03-31-1969 Council Minutes-Special Mtg discussion

Home Browse Search

• �Z�'-�� Tape 4 , . page 5 �' � Searless In fact, there was a question that somebody raised on the first one, too, and I think for the record it should be clarified, but why don' t we �a.ke a roll call. . . . Whiteheads What I want to say is that the language of the first motion was to limit the boat slips to last year, and no building permit. There was talk about defer and deny, but the actual lanquage of the motian was no building permit, and no reference to defer`'��Bd'�deny� if that is importa.nt. This motion clarified specifically. . . . Searless My intention is to defer Butterfield: maybe we could come up with a little different language here still on a chance that you add building permit as applied for. Searles: I would accept that, yes. It's the only building permit that we 're acting on Butterfield: I know, but not defer any building permit, but this 4�i��e.�sThat's all we can act on, because that's all that's here Whiteheads (something about f ormal motion) Searles: Just as well add it to this one here , to clarify that? , . . This is all right with me, I 'll add the phrase �t" building permit as applied for�� to that past motion, and I would so move that that be added. Mayor: Second on that. Stubbsa Second. Mayors Moved and seconded. All those in favor say aye (ayes ) Contrary? (NONE) S tubbss I think that's an excellent point. It seems like he could 3ust han� us on this one� if we didn't have this in there. . . Searles: Well, there 's a lot of legal nitpick that goes on, and thishas nothing to do with the intentions. Stubbs : �'Pe sho��ld have it clearly understand that we aren' t going to give him a building to use for boats . Someone : You' re merely deferring, you ' re not doing anything else . Searles : This is the intention anyway, as far as I 'm concerned. (Reporter comes forward to ask for roll call votes on motions) More discussion on motions (who voted for what and when) � ��'� L;,�-� c��. ��`�L �-��> � �.