Councilor seeks answer on public notice legality; counselor tells him go pound sand

City Attorney Terence O'Rourke shrugs after saying he had nothing to say about a request from Councilor Jim Gray to look into the legality of a public hearing notice. At right is Deputy City Manager Katie Ambrose. Inset, copy of public notice.

ROCHESTER - A Rochester resident was told in no uncertain terms they had no right to raise a point of order during Tuesday's public hearing in City Council chambers.

Moments later a Rochester city councilor was told the same thing.

It all began around the 5:30 mark of the public hearing during which residents were invited to give their input on a proposed zoning change in the downtown.

The zoning change was proposed for 15 parcels along Congress, Water and Bridge streets, and if passed would change them from R2 to downtown commercial, which would allow 79e tax breaks for developers.

Rochester resident Susan Rice, one of a handful of frequently vocal critics of city policy, city officials and department heads, noted that one of the agendas and the city's public notice of the hearing published in Foster's Daily Democrat, was misleading. She said it referred to proposed zoning changes to certain parcels, but did not fully describe the location, something she said the public had a compelling right to know.

Mayor Paul Callaghan motioned for a reply from City Attorney Terence O'Rourke, at the 8:30 mark, who immediately explained, "People from the audience don't make points of order. Continue the public hearing."

As the public hearing drew to a close around the 19-minute mark, however, city councilor Jim Gray asked O'Rourke to clarify if he saw any ambiguity in the public notice published in Foster's and whether it had represented the subject matter of the public hearing sufficiently.

"I think that it is appropriate the city attorney to talk about whether or not we've followed procedure for notice of public hearing, if not at this session, at our next meeting if he needs the time to do that, and then if there is corrective action that needs to be taken to take it," Gray said.

Again Callaghan pointed to O'Rourke.

"I have nothing to say right now on that matter," O'Rourke said with a shrug.

The 79e tax incentive to developers allows them to pay the current taxes on their properties for a given numbers of year - often around seven - without paying the higher taxes that result from completed construction.

The incentive has been given or is expected to be given to most of the downtown commercial/residential ventures undertaken in the past couple of year, including the Scenic Salinger complex, Hoffman/Slims, 38 Hanson St. and the Hartigan block.

Rice said when the City Council held a public hearing in May on changing zoning at The Ridge to allow housing, the public notice correctly alerted residents that the locale proposed to be change was The Ridge.

She said residents didn't get the specific location this time and wondered if that might make any decisions down the road subject to legal action given the dearth of info for residents prior to the public hearing.

It remains to be seen whether or not O'Rourke will clarify the matter at the regularly scheduled Nov. 1 City Council meeting.

On Tuesday he made no commitment.