My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10/17/1995 Meeting Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Minutes
>
1995
>
10/17/1995 Meeting Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/16/2014 8:41:18 AM
Creation date
1/9/2014 9:18:34 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
North Olmsted Legislation
Legislation Date
10/17/1995
Year
1995
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Council Report <br />October 17, 1995 <br />Concealed Weapons Law <br />I have received a letter from Governor Voinovich concerning the <br />proposed concealed weapons law, S.B.68, which I have proposed <br />we object to. The Governor agrees with me on this subject and <br />pointed out several reasons for the defeat of the bill. <br />A. The Ohio Task Force on Gun Violence, through research, <br />found no evidence that a concealed weapons law reduced <br />crime. They concluded there was no reason to change our <br />existing laws. <br />B. S.B. 68 would promote a feeling that Ohio is so unsafe a <br />person needs a gun. <br />C. S.B. 68 would put concealed weapons in the hands of <br />desperate, drunken, crazy and immature people. <br />D. "The idea is a definite change in the idea of standard of living <br />or quality of life. It is a big change, and 1 believe it is a <br />change for the worse. Our standard of living is lowered. Not <br />to say anything about standard of spirituality or standard of <br />human development, with a leaning toward evolving towards <br />diplomacy rather than killing." <br />E. This is contrary to the "alternative dispute resolution" program <br />currently being taught in our school. <br />Land Ownership <br />At the last Town Hall meeting a resident asked tha# the City pass <br />a law requiring that developers own the land they are developing. <br />My response was that if they do not own the land they probably <br />have an option on it. The resident stated she new this was not <br />always the case. I said I would discuss this with our Law Director. <br />In written discussions with Mr. Gareau, neither of us can <br />remember a situation where a developer did not have some legal <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.