USE THIS LINK TO Comment AND VIEW COMMENTS
BY GREG WALTERS
BREAKING NEWS . . .Ward 1 Alderman Race
Decided by One Vote
 |
| BY GREG WALTERS |
Alderman Greg Walters and his challenger
Demonte Rochester met this afternoon at the Jackson County Board of Election
Headquarters to witness the recount of votes from the May 4th
Election. The unofficial vote count came to a tie between the two candidates .
. . Each of them garnering 240 votes.
One and one-half hours later the vote was officially recorded as 241 votes for Alderman Greg Walters, 240 votes for Demonte Rochester.
The errant count was found to be a vote the voting machine did not recognize when the votes were originally counted.
Also in attendance with Demonte Rochester was Ward 5 Alerman Bonnaye Mims. Attorney Robert Murphy accompanied Alderman Greg Walters.
OTHER NEWS OF INTEREST . . .
As reported last week, the Raytown Planning and Zoning
Commission rejected a request to make changes to the City of Raytown’s Master
Zoning Plan. Had they approved the proposed changes, the property known as the
Old Blue Ridge Nursery, would have been changed from residential to commercial
property.
A completely packed City Council Chambers was full of neighbors of the property. All but three of those speaking were in opposition to changing the plan. The testimony was riveting and very informative. For those interested, use the link at the end of this story to access the video of the meeting.
Be forewarned, the meeting lasted four hours. At the end of the hearing the Planning and Zoning Commission voted to reconvene on May 4, 2023 to determine an application to re-zone the old Nursery Property from residential to commercial.
CLICK ON THIS
LINK TO VIEW APRIL 6TH
Planning and Zoning Meeting
One talking point brought up by some members of the
Commission, was a claim the property was commercial for all those years as Blue
Ridge Nursery.
SO
WE DID SOME FACT CHECKING.
We checked with the former owner of the property, Mr. Bob
Vorheis. He told us Jackson County, Missouri, (which was the authority at the
time) taxed the property as 1/3rd residential, 1/3rd
agricultural and 1/3rd commercial.
Mr. Voorheis also told us that when he closed the Blue
Ridge Nursery the City of Raytown had contacted him and informed him he had to
remove the sign since he had not paid his business license tax. The letter
informed him the land would be considered “residential” by the city since it no
longer had a “business” on it.
Voorheis said, “The instructions from City Hall were very
clear. They told me I had to cut the sign posts down level to the ground.”
Re-Count on Ward 1 Race
Scheduled for Tuesday,
April 11th
BY GREG WALTERS
The Jackson County Election Board has scheduled a re-count of votes cast in the Raytown, Missouri Ward 1 Alderman race for Tuesday, April 11th.
The two candidates, Ward 1 Alderman Greg Walters and his challenger, Demonte Rochester are tied at 240 votes each.
Election Board officials are required by state law to conduct a hand re-count when a tie between two issues or candidates occurs.
Here is what to expect:
If the recount uncovers a discrepancy or missed vote in the re-count causing one candidate to have more voters than the other, a winner will be declared and the election will be over.
If a tie remains after the re-count, Missouri State Statutes call for a new election to be held. The City of Raytown is required to hold the new election as early as is practical. The Jackson County Election Board will be in charge of conducting such an election.
An alternative to a new election would be for the candidates to hold a coin toss, lottery, draw straws or any other device to determine the winner. However, both candidates must agree to this second alternative. If they do not, state statutes require a new election to be held.
The incumbent office
holder shall remain in office until such a tie-breaker is held. This guarantees
the people within his or her Ward will continue to have representation on the
Board of Aldermen until the contest is decided.
MO STATE STATUTE 79.050. Elective officers, terms — chief of police or marshal, qualification — same person may be elected collector and marshal — board of aldermen, four-year term permitted, submission to voters required. — 1. The following officers shall be elected by the qualified voters of the city, and shall hold office for the term of two years, except as otherwise provided in this section, and until their successors are elected and qualified, to wit: mayor and board of aldermen. The board of aldermen may provide by ordinance, after the approval of a majority of the voters voting at an election at which the issue is submitted, for the appointment of a collector and for the appointment of a chief of police, who shall perform all duties required of the marshal by law, and any other police officers found by the board of aldermen to be necessary for the good government of the city. The marshal or chief of police shall be twenty-one years of age or older. If the board of aldermen does not provide for the appointment of a chief of police and collector as provided by this section, a city marshal, who shall be twenty-one years of age or older, and collector shall be elected, and the board of aldermen may provide by ordinance that the same person may be elected marshal and collector, at the same election, and hold both offices and the board of aldermen may provide by ordinance for the election of city assessor, city attorney, city clerk and street commissioner, who shall hold their respective offices for a term of two years and until their successors shall be elected or appointed and qualified, except that the term of the city marshal shall be four years.
2. The board of aldermen may provide by ordinance, after the approval of a majority of the voters voting thereon at the next municipal election at which the issue is submitted, that the term of the collector shall be four years and the term of the mayor shall be two, three, or four years. Any person elected as collector after the passage of such an ordinance shall serve for a term of four years and until his successor is elected and qualified. Any person elected as mayor after the passage of such ordinance shall serve for a term of two, three, or four years, as provided, and until his successor is elected and qualified.
3. The board of aldermen may provide by ordinance
that the term of the board of aldermen shall be four years. Such
ordinance shall be submitted by the board to the voters of the city and shall
take effect only upon the approval of a majority of the voters voting at an
election at which the issue is submitted. Any person elected to the
board of aldermen after the passage of such an ordinance shall serve for a term
of four years and until his successor is elected and qualified.
Pargraph 3. If two or more persons receive an equal number of votes for nomination or election to any office not otherwise provided for in section 115.515 or this section, and a higher number of votes than any other candidate for nomination or election to the same office, the officer with whom such candidates filed their declarations of candidacy shall, immediately after the results of the election have been certified, issue a proclamation stating the fact and ordering a special election to determine which candidate is elected to the office. The proclamation shall set the date of the election and shall be sent by the officer to each election authority responsible for conducting the special election. In his proclamation, the officer shall specify the name of each candidate for the office to be voted on at the election, and the special election shall be conducted and the votes counted as in other elections.
4. As an alternative to the procedure prescribed in subsections 1, 2, and 3 of this section, if the candidates who received an equal number of votes in such election agree to the procedure prescribed in this subsection, the officer with whom such candidates filed their declarations of candidacy may, after notification of the time and place of such drawing given to each such candidate at least five days before such drawing, determine the winner of such election by lot. Any candidate who received an equal number of votes may decline to have his name put into such drawing.
CLICK ON LINK TO VIEW APRIL 6TH
Planning and Zoning Meeting
Marathon
Planning and Zoning
Commission Meeting Held
 |
| BY GREG WALTERS |
At issue were two controversial zoning issues.
CASE No. 2023-02 would have amended the Comprehensive Plan For Future Land Use Map on a Portion of a 5.2 Acre Tract of Land located at 5348 Blue Ridge Boulevard from Single Family Residential to Commercial.
CASE No. 2023-01 would amend the City of Raytown’s Official Zoning Map on a Portion of a 5.2 Acre Tract of Land located at 5348 Blue Ridge Boulevard from District R-1, Low Density Residential to District NC, Neighborhood Commercial.
Debate on Case No. 2023-02 last four hours. At the end of the public discussion and debate by members of the Planning and Zoning Commission, the representatives voted unanimously to deny the amendment. Though some members did voice a need to study the issue further in the future.
The meeting was an open forum allowing the public to participate. The City Council Chambers was filled to standing room only for the event. So many people spoke to Case No. 2023-02 to change the City’s Comprehensive Plan for Future Land Use that the Commission decided to continue the next discussion item for a controversial Zoning Change for the rezoning of a 5.2 Acre Tract of land at 5348 until May 4, 2023.
The meeting lasted four hours. It was interesting and compelling to hear what residents of the area and other Raytown citizens had to say about the proposed zoning changes. With the exception of one speaker, a Mr. Joe Creamer, all of the public speakers spoke in depth about their opposition to the proposals.
It was an interesting example of Democracy in Action. We urge our readers to take the time to watch as much of the video as possible. Use the following link to watch what was truly an exciting meeting.
18 comments:
Joehe is on Raytown Unleashed complaining about the people who attended the Zoning hearing Creamer is at it again. Now he is complaining about the people who attended the Planning and Zoning Hearing. He thinks they were unfair in protecting their property and their rights. Anyone who questions their motives should use the link at the top of the home page of the Raytown Report. It will take you to the video of the meeting.
You can watch the proceedings. Hear what the people had to say and make up your own mind.
Enough said!
Good advice. I already used the link to watch the meeting. Creamer is so wrong in his conclusions. The most telling part of the meeting is when the Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously voted not to move forward with a plan to change the recommendations of the city's master plan.
Does Joe include P and Z Commission in his crazy conspiracy theory?
I urge everyone to watch the video of the meeting. It is extremely informative.
The People in attendance were well mannered and well spoken. The members of the Planning and Zoning Commission listened and came to the right conclusion.
By the way, Joe Creamer did not stay for the entire meeting. After making his remarks he left the building. Perhaps he should watch the video as well. He may have a different view of himself after seeing his bad conduct.
"...Raytown Unleashed complaining about the people who attended the Zoning hearing Creamer is at it again. Now he is complaining about the people who attended the Planning and Zoning Hearing. He thinks they were unfair in protecting their property and their rights..."
Let the "board blasters" go wild with the accusations.
Let them "post" away. All day, daily, as per usual.
Let them "publish", be "editors".
Allow their marginally-informed biases and manipulative behavior to continue to shine through, as it always has. Everyone has those characters figured out anyway.
That wonderful group that opposes yet another smoke and booze shop are sensible, well-spoken and have conducted themselves in a dignified manner.
Our only wish is that some of their standouts realize that the community is in dire need their talents, abilities and common sense. We'll keep on hoping that some of these people break out, post- issue activism, and realize how *welcomed* and *valued* they would be if they chose to run for office in Raytown. Please invest further in the Raytown community in the future!
We're also heartened at the spectacular result in Ward IV. Hopefully that new Alderman will inspire additional citizens of her caliber to participate in local government.
It appears the votes on the Planning and Zoning Commission were sincere and realized a rush to judgment was not a proper solution. By and large the public forum exposed the flaw in the proposal before the Planning and Zoning Commission. With the exception of three of those who spoke -- two of who made little sense and seemed to be more concerned about dropping names of writers from the 18th and 19th centuries. The third seemed more concerned about dropping their own name and qualificationd for reasons that were not clear. Those who attended and spoke were impressive and well prepared with what they had to say.
A job well done by those who spoke on behalf of our neighborhood on April 6th.
The next meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission is scheduled for May 4th. Please, please, please make plans on attending. This meeting is very important. The end result will be a recommendation to the Board of Aldermen on this important question for the future or our homes.
Mark your calendar for May 4th at 7:00 p.m. at Raytown City Hall.
The voice of the community has spoken. Its unfortinate the someone purchased a property to build commercial that has been zoned residential. He should have approached this a different way before spending money. We are hopeful the property will have new hones on it in the future. Not a liquor store.
I think the beer, wine and liquor also convenience store items are already available right across the street from this location at the CVS. No smokes but that's okay by me. So what could possibly be any perceived need this application addresses? Gasoline and smokes? That's just not enough in this Raytowner's mind for this bad idea to go forward. BTW... if this somehow does get built, I predict the CVS will be long-gone very soon afterword.
"Now he is complaining about the people who attended the Planning and Zoning Hearing. He thinks they were unfair in protecting their property and their rights."
So the entire town is going to blow up if "they" don't get their one additional cigarette and liquor store? That's a hard pass. We're at capacity.
Congrats - Glad we have a voice of reason left at city hall
CONGRATULATIONS Alderman Walters!
FOUR MORE YEARS!!
A sincere thank you for everything you've done for us over so many years.
As someone else already mentioned on this blog, "spectacular result".
Congrats Greg,
Iz
The water run off going into the retirement home retention pond is already filled with trash and debris. Coming out the back of the retention pond, the water backups to a tree/brush/scrub filled ditch and into nearby neighborhoods creating flooded yards resulting in stagnant water and mosquitoes for families to enjoy.
A great savings to the city not to have a recount. The best man won in this case!
Visiting with one of the neighbors of the 53rd Street / old Blue Ridge Nursery Property the other day I learned something some city official had told a neighbor of the proposed development. Anyone driving by the property cannot help but see all the signage the neighborhood has placed in front of where the "discount smokes and alcohol/gasoline station and so-called convenience store has applied to be built.
Apparently some city official told one of those who had a sign in their yard that only one sign is allowed per yard.
Rubbish! The city just went through an election. I clearly remember three yard signs for the same political candidate in one yard in many places in Raytown.
For those who may wonder. The Supreme Court has ruled that putting a sign up on personal property is a First Amendment Right that guarantees free speech.
The Zoning Questions surrounding the old Blue Ridge Nursery at 53rd and Blue Ridge is being heard by the Planning and Zoning Commission. From there it will go to the Board of Aldermen to be voted on.
Make no mistake about it. Those folks who live along Blue Ridge can put up as many signs as they wish to express their opinion.
If you drive by the property in question, you will see the developer has TWO SIGNS on the old Blue Ridge Nursery property announcing the meeting times!
Am really pleased with the election results. Congrats to Jim and Teresa diane, and of course Greg. Better times ahead for raytown!
Congratulation on your re-election. Keep up the good work Greg and give the Mayor hell!
The zoning on the old Blue Ridge Nursery property was agricultural when it operated as a nursery. I have wondered when it got changed to residential. I looked into the zoning at the time the property was for sale.
That last comment is kind of silly. The reason they are asking for a new zoning designation is because they cannot create commercial use in a residentially zoned area. According to the City's Master Plan -- the zoning is currently residential. This means the burden is on the developer to try to persuade the city to make the change to commercial. Eventually the Board of Aldermen have to respond to the the request.
It seems a lot of people do not want a commercial business on the Blue Ridge Nursery property. According to the very interesting article in this week's Raytown Report, the property has sat vacant for close to 10 years. If you people wanted control of the destiny of this property, why didn't you buy it? Since you didn't, you have no right to dictate how the new owner develops the property.
Post a Comment