City Council Minutes 1999 06 15 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Approval of Bills Approval of Minutes (3/16/99) Approval of Boulder Regional Emergency Telephone Service Authority Budget Appointment to Louisville Recycling Conservation Advisory Board Acceptance of Colorado Parks & Recreation Association Tree Grant PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA Pat Hornbostel, 655 W Hawhtom Street, Louisville, Colorado, read the following statement: The City of Louisville had 543 curbs that needed to be replaced to comply and provide access with the Americans with Disabilities Act. My understanding is that about 280 curbs have been completed to date. This should have been the last year for funding curb replacement, instead, we have about 250 left to replace. The projected amount for the fiscal year 2000 budget is $115,000. Due to the slippage that has occurred in the work schedule, I would like to see the remainder of curb cuts funded in the fiscal year 2001 budget. This represents a one-year extension in the timetable proposed by the City in'1994. After talking with the Mayor and Councilmember Mayer, I would also suggest that the Mayor's ADA Advisory Committee be informed of the exact number and location of the curb cuts remaining and when they are to be replaced. Davidson replied that he will ask for the ADA Advisory Committee to reconvene and review the status of where the City is versus the plan. Jay Berger, 1016 Main Street, Louisville, Colorado, stated that he intended to speak on a different issue but was appalled by Council's discussion on Agenda Item H, therefore, he wanted to address that issue also. He explained that Louisville citizens are in attendance at tonight's meeting to participate in the discussion for this issue. He questioned Council's actions of voting to remove the item from the Agenda without allowing for public comment. Berger stated that he is aware of several individuals who are planning to arrive later in the Council meeting in order to participate in the public comments on this issue. He stated that these individuals will be disappointed to discover that Council has usurped part of the public's role in this issue. Berger stated that Council participated in a discussion about the issue, and the discussion is probably the same one that Council would have had, only it was without public comment. He stated that this was disgraceful. He agreed with Mayer and Sisk that Council would be judged by their actions on this issue. He expressed his disappointment with the three Councilmembers who voted for removing the item from the Agenda and for refusing to allow public comment on the issue. He stated that he believes that Mayer and Sisk were simply asking for direction to discuss the issue and to hear public comments. He questioned Council's decision to provide direction without public comments and without an Agenda Item, as it was neither proper nor correct. Berger stated that at the May 5, 1999 City Council meeting, he asked the City Council to consider adopting an ordinance or legislation that would require development in sensitive 4