Southport Park resolution not on Parks agenda
The Southport Park resolution, which was expected to be on tonight’s Parks Commission agenda, did not appear. George Clark questioned Chairman Michael Orth on it. Orth’s response was that, as soon as he got a copy from Legal, it would be placed on the agenda, possibly at the next meeting.
After the meeting ended, Alderperson Anthony Kennedy gave Clark a copy of the latest resolution that was distributed at last Wednesday’s Common Council meeting. Clark asked why Kennedy had a copy and Orth didn’t. Kennedy said that this copy had his added amendments and changes. Orth said that it was for the Parks Commission to consider first. Kennedy said that he happened to disagree, but that “we need to work with it where it’s at.”
Orth did offer a few dates in relation to the SAA Group’s planning. September 26th, November 1st, and December 5th were three dates that were mentioned for future meetings.
Alderperson Keith Mathewson made a few comments that the voting at the Common Council meeting was “political.”
Orth said that the goal is to get a better resolution.
Clark stated that he was just trying to find out what was happening with the resolution. “I think the average citizen has the right to know what’s going on,” he said. Mathewson gave Clark his business card and told Clark to e-mail him. He would talk to him about the politics involved.
One Response to Southport Park resolution not on Parks agenda
Leave a Reply
Thanks for writing on this. This kind of sums up what the average citizen is thinking on this subject. This started out with people who just wanted to let the city know that they love this building and want to see the deterioration stop and that a new building should not be on the table. We love our historic beach house. The citizens have been diligent and stayed on purpose while the city council writes a resolution in support; the mayor pulls the resolution and throws in an expensive study of the Park; puts the resolution back in; throws the resolution out to the Parks Commission and now stalls on the resolution in the Parks Commission. It is a simple matter- what happens when something complex comes up for our city council? This is a city building. Most of the deterioration has been caused by the city doing bad workmanship over the 71 years because people did not know better (You don’t paint brick, you don’t use cement in place of mortar, you fix roof drainage issues). The city should fix this if the citizens want the building – they should not let it deteriorate more. People who live on the Lake have not let their homes fall into disrepair. The citizens of this town should not have to take a class in government to try to figure out why this is not in the Capital Improvement Plan.