City revokes license

After a brief discussion regarding city property at Lake Fort Scott, the Fort Scott City Commission recently revoked a temporary license they approved last month granting local residents access to city-owned property at the lake.

Commissioners voted unanimously on Tuesday to rescind a temporary license originally granted April 17 to Byron and Nancy Maze. Mayor Jim Adams initiated the discussion which culminated in a motion by Adams to repeal the license, which was seconded by Commissioner Jeanie Parker.

Adams, who was the only "no" vote last month, saying he didn't feel he had enough information to make a decision at that meeting, said Tuesday he thought the city might be setting a bad precedent by approving the license. He said he feels the commission made a rushed decision that could open the door for similar requests in the future.

"I think we did ourselves a disservice; I think we jumped the gun," Adams said.

He added commissioners "need to look at all city property at the lake" first, because there are others who want access to it and some who have encroached upon city property without permission or permits.

Adams said the situation concerning the license is difficult "because I don't know how to tell someone else 'No.'"

"We'll have people up here constantly," he said.

Adams added that city personnel, who are currently handling numerous other projects, do not need the extra work dealing with lake property.

Parker said she resents her vote last month and apologized because she thinks commissioners "need more research."

"I think there should have been more discussion," she said. "People will want to come into town for city property."

City Attorney Bob Farmer said it is legal for the commission to rescind the license. Farmer told the commission during their April 17 meeting that they could issue either a temporary or permanent license and include whatever stipulations they chose.

During that meeting, commissioners discussed city property at the lake, licensing details and stipulations and fees that could be assessed. They also talked about whether there was sufficient information to proceed with the license.

Along with their discussion Tuesday, commissioners also briefly looked at a map of lake property.

Nancy Maze last month approached commissioners seeking access to her property over city-owned property at the lake. She and her husband wanted to put in a driveway and storage building for their personal use at the location. They had planned to do all the work at their expense.

During the April 17 meeting, Maze said she felt she has gone through all the proper channels, including bringing the issue to the Planning Commission for discussion and approval. She shared pictures of other city property at Lake Fort Scott that had been accessed without permission or permits.

"I wanted to ask for approval unlike other people accessing city property without permission," Maze said Thursday. "I wanted to go through the appropriate channels."

Maze said she was "perplexed and confused" at the commission's decision because she thought she had already been granted approval to proceed last month and had started the driveway project. However, she later learned that commissioners needed to discuss terms of the license before final approval.

City Manager Dave Martin said he spoke with Maze not long after the April commission meeting to confirm that she understood that commissioners would discuss the license and any stipulations at their May 15 meeting, that there may be a fee with the license and it could be revoked at any time. He said Maze had no problem and "wanted to do everything the right way." He also told her to not continue with the project until the license received final approval this month.

Martin said he takes full responsibility for the Mazes starting the project early due to a "miscommunication." He also said the issue was an example of "a rushed decision by the commission without time to research and discuss the issue" and that "no one did anything wrong."

"It's a perfect example of why you don't make snap judgments," he said.

Maze said she can still get to her property another way without using city property, however, creating a driveway would have made a safer, more direct route. They had started to clear the land for the driveway, but Maze said it was not yet complete. The storage building they planned to build would be on their property.

Martin said Maze now will not be able to do any more work or improvements on the city property.

Lake property has not been monitored in a long time and the commission will need to address the issue "somewhere down the road," Martin said.

"There are people out there that are using city property that shouldn't be," he said. "It's a process of research and discussion. We don't have time to tackle it right now; we have 40 projects we're working on right now."

Martin said the commission needs to talk about "clear definitions" and make sure everyone involved understands details concerning any plan to access private property via city property.

Martin added, "We want to address it in time. After a long process and much dialogue. It's a long-range plan."

Concerning people who are accessing city property without the city's permission, Martin said that issue will be tackled when the commission takes on the whole matter of property at the lake.

"We won't be ticketing anyone anytime soon," he said. "It's just something that's happened over time that we need to look at."