Laserfiche WebLink
cutting. Both require weeds to be cut to a <br />certain length. The existing ordinance states <br />that anyone that owns property in the City of <br />Louisville is responsible for cutting their weeds <br />and the City of Louisville is a land owner by all <br />legal definitions. <br />Leary moved that council direct the City Attorney <br />draft this ordinance for first reading at the next <br />council meeting and at that time put it out for <br />publication as an ordinance. Cussen seconded, and <br />the motion was carried unanimously. <br />ANNEXATION <br />PETITION The second petition directs the City Council to <br />annex and zone certain property located east of <br />Highway 42 which is not currently annexed to the <br />City. Rautenstraus related some general <br />statements in the State Statutes with regard to <br />actions that can be taken on initiative petitions. <br />These options are 1) adopting the ordinance as <br />proposed, 2) set an election with the election <br />taking place between 60 and 150 days after said <br />petition is filed, 3) state that the matter is <br />inappropriate for initiative and therefore, would <br />not be something that would fall into that <br />statute. <br />Leary moved that the ordinance identified in this <br />petition be set for an election on Tuesday, March <br />19, 1985. Cussen seconded. The motion was <br />carried unanimously. <br />Morris related concerns that the property owners <br />themselves were not requesting annexation and if <br />in fact the proposal goes through, what the legal <br />ramifications would be. These questions according <br />to Rautenstraus should be addressed after said <br />election. The Colorado Supreme Court has stated <br />that the right to the election itself seems to be <br />paramount and then at that time the rights of the <br />property owners can be determined. <br />AQUARIOUS WATER <br />RIGHTS Hundley referred to a memo that Council received <br />as part of their packet and asked them to direct <br />any questions to the City's Water Attorney, <br />Stephen Williamson. Williamson gave Council <br />background in the issue and indicated that Brock <br />is dissatisfied with the way the City is handling <br />the water rights and has requested that Council <br />take action. If it is not resolved, Brock has <br />intention to consider litigation. <br />4 <br />