By: Lydia Crawley
The subject of reopening an alley in the Battle Street area to allow access to a proposed housing development by Sky Shine Properties, owned and operated by local brothers Skylar and Shane Humphrey, was once again the subject of discussion by the City of Parsons Council on October 7th. While there was a motion to explore costs approved by the Council, no action has been made towards improvements to the paper alley.
Quite a bit of confusion dominated the conversation, as well as the motions made during the meeting. City Attorney Tim Stranko stepped in at one point to clarify the motion and what was and could be made in the motion by the Council.
A motion was made by Council Member Tim Turner to open the alley for Sky Shine Development with a second by Council Member Seth Rosenau. Discussion focused on the lack of funding in the budget for the project, as well as estimated costs in excess of $70,000. Subsequent discussions followed over permitting requirements with the DEP and potential options of arrangements with the logging company to assist with costs and permitting. However, any pairing with the logging companies was found to be impractical.
Almost immediately, confusion began during the discussion. Confusion was raised over expectations from past meetings, as well as wording of papers distributed, historical precedent of the City’s position on alley abandonment, discussions made and information disseminated during the meeting.
Mayor Kolsun also raised concerns over potential ethics concerns and conflicts of interest. Mayor Kolsun had raised these concerns to the West Virginia Ethics Commission over the project, mainly due to the issue of the brother’s father, Sam Humphrey, is a seated Council Member for Ward I. Councilman Humphrey, it was alleged, is also a co-signer for the loan on the property. The Ethics Commission was consulted due to concerns over a conflict of interest with the City on the issue.
The Ethics Commission returned the verdict that Councilman Humphrey should stay out of all discussions regarding the matter.
“The City should decide what is best for the residents of the City, not the council member,” the decision states.
Should the decision be made that the Council would decide to either abandon the alley or build an access to the land, the Ethics Commission would be required to be consulted and a contract exemption would need to be obtained, the decision stated.
“The City would need to assert a hardship in order for the Ethics Commission to grant the exemption,” the decision states.
Hardships, the decision lays out, could include the potential loss of tax revenue should the exemption be denied or a burden to the City maintenance of the paper alley would bring.
By the time the vote came around, the motion had morphed into voting to develop the alley instead of just opening it. Several Council Members including Rosenau and Turner discussed the intent of the motion. In the midst of the confusion over what the motion actually was, Councilman Turner called for Question, which would force a vote on his original motion.
City Attorney Tim Stranko clarified the City’s position on what the approval of the motion meant. While no money was allocated by the measure, the motion allowed City Manager Mike Simmons to gather information such as bids, a budget and a plan to move forward towards development of a wing culvert at the creek across the alley.
“So that is approved proceeding with the development. That means you want to see a budget, you want to see a plan. That’s the proceeding part of this,” Stranko said.
During the public comment period at the beginning of the meeting, Lauren Fidley, significant other of Skylar Humphrey and a commercial Realtor in her own right, spoke on behalf of the project and developers.
Fidley addressed what she referenced as inaccuracies in recent reports and public perception regarding the project which included how the trees on the site would be harvested. The land is slated to undergo a selective cut that will focus on smaller, less viable trees that Fidley said would not contribute to the canopy. She denied that there would be any clear cutting of trees at any area of the property.
Fidley said the brothers are locals who are trying to do well for the community and help the community grow.
“These gentlemen are not outside developers parachuting in for profit,” Fidley said. “They are from here, they are investing back into their own community with a goal of helping it grow in a healthy, sustainable way.”
Fidley accused the Council of holding Parsons back from progress. She said that the Corridor H Project brings unique opportunities that could easily be lost for the City. Fidley described Parsons in the future as, “the City that people drive through, not the one that people drive to” if the housing project is not allowed to go forward and the City is not allowed to progress.
“And yet, despite that, the project has faced unnecessary hesitation, the kind that risks holding Parsons back at a time when it should be moving forward,” Fidley said. “With the Corridor H Project coming through Parsons, the City is standing at a defining moment.”
Mayor Kolsun refuted the accusation and said that the City of Parsons has never been against progress or expansion.
“No way is myself, and I believe this Council, too, are against any kind of progress for Parsons. We encourage you developers to be here to develop, to do things for us,” Kolsun said. “We’re all for housing projects. If we weren’t we’d be crazy. We got a road coming through and anyone that wants to do any kind of development, they’re welcome in this town.”
