In a recent council meeting in Orange Village, residents expressed deep concerns over the handling of a contentious development project, known as Issue 32, which was met with significant opposition from the community. Speakers highlighted a perceived disconnect between the council's actions and the wishes of the residents, emphasizing that many felt their voices were ignored throughout the decision-making process.

Community member Loftus criticized the council for pushing forward with the project despite a lack of public support, noting that not a single resident had called in favor of it. He pointed out that the council's insistence on proceeding contradicted the community's request to adhere to the master plan. Loftus also raised concerns about the legality of the mayor's use of village resources to promote the project, suggesting that it violated legal counsel's advice.

Jim Boyle echoed these sentiments, arguing that the council's process was flawed from the outset, particularly due to undisclosed conflicts of interest involving the law director. He lamented the lack of engagement with residents, stating that council members failed to communicate effectively with the community about the implications of the proposed zoning changes.

Stacy Golden, another resident, reinforced the idea that the community is not merely a group of opponents but rather invested neighbors seeking to preserve the integrity of their village. She emphasized the importance of open communication and collaboration between residents and their elected officials.

The meeting concluded with Mayor Cline acknowledging the residents' concerns and expressing a desire for unity moving forward. The discussions underscored a critical moment for local governance, highlighting the need for transparency and community engagement in decision-making processes.