Sent: Friday, January 26, 2007 9:55 AM

Hi Sheila,

My name is Dane Cook and I recently attended the town meeting regarding the Schuetz property.  After reading many of these e-mails, the one thing that stands out to me is the apparent confusion regarding the Town of Dunn. As someone new to this issue, I find myself saying "who is right" and I'm left with a "he said she said" situation. I was swayed by the argument made at the town meeting that the land, by boundary agreement, will not be covered by the town of Dunn and that the committee members have their facts wrong.  But why, after receiving so many e-mails from village citizens and I'm sure hearing your arguments numerous times, would they stand by their assertions that it is protected by Dunn?

As for the money issues, I think that the committee is being very short sighted, but we are unlikely to change conservative fiscal views.  Finally, will the meeting in February be open to the public?

Just a few thoughts and questions,

Dane B. Cook  

Sent: Fri, 26 Jan 2007 2:55 PM

Hi Dane,

Thank you so much for your interest.  I sympathize with your dilemma.  I’m attaching an excerpt from the relevant portion of the boundary agreement with Town of Dunn.  After reading just this excerpt, it’s very hard to understand why they stand by their assertions.  I sometimes wonder if they’ve actually read the agreement, but that can’t be possible, can it?  It would be a good question for you to ask them.

My reading of the agreement leads to this conclusion: Dunn can’t protect the land in any way; they have waived any control over it.  McFarland can protect it only by buying it for parkland.  If we don’t, the Schuetz family will sell to the highest bidder.  Dunn can’t stop that sale.

That new owner will petition McFarland for annexation.  Since it’s in our east side growth area, there would be no reason to deny annexation, and Dunn can’t stop it.  Following annexation, the waters get muddier.  It is currently zoned parkland, so the zoning would have to be changed.  Klar says that wouldn’t happen, but recent requests for such zoning changes were defeated by only a very slim margin.  Who can say that a future Board wouldn’t think that the taxes generated by half-acre estates are too good to pass up?

It’s that future Board I’m so worried about.  I’ve watched this Board’s actions, and if such a zoning change came before this Board majority, I have no doubt at all that it would pass. 

The bottom line for me is this: this Board majority doesn’t want to spend the money, regardless of where it comes from, and they’re using any and all excuses they can think of to avoid it.  I applaud you for asking the right question; I wish that I had a better answer.  Perhaps they do.

Village Board meetings are at 7:00 p.m. on the second and fourth Mondays of every month, and all are public; my husband and I go frequently.  I’ll send out an announcement once I learn the date.  Prior to that time, there may be another meeting for Schuetz supporters to attend.  I’ll keep you posted.  You can also keep current at my website, www.forwardmcfarland.info Would it be okay with you if I put your e-mail on the website along with my answer?  Let me know, please; I won’t do it without your permission.

Thanks again for caring enough to contact me.  I really appreciate that.

Sheila

Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 9:06 AM

Please feel free to post my e-mail and your answer and thank you for trying to clarify the issue.

Dane