The Fiester Preserve condemnation process is continuing without a public meeting (includes public announcements, cards mailed and a meeting where facts are presented and dialogue occurs). The Summit County government website under: “Summary: Exploring Housing at the County Commons” says,
“The extinguishment of this conservation easement is not precedent setting. It simply follows the procedures currently in place that allow for the removal of all or part of a conservation easement.”
The procedure is: The housing authority condemns the property. I went to the Summit County Housing Authority meeting Feb. 18 to plead with them to wait until the current senior living needs assessment is completed so we know exactly what is needed for seniors before we determine what site is the best. But the Housing Authority is the county commissioners.
From the website: “Bill’s Ranch voiced opposition to the prospect of workforce housing adjacent to their neighborhood, due to unsubstantiated fears that the future development would bring negative impacts.”
If the need is for senior housing, why is this statement about workforce housing?
And finally:
“A politically expedient but shortsighted decision made in the run-up to a hotly contested BOCC election campaign led to a shift in the workforce housing site and the placement of a conservation easement on 6 acres of County Commons land to create a buffer between Ophir Mountain Village and its residents and Bill’s Ranch.”
Who decided the Fiester Preserve designation was “politically expedient but shortsighted” versus a collaboratively agreed upon resolution to a concern? The Housing Authority is continuing its discussion of condemning the Fiester Preserve. Please call them and request a real, true public meeting where they present the facts before they condemn the Fiester Preserve.