Takes exception
To the Editor:
This is the first time I've written concerning articles printed in the Record (issue Nov. 3, 2004).
[1] "One more reason to visit Marion County." This article states that liquor-by-the-drink wouldn't make or break the county, but it may bring additional revenue and visitors to the county. It also states: "guess what patrons do before and after they dine? They spend time and money in the community." The article goes on and states many downtown businesses coordinate their hours to facilitate visitors who eat at restaurants.
Do you honestly believe all of this? The majority of businesses are ma and pa-run businesses. They have been open all day waiting for customers to come in. Do you really think people are going to come to Marion, Hillsboro, Burns, or other county towns to shop before or after they eat out in one of the towns, especially an evening meal? Let's get real.
[2] Second article. "Variance denied." To be really honest I did not attend any of the meetings when the county was having the zoning codes updated. Why? Because the Realtors have been there and gave some very good advice and the zoning laws already had the tool to bring economic growth to the county in the code.
Terry Graber had 76 acres and sold 40 acres leaving him with 36 acres of land not suited for farming, as stated in the article. The zoning director said this application was denied in 2001 because it didn't meet the 40-acre requirement. Board chairman said a similar variance was approved in the past because of short acreage due to highway right of way.
The board said the owner created the variance — if you have only 76 acres to begin with — he sold 40 acres to keep within the rules — that leaves 36 acres — now did he create the four-acre shortage? I don't think so.
Now let's get down to brass tacks on the issue. Marion County was founded on a lot of 80-acre homesteads. Look around and you see lots of abandoned farms of two, five, seven, or 10 acres out there producing nothing. It's about time the zoning board uses the word "variance" to put these small tracts of land into economic production.
There is a greater possibility if a home was built on these sites, just maybe the new owners would drive to a neighboring town and spend some of their hard-earned cash — and by all means the county would tax that property accordingly and bring more tax money for the county budget. These small acreages have been sitting idle long enough.
It's time either the planning board stops trying to follow the letter of the law as written and use a variance for what it was intended to be used for — or the county commission overrides some of their decisions.
D. Eugene Enos
Marion
