My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2004-06-07
Public Access
>
City Council Minutes
>
2004
>
2004-06-07
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/6/2004 2:50:15 PM
Creation date
8/24/2004 11:46:02 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Council Meeting
Supplemental fields
Minutes - Date
6/7/2004
SESSIONNUM
1923
TYPE
REGULAR
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
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
Session 1923 <br />June 7, 2004 <br /> <br />sent to all persons who sent form letters. <br /> <br />Mr. Sharpe agreed that a written communication should be sent to The Loop owners. He <br />saw their charges as misinformation rather than insults, and felt it should be stated to <br />them that their information is incorrect, and it should be sent as soon as possible. <br /> <br />Ms. Brungardt agreed with Mr. Wagner and Mr. Sharpe as to the timing of a written <br />response, and expressed that inviting The Loop owners to discuss the matter with the <br />Council is a valuable undertaking, but separate from this particular instance. <br /> <br />Mayor Adams said he is not willing to agree with Mr. Wagner's statement that The Loop <br />owners had false information, because the developer may or may not have <br />misrepresented the facts. He does not agree with attacking The Loop owners for what <br />they may or may not have perceived to be the facts. If anyone should be chastised, <br />perhaps it should be the developer, for misrepresenting the facts, the Mayor added. <br /> <br />Ms. Brot asserted the need to express to The Loop owners that their contributions are <br />valued. The point here is that this issue was not brought before the Council and no <br />member of the Council advocated what the developer represented as being advocated. <br />The Council should not be criticized nor held accountable for perceptions, but the Council <br />has been criticized for something it has not done, and this should be expressed in <br />communication with The Loop owners. She suggested a blending of Mr. Wagner's point <br />with Mayor Adams' points. Mr. Sharpe agreed with Ms. Brot. He wants any letter to affirm <br />that the "Council did not say what some developer said we said." Mr. Wagner reiterated <br />the necessity to stress that The Loop owners were basing their statement upon false <br />premises, and he reiterated the necessity to state this in a return letter. He is willing to <br />send a letter of his own, under his own signature, and to allow other members of the <br />Council to do the same, because he feels very strongly that the Council has been <br />accused of a falsehood. <br /> <br />Ms. Colquitt said she understood that any letter sent needed to be redrafted and done <br />immediately, and if an agreement cannot be reached, then Mr. Wagner would send a <br />letter under his own signature. Mr. Wagner said he would send his own letter tomorrow, <br />since Mayor Adams is not willing to change his position. <br /> <br />Ms. Brungardt went on record as being willing to co-sign Mr. Wagner's letter because she <br />believes in the importance that there be no question as to "the forthright transparency of <br />the Council" and she does not want the Council to be in the public position of not being <br />clear in its response to this particular letter. The misinformation needs to be clarified <br />wholly and without any potential for misinterpretation. <br /> <br />Ms. Brot said that she would sign Councilmember Wagner's letter if he and Mayor Adams <br />cannot agree upon changes to the drafted letter. <br /> <br />Page 8 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.