According to this story by Derek Simmonsen in The Columbia Flier this week, the Board of Directors of the Columbia Association would like have “some authority over its zoning and planning and give its village boards a strong advisory role.”
I happen to think that this is a very bad idea.
First and foremost is the legacy of the CA Board. This is a group of individuals that has a history of infighting and dysfunction. They have proven time and time again to be challenged in dealing with their own parks and recreation issues much less planning and zoning issues.
Secondly, CA is a private homeowners association that only covers the CPRA lien paying parcels that make up Columbia. Columbia today encompasses several parcels that while physically are inside Columbia, are not subject to the lien and therefore are not represented on the CA Board.
And finally, approximately 25% of CA’s budget comes from lien assessments on commercial properties that are located outside of a village and consequently have no voting rights in the organization. This disenfranchisement contradicts the notion that the CA Board truly “represents” Columbia.
Daily
12 hours ago
2 comments:
Meanwhile, there was another article saying the County Council is ready to finalize CB 29.
By the way has there been any discussion as to how much it actually costs GGP to administer their gatekeeper role. Some good reporter should ask that question.
I agree that the CA board should not have any authority over zoning and planning. They can't agree on their way out of a paper bag, much less on a forward-thinking plan for downtown Columbia. I don't trust that group as far as I can throw them.
Post a Comment