My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 1993 04 06
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
1970-1999 City Council Minutes
>
1993 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 1993 04 06
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:31:36 PM
Creation date
7/30/2004 11:35:32 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
4/6/1993
Original Hardcopy Storage
2E3
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 1993 04 06
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
36
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
and I will immediately get you, <br />whatever information you so choose. <br /> <br />Howard believes in open government and that Louisville's City <br />Government has gone out of its way to ensure that its citizens are <br />adequately informed and that they get the access to their <br />government that they deserve. He stated that, if Louisville's <br />citizens believe that Council needs to restate their position, this <br />Resolution does so handle it. <br /> <br />Mayer agreed with Howard. He felt that people, who apply for <br />employment, have a certain privacy considerations that Council has <br />to be sensitive to. He asked that the City Attorney provide <br />Council with some information in terms of State law, how privacy <br />considerations could be mediated. Maybe, when people apply they <br />could request privacy. He felt that unless a person requests <br />privacy, then the materials should be open. He thought that people <br />need to know, when they apply, if all of their application <br />materials are going to be given to the newspaper. He felt that a <br />number of people might find that an invasion of their privacy. He <br />felt that this is a delicate issue that pits two competing rights, <br />the right to privacy vs. the right to open government. He stated <br />that this Resolution does nothing to contradict that. <br /> <br />Lathrop believes in open government and a right to privacy. He <br />felt that in this particular instance Louisville's City <br />Administrator, Annette Brand, handled it properly. He saw no <br />danger in the Resolution, as presented. <br /> <br />Hedding stated that controversy for the sake of controversy is <br />seldom constructive. <br /> <br />Davidson stated that both the City Administration and the City <br />Clerk have made every effort to make every record that's possible <br />public. He felt that this Resolution reaffirms that this is <br />Louisville's policy and will continue to be Louisville's policy. <br /> <br />Sisk moved that Council approve Resolution No. 13, Series 1993. <br />Seconded by Howard. All in favor except ~Hedding. <br /> <br />ORDINANCE NO. 1097, SERIES 1993 -AMENDINGTHE CITY OF LOUISVILLE, <br />COLORADO, INDUSTRIAL REVENUE BOND (REGAL INVESTMENT ASSOCIATES, <br />LIMITED, PROJECT) SERIES 1981, AND APPROVING THE FORM AND <br />AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF CERTAIN DOCUMENTS RELATING THERETO - <br />2ND READING - PUBLIC HEARING (PUBL. LSVL. TIMES 3/17/93) <br /> <br />Griffiths read by title only Ordinance No. 1097, Series 1993, "An <br />ordinance providing for the amendment of the City of Louisville, <br />Colorado, Industrial Development Revenue Bond (Regal Investment <br />Associates, Limited, Project) Series 1981, and approving the form <br />and authorizing the execution of certain documents relating <br />thereto." <br /> <br />6 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.