Important Community Issues

 

Our goal is to let you know generally what proposals are up for consideration and provide you with the background information so you can voice your opinion as to the Pros and Cons of the issue. Your opinions do count and should be heard by the commissioners. This platform will be a great opportunity to make sure your elected officials are representing you and your interests are being served. 

We hope you will let us know how you feel about these issues.  We will not use your name in summarizing our members’ positions.  The reason for asking your name is to be sure we are speaking for those who are actually our members.

Of course, what we are providing here is only a summary.   While we are attempting to be objective and accurate, there are many nuances to these proposals and the arguments for and against them.  If you think we should correct anything, please let us know.  Most importantly, please come to the meeting or contact the town’s offices for more details. 

Town council meetings are held at the Lifesaving station on Dagsworthy Street on the 2nd Saturday of each month during the “off-season” of October through May. During the summer season, June through September, meetings are held on the 2nd Friday of each month. The League will have representatives at each meeting and will post a summary of the proceedings on this website after each of them.

________________________________________________________________________


These matters are as follows:

1.   Proposal to Give Lifeguards Greater Discretion to Monitor Skim Boarding on the Beach.

2.   Proposal to give Dewey Voters a Right of Referendum. (Draft Ordinance)

3.  Proposal to Continue the Moratorium on Hotel/Motels Converting to Condominiums. (Draft Ordinance)

4.   Proposal to Limit the Conversion of Business Property to Residential use.

5: Proposal that dogs on the beach rmust be on a leash under the control of a person at all times.

 ______________________________________________________________________

Proposal #1: To Give Lifeguards Greater Discretion to Monitor Skim Boarding on the Beach

Background:
Currently, there is an ordinance that prohibits volleyball playing on the beach except in designated locations, and prohibits skimboarding between 11:00 am and 3:00 pm during the summer season.  There is also a non-code rule that prohibits skim boarders within 100 feet of swimmers. At  the September Town Council meeting there was discussion about adjusting our Municipal Code to modify the current rule to remove these restrictions and allow the Lifeguards to designate zones and enforce safety in their own discretion.. The Chief Lifeguard said they would prefer to have more discretion to regulate skim boarding at all hours of the day without a specific rule in place.

Pros:
- The Skim Boarders should be able to enjoy our Beach as long as they do not disrupt the others.
- The guards are closest to the situation and specific rules should be tailored to what they observe with greater flexibility.
- With replenishment, the beach is now larger, so more freedom is possible

Cons:
- While accidents have been rare, there is a potential for serious injury due to the speed and amount of space required for skim boarders.
- Skimmers often are in large groups and there have been incidents where they have deterred swimmers by occupying large sections of the beach.
- It is not always feasible for guards to monitor or control skim boarding due to their limited presence, so the 100 hundred foot rule should be maintained.
- volleyball playing uses large areas and can be loud, so maintaining designated areas is preferable to potential confusion and conflict with beachgoers and families.

How do you feel about this proposal?

Clicking on one of the below options will initiate an email to be sent to the league with the subject reflecting your choice. If you have comments you'd like to add, use the body of that email. Please also include your name in the submission.. Only League member responses will be counted.


   In Favor  Against

________________________________________________________________________

Proposal #2: To give Dewey Voters a Right of Referendum (Draft Ordinance)

Background.
This issue was brought up by our former mayor before the election but has not yet been acted upon. It was originally discussed at the July 2006 Town meeting. It was also discussed at the August and September meetings

We currently have a right of referendum  via our elected commissioners needing 3 votes to bring an issue to a referendum of the whole town. What has been discussed is changing our Charter to allow for people to collect signatures to bring a matter to a public vote. Our former Mayor thought the number should be low such as 10% of the number of people who voted in the previous year’s election with a minimum of 150 signatures.  In the August meeting, the commissioners advised that our neighboring towns need 20% to 30% of the people who voted in the previous year’s election to sign to create a referendum.

Pros:
- Allowing the people to have a referendum would allow the populace to override an action of the Council if there was substantial disagreement with such actions.
- This would help prevent lawsuits against the town where the commissioners have acted in a way that is inconsistent with the code or unpopular.

Cons:
- Administrative costs to the town (mailings, absentee ballots, administration time and effort)
- Potential for frivolous referendums if the signatures required to force a referendum is too low
- Full Time local residents will have an easier time collecting signatures to force a referendum than the remote, part-time resident. Non-resident homeowners would have a difficult time getting signatures in the time period needed.
- We have an Election every year, so when an elected official isn’t voting with our interests in mind, we can vote them out of office.

How do you feel about this proposal?

Clicking on one of the below options will initiate an email to be sent to the league with the subject reflecting your choice. If you have comments you'd like to add, use the body of that email. Please also include your name in the submission.. Only League member responses will be counted.

In Favor    Against

________________________________________________________________________

Proposal #3: To Continue the Moratorium on Hotel/Motels Converting to Condominiums
 (Draft Ordinance)

Background:
There is currently in force a moratorium on the conversion of hotel and motel space to condominiums.  The Planning and Zoning Committee has held multiple planning meetings to design a plan for Condominium conversions. Prior to the moratorium going into place last November, many of our former hotels were taking 2 hotel rooms and converting that space into 1 condominium. This kept the unit at the minimum 750 square foot zoning requirement. The recommendation that the Planning and Zoning committee has put forward, as a way to discourage conversions, is a zoning plan to establish the minimum square footage of a condominium to be 1800 square feet. To put this into perspective, 1800 square feet is the approximate size of 5 hotel rooms.

The conversion issue has been the subject of two lawsuits filed against the town.

There appear to be at least four options the Commissioners have to choose from.

1) Rescind the motel to condo conversion moratorium.

2) Do nothing now and wait for the comprehensive draft plan to be completed.

3) Vote to allow  conversions and accept the Planning & Zoning recommendation, which sets the minimum square footage requirement at 1800 square feet. As a point of reference, a 750 square foot Condominium is on the market for $700,000 to $850,000 depending on its location. 1800 square feet is 2.4 times the size,  which means that these units would probably need to sell at the $1.5 to $2 Million range.

4) Vote to allow conversions and Revise the Planning & Zoning recommendation, to allow for a lower minimum square footage requirement.

Pros:
- If the units are reasonable in size and price, they will start to sell and the Town collects the 1.5% transfer fee at Closing
- Even with the reduction of hotel rooms in Dewey this summer, the remaining hotels experienced lower occupancy rates. Less hotel rooms will help fill the occupancy rates.
- An owner-resident or a seasonal-term rental occupant as opposed to a transient hotel visitor is a better guest for our town.
- The town makes more money on a 1.5% Transfer fee on a Condominium than it would on a low nightly room tax rate.
- Newer, nicer units are attractive and may attract higher income and less rowdy visitors.

Cons:
- Less Hotel rooms means that the transient weekend visitor might have to stay up the road on Route 1, costing the town revenue
- Weekend Visitors might have difficulty finding a vacant hotel room  for a night or two.
- By allowing conversions fed by the current real estate market, we are in danger of losing the long-term asset of a viable hotel and motel business in Dewey.
- Motels and hotels draw other business to the community, such as conventions and groups.
- Fewer hotel rooms hurt restaurant business and other sales.
- More condos to rent hurts ability of current landlords to fill their available terms .

How do you feel about this proposal?

Clicking on one of the below options will initiate an email to be sent to the league with the subject reflecting your choice. If you have comments you'd like to add, use the body of that email. Please also include your name in the submission.. Only League member responses will be counted.

Option 1       Option 2      Option 3         Option 4

________________________________________________________________________

Proposal #4: To Limit the Conversion of Business Property to Residential use

Background:
There is a moratorium  on such conversions that date back to April, 2006.  Two days before the last Town Council meeting, there was a notice to discuss and vote to prevent a commercial property from converting to residential use. This prompted Highway One to file plans to build residential units on their Ruddertowne and Venus on the Half Shell properties. At that time, the Commissioners instead voted for a moratorium until after the summer season in which construction is not permitted.

Pros:
- Will prevent the loss of some bar/restaurant businesses as well as loss of retail business

Cons:
- People should be able to use and develop their property as they see fit and without limits that have large economic cost.
- There may be lawsuits against the town if we do not allow the conversion as plans were submitted and are within existing codes.
- Potential Loss of the Ruddertowne parking lot.
- More properties for sale means more Transfer tax revenue for the town.
- Residential use is better for the town than restaurants and bar use.

How do you feel about this proposal?

Clicking on one of the below options will initiate an email to be sent to the league with the subject reflecting your choice. If you have comments you'd like to add, use the body of that email. Please also include your name in the submission.. Only League member responses will be counted..

In Favor   Against