Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~ <br /> <br />.~. <br /> <br />'-- <br /> <br />to grow through development in certain needed areas. He also <br /> <br /> <br />advised that other public hearings will be held in determining how <br /> <br /> <br />to specifically use the tax increment. Robert Tucker had some <br /> <br /> <br />questions concerning how and where the monies would be used. The <br /> <br /> <br />Board's Attorney advised that it could only be used ln the area <br /> <br /> <br />shown on the map as the allocation area. Shirley Welker stated <br /> <br /> <br />that she would have felt more comfortable if the Redevelopment <br /> <br /> <br />Plan had stated that it was based upon a proposed plan. She also <br /> <br /> <br />questioned the use of the word "blighted". Dave Kollmeyer advised <br /> <br /> <br />that the Redevelopment Commission was troubled over the need of <br /> <br /> <br />calling the area "blighted" but recognized the need to use this <br /> <br /> <br />word to be in compliance with the law. Bill Abbott stated that he <br /> <br /> <br />had no problems with the wording of the document and felt that it <br /> <br /> <br />was consistent with our current plan. Bill Abbott then moved to <br /> <br /> <br />pass a Declaratory Resolution finding the plan conforms to the <br /> <br /> <br />plan of development of the Town of Mooresville. This was seconded <br /> <br /> <br />by Steve Edwards. Signe Nicholson then stated that the <br /> <br /> <br />Redevelopment Plan refers to the future comprehensive plan and the <br /> <br /> <br />current one shows local business and single family dwellings in <br /> <br /> <br />areas where reference to industrial and general business are <br /> <br /> <br />proposed and for that reason, the plan is inconsistent. The Board <br /> <br /> <br />then proceeded to a vote with Steve Edwards, William Abbott, <br /> <br /> <br />Vernon Kimmel, and Robert Tucker voting in favor of the motion. <br /> <br /> <br />David Barry, Shirley Welker, and Signe Nicholson were opposed to <br /> <br /> <br />the motion. The motion failed for a lack of a quorum and was <br /> <br /> <br />tabled until the next meeting. <br /> <br />-2- <br />