Clarke Kahlo's comments to the zoning commission

Dateline: Mon 21 Aug 2006

Thank you God for the Clarke Kahlos of Indy...oh, wait, there is only one Clarke Kahlo. The tireless gov't watchdog and greenspace preserver was the original and only remonstrator on the crummy Polin Park deal. Since the Star has not yet seen fit to print Kahlo's letter to the editor on this situation, this blog is sharing his original remarks to the Metropolitan Development Commission.

I'd also like to go on record as saying that Clarke Kahlo is right in calling for hearing examiner Judy Conley to have recused herself. Not only is she the wife of King Ro Conley on the council, but she and her husband are said to have sponsored a fund-raiser on behalf of Center Township Trustee Carl Drummer, who would be the landlord of the lounge in question -- the one that is already in the works and has cost the city park space, to the tune of one park off the books in exchange for a parking lot.

Here is what Clarke had to say, including his call for an investigation into this matter:

"Comments to the Metropolitan Development Commission, 8-16-06,

2006-ZON/VAR-823-- Petitioner's request to withdraw the portion re the rezoning of the Parkland to a parking lot for a bar/restaurant

(The Petitioner's attorney had not supplied a copy of their withdrawal letter in advance of the hearing to either the City or the remonstrator, another professional discourtesy, courtesy of the arrogant Ice Miller attorney who represented the petitioner).

\t\t\t\t\t

I'm Clarke Kahlo, the remonstrator of record, and the person who appealed the Hearing Examiner's recommendation.

I'm of two minds about the proposed withdrawal. Ordinarily, I'd be glad for the promoters of such an outrageous anti-public land-grab to realize their over-reach and withdraw. This would save the volunteer citizen-defenders of the Comprehensive Plan a lot of unnecessary work.

However, if the petition would be heard, the MDC and the public would be properly apprised not only of the adverse implications of this park-to-parking lot plan, but also the astonishing extent to which our so-called watchdog regulatory agencies (the Parks Department and Metropolitan Development) have become complicit lapdogs.

If this case is withdrawn with your consent, let this not be the end of the matter. This Commission, or preferably a more independent panel, should initiate a formal inquiry into the process of how such a poorly-conceived idea could ever receive the approval of Parks officials and the Planning Division, and astonishingly, the active support of the president of the City-County Council, who formerly chaired the Council's Parks Committee.

I'm in support of the withdrawal.

Clarke Kahlo"

contact me: ruth@ruthholladay.com

Comments

Comments are closed.

Login

or Register

Search

Syndicate Blog