|
|
|
By Mike Stephenson
Leavenworth
The Leavenworth community should be proud of the procedural outcome, if not the results of the recent city commission decision to allow the United Methodist Church (UMC) to proceed with their request for demolition of the old Leavenworth High School. As is known, the church purchased the building several years ago from the school district and is now considering options for the land adjacent to the church.
The original purpose of the purchase is apparently unclear or least not public, but the building remained vacant and unused in the interim. Over the years, the congregation considered options; but without decision. The building continued to “deteriorate through neglect.” Several weeks ago, the congregation petitioned the Leavenworth Preservation Commission (LPC) seeking approval to demolish the building. The building resides within historic district environs, though it is not on a historic register. Consequently, appearance before and approval from the LPC is part of the administrative process. The commission disapproved the request; setting up an appeal to the city commission. The city commission could either over-rule the “lower” body and allow the demolition or uphold the decision and disapprove the request. In a close vote, the city commission agreed with the UMC and will allow a request for demolition to advance. That is the background – and to some degree, the drama.
The issue is important to the community on several levels. The citizens speaking in support of and opposed to the demolition brought forth arguments with merit. Both sides expressed views in good faith and what they believed to be in the best interest of their position. The debate was informative, emotional yet measured and respectful. Both sides represented their position the way a serious issue should be. However, as important as the specific issues are; the procedure and operation of local citizen government was impressive and exceeds the specifics.
Think about this – the Preservation Commission has a strong and specific charter and responsibility to the city and state. In the initial round, the UMC brought their proposal forward; the LPC considered the merits, consulted the guidelines and made their decision – as they are obligated to do.
The UMC took advantage of their right to appeal and on Sept. 28. Mayor Dedeke and the commissioners listed attentively to citizens, considered the merits, expressed their views openly, and proceeded to vote and decide the matter – which they are obligated to do.
This is solid, good government working at its best – fidelity to administrative procedure, an expeditious hearing, exercise of rights and a decision by locally elected officials.
Regardless of the side of the issue you agree with; we all must agree that at least in our little part of the U.S., democratic government worked effectively.
By Mike Stephenson
Leavenworth
The Leavenworth community should be proud of the procedural outcome, if not the results of the recent city commission decision to allow the United Methodist Church (UMC) to proceed with their request for demolition of the old Leavenworth High School. As is known, the church purchased the building several years ago from the school district and is now considering options for the land adjacent to the church.
The original purpose of the purchase is apparently unclear or least not public, but the building remained vacant and unused in the interim. Over the years, the congregation considered options; but without decision. The building continued to “deteriorate through neglect.” Several weeks ago, the congregation petitioned the Leavenworth Preservation Commission (LPC) seeking approval to demolish the building. The building resides within historic district environs, though it is not on a historic register. Consequently, appearance before and approval from the LPC is part of the administrative process. The commission disapproved the request; setting up an appeal to the city commission. The city commission could either over-rule the “lower” body and allow the demolition or uphold the decision and disapprove the request. In a close vote, the city commission agreed with the UMC and will allow a request for demolition to advance. That is the background – and to some degree, the drama.
The issue is important to the community on several levels. The citizens speaking in support of and opposed to the demolition brought forth arguments with merit. Both sides expressed views in good faith and what they believed to be in the best interest of their position. The debate was informative, emotional yet measured and respectful. Both sides represented their position the way a serious issue should be. However, as important as the specific issues are; the procedure and operation of local citizen government was impressive and exceeds the specifics.
Think about this – the Preservation Commission has a strong and specific charter and responsibility to the city and state. In the initial round, the UMC brought their proposal forward; the LPC considered the merits, consulted the guidelines and made their decision – as they are obligated to do.
The UMC took advantage of their right to appeal and on Sept. 28. Mayor Dedeke and the commissioners listed attentively to citizens, considered the merits, expressed their views openly, and proceeded to vote and decide the matter – which they are obligated to do.
This is solid, good government working at its best – fidelity to administrative procedure, an expeditious hearing, exercise of rights and a decision by locally elected officials.
Regardless of the side of the issue you agree with; we all must agree that at least in our little part of the U.S., democratic government worked effectively.
