In an attempt to improve the viewing experience (at the expense of post length) I have broken up the video into many individual segments. Any segment can be downloaded by clicking on the video to go to google video and clicking the download video for Ipod link on the right.
Now for the video…
Feel free to comment if I didn’t get a name right or I have no name for you.
The public hearing is over and the P&Z has decided to postpone action on the proposed zoning changes for adult establishments until their next regular meeting at earliest to allow for further research.
Many people turned out and all told I have about 3 hours of video to sort through so more will come later.
The message was clear tonight. Not in my town. Not in my backyard. The P&Z will continue investigating alternatives but it looks like it will be our town and our back yards.
If you live in North Meadows or the Prestige Park area you need to be there.
The topic of discussion will be the zoning changes to allow strip clubs in the North Meadows and Prestige Park sections of town.
Thanks Jim. To answer your question, I’m just an average guy who is sick of municipal, state and federal government regulating my life and taxing me for the privilege. So sick in fact that I decided to get involved.
If you weren’t aware the Town Council and P&Z Commission met in a joint meeting last night at 6:30 to discuss needed regulatory and zoning changes to bring the city into compliance with constitutional tests the courts are likely to apply regarding the restrictions of first amendment rights applied to adult establishments.
The town retained the firm Harrall-Michalowski Associates Inc. to do a study of our current zoning and regulations concerning adult establishments and the zoning and regulations of other areas that have faced this issue previously. They presented some suggested regulatory changes to the council and zoning changes to the P&Z. Changes suggested include allowing adult establishments in the areas known as Prestige Park and the Meadows.
The topic of the night was secondary effects. Secondary effects are important, as explained by Kim Coleman (legal council for Masters Club LLC.), because a way the town can restrict the free speech rights of an adult establishment (or any other group) is by demonstrating secondary effects sufficiently harmful to warrant a restriction.
For his part Mr. Dayton, the town planner, presented a considerable compilation of police reports and incidents to councilors and commissioners demonstrating the secondary effects of the existing adult establishments. Was it enough to make the case? Kim Coleman says no.
In my discussion with Coleman after the meeting she conveyed that although secondary effects can be a valid reason for limiting free speech rights the argument doesn’t work here because the town has made a mistake in the areas they chose to recommend for adult establishment use because as the maps distributed by the town’s consultant show the two designated areas have a considerably greater residential concentration and therefore greater likelihood of secondary effects than the currently disputed site on Robert’s Street.
In reviewing the maps I can’t help but to agree with her on that point. While Prestige Park has a benefit in that the club would be somewhat cordoned off inside the industrial park it has a large negative in that it’s positioning provides for no direct highway access and worse it’s central location in proximity to surrounding highways guarantees that visitors would come from every direction and would have to use residential neighborhoods and streets throughout town as their route to the club which would likely translate into a lot more intoxicated persons driving in the surrounding residential areas day and night.
While the Meadows location does have some of the benefits that the Roberts Street location has, such as almost direct highway access from Rt 2, I-84 and I-91 as well as relative isolation, it’s a very mixed area with about a quarter of the properties being residential. The location of the residential properties makes it unlikely that any of them would be able to escape exposure to adult establishments located in that area.
To add insult to injury the largest vacant lots to be developed are located directly adjacent to residential properties.
With the shortcomings of these areas in mind it must be considered that more than just Masters Club LLC is on the table here. The town is required to make it possible for future developers to have the opportunity to come to town and this isn’t a town with a lot of real estate to consider which wouldn’t have a close proximity to undesirable properties such as houses, schools and churches. In that thread these areas may not be better than the Robert’s Street location but they may be the best we can get and still allow for future development as required.
So what happens now? Well have to wait and see. The lawsuit filed by Masters Club is at least temporarily halted in trade for the town paying their legal fees to date totaling over $13,000 and as my conversation with Coleman suggests temporarily is the key word so long as the town fails to provide a zone with ample development potential which would suffer less secondary effects than the Robert’s Street location.
On Wednesday the 30th at 7PM there will be a public hearing on the proposed zoning changes at town hall in the council chamber. I strongly encourage anyone who can to attend and bring talking points. Especially if you live around prestige park or in or around the meadows area.
I received an update email from Kim Coleman who is the legal counsel for Masters Club LLC.
Hi Jon-
Just a quick update as to what has occurred in the lawsuit.
The Town of East Hartford is again amending their zoning regulations. They are changing several zones. A portion of North Meadows (including water) is being converted from B-3 to B-3A. A portion of Prestige Park is being converted from I-3 to I-3A. Both will allow adult entertainment establishments.
On April 23, 2008 there is a joint meeting between the Town Council & P&Z.
The P&Z meeting to adopt the zone changes is on April 30, 2008.
We came to a temporary resolution with the town recently. The paid for my client’s attorney fees and we agreed to no press forward on the suit until after the zoning changes are in effect.
Our concerns regarding these changes are that they are still in residential areas and no parking is required; what will the impact be on traffic in these residential areas; lack of notice to the residents and business owners in the areas.
Kim Coleman
Law Offices of Norman A. Pattis, LLC
I had a feeling this was the case when I saw that the council voted to pay the attorney fees. I take it this means the town has finally come to terms that a new strip club is coming to town (potentially more than one) and and has decided to move towards managing it rather than preventing it.
Alternative Electricity Provider To Charge Less
By David Krechevsky
An alternative electricity provider already offering Connecticut Light & Power and United Illuminating customers a significantly lower rate plans to cut that rate even further on Friday.
Public Power & Utility of New Milford, which electrician David Pearsall opened in November to serve as an alternative for CL&P and UI customers, said this week it will cut its rate by about 2 percent.
PP&U currently offers electricity at 10.494 cents per kilowatt hour, nearly 11 percent below CL&P’s standard residential rate of 11.78 cents and about 14.5 percent below UI’s rate of 12.28 cents.
Friday, PP&U will reduce its rate to 10.294 cents/kWh. According to a comparison calculator on the company’s Web site, the typical CL&P customer using 700 kilowatt hours a month would save $10.40 per month by switching to electricity supplied by PP&U.
It should be noted that this is what competition brings in a free (somewhat) market.
As I watched the Town Council meeting tonight two things struck me. First I thought “what a good idea” when I heard a renewable energy committee was being created to investigate and give guidance on energy solutions for the town, businesses and residents.
Secondly I thought “how stupid” when I then saw the council unanimously commit to offsetting 20% of the town’s energy usage without any factual consideration of the costs or impact on the town. I heard unsubstantiated and misinformed rhetoric related to oil and global warming which would be expected with such a motion but no discussion of the costs. Mr Rojas was certainly passionate about it in his description and on it’s face it seems like a reasonable and responsible thing to do. The problem here is that we don’t elect our town leaders to judge things by their face. We elect them to exhibit wisdom and deep consideration of matters such as these which will have actual costs and consequences. There was no such wisdom or consideration demonstrated on this issue which has the fortune of a pretty face.
I plan on putting my name in for the energy committee and I hope you will too. I whole heartedly support alternative energy and as my wife can attest it’s one of my hobbies. It makes no sense whatsoever, though, to replace one expensive energy source with a more expensive one. Industries created by government demand are not sound industries. When oil rises in price or alternative energy lowers in price to a point where it is naturally competitive for alternative energy sources to compete they will. Until then it is an economic drain to force through taxation a less cost efficient energy source on business and residents of East Hartford.
Bottom line, shame on our councilors for committing the town to spending money it doesn’t need to spend in the name of going ‘green’.
ETA: A bit of research through the Department of Energy shows that the premium for energy certificates is generally between 1.5 and 5 cents per KWH. If I were to participate for my house alone there would be an additional cost of between $42 and $140 per year to be offset 20%. That’s for just one 1300 sq ft house now. Imagine the cost when we are talking all town buildings and resource.
I looked into the 99MPG.COM site that Mr. Sanzo expressed interest in. It’s ideas like those which need public support, not companies who sell uncompetitive solar installations. R&D is where future affordability is to be found, not installation services.
ETA2: From looking back through the budget it appears that the budgeted expenditure for town electricity in 08-09 not including the schools is targeted at about 1.02 million dollars. Interestingly that budgeted amount is less than it actually cost in 07-08 (to the tune of about $86,000) so I wonder if there is legitimate energy savings there which accounts for the lower amount or if those budget items were reduced to give an appearance of a lower budget since they are items which are guaranteed to be funded anyways if there is a shortfall. A really rough and inaccurate estimate based on the above figure and a need for an additional 12% offset (8% already being offset according to the electric contract?) would be an annual cost between $10,282 and $34,275 that the town has no real need to spend.
I can’t help but wonder if town document fees, despite limitations imposed by CGS Sec. 1-212, and the necessity of a physical trip to town hall have a tangible negative impact on citizen knowledge and participation in town politics. I know for certain they have that result with me, but how many others feel the same way?
Just for reference the standard fee for a copy of any standard document not fortunate enough to be featured on the town website or unfortunate enough to have aged off the site is 50 cents per page. In the case of a double sided document that is 50 cents per side.
For a bit of reference the last P&Z meeting I attended had an information packet about 96 pages in length not including over-sized drawings and the minutes of previous meetings. For the math impaired that translates into a fee of greater than $48 for the average citizen to have access to the same information as the P&Z members. Granted the information is available for review in the Town Council office (I believe) and on site at the meeting, but it’s hardly practical for one person to review 96 pages plus drawings and minutes prior to a meeting or while sitting in the council office. It’s not expected that commission or council members should have to do so and it should not be expected for citizens to do so.
I took this a step further and investigated just how much money the town takes in through copy fees. According to data from the finance department since July 1st 2007 the town has taken in just $1,200 across all departments in copy fees. Weigh that sum against the capital expenditures in the budget that many called discretionary to say the least and it demonstrated just how minuscule that amount really is. There is clearly no risk of loss of a substantial revenue stream by making documents freely available.
Here’s what I’d like to see happen. I’d like to see every committee, commission and council document made available either online at the town website or for free at the council office.
I’d like to see the town website archive all electronic documents in perpetuity. There is no excuse for the events of last year to fall off the site eliminating the simplest way for residents to know what has happened in the past.
I’d like to see all EHCTV broadcasts made available on the town website and archived.
I realize all this takes time and money, but the technology is here and there is no excuse for it to cost the residents of East Hartford anything to exercise their right to be informed citizens.
There is nothing more vital to healthy government than an informed citizenry. Without transparency everything else is just a show.
