Plaintiff signatures needed for Bella Vista lawsuit
Posted on Wednesday, August 27, 2008
BELLA VISTA - The annexation lawsuit filed against the city of Bella Vista edged one step closer to resolution at Monday night's meeting.
It remains to be seen if all plaintiffs in the action will honor their agreement and sign the document.
The lawsuit was filed in August 2007 by two businesses and more than 20 land owners after city officials voted to annex 12 unincorporated pockets surrounded by the city. The city of Bella Vista incorporated in late 2006 and voted for the annexation in July 2007, despite protests by residents. The anticipated turnback funds from the county were a factor in the decision for annexation; the city would not receive the funds if the areas remained unincorporated.
The language of the resolution was approved in advance by both sides, city attorney Jason Kelley said. He is assisting the lead council for the case, Michael Mosley, an attorney with the Arkansas Municipal League. The league defends cities around the state when lawsuits or other legal matters must be resolved. Kelley feels the resolution does not limit the city in any way and is a clarification of the city's intention.
Attorney Rick Hood of the Hood and Stacy Law Firm, filed the complaint for the plaintiffs. In July of this year, two of the plaintiffs said they would not sign the settlement, and their attorney, Christopher Griffin, did not return a phone message.
"I believe our legal position is that we have made a deal. The city is proceeding pursuant to our settlement agreement. If all of them do not sign, we reserve the right to pursue legal remedies," Kelley said.
The resolution passed by the City Council requires the city to abide by any existing uses of the properties, regardless of any zoning laws that may be enacted. This addresses the main concern of the property owners - that they would not be allowed to use their land as they had in the past.
The resolution calls this preexisting, nonconforming uses; most people are more familiar with the term "grandfathering. "In other words, however the land or buildings had been utilized in the past, they may continue to be used in that manner, even though they will be part of the city of Bella Vista. Kelley feels it's important that Bella Vistans realize that the 12 pockets are not receiving any special consideration and that all previous land uses will be honored.
If the use of any building or purpose of the property is discontinued, then the property must conform to the city zoning laws at that time. Property and structure use may be conveyed to a new owner. Zoning laws, which are still being written by the Bella Vista Planning Commission, are expected to be presented to the City Council sometime next year.
Should all of the plaintiffs sign the resolution, it would end a year-and-a-half-long battle.
"We expect a decision (from the plaintiffs ) quite soon. I'm hopeful that this will work out," Kelley said.
Mayor Frank Anderson had a slightly different take on the situation.
"It sounds like it's getting closer, but I haven't seen anything in black and white. It'll be a done deal when the judge says it's a done deal."
FEEDBACK:
Something to say about this topic? Submit a Letter to the Editor online
