Laserfiche WebLink
Tanoue stated that the petition purported to reserve a right to withdraw. On the other hand, the <br />statutes do not explicitly provide for any right to withdraw. At what point does that fight, if it exists, <br />go away. Certainly, after second reading that right must have gone away. At this point, they had <br />already had first reading and there is a legitimate question as to whether that right had already gone <br />away. <br /> <br />Edwards argued that in the original petition it stated that, if they had not executed the amendment <br />to the annexation agreement by November 3, they have the right to withdraw. <br /> <br />Tanoue did not feel that answered the question of when the right to withdraw, if it exists, goes away. <br /> <br />Davidson asked the applicant to make a summary statement. <br /> <br />Edwards wanted Council to postpone this to their next heating, then everything would be cleared up. <br /> <br />Davidson called for anyone else wishing to speak on Ordinance No. 1268. <br /> <br />NONE <br /> <br />Davidson closed the public hearing and called for Council comments. <br /> <br />Davidson asked the City Attorney if the petition for withdrawal had been signed by the City. <br />Tanoue stated that it had not. <br /> <br />Davidson stated that the intent was to have a petition and to act on it right after the election, which <br />is being done here. Since Biella and Menkick went to court twice to deannex, that is clearly what <br />they want, because of not having access to McCaslin Boulevard. <br /> <br />Sisk stated that the City has an IGA with Superior and in good faith with Superior he did not want <br />to take a step backward. <br /> <br />Mayer stated that our IGA is with Superior and when you make an agreement, you keep it. <br /> <br />Lathrop was in favor of tabling this for two weeks and hoping everything comes together. If it does <br />not, then take the next course of action. <br /> <br />Davidson stated that by tabling this, we would be trying to force Superior to annex the land, which <br />is outside of the IGA, and it would add another condition. Louisville is the one at risk on this. <br /> <br />Sisk moved that Council approve Ordinance No. 1268, Series 1997, approving the disconnection of <br />the 80.1 acres from the City of Louisville on second and final reading, seconded by Mayer. Roll call <br />was taken. Motion passed by a 5 - 0 vote with Levihn and Howard being absent. <br /> <br />4 <br /> <br /> <br />