03-31-1969 Council Minutes-Special Mtg discussion

Home Browse Search

��' Tape 4 �.>, • Page 3 �'` Whitehead: Mr. Mayor, there apparently is a great deal of confusion, to get off of Fieed's , and go ba.ck to Hork. There is a great deal of confusion over the exact wor�dng, the exact intent pertaining to the package that was presented by Hork, not in relation to your action on Maxwell Ba.y. There is that confusion as to what action was taken as regards to the pac�&.ge that was presented by Hork. The Council certainly can entertain a motion that will rephrase and proper�.y express the intent of the Council, as to what that motion was. Searles: Why don't we Whitehead: I don't think there's any confusion at all on the intent of the Council, but I think that that intent ought to be succinctly verba.lized, and I think that if this is the feeling of the Council that you can do this in a motion to restate the origina.l motion. Searlesc I suggest that you write down a motion for and then read it, instead of . . . . Franzel: Well, the part that I read here, that I have got written down, does that express. . . Searles: It expresses it about Maxwell Ba.y, not Hork? Let's be specgfic about Hork. Whitehead: The problems of Maxwell Bay you can ta.lk about all night� and that's important, because those facts about Maxwell Bayia formed the basis for the Council's action with regard to the Hork package, but you're taking action not on Maxwell Bay, but on Hork's package. Franzela alould this be in line? You know what the intent is , and to mix a little legal ? , could you sketch upbwhat would be a proper motion? I 'i[ anly looking at this to get the legality of this th�ing covered properly Whiteheads It's a matter of fact that you have a request for a marina � �� x application, and a building permit, which we have sta.ted as � , �here was a motion taken in responding to that package. you hav� limited the number of boa.t slips to 64, which is what he had last year, and to �ake no action, or to defer action on the building permit f or one year. Searless This is the intent, really, this expansion, but we said deny. Franzels Well, defer is specifically what I meant in here. Whiteheads I tried to pick that language off the tape, and that seems to be in essence the motion that was made in response to the Hork package. Now if that•s clear, I think we're okay. If there is any clarif ication, I think it should be ma.de now, and I don't mean--you don't have to go over all the facts in the conversation a.bout Maxwell Bay, this was all s�a discussed very thoroughly and forms the basis for the Council's action. The only thing I 'r� saying is that you want to be clear. . . . Franzel: 81ght, this is specifically what I want to accomplish here. Searlesa Well, you think it's clear now, so that in the writing of the minutes of this meeting it can be stated that his application for ezpanded, storage of boats ashore and in the lake was deferred for a year? �c�-•;'.7�`G -----�-- Whiteheads I think that �� be clarified.