 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
April 5, 2007
|
|||||
|
|
|
|||
|
April 5, 2007 |
|||||
 |
|
Editorial Important work to be done Several critical things remain unknown about last week’s surprising sale of the Fogg farm: we don’t know who bought the farm and we don’t know the buyer’s intentions. But whether or not the new owner someday brings another annex request to the Village, it’s a safe bet someone will. And we know one thing for sure: villagers now have a huge opportunity to engage in the sort of in-depth deliberation they need before making successful land use decisions. Council provided, during forums and meetings, many opportunities for citizen input during the Fogg annex issue, and that’s to be commended. But those conversations always took place under the gun of the impending May 1 deadline; they were also largely limited to the specific Fogg farm proposal. Over and over villagers rightly asked for more time, more opportunities to engage over land use issues. Now we have the time. The Fogg issue raised many questions. What are the needs of our schools and how do we best address them? Could infill development provide enough housing to meet the Village’s economic needs, and if so, how do we make that happen? Are there creative ways to provide houses for seniors, so that existing homes could open up for new families? How do we attract those families? How do we make Yellow Springs the sort of place that attracts the businesses we want? Past community forums have addressed these questions, but there’s more work to be done. These questions deserve a community-wide conversation that could take various forms. The conversation could involve Yellow Springers in an update of the Village Comprehensive Plan (the Planning Commission is currently addressing this update) or a revision of the zoning code that reflects village values. It could take a new look at the village’s annexation policy or determine whether to place a moratorium on annexations. It could be a visioning process on the future of Yellow Springs, as suggested by Council member Kathryn Van der Heiden as well as many villagers. Whatever the specific goal, it seems wise to start the conversation in a way that emphasizes our common humanity, that allows us to look at our needs, our fears and our values that brought us to Yellow Springs and that keep us here. Both the levy vote and the annex issue showed that villagers have passionate differences over how best to address Village challenges; it’s easy to forget that we are all good people and we have much in common. We need a deliberative process that allows us to find common ground, or at least to gain the mutual understanding and respect for each others’ positions that allows us to move forward. The Appreciative Inquiry process, which Council considered using several years ago, could do this. There are no doubt many others as well. Organizers could look to last week’s Arts Center Community Workshop as a model of civic engagement. That event brought out the best in Yellow Springers by adhering to that age-old maxim: focus on assets. And throughout Yellow Springs’ 200 years our town’s greatest asset has been its people, their creativity, innovation and collaborative spirit. Many villagers engaged in the Fogg farm process; many more would likely engage in a visioning process or a conversation on land-use issues. Two years ago, when the Fogg farm owners withdrew their first annex request, the village missed an opportunity to do this important work. But we have another chance now. Let’s use it well.
|
|
