News
City Council violates law
November vote to amend general development plan void
Thelma Grimes/San Pedro Valley News-Sun
The bad news is the Benson City Council didn't have all the facts and violated the law when they voted to approve a general plan amendment in November.
The good news, according to city officials, is that they won't have to spend $10,000 on a special election in May that would have allowed voters to weigh in on the matter.
Monday night, Benson City Manager Glenn Nichols read a prepared speech, stating the 4-3 City Council vote in November is now considered void, and an election is no longer needed.
Nichols said while conducting some research, City Attorney Michael Massee found a statute stating that any amendment to the General Development Plan must be approved by at least two-thirds of the council to be official.
In November, the council vote was split 4-3. The amendment was needed to start the process to annex 148 acres owned by four different property owners and rezone the properties from low density residential to high density residential and commercial.
Developer Jerry De-Grazia has been working for several years to build an 850-home development near State Route 90 in west Benson.
DeGrazia already had gone through the amendment process to annex and rezone 305 acres of land in 2007. The recent vote was considered part of that project, but would not affect the number of homes he is allowed to build. DeGrazia has already received unanimous council approval to build up to 850 homes on the 305-acre parcel.
"At the meeting (Nov. 23), it should have been brought to your attention that the motion failed," Nichols said. "What this means is that the major plan amendment did not pass since it failed to obtain the necessary super majority vote. What this also means is that since Resolution 74-2009 did not pass, the referendum to refer that resolution to the people is moot. Therefore there is not going to be a referendum election in May."
Following the council's vote to amend the general development plan, Benson resident Tom Fitzgerald led referendum efforts, gathering enough signatures from registered voters living in Benson City limits to require a special election.
The election would have allowed voters to either accept or reject the council's decision to amend the plan.
While DeGrazia received a courtesy call prior to Monday night's an-nouncement, Fitzgerald learned that his efforts appeared to be for nothing during Nichols' public announcement.
Fuming after the meeting, Fitzgerald said the elected officials who make up the City Council obviously have a "slick" attorney in Massee, and now, "the people need an attorney that will represent them."
Mayor Mark Fenn said Friday that he realizes this news makes the council look bad, and it is a mistake they will not make again in the future.
Fenn said Massee was following his directive when the "oversight" was discovered.
"I had asked the city attorney to look at how the council could rescind the original vote to amend the plan, and that way it would take away the action completely and there would be nothing to refer," he said.
The two-term mayor said he wasn't trying to sidestep voters, but was looking to save the city up to $10,000, which is the estimated cost to hold a special election.
Fenn said Massee subsequently found that the council accepted a vote that would not have been allowed by law, and there is no other choice except to void it and let the record reflect that without enough council votes, the measure failed in November.
This turn of events may stop the election efforts, but the city plans to move forward with a general plan amendment.
During his speech, which was read under the agenda item "city manager's report," Nichols said DeGrazia has been informed that he can reapply and go through the public process all over again.
"Had the ruling been made on Nov. 23 that the motion as presented failed, the City Council would have had jurisdiction to consider another motion, and the applicant could have requested a different, lesser, plan use designation," Nichols said. "We have informed (DeGrazia) of the status of the resolution, which is that it failed. If the applicant chooses the offer to be placed back in the position he was in on Nov. 23, we will be noticing a public hearing on the major amendment to the general development plan in the near future and scheduling action at the subsequent meeting."
Another option that was recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission, prior to the November vote, was to approve a lesser zoning of medium-density residential, which would have meant fewer homes per acre.
While DeGrazia's portion of the project would not impact the number of homes he is allowed to build, it allows the other property owners such as Triple L Management and the Harlan Trust, which owns 60 of the 148 acres, to move forward with development plans.
City officials said they have no specifics on what the landowners are planning, but felt the general plan amendment and annexation would fit their future plans for growth along State Route 90.
For now, Fitzgerald couldn't say what his next step would be, but said more residents need to start attending council meetings to see what their elected officials are really up to.
Thelma Grimes/San Pedro Valley News-Sun
The bad news is the Benson City Council didn't have all the facts and violated the law when they voted to approve a general plan amendment in November.
The good news, according to city officials, is that they won't have to spend $10,000 on a special election in May that would have allowed voters to weigh in on the matter.
Monday night, Benson City Manager Glenn Nichols read a prepared speech, stating the 4-3 City Council vote in November is now considered void, and an election is no longer needed.
Nichols said while conducting some research, City Attorney Michael Massee found a statute stating that any amendment to the General Development Plan must be approved by at least two-thirds of the council to be official.
In November, the council vote was split 4-3. The amendment was needed to start the process to annex 148 acres owned by four different property owners and rezone the properties from low density residential to high density residential and commercial.
Developer Jerry De-Grazia has been working for several years to build an 850-home development near State Route 90 in west Benson.
DeGrazia already had gone through the amendment process to annex and rezone 305 acres of land in 2007. The recent vote was considered part of that project, but would not affect the number of homes he is allowed to build. DeGrazia has already received unanimous council approval to build up to 850 homes on the 305-acre parcel.
"At the meeting (Nov. 23), it should have been brought to your attention that the motion failed," Nichols said. "What this means is that the major plan amendment did not pass since it failed to obtain the necessary super majority vote. What this also means is that since Resolution 74-2009 did not pass, the referendum to refer that resolution to the people is moot. Therefore there is not going to be a referendum election in May."
Following the council's vote to amend the general development plan, Benson resident Tom Fitzgerald led referendum efforts, gathering enough signatures from registered voters living in Benson City limits to require a special election.
The election would have allowed voters to either accept or reject the council's decision to amend the plan.
While DeGrazia received a courtesy call prior to Monday night's an-nouncement, Fitzgerald learned that his efforts appeared to be for nothing during Nichols' public announcement.
Fuming after the meeting, Fitzgerald said the elected officials who make up the City Council obviously have a "slick" attorney in Massee, and now, "the people need an attorney that will represent them."
Mayor Mark Fenn said Friday that he realizes this news makes the council look bad, and it is a mistake they will not make again in the future.
Fenn said Massee was following his directive when the "oversight" was discovered.
"I had asked the city attorney to look at how the council could rescind the original vote to amend the plan, and that way it would take away the action completely and there would be nothing to refer," he said.
The two-term mayor said he wasn't trying to sidestep voters, but was looking to save the city up to $10,000, which is the estimated cost to hold a special election.
Fenn said Massee subsequently found that the council accepted a vote that would not have been allowed by law, and there is no other choice except to void it and let the record reflect that without enough council votes, the measure failed in November.
This turn of events may stop the election efforts, but the city plans to move forward with a general plan amendment.
During his speech, which was read under the agenda item "city manager's report," Nichols said DeGrazia has been informed that he can reapply and go through the public process all over again.
"Had the ruling been made on Nov. 23 that the motion as presented failed, the City Council would have had jurisdiction to consider another motion, and the applicant could have requested a different, lesser, plan use designation," Nichols said. "We have informed (DeGrazia) of the status of the resolution, which is that it failed. If the applicant chooses the offer to be placed back in the position he was in on Nov. 23, we will be noticing a public hearing on the major amendment to the general development plan in the near future and scheduling action at the subsequent meeting."
Another option that was recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission, prior to the November vote, was to approve a lesser zoning of medium-density residential, which would have meant fewer homes per acre.
While DeGrazia's portion of the project would not impact the number of homes he is allowed to build, it allows the other property owners such as Triple L Management and the Harlan Trust, which owns 60 of the 148 acres, to move forward with development plans.
City officials said they have no specifics on what the landowners are planning, but felt the general plan amendment and annexation would fit their future plans for growth along State Route 90.
For now, Fitzgerald couldn't say what his next step would be, but said more residents need to start attending council meetings to see what their elected officials are really up to.
Copyright © 2012 - San Pedro Valley News-Sun