Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Easement Transparency topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident urges independent probe of Tamarack property sale and easement
Summary
A Kings Road neighborhood leader told the Victoria City Council that records show coordination between city staff and a developer before a March sale of Tamarack properties, and requested an independent investigation into an easement and an appraisal that he says understated potential value.
At the Victoria City Council’s regular meeting a neighborhood association president urged the city to open an independent review into the sale of 26 acres of Tamarack property and the establishment of an easement across adjacent parcels.
Nick Gardino, President of the Kings Road Neighborhood Association, told council members he had filed multiple data-practice requests and that the returned records suggested staff and a developer coordinated on an easement and utility plans in the days before a March 10 sale. "I have completed several data practice act request. I have the output of that data, which I'm happy to share with council," Gardino said, and he provided a packet to the city clerk.
Gardino said communications showed the developer had plans for 15 homes with sewer and road infrastructure and that appraisals completed without knowledge of the development could have materially undervalued the land. "The appraisal actually began in July 2024...the appraiser states...this land, if buildable with lots, could sell for 2,450,000," Gardino said, and he asked the council to "conduct a full independent review."
City officials said they would distribute Gardino’s materials to council members for evaluation. Acting Mayor opened the record and asked the city clerk to share the packet with council. The council did not take immediate action; staff and the city attorney later noted the council lacks subpoena power and that criminal investigatory authority would rest with prosecutors or law enforcement, not the council.
Gardino’s public statement drew a brief corroborating comment from a nearby homeowner who said he had inquired about development plans and had been told none existed. Council members did not vote to initiate an investigation during the meeting; they asked staff to include the submitted materials in the record and to review them as part of any follow-up work.
What happens next: The council accepted the packet for distribution and said staff would review the materials; Gardino asked for a formal independent review and offered to share supporting documents. The council did not set a date for any formal inquiry at the meeting.
