9/5/1989 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

impact, and he believed Alternate #2 is all we should have considered. Nancy Offutt came before the Board. She realized this is not a public hearing on this subject, and basically that is the gist of her comments. She noted that the newspapers treated this much like the Comprehensive Plan in their attempt to get the message across to the public. They have had the routes published in the newspaper repeatedly; they have had public meetings and public hearings; and she knew there has been at least 10 days' grace period time where the public can forward their comments to the DOT. Mrs. Offutt also knew that the Board of Realtors has written to the DOT recommending Alternative #3, and she would suggest that if the Board is going to change their thinking and take a position on an alternate, that they provide more opportu- nity for public discussion on this, especially from those who have a vested interest. She did feel the time the public has been given to express their feelings on this matter is considerable. Carol Johnson, representing Citizens for Progressive Action, informed the Board that their study committee has not come back with any recommendation regarding either alternative yet; however, it is encouraging to see that Mr. Davis has been following this closely with the City as a representative of the county. She believed in the past we have lost projects because of lack of interagency cooperation. Mrs. Johnson felt there is nothing more detrimental to a community than to see governmental agencies interacting negatively and have the community itself in an upheaval, and if the Board has any problem with the City's recommendation, their group would encourage the Board to direct staff to pursue any questions they might have. Commissioner Eggert believed we are being asked now to participate with the state in a purchase for something that really hasn't been finalized. 47