My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
MAY 9, 1990
Town-of-Mooresville
>
PUBLIC DOCUMENTS ON LINE
>
MINUTES
>
Plan Commission
>
1990-1999
>
1990
>
MAY 9, 1990
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/13/2005 10:12:55 AM
Creation date
5/20/2005 11:50:38 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Plan Commission
NAME
MAY 9, 1990
Plan Commission - Type
Minutes
DATE
1990-05-09
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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).
View images
View plain text
<br />'- <br /> <br />'- <br /> <br />'--- <br /> <br />,.. <br /> <br />12 and 13 of the complaint and felt that since the Plan Commission <br /> <br /> <br />did not unanimously approve the Resolution and Redevelopment Plan <br /> <br />that somehow the minority vote should be reflected. The Board's <br />Attorney advised that the minutes do reflect the vote and comments <br />of all parties. Dave Barry stated that it is not the function of <br />the individuals of the Plan Commission to act but for the Plan <br /> <br />Commission to act as a single body. He further stated that the <br /> <br /> <br />duty to bring out some of these minority views of the Plan <br /> <br /> <br />Commission was up to the plaintiff. He advised that the attorney <br /> <br /> <br />can't present both sides. Lastly, he stated that the Plan <br /> <br /> <br />Commission voted as a body and was proper in their actions so we <br /> <br /> <br />should follow up in defending the lawsuit. The vote was unanimous <br /> <br /> <br />to approve the answer proposed by the attorney. The Board then <br /> <br /> <br />reviewed the Request to Admission with the attorney advising that <br /> <br /> <br />the responses for Admissions 2 - 8 should be consistent with the <br /> <br /> <br />answer. The Admission 1, requesting the Plan Commission to admit <br /> <br />to the residency of Barry N. Nelson and Joe D. Neal in the TIF <br />district was one which the Board needed to either admit or deny. <br />After discussion the Board unanimously agreed to deny this since <br />they did not know the actual residency of these gentlemen. A <br /> <br />motion then was made by Robert Tucker to approve the proposed <br /> <br /> <br />response to Admissions 1 - 8 as summarized: 1 - deny, 2 - admit, 3 <br /> <br /> <br />- deny, 4 -admit,S - admit, 6 - admit, 7 - admit, 8 - admit. <br /> <br /> <br />This was seconded by Dave Barry and unanimously carried. The next <br /> <br /> <br />issue concerned approval of the minutes of the prior meeting. The <br /> <br /> <br />Board's Attorney advised that these had been requested in the <br /> <br /> <br />Motion to Produce; however, since they had not been approved, he <br /> <br />-2- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.