From: Michael S Almon [paradigm@ixks.com]

Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 1:41 PM

To: Paul Patterson

Cc: Sheila Stogsdill; Bobbie Walthall

Subject: Re: 03-28-06 Corrected CC Minutes

 

Sheila Stogsdill wrote:

 

> Paul --

> 

> Please correct and ask Bobbie to repost to CC agenda. Thanks.

> 

> Sheila

 

Hi Paul:

Just curious, will these corrections be made soon, so as to be of any consequence?

 

Thanks for your attention,

Michael Almon

 

> 

> 

> -----Original Message-----

> From: Michael S Almon [mailto:paradigm@ixks.com]

> Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 7:57 AM

> To: Sheila Stogsdill

> Cc: Paul Patterson; Klingenberg, Gwendolyn; Mansur, Beth Anne;

> Grauerholz, James ; Heckler, Richard; Brown, Aaron ; Comstock, Craig ;

> Noever, Rhetta J; Good, Janet; Tomc, Matt

> Subject: 6 June 06 CC agenda Item #9(b) SP-03-27-06

> 

> 

> Hello Sheila:

> Thank you for your comments about how land use conditions might be

> attached to the Salvation Army site plan SP-03-27-06. However, I am

> submitting an addition to your 1 June Staff Report about this item

> (attached herein). While you have discussed the enforceability of such

> conditions and have included the Salvation Army version of such

> conditions, I am astonished that nowhere under Agenda Item #9(b) have

> you included the Neighborhood Coalition proposal for such site plan

> conditions. Instead, an untitled version is buried in the "rezoning"

> part of #9(a) under the generic caption of "correspondence".

> 

> The Salvation Army proposal is a nine-item list of "commitments" that

> are legally quite non-specific and contain no periodic review

> provisions. The Eastside Neighborhood Coalition proposal includes a

> nine-item list of legally worded use activities, specific time

> constraints and surrogate UPR review and revocation provisions, and

> definitions of terminology.

> 

> Both proposals were discussed at the 3 May 2006 negotiation session

> between the Salvation Army and the Eastside Neighborhood Coalition.

> Both proposals are on the table. To avoid the appearance of favoritism

> towards the Salvation Army, I think you would be wise to present both

> proposals in the City Commission agenda on equal footing: that is

> equally identified, equally accessible , and equally referenced and

> evaluated in your Staff Report.

> 

> Please revise your staff report accordingly, and include as

> "Attachment B" the "Neighborhood Coalition Proposed Site Plan

> Conditions", or at the

> 

> very least, make it an identified item under Agenda Item #9(b) along

> with the other site plan attachments.

> 

> Also, please include this e-mail as an attachment under Agenda Item

> #9(b).

> 

> thanks so much for your work,

> Michael Almon

> 

> 

> 

> 

> Subject: 03-28-06 Corrected CC Minutes

> 

> 

> Hello again Sheila:

> Please include the corrected minutes of the City Commission from 28

> March 2006 under Agenda Item #9(a) for the 6 June 2006 meeting agenda

> (attached herein).

> 

> The attached "Excerpt from the City Commission Minutes dated 3/28/06"

> include my comments made that evening regarding initiation of rezoning

> of the Salvation Army property. Your currently posted minutes excluded

> my comments, though part of the official minutes.

> 

> Please correct the 03-28-06 Minutes accordingly, and include under

> Agenda Item #9(a) as posted for next Tuesday's agenda, 6 June 2006.

> 

> Thanks again,

> Michael Almon