Kennesaw Zoning Administrator Mr. Simmons spoke and gave a complete review of both the 2004 City Council decision and summarized the City error in letting the Pawn Shop get a business license. He stated that the Zoning Department did NOT recommend the requested change and asked that the Planning Commission deny the request by Sams/Venturi.Mr. Sams, the same zoning lawyer representing Venturi in 2004, spoke to 30 minutes but did not manage to explain why he had agreed to exclude Pawn Shops 8 years ago and was suddenly now in favor of them. Mr. Venturi spoke for 3 minutes.
5 people spoke in the public comments section, 4 against the Rezoning Request and 1 in favor.
When I spoke I mentioned that it was understandable that Mr. Venturi would want the shop to remain as he had a 60 month lease with the Cruchelow's and over the 5 years of the lease it would result in rentals of approx. $300,000. I further pointed out that area residents felt that they were being 'stabbed in the back' by this reconsideration of the zoning to allow the Pawn Shop to remain.
Attorney Mr. Sams had earlier mentioned that there was a petition presented to the City with approx 160 names of people in favor of the Pawn Shop remaining. Later Mr. Simmons provided this petition to one of the speakers who were against the shop and both he and I looked at it briefly while other people spoke. We both noted that some of the handwriting seemed similar and also that there were a lot of people listing out of area addresses (Marietta) who would not be impacted by the Pawn Shop.
The vote was taken and it was 3-0 to deny the request for rezoning of the mall to allow Pawn Shops. The next meeting on this topic will be May 16th at 6 pm in the City Hall Council Chambers.
My Opinion:
On May 3rd we did get 2 small but significant 'wins', with the Zoning Department recommendation not to change the zoning and with the Planning Commission voting 3-0 to defeat the request to make the change, the issue is still not decided and area residents should not become complacent and assume that the matter is now resolved.
We still must have the City Council make a decision as to either enforcing the zoning, giving in to the property owner or making some middle of the road decision which would allow the shop to remain for the term of the 5 year lease.
One of the main items for the City will be the possible cost of litigation if they decide to remove the pawn shop. I am sure that the City Attorney has (or will) inform the Council on what to expect if they decide to go forward and require the pawn shop to close.
With recent litigation costing the City 1.8 million for a discrimination suit settlement*, it may be that they will be reluctant to embark on a course which almost surely will result in a civil suit for the City. Continued public pressure is the only way to make sure that our initial tentative gains are not thrown out by the reluctance of the City Council to make a firm decision to uphold the 2004 agreement.
If readers think that the matter is now over and stop attending Council meetings and no longer contact Council members, then we risk having the Council give in and grant a variance allowing the pawn shop to remain in the mall. Keep up the contacts with the City Council and also attend the meetings, if you do not then our initial gains will mean nothing and the threats of the Venturi/Cruchelow lawyers to sue will have swayed the Council into a compromise that will allow the pawn shop to remain.
* details at: http://mdjonline.com/view/full_story/3269184/article-Kennesaw-doles-out--1-8M-for-racial-suit
