Residents of Medusa Court attend a special Syracuse Town Council meeting Wednesday morning, May 28, to discuss how the town will address an easement issue.

By Lauren Zeugner
InkFreeNews

SYRACUSE —  During an hour long special meeting, the Syracuse Town Council came to a decision regarding Medusa Court and how to handle redistricting. The meeting was held Wednesday morning, May 28.

After 40 minutes of discussion among themselves and residents of Medusa Court, the council approved a motion made by Councilman Paul Stoelting. Stoelting made the motion to “declare and recognize all existing asphalt from Medusa Street to Huntington an easement for the town.”

The vote was 3-1 in favor of the motion with Councilman Bill Musser voting against the motion and Councilman Larry Siegel abstaining as he owns a double lot which has Medusa Court running through it.

During the discussion, property owners told the council they wanted access to their homes and for the town to continue maintaining the paved road or alleyway as it has done for the last 60 years.

Siegel stated his property, 112 N. Huntington was water front property and he was not interested in having a road between his lots. He didn’t want “ a house and a boat lot.” At the same time he had no issue with residents continuing to drive through there. “I don’t want my property depreciated with an alley easement,” he said.

One resident said as long as she has access to her home and isn’t threatened again,she’s fine. Recently lots were sold on Medusa Court and the resident came home to find someone blocking the easement, refusing to give her access to her home until Syracuse Police intervened.

Homeowners said they had no issue with people using the paved road, what they weren’t on board with the town seizing their property.

Town Attorney Jay Rigdon weighed in explaining no one would be taking the resident’s property, they would still own the land under the pavement. The council was just saying it would maintain its use as it has for the last 60 years. One resident asked the council to just take the road to end issues of other residents blocking it.

After the vote one resident asked if the council just moved to seize their property. “The town is saying it’s a roadway. It’s the same as individual property owners giving the town an easement, ” Rigdon said.

By state statue the town council is required to go through redistricting. The redistricting must be done by June 30. The council instructed David Wilkinson, town manager, to hire the redistricting firm recommended by Rigdon.

Council president Nathan Scherer said the council had some decisions to make regarding redistricting. They could redistrict for five wards as they have in the past or they could redistrict with three wards and two at-large seats. If they proceeded with going to fewer wards with at-large members, that would affect Siegel and Stoelting first as they are up for re-election next year.

Siegel suggested going four wards, making them slightly bigger and making ward five an at-large seat to see how at-large seats work.

Siegel also questioned the benefit, claiming all five wards were considered at large since voters could cast votes for all of them. Representatives just lived in their wards. “Having at-large seats gives people an opportunity to run,”Scherer said. As an example, he pointed out Tom Hoover, a former councilman, wouldn’t have had to step down when he moved into Kerns Crossing. He would have been in an at-large seat on the council. Siegel reminded the council when Hoover moved, Kerns Crossing was considered out of town so he would have had to step down anyway.

Rigdon explained the redistricting experts the town will hire will look at census data, where council members live, natural barriers and more. “The advantage for them doing it, is they don’t have a dog in the fight … “They’re professionals who do it for a lot of folks,” Rigdon said.

Scherer stressed the need for more representation on the council, saying some people are interested in serving, but don’t want to run against their current council member.

Siegel made a motion to leave the wards as they are. The motion went no where.

“I’m worried about enough people being able to run in the future,” Scherer said. “I’m not worried about now or the past. The average age of this board is retired.”

Stoelting said he could see the arguments for redistricting both ways, noting in Councilwoman Cindy Kaiser’s ward it’s hard to find people to represent the ward.

Scherer made a motion to redistrict with three wards and two at-large seats. The vote was 3-2 with Councilmen Siegel and Musser voting against it. After the meeting Musser said he was very disappointed at the vote saying he didn’t like it.