Trends

Chevron Deference

by

I wrote a bit on this last January (here) when I first heard the Chevron Deference was up for consideration by the Supreme Court. (Kiplinger’s follow-up article here.) Now there seems to be a huge uproar over this or to paraphrase the words of Charlie Daniels: They’re all out there steppin’ an’ fetchin’, like their heads are on fire and their asses are catchin’… (from Uneasy Rider)

Saying that we’ve always done it this way, fails to recognize that the Chevron Deference is a product of the 80’s, not something springing from the Constitution. It was a case where the courts gave up their constitutional power to interpret laws, ceding it to the administrative agencies. This has been abused by the agencies and aided by lazy lawmakers, who intentionally or unintentionally write ambiguous legislation.

Unfortunately, the agencies are abusing their power over their clients, the citizens of the United States, while also ignoring their bosses, the Senators and Representatives that write the laws. (Check out this video of Democratic Senator, Joe Manchin, schooling Treasury Secretary, Janet Yellen, on the way that agency is disregarding very specific language in a Law he wrote and helped pass.) Unambiguous language in legislation is rare, but even when it’s in place, it requires legislators to be enforcers, as with the above video or citizens to risk their livelihoods taking them to court. The Chevron Deference had been used to give the advantage in these situations to the agencies as the de facto experts.

I seriously feel that the various bureaucratic agencies are being allowed to run the show. Even granting them the benefit of the doubt on knowing a lot about the things they oversee, bureaucracies tend to be invasive. They try and make themselves seem more valuable by growing and inserting themselves into more things. This is true with private bureaucracies and seemingly more so with public bureaucracies. When President Biden said we’re going to add 80,000 more IRS agents, I never heard the IRS say, they could get by with 50,000 or even lets start with 30,000 and see how it goes… No, they gladly accepted the growth, the larger budget and the increase power that came with this.

IRS: You owe us money. It’s called taxes. Me: How much do I owe? IRS: You have to figure that out. Me: I just pay what I want? IRS: Oh, no! We know exactly how much you owe. But you have to guess that number too. Me: What if I get it wrong? IRS: You go to prison. ME: [rifling through papers] Ok this is all kind of confusing, but I think this is how much I owe. IRS: Yikes, looks like you missed a number somewhere. I guess you’re going to prison. ME: [being handcuffed] Can’t argue with justice! – Jordan Stratton

As I mentioned on the previous post here, the agencies’ positions and enforcement can swing wildly based on whichever party is in office. Taking the political positions out, at least as much as possible, by putting it back in the hands of the judiciary, seem prudent. Acknowledging their expertise in these things, it would make more sense to bring them in when the law is being crafted rather than waiting until it’s in place and subject to their, sometimes bias, interpretation.

The striking down of the Chevron Deference seems to make perfect sense to me, but only time will tell. While in place, it was interpreted broadly, which caused the problems leading to the Supreme Court’s review. Doing away with it may create a new set of unintended consequences, but with government in general, less is better…

Dunes Approvals

by

The Dunes received a major subdivision plat approval and site plan approval from the Culver Plan Commission on June 18th and from the Culver Town Council on June 26th. This was somewhat a foregone conclusion since Culver has been working with the developer for over a year on this project. It was interesting though that neither entity passed these approvals unanimously.

The preponderance of people in attendance at the meetings were against the project. Some in its entirety, but most in its scale. Some (falsely in my opinion) called the Town to task for not communicating enough and not listening to concerns. (If there is one thing that I would say Culver is above average in, it’s communication with its citizens…) There were also those that attempted to complain on both sides of the issues, saying it was too big, but might be left incomplete; it was being pushed to quickly, but the developer shouldn’t be give 8 years to complete it; it was not planned to be part of the community, but but it should be connected directly to State Road 17, to direct traffic out of community.

I remain generally in favor of the project. I am a little disappointed in the the follow through on requirements the town had placed on the project. The project presentation to the plan commission has been delayed twice because of engineering questions being unanswered. As presented, at the meeting, most of those were answered “in concept”, but details were still not complete. There were also pending questions regarding the projects connection to South Main Street that were not complete. And then there was the statement from the developer that the town would be receiving a lot of money from increased TIF capture on this project which could be directed towards some of the short falls in water and sewer needs. Many of these things affect adjacent property owners, including a wetlands and the town’s own well field, while the money being proposed for water and sewer improvements had previously been suggested for other TIF district needs not connected to this project. I would have liked to have seen all these things tied down before authorizing them to proceed.

I was pleased that many of the questions from the audience were addressed, but I have concerns with their substantiation. I do not in anyway want to speak ill of the developer and their honesty regarding the project, but the answers given were off-the-cuff, having little if any documentation or requirements of follow-through. Many of the questions were, frankly, not the business of anyone but project investors, but the reassurances carried no weight. While I trust that everything said was in good faith, there is nothing that keeps them from changing direction on them if economics of the project suggest better uses of funds. As suggested here before (second to last paragraph), their development agreement included none of the delineated requirements seen in past agreements.

That said, I think many of those protesting this development fail to understand that this project was not a surprise, but something that has been in the Town of Culver’s plans and one of their goals for over a decade. When the Culver Garden Court property was annexed around 2010, the surrounding property was annexed as well. It was rezoned as R-2 to promote housing in that area. When the last revisions to the Culver Zoning Ordinance were completed, R-2 was rewritten to allow higher density developments. The 2014 Comprehensive Plan suggested, due to citizen input, that more housing is needed. The Stellar Communities surveys of 2016 and 2017 indicated more housing is needed. The 2024 Comprehensive Plan still indicated the need for more housing, even with The Dunes under discussion. This was not a project that required a rezoning or multiple variances to make happen. It fits with the planned development of the town.

Do I think things might have been done better? Always. Until I’m appointed benevolent dictator, I will most likely always see alternatives that I would have pursued. (I still have questions about whether it follows the Culver Complete Streets Ordinance, whether there were drywells added, where they drain and who owned them, and whether the wetlands have been properly addressed, etc.) Do I think those in charge were (mostly) following the will of the majority of citizens? Yes.

Sand Hill Farm Apartments – Blast from the Past

by

I was going through some old posts and ran across this video the Culver Visitors Center created when Sand Hill Farm Apartments first opened: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ejjSup5eoh-Rfs266NGxjJ2d42b35t21/view You can tell it was early on because the joy john was still in the parking lot! Ha!

Since opening, we have tried to continue to make improvements. We installed an Amazon Hub, a bike rack, a fire pit and firewood rack (which we periodically fill), some pines to hide the ugly Culver lift station, some trees, a new site sign and this year we mulched the parking lot islands and planted creeping thyme, and will be planting some more trees. We’ve also set things up so the residents can access Surf Internet as well as the Mediacom service, which was there originally.

I would still contend that the construction of the Damore Amphitheater and Sand Hill Farm Apartments are what tipped the scale for Culver’s Stellar designation. We want to maintain Sand Hill Farm Apartments with that same leadership going forward.

GC Horizons at the Plymouth Common Council

by
Pitchforks and Torches were out at the Council Meeting

It was a very disheartening meeting of the Plymouth Common Council this past week. What should have been a relatively easy vote for the council, acting on the Plymouth Plan Commission‘s recommendation to rezone property for Garden Court’s GC Horizons project, went nowhere because of misunderstandings, miscommunications and emotional responses. The arguments at the plan commission meeting, some of them not much more than mudslinging, were apparently repeated over the last week, inundating the council with calls, texts and emails. The Plan Director, Ralph Booker, was not allowed to make his presentation nor present the recommendation of the Plan Commission. With no discussion, a motion to deny the rezoning was made, seconded and passed 4 to 2.

Some of the comments from the board after the vote were difficult to hear. It was said that this wasn’t the right location… This site was found after a year of searching, because the council voted down the site we presented last year. We vetted a dozen sites, some turned down by the City in pre-discussions and some because property owners were unwilling to sell or unable to make a decision to sell. This was a good site, following the Comprehensive Plan in a transitional neighborhood, adding apartments and single family homes in an existing neighborhood with apartments and single family homes.

From Ali Riza Kukuk on LinkedIn

The project was conflated with the motels on the north side of town, but not as a solution… just a spreading of the problem. Paraphrasing one statement made, “We (City, Council) should be directing our funds and efforts towards the motel issue instead of this project.” This is a specious argument since Garden Court has not requested any funds from the City. This project would bring in $14MM in outside investment to the community and put a new property on the tax rolls, maybe delayed by an abatement, but still, a property paying taxes above the current farmland rate. There is nothing preventing the City from investing in a different motel solution. These are different projects!

The volunteer Garden Court board stepped up to the challenge of helping with the housing problems in Plymouth with this project. They were encouraged by IHCDA, providing training and offered $14MM in capital investment. It is not the total solution, but it would have been a great first step. Hopefully, the effort hasn’t been completely in vain, but like me, many involved are feeling unappreciated and beaten down. Garden Court’s name has been dragged through the mud throughout these discussions. These were undeserved attacks on their reputation. We’ll see how or if this moves forward. Disheartening…

LaPaz Commons Ribbon Cutting

by

On Thursday, May 23rd, we had the Ribbon Cutting for Riverside Commons Apartments in Plymouth and LaPaz Commons Apartments in LaPaz. This project resulted from Marshall County Crossroads‘ Stellar Designation.

In LaPaz, Matthew Celmer spoke on behalf of the Crossroads committee. Gary Neidig spoke on behalf of One Marshall County, the new reiteration of Crossroads. Roger Ecker, LaPaz Town Council President, spoke on behalf of the Town of LaPaz. Alan Rakowski, Director of Real Estate Acquisition, for IHCDA spoke as well. It was also nice to see Council member, Ryan Young; Clerk Treasurer, Jenn Gilmer; Former Clerk Treasurer, Lorraine Dove; and some of the town employees there as well. All of them praised the new development and the what it would do for the Town of LaPaz. (Marty Oosterbaan was there as a former Crossroads’ leader. He was also responsible for a lot of help in pulling the Ribbon Cutting together.) Thanks also to Easterday Construction Co., Inc. Project Superintendent, Bob Cooper, and Office Manager, Julie Heise for their help throughout the project and at the Ribbon Cutting. Thank you to Gavin Greer for his coverage in the Pilot News on May 29th.

When we have a project like this, I try and attend all of the local town council meetings. I hit most of them and the council made me a standing agenda item. My time there helped me understand the struggles LaPaz is going through and the good people that are involved in the town’s government, contributing their efforts. This made it all the more significant that LaPaz stepped up to help make this project happen, understanding their tight budget. LaPaz punched above their weight, providing more assistance than we received for Riverside Commons in Plymouth and for The Paddocks in Culver.

The LaPaz Council helped find a suitable site and made initial contacts with the owner. They also obtained an appraisal for the property.

The site required a variance. LaPaz Council President, Roger Ecker, appeared with us before the Marshall County BZA and spoke in favor of the variance request. (That was a late night and much appreciated!)

Troyer Street was not much more than a cow path before this project. The town provided and installed stone where the “street” had become a mud hole. Later, the town was able to grade and stone the remainder of the street in-house and then applied for Community Crossings funds to pave it and provide storm water infrastructure. This didn’t just benefit LaPaz Commons, but since these improvements, there has been steady traffic from the other apartments to the east. This was a great improvement for LaPaz.

LaPaz also waived tap fees for the sewer hook-up. A small thing, but helpful to project costs.

And as a final gesture of support, the LaPaz Council provided a picnic lunch at the Ribbon Cutting. That was a touching gesture!

Alan Rakowski, Director of Real Estate Acquisition, for IHCDA 

LaPaz and Plymouth were the only communities that stepped up to the challenge for this project. We approached Argos, Bremen and Bourbon (Culver was not eligible), but they either did not have a site available or wanted terms that didn’t fit the IHCDA application. It took courage and a lot of effort for LaPaz to do this and they should be commended. As Alan Rakowski from IHCDA stated in his speech, including LaPaz strengthened the overall application and probably made the difference in it being awarded. I also think that including these projects made a difference in Marshall County Crossroads receiving the Stellar designation and all the ancillary that came from that.

LaPaz Commons is an eight unit townhome project. There are 6 townhouse units and two ADA accessible flats. All of the units are ADA visitable. Before we were even done with construction, there were 10 applications for the units and at the Ribbon Cutting, there were four units filled. This is the first new housing in LaPaz since we did the LaPaz Garden Court senior housing in 2010.

LaPaz has suffered with the Highway 31 bypass literally bypassing them. They are working hard to keep their community thriving, using the limited resources which they have. We are happy that we could make a dent in this and provide some much needed housing. Fingers crossed that this helps kickstart some other positive additions for LaPaz!