LEE COUNTY – A move to voluntarily annex county land into the city for potential development of a future Casey’s on the city’s west side was opposed by Lee County Supervisors Tuesday .
The City of Fort Madison voted Tuesday to annex the property, which they can do according to Iowa Code. However, the code requires proper notification to the county and requires some adjacent property logistics to make the move.
Supervisors on Monday approved a resolution opposing the voluntary annexation of the property that will be known as 6130 Avenue O, where Caseys is planning to build a large retail facility. They have also requested signage variances to extend allowable signage from 30 feet to 100 feet in a “bypass zone” to overcome hills and trees for motorists on the Hwy. 61 bypass near the Hwy. 2 intersection.
On Tuesday, city officials approved setting public hearings for June 17 on the annexation and for rezoning the property from single family to business. They also approved the first reading of the changes to the sign ordinance.
Regarding the annexation, Supervisors said they didn’t want to impede local economic development, but said the annexation does not follow Iowa Code and they couldn’t approve the annexation.
The resolution stated Lee County Attorney Ross Braden had not received proper service of notice or any hearing nor a copy of the proposal required by Iowa Code 368.5, and the county had not waived that requirement.
However, the county supervisors did receive notice on April 28 that a consultation meeting was being held on May 5 at City Hall and county officials were invited to ask questions. On May 27, a letter was sent from the City to Supervisor Chair Denise Fraise indicating that a public hearing was being scheduled for June 17 regarding the annexation.
The property is currently owned by Joanne and Michael McQuade.
The resolution went on to say the property to be annexed is not adjoining the city and has no common boundary, essentially creating an island, which wasn’t accepted by the county.
Supervisor Ginger Knisley pointed out that the county received correspondence on April 28.
“It was received after the May 5th date?” Knisley asked County Engineer Ben Hull.
Supervisor Chuck Holmes then spoke up and said he had possession of the letter and then thought Hull should see it.
Garry Seyb said the letter was mailed out with a one-week timeline, which is difficult for a board that meets weekly to react to.
“I think this is just a procedural thing for us. We have a timeline, and we have until Thursday to make a decision on this resolution. It’s not that we want to stifle economic growth at all, we can always rescind the resolution at a later date,” Seyb said.
“We can always reconsider if everything is brought up to snuff.”
Knisley said she was concerned with the ongoing contentious relationship the county has with the City of Fort Madison.
Holmes said it was the city’s doing, not the county’s.
“I get that, but I don’t think this is how either body of government should be operating. We have to find some way to resolve this and be working in more cooperation with our cities and not opposing things.”
Seyb said communication is happening over the issue and the county has been abundantly clear with the city and they want to work with them, but they have to follow code.
Knisley said the county needs to work on their internal procedures, as well. She said she wasn’t in opposition to the resolution, but the two groups need to work better together.
“Had all five of us known about this on April 28, maybe we could have gotten a little more work done on this. At least been aware of it a little more than three days before the meeting.”
Supervisor Tim Wondra said the county has in the past taken things on good faith with the city that have been ultimately shot down.
The county resolution was approved 5-0.
Fort Madison Mayor Matt Mohrfeld said the city had approved the public hearing and is moving forward with the annexation process.
Comments
No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here