Resident Linda McBride is quoted [ESI June 26] saying that the parking Ord. 2332 was being “sabotaged” by the owners of the Bridgeford House Bed and Breakfast and “if the Bridgeford House claims they don’t have enough spaces on their land, they need to advertise fewer rooms.” She went on to say that if the council was not going to uphold Ord. 2332 then “they need to prepare for Ord. 1816 to follow.”
Ms. McBride’s accusation of “sabotage” is slanderous. We can show that we made every effort to require our guests to comply with the ordinance even though we disagreed with it. In addition, I view the comment “prepare for Ord. 1816” as a threat.
Later in the article, alderman Terry McClung also referred to Ord. 1816 and intimated that we were attempting to “circumvent the law.” I consider this statement also slanderous: we have made efforts to comply with an ordinance that is both not applicable to us (a legal, non-conforming establishment) and a hindrance to our business.
The city council has now called for a joint workshop with the Planning Commission to specifically “discuss the problem of the Bridgeford House.” I am done fighting. My attorney will handle things now.
I would remind the business owners in Eureka Springs that Ord. 2332 is a test case. What they are doing to me, as owner of Bridgeford House, may well be your problem in the future. Because my residence is Holiday Island, I cannot vote in elections that directly affect my business. If you own a business in Eureka and live there, you should seriously consider running for office to protect your business interests. Or at the very least vote for people who will.
Sharon Lawlor