Commentary
printer friendly PDF file abridged version published in the Tribune
printer friendly PDF file of an earlier and unabridged version

Business Plan for Gilbert
by Helen D. Gunderson, Gazette editor

This piece was originally published on May 4, 2005, as a letter to the editor of the Ames Tribune.

The bond that some clients have with Gilbert veterinarian Dr. Tammy Kersting is as deep as the bond some parishioners have with a beloved pastor. Kersting is so popular that Gilbert's leaders are allowing her to build a new clinic near homes and the Gilbert Apartments.

On April 14, 30 visitors attended a hearing regarding the clinic. Two petitions, totaling 150 signatures, were presented. That level of involvement is rare at Gilbert council meetings.

One petition, signed by 50 residents, listed the following reasons for opposing the special-use permit for Kersting's new clinic.

1. The property is zoned as an R-3, multi-family residential district, not for commercial purposes.

2. The city's comprehensive plan adopted in 2003 identifies this property and the surrounding properties as residential, not commercial.

3. Until recent changes to the zoning ordinances, building a veterinary clinic would not have been allowed in this district.

4. The plan for this clinic includes multiple outdoor, open-air dog runs.

5. Under the existing zoning ordinances of the City of Gilbert, such outdoor, open-air structures would not be allowed in even a commercially zoned district.

6. "Spot-zoning" such as this will make the enforcement of zoning regulations and restrictions more difficult in the future.

When Kersting suggested that the signatures of renters be removed from the petition, some of her supporters chuckled. Hal Briley, Gilbert's building inspector, chirped, "That's right," and a woman said "Amen."

Kersting implied that renters are transients and not paying taxes, basing her rationale on advice from an Ames council member and the Roland mayor. The Ames council member has denied the remarks attributed to him. The Roland mayor has offered no comment. Kersting should publicly apologize for her insinuations.

Earlier, Kersting had submitted 100 signatures supporting her new location. When she learned that renters had signed her petition, she said, "I apologize. And I would ask those be stricken, too."

After the April 14 hearing, the council unanimously approved the permit — without acknowledging that the Gilbert code does not allow open-air kennels in a commercially zoned district or addressing issues of spot zoning.

The reason for allowing Kersting to build in the residential area is her claim that no other Gilbert landowner would sell her property. In a meeting with the planning and zoning commission last summer, she was instructed to investigate other properties and return to the next meeting. She did not attend the next meeting (Aug. 18), but the commission voted to allow a vet clinic to apply for a special-use permit in the R3 area.

Gilbert's mayor and four of the five council members had enormous influence on the comprehensive plan. They have never acknowledged their error of not taking into account what land would or would not be available for development.

They have never encouraged Planning and Zoning to meet monthly to implement the plan. They have never talked about working with landowners and developers to create a commercial-industrial area. They have never deputized an economic development commission following the dissolution of the last one in 1999.

At two public meetings, Kersting explained how she had told area homeowners that if they were ever bothered by noise from the dogs in the new kennels, the residents should call, and she would place the dogs inside. She has never made that offer to renters or Kevin Beyer, owner of the Gilbert apartments, and should make amends with the renters and Beyer.

Council Member Craig Allen has often suggested the need for a "Goldilocks solution" — one that is neither too hot nor cold, neither too big nor small, but just right. Allen never applied the principle to the veterinary clinic. Instead he cavalierly said the comprehensive plan was not an iron-clad document and showed no concern for the quality of life in the residential area affected by the clinic. He never suggested finding a solution that would help Kersting remain in Gilbert while protecting Beyer's investment in the apartment buildings. Had the council invoked the Goldilocks solution, I might not be so rankled.

The building inspector should apologize for his partisan behavior at council meetings. The city leaders should acknowledge the irregularities that have occurred in relation to the vet clinic. The mayor did not maintain decorum at the April 14 meeting. Neither did she nor any council member assure visitors that the city does not discriminate against renters.

Meetings about changing the zoning ordinances were held without written notification to owners of adjacent land. The council set a date for a hearing on the zoning code prior to the planning and zoning commission recommending a change. Agendas for two planning and zoning meetings were posted 28 hours in advance, barely within the legal requirement. The council discussed the clinic substantively when it was not on the agenda. Agenda items did not clearly define the topics. There was a phantom planning and zoning meeting without minutes. Council Member Bob Jaquis denied another councilor her right to abstain from voting, and at a hearing, he rudely interrupted a speaker.

The theme of Gilbert's comprehensive plan is "growing gracefully." For that to happen, the town must mature in how it does business. Also, Gilbert must develop a commercial-industrial area so when a business is looking for space, the city and/or a developer can say, "Right this way. We have a place for you that fits a smart growth vision for the community."
     

Links to other Gazette material related to the new veterinary clinic location.

Preliminary timeline of planning and zoning commission and council business regarding the vet clinic prepared on April 13, 2005.

Commentary posted during the afternoon of August 18, 2004.

Report written late at night August 18, 2004, about the planning and zoning commission meeting held that evening.

Explanation, commentary, and map posted on September 3, 2004.

Report about the April 14, 2005, hearing on the special use permit for the veterinary clinic. It includes information, opinion, and links to the two petitions that were submitted as well as transcriptions and links to audio files for portions of the hearing.