Laserfiche WebLink
Planning and Zoning <br />August 20, 1980 <br />Page Six <br />relative to that decision. <br />• Mr. Prokop made reference to the revocation of the special use permit on <br />Outlot C - he was confused on this action. <br />Mr. Julian Hook, Attorney, pointed out the wording when the special use permit <br />was issued and also pointed out the sections of Ord. #56 that he felt applied <br />to this proposed plat. <br />Mr. Blackbird pointed out that at the time this special use permit was issued <br />Ord. #6 was in effect and that Ord. has no language addressed to quads. There <br />was discussion on the probability of a law suit - Mr. Reinert had discussed <br />this matter with members of the Attroney General's staff and they had told <br />him this Board would be subject to the suit as well as the Council. He re- <br />peated this was his reason for writing to Mr. Locher for a legal opinion on <br />this matter to be put in writing. He felt this is needed to protect this <br />Board from litigation. Mr. Reinert said he had no intention of making a <br />decision on this matter without assurance that this Board has legal coverage. <br />Mr. Reinert repeated his question - is this Board satisfied that what they <br />have before them is adequate? He felt that the persons who felt there is <br />adequate information should be aware that they could be involved in a law <br />suit. <br />Mrs. Schwankl said one of the concerns she has is that two persons sitting <br />on this Board live in the area that's in discussion. She personally feels <br />that it is not proper that these two persons sit on this Board and discuss <br />• this plat. She felt that there is a conflict of interest and they should <br />excuse themselves from this discussion. <br />• <br />Mr. Reinert felt that was a personal judgement and he felt this is something <br />they have to decide on. He did think he had made his decisions based on <br />judgement and documentation. He says t.-a -t is not present -a-t this discussion. <br />l�oCe/nEi'T'4It Si p { , <br />Mr. Bathke thought the primary objective of this Board was to make sure that <br />requests that come before this Board conform to Ordinances. He did not feel <br />it was aat the responsibility of this Board to debate whether this permit is <br />valid not. Mr. Bathke felt this is the province of the Council and this <br />Board is not the proper place to debate this point. He felt this should be <br />considered on the following points; 1) the special use permit is valid per <br />Council action; 2) why is this Board is holding up considering the plat? <br />Mr. Reinert said this point is only hearsay and that was the point of his <br />letter to Mr. Locher - he wanted this in writing. <br />Mr. Hook informed the Board that if he had requested information from the <br />Council and it was not forth coming, he would not do anything on the subject. <br />Mr. Reinert felt that his request was legimate - he will merely following <br />precedent set by the former chairman and he felt this administration had <br />changed the policy and if it is necessary for him to go through the Council <br />or Mayor Gourley, then he will rewrite the letter. <br />Mayor Gourley said the Council has taken their position on this matter and it <br />was agg unanimously and this Board is merely acting on direction from the <br />