Laserfiche WebLink
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of Council <br />Monday, August 15, 2011 <br />Page 14 <br />Mr. Esborn stated, I thought we discussed it on the floor of Caucus as well, but if it's not in the <br />Minutes. <br />Mr. Marquardt stated, not in the Minutes. It doesn't matter. It would have been after the fact <br />anyhow. <br />Council President Buckholtz stated, I think it went out after the Planning and Development <br />meeting. <br />Mr. Marquardt stated, it wasn't in the Minutes of the Planning and Development meeting either. <br />Mr. Saponaro stated, it may have been dated for the 26th. I don't believe it went out on that date. <br />Mr. Marquardt stated, that's the date. It was signed and dated on that date. <br />Mr. Saponaro stated, we did have a discussion in Caucus. I will look at the Minutes. <br />Mr. Marquardt stated, I looked at the Minutes. It's not in there. <br />Council President Buckholtz stated, you certainly read them close. I take your word for it that <br />they weren't in the Minutes. That would not be correct if it was a binding agreement for sure, but <br />I know how that went down and how we talked about it. It had something to do with the fragile <br />nature of the deal but I know we have already discussed it, that how could $50,000 make that big <br />of a difference on a$4 million to them, but for some reason it does and there was some <br />timeframe issue. <br />Mr. Esborn stated, it certainly doesn't speak to when it was first discussed on the floor. I think <br />the main purpose of the letter was to provide the owner with something for their negotiation <br />process at the time. Again, it doesn't pertain to when it was discussed. <br />Council President Buckholtz stated, if the timing is as you say, then that could have been handled <br />better. <br />Council President Buckholtz asked if there was anything else. There were no other matters <br />before Council. <br />ADJOURNMENT <br />Mrs. Mills, seconded by Mrs. Cinco, made a motion to adjourn. <br />