for the City Manager position are (in alphabetical order):

• Greg Burris, Vice President at Missouri State University
• Kent Myers, City Manager of Hot Springs, Ark.
• Larry Stevens, City Manager of Edmond, Okla.

The candidates will begin the interview process Sunday afternoon with a welcome reception with City Council, the City Manager Search Committee, Management Team and other community leaders. On Monday, the candidates will go through a series of interviews with City Council and Management Team in addition to the public events and an employee reception late Monday afternoon.

Assuming Council makes a decision to offer the position to one of the candidates next week, the candidate will still go through background checks as part of the standard City hiring process. An announcement will not be made until terms of a contract are set and the background checks have taken place.

Citizens can visit the CityConnect feature on the City Web site for details of the public events throughout the visit: www.springfieldmo.gov/cityconnect <http://www.springfieldmo.gov/cityconnect>

Partnership Industrial Center; Springfield-Greene County Health Department: An Integrated Approach to Health Care

View the Power Point Presentation, presented by Director of Health Kevin Gipson and Carmen Bradshaw of the Springfield-Greene County Health Department, at the City Council luncheon today. The presentation was a Community Health Partnership project: An Integrated Approach to Health Care.

There are also details available concerning Partnership Industrial Center West here. Chamber of Commerce senior vice president for economic development Greg Williams informed the Council about the details and took questions from the Council. Williams said the Chamber has no intention of making a profit and merely wants to recover costs of the investment of property.

Source: City Connect, "Healthcare Providers Addressing Health Access Issues"

Mayor Carlson: Excerpt from the State of the City Report:

June 5, 2008

"The challenges that this community is facing in trying to get the community to support things have increased many fold.

I (will) probably not make any friends right here, but I'll tell you that our friends in the media don't support the community like they used to. I think I am qualified to say that, not only as a person that's worked as a journalist and as an editor, but also as a person that's worked in public life.

It's not like it used to be, there's not the depth, there's not the scope, there's not the understanding on the part of the media, on the topics that they're covering. On top of that, we have this internet thing that's going on now, with this blogging stuff, where people used to, if you wanted to say something, you had to put your name to it, now, there's this anonymous character assassination that is encouraged in order to sell newspapers or other media outlets. It makes it very difficult to get your message out.

People in this room can tell you questions that a person from the media will ask you about some person in this town that everybody here has known of for years and the person who's charged with covering that has never heard of them.

How do you get a message out to the public, to the people that you're elected to represent if you no longer have a medium to do it with? It's a big challenge, and how do you get, with the amount of time and effort that it takes these days to deal with these issues, to get qualified people to step up to serve? You know, the only thing I'm banking on, and I'm betting on Springfield because this town has always been a town that when you presented a challenge, rose to it...." - Mayor Carlson, from his state of the city report, June 5, 2008.

Listen to the entire podcast here or here.

City Connect Provides Valuable Research Links

City Connect, the city's semi-blog,* has provided the following links at their website under the heading of "Talk to Council About the Budget on March 31" :

> Video link of the meeting today at the Council luncheon

> The city email address that citizens can use to communicate their ideas on the budget

> The budget discussion schedule

> The current year's budget

> Links to specific pages in the current year's budget that will be helpful to the public

These are the tools you need to comment or make recommendations for the future budget. You have 13 days to prepare to address Council at the March 31 meeting at Council Chambers from 6:30 - 8:00 p.m. if that is the way you choose to share your ideas. You know what to do. :)

* I consider it only sort of a blog because readers cannot post comments there. Readers can privately email questions and comments but there is no comment section. What's a blog without a comment section!?? :0