My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 1991 04 02
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
1970-1999 City Council Minutes
>
1991 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 1991 04 02
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:31:33 PM
Creation date
6/16/2006 11:38:14 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
4/2/1991
Original Hardcopy Storage
2E3
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 1991 04 02
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
31
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 /> ..,., <br />Howard: Margaret, on the last ballot issue where tolling <br /> was part of the funding packet, where it lost 4 to <br /> 1, I guess the question is, that if we bring this <br /> back up out here, an issue that was clearly voted <br /> against by the people, what chance do we have of <br /> getting the votes that are required to get any <br /> kind of access or any kind of parkway at all. <br /> We're no longer talking about that the people <br /> voted against no highway or our highway, they did <br /> specifically vote against tolling. So I guess I <br /> have a hard time understanding how. It was very <br /> recently, only a couple of years ago, that this <br /> issue was voted strongly against. Bringing it up <br /> again may alienate the very group of voters that <br /> we want to attract. <br />Hornbostel: The first time, when you're talking about tolling <br /> that had more to do with W-470. The last MTDC <br /> package, we had nothing in the package. The roads <br /> that were affected in Boulder County were all <br /> mostly around Boulder on the diagonal and other <br /> places; there was no tolling as part of the MTDC <br /> plan that was something that was in the <br /> legislature that didn't go through, not as a vote <br /> of the people. The tolling that you're talking <br /> about, the tolling in the authority was with the <br /> W-470, and that was voted down. In answer to your <br /> question, I believe, and I believe that's what <br /> most of the governmental officials and this <br /> committee believe, that if we bring that back, at <br /> least in Boulder County, that is definitely a <br /> liability. Particularly if you bring back tolling <br /> and the authority, that it would have a chance of <br /> shooting the whole thing down. What they are <br /> doing right now is leaving their options open, <br /> however, the governance is not an authority, we <br /> have to come up with a committee of the <br /> representatives of the signatories to come up with <br /> a plan as to how the financing is going to <br /> accomplished. That all has to be done, if it gets <br /> past the legislature right now, that all has to be <br /> ready for vote in 92', if it gets through this <br /> session of legislature. The sponsor of the bill, <br /> Bonnie Allison, said that she felt like now there <br /> was a very good chance that this portion would get <br /> through. I think that they have a lot of respect <br /> for the work that has been done in Boulder County <br /> and even though Jefferson County and Arvada are <br /> not a part of the parkway right now, we're <br /> continuing on to try to say that, they're hoping <br /> that if we go in and say, "will you make this a <br /> portion of the Boulder County allocation?" We have <br /> so much allocated per county. You take this <br /> portion of the parkway and that portion of it for <br /> Boulder County. That's where we are right now. <br /> 8 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.