ABSTRACT: On 3 November 2009, by a majority vote of 63% “yes” (34% “no,”) Carmel-by-the-Sea voters voted to approve discontinuance and abandonment of, and authorization to sell the Flanders Mansion Property “with Conservations Easements and Mitigation,” Flanders mansion property public parkland. Subsequently, five days after the election, The Monterey County Herald published a letter to the editor, ‘Exploring other uses for Flanders Mansion;’ the letter's salient points are presented.
SALIENT POINTS AGAINST THE SALE OF THE FLANDERS MANSION PROPERTY:
• “...it doesn't seem to me that all possibilities have been explored or imagined.”
• “...how about Flanders as an archive of the current work in music regarding its healing and educational capabilities? Or as an archival way station gathering the work being done on interspecies communication? Given Carmel's love for animals and dogs, what a perfect match that might be.”
• “I hope everyone will think about the possibilities not yet explored for Flanders Mansion's future. She is a star in starry place for all of Carmel's residents and creatures.”
(Source: The Monterey County Herald, Letters, (Exploring other uses for Flanders Mansion, Deanna McKinstry-Edwards, Carmel) 11/08/2009)
Showing posts with label Measure I. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Measure I. Show all posts
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Wednesday, November 04, 2009
MEASURE I: YES 63.3%, NO 36.8%
Measure I
City of Carmel-by-the-Sea
Approve discontinuance and abandonment of, and authorization to sell, Flanders mansion property public parkland. Shall discontinuance and abandonment of the Flanders Mansion Property(APN 010-061-005) as public parkland, and authorization to sell the Flanders Mansion Property "with Conservation Easements and Mitigation" as passed on May 12,2009 by the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea City Council by Resolutions No. 2009-30 through 2009-33, be approved?
Majority Approval
COUNTY OF MONTEREY
CITY/SCHOOL/SPECIAL DISTRICT ELECTIONS
November 3, 2009
Semi-Final Official Report 4
Measure I (2/2) 100%
YES Vote Count: 757 (63.29%)
NO Vote Count: 439 (36.71%)
TOTAL: Vote Count: 1,196 (100.0%)
City of Carmel-by-the-Sea
Approve discontinuance and abandonment of, and authorization to sell, Flanders mansion property public parkland. Shall discontinuance and abandonment of the Flanders Mansion Property(APN 010-061-005) as public parkland, and authorization to sell the Flanders Mansion Property "with Conservation Easements and Mitigation" as passed on May 12,2009 by the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea City Council by Resolutions No. 2009-30 through 2009-33, be approved?
Majority Approval
COUNTY OF MONTEREY
CITY/SCHOOL/SPECIAL DISTRICT ELECTIONS
November 3, 2009
Semi-Final Official Report 4
Measure I (2/2) 100%
YES Vote Count: 757 (63.29%)
NO Vote Count: 439 (36.71%)
TOTAL: Vote Count: 1,196 (100.0%)
Sunday, November 01, 2009
UPDATE VI: Flanders Mansion Property: SALIENT POINTS AGAINST THE SALE OF THE FLANDERS MANSION PROPERTY
ABSTRACT: On the 3 November 2009 General Election Ballot, there appears the following question: “Shall discontinuance and abandonment of the Flanders Mansion Property (APN 010-061-005) as public parkland, and authorization to sell the Flanders Mansion Property 'with Conservation Easements and Mitigation' as passed on May 12, 2009 by the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea City Council by Resolutions No. 2009-30 through 2009-33, be approved.” A Summary of the SALIENT POINTS AGAINST THE SALE OF THE FLANDERS MANSION PROPERTY gleaned from Letters to the Editor and Editorial Commentaries between March 13, 2009 and November 1, 2009 are compiled and presented. REFERENCES consisting of links to the entire original letters and commentaries are provided. Polls open Tuesday, 3 November 2009 from 7:00 A.M. – 8:00 P.M.
SALIENT POINTS AGAINST THE SALE OF THE FLANDERS MANSION PROPERTY:
• The City’s purchase of the Flanders Mansion property was “visionary.” And it was “a great investment!” “It has appreciated, since 1972, by about $2.7 million, or about $70,000 per year, with minimal maintenance.” (10/31/2009)
• “...the lawsuit was necessary to make the council follow state law and hold an election regarding the sale. The council shouldn't have to be forced to act lawfully.” (10/31/2009)
• “Blowing all of this taxpayers' money in an attempt to sell this irreplaceable parkland, which appreciates at $70,000 per year, at a time when the city, with its $10.5 million in reserves, needs no money, is, fiscally speaking, shortsighted.” (10/31/2009)
• When the Carmel City Council purchased the Flanders estate in 1972 it was “presumed the property would be dedicated to use and enjoyment by Carmel taxpayers” and it has “served that purpose for many years.” (10/31/2009)
• “There's a reason people live in Carmel...It has to do with values that are intangible, but greater: beauty, nature and community.” 10/30/2009
• “Carmel's general plan requires the city to 'acquire and enhance parkland'—certainly not sell it.” 10/30/2009
• “The city has put forward other arguments to sell the parkland that are based on similarly flimsy assumptions. For example: No viable use has been found for the historic home...It's too expensive for the city to repair and maintain...Too much money has been spent already on Flanders...The house is not accessible to the handicapped...The property is at the edge of the park...Neighbors would not tolerate the traffic and noise from public use.” 10/30/2009
• “We are not alone in our belief that we live in a village that does not sell its parkland. We are joined by the Carmel Residents Association, the Monterey Peninsula Chapter of the League of Women Voters, the Sierra Club, the National Trust of Historic Preservation, the California State Office of Historic Preservation, the Monterey Regional Park District, and the Monterey Peninsula Audubon Society.” 10/30/2009
• “Carmel and its precious beach and parklands are a gift from our predecessors, a gift we are holding in trust for those who will follow us. Measure I betrays that trust.” 10/30/2009
• “I believe the defeat of Measure I will make the City Council and the Flanders Foundation find the best usage of the parkland/estate; selling it means putting the money into the General Fund so it can be wasted.” (October 29, 2009)
• “Ask yourself two questions: Does selling the parkland/estate now make sense, when housing values are at their low value; and what is the city thinking when it wants to compete with its residents in the sale of parkland/property?” (October 29, 2009)
• “Selling Flanders breaks up the Mission Trail Nature Preserve and creates an inholding in its midst. Inholdings within parks cause problems: privacy issues, noise, fences, etc.” (October 23, 2009)
• If the Flanders Mansion Property is sold, “it would greatly impact the use and enjoyment of the Harriet Rowntree Native Plant Garden, the Martin Meadow, and access to many of the trails.” (October 23, 2009)
• The sale of the Flanders Mansion Property “would create a private in-holding completely surrounded by parkland. Bad idea.” (10/19/2009)
• “...voting 'NO' on Measure I. That would be a step towards preserving Carmel's precious parklands.” (10/19/2009)
• “As one of only two Carmel properties listed in the National Register of Historic Places, the Flanders Mansion is an important community asset and should be accessible to all. Its sale would not only fragment a public park, it would deprive Carmelites access to a key piece of their heritage that can be retained and enjoyed through adaptive reuse.” (10/17/2009)
• “The sale of parkland is particularly unwise as there are other ways to reduce the city's costs and keep the historic resource in public hands. The city has the authority, for instance, to lease the property and contribute the revenue to the estate's maintenance and upkeep at no cost to the taxpayer.” (10/17/2009)
• “When elected to public office the stewardship of public property became the responsibility of the city council. To abandon that public trust and duty in the application of personal political agendas is both arrogant and irresponsible.” (October 16, 2009)
• Since the current City Council has been “unable to achieve a good solution to the issue of an appropriate use for the Flanders Mansion that no council, now or at some time in the future, can...That position ignores the fact that there are good uses that have been proposed for Flanders, but McCloud and the council apparently don’t like the people making the offers.” (October 16, 2009)
• “One of the main selling points that the mayor and the council members have stressed is that the Flanders Mansion will remain forever a historic single-family residence. There is absolutely no guarantee that the residence will be just a single-family home. California law does not allow them to make that determination...There is absolutely no guarantee that the residence will be just a single-family home.” (October 15, 2009)
• “Stewardship of public assets is a significant responsibility of elected public officials. Public use options, such as an art and/or natural history venue, should be publicly explored prior to a decision to sell the Flanders Mansion property. Vote no on Measure I and make certain our public servants fulfill their stewardship and open government responsibilities.” (10/14/2009)
• “Selling Flanders breaks up the Mission Trail Nature Preserve and creates an inholding in its midst. Inholdings cause problems: privacy issues, noise, fences, etc.” (10/14/2009)
• If the Flanders Mansion Property “is sold, it would greatly impact the use and enjoyment of the Rowntree Native Plant Garden, the Martin Meadow, and access to many trails.” (10/14/2009)
• “Bravo to those who support preserving this special piece of parkland so future generations can know of the work of this amazing woman (Lester Rowntree, author, plant collector, lecturer and early popularizer of California native plants for the garden) who died in Carmel in 1979 at the age of 100!” (October 9, 2009)
• “A precedent-setting sale of Flanders could empower current or future Carmel-by-the-Sea city councils to carve up more of the Mission Trail park. For starters, there are nine 40-by-100 lots in the native plant garden which could be sold and developed. Imagine the years of construction disruption, traffic congestion, noise and parking problems that would cause.” (October 9, 2009)
• “...the long battle to save the integrity of Carmel’s one lovely natural park, Mission Trail Nature Preserve. Without a doubt, the nature-loving artists, writers and musicians whose vision gave our town its original soul would turn over in their graves that the idea to sell a part of this treasure could gain any currency here. Though the mansion itself would not be to their taste, since “small is beautiful” expressed their value system, its location within the park and the potential for its use to serve as a venue to preserve and celebrate Carmel’s remarkable past would gain their enthusiastic support. To them it would be a no-brainer!” (October 9, 2009)
• “Back in 1987, when faced with another council’s intention to sell Flanders Mansion and adjacent Martin Meadow, a group of us, neighbors of the park, natives and enlightened newcomers, got together a petition and in a week garnered over 600 signatures to save the mansion and the meadow. It was an inspiring grassroots effort, and we got the city’s promise that they would not ever sell these treasures.” (October 9, 2009)
• “Over the years, there have been a number of suggestions as to a use for it. One, which is echoed by the Flanders Foundation, which is waging a further inspiring battle on behalf of the park, was to utilize the mansion as a library, heritage museum, natural history study center and small gathering place. It had the support of CSUMB and all the Monterey Peninsula’s living artistic luminaries. This is the use that cries out to be implemented.” (October 9, 2009)
• “A precedent-setting sale of Flanders Parkland could empower the current or future Carmel City Councils to carve up more of the Mission Trail Park…there are nine 40-foot-by-100-foot lots in the Native Plant Garden that could be sold and developed. Imagine the years of construction disruption, traffic congestion, noise and parking problems that would cause.” (10/05/2009)
• “Sell Flanders and a precedent is set to carve up another large chunk of our park. The public loses recreational, educational and environmental treasures.” (09/21/2009)
• “I always thought that the city leaders were to be stewards of the public's land, not the agents of their demise.” (09/21/2009)
• ”Land matters. If a piece of our city is taken away, if our parkland is sold off acre by acre, bit by bit, our community begins to lose the distinctiveness, and charm it once created.” (09/19/2009)
• “The park thus would lose its most dramatic area with incomparable views of the Carmel Mission, and the littoral of the Carmel River entering the Pacific with Carmel Bay and Point Lobos in the background.” (September 18, 2009)
• The Flanders Mansion Property “is so clearly a central part of the park that the wooden map signs at park entrances feature the Flanders Mansion as a prominent landmark.” (September 11, 2009)
• “Once the property is sold, this beautiful piece of our park is gone forever.” (September 11, 2009)
• “...substantive reasons for voting not to sell the Flanders Mansion property, including maintaining the physical integrity of Mission Trail Nature Preserve and retaining a National Register of Historic Places resource as a public asset...” (09/10/2009)
• “For over nine years, the mayor has refused to meet and confer with the Flanders Foundation to explore possible public uses; City Council members have failed to present persuasive reasons for the sale of the Flanders Mansion; and the sale of the Flanders Mansion Property would result in the loss of significant parkland that is considered an integral component of Mission Trail Nature Preserve.” (09/10/2009)
• General Plan goals and objectives: "To protect, conserve and enhance the unique natural beauty and irreplaceable natural resources of Carmel"; "Use, maintain, and enhance publicly owned land for the benefit of Carmel residents"; "Establish an acquisitions list when opportunities arise to obtain land and/or facilities within the Carmel city limits"; and "Develop, preserve and enhance areas of scenic interest." (09/07/2009)
• “...tragic to permit this irretrievable loss.” (09/07/2009)
• ”...if our parkland is sold off acre by acre, bit by bit, our community begins to lose the distinctiveness, and charm it once created.” (SEPTEMBER 03, 2009)
• General Plan encourages the city “to preserve, protect our forest and open space; conserve and enhance the irreplaceable natural resources of Carmel.” (SEPTEMBER 3, 2009)
• The City, since Sue McCloud was elected mayor, has “failed to look at lease options that keep the park public and achieve restoration.” (08/23/2009)
• The City, since Sue McCloud was elected mayor, has not “explored any viable uses” for the Flanders Mansion Property; five task forces “looked for uses” “11 to 30 years ago.” (08/23/2009)
• “Once parkland is sold, it is gone forever.” (07/13/2009)
• City has rejected offers to “lease and refurbish” Flanders Mansion from “numerous individuals and organizations” and City has failed to “avail itself of public or private grants.” (07/13/2009)
• City does not lack money to maintain or rehabilitate Flanders Mansion; City reserves $10 million, FY 2008/09 budget “$1.2 million in the black.” (07/13/2009)
• “No reason to sell” Flanders Mansion Property, a 1.25 acre parcel in the “heart of the park.” (7/13/2009)
• Encourages “all of good faith to join the committee to preserve and enhance Flanders Mansion, instead of selling it to a rich party-developer for personal gain.” (6/24/2009)
• Senses “some ulterior motive for the city not putting energy and foresight into Flanders.” (6/24/2009)
• Flanders Mansion a “jewel in the crown of Carmel;” it “could be as well-known and visited as the Carmel Beach and Ocean Avenue." (6/24/2009)
• “Win-win proposition” of a resident curatorship; City leases Flanders Mansion Property to an individual for life and upon death property reverts to the City. Resident curator restores Flanders Mansion at his/her expense and allows public access to Flanders Mansion Property at specified times. (5/8/2009)
• “...once Flanders is gone, it is gone forever.” (4/16/2009)
• Flanders Mansion is “a beautiful mansion situated in spectacular park setting.” (4/16/2009)
• Urges city government representatives and Carmelites in favor of selling the Flanders Mansion Property to meet with Carmelites opposed to selling the Flanders Mansion Property and “work out a solution that keeps this priceless property in the community’s hands.” (4/16/2009)
• Comparison made between what Flanders Mansion and Mission Trail Nature Preserve could be and Villa Montalvo, Gamble House, Filoli, Steinbeck House and La Mirada. (3/13/2009)
• City cites reason to sell Flanders Mansion Property based on need of “significant” repairs, yet the City had failed to apply for grants and meet with local groups during the last 10 years. (3/13/2009)
• Sale of parkland in the “heart of the park” “will damage the park irrevocably." (3/13/2009)
REFERENCES:
The Monterey County Herald, (Flanders sale shortsighted, Francis "Skip" Lloyd, Carmel), 10/31/2009
The Monterey County Herald, (Outsiders flex Flanders muscle, Brie Tripp, Carmel), 10/31/2009
The Monterey County Herald, (Flanders Mansion sale betrays trust, ANNE BELL, Guest commentary) 10/30/2009
MONTEREY COUNTY WEEKLY, The Public Voice, Letters (Flanders Founder, Mike Brown | Carmel) October 29, 2009
The Carmel Pine Cone, LETTERS, (The wonder of parks, Karen and Hugo Ferlito, Carmel) October 23, 2009), 21A
MONTEREY COUNTY WEEKLY: MEASURE I ‘No,’ October 22, 2009
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, (See Flanders Mansion, then vote, Roy L. Thomas), Carmel), 10/20/2009
The Monterey County Herald, Letters, (Preserve Carmel parks, Joyce Stevens, Carmel) 10/19/2009
The Monterey County Herald, Letters, (Preserve Flanders Mansion, Brian R. Turner, NTHP regional attorney), 10/17/2009
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, (Power grab? David Maradei, Carmel), October 16, 2009, 28A
MONTEREY COUNTY WEEKLY, Letters, (Flanders Flap, Karen Brown), October 15, 2009
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, (Help fulfill potential of Flanders site, D.L. Trout, Carmel), 10/14/2009
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, (No vote on Measure I preserves Flanders, Karen and Hugo Ferlito, Carmel), 10/14/2009
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009 (Move the garden? Mary Ann Matthews, Carmel Valley) 22A & 15 IYD
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009 (‘Be careful what you wish for,’ Robert E. Kohn, Carmel) 15IYD
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009 (The importance of parks, Linda Lachmund Smith, Carmel) 15IYD
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 10/05/2009, (Be wary of parkland sale, Robert E. Kohn, Carmel)
The Monterey County Weekly, The Public Voice Letters, SEPTEMBER 24, 2009 (WHAT’S AT STAKE, Margaret L. Purchase | Carmel-by-the-Sea
The Monterey County Herald, 09/21/2009 (Save Carmel park, vote no on Measure I, Margaret L. Purchase Carmel)
The Monterey County Herald, 09/19/2009 (Don't sell off Carmel parkland, Roberta Miller Carmel)
The Carmel Pine Cone, September 18, 2009 (‘Simple solution,’ Olof Dahlstrand, Carmel) pg. 28A
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, September 11, 2009 (Same parcel? Ann Flower, Carmel) 20A
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 09/10/ 2009 (Don't sell Flanders Mansion for short-term gain, Barbara Stiles, Carmel)
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 09/10/ 2009 (Carmel council failed residents on mansion, L.A. Paterson, Carmel)
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 09/07/2009 (Protect Carmel: Vote 'no' on Measure I, Richard M. Flower, Carmel)
The Monterey County Weekly, Letters to the Editor, SEPTEMBER 03, 2009 (PARK PLACES, Roberta Miller|Carmel)
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 08/23/2009 (Flanders options ignored, Shirley Humann, Carmel)
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 07/13/2009 (No reason to sell Flanders Mansion, Brie Tripp, Carmel)
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 06/24/2009 (Invest in Flanders Mansion, JoAnn Vincent, Carmel)
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, May 8, 2009 (‘Resident curatorship,’ Virginia Connelly, Carmel) 26A
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 04/16/2009 (Flanders priceless property, Richard Stiles, Carmel)
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, March 13, 2009 (‘Enrich our lives,’ Shirley Humann, Carmel) 26A
SALIENT POINTS AGAINST THE SALE OF THE FLANDERS MANSION PROPERTY:
• The City’s purchase of the Flanders Mansion property was “visionary.” And it was “a great investment!” “It has appreciated, since 1972, by about $2.7 million, or about $70,000 per year, with minimal maintenance.” (10/31/2009)
• “...the lawsuit was necessary to make the council follow state law and hold an election regarding the sale. The council shouldn't have to be forced to act lawfully.” (10/31/2009)
• “Blowing all of this taxpayers' money in an attempt to sell this irreplaceable parkland, which appreciates at $70,000 per year, at a time when the city, with its $10.5 million in reserves, needs no money, is, fiscally speaking, shortsighted.” (10/31/2009)
• When the Carmel City Council purchased the Flanders estate in 1972 it was “presumed the property would be dedicated to use and enjoyment by Carmel taxpayers” and it has “served that purpose for many years.” (10/31/2009)
• “There's a reason people live in Carmel...It has to do with values that are intangible, but greater: beauty, nature and community.” 10/30/2009
• “Carmel's general plan requires the city to 'acquire and enhance parkland'—certainly not sell it.” 10/30/2009
• “The city has put forward other arguments to sell the parkland that are based on similarly flimsy assumptions. For example: No viable use has been found for the historic home...It's too expensive for the city to repair and maintain...Too much money has been spent already on Flanders...The house is not accessible to the handicapped...The property is at the edge of the park...Neighbors would not tolerate the traffic and noise from public use.” 10/30/2009
• “We are not alone in our belief that we live in a village that does not sell its parkland. We are joined by the Carmel Residents Association, the Monterey Peninsula Chapter of the League of Women Voters, the Sierra Club, the National Trust of Historic Preservation, the California State Office of Historic Preservation, the Monterey Regional Park District, and the Monterey Peninsula Audubon Society.” 10/30/2009
• “Carmel and its precious beach and parklands are a gift from our predecessors, a gift we are holding in trust for those who will follow us. Measure I betrays that trust.” 10/30/2009
• “I believe the defeat of Measure I will make the City Council and the Flanders Foundation find the best usage of the parkland/estate; selling it means putting the money into the General Fund so it can be wasted.” (October 29, 2009)
• “Ask yourself two questions: Does selling the parkland/estate now make sense, when housing values are at their low value; and what is the city thinking when it wants to compete with its residents in the sale of parkland/property?” (October 29, 2009)
• “Selling Flanders breaks up the Mission Trail Nature Preserve and creates an inholding in its midst. Inholdings within parks cause problems: privacy issues, noise, fences, etc.” (October 23, 2009)
• If the Flanders Mansion Property is sold, “it would greatly impact the use and enjoyment of the Harriet Rowntree Native Plant Garden, the Martin Meadow, and access to many of the trails.” (October 23, 2009)
• The sale of the Flanders Mansion Property “would create a private in-holding completely surrounded by parkland. Bad idea.” (10/19/2009)
• “...voting 'NO' on Measure I. That would be a step towards preserving Carmel's precious parklands.” (10/19/2009)
• “As one of only two Carmel properties listed in the National Register of Historic Places, the Flanders Mansion is an important community asset and should be accessible to all. Its sale would not only fragment a public park, it would deprive Carmelites access to a key piece of their heritage that can be retained and enjoyed through adaptive reuse.” (10/17/2009)
• “The sale of parkland is particularly unwise as there are other ways to reduce the city's costs and keep the historic resource in public hands. The city has the authority, for instance, to lease the property and contribute the revenue to the estate's maintenance and upkeep at no cost to the taxpayer.” (10/17/2009)
• “When elected to public office the stewardship of public property became the responsibility of the city council. To abandon that public trust and duty in the application of personal political agendas is both arrogant and irresponsible.” (October 16, 2009)
• Since the current City Council has been “unable to achieve a good solution to the issue of an appropriate use for the Flanders Mansion that no council, now or at some time in the future, can...That position ignores the fact that there are good uses that have been proposed for Flanders, but McCloud and the council apparently don’t like the people making the offers.” (October 16, 2009)
• “One of the main selling points that the mayor and the council members have stressed is that the Flanders Mansion will remain forever a historic single-family residence. There is absolutely no guarantee that the residence will be just a single-family home. California law does not allow them to make that determination...There is absolutely no guarantee that the residence will be just a single-family home.” (October 15, 2009)
• “Stewardship of public assets is a significant responsibility of elected public officials. Public use options, such as an art and/or natural history venue, should be publicly explored prior to a decision to sell the Flanders Mansion property. Vote no on Measure I and make certain our public servants fulfill their stewardship and open government responsibilities.” (10/14/2009)
• “Selling Flanders breaks up the Mission Trail Nature Preserve and creates an inholding in its midst. Inholdings cause problems: privacy issues, noise, fences, etc.” (10/14/2009)
• If the Flanders Mansion Property “is sold, it would greatly impact the use and enjoyment of the Rowntree Native Plant Garden, the Martin Meadow, and access to many trails.” (10/14/2009)
• “Bravo to those who support preserving this special piece of parkland so future generations can know of the work of this amazing woman (Lester Rowntree, author, plant collector, lecturer and early popularizer of California native plants for the garden) who died in Carmel in 1979 at the age of 100!” (October 9, 2009)
• “A precedent-setting sale of Flanders could empower current or future Carmel-by-the-Sea city councils to carve up more of the Mission Trail park. For starters, there are nine 40-by-100 lots in the native plant garden which could be sold and developed. Imagine the years of construction disruption, traffic congestion, noise and parking problems that would cause.” (October 9, 2009)
• “...the long battle to save the integrity of Carmel’s one lovely natural park, Mission Trail Nature Preserve. Without a doubt, the nature-loving artists, writers and musicians whose vision gave our town its original soul would turn over in their graves that the idea to sell a part of this treasure could gain any currency here. Though the mansion itself would not be to their taste, since “small is beautiful” expressed their value system, its location within the park and the potential for its use to serve as a venue to preserve and celebrate Carmel’s remarkable past would gain their enthusiastic support. To them it would be a no-brainer!” (October 9, 2009)
• “Back in 1987, when faced with another council’s intention to sell Flanders Mansion and adjacent Martin Meadow, a group of us, neighbors of the park, natives and enlightened newcomers, got together a petition and in a week garnered over 600 signatures to save the mansion and the meadow. It was an inspiring grassroots effort, and we got the city’s promise that they would not ever sell these treasures.” (October 9, 2009)
• “Over the years, there have been a number of suggestions as to a use for it. One, which is echoed by the Flanders Foundation, which is waging a further inspiring battle on behalf of the park, was to utilize the mansion as a library, heritage museum, natural history study center and small gathering place. It had the support of CSUMB and all the Monterey Peninsula’s living artistic luminaries. This is the use that cries out to be implemented.” (October 9, 2009)
• “A precedent-setting sale of Flanders Parkland could empower the current or future Carmel City Councils to carve up more of the Mission Trail Park…there are nine 40-foot-by-100-foot lots in the Native Plant Garden that could be sold and developed. Imagine the years of construction disruption, traffic congestion, noise and parking problems that would cause.” (10/05/2009)
• “Sell Flanders and a precedent is set to carve up another large chunk of our park. The public loses recreational, educational and environmental treasures.” (09/21/2009)
• “I always thought that the city leaders were to be stewards of the public's land, not the agents of their demise.” (09/21/2009)
• ”Land matters. If a piece of our city is taken away, if our parkland is sold off acre by acre, bit by bit, our community begins to lose the distinctiveness, and charm it once created.” (09/19/2009)
• “The park thus would lose its most dramatic area with incomparable views of the Carmel Mission, and the littoral of the Carmel River entering the Pacific with Carmel Bay and Point Lobos in the background.” (September 18, 2009)
• The Flanders Mansion Property “is so clearly a central part of the park that the wooden map signs at park entrances feature the Flanders Mansion as a prominent landmark.” (September 11, 2009)
• “Once the property is sold, this beautiful piece of our park is gone forever.” (September 11, 2009)
• “...substantive reasons for voting not to sell the Flanders Mansion property, including maintaining the physical integrity of Mission Trail Nature Preserve and retaining a National Register of Historic Places resource as a public asset...” (09/10/2009)
• “For over nine years, the mayor has refused to meet and confer with the Flanders Foundation to explore possible public uses; City Council members have failed to present persuasive reasons for the sale of the Flanders Mansion; and the sale of the Flanders Mansion Property would result in the loss of significant parkland that is considered an integral component of Mission Trail Nature Preserve.” (09/10/2009)
• General Plan goals and objectives: "To protect, conserve and enhance the unique natural beauty and irreplaceable natural resources of Carmel"; "Use, maintain, and enhance publicly owned land for the benefit of Carmel residents"; "Establish an acquisitions list when opportunities arise to obtain land and/or facilities within the Carmel city limits"; and "Develop, preserve and enhance areas of scenic interest." (09/07/2009)
• “...tragic to permit this irretrievable loss.” (09/07/2009)
• ”...if our parkland is sold off acre by acre, bit by bit, our community begins to lose the distinctiveness, and charm it once created.” (SEPTEMBER 03, 2009)
• General Plan encourages the city “to preserve, protect our forest and open space; conserve and enhance the irreplaceable natural resources of Carmel.” (SEPTEMBER 3, 2009)
• The City, since Sue McCloud was elected mayor, has “failed to look at lease options that keep the park public and achieve restoration.” (08/23/2009)
• The City, since Sue McCloud was elected mayor, has not “explored any viable uses” for the Flanders Mansion Property; five task forces “looked for uses” “11 to 30 years ago.” (08/23/2009)
• “Once parkland is sold, it is gone forever.” (07/13/2009)
• City has rejected offers to “lease and refurbish” Flanders Mansion from “numerous individuals and organizations” and City has failed to “avail itself of public or private grants.” (07/13/2009)
• City does not lack money to maintain or rehabilitate Flanders Mansion; City reserves $10 million, FY 2008/09 budget “$1.2 million in the black.” (07/13/2009)
• “No reason to sell” Flanders Mansion Property, a 1.25 acre parcel in the “heart of the park.” (7/13/2009)
• Encourages “all of good faith to join the committee to preserve and enhance Flanders Mansion, instead of selling it to a rich party-developer for personal gain.” (6/24/2009)
• Senses “some ulterior motive for the city not putting energy and foresight into Flanders.” (6/24/2009)
• Flanders Mansion a “jewel in the crown of Carmel;” it “could be as well-known and visited as the Carmel Beach and Ocean Avenue." (6/24/2009)
• “Win-win proposition” of a resident curatorship; City leases Flanders Mansion Property to an individual for life and upon death property reverts to the City. Resident curator restores Flanders Mansion at his/her expense and allows public access to Flanders Mansion Property at specified times. (5/8/2009)
• “...once Flanders is gone, it is gone forever.” (4/16/2009)
• Flanders Mansion is “a beautiful mansion situated in spectacular park setting.” (4/16/2009)
• Urges city government representatives and Carmelites in favor of selling the Flanders Mansion Property to meet with Carmelites opposed to selling the Flanders Mansion Property and “work out a solution that keeps this priceless property in the community’s hands.” (4/16/2009)
• Comparison made between what Flanders Mansion and Mission Trail Nature Preserve could be and Villa Montalvo, Gamble House, Filoli, Steinbeck House and La Mirada. (3/13/2009)
• City cites reason to sell Flanders Mansion Property based on need of “significant” repairs, yet the City had failed to apply for grants and meet with local groups during the last 10 years. (3/13/2009)
• Sale of parkland in the “heart of the park” “will damage the park irrevocably." (3/13/2009)
REFERENCES:
The Monterey County Herald, (Flanders sale shortsighted, Francis "Skip" Lloyd, Carmel), 10/31/2009
The Monterey County Herald, (Outsiders flex Flanders muscle, Brie Tripp, Carmel), 10/31/2009
The Monterey County Herald, (Flanders Mansion sale betrays trust, ANNE BELL, Guest commentary) 10/30/2009
MONTEREY COUNTY WEEKLY, The Public Voice, Letters (Flanders Founder, Mike Brown | Carmel) October 29, 2009
The Carmel Pine Cone, LETTERS, (The wonder of parks, Karen and Hugo Ferlito, Carmel) October 23, 2009), 21A
MONTEREY COUNTY WEEKLY: MEASURE I ‘No,’ October 22, 2009
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, (See Flanders Mansion, then vote, Roy L. Thomas), Carmel), 10/20/2009
The Monterey County Herald, Letters, (Preserve Carmel parks, Joyce Stevens, Carmel) 10/19/2009
The Monterey County Herald, Letters, (Preserve Flanders Mansion, Brian R. Turner, NTHP regional attorney), 10/17/2009
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, (Power grab? David Maradei, Carmel), October 16, 2009, 28A
MONTEREY COUNTY WEEKLY, Letters, (Flanders Flap, Karen Brown), October 15, 2009
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, (Help fulfill potential of Flanders site, D.L. Trout, Carmel), 10/14/2009
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, (No vote on Measure I preserves Flanders, Karen and Hugo Ferlito, Carmel), 10/14/2009
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009 (Move the garden? Mary Ann Matthews, Carmel Valley) 22A & 15 IYD
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009 (‘Be careful what you wish for,’ Robert E. Kohn, Carmel) 15IYD
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009 (The importance of parks, Linda Lachmund Smith, Carmel) 15IYD
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 10/05/2009, (Be wary of parkland sale, Robert E. Kohn, Carmel)
The Monterey County Weekly, The Public Voice Letters, SEPTEMBER 24, 2009 (WHAT’S AT STAKE, Margaret L. Purchase | Carmel-by-the-Sea
The Monterey County Herald, 09/21/2009 (Save Carmel park, vote no on Measure I, Margaret L. Purchase Carmel)
The Monterey County Herald, 09/19/2009 (Don't sell off Carmel parkland, Roberta Miller Carmel)
The Carmel Pine Cone, September 18, 2009 (‘Simple solution,’ Olof Dahlstrand, Carmel) pg. 28A
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, September 11, 2009 (Same parcel? Ann Flower, Carmel) 20A
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 09/10/ 2009 (Don't sell Flanders Mansion for short-term gain, Barbara Stiles, Carmel)
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 09/10/ 2009 (Carmel council failed residents on mansion, L.A. Paterson, Carmel)
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 09/07/2009 (Protect Carmel: Vote 'no' on Measure I, Richard M. Flower, Carmel)
The Monterey County Weekly, Letters to the Editor, SEPTEMBER 03, 2009 (PARK PLACES, Roberta Miller|Carmel)
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 08/23/2009 (Flanders options ignored, Shirley Humann, Carmel)
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 07/13/2009 (No reason to sell Flanders Mansion, Brie Tripp, Carmel)
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 06/24/2009 (Invest in Flanders Mansion, JoAnn Vincent, Carmel)
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, May 8, 2009 (‘Resident curatorship,’ Virginia Connelly, Carmel) 26A
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 04/16/2009 (Flanders priceless property, Richard Stiles, Carmel)
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, March 13, 2009 (‘Enrich our lives,’ Shirley Humann, Carmel) 26A
UPDATE VI: Flanders Mansion Property: SALIENT POINTS FOR THE SALE OF THE FLANDERS MANSION PROPERTY
ABSTRACT: On the 3 November 2009 General Election Ballot, there appears the following question: “Shall discontinuance and abandonment of the Flanders Mansion Property (APN 010-061-005) as public parkland, and authorization to sell the Flanders Mansion Property 'with Conservation Easements and Mitigation' as passed on May 12, 2009 by the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea City Council by Resolutions No. 2009-30 through 2009-33, be approved.” A Summary of the SALIENT POINTS FOR THE SALE OF THE FLANDERS MANSION PROPERTY gleaned from Letters to the Editor and Editorial Commentaries between March 13, 2009 and November 1, 2009 are compiled and presented. REFERENCES consisting of links to the entire original letters and commentaries are provided. Polls open Tuesday, 3 November 2009 from 7:00 A.M. – 8:00 P.M.
SALIENT POINTS FOR THE SALE OF THE FLANDERS MANSION PROPERTY:
• Claims “It is a total drain on the budget. Fixing broken windows, leaking pipes, rotten electrical wiring and roof leaks is, as Mayor Sue McCloud pointed out, an expenditure of over $20,000 yearly.” (10/30/2009)
• Claims “Flanders is a revenue drain; it serves no useful purpose. It should be sold to someone who can enjoy its unique characteristics.” (October 30, 2009)
• Claims “Despite honest and repeated efforts, there has been no viable public usage that would make sense for this house other than a sale. The expenses to make the house accessible for public use would be irresponsible.” (October 30, 2009)
• “Selling Flanders is one way to raise important revenues when voters reject tax increases.” (October 23, 2009)
• Claims “Making the Flanders Mansion a convention center, or an arts center, or any kind of a public building just doesn't make good economic sense in today's economy.” (10/22/2009)
• “The money that would come from the sale of this property could fund other projects or lessen budget deficits.” (10/22/2009)
• “In this time of fiscal uncertainty, the city should recoup this money by selling the mansion—and using the rest of the proceeds for good causes, like more low-cost housing for elderly Carmelites, as well as for the city's ongoing expenses.” (10/21/2009)
• Urges sale of the Flanders Mansion Property “based on its dubious historic value, its awkward location, its cost for maintenance or refurbishment, its loss of tax revenue, and its very costly ADA requirements for a public use structure.” (October 16, 2009)
• “Sale of the Flanders Mansion would still leave Mission Trail Park with more than 96 percent of the current 32.4 acres and would not encroach on any trails.” (October 16, 2009)
• “The best plan is to sell the Flanders house to someone who will restore it to its original use as a single-family house. The property will then go back on the tax rolls and, finally, the house will be in use again as a home.” (October 9, 2009)
• “...the preserve does not have adequate traffic and circulation paved roads and paved parking for public or quasi-public use, as was reported in the EIR of January 2009…. Currently and historically, it only has capacity for single-family land use.” (October 9, 2009)
• “Selling Flanders Mansion to a private party will end the exposure of Carmel to the environmental legal actions associated.” (October 9, 2009)
• Claims “The city has examined many suggestions for use, but none — except sale — has merit.” (October 9, 2009)
• “Flanders Mansion was built as a single-family home in a neighborhood of single-family homes. There were no objections to it then and there should be no objections to it now.” (October 9, 2009)
• Claims “Narrow Hatton Road, which provides access to Flanders Mansion, cannot safely accommodate significantly increased traffic.” (October 9, 2009)
• Claims the Flanders Mansion “has been vacant for most of a 30-year period and has been cost-generating and non-revenue-producing throughout the entire period.” (10/05/2009)
• “Keep the unused asset and get little or no value, or sell the unused asset and use the interest income off the proceeds to fund important things for your family. Selling is the sensible thing to do.” (September 25, 2009)
• “There will still be lots of room for dogs, people and wild animals to roam around if we return the home to private use.” (September 18, 2009)
• Asks “How safe is it to have a building and its surrounding area continually exposed to people coming in to prepare for a public event with the extra traffic, water use, possibility of damage to the property and improper use of a narrow county road?” (September 11, 2009)
• Claims it is “very unlikely” that if Flanders Mansion were on Scenic Road instead of Hatton Road, the Flanders Foundation would not take the position that the property should be other than “a single family residence— perhaps a museum, or put to use for some other public purpose.” (September 11, 2009)
• “By not selling the house, the community risks a possible devastating fire or continuing acts of vandalism. New residents would not only restore the home, but would oversee the property. It could then return to its primary purpose — a lovely home in a welcoming residential neighborhood.” (09/05/2009)
• Claims “If the mansion is not sold and becomes some kind of public institution, increased traffic and pedestrians will be at risk.” (09/05/2009)
• ”...the sale can become a shot in our economic arm and our wallet.” (09/04/2009)
• States that the “Carmel City Council and the previous mayor voted to sell the Flanders Mansion property in December 1999.” (08/26/2009)
• “Selling 2 percent leaves 98 percent total parkland for Carmel.” (August 14, 2009)
• Claims using Flanders Mansion “as a quasi-public institution would disrupt the tranquility of the area, with traffic and service vehicles, and even unsettling to flora and fauna.” (August 14, 2009)
• Claims the Flanders Mansion is “unsuitable” for any “worthy public use” “due to its location in a quiet, residential neighborhood.” (7/03/2009)
• Wants “objectors” to purchase Flanders Mansion Property and pay for restoration rather that waste “taxpayers money with legal obstructions.” (5/08/2009)
• Claims, if polled, neighbors want private residence “compatible with the area.” (5/08/2009)
• Claims “no public use that’s suitable” for the Flanders Mansion; cites committee proposal for use as a culinary academy voted down by City Council under Mayor Ken White. (3/27/2009)
REFERENCES:
The Monterey County Herald, Letters, (Flanders Mansion a money pit, Tim Meroney, Carmel), 10/30/2009
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, (Flanders a ‘revenue drain,’ Amber Archangel, Carmel), October 30, 2009, 31A
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, (‘Misleading voters’ Donna Shore, Carmel), October 30, 2009, 31A
The Carmel Pine Cone, LETTERS, (Too big to fail? Chris Tescher, Carmel), October 23, 2009, 21A
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, (Public-owned Flanders Mansion, Jon Kannegaard and Pat Sandoval, Carmel), 10/22/2009
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, (Vote for sale of Flanders Mansion, Riane Eisler, Carmel), 10/21/2009
Editorial: Flanders Mansion sale makes sense, THE HERALD'S VIEW, The Monterey County Herald, 10/20/2009
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, (Flanders issue should be non-partisan, Clay Berling, Carmel), October 16, 2009, 28A & 25A
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, (How park was created, William Doolittle, Carmel), October 16, 2009, 25A
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, (Yes vote on Measure I helps sell Flanders, Dale Hekhuis, Carmel), 10/14/2009
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009 (‘Best plan is to sell,’ Pat Sippel, Carmel), 22 A
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009 (Hatton Road inadequate, Robert G. Morris, Carmel) 15IYD
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009 (‘End the exposure to litigation,’Pamela Heisinger, Carmel) 15IYD
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009 (‘Abandon the myth,’ Jeffrey Lehr, M.D., Carmel) 15IYD
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009 (Thank the Doolittles, Erling Lagerholm, Carmel) 15IYD
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009 (Hatton Road too narrow, Laura Newmark, Carmel) 15IYD
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 10/05/2009, (It's time to sell Flanders, Dale Hekhuis, Carmel)
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, September 25, 2009 (A Useful Analogy, Mike Cunningham, Carmel) pg. 36A
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, September 18, 2009 (A ‘mistake’ to buy it, Carolyn S. Akcan, Carmel) pg. 28A-29A
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, September 11, 2009 (How safe? J. Daniel Tibbitts, Carmel) 20A
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, September 11, 2009 (Flanders ‘fiasco,’ William J.Woska, Carmel) 20A-21A
The Carmel Pine Cone, Editorial: Through the looking glass, September 4, 2009
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, September 4, 2009 (Vote Aye on Measure “I,” Patricia Sandoval, Carmel)
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, September 4, 2009 (‘A lovely private home,’ Suzanne Lehr, Carmel)
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 09/04/2009 (Proceeds from Flanders Mansion would help city, Jon Kannegaard Carmel)
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 08/26/2009 (Flanders options to be studied, Sue McCloud, Mayor of Carmel)
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, August 14, 2009 (Flanders ‘myth,’ Marikay Morris, Carmel) 26A
The Carmel Pine Cone July 3, 2009 (Editorial: The power of one)
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, May 8, 2009 (‘Get rid of Flanders now,’ P. S. Chase, Carmel) 26A
Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, March 27, 2009 (‘Here we go again,’ Rita Holloway, Carmel Valley) 22A
SALIENT POINTS FOR THE SALE OF THE FLANDERS MANSION PROPERTY:
• Claims “It is a total drain on the budget. Fixing broken windows, leaking pipes, rotten electrical wiring and roof leaks is, as Mayor Sue McCloud pointed out, an expenditure of over $20,000 yearly.” (10/30/2009)
• Claims “Flanders is a revenue drain; it serves no useful purpose. It should be sold to someone who can enjoy its unique characteristics.” (October 30, 2009)
• Claims “Despite honest and repeated efforts, there has been no viable public usage that would make sense for this house other than a sale. The expenses to make the house accessible for public use would be irresponsible.” (October 30, 2009)
• “Selling Flanders is one way to raise important revenues when voters reject tax increases.” (October 23, 2009)
• Claims “Making the Flanders Mansion a convention center, or an arts center, or any kind of a public building just doesn't make good economic sense in today's economy.” (10/22/2009)
• “The money that would come from the sale of this property could fund other projects or lessen budget deficits.” (10/22/2009)
• “In this time of fiscal uncertainty, the city should recoup this money by selling the mansion—and using the rest of the proceeds for good causes, like more low-cost housing for elderly Carmelites, as well as for the city's ongoing expenses.” (10/21/2009)
• Urges sale of the Flanders Mansion Property “based on its dubious historic value, its awkward location, its cost for maintenance or refurbishment, its loss of tax revenue, and its very costly ADA requirements for a public use structure.” (October 16, 2009)
• “Sale of the Flanders Mansion would still leave Mission Trail Park with more than 96 percent of the current 32.4 acres and would not encroach on any trails.” (October 16, 2009)
• “The best plan is to sell the Flanders house to someone who will restore it to its original use as a single-family house. The property will then go back on the tax rolls and, finally, the house will be in use again as a home.” (October 9, 2009)
• “...the preserve does not have adequate traffic and circulation paved roads and paved parking for public or quasi-public use, as was reported in the EIR of January 2009…. Currently and historically, it only has capacity for single-family land use.” (October 9, 2009)
• “Selling Flanders Mansion to a private party will end the exposure of Carmel to the environmental legal actions associated.” (October 9, 2009)
• Claims “The city has examined many suggestions for use, but none — except sale — has merit.” (October 9, 2009)
• “Flanders Mansion was built as a single-family home in a neighborhood of single-family homes. There were no objections to it then and there should be no objections to it now.” (October 9, 2009)
• Claims “Narrow Hatton Road, which provides access to Flanders Mansion, cannot safely accommodate significantly increased traffic.” (October 9, 2009)
• Claims the Flanders Mansion “has been vacant for most of a 30-year period and has been cost-generating and non-revenue-producing throughout the entire period.” (10/05/2009)
• “Keep the unused asset and get little or no value, or sell the unused asset and use the interest income off the proceeds to fund important things for your family. Selling is the sensible thing to do.” (September 25, 2009)
• “There will still be lots of room for dogs, people and wild animals to roam around if we return the home to private use.” (September 18, 2009)
• Asks “How safe is it to have a building and its surrounding area continually exposed to people coming in to prepare for a public event with the extra traffic, water use, possibility of damage to the property and improper use of a narrow county road?” (September 11, 2009)
• Claims it is “very unlikely” that if Flanders Mansion were on Scenic Road instead of Hatton Road, the Flanders Foundation would not take the position that the property should be other than “a single family residence— perhaps a museum, or put to use for some other public purpose.” (September 11, 2009)
• “By not selling the house, the community risks a possible devastating fire or continuing acts of vandalism. New residents would not only restore the home, but would oversee the property. It could then return to its primary purpose — a lovely home in a welcoming residential neighborhood.” (09/05/2009)
• Claims “If the mansion is not sold and becomes some kind of public institution, increased traffic and pedestrians will be at risk.” (09/05/2009)
• ”...the sale can become a shot in our economic arm and our wallet.” (09/04/2009)
• States that the “Carmel City Council and the previous mayor voted to sell the Flanders Mansion property in December 1999.” (08/26/2009)
• “Selling 2 percent leaves 98 percent total parkland for Carmel.” (August 14, 2009)
• Claims using Flanders Mansion “as a quasi-public institution would disrupt the tranquility of the area, with traffic and service vehicles, and even unsettling to flora and fauna.” (August 14, 2009)
• Claims the Flanders Mansion is “unsuitable” for any “worthy public use” “due to its location in a quiet, residential neighborhood.” (7/03/2009)
• Wants “objectors” to purchase Flanders Mansion Property and pay for restoration rather that waste “taxpayers money with legal obstructions.” (5/08/2009)
• Claims, if polled, neighbors want private residence “compatible with the area.” (5/08/2009)
• Claims “no public use that’s suitable” for the Flanders Mansion; cites committee proposal for use as a culinary academy voted down by City Council under Mayor Ken White. (3/27/2009)
REFERENCES:
The Monterey County Herald, Letters, (Flanders Mansion a money pit, Tim Meroney, Carmel), 10/30/2009
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, (Flanders a ‘revenue drain,’ Amber Archangel, Carmel), October 30, 2009, 31A
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, (‘Misleading voters’ Donna Shore, Carmel), October 30, 2009, 31A
The Carmel Pine Cone, LETTERS, (Too big to fail? Chris Tescher, Carmel), October 23, 2009, 21A
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, (Public-owned Flanders Mansion, Jon Kannegaard and Pat Sandoval, Carmel), 10/22/2009
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, (Vote for sale of Flanders Mansion, Riane Eisler, Carmel), 10/21/2009
Editorial: Flanders Mansion sale makes sense, THE HERALD'S VIEW, The Monterey County Herald, 10/20/2009
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, (Flanders issue should be non-partisan, Clay Berling, Carmel), October 16, 2009, 28A & 25A
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, (How park was created, William Doolittle, Carmel), October 16, 2009, 25A
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, (Yes vote on Measure I helps sell Flanders, Dale Hekhuis, Carmel), 10/14/2009
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009 (‘Best plan is to sell,’ Pat Sippel, Carmel), 22 A
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009 (Hatton Road inadequate, Robert G. Morris, Carmel) 15IYD
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009 (‘End the exposure to litigation,’Pamela Heisinger, Carmel) 15IYD
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009 (‘Abandon the myth,’ Jeffrey Lehr, M.D., Carmel) 15IYD
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009 (Thank the Doolittles, Erling Lagerholm, Carmel) 15IYD
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009 (Hatton Road too narrow, Laura Newmark, Carmel) 15IYD
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 10/05/2009, (It's time to sell Flanders, Dale Hekhuis, Carmel)
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, September 25, 2009 (A Useful Analogy, Mike Cunningham, Carmel) pg. 36A
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, September 18, 2009 (A ‘mistake’ to buy it, Carolyn S. Akcan, Carmel) pg. 28A-29A
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, September 11, 2009 (How safe? J. Daniel Tibbitts, Carmel) 20A
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, September 11, 2009 (Flanders ‘fiasco,’ William J.Woska, Carmel) 20A-21A
The Carmel Pine Cone, Editorial: Through the looking glass, September 4, 2009
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, September 4, 2009 (Vote Aye on Measure “I,” Patricia Sandoval, Carmel)
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, September 4, 2009 (‘A lovely private home,’ Suzanne Lehr, Carmel)
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 09/04/2009 (Proceeds from Flanders Mansion would help city, Jon Kannegaard Carmel)
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 08/26/2009 (Flanders options to be studied, Sue McCloud, Mayor of Carmel)
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, August 14, 2009 (Flanders ‘myth,’ Marikay Morris, Carmel) 26A
The Carmel Pine Cone July 3, 2009 (Editorial: The power of one)
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, May 8, 2009 (‘Get rid of Flanders now,’ P. S. Chase, Carmel) 26A
Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, March 27, 2009 (‘Here we go again,’ Rita Holloway, Carmel Valley) 22A
Monday, October 26, 2009
MONTEREY COUNTY WEEKLY: MEASURE I ‘No’
ABSTRACT: On Thursday, 22 October 2009, the Staff of the Monterey County Weekly recommended a 'No' vote on Measure I involving the sale of the Flanders Mansion Property in Mission Trail Nature Preserve. Highlights of the endorsement and a link to the complete endorsement are presented.
• “...no convincing argument has been mounted for why that time should be now,” regarding the sale of the Flanders Mansion Property.
• It is “short-sighted” for the City to not “preserve one of its historic sites.”
• Selling the Flanders Mansion Property “seems like a bad idea, especially at a time when other publicly-owned parks have been at risk.”
• “Flanders could be an asset to the community for decades to come, even if it’s not clear what the immediate best use of this public building is.”
• “The short-term gain on the sale doesn’t outweigh its permanent loss to a private owner.”
ADDENDUM:
Endorsements
The Weekly editorial board’s endorsements for the upcoming elections on Nov. 3. By Staff
• “...no convincing argument has been mounted for why that time should be now,” regarding the sale of the Flanders Mansion Property.
• It is “short-sighted” for the City to not “preserve one of its historic sites.”
• Selling the Flanders Mansion Property “seems like a bad idea, especially at a time when other publicly-owned parks have been at risk.”
• “Flanders could be an asset to the community for decades to come, even if it’s not clear what the immediate best use of this public building is.”
• “The short-term gain on the sale doesn’t outweigh its permanent loss to a private owner.”
ADDENDUM:
Endorsements
The Weekly editorial board’s endorsements for the upcoming elections on Nov. 3. By Staff
Sunday, October 25, 2009
UPDATE V: Flanders Mansion Property: SALIENT POINTS AGAINST THE SALE OF THE FLANDERS MANSION PROPERTY
ABSTRACT: On the 3 November 2009 General Election Ballot, there appears the following question: “Shall discontinuance and abandonment of the Flanders Mansion Property (APN 010-061-005) as public parkland, and authorization to sell the Flanders Mansion Property "with Conservation Easements and Mitigation" as passed on May 12, 2009 by the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea City Council by Resolutions No. 2009-30 through 2009-33, be approved.” A Summary of the SALIENT POINTS AGAINST THE SALE OF THE FLANDERS MANSION PROPERTY gleaned from Letters to the Editor and Editorial Commentaries between March 13, 2009 and October 23, 2009 are compiled and presented. REFERENCES consisting of links to the entire original letters and commentaries are provided.
SALIENT POINTS AGAINST THE SALE OF THE FLANDERS MANSION PROPERTY:
• “Selling Flanders breaks up the Mission Trail Nature Preserve and creates an inholding in its midst. Inholdings within parks cause problems: privacy issues, noise, fences, etc.” (October 23, 2009)
• If the Flanders Mansion Property is sold, “it would greatly impact the use and enjoyment of the Harriet Rowntree Native Plant Garden, the Martin Meadow, and access to many of the trails.” (October 23, 2009)
• The sale of the Flanders Mansion Property “would create a private in-holding completely surrounded by parkland. Bad idea.” (10/19/2009)
• “...voting 'NO' on Measure I. That would be a step towards preserving Carmel's precious parklands.” (10/19/2009)
• “As one of only two Carmel properties listed in the National Register of Historic Places, the Flanders Mansion is an important community asset and should be accessible to all. Its sale would not only fragment a public park, it would deprive Carmelites access to a key piece of their heritage that can be retained and enjoyed through adaptive reuse.” (10/17/2009)
• “The sale of parkland is particularly unwise as there are other ways to reduce the city's costs and keep the historic resource in public hands. The city has the authority, for instance, to lease the property and contribute the revenue to the estate's maintenance and upkeep at no cost to the taxpayer.” (10/17/2009)
• “When elected to public office the stewardship of public property became the responsibility of the city council. To abandon that public trust and duty in the application of personal political agendas is both arrogant and irresponsible.” (October 16, 2009)
• Since the current City Council has been “unable to achieve a good solution to the issue of an appropriate use for the Flanders Mansion that no council, now or at some time in the future, can...That position ignores the fact that there are good uses that have been proposed for Flanders, but McCloud and the council apparently don’t like the people making the offers.” (October 16, 2009)
• “One of the main selling points that the mayor and the council members have stressed is that the Flanders Mansion will remain forever a historic single-family residence. There is absolutely no guarantee that the residence will be just a single-family home. California law does not allow them to make that determination...There is absolutely no guarantee that the residence will be just a single-family home.” (October 15, 2009)
• “Stewardship of public assets is a significant responsibility of elected public officials. Public use options, such as an art and/or natural history venue, should be publicly explored prior to a decision to sell the Flanders Mansion property. Vote no on Measure I and make certain our public servants fulfill their stewardship and open government responsibilities.” (10/14/2009)
• “Selling Flanders breaks up the Mission Trail Nature Preserve and creates an inholding in its midst. Inholdings cause problems: privacy issues, noise, fences, etc.” (10/14/2009)
• If the Flanders Mansion Property “is sold, it would greatly impact the use and enjoyment of the Rowntree Native Plant Garden, the Martin Meadow, and access to many trails.” (10/14/2009)
• “Bravo to those who support preserving this special piece of parkland so future generations can know of the work of this amazing woman (Lester Rowntree, author, plant collector, lecturer and early popularizer of California native plants for the garden) who died in Carmel in 1979 at the age of 100!” (October 9, 2009)
• “A precedent-setting sale of Flanders could empower current or future Carmel-by-the-Sea city councils to carve up more of the Mission Trail park. For starters, there are nine 40-by-100 lots in the native plant garden which could be sold and developed. Imagine the years of construction disruption, traffic congestion, noise and parking problems that would cause.” (October 9, 2009)
• “...the long battle to save the integrity of Carmel’s one lovely natural park, Mission Trail Nature Preserve. Without a doubt, the nature-loving artists, writers and musicians whose vision gave our town its original soul would turn over in their graves that the idea to sell a part of this treasure could gain any currency here. Though the mansion itself would not be to their taste, since “small is beautiful” expressed their value system, its location within the park and the potential for its use to serve as a venue to preserve and celebrate Carmel’s remarkable past would gain their enthusiastic support. To them it would be a no-brainer!” (October 9, 2009)
• “Back in 1987, when faced with another council’s intention to sell Flanders Mansion and adjacent Martin Meadow, a group of us, neighbors of the park, natives and enlightened newcomers, got together a petition and in a week garnered over 600 signatures to save the mansion and the meadow. It was an inspiring grassroots effort, and we got the city’s promise that they would not ever sell these treasures.” (October 9, 2009)
• “Over the years, there have been a number of suggestions as to a use for it. One, which is echoed by the Flanders Foundation, which is waging a further inspiring battle on behalf of the park, was to utilize the mansion as a library, heritage museum, natural history study center and small gathering place. It had the support of CSUMB and all the Monterey Peninsula’s living artistic luminaries. This is the use that cries out to be implemented.” (October 9, 2009)
• “A precedent-setting sale of Flanders Parkland could empower the current or future Carmel City Councils to carve up more of the Mission Trail Park…there are nine 40-foot-by-100-foot lots in the Native Plant Garden that could be sold and developed. Imagine the years of construction disruption, traffic congestion, noise and parking problems that would cause.” (10/05/2009)
• “Sell Flanders and a precedent is set to carve up another large chunk of our park. The public loses recreational, educational and environmental treasures.” (09/21/2009)
• “I always thought that the city leaders were to be stewards of the public's land, not the agents of their demise.” (09/21/2009)
• ”Land matters. If a piece of our city is taken away, if our parkland is sold off acre by acre, bit by bit, our community begins to lose the distinctiveness, and charm it once created.” (09/19/2009)
• “The park thus would lose its most dramatic area with incomparable views of the Carmel Mission, and the littoral of the Carmel River entering the Pacific with Carmel Bay and Point Lobos in the background.” (September 18, 2009)
• The Flanders Mansion Property “is so clearly a central part of the park that the wooden map signs at park entrances feature the Flanders Mansion as a prominent landmark.” (September 11, 2009)
• “Once the property is sold, this beautiful piece of our park is gone forever.” (September 11, 2009)
• “...substantive reasons for voting not to sell the Flanders Mansion property, including maintaining the physical integrity of Mission Trail Nature Preserve and retaining a National Register of Historic Places resource as a public asset...” (09/10/2009)
• “For over nine years, the mayor has refused to meet and confer with the Flanders Foundation to explore possible public uses; City Council members have failed to present persuasive reasons for the sale of the Flanders Mansion; and the sale of the Flanders Mansion Property would result in the loss of significant parkland that is considered an integral component of Mission Trail Nature Preserve.” (09/10/2009)
• General Plan goals and objectives: "To protect, conserve and enhance the unique natural beauty and irreplaceable natural resources of Carmel"; "Use, maintain, and enhance publicly owned land for the benefit of Carmel residents"; "Establish an acquisitions list when opportunities arise to obtain land and/or facilities within the Carmel city limits"; and "Develop, preserve and enhance areas of scenic interest." (09/07/2009)
• “...tragic to permit this irretrievable loss.” (09/07/2009)
• ”...if our parkland is sold off acre by acre, bit by bit, our community begins to lose the distinctiveness, and charm it once created.” (SEPTEMBER 03, 2009)
• General Plan encourages the city “to preserve, protect our forest and open space; conserve and enhance the irreplaceable natural resources of Carmel.” (SEPTEMBER 3, 2009)
• The City, since Sue McCloud was elected mayor, has “failed to look at lease options that keep the park public and achieve restoration.” (08/23/2009)
• The City, since Sue McCloud was elected mayor, has not “explored any viable uses” for the Flanders Mansion Property; five task forces “looked for uses” “11 to 30 years ago.” (08/23/2009)
• “Once parkland is sold, it is gone forever.” (07/13/2009)
• City has rejected offers to “lease and refurbish” Flanders Mansion from “numerous individuals and organizations” and City has failed to “avail itself of public or private grants.” (07/13/2009)
• City does not lack money to maintain or rehabilitate Flanders Mansion; City reserves $10 million, FY 2008/09 budget “$1.2 million in the black.” (07/13/2009)
• “No reason to sell” Flanders Mansion Property, a 1.25 acre parcel in the “heart of the park.” (7/13/2009)
• Encourages “all of good faith to join the committee to preserve and enhance Flanders Mansion, instead of selling it to a rich party-developer for personal gain.” (6/24/2009)
• Senses “some ulterior motive for the city not putting energy and foresight into Flanders.” (6/24/2009)
• Flanders Mansion a “jewel in the crown of Carmel;” it “could be as well-known and visited as the Carmel Beach and Ocean Avenue." (6/24/2009)
• “Win-win proposition” of a resident curatorship; City leases Flanders Mansion Property to an individual for life and upon death property reverts to the City. Resident curator restores Flanders Mansion at his/her expense and allows public access to Flanders Mansion Property at specified times. (5/8/2009)
• “...once Flanders is gone, it is gone forever.” (4/16/2009)
• Flanders Mansion is “a beautiful mansion situated in spectacular park setting.” (4/16/2009)
• Urges city government representatives and Carmelites in favor of selling the Flanders Mansion Property to meet with Carmelites opposed to selling the Flanders Mansion Property and “work out a solution that keeps this priceless property in the community’s hands.” (4/16/2009)
• Comparison made between what Flanders Mansion and Mission Trail Nature Preserve could be and Villa Montalvo, Gamble House, Filoli, Steinbeck House and La Mirada. (3/13/2009)
• City cites reason to sell Flanders Mansion Property based on need of “significant” repairs, yet the City had failed to apply for grants and meet with local groups during the last 10 years. (3/13/2009)
• Sale of parkland in the “heart of the park” “will damage the park irrevocably." (3/13/2009)
REFERENCES:
The Carmel Pine Cone, LETTERS, (The wonder of parks, Karen and Hugo Ferlito, Carmel) October 23, 2009), 21A
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, (See Flanders Mansion, then vote, Roy L. Thomas), Carmel), 10/20/2009
The Monterey County Herald, Letters, (Preserve Carmel parks, Joyce Stevens, Carmel) 10/19/2009
The Monterey County Herald, Letters, (Preserve Flanders Mansion, Brian R. Turner, NTHP regional attorney), 10/17/2009
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, (Power grab? David Maradei, Carmel), October 16, 2009, 28A
MONTEREY COUNTY WEEKLY, Letters, (Flanders Flap, Karen Brown), October 15, 2009
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, (Help fulfill potential of Flanders site, D.L. Trout, Carmel), 10/14/2009
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, (No vote on Measure I preserves Flanders, Karen and Hugo Ferlito, Carmel), 10/14/2009
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009 (Move the garden? Mary Ann Matthews, Carmel Valley) 22A & 15 IYD
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009 (‘Be careful what you wish for,’ Robert E. Kohn, Carmel) 15IYD
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009 (The importance of parks, Linda Lachmund Smith, Carmel) 15IYD
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 10/05/2009, (Be wary of parkland sale, Robert E. Kohn, Carmel)
The Monterey County Weekly, The Public Voice Letters, SEPTEMBER 24, 2009 (WHAT’S AT STAKE, Margaret L. Purchase | Carmel-by-the-Sea
The Monterey County Herald, 09/21/2009 (Save Carmel park, vote no on Measure I, Margaret L. Purchase Carmel)
The Monterey County Herald, 09/19/2009 (Don't sell off Carmel parkland, Roberta Miller Carmel)
The Carmel Pine Cone, September 18, 2009 (‘Simple solution,’ Olof Dahlstrand, Carmel) pg. 28A
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, September 11, 2009 (Same parcel? Ann Flower, Carmel) 20A
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 09/10/ 2009 (Don't sell Flanders Mansion for short-term gain, Barbara Stiles, Carmel)
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 09/10/ 2009 (Carmel council failed residents on mansion, L.A. Paterson, Carmel)
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 09/07/2009 (Protect Carmel: Vote 'no' on Measure I, Richard M. Flower, Carmel)
The Monterey County Weekly, Letters to the Editor, SEPTEMBER 03, 2009 (PARK PLACES, Roberta Miller|Carmel)
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 08/23/2009 (Flanders options ignored, Shirley Humann, Carmel)
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 07/13/2009 (No reason to sell Flanders Mansion, Brie Tripp, Carmel)
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 06/24/2009 (Invest in Flanders Mansion, JoAnn Vincent, Carmel)
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, May 8, 2009 (‘Resident curatorship,’ Virginia Connelly, Carmel) 26A
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 04/16/2009 (Flanders priceless property, Richard Stiles, Carmel)
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, March 13, 2009 (‘Enrich our lives,’ Shirley Humann, Carmel) 26A
SALIENT POINTS AGAINST THE SALE OF THE FLANDERS MANSION PROPERTY:
• “Selling Flanders breaks up the Mission Trail Nature Preserve and creates an inholding in its midst. Inholdings within parks cause problems: privacy issues, noise, fences, etc.” (October 23, 2009)
• If the Flanders Mansion Property is sold, “it would greatly impact the use and enjoyment of the Harriet Rowntree Native Plant Garden, the Martin Meadow, and access to many of the trails.” (October 23, 2009)
• The sale of the Flanders Mansion Property “would create a private in-holding completely surrounded by parkland. Bad idea.” (10/19/2009)
• “...voting 'NO' on Measure I. That would be a step towards preserving Carmel's precious parklands.” (10/19/2009)
• “As one of only two Carmel properties listed in the National Register of Historic Places, the Flanders Mansion is an important community asset and should be accessible to all. Its sale would not only fragment a public park, it would deprive Carmelites access to a key piece of their heritage that can be retained and enjoyed through adaptive reuse.” (10/17/2009)
• “The sale of parkland is particularly unwise as there are other ways to reduce the city's costs and keep the historic resource in public hands. The city has the authority, for instance, to lease the property and contribute the revenue to the estate's maintenance and upkeep at no cost to the taxpayer.” (10/17/2009)
• “When elected to public office the stewardship of public property became the responsibility of the city council. To abandon that public trust and duty in the application of personal political agendas is both arrogant and irresponsible.” (October 16, 2009)
• Since the current City Council has been “unable to achieve a good solution to the issue of an appropriate use for the Flanders Mansion that no council, now or at some time in the future, can...That position ignores the fact that there are good uses that have been proposed for Flanders, but McCloud and the council apparently don’t like the people making the offers.” (October 16, 2009)
• “One of the main selling points that the mayor and the council members have stressed is that the Flanders Mansion will remain forever a historic single-family residence. There is absolutely no guarantee that the residence will be just a single-family home. California law does not allow them to make that determination...There is absolutely no guarantee that the residence will be just a single-family home.” (October 15, 2009)
• “Stewardship of public assets is a significant responsibility of elected public officials. Public use options, such as an art and/or natural history venue, should be publicly explored prior to a decision to sell the Flanders Mansion property. Vote no on Measure I and make certain our public servants fulfill their stewardship and open government responsibilities.” (10/14/2009)
• “Selling Flanders breaks up the Mission Trail Nature Preserve and creates an inholding in its midst. Inholdings cause problems: privacy issues, noise, fences, etc.” (10/14/2009)
• If the Flanders Mansion Property “is sold, it would greatly impact the use and enjoyment of the Rowntree Native Plant Garden, the Martin Meadow, and access to many trails.” (10/14/2009)
• “Bravo to those who support preserving this special piece of parkland so future generations can know of the work of this amazing woman (Lester Rowntree, author, plant collector, lecturer and early popularizer of California native plants for the garden) who died in Carmel in 1979 at the age of 100!” (October 9, 2009)
• “A precedent-setting sale of Flanders could empower current or future Carmel-by-the-Sea city councils to carve up more of the Mission Trail park. For starters, there are nine 40-by-100 lots in the native plant garden which could be sold and developed. Imagine the years of construction disruption, traffic congestion, noise and parking problems that would cause.” (October 9, 2009)
• “...the long battle to save the integrity of Carmel’s one lovely natural park, Mission Trail Nature Preserve. Without a doubt, the nature-loving artists, writers and musicians whose vision gave our town its original soul would turn over in their graves that the idea to sell a part of this treasure could gain any currency here. Though the mansion itself would not be to their taste, since “small is beautiful” expressed their value system, its location within the park and the potential for its use to serve as a venue to preserve and celebrate Carmel’s remarkable past would gain their enthusiastic support. To them it would be a no-brainer!” (October 9, 2009)
• “Back in 1987, when faced with another council’s intention to sell Flanders Mansion and adjacent Martin Meadow, a group of us, neighbors of the park, natives and enlightened newcomers, got together a petition and in a week garnered over 600 signatures to save the mansion and the meadow. It was an inspiring grassroots effort, and we got the city’s promise that they would not ever sell these treasures.” (October 9, 2009)
• “Over the years, there have been a number of suggestions as to a use for it. One, which is echoed by the Flanders Foundation, which is waging a further inspiring battle on behalf of the park, was to utilize the mansion as a library, heritage museum, natural history study center and small gathering place. It had the support of CSUMB and all the Monterey Peninsula’s living artistic luminaries. This is the use that cries out to be implemented.” (October 9, 2009)
• “A precedent-setting sale of Flanders Parkland could empower the current or future Carmel City Councils to carve up more of the Mission Trail Park…there are nine 40-foot-by-100-foot lots in the Native Plant Garden that could be sold and developed. Imagine the years of construction disruption, traffic congestion, noise and parking problems that would cause.” (10/05/2009)
• “Sell Flanders and a precedent is set to carve up another large chunk of our park. The public loses recreational, educational and environmental treasures.” (09/21/2009)
• “I always thought that the city leaders were to be stewards of the public's land, not the agents of their demise.” (09/21/2009)
• ”Land matters. If a piece of our city is taken away, if our parkland is sold off acre by acre, bit by bit, our community begins to lose the distinctiveness, and charm it once created.” (09/19/2009)
• “The park thus would lose its most dramatic area with incomparable views of the Carmel Mission, and the littoral of the Carmel River entering the Pacific with Carmel Bay and Point Lobos in the background.” (September 18, 2009)
• The Flanders Mansion Property “is so clearly a central part of the park that the wooden map signs at park entrances feature the Flanders Mansion as a prominent landmark.” (September 11, 2009)
• “Once the property is sold, this beautiful piece of our park is gone forever.” (September 11, 2009)
• “...substantive reasons for voting not to sell the Flanders Mansion property, including maintaining the physical integrity of Mission Trail Nature Preserve and retaining a National Register of Historic Places resource as a public asset...” (09/10/2009)
• “For over nine years, the mayor has refused to meet and confer with the Flanders Foundation to explore possible public uses; City Council members have failed to present persuasive reasons for the sale of the Flanders Mansion; and the sale of the Flanders Mansion Property would result in the loss of significant parkland that is considered an integral component of Mission Trail Nature Preserve.” (09/10/2009)
• General Plan goals and objectives: "To protect, conserve and enhance the unique natural beauty and irreplaceable natural resources of Carmel"; "Use, maintain, and enhance publicly owned land for the benefit of Carmel residents"; "Establish an acquisitions list when opportunities arise to obtain land and/or facilities within the Carmel city limits"; and "Develop, preserve and enhance areas of scenic interest." (09/07/2009)
• “...tragic to permit this irretrievable loss.” (09/07/2009)
• ”...if our parkland is sold off acre by acre, bit by bit, our community begins to lose the distinctiveness, and charm it once created.” (SEPTEMBER 03, 2009)
• General Plan encourages the city “to preserve, protect our forest and open space; conserve and enhance the irreplaceable natural resources of Carmel.” (SEPTEMBER 3, 2009)
• The City, since Sue McCloud was elected mayor, has “failed to look at lease options that keep the park public and achieve restoration.” (08/23/2009)
• The City, since Sue McCloud was elected mayor, has not “explored any viable uses” for the Flanders Mansion Property; five task forces “looked for uses” “11 to 30 years ago.” (08/23/2009)
• “Once parkland is sold, it is gone forever.” (07/13/2009)
• City has rejected offers to “lease and refurbish” Flanders Mansion from “numerous individuals and organizations” and City has failed to “avail itself of public or private grants.” (07/13/2009)
• City does not lack money to maintain or rehabilitate Flanders Mansion; City reserves $10 million, FY 2008/09 budget “$1.2 million in the black.” (07/13/2009)
• “No reason to sell” Flanders Mansion Property, a 1.25 acre parcel in the “heart of the park.” (7/13/2009)
• Encourages “all of good faith to join the committee to preserve and enhance Flanders Mansion, instead of selling it to a rich party-developer for personal gain.” (6/24/2009)
• Senses “some ulterior motive for the city not putting energy and foresight into Flanders.” (6/24/2009)
• Flanders Mansion a “jewel in the crown of Carmel;” it “could be as well-known and visited as the Carmel Beach and Ocean Avenue." (6/24/2009)
• “Win-win proposition” of a resident curatorship; City leases Flanders Mansion Property to an individual for life and upon death property reverts to the City. Resident curator restores Flanders Mansion at his/her expense and allows public access to Flanders Mansion Property at specified times. (5/8/2009)
• “...once Flanders is gone, it is gone forever.” (4/16/2009)
• Flanders Mansion is “a beautiful mansion situated in spectacular park setting.” (4/16/2009)
• Urges city government representatives and Carmelites in favor of selling the Flanders Mansion Property to meet with Carmelites opposed to selling the Flanders Mansion Property and “work out a solution that keeps this priceless property in the community’s hands.” (4/16/2009)
• Comparison made between what Flanders Mansion and Mission Trail Nature Preserve could be and Villa Montalvo, Gamble House, Filoli, Steinbeck House and La Mirada. (3/13/2009)
• City cites reason to sell Flanders Mansion Property based on need of “significant” repairs, yet the City had failed to apply for grants and meet with local groups during the last 10 years. (3/13/2009)
• Sale of parkland in the “heart of the park” “will damage the park irrevocably." (3/13/2009)
REFERENCES:
The Carmel Pine Cone, LETTERS, (The wonder of parks, Karen and Hugo Ferlito, Carmel) October 23, 2009), 21A
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, (See Flanders Mansion, then vote, Roy L. Thomas), Carmel), 10/20/2009
The Monterey County Herald, Letters, (Preserve Carmel parks, Joyce Stevens, Carmel) 10/19/2009
The Monterey County Herald, Letters, (Preserve Flanders Mansion, Brian R. Turner, NTHP regional attorney), 10/17/2009
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, (Power grab? David Maradei, Carmel), October 16, 2009, 28A
MONTEREY COUNTY WEEKLY, Letters, (Flanders Flap, Karen Brown), October 15, 2009
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, (Help fulfill potential of Flanders site, D.L. Trout, Carmel), 10/14/2009
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, (No vote on Measure I preserves Flanders, Karen and Hugo Ferlito, Carmel), 10/14/2009
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009 (Move the garden? Mary Ann Matthews, Carmel Valley) 22A & 15 IYD
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009 (‘Be careful what you wish for,’ Robert E. Kohn, Carmel) 15IYD
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009 (The importance of parks, Linda Lachmund Smith, Carmel) 15IYD
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 10/05/2009, (Be wary of parkland sale, Robert E. Kohn, Carmel)
The Monterey County Weekly, The Public Voice Letters, SEPTEMBER 24, 2009 (WHAT’S AT STAKE, Margaret L. Purchase | Carmel-by-the-Sea
The Monterey County Herald, 09/21/2009 (Save Carmel park, vote no on Measure I, Margaret L. Purchase Carmel)
The Monterey County Herald, 09/19/2009 (Don't sell off Carmel parkland, Roberta Miller Carmel)
The Carmel Pine Cone, September 18, 2009 (‘Simple solution,’ Olof Dahlstrand, Carmel) pg. 28A
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, September 11, 2009 (Same parcel? Ann Flower, Carmel) 20A
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 09/10/ 2009 (Don't sell Flanders Mansion for short-term gain, Barbara Stiles, Carmel)
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 09/10/ 2009 (Carmel council failed residents on mansion, L.A. Paterson, Carmel)
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 09/07/2009 (Protect Carmel: Vote 'no' on Measure I, Richard M. Flower, Carmel)
The Monterey County Weekly, Letters to the Editor, SEPTEMBER 03, 2009 (PARK PLACES, Roberta Miller|Carmel)
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 08/23/2009 (Flanders options ignored, Shirley Humann, Carmel)
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 07/13/2009 (No reason to sell Flanders Mansion, Brie Tripp, Carmel)
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 06/24/2009 (Invest in Flanders Mansion, JoAnn Vincent, Carmel)
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, May 8, 2009 (‘Resident curatorship,’ Virginia Connelly, Carmel) 26A
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 04/16/2009 (Flanders priceless property, Richard Stiles, Carmel)
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, March 13, 2009 (‘Enrich our lives,’ Shirley Humann, Carmel) 26A
UPDATE V: Flanders Mansion Property: SALIENT POINTS FOR THE SALE OF THE FLANDERS MANSION PROPERTY
ABSTRACT: On the 3 November 2009 General Election Ballot, there appears the following question: “Shall discontinuance and abandonment of the Flanders Mansion Property (APN 010-061-005) as public parkland, and authorization to sell the Flanders Mansion Property "with Conservation Easements and Mitigation" as passed on May 12, 2009 by the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea City Council by Resolutions No. 2009-30 through 2009-33, be approved.” A Summary of the SALIENT POINTS FOR THE SALE OF THE FLANDERS MANSION PROPERTY gleaned from Letters to the Editor and Editorial Commentaries between March 13, 2009 and October 23, 2009 are compiled and presented. REFERENCES consisting of links to the entire original letters and commentaries are provided.
SALIENT POINTS FOR THE SALE OF THE FLANDERS MANSION PROPERTY:
• “Selling Flanders is one way to raise important revenues when voters reject tax increases.” (October 23, 2009)
• Claims “Making the Flanders Mansion a convention center, or an arts center, or any kind of a public building just doesn't make good economic sense in today's economy.” (10/22/2009)
• “The money that would come from the sale of this property could fund other projects or lessen budget deficits.” (10/22/2009)
• “In this time of fiscal uncertainty, the city should recoup this money by selling the mansion—and using the rest of the proceeds for good causes, like more low-cost housing for elderly Carmelites, as well as for the city's ongoing expenses.” (10/21/2009)
• Urges sale of the Flanders Mansion Property “based on its dubious historic value, its awkward location, its cost for maintenance or refurbishment, its loss of tax revenue, and its very costly ADA requirements for a public use structure.” (October 16, 2009)
• “Sale of the Flanders Mansion would still leave Mission Trail Park with more than 96 percent of the current 32.4 acres and would not encroach on any trails.” (October 16, 2009)
• “The best plan is to sell the Flanders house to someone who will restore it to its original use as a single-family house. The property will then go back on the tax rolls and, finally, the house will be in use again as a home.” (October 9, 2009)
• “...the preserve does not have adequate traffic and circulation paved roads and paved parking for public or quasi-public use, as was reported in the EIR of January 2009…. Currently and historically, it only has capacity for single-family land use.” (October 9, 2009)
• “Selling Flanders Mansion to a private party will end the exposure of Carmel to the environmental legal actions associated.” (October 9, 2009)
• Claims “The city has examined many suggestions for use, but none — except sale — has merit.” (October 9, 2009)
• “Flanders Mansion was built as a single-family home in a neighborhood of single-family homes. There were no objections to it then and there should be no objections to it now.” (October 9, 2009)
• Claims “Narrow Hatton Road, which provides access to Flanders Mansion, cannot safely accommodate significantly increased traffic.” (October 9, 2009)
• Claims the Flanders Mansion “has been vacant for most of a 30-year period and has been cost-generating and non-revenue-producing throughout the entire period.” (10/05/2009)
• “Keep the unused asset and get little or no value, or sell the unused asset and use the interest income off the proceeds to fund important things for your family. Selling is the sensible thing to do.” (September 25, 2009)
• “There will still be lots of room for dogs, people and wild animals to roam around if we return the home to private use.” (September 18, 2009)
• Asks “How safe is it to have a building and its surrounding area continually exposed to people coming in to prepare for a public event with the extra traffic, water use, possibility of damage to the property and improper use of a narrow county road?” (September 11, 2009)
• Claims it is “very unlikely” that if Flanders Mansion were on Scenic Road instead of Hatton Road, the Flanders Foundation would not take the position that the property should be other than “a single family residence— perhaps a museum, or put to use for some other public purpose.” (September 11, 2009)
• “By not selling the house, the community risks a possible devastating fire or continuing acts of vandalism. New residents would not only restore the home, but would oversee the property. It could then return to its primary purpose — a lovely home in a welcoming residential neighborhood.” (09/05/2009)
• Claims “If the mansion is not sold and becomes some kind of public institution, increased traffic and pedestrians will be at risk.” (09/05/2009)
• ”...the sale can become a shot in our economic arm and our wallet.” (09/04/2009)
• States that the “Carmel City Council and the previous mayor voted to sell the Flanders Mansion property in December 1999.” (08/26/2009)
• “Selling 2 percent leaves 98 percent total parkland for Carmel.” (August 14, 2009)
• Claims using Flanders Mansion “as a quasi-public institution would disrupt the tranquility of the area, with traffic and service vehicles, and even unsettling to flora and fauna.” (August 14, 2009)
• Claims the Flanders Mansion is “unsuitable” for any “worthy public use” “due to its location in a quiet, residential neighborhood.” (7/03/2009)
• Wants “objectors” to purchase Flanders Mansion Property and pay for restoration rather that waste “taxpayers money with legal obstructions.” (5/08/2009)
• Claims, if polled, neighbors want private residence “compatible with the area.” (5/08/2009)
• Claims “no public use that’s suitable” for the Flanders Mansion; cites committee proposal for use as a culinary academy voted down by City Council under Mayor Ken White. (3/27/2009)
REFERENCES:
The Carmel Pine Cone, LETTERS, (Too big to fail? Chris Tescher, Carmel), October 23, 2009, 21A
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, (Public-owned Flanders Mansion, Jon Kannegaard and Pat Sandoval, Carmel), 10/22/2009
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, (Vote for sale of Flanders Mansion, Riane Eisler, Carmel), 10/21/2009
Editorial: Flanders Mansion sale makes sense, THE HERALD'S VIEW, The Monterey County Herald, 10/20/2009
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, (Flanders issue should be non-partisan, Clay Berling, Carmel), October 16, 2009, 28A & 25A
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, (How park was created, William Doolittle, Carmel), October 16, 2009, 25A
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, (Yes vote on Measure I helps sell Flanders, Dale Hekhuis, Carmel), 10/14/2009
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009 (‘Best plan is to sell,’ Pat Sippel, Carmel), 22 A
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009 (Hatton Road inadequate, Robert G. Morris, Carmel) 15IYD
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009 (‘End the exposure to litigation,’Pamela Heisinger, Carmel) 15IYD
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009 (‘Abandon the myth,’ Jeffrey Lehr, M.D., Carmel) 15IYD
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009 (Thank the Doolittles, Erling Lagerholm, Carmel) 15IYD
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009 (Hatton Road too narrow, Laura Newmark, Carmel) 15IYD
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 10/05/2009, (It's time to sell Flanders, Dale Hekhuis, Carmel)
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, September 25, 2009 (A Useful Analogy, Mike Cunningham, Carmel) pg. 36A
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, September 18, 2009 (A ‘mistake’ to buy it, Carolyn S. Akcan, Carmel) pg. 28A-29A
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, September 11, 2009 (How safe? J. Daniel Tibbitts, Carmel) 20A
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, September 11, 2009 (Flanders ‘fiasco,’ William J.Woska, Carmel) 20A-21A
The Carmel Pine Cone, Editorial: Through the looking glass, September 4, 2009
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, September 4, 2009 (Vote Aye on Measure “I,” Patricia Sandoval, Carmel)
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, September 4, 2009 (‘A lovely private home,’ Suzanne Lehr, Carmel)
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 09/04/2009 (Proceeds from Flanders Mansion would help city, Jon Kannegaard Carmel)
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 08/26/2009 (Flanders options to be studied, Sue McCloud, Mayor of Carmel)
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, August 14, 2009 (Flanders ‘myth,’ Marikay Morris, Carmel) 26A
The Carmel Pine Cone July 3, 2009 (Editorial: The power of one)
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, May 8, 2009 (‘Get rid of Flanders now,’ P. S. Chase, Carmel) 26A
Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, March 27, 2009 (‘Here we go again,’ Rita Holloway, Carmel Valley) 22A
SALIENT POINTS FOR THE SALE OF THE FLANDERS MANSION PROPERTY:
• “Selling Flanders is one way to raise important revenues when voters reject tax increases.” (October 23, 2009)
• Claims “Making the Flanders Mansion a convention center, or an arts center, or any kind of a public building just doesn't make good economic sense in today's economy.” (10/22/2009)
• “The money that would come from the sale of this property could fund other projects or lessen budget deficits.” (10/22/2009)
• “In this time of fiscal uncertainty, the city should recoup this money by selling the mansion—and using the rest of the proceeds for good causes, like more low-cost housing for elderly Carmelites, as well as for the city's ongoing expenses.” (10/21/2009)
• Urges sale of the Flanders Mansion Property “based on its dubious historic value, its awkward location, its cost for maintenance or refurbishment, its loss of tax revenue, and its very costly ADA requirements for a public use structure.” (October 16, 2009)
• “Sale of the Flanders Mansion would still leave Mission Trail Park with more than 96 percent of the current 32.4 acres and would not encroach on any trails.” (October 16, 2009)
• “The best plan is to sell the Flanders house to someone who will restore it to its original use as a single-family house. The property will then go back on the tax rolls and, finally, the house will be in use again as a home.” (October 9, 2009)
• “...the preserve does not have adequate traffic and circulation paved roads and paved parking for public or quasi-public use, as was reported in the EIR of January 2009…. Currently and historically, it only has capacity for single-family land use.” (October 9, 2009)
• “Selling Flanders Mansion to a private party will end the exposure of Carmel to the environmental legal actions associated.” (October 9, 2009)
• Claims “The city has examined many suggestions for use, but none — except sale — has merit.” (October 9, 2009)
• “Flanders Mansion was built as a single-family home in a neighborhood of single-family homes. There were no objections to it then and there should be no objections to it now.” (October 9, 2009)
• Claims “Narrow Hatton Road, which provides access to Flanders Mansion, cannot safely accommodate significantly increased traffic.” (October 9, 2009)
• Claims the Flanders Mansion “has been vacant for most of a 30-year period and has been cost-generating and non-revenue-producing throughout the entire period.” (10/05/2009)
• “Keep the unused asset and get little or no value, or sell the unused asset and use the interest income off the proceeds to fund important things for your family. Selling is the sensible thing to do.” (September 25, 2009)
• “There will still be lots of room for dogs, people and wild animals to roam around if we return the home to private use.” (September 18, 2009)
• Asks “How safe is it to have a building and its surrounding area continually exposed to people coming in to prepare for a public event with the extra traffic, water use, possibility of damage to the property and improper use of a narrow county road?” (September 11, 2009)
• Claims it is “very unlikely” that if Flanders Mansion were on Scenic Road instead of Hatton Road, the Flanders Foundation would not take the position that the property should be other than “a single family residence— perhaps a museum, or put to use for some other public purpose.” (September 11, 2009)
• “By not selling the house, the community risks a possible devastating fire or continuing acts of vandalism. New residents would not only restore the home, but would oversee the property. It could then return to its primary purpose — a lovely home in a welcoming residential neighborhood.” (09/05/2009)
• Claims “If the mansion is not sold and becomes some kind of public institution, increased traffic and pedestrians will be at risk.” (09/05/2009)
• ”...the sale can become a shot in our economic arm and our wallet.” (09/04/2009)
• States that the “Carmel City Council and the previous mayor voted to sell the Flanders Mansion property in December 1999.” (08/26/2009)
• “Selling 2 percent leaves 98 percent total parkland for Carmel.” (August 14, 2009)
• Claims using Flanders Mansion “as a quasi-public institution would disrupt the tranquility of the area, with traffic and service vehicles, and even unsettling to flora and fauna.” (August 14, 2009)
• Claims the Flanders Mansion is “unsuitable” for any “worthy public use” “due to its location in a quiet, residential neighborhood.” (7/03/2009)
• Wants “objectors” to purchase Flanders Mansion Property and pay for restoration rather that waste “taxpayers money with legal obstructions.” (5/08/2009)
• Claims, if polled, neighbors want private residence “compatible with the area.” (5/08/2009)
• Claims “no public use that’s suitable” for the Flanders Mansion; cites committee proposal for use as a culinary academy voted down by City Council under Mayor Ken White. (3/27/2009)
REFERENCES:
The Carmel Pine Cone, LETTERS, (Too big to fail? Chris Tescher, Carmel), October 23, 2009, 21A
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, (Public-owned Flanders Mansion, Jon Kannegaard and Pat Sandoval, Carmel), 10/22/2009
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, (Vote for sale of Flanders Mansion, Riane Eisler, Carmel), 10/21/2009
Editorial: Flanders Mansion sale makes sense, THE HERALD'S VIEW, The Monterey County Herald, 10/20/2009
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, (Flanders issue should be non-partisan, Clay Berling, Carmel), October 16, 2009, 28A & 25A
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, (How park was created, William Doolittle, Carmel), October 16, 2009, 25A
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, (Yes vote on Measure I helps sell Flanders, Dale Hekhuis, Carmel), 10/14/2009
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009 (‘Best plan is to sell,’ Pat Sippel, Carmel), 22 A
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009 (Hatton Road inadequate, Robert G. Morris, Carmel) 15IYD
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009 (‘End the exposure to litigation,’Pamela Heisinger, Carmel) 15IYD
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009 (‘Abandon the myth,’ Jeffrey Lehr, M.D., Carmel) 15IYD
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009 (Thank the Doolittles, Erling Lagerholm, Carmel) 15IYD
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009 (Hatton Road too narrow, Laura Newmark, Carmel) 15IYD
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 10/05/2009, (It's time to sell Flanders, Dale Hekhuis, Carmel)
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, September 25, 2009 (A Useful Analogy, Mike Cunningham, Carmel) pg. 36A
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, September 18, 2009 (A ‘mistake’ to buy it, Carolyn S. Akcan, Carmel) pg. 28A-29A
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, September 11, 2009 (How safe? J. Daniel Tibbitts, Carmel) 20A
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, September 11, 2009 (Flanders ‘fiasco,’ William J.Woska, Carmel) 20A-21A
The Carmel Pine Cone, Editorial: Through the looking glass, September 4, 2009
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, September 4, 2009 (Vote Aye on Measure “I,” Patricia Sandoval, Carmel)
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, September 4, 2009 (‘A lovely private home,’ Suzanne Lehr, Carmel)
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 09/04/2009 (Proceeds from Flanders Mansion would help city, Jon Kannegaard Carmel)
The Monterey County Herald, Letters to the Editor, 08/26/2009 (Flanders options to be studied, Sue McCloud, Mayor of Carmel)
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, August 14, 2009 (Flanders ‘myth,’ Marikay Morris, Carmel) 26A
The Carmel Pine Cone July 3, 2009 (Editorial: The power of one)
The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, May 8, 2009 (‘Get rid of Flanders now,’ P. S. Chase, Carmel) 26A
Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, March 27, 2009 (‘Here we go again,’ Rita Holloway, Carmel Valley) 22A
Friday, October 09, 2009
Significant New Information from Letters to the Editor Writers
ABSTRACT: In The Carmel Pine Cone, October 9, 2009 issue, three Letters to the Editor provide new information regarding Flanders Mansion, namely that a City Committee adopted “one overriding fact” that precluded the Committee from objectively analyzing and evaluating potential pubic uses, city officials have apparently violated the terms of an agreement between the City and CNPS and a group of “neighbors of the park, natives and enlightened newcomers” got the city’s “promise that they would not ever sell these treasures” in 1987. Comments are made on each Letter to the Editor.
• Letter to the Editor, The Carmel Pine Cone, by Pat Sippel:
In describing her “eight years on a city committee which studied possible uses for the Flanders house,” Pat Sippel wrote, as follows: “We worked with one overriding fact: The house is a single-family dwelling in a quiet residential neighborhood located on a winding road. The neighbors have always made it known to the city council that they do not want any public or commercial use of the residence. Do you blame them?”
Comment: Sippel’s statement betrays a mindset which precluded the committee from objectively analyzing and evaluating potential public uses for the Flanders Mansion; and that is, the committee’s assumption that no public use would be acceptable because of their beliefs about the opinions of some Hatton Fields residents. Moreover, since 2000, the City has not appointed members to a committee to study the issue and the mayor has not met and conferred with Flanders Foundation, which formally became a non-profit, 501(c)3 organization in 1999, or any other groups or individuals, to explore public use options for the Flanders Mansion.
• Letter to the Editor by Mary Ann Matthews, Past President of the Monterey Bay Chapter of the California Native Plant Society:
Mary Ann Matthews wrote that “city officials are known to have asked the Rowntree Garden Committee to agree to move it” (Lester Rowntree Native Plant Garden) and “the Rowntree Garden Committee members voted unanimously to oppose moving the garden and so informed the city.” Moreover, “the terms of the agreement between the city and CNPS state that the garden is to remain a quiet natural retreat, encouraging walk-in visits from local residents and from visitors who park at the Mission.”
Comment: Ergo, city officials apparently have violated the terms of an agreement between the City and CNPS by making requests that the Rowntree Garden Committee agree to move the Native Plant Garden to another location.
• Letter to the Editor by Linda Lachmund Smith:
Linda Lachmund Smith wrote, as follows: “Back in 1987, when faced with another council’s intention to sell Flanders Mansion and adjacent Martin Meadow, a group of us, neighbors of the park, natives and enlightened newcomers, got together a petition and in a week garnered over 600 signatures to save the mansion and the meadow. It was an inspiring grassroots effort, and we got the city’s promise that they would not ever sell these treasures.”
Furthermore, one public use for Flanders Mansion “was to utilize the mansion as a library, heritage museum, natural history study center and small gathering place. It had the support of CSUMB and all the Monterey Peninsula’s living artistic luminaries. This is the use that cries out to be implemented.”
Comment: The Mayor and City Council should honor the “promise” made by the City in 1987 to the group of neighbors of the park that the City would not ever sell Flanders Mansion, et cetera.
(Source: The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009, 22A and 15IYD)
• Letter to the Editor, The Carmel Pine Cone, by Pat Sippel:
In describing her “eight years on a city committee which studied possible uses for the Flanders house,” Pat Sippel wrote, as follows: “We worked with one overriding fact: The house is a single-family dwelling in a quiet residential neighborhood located on a winding road. The neighbors have always made it known to the city council that they do not want any public or commercial use of the residence. Do you blame them?”
Comment: Sippel’s statement betrays a mindset which precluded the committee from objectively analyzing and evaluating potential public uses for the Flanders Mansion; and that is, the committee’s assumption that no public use would be acceptable because of their beliefs about the opinions of some Hatton Fields residents. Moreover, since 2000, the City has not appointed members to a committee to study the issue and the mayor has not met and conferred with Flanders Foundation, which formally became a non-profit, 501(c)3 organization in 1999, or any other groups or individuals, to explore public use options for the Flanders Mansion.
• Letter to the Editor by Mary Ann Matthews, Past President of the Monterey Bay Chapter of the California Native Plant Society:
Mary Ann Matthews wrote that “city officials are known to have asked the Rowntree Garden Committee to agree to move it” (Lester Rowntree Native Plant Garden) and “the Rowntree Garden Committee members voted unanimously to oppose moving the garden and so informed the city.” Moreover, “the terms of the agreement between the city and CNPS state that the garden is to remain a quiet natural retreat, encouraging walk-in visits from local residents and from visitors who park at the Mission.”
Comment: Ergo, city officials apparently have violated the terms of an agreement between the City and CNPS by making requests that the Rowntree Garden Committee agree to move the Native Plant Garden to another location.
• Letter to the Editor by Linda Lachmund Smith:
Linda Lachmund Smith wrote, as follows: “Back in 1987, when faced with another council’s intention to sell Flanders Mansion and adjacent Martin Meadow, a group of us, neighbors of the park, natives and enlightened newcomers, got together a petition and in a week garnered over 600 signatures to save the mansion and the meadow. It was an inspiring grassroots effort, and we got the city’s promise that they would not ever sell these treasures.”
Furthermore, one public use for Flanders Mansion “was to utilize the mansion as a library, heritage museum, natural history study center and small gathering place. It had the support of CSUMB and all the Monterey Peninsula’s living artistic luminaries. This is the use that cries out to be implemented.”
Comment: The Mayor and City Council should honor the “promise” made by the City in 1987 to the group of neighbors of the park that the City would not ever sell Flanders Mansion, et cetera.
(Source: The Carmel Pine Cone, Letters to the Editor, October 9, 2009, 22A and 15IYD)
Save Our Park, Vote No on Measure ‘I’
ABSTRACT: The text of the Save Our Park, Vote No on Measure “I” color postcard mailed to Carmelites, sent by the Committee to Oppose Measure I and Save Mission Trail Park, is reproduced, including a link to their website.
Save Our Park
Vote No on Measure “I”
"There’s so much here to love – and protect.”
Learn more at heartofthepark.org
The heart of Mission Trail park will be gone forever – if we sell.
Mission Trail Park is a treasured resource for us all. The Flanders property is at its heart. But if we sell it, it will be gone forever. We must keep our park whole:
• Because it saves trails, views and open space – why exchange them for wall and fences?
• Because the city has an obligation to the public to “preserve and acquire parkland.” It’s right there in the General Plan.
• Because the city doesn’t need the money, with millions in reserves, and we should not raise temporary cash by selling precious assets.
• Because keeping the property will cost us nothing. Several groups and individuals have offered to restore and maintain it at no expense.
We can and must keep Mission Trail Park whole – for ourselves and for future generations.
Vote no on the sale of our parkland. Vote No on Measure “I.”
The League of Women Voters, and the Carmel Residents Association
Recommend Vote No on Measure “I”
Sent by the Committee to Oppose Measure I and Save Mission Trail Park
P.O. Box 2303, Carmel, Ca. 93921
To volunteer or contribute, call 624-3942
Save Our Park
Vote No on Measure “I”
"There’s so much here to love – and protect.”
Learn more at heartofthepark.org
The heart of Mission Trail park will be gone forever – if we sell.
Mission Trail Park is a treasured resource for us all. The Flanders property is at its heart. But if we sell it, it will be gone forever. We must keep our park whole:
• Because it saves trails, views and open space – why exchange them for wall and fences?
• Because the city has an obligation to the public to “preserve and acquire parkland.” It’s right there in the General Plan.
• Because the city doesn’t need the money, with millions in reserves, and we should not raise temporary cash by selling precious assets.
• Because keeping the property will cost us nothing. Several groups and individuals have offered to restore and maintain it at no expense.
We can and must keep Mission Trail Park whole – for ourselves and for future generations.
Vote no on the sale of our parkland. Vote No on Measure “I.”
The League of Women Voters, and the Carmel Residents Association
Recommend Vote No on Measure “I”
Sent by the Committee to Oppose Measure I and Save Mission Trail Park
P.O. Box 2303, Carmel, Ca. 93921
To volunteer or contribute, call 624-3942
SELL THE HOUSE & SAVE THE PARK! Vote YES on measure I
ABSTRACT: The text of the SELL THE HOUSE & SAVE THE PARK! Vote YES on measure I color postcard mailed to Carmelites, sent by the Committee for AYE on Measure I, is reproduced and COMMENTS are made.
SELL THE HOUSE & SAVE THE PARK!
Vote YES on measure I
IT’S AS EASY AS AYE ON I
A = ACTIONS by Carmel City Mayors and Councils since 1999 have been to sell the house. Any public use with public events is impractical, with the burden of financing on the taxpayers.
Y = YOU have the power to stop the payment of taxpayer money in frivolous litigation, nearly $800,000 to date, which could be used to improve our local needs.
E = ENVIRONMENT and parkland will be preserved. The Flanders Mansion is on 2% of the Preserve. All 5 trails are unaffected.
VOTE YES ON MEASURE I
Paid for by Committee for AYE on Measure I P.O. box 22351, Carmel, CA 93922
COMMENTS:
• The color photo on the postcard depicts a park bench and bridge near the 11th Av. Entrance surrounded by invasive vegetation overgrowth.
• Since 2000 when Sue McCloud was elected mayor, the City has not appointed an Ad Hoc Committee or Task Force to examine potential public uses for the Flanders Mansion, nor has the City placed proposals for potential public uses on any public hearing agenda for public input and consideration. Therefore, there is no evidence since 2000 that “any public use with public events is impractical.”
• The Committee for AYE on Measure I characterizes litigation involving defendant City of Carmel-by-the-Sea as “frivolous;” translation, the City defines “frivolous” as substantive violations of municipal and state laws. This definition places the City above the law. Interestingly, at the 6 October 2009 City Council meeting, a private attorney deemed the City’s motion to dismiss his clients’ lawsuit against the City as “frivolous,” to which Council Member Gerard Rose replied that a court’s decision in favor of the City granting dismissal of the lawsuit made the motion not frivolous. Applying the same rationale, if a court’s ruling in favor of the City made the City’s motion not frivolous, then a court’s ruling in favor of Flanders Foundation and against the City made the Flanders Foundation similarly not “frivolous.”
• As parkland, the Flanders Mansion Property in Mission Trail Nature Preserve will not be preserved according to the goals, objectives and policies in the City’s General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan. The construction of new trails is mandated due to the creation of a private inholding, if sold to a private owner, because of the permanent loss of parkland currently used by the public.
SELL THE HOUSE & SAVE THE PARK!
Vote YES on measure I
IT’S AS EASY AS AYE ON I
A = ACTIONS by Carmel City Mayors and Councils since 1999 have been to sell the house. Any public use with public events is impractical, with the burden of financing on the taxpayers.
Y = YOU have the power to stop the payment of taxpayer money in frivolous litigation, nearly $800,000 to date, which could be used to improve our local needs.
E = ENVIRONMENT and parkland will be preserved. The Flanders Mansion is on 2% of the Preserve. All 5 trails are unaffected.
VOTE YES ON MEASURE I
Paid for by Committee for AYE on Measure I P.O. box 22351, Carmel, CA 93922
COMMENTS:
• The color photo on the postcard depicts a park bench and bridge near the 11th Av. Entrance surrounded by invasive vegetation overgrowth.
• Since 2000 when Sue McCloud was elected mayor, the City has not appointed an Ad Hoc Committee or Task Force to examine potential public uses for the Flanders Mansion, nor has the City placed proposals for potential public uses on any public hearing agenda for public input and consideration. Therefore, there is no evidence since 2000 that “any public use with public events is impractical.”
• The Committee for AYE on Measure I characterizes litigation involving defendant City of Carmel-by-the-Sea as “frivolous;” translation, the City defines “frivolous” as substantive violations of municipal and state laws. This definition places the City above the law. Interestingly, at the 6 October 2009 City Council meeting, a private attorney deemed the City’s motion to dismiss his clients’ lawsuit against the City as “frivolous,” to which Council Member Gerard Rose replied that a court’s decision in favor of the City granting dismissal of the lawsuit made the motion not frivolous. Applying the same rationale, if a court’s ruling in favor of the City made the City’s motion not frivolous, then a court’s ruling in favor of Flanders Foundation and against the City made the Flanders Foundation similarly not “frivolous.”
• As parkland, the Flanders Mansion Property in Mission Trail Nature Preserve will not be preserved according to the goals, objectives and policies in the City’s General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan. The construction of new trails is mandated due to the creation of a private inholding, if sold to a private owner, because of the permanent loss of parkland currently used by the public.
MEASURE I: IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS BY CITY ATTORNEY
ABSTRACT: The IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS BY CITY ATTORNEY on Measure I is reproduced from the MONTEREY COUNTY ELECTIONS SAMPLE BALLOT pamphlet.
MEASURE I
City of Carmel-by-the-Sea
Approve discontinuance and abandonment of, and authorization to sell, Flanders mansion property public parkland. Shall discontinuance and abandonment of the Flanders Mansion Property(APN 010-061-005) as public parkland, and authorization to sell the Flanders Mansion Property "with Conservation Easements and Mitigation" as passed on May 12,2009 by the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea City Council by Resolutions No. 2009-30 through 2009-33, be approved?
IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS BY CITY ATTORNEY
IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS BY CITY ATTORNEY, CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA REGARDING MEASURE I – A MEASURE TO DISCONTINUE AND ABANDON AS PUBLID PARKLAND APPROXIMATELY 1.252 ACRES KNOWN AS FLANDERS MANSION PROPERTY, WITH CONDITINS TO INCLUDE CONSERVATION EASEMENTS AND MITIGATIONS, AND AUTHORIZATION TO SELL THIS PARCEL KNOWN AS FLANDERS MANSION PROPERTY.
The City of Carmel-by-the-Sea owns an approximately 1.252 acre parcel known as the Flanders Mansion Property. This property is part of the Mission Trail Nature Preserve. On May 12, 2009, the City Council of Carmel-by-the-Sea approved discontinuance and abandonment of the Flanders Mansion Property as public parkland, and sale of the property subject to conservation easements and mitigations. California State law requires voter approval to sell parkland. The City Council has placed this proposed measure on the ballot so voters can determine whether this action shall or shall not be enacted.
A vote FOR this measure will allow a parcel of land, approximately 1.252 acres in size, which contains a building known as the Flanders Mansion to be discontinued and abandoned as public parkland within Mission Trail Nature Preserve, and will authorize sale of this parcel including the land, buildings and all improvements. Any action to sell the Property would be subject to certain conservation easements and mitigations. Upon sale, the property could be used consistent with zoning standards. Current zoning allows residential use as well as a limited range of non residential uses.
The effect of the conservation easements and mitigations would be to (1) preserve public access to the Mission Trail Nature Preserve and the Lester Rowntree Arboretum at this location, and (2) minimize potential biological impacts on adjacent environmentally sensitive habitat areas that might result from future use of the property by a new owner. Easement restrictions and mitigations would provide for continued public use of portions of the property for trail access and prohibit a future owner of the parcel from installing fencing, walls or other man-made features within the boundaries of the easements. The Flanders Mansion is recognized as an historical resource and is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Mitigations would require that the Flanders Mansion be fully rehabilitated as an historical resource consistent with local, State and Federal standards.
A vote AGAINST this measure will not allow the approximately 1.252-acre parcel of land, which contains a building known as the Flanders Mansion, to be discontinued and abandoned as public parkland within the Mission Trail Nature Preserve, will not authorize sale of the parcel, and specified conservation easements and mitigations associated with the measure will not be applicable.
BALLOT MEASURE INFORMATION HAS BEEN PRINTED “AS SUBMITTED” AND PROOFED BY THE PUBLIC AGENCY SUBMITTING THE MEASURE PRIOR TO PRINTING
MEASURE I
City of Carmel-by-the-Sea
Approve discontinuance and abandonment of, and authorization to sell, Flanders mansion property public parkland. Shall discontinuance and abandonment of the Flanders Mansion Property(APN 010-061-005) as public parkland, and authorization to sell the Flanders Mansion Property "with Conservation Easements and Mitigation" as passed on May 12,2009 by the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea City Council by Resolutions No. 2009-30 through 2009-33, be approved?
IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS BY CITY ATTORNEY
IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS BY CITY ATTORNEY, CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA REGARDING MEASURE I – A MEASURE TO DISCONTINUE AND ABANDON AS PUBLID PARKLAND APPROXIMATELY 1.252 ACRES KNOWN AS FLANDERS MANSION PROPERTY, WITH CONDITINS TO INCLUDE CONSERVATION EASEMENTS AND MITIGATIONS, AND AUTHORIZATION TO SELL THIS PARCEL KNOWN AS FLANDERS MANSION PROPERTY.
The City of Carmel-by-the-Sea owns an approximately 1.252 acre parcel known as the Flanders Mansion Property. This property is part of the Mission Trail Nature Preserve. On May 12, 2009, the City Council of Carmel-by-the-Sea approved discontinuance and abandonment of the Flanders Mansion Property as public parkland, and sale of the property subject to conservation easements and mitigations. California State law requires voter approval to sell parkland. The City Council has placed this proposed measure on the ballot so voters can determine whether this action shall or shall not be enacted.
A vote FOR this measure will allow a parcel of land, approximately 1.252 acres in size, which contains a building known as the Flanders Mansion to be discontinued and abandoned as public parkland within Mission Trail Nature Preserve, and will authorize sale of this parcel including the land, buildings and all improvements. Any action to sell the Property would be subject to certain conservation easements and mitigations. Upon sale, the property could be used consistent with zoning standards. Current zoning allows residential use as well as a limited range of non residential uses.
The effect of the conservation easements and mitigations would be to (1) preserve public access to the Mission Trail Nature Preserve and the Lester Rowntree Arboretum at this location, and (2) minimize potential biological impacts on adjacent environmentally sensitive habitat areas that might result from future use of the property by a new owner. Easement restrictions and mitigations would provide for continued public use of portions of the property for trail access and prohibit a future owner of the parcel from installing fencing, walls or other man-made features within the boundaries of the easements. The Flanders Mansion is recognized as an historical resource and is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Mitigations would require that the Flanders Mansion be fully rehabilitated as an historical resource consistent with local, State and Federal standards.
A vote AGAINST this measure will not allow the approximately 1.252-acre parcel of land, which contains a building known as the Flanders Mansion, to be discontinued and abandoned as public parkland within the Mission Trail Nature Preserve, will not authorize sale of the parcel, and specified conservation easements and mitigations associated with the measure will not be applicable.
BALLOT MEASURE INFORMATION HAS BEEN PRINTED “AS SUBMITTED” AND PROOFED BY THE PUBLIC AGENCY SUBMITTING THE MEASURE PRIOR TO PRINTING
MONTEREY COUNTY ELECTIONS: MEASURE “I” ARGUMENTS & REBUTTALS
Abstract: With regard to Measure I, the texts of ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF MEASURE I and REBUTTAL TO THE ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF MEASURE I, from the MONTEREY COUNTY ELECTIONS SAMPLE BALLOT pamphlet, are reproduced. Measure I requires Majority Approval for passage.
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF OR IN OPPOSITION TO THE PROPOSED LAWS ARE THE OPINIONS OF THE AUTHORS.
MEASURE I
City of Carmel-by-the-Sea
ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF MEASURE I
For 10 plus years, City Councils have voted to preserve Flanders Mansion by ensuring its continued use as an historic family residence. After 35 years of study, the City found no municipal use for this isolated building that would merit its restoration cost and long-term maintenance. Sale as an historic home will put it back on property tax rolls and end these costs.
Built in 1924 on the eastern edge of the Mission Trail Park (MTP) at 25800 Hatton Road, the approximately 6,000-square-foot Flanders Mansion is accessed by a driveway from Hatton Road. In 1971 Carmel purchased 17.5 acres and in 1972 14.9 acres including Flanders to form MTP. Twice during this period the City denied subdivision of the property. In 1989 Flanders was placed on the National Register of Historic Places for its local significance.
After the City’s purchase, Council twice discussed the possibility of selling the house to finance the purchase of the 32.4 acres of open space (of which the City has a total of 135 acres). The City borders three sides of MTP, while the east side (Hatton Road) is a residential area located in Monterey County.
The City began discussing possible uses of Flanders at a town hall meeting in 1977. Subsequently, five task forces were formed, one deliberated for eight years, to determine a use which would be compatible with the Hatton Road residential area. None was found. Flanders has been vacant since 2003 as it is not compatible with the Americans with Disabilities Act nor seismically retrofitted as necessary for public use.
Please vote with the last six Councils to sell Flanders (including 1.252 improved acres—house, roundabout and driveway access) to preserve this historic family residence, while retaining 31 plus acres in MTP.
/s/ Sue McCloud Mayor
/s/ Karen Sharp Mayor Pro Tempore
/s/Paula Hazdovac Councilperson
/s/ Gerard Rose Councilperson
/s/ Ken Talmage Councilperson
REBUTTAL TO THE ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF MEASURE I
Proponents of Measure “I” claim that the best way to preserve the property at the heart of Mission Trail Park is to sell it.
But you cannot preserve park land by selling it. If park land is sold into private hands, it is no longer park land. The physical property may be “preserved,” but as a park, it is eliminated.
Let there by no confusion, a sale would eliminate a critical part of Mission Trail Park forever. We would lose trails, views and ambiance. Open space would be replaced by walls and fences.
The city’s General Plan contains a clear, firm commitment to “preserve and acquire open space and parks.” This is a public trust: The city council is required to protect our park land on our behalf.
But if the property is sold, the heart of Mission Trail Park will be gone forever.
And there is no need to sell. The city has significant reserves and budget surpluses. Several organizations have already offered to take on the repair and maintenance of the building and land, at no cost to the city of Carmel.
Mission Trail Park is a treasured recreational and environmental resource. Please help keep the park intact, for all of us, and for future generations.
Please vote no on the sale of park land: Vote No on Measure “I.”
/s/ James C. Emery Retired/Resident
/s/ Margaret Young Resident
/s/ Margery C. Adams Retired/Resident
/s/ Gregory D’Ambrosio Retired/Resident
/s/ Roberta G. Miller Retired/Resident
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF OR IN OPPOSITION TO THE PROPOSED LAWS ARE THE OPINIONS OF THE AUTHORS.
MEASURE I
City of Carmel-by-the-Sea
ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF MEASURE I
For 10 plus years, City Councils have voted to preserve Flanders Mansion by ensuring its continued use as an historic family residence. After 35 years of study, the City found no municipal use for this isolated building that would merit its restoration cost and long-term maintenance. Sale as an historic home will put it back on property tax rolls and end these costs.
Built in 1924 on the eastern edge of the Mission Trail Park (MTP) at 25800 Hatton Road, the approximately 6,000-square-foot Flanders Mansion is accessed by a driveway from Hatton Road. In 1971 Carmel purchased 17.5 acres and in 1972 14.9 acres including Flanders to form MTP. Twice during this period the City denied subdivision of the property. In 1989 Flanders was placed on the National Register of Historic Places for its local significance.
After the City’s purchase, Council twice discussed the possibility of selling the house to finance the purchase of the 32.4 acres of open space (of which the City has a total of 135 acres). The City borders three sides of MTP, while the east side (Hatton Road) is a residential area located in Monterey County.
The City began discussing possible uses of Flanders at a town hall meeting in 1977. Subsequently, five task forces were formed, one deliberated for eight years, to determine a use which would be compatible with the Hatton Road residential area. None was found. Flanders has been vacant since 2003 as it is not compatible with the Americans with Disabilities Act nor seismically retrofitted as necessary for public use.
Please vote with the last six Councils to sell Flanders (including 1.252 improved acres—house, roundabout and driveway access) to preserve this historic family residence, while retaining 31 plus acres in MTP.
/s/ Sue McCloud Mayor
/s/ Karen Sharp Mayor Pro Tempore
/s/Paula Hazdovac Councilperson
/s/ Gerard Rose Councilperson
/s/ Ken Talmage Councilperson
REBUTTAL TO THE ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF MEASURE I
Proponents of Measure “I” claim that the best way to preserve the property at the heart of Mission Trail Park is to sell it.
But you cannot preserve park land by selling it. If park land is sold into private hands, it is no longer park land. The physical property may be “preserved,” but as a park, it is eliminated.
Let there by no confusion, a sale would eliminate a critical part of Mission Trail Park forever. We would lose trails, views and ambiance. Open space would be replaced by walls and fences.
The city’s General Plan contains a clear, firm commitment to “preserve and acquire open space and parks.” This is a public trust: The city council is required to protect our park land on our behalf.
But if the property is sold, the heart of Mission Trail Park will be gone forever.
And there is no need to sell. The city has significant reserves and budget surpluses. Several organizations have already offered to take on the repair and maintenance of the building and land, at no cost to the city of Carmel.
Mission Trail Park is a treasured recreational and environmental resource. Please help keep the park intact, for all of us, and for future generations.
Please vote no on the sale of park land: Vote No on Measure “I.”
/s/ James C. Emery Retired/Resident
/s/ Margaret Young Resident
/s/ Margery C. Adams Retired/Resident
/s/ Gregory D’Ambrosio Retired/Resident
/s/ Roberta G. Miller Retired/Resident
Friday, October 02, 2009
PLEASE VOTE NO ON MEASURE 'I'
ABSTRACT: ‘PLEASE VOTE NO ON MEASURE I,’ as a counter to ‘PLEASE VOTE YES ON MEASURE I,’ Paid for by the Committee for Aye on Measure I, appearing in the 2 October 2009 edition of The Carmel Pine Cone, is presented. SUPPORTERS, as Guardians, Defenders and Protectors of Public Parkland & Historic Resource, are described.
PLEASE VOTE NO ON MEASURE “I”
• The National Register of Historic Places Flanders Mansion Parkland Property will be made inaccessible to the public, Mission Trail Nature Preserve users and the current owners of the property, the residents of Carmel-by-the-Sea, if Measure I passes by a simple majority. The sale of the Property could create potential conflicts between a private property inholder owner and public park users.
• Despite a record of failure by previous City Councils since 1999 to muster the political will to determine and implement a public use compatible with the Hatton Fields neighborhood, a new City Council under new visionary leadership could consider proposals which were never placed on public hearing agendas for public input and consideration.
• In 2009, Architectural Resources Group estimated the restoration costs for a nonresidential use at $1,409,716; and "the difference between the as-rehabilitated value of $2,040,000 for sale as non-residential property and the as-is value of $890,000 is $1,157,000 for restoration," according to CBRE Consulting, Inc. These restoration costs could be budgeted for by a City Council over a multi-year period.
• “A number of impacted trails were identified in the RDEIR” and mitigation measures were identified which require the City provide adequate replacement trails to compensate for the lack of trail access to and through the Flanders Mansion property, according to the RFEIR. Whether “adequate replacement trails” will be expeditiously constructed is uncertain and not necessary if the Flanders Mansion Property remains as an “intrinsic” part of Mission Trail Nature Preserve.
• “The parks and open space amount to over 68 acres of land. In addition, the City has approximately 67 acres of other areas that can be considered an important open space resource, but are not available for the traditional park and recreation use.” (Source: General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan Open Space and Conservation Element) Every acre of the total 68 acres available for park and recreation use is precious; the City’s General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan states that the City must “Use, maintain and enhance publicly owned land for the benefit of Carmel residents.”
• “Illegal” actions in 2005 by a City Council in voting to sell the Flanders Mansion Property have cost Carmelites hundreds of thousands of dollars in attorney and consultant fees which could have been more constructively expended on the rehabilitation and maintenance of the Flanders Mansion Property and Mission Trail Nature Preserve. A pending lawsuit, Flanders Foundation vs City of Carmel-by-the-Sea (M99437), may again find the City violated laws pertaining to the sale of parkland and may find the City did not meet its burden with regard to the Economic Feasibility Analysis which could potentially nullify a simple majority vote in favor of selling the Flanders Mansion Property.
SUPPORTERS:
Guardians, Defenders and Protectors of Public Parkland & Historic Resource;
Carmelites who view every acre of Mission Trail Nature Preserve Parkland as precious and the National Register of Historic Places Flanders Mansion as a significant and incomparable structure worthy of rehabilitation, maintenance and use as a low-intensity, compatible with the Hatton Fields neighborhood, public asset for us and future generations.
PLEASE VOTE NO ON MEASURE “I”
• The National Register of Historic Places Flanders Mansion Parkland Property will be made inaccessible to the public, Mission Trail Nature Preserve users and the current owners of the property, the residents of Carmel-by-the-Sea, if Measure I passes by a simple majority. The sale of the Property could create potential conflicts between a private property inholder owner and public park users.
• Despite a record of failure by previous City Councils since 1999 to muster the political will to determine and implement a public use compatible with the Hatton Fields neighborhood, a new City Council under new visionary leadership could consider proposals which were never placed on public hearing agendas for public input and consideration.
• In 2009, Architectural Resources Group estimated the restoration costs for a nonresidential use at $1,409,716; and "the difference between the as-rehabilitated value of $2,040,000 for sale as non-residential property and the as-is value of $890,000 is $1,157,000 for restoration," according to CBRE Consulting, Inc. These restoration costs could be budgeted for by a City Council over a multi-year period.
• “A number of impacted trails were identified in the RDEIR” and mitigation measures were identified which require the City provide adequate replacement trails to compensate for the lack of trail access to and through the Flanders Mansion property, according to the RFEIR. Whether “adequate replacement trails” will be expeditiously constructed is uncertain and not necessary if the Flanders Mansion Property remains as an “intrinsic” part of Mission Trail Nature Preserve.
• “The parks and open space amount to over 68 acres of land. In addition, the City has approximately 67 acres of other areas that can be considered an important open space resource, but are not available for the traditional park and recreation use.” (Source: General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan Open Space and Conservation Element) Every acre of the total 68 acres available for park and recreation use is precious; the City’s General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan states that the City must “Use, maintain and enhance publicly owned land for the benefit of Carmel residents.”
• “Illegal” actions in 2005 by a City Council in voting to sell the Flanders Mansion Property have cost Carmelites hundreds of thousands of dollars in attorney and consultant fees which could have been more constructively expended on the rehabilitation and maintenance of the Flanders Mansion Property and Mission Trail Nature Preserve. A pending lawsuit, Flanders Foundation vs City of Carmel-by-the-Sea (M99437), may again find the City violated laws pertaining to the sale of parkland and may find the City did not meet its burden with regard to the Economic Feasibility Analysis which could potentially nullify a simple majority vote in favor of selling the Flanders Mansion Property.
SUPPORTERS:
Guardians, Defenders and Protectors of Public Parkland & Historic Resource;
Carmelites who view every acre of Mission Trail Nature Preserve Parkland as precious and the National Register of Historic Places Flanders Mansion as a significant and incomparable structure worthy of rehabilitation, maintenance and use as a low-intensity, compatible with the Hatton Fields neighborhood, public asset for us and future generations.
PLEASE VOTE YES ON MEASURE 'I'
ABSTRACT: In the Friday, 2 October 2009 edition of The Carmel Pine Cone, there appears a ‘PLEASE VOTE YES ON MEASURE I' advertisement. Six claims and a “partial list” of supporters are presented. The advertisement is reproduced; informational NOTES are made.
PLEASE VOTE YES ON MEASURE “I”
• Flanders is and will remain an historic single family residence for its local significance.
• No municipal use for the 1.252 acre parcel has been found despite 35 years of study and input from 5 citizen groups
• Restoration of Flanders in 2005 was estimated to cost $1.7-$2.2 million.
• None of the many trails in the Park intersects the parcel.
• The City has 138 acres of open space completely accessible to the public.
• Each of the past 6 City Councils has taken action toward the sale of Flanders.
We support the sale of the “Flanders Mansion” (partial list):
Carolyn Akcan
Robert Ballard
Josh Banks
Mary Janet Barger
Susan and Bob Belk
Mary Bell
Sarah and Clay Berling
Judy and Woody Beville
Barbara and Roger Bolgard
Judy and Dick Borda
Justin Borello
Phil Bowhay
Sylvia and Buck Breiholz
Paul Brocchini
Linda Calafiore
Chris and Pam Carroll
Betty and Joseph Chaffers
Sarah and Gary Chang
Gene and Bob Clifford
Gene Conley
Susan Conway
Marilyn and Lee Cox
Mary Kay Crockett
Jerian and Al Crosby
Judy and Mike Cunningham
Lucia Dahlstrand
Walt deFaria
Kathleen DeMaria
Tina DeMaria
Fleece Dennis
Dixie Dixon
Nancy and Bill Doolittle
Liam Doust
Hallie and Brad Dow
Jean Draper
Francis Duda
Corky Duke
Lillian Eccher
Patricia and Bill Eggleston
Gloria Eldred
Janis and Randy Elliott
Roberta and David Elliott
Mary Ann and Joe Ford
Joyce and Jerry Frasca
Peppy Garner
Barbara Genovese
Lois Genovese
Karol and Jerry Gleason
Patricia Golman
Donald Graham
Dolores (Dee) Hagey
Barbara and Dick Hammond
Lindsay Hanna
Harriet Harrell
Hildegunn Hawley
Lillian Hazdovac
Paula Hazdovac
Jim Heilig
Alexander Heisinger
Michael Heisinger
Pamela and Jim Heisinger
Dale Hekhuis
Dorothy and Howard Herning
Steve Hillyard
Suzanne and Gordon Holm
Kay and Don Holz
Angie and Bob Irvine
Donna Jett
Martha Jordan
Casey Jones
Mary Jones
Karen Juhring
Sally and Bill Kadell
Les Kadis
Florrie and Paul Kagan
Carol and Jesse Kahn
Liz and Scott Kantor
Jack Kendall
Pam and Clyde Klaumann
Marguerite and John Krisher
Elinor Laiola
Gary LaMar
Doris Lawton
Jill Lee
Brian Leidig
Marian and Glenn Leidig
Jody LeTowt
Denny LeVett
Bernice and Bob Little
Robert Little
Keira and Matt Little
Judy and Gary Logan
Judy Lyle
Michael Lynch
Caroline MacDonald
Ruth McClendon
Sue McCloud
Alton McEwen
Mia and Gerry Maddoux
Sheila and Joe Mark
Susan and Rich Mastio
David Mauldwin
Linda and Walter McCarthy
Jude and Phil Melrose
Pam and Steve Meyer
Marikay and Bob Morris
Martha Mosher
Gisela and Peter Murray
Lillian and Warren Neidenberg
Jody Norman
Dick Nystrom
Linda O’Connor
Lynn and Bob O’Neill
Joyce Gil Osorio
Roger Parkes
Burt Pike
Jane and Jim Price
Judy Profeta
Debbie Quayle
Nancy Reese
Diane and Bob Reid
Jan and Niels Reimers
Mary and John Ricksen
Maureen and Benjamin Richards
LaVonne Rilling
Nita Robbins
Chris and Graeme Robertson
Joan and Steve Robinson
Mary and Brian Robotti
Gloria and James Rodda
Paige and Carl Roetter
Ronni Roman
Gerard Rose
Anne and Jim Rurka
Gail and Bill Scearce
Debbie and Dennis Sharp
Karen and David Sharp
Donna Shore
William Shreve
Pat and Dick Sippel
Nancy Slade
Leslie and Charlie Snorf
Jean Sonoda
Susan Sory
Bob Spencer
Connie and Robert Spencer
Pat Steele
Dick Stewart
Cathy and Larry Stewart
Pat and Rod Stofle
Brendan Sullivan
Nancie and Merv Sutton
Ken Talmage
Anne and Chris Tescher
Judy and John Thodos
Georganne Thurstun
Vonda and Dan Tibbitts
Sally Tierney
Paula and George Tipton
Rosaleen Trambley
Hilary Traynor-Duda
John Wagner
Patty and George Walker
Perry Walker
Suzanne Webb
Carla and Jeff White
Ramie Wikdahl
Susan Willey
Anna Yateman
Linda Yellich
Paid for by the Committee for Aye on Measure I, P. O. Box 22351, Carmel, CA 93922 • 831-624-6543
(Source: The Carmel Pine Cone, October 2, 2009, 5A)
NOTES (on Paid for by the Committee for Aye on Measure I):
• Mailing Address: Robert and Marikay Morris, Hatton Fields
• Phone Number: Sarah Berling, sister of Mayor Sue McCloud
PLEASE VOTE YES ON MEASURE “I”
• Flanders is and will remain an historic single family residence for its local significance.
• No municipal use for the 1.252 acre parcel has been found despite 35 years of study and input from 5 citizen groups
• Restoration of Flanders in 2005 was estimated to cost $1.7-$2.2 million.
• None of the many trails in the Park intersects the parcel.
• The City has 138 acres of open space completely accessible to the public.
• Each of the past 6 City Councils has taken action toward the sale of Flanders.
We support the sale of the “Flanders Mansion” (partial list):
Carolyn Akcan
Robert Ballard
Josh Banks
Mary Janet Barger
Susan and Bob Belk
Mary Bell
Sarah and Clay Berling
Judy and Woody Beville
Barbara and Roger Bolgard
Judy and Dick Borda
Justin Borello
Phil Bowhay
Sylvia and Buck Breiholz
Paul Brocchini
Linda Calafiore
Chris and Pam Carroll
Betty and Joseph Chaffers
Sarah and Gary Chang
Gene and Bob Clifford
Gene Conley
Susan Conway
Marilyn and Lee Cox
Mary Kay Crockett
Jerian and Al Crosby
Judy and Mike Cunningham
Lucia Dahlstrand
Walt deFaria
Kathleen DeMaria
Tina DeMaria
Fleece Dennis
Dixie Dixon
Nancy and Bill Doolittle
Liam Doust
Hallie and Brad Dow
Jean Draper
Francis Duda
Corky Duke
Lillian Eccher
Patricia and Bill Eggleston
Gloria Eldred
Janis and Randy Elliott
Roberta and David Elliott
Mary Ann and Joe Ford
Joyce and Jerry Frasca
Peppy Garner
Barbara Genovese
Lois Genovese
Karol and Jerry Gleason
Patricia Golman
Donald Graham
Dolores (Dee) Hagey
Barbara and Dick Hammond
Lindsay Hanna
Harriet Harrell
Hildegunn Hawley
Lillian Hazdovac
Paula Hazdovac
Jim Heilig
Alexander Heisinger
Michael Heisinger
Pamela and Jim Heisinger
Dale Hekhuis
Dorothy and Howard Herning
Steve Hillyard
Suzanne and Gordon Holm
Kay and Don Holz
Angie and Bob Irvine
Donna Jett
Martha Jordan
Casey Jones
Mary Jones
Karen Juhring
Sally and Bill Kadell
Les Kadis
Florrie and Paul Kagan
Carol and Jesse Kahn
Liz and Scott Kantor
Jack Kendall
Pam and Clyde Klaumann
Marguerite and John Krisher
Elinor Laiola
Gary LaMar
Doris Lawton
Jill Lee
Brian Leidig
Marian and Glenn Leidig
Jody LeTowt
Denny LeVett
Bernice and Bob Little
Robert Little
Keira and Matt Little
Judy and Gary Logan
Judy Lyle
Michael Lynch
Caroline MacDonald
Ruth McClendon
Sue McCloud
Alton McEwen
Mia and Gerry Maddoux
Sheila and Joe Mark
Susan and Rich Mastio
David Mauldwin
Linda and Walter McCarthy
Jude and Phil Melrose
Pam and Steve Meyer
Marikay and Bob Morris
Martha Mosher
Gisela and Peter Murray
Lillian and Warren Neidenberg
Jody Norman
Dick Nystrom
Linda O’Connor
Lynn and Bob O’Neill
Joyce Gil Osorio
Roger Parkes
Burt Pike
Jane and Jim Price
Judy Profeta
Debbie Quayle
Nancy Reese
Diane and Bob Reid
Jan and Niels Reimers
Mary and John Ricksen
Maureen and Benjamin Richards
LaVonne Rilling
Nita Robbins
Chris and Graeme Robertson
Joan and Steve Robinson
Mary and Brian Robotti
Gloria and James Rodda
Paige and Carl Roetter
Ronni Roman
Gerard Rose
Anne and Jim Rurka
Gail and Bill Scearce
Debbie and Dennis Sharp
Karen and David Sharp
Donna Shore
William Shreve
Pat and Dick Sippel
Nancy Slade
Leslie and Charlie Snorf
Jean Sonoda
Susan Sory
Bob Spencer
Connie and Robert Spencer
Pat Steele
Dick Stewart
Cathy and Larry Stewart
Pat and Rod Stofle
Brendan Sullivan
Nancie and Merv Sutton
Ken Talmage
Anne and Chris Tescher
Judy and John Thodos
Georganne Thurstun
Vonda and Dan Tibbitts
Sally Tierney
Paula and George Tipton
Rosaleen Trambley
Hilary Traynor-Duda
John Wagner
Patty and George Walker
Perry Walker
Suzanne Webb
Carla and Jeff White
Ramie Wikdahl
Susan Willey
Anna Yateman
Linda Yellich
Paid for by the Committee for Aye on Measure I, P. O. Box 22351, Carmel, CA 93922 • 831-624-6543
(Source: The Carmel Pine Cone, October 2, 2009, 5A)
NOTES (on Paid for by the Committee for Aye on Measure I):
• Mailing Address: Robert and Marikay Morris, Hatton Fields
• Phone Number: Sarah Berling, sister of Mayor Sue McCloud
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)