From the News Press:Bonita council roundup: Officials to move ahead with shelter ordinance
Feb 20, 2013 |
Written by:
The Bonita Springs City Council voted 6-1 Wednesday to advertise the ordinances for homeless shelter operating standards and social services zoning regulations.
Public hearings are set for 9 a.m. March 20 and 5:30 p.m. April 3 at City Hall, 9101 Bonita Beach Road.
Councilman Bill Lonkart dissented.
“I have hundreds and hundreds, maybe thousands of emails from people that live in our city, including many, all the businesses that would be impacted by this kind of circumstance,” he said. “We must listen to the people that live in this town ... and then apply it no matter what the risks are.
“There are hundreds and thousands of people in this town who do not want any part of a homeless shelter.”
The city’s Local Planning Agency came up with drafts after input from the public. After review by special counsel Beverly Grady and Bob Pritt, many items were taken out of the proposed operating standards.
City Attorney Audrey Vance said some items, such as requiring shelter clients present an identification card, would be unconstitutional, or requiring job training could be an unreasonable burden.
She believes the proposed ordinance is now legally sustainable.
Councilwoman Martha Simons asked if priority can be given to Bonita residents. “We like to serve our own,” she said. Vance said she will look into that possibility.
Councilman Steve McIntosh also asked Vance to clarify that people convicted of violent crimes will not be allowed to stay in a shelter.
The City Council also has to nail down how many individuals should be permitted at a shelter. The proposed ordinance limits homeless shelters to 30 residents at any one facility, excluding children younger than 6.
Cedar Creek residents Dave Gallagher and Patricia Zimmerman said the limit should be for 30 residents not counting children younger than 6 citywide because 30 is a rough estimate of the number of homeless individuals in Bonita.
The City Council also decided to continue applying the moratorium on shelters to the application filed last year to build a shelter of up to 168 beds in the empty bank building at 9200 Cockleshell Court, off Old 41 Road next to the Art League of Bonita Springs. The Bernwood site is owned by the estate of Jim Bernet.
Public hearings are set for 9 a.m. March 20 and 5:30 p.m. April 3 at City Hall, 9101 Bonita Beach Road.
Councilman Bill Lonkart dissented.
“I have hundreds and hundreds, maybe thousands of emails from people that live in our city, including many, all the businesses that would be impacted by this kind of circumstance,” he said. “We must listen to the people that live in this town ... and then apply it no matter what the risks are.
“There are hundreds and thousands of people in this town who do not want any part of a homeless shelter.”
The city’s Local Planning Agency came up with drafts after input from the public. After review by special counsel Beverly Grady and Bob Pritt, many items were taken out of the proposed operating standards.
City Attorney Audrey Vance said some items, such as requiring shelter clients present an identification card, would be unconstitutional, or requiring job training could be an unreasonable burden.
She believes the proposed ordinance is now legally sustainable.
Councilwoman Martha Simons asked if priority can be given to Bonita residents. “We like to serve our own,” she said. Vance said she will look into that possibility.
Councilman Steve McIntosh also asked Vance to clarify that people convicted of violent crimes will not be allowed to stay in a shelter.
The City Council also has to nail down how many individuals should be permitted at a shelter. The proposed ordinance limits homeless shelters to 30 residents at any one facility, excluding children younger than 6.
Cedar Creek residents Dave Gallagher and Patricia Zimmerman said the limit should be for 30 residents not counting children younger than 6 citywide because 30 is a rough estimate of the number of homeless individuals in Bonita.
The City Council also decided to continue applying the moratorium on shelters to the application filed last year to build a shelter of up to 168 beds in the empty bank building at 9200 Cockleshell Court, off Old 41 Road next to the Art League of Bonita Springs. The Bernwood site is owned by the estate of Jim Bernet.
Special counsel Grady said Neale Montgomery, the property owner’s attorney, was informed numerous times a moratorium was pending, and Montgomery did not request an exception.
The moratorium went into effect May 18 for 12 months, or until a homeless shelter ordinance is passed, whichever is shorter.
“Every meeting from the time we met with your staff and every meeting we had with you folks, you all knew exactly what we were doing. You knew it was a permitted use. You said you were going to process our application before the effective date (of the moratorium),” Montgomery said.
“We had a piece of property with a committed right. This was a property owner who’s invested millions and millions and millions of dollars in your community. That (Bonita Springs charter) school is there because they built that. That road — that’s there because they built it. That landscaping — they built it.
“The staff knew and you knew it was a permitted use. You have done everything possible to take away that right. That’s sad because we believed you.”
Grady responded: “Zoning alone does not provide a vested right to a particular use.”
The moratorium went into effect May 18 for 12 months, or until a homeless shelter ordinance is passed, whichever is shorter.
“Every meeting from the time we met with your staff and every meeting we had with you folks, you all knew exactly what we were doing. You knew it was a permitted use. You said you were going to process our application before the effective date (of the moratorium),” Montgomery said.
“We had a piece of property with a committed right. This was a property owner who’s invested millions and millions and millions of dollars in your community. That (Bonita Springs charter) school is there because they built that. That road — that’s there because they built it. That landscaping — they built it.
“The staff knew and you knew it was a permitted use. You have done everything possible to take away that right. That’s sad because we believed you.”
Grady responded: “Zoning alone does not provide a vested right to a particular use.”
