02-18-1982 CC MIN - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Council Minutes February 18. 1982 Page Four being bound or directed by the precedent established. The City Administrator suggested that the City Council consider changing the ordinance rather than bending or working around the present ordinance in effect. The Administrator explained that if the ordinance were in fact a problem. that changing the or- dinance would be a better solution than creating problems in the future in other situations by bending the ordinance. After additional general discussion on the problem posed by Mr. Dickenson's situation and the Council's desire to assist Mr. Dickenson if possible. the motion to deny was voted upon. MOTION PASSED 3-2. COUNCILMAN> TOTH AND COUNCILMAN DUITSMAN OPPOSED. COUNCILMAN TOTH MOVED TO REFER THE QUESTION OF ALTERING THE NONCONFORMING USE SECTION OF THE CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE. TO ADDRESS THE PROBLEM POSED BYMR. DICKENSON AND OTHER RELATED BUSINESSES. TO THE DEPARTMENT OPERATIONS COMMIT- TEE OF THE CITY COUNCIL WITH THE INTENT THAT LANGUAGE BE DRAFTED FOR PRESENTA- TION TO THE PLANNING' COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL FOR THEIR CONSIDERATION. COUNCILMAN DUITSMAN SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. 7. Al-Lan/Alltoollndustrial Revenue Bond Request Mayor Hinkle briefly explained the Alltool request for an industrial revenue bond for the benefit of those individuals in the audience. Mayor Hinkle formally de- clared the public hearing open and asked for any comments for or against the in- dustrial revenue bond. There being no persons wishing to address the Council. Mayor Hinkle closed the public hearing and asked the City Council for their com- ments. The City Administrator indicated that a copy of the preliminary resolution had been distributed for the Council's review with one addition suggested by the City Attorney. The additional clause will enable the City to withdraw from the industrial bond process if in fact a problem or an unknown factor developed at a later date. The Administrator indicated that this clause was particularly im- portant. inasmuch as the analysis of the Alltool financial statement had not yet been completed by Springsted. Inc. The Administrator indicated further that if there was a problem that developed as a result of Springsted'sreview. it would be brought to the Council's attention. Councilman Duitsman questioned why the statements presented were unaudited. Mr. Earl Hendricks. the CPA for Alltool. Inc.. indicated that the company is financially strong and had not yet needed an audited statement. Mr. Hendricks also cited the expense of preparing audited figures and indicat.ed that the anal- ysis presented should be adequate and serve the needs expressed by the City. Councilman Duitsman asked that when Springsted's analysis was complete. that a representative come to the City Council meeting to discuss their findings with the Councilmembers. COUNCILMAN ENGSTROM MOVED APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION 82-2. AS AMENDED. GIVING PRELIM- INARY APPROVAL TO AN INDUSTRIAL REVENUE BOND ISSUE FORAL:....LAN/ALLTOOL. INC. COUNCILMAN DUITSMAN SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 5-0.