My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
res_7499
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Resolutions
>
07xxx
>
7400
>
res_7499
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 9:17:34 AM
Creation date
4/25/2005 12:15:42 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Resolutions
Resolution #
7499
Resolution Title
Rescinding Resolution No. 7489 Ordering the Construction of Improvement No. P-83-3
Resolution Date Passed
4/11/1983
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />COUNCILMAN CURLEY: (Inaudible) inasmuch as I voted yes <br />when the original petition came in for a feasibility report <br />with approximately 53% of the people signing for it - I voted <br />for it and we had a feasibility report prepared. I have not <br />been able to vote for it or against it and I wasn't able to <br />vote to reconsider it because I was not here - I was out of <br />town (inaudible) express my feelings tonight. As a Councilman, <br />I would love to see every street in Roseville in good shape, <br />but inasmuch as our present policy says that a street improve- <br />ment has to come from the people - it's initiated by the <br />people, not by the City Council - then the people involved, I <br />think we should listen to them because you are the ones telling <br />us that you either want it or you don't want it. I'm real <br />sorry (inaudible) friction and hard feelings between the <br />neighbors. I think that's too bad and I'm sorry I can't help <br />it. If the first petition would have come in (inaudible) or <br />63% (inaudible) I wouldn't even have voted for it to have a <br />feasibility report so why should I vote for it now? I think <br />I'm making an informed judgment because I've been informed by <br />the majority of these people that they don't want it and I'll <br />vote against it. <br /> <br />COUNCILMAN FRANKE: I realize that it's not going to do <br />any good, but I would still like to say my piece. It looks <br />like it's the women against the men (inaudible). I've heard <br />a lot of eloquence expressed tonight, but I would have to say <br />that once a petition comes in, once the Council has the <br />hearing and we make an informed judgment - the petition came <br />in (inaudible) we had a hearing. We heard tonight from the <br />young lady who took the petition around - she's sincere, she <br />spoke the last time we were here - I have every reason to <br />believe that the people were informed about what they were <br />signing. We had eight or nine other improvements that night. <br />Other people had signed petitions - they were (inaudible) the <br />same way she was and there was no problem. Something <br />happened along the way. Some one, two people (inaudible) <br />along the street and so they decided to make statements. The <br />situation becomes (inaudible). It's (inaudible) homeowner <br />aqainst homeowner or family against family or children <br />asainst children and then we have to sit up here and become <br />an arbitrator. It's a no-win situation, but I feel that when <br />the petition first came in, it was in order, there was a <br />proper hearing (inaudible) every decision we make, this <br />would go on forever. We've had one in the last couple of <br />years - this is the second one. I, for one, do not want the <br />precedent to go any further. I felt it was a good decision, <br />I feel it should be honored and I will not vote in favor to <br />reconsider it or retract it. <br /> <br />Councilman Kehr then introduced the following resolution <br />and moved its adoption: <br /> <br />-13- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.