My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Agenda and Packet 1982 11 16
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
AGENDAS & PACKETS (45.010)
>
1973-1989 City Council Agendas and Packets
>
1982 City Council Agendas and Packets
>
City Council Agenda and Packet 1982 11 16
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 1:46:50 PM
Creation date
12/29/2009 12:08:54 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Packet
Signed Date
11/16/1982
Supplemental fields
Test
CCAGPKT 1982 11 16
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
59
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
11/3/82 Page -10- <br /> Board of Adjustments Attorney Rautenstraus advised this meeting <br /> Neodata - Nov. 18, 1982 was scheduled for November 18, 1982 at 7 :00 P.N. <br /> Councilman Leary Commented that he felt fairly strongly that <br /> as a member of the Council he was required to <br /> uphold the ordinance of the City; however <br /> there is a question on the matter and it <br /> has become an issue of time, now He felt <br /> that the City should seek the Declaratory Judge- <br /> ment when the time is appropriate. He would <br /> question taking the motion off the table until <br /> the Court ruling has been made. Wished to <br /> make a motion that the Court be asked to ex- <br /> pedite their decision on this case. <br /> Councilwoman Morris Wished to clarify that the property owners <br /> are not asking for a Declaratory Judgement <br /> they are asking for dismissal of the current <br /> suit. <br /> Rautenstraus said this was correct . <br /> She then inquired if we had to wait for <br /> that to be done before we could request a <br /> Declaratory Judgement, if that is what Council <br /> decided to do? <br /> Rautenstraus suggested that if there is a <br /> pending action requesting a Declaratory Judgement, <br /> which he felt there was at this time, for us <br /> to file another action basically on the same <br /> issue might not make much sense. <br /> Councilwoman Morris then asked, when the Judge <br /> makes a final determination regarding the pend- <br /> ing MCIC suit , would that also then in turn <br /> take care of the property owners request, or <br /> is it two separate issues that are being dealt <br /> with now? <br /> Rautenstraus advised, yes it would, that is <br /> what the judge would be ruling. He would be <br /> ruling on the property owners motion to clarify <br /> decision. <br /> Morris then stated she would support Council- <br /> man Leary's motion that the Judge expedite <br /> this matter. <br /> Councilman Cussen Commented that until such time as the ruling <br /> is expedited he would like to consider recalling <br /> the building permits . <br /> WAS <br /> Councilman Cummings Inquired if it/legally within the right of <br /> Neodata to apply for the building permit. <br /> Rautenstraus advised they have applied and <br /> it has been issued. Pending the Board of <br /> Adjustments hearing, however, it was his <br /> feeling they would not be proceeding. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.