
(a picture of Moore post May 3rd, 1999)
The funny thing is, we don't need tornados to do the damage.
We have bulldozers and a repugnant city council!
I picked up the Edmond newspaper this
morning after I got home from posting some campaign signs, and on the
front page I saw yet another article in which the writer misunderstood
their topic. This morning, Greg Elwell, a man noteworthy for his lack
of precision, stated:
"Remember-- if you want houses instead of stores, vote 'No No Yes Yes.'
If you want stores instead of houses, vote 'Yes Yes No No'."
For some reason (I would assume because of some deceit on behalf of the
"Better Edmond" organization), every person in my town thinks that
voting NO NO YES YES in Edmond's upcoming election means that housing
absolutely will be developed on the land south of Hafer Park.
That is just not true.
Voting NO NO YES YES only means the land in question will remain zoned
residential, as was the desire of Edmond's forefathers. Residential
zoning means that the land may be used for churches, parks,
neighborhoods, and educational facilities, and that such civic
structures may legally go in there. However, they must pass three
checkpoints before any change can be made on the land:
1. Said project must pass by a majority vote of the planning commission.
2. Said project must pass by a majority vote of the city council.
3. Said project must not be petitioned by a certain number of Edmond
residents (number based on previous election turnout) to a city-wide
vote, and then voted down.
For example, if HUD housing were proposed to go into the land south of
Hafer Park, but it failed to pass one of those standards, then HUD
housing would fail to be developed. The same process would go for any
church, school, neighborhood or park.
This is why voting "NO NO YES YES" DOES NOT mean houses absolutely will go in.
However, since the commercial development in question has already
passed through City Council, this petitioned vote is the last chance to
stop it from going in.
So, please, think about it. It's not a matter of stores vs houses. It's
a matter of traffic inflation/flood plain devastation/green belt
destruction vs preservation of all those things.
Vote No No Yes Yes if you want to give the land surrounding Hafer a
chance to grow into what it was originally desired to become.
Here is a picture for reference:

Another picture for reference:
Now, given the information you may have received, you must think that I
am in favor of the HUD housing that will go in if the shopping center
does not. I am not in favor of that. As I've hinted at slightly in my
writing preceeding this, I am against anything going into the land
south of Hafer.
The people who back the YYNN campaign are using the idea of low-income
housing as a scare tactic to sway people into voting for the commercial
development. What really would happen in the case of the decision
turning out No No Yes Yes is that the plot of land would remain zoned
residential, which simply means there is a possibility of HUD housing
going in, but that is a rare chance indeed. I'll explain:
In order for anything to be developed in Edmond, the city planning
commission has to vote in favor of the plan, then the city council has
to do the same, then if the people of Edmond don't petition a vote on
the project and vote it down [as we are currently trying to do for the
commercial development] the land will be developed on.
So I maintain, while it's possible for HUD housing to go in if the
commercial development fails, it is highly unlikely, as the people in
favor of NO NO YES YES will be as adamant about keeping that sort of
building off of the land south of Hafer as they are the commercial
building.
Please message me back if you have any more questions.
Recent Comments