Laserfiche WebLink
Special Council Meeting <br />1/2/95 <br />Page Six <br />Mr. Flynn rather than a ten-year, he would like to see a one-year re-evaluation. Also, he <br />would like to request from the School Board a breakdown of the children attending the <br />Mayfield School District city by city. He would also like to see the School Board, at the <br />end of the year, publish a report and mail it to every resident of Mayfield Village. He <br />has trouble with the Mayor's term "endowment." Companies like Lubrizol have like 3-5 <br />million dollars a year to endow other sources which to me, we are in no position with <br />our encumbrances, to give anybody an endowment. <br />Mr. Basile asked why we are starting in 1995 when Progressive is not fully staffed as <br />yet. <br />Mayor Rinker said the abatement commences in 1995. <br />Mr. Buckholtz said we may or may not be involved in politics in the city in ten years. It <br />is a moot point. <br />Mayor Rinker said a lot of times, people's perceptions drive how they handle <br />something. If someone were to look at this for the first time, ten years from now <br />someone says "oh, by the way--here's the time capsule and pulls out the legislation and <br />they start scrutinizing us." That is a legitimate concern. Is the language in here <br />sufficient to the purpose. He had explained this to Joe and he, in turn, drafted this <br />language and then this is presented to all of you to review. Don't accept it as this has to <br />be the final version. If anything, he would love to be sure that tonight, hopefully, <br />finally, we have gotten the final languages in. He thought we were there a few weeks <br />back. It is ttnfortunate that we did not have a chance to discuss it. We basically held <br />our breath for a few weeks to come back to this point. He thinks if what we are stating <br />is the spirit of this is to promote this program. That we have an idea of what the <br />expenditure is for and that it is going to continue for that fifteen years, barring a <br />negative conclusion. So that is fraught with different conclusions. So if the concern is <br />that should be better defined. <br />Mr. Buckholtz said it is written in sort of a positive way, in saying it will automatically <br />renew, it will automatically continue if there isn't a major complaint. So, it is kind of <br />putting the burden of proof on somebody to prove that it is not. It leaves a lot of room <br />for any kind of personal or political conflicts that could exist in that year, or any <br />animosity or negative publicity over something that has nothing to do with the spirit of <br />this, can enter into the decision making. He feels there needs to be a limiting of what it <br />cannot affect the decision or something--solely based on those funds and that program <br />which it is being used.