Tuesday, October 22, 2019

Letter to the Editor: DUH?

 

 

I’ve just read the Planning Board chairman’s explanation of why city council ignored the PB’s vote, (Marco Eagle, 14 June, 2016). I’m wondering if I have this right:

1.  An applicant came before the PB wishing to start a disallowed business in a specific Marco locale. The PB stated that the disallowing ordinance would have to be changed in order to lawfully permit the business.

2.  The applicant pleaded that they didn’t have time to wait for the ordinance to be changed.

3.  With Board member Charlette Roman as the sole dissenter, the PB sympathized and voted 6-1 to recommend City Council approval of the application. The PB felt they could hold hearings later to change the ordinance. The PB reasoned that, after all, other well-known, not permitted uses are already unlawfully in place there, i.e. real estate, dental, chiropractic.

4.  Somehow, somewhere and presumably-someplace-in-the-sunshine, City Council decided it might be smarter to first amend the ordinance before approving any business application that would be otherwise unlawful.

Now, if I have the PB chairman’s “explanation” correct, I understand why an old truism still survives, namely:

“DON’T ATTRIBUTE TO MALICE, THAT WHICH IS ADEQUATELY EXPLAINED BY STUPIDITY.” [Robert J. Hanlon]

Russ Colombo

Marco Island

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *