City Council Minutes 2007 10 02 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Council Meeting Minutes October 2, 2007 Page 6 of 12 Boulder County. He stated if' Ballot Issue 2A passes, it will have significant impacts on the development Environment in the City of Louisville. Resolution No. 52 affirmatively makes the folllowing statements derived from the urban renewal plan documentation: • The LRC cannot make any expenditure that has not been previously approved by the Louisville City Council. • The LRC cannot independently establish any tax increment financing plan, whether through property or sales tax, or any other form of tax • The LRC has no land use approval authority for the urban renewal area. • One elected official, M;ayc~r Sisk is a member of the LRC Commission. PUBLIC COMMENT Susan Morris, 939 W. Maple Court, Louisville, CO spoke in opposition of Resolution No. 52, stating it is inappropriate for a City Council to take issue with a citizen initiative. She felt Council should allow the citizens to vote on Ballot Issue 2A and urged Council to vote no on Resolution No. 52. John Leary, 1116 La Farge Avenue, Louisville, CO opposed Resolution No. 52 and stated it is wrong for Council to use taxpayers' money to sway electors to vote one way or another on a ballot issue. He noted the Resolution states the proponents have misled the ~-ublic, which he interpreted as the proponents lied to the public. He urged Council to take the resolution off the table. Don Atwood, 298 S. Taft Court, Louisville, CO stated Resolution No. 52 has two fatal flaws; intent and context. He stated the Resolution accuses the proponents of the initiative of lying. He urged Council to deny Resolution No. 52. Michael Menaker, 1827 Choke Cherry Court, Louisville, CO disagreed with Mr. Leary and Mr. Atwood and outlined the discrepancies in the initiative and stated the information is misleading. He stated all provisions of the initiative had been met. He urged Council to pass Resolution No. 52. Gary Baxley, 319 W. Hawthorn Court, Louisville, CO stated Resolution No. 52 is disrespectful to the citizens o~f the City of Louisville who signed the initiative petition. He explained those citizens who signed the petition had an opportunity to review the petition before signing it. He noted the Mayor and City Council are not always correct in knowing what kind of a City the citizen's want. He urged Council to deny Resolution No.:i2. Randy Luallin, 301 East Street, Louisville, CO stated the people will, can and must decide for themselves. He stated representatives are not to influence the people rather they are to be open and receptive to the people. He felt it is wrong