Editor's Note: The following is an open letter that Councilman Bill Cox sent The Batavian this morning. We likely would have published it then, long before he approached us about the paid post we have on the site now, but the bank robbery took up most of our day. We make the point to note, we would have published this without the paid sponsorship.
Council members,
Tomorrow evening October 6th at 7 PM the Board of Education will be holding an informational meeting in the high school on State Street about their plans to convert the North Street Extn. property they own into athletic fields.
Well over 100 neighbors, school taxpayers, and voters in this area (East Avenue, Naramore, Woodcrest, Hillside Drive,, Garden Drive, Carolwood, Harrold Square, Belvedere, North Street, Elm Street, Clinton Street, and other streets have signed petitions strongly opposing this school development. These petitions will be presented to the school board tomorrow evening.
They are concerned this development will change their peaceful and quiet neighborhood forever. In particular they are concerned with the fact that school enrollment is going down not up which does not justify more fields, it justifies fewer. The fact that their taxes will be going up to provide funding to maintain this area after it is developed; they are concerned that their school taxes will be used to support adult sports events the school board needs to justify the maintenance costs, that have nothing to do with school activities.
They are concerned with loud noise from fans and participants that occurs at all sporting events; their property being walked on invading their privacy, that property values go down not up when these kinds of facilities are created, refuge will be deposited in yards, on streets, and blow on other properties. Parking and traffic will clog streets, and a whole lot more.
I ask for you to come to this meeting and show your support for the city residents who this is being forced upon. A large number of the people who signed petitions stated this one topic alone will decide who they vote for on council and the legislature. Some asked me to contact you to ask you to come to this meeting and speak out on their behalf. They want to know where our council people and legislator candidates stand on this development which is vital to the quality of life in their neighborhood.
Bill Cox
Councilman - First Ward
The property could be sold to
The property could be sold to an outside developer for low income housing . Is that what you want ? The schools are not going to hold onto the property if it can't develope it . The bottom line is that there are many more than a hundred people that will use the facility and appreciate it than oppose it .
Do you honestly believe that
Do you honestly believe that the NIMBYs are going to accept low income housing on that property? The same debate will rage; it will lower property value; too much noise; etc.
If children are the wrong kind of people that should utilize that space, imagine the outcry when it is low income people.
Some have said that the tax
Some have said that the tax base needs to be increased through development of new housing.
Before any housing would be developed, there would have to be a need for such housing.
It all comes down to what would make Batavia more desirable to live here.
What is the best way to improve the demand for new housing? I would think that amenities such as a place for kids to run and play would certainly be a factor that would help draw new homeowners to the area.
I am pretty sure that the city's master plan includes a street to connect East Ave to Garden and North. Such a street would enable a developer to add houses to the East (all within City limits) and increase our tax base. It would also solve the problem of a couple dead-end streets that are probably harder on City maintenance crews when it comes to plowing.
Increased tax base, fields and playground for the kids, better street management for the City...sounds like a Win-Win prospect to me.
The mere fact that
The mere fact that Councilperson Cox ends this letter with a statement that is "just short" of a threat while maintaining misinformation and non-facts is clear that this is being used as a NEGATIVE campaign tactic. I can assure all candidates that are running that there are more positive comments coming into my computer and telephone about the use of this property as a playground and atheletic field complex than negative.
It is not that I don't understand the concerns of the neighbors, BUT I have greater concerns on what will happen to the property should it not be set aside as greenspace and a park. I have fought to maintain that property for the use by our young people in the community for years. I think it is a wonderful use of our land. Keeping the vast majority green and providing for the young people of this community.
A simple question should be asked, "Why is this not an appropriate use for property that is currently being used and maintained for athletic facilities and for children." There used to be a playground there.
Let's see what happens with grant money and money for collaborative projects that is out there. Aren't we supposed to work smarter to improve our communities and collaborate? That is all this is trying to do.
The increased tax base that this will add is amazing. It opens many new lots and development areas by using grant money NOT our tax dollars and the new lots will generate more tax dollars.
Pat, Since a version of this
Pat,
Since a version of this was voted down once, but has come back, maybe it is a good election issue.
While Bill Cox is not running, all three Republican city council candidates are against this plan. It seems that the Democrats are in favor.
And while grants might pay for this at first, it will cost us tax payers later in year to year upkeep.
Maybe being burned on being told Dwyer would never cost us a penny has caused us not be to trust "its free".
No I don't think low income
No I don't think low income housing is actully ever going to happen at North Street Ext. . I was trying to make a point indirectly that the currant ideas of development for athletic fields should be embraced by the neighbors because of the simple fact that it is better than any other options that would come forth in the future . The vacant land will only be vacant for so long before someone else comes along with a development idea that will most likly be more evasive to the same people opposed to this project . New building lots , much needed playing field , walking track , lockers and bathrooms , green space , these are all good things that will enhance that area so much that I wish I had it close to where I live .
Nothing is free and it isn't
Nothing is free and it isn't free to maintain now . Mowing the fields has to happen either way , we mow this field now . Once the fields are flat and rock free like they would be with the completion of the project . The wear and tear on the equipment would be less and the time to mow would be less .
Mowing around a track and
Mowing around a track and buildings will not take less time. And the field is not a major problem now to cut.
How much will it cost to maintain the new buildings and to maintain the track?
As far as I know....NO
As far as I know....NO Democratic Candidate has spoken out for or against it... I think they want to know the facts first and not knee jerk react to this issue. Knowing the facts is something that is important when you are running for elected office...perhaps that is a new concept...but it is a proven one.
So as far as the Democrats being for the field, you speak in error.... I am for the kids and for a progressive dialouge on what to do with that property.
That is all that I am advocating.
I just want to ask, can some
I just want to ask, can some one give me one example of any government project not adding costs in the future? John is right. We've been told before it won't costs us more and I can't think of one time it's been true when the government is the one in control of the project.
Pat, Maybe you're right on no
Pat,
Maybe you're right on no Democrat not knowing much about this, but that does ring hollow. And there is no reason somebody running for citywide office should not know about by now. All they had to do is pick up the phome and call you.
One of your candidates is your own daughter. I would think she knows about this subject. One is a former school board member. The other has been saying she wants more city spending. And this issue has come up before and been voted down. Maybe they didn't vote that time.
This issue has been out there, this time, for weeks. The Republicans seem to have studied it and said no to more taxes.
I understand you think they are wrong, but they took a stand. When will your candidates do that?
John, How you use words.
John,
How you use words. When did I say that they did not know much about this??? As far as I can tell they have been very much looking into this issue as one of many. All three of our candidates are aware of the issue, are studying the issue and working out thier own response to the question. Our candidates have been asked about this door to door as well.
Again FACTS speak for themselves. It is more than just calling me or anyone else...it is listening to many and then coming up with your own opinion. I do not tell my daughter or any candidate what to think?
There has been a great deal of misinformation as well as good information out there. I am amazed that so many people who voted against this being sold for housing are now against it being used for a city park. One year they vote against selling the land for housing, the next year they vote against it for a City Park??? Oh well.....
By the way... I have stated that I am in favor of working to see if we can obtain the grant, I have never stated that I am in favor of one plan or the other....Again the FACTS... You should know the facts. Knowing the facts is important.
Why not just give the land to
Why not just give the land to the City as green space with a restriction it not be developed? That would end this controversy.
If you want to walk, go to the stadium. They have the best walking track in Genesee County, which the School Board just upgraded.
You can also go to the DeWitt Park, where there is a great place to walk and has a playground also.
John , have you ever mowed 11
John , have you ever mowed 11 acres of rough terrain before , didn't think so . They make mowers that can zip around buildings and track's with great ease . Mowers do have limitations as to how fast you can mow over rough terrain filled with rocks and other debrise dumped there by some of the neighbors in the area ( propbably the ones that want to keep the park untouched) . Along with having the tough duty of cutting switch grass instead of lush sod . So once again we won't be spending any more time but less time to cut the same area and have it as a functional piece of property rather than a dumping ground .
Dumping ground? I have
Dumping ground?
I have walked/run over there, and if you tell the truth, it is as clean as any of the parks we have now. Why do you think it would be cleaner?
The idea of paying higher school taxes so it is easier to cut grass doesn't "cut it".
Some of the local residents
Some of the local residents regularly dump their yard waste on the property. Some drive off-road vehicles on it. There should be a law against that in the City.
So there is less lawn to mow
So there is less lawn to mow is a reason to do this..Wow that one really blows my mind..John you got this one right.Why not just blacktop the whole thing,problem solved,no more lawn to mow..This land need to be sold .The school has no need for it..It should have houses built on it ,so we can collect taxes for it...
Mark , I don't think anyone
Mark , I don't think anyone opposed to the project are for selling the property for development of any sort . My assumption is that the people opposed to the project are opposed to any project at North Street Ext., and they just want it left alone like it has been for the past 10 or so years . I actully used to go to North Street Ext. for the Summer Parks Program when I was a kid . Why did we ever abandone the park to begine with ? I could be wrong but I was told that there were to many complaints to the city because of no parking , traffic , bathrooms , and poor support from neighbors . The people of the North Street Ext. area don't even want a place for the kids in the neighborhood to go to . Why is that I ask ? My opinion is that they do not want "outside of neighborhood "users of the facility . The North Street Naramore area has been filled with uptight "not in my back yard " people for as long as I can remember .Who's backyard should it be in , is there a certain area that the NIMBY's are all right with or did they drop that phrase .