South Avenue - This Isn't Personal; It's Business

Five years ago, when I first realized things were going badly awry with the town's lawsuit over South Avenue, I determined to pursue the cause as vigorously as possible. What was the cause? It was public access to public trust waters. It was also, more generally, pursuit of the Town Board's obligation to protect and defend public assets.

I was not motivated by any animosity toward Mr. Henry. I don't know Mr. Henry. Neither in the present case concerning the Town's response to Mr. Fulcher's proposal for what amounts to an exchange of routes of access to the harbor, am I motivated by either hostility or warm feelings toward Mr. Fulcher. Any such feelings are neither here nor there. A few years ago, I set forth my views about the suit here.

The bottom line now, as it was for more than a decade, is: The Board of Commissioners has a duty to protect the town’s assets. South Avenue has been a public right of way for at least ninety-five years and arguably for a hundred and twelve. It extends all the way to Raccoon Creek. The Board would be remiss if it didn’t continue to defend the public’s right of access to public waters, which has been provided by South Avenue.

We know that if we lose control over public access to the harbor in the vicinity of South Avenue and Avenue A we will never get it back. Future generations will never be able to use that access to public waters unless it is defended. 

We are now faced with a proposal from Mr. Fulcher which, if accepted by the town, may consolidate his holdings in a way that will enhance the value to him and to his "successors and assigns." 

Any benefit to Mr. Fulcher should not be the focus of our deliberations. Our focus should be on whether the proposal provides the public with equivalent or improved access to public trust waters in our harbor.  

We also have the issue of whether the proposed deal, as negotiated, is legal.

More later.