CC MIN 1957 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

431 of the motion since Councilman Spillers did not know the thinking of the Council, that is, at least his, Councilman Granger's, thinking on the matter. They Mayor asked Councilman Spillers to restate his motion. Councilman Spillers moved that this matter be referred to the Planning Commission.to b e given reconsideration towards subdivision of two lots, seconded by Councilman Herkner who stated that he was seconded the motion due to the fact that it will be eventually in an R-3 district. The motion carried on roll call, Councilman E, • Weiss being noted absent. RESOLUTION OF PRELIMINARY DETERMINATION, KENTFIELD-PALM-VALOTA IMPROVEMENTS. The Clerk read the title of the resolution. Councilman Spillers offered RESOLUTION 2201 BEING THE RESOLUTION OF PRELIMINARY DETERMINATION FOR KENTFIELD-PALM-VALOTA ROAD IMPROVEMENTS AND SETTING THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR APRIL 8th and moved its adoption, seconded by Councilman Herkner. The motion carried on roll call with Councilman Weiss being noted absent. Mr. Lebsack asked the Council to consider the problem of the greenhouse which sits on the right-of-way. This was followed by disussion in which it was agreed that there wasn't much the Council could do at this time. They could only advise the owner of the greenhouse that the portion lying on'.the right-of-way-would have to be moved, and, if everything went according to schedule and there wasn't any changes if the plans, the building.would have to be altered within 60 or 90 days. SALES TAX, REQUEST FOR ORDINANCE REPEALING PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACT ON. The Mayor stated that a request had been made that the Council adopt an ordinance providing for an election in regard to the local mn-uniform sales tax and. suspending the existing tax pending such election; the ordinance to b ecome effective immediately upon.approval. This was followed by disussion. Mr. Lebsack spoke an the subject and stated that, if the . proposed ordinance were adopted, Mr. Davies would not file the petitions. The Mayor asked Mr. Davies to make a statement that the petitions would not be filed. Mr. Davies stated that, in essence, if the Council adopted this proposed ordinance it will have the same effect that the petition called for, and, therefore, there would be no reason to file the petitions and he would see to it that the petitions would not be filed. Councilman Granger asked if Mr. Davies would keep the petitions in custody-at all time. Mr. Davies agreed to this. Councilman Granger also wanted to know if Mr. Davies would have any objections to the petitions being placed in escrow with some title company, Mr. Davies to be the only person allowed to take the petitions out of secrow. Mr. Davies stated that he saw nothing wrong with this suggestion. Councilman Stout stated that the Council passed four• ordinances, two local, one County uniform ordinance and one allocating funds. He stated that he had had an ordinance prepared for introduction at this meeting. This ordinance would, in effect, make the effective date July 1st and would have indicated to the people the Amount of sales.tax collected in actual figures rather then estimates and would also be reflected in the 1957-58 tax bills. If the Countywide ordinance were not in effect by July 1, 1958, the matter would ,,, be submitted to the electors for their decision. The Mayor stated that if the Council goes against the rm proposed ordinance submitted by Mr. Lebsack that the ordinance read by Councilman Stout would be introduced. Councilman Spillers offered the introduction of an ordinance providing.for a sales tax election and suspending the operation of ordinance 8113 and 8144. The Mayor stated that the attorneys would have to get together and draw up the ordinance before the Council voted on the motion._ [:: Mr. Davies was asked to.express his opinion of what they would do about the County-wide sales tax. Mr. Davies stated that he was against the uniform sales tax. He would go along with the peoples wishes if this sales tax should pass a city election. The City Attorney stated that there wasn't anyway the Council could legally prevent the filing of the petitions. He was not implying that Mr. Davies did not or would not keep his word, but he stated the petitions could be filed by any proponent regardless of council action in reference to the proposed ordinance. Mr. James Miller, Rual Myers and James Hummel spoke on the matter of sales tax, some in favor and some against. Mr. Hummel, represent COST, stated that they had circulated