My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 1982 11 03
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
1970-1999 City Council Minutes
>
1982 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 1982 11 03
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:31:20 PM
Creation date
7/8/2009 3:15:29 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
11/3/1982
Original Hardcopy Storage
7C3
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 1982 11 03
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />11/3/82 <br /> <br />Page 11 - <br /> <br />Councilman Cussen <br /> <br />Suggested that the motion be withheld until <br />the Board of Adjustments meeting of November <br />18, 1982. <br /> <br />Councilman Ferrera <br /> <br />Inquired if the Judge rules on the Declaratory <br />Judgement, would that be speedier than if <br />Council decided to seek it? <br />Rautenstarus advised that certainly a suit <br />that is pending before the Court would be <br />ruled on before a later action was filed. <br />Ferrera connnented, as stated in the memo, <br />by requesting a Declaratory Judgement at this <br />time would set us up to seek other issues <br />at different times when there is a conterver- <br />sial issue. It was his feeling we could be <br />going to Court every few months; also, felt <br />that as members of the Council they should <br />be making some decisions, such as what fits <br />the zoning or what doesn't. Reiterated that <br />as elected officials they should make the <br />decision on what the ordinances state, <br />therefore felt that the citizens did not ex- <br />pect Court action each time there was a con- <br />Eroversy and pay additional Attorney fees <br />for this. It was his opinion Declaratory <br />Judgement should not be sought at this time <br />as it would be required of every special <br />interest group that comes before Council. <br /> <br />Councilman Fauson <br /> <br />Agreed with Councilman Ferrera that a precedent <br />would be set and wished clarification why <br />Council would seek a Declaratory Judgement <br />at this time. He too felt this was the respon- <br />sibility of Council to make the decision. <br />Remarked that our Planning Director, Mr. Rupp <br />was very well qualified, as well as City <br />Attorney Rautenstraus as a legal advisor; <br />therefore felt there was not sufficient reason <br />to seek the Declaratory Judgement. He was <br />of the opinion that the MCIC group should seek <br />this action. <br /> <br />Councilman Cussen <br /> <br />Commented in response to dealing with a special <br />interest group, and it was his feeling that <br />they were dealing with such a group and citizens <br />of this City and there are a great number of <br />them, who have said they see this as a conflict. <br />As long as there is some ambiguity to this he <br />felt counc,ilmembers had a duty and responsi- <br />bility and do have to make that decision. He <br />stated he didn't want to go to Court over <br />everyone of thE~ decisions or ordinances, but <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.