Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
Griffiths: <br /> <br />Bellock: <br /> <br />Griffiths: <br />Bellock: <br /> <br />Griffiths: <br /> <br />Bellock: <br /> <br />Griffiths: <br /> <br />the city, with regard to its own <br />acts or omissions. <br /> <br />Would you agree, "except out" the <br />city's negligence? <br /> <br />Yes. I wouldn't want to indemnify <br />the city's own negligence. <br /> <br />I don't see any problem with that. <br /> <br />On paragraph 7, while I'm not sure I <br />understand all of this, it does <br />appear as if I'm appointing the city <br />as attorney-in-fact to execute all <br />documents that the city deemed <br />necessary, so that in fact we would <br />have no opportunity for review or <br />discussion. Should the city decide <br />that they wanted to impose any <br />special fee or take possession of <br />the site .... <br /> <br />I would like to stress that this is <br />a standard annexation agreement <br />that's being addressed. This <br />paragraph relates solely to the <br />inclusion of the property within one <br />or more special improvement <br />districts. There are other kinds of <br />mechanisms for making the necessary <br />improvements. I don't know whether <br />that's even being contemplated with <br />respect to this Property. I don't <br />know whether it's even relevant or <br />not. <br /> <br />I don't suspect it is being <br />contemplated, but what happens here <br />is, should the city decide to expand <br />the city hall and create an <br />improvement district and include <br />this property, the city would have <br />the right, according to this <br />document, to vote on our behalf to <br />do that, and we would have no <br />review. <br /> <br />That's correct. That would extend <br />only to the inclusion of the <br />property in a special improvement <br />district. <br /> <br />13 <br /> <br /> <br />