[00:00:16]
AND MY WIFE OR WITH A BRAND BY REVEREND MIKE REGISTER OVER RIVERSIDE, THE UNITED METHODIST CHURCH GOT A SPRAY PRECIOUS, AND HOLY FATHER, WE DO THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME TOGETHER, TO CARRY ON THE BUSINESS OF THEIR CITY.
AND YOU HAVE CHOSEN AS LEADERS AND FATHER, WE PRAY YOUR RICHEST BLESSINGS UPON EACH ONE.
FATHER, WE PRAY THAT YOU WILL GIVE THEM THE WISDOM THAT THEY NEED TO GO ABOUT WITH FAIR AND IMPARTIAL JUDGMENT UPON ALL OF THE MATTERS OF BASIS THAT WILL PERTAIN TO THEIR CITY FATHER.
WE PRAY THAT YOU WILL BLESS THIS CITY, THAT IT MAY BE A PLACE OF PEACE, A PLACE OF HARMONY, AND THAT PEOPLE CAN WORSHIP WORK AND LOVE ONE ANOTHER FATHER.
WE DO PRAISE YOU BECAUSE YOU'RE WHO YOU SAY YOU ARE.
YOU'RE THE KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.
WE THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO LIFT UP THAT BEAUTIFUL NAME OF JESUS, WHO IT'S IN HIS PRECIOUS NAME THAT WE PRAY.
FIRST THING YOU HAVE IS THE PRESERVATION WEEK PRESENTATION BY MR. NANCE STONE.
GOOD EVENING, MAYOR FORD, SHORTEST PRESENTATION A WEEK PRESENTATION.
I'M SURE YOU'VE EVER SEEN, BUT I DID WANT TO TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO RECOGNIZE NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION WEEK.
UH, THIS WEEK IS SPONSORED BY THE NATIONAL TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION.
UH, THE THEME FOR THIS YEAR IS PROTECTING THE IRREPLACEABLE AND I PASSED OUT SOME PHOTOGRAPHS TO YOU ALL.
SO THE FOLKS AT HOME, HOPEFULLY FOLKS OUT IN THE AUDIENCE CAN SEE, AND THESE ARE A COUPLE OF STRUCTURES THAT WE LOST IN THE 1960S.
THE FIRST A LOT OF YOU WILL REMEMBER IS THE QUEEN ANNE HOTEL.
AND IT WAS DEMOLISHED IN 1960 IN THE 1960S.
AND THEN THE SECOND WAS THE HUGE, HUGE STUART HOUSE.
IT WAS ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF POLLOCK AND CRAVEN RIGHT OUT HERE WHERE OUR CITY PARKING LOT IS THIS WONDERFUL VICTORIAN HOMES ALSO DEMOLISHED IN THE 1960S.
SO THAT KIND OF, I THINK, ILLUSTRATES WHAT THE THING PROTECTING THE IRREPLACEABLE.
AND THESE ARE THE KINDS OF THINGS THAT GOT THE PRESERVATION MOVEMENT GOING IN THIS CITY AND A LOT OF CITIES ACROSS THIS COUNTRY.
UM, THESE PHOTOS ARE JUST TWO EXAMPLES OF WHY PRESERVATION IS SO IMPORTANT.
AND IF YOU CAN JUST IMAGINE THE POSSIBILITIES OF THOSE STRUCTURES TODAY AND HOW BRAND THAT WOULD BE, UM, ENCLOSED IN YOUR PACKETS OR COPIES OF A PROCLAMATION THAT THE MAYOR WAS GRACIOUS ENOUGH TO SIGN FORCE AND OBSERVANCE OF THIS SPECIAL CASE.
THE PROBLEM IS NATION STATES THAT THE ACT OF PRESERVATION CONTRIBUTES TO THE ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL WELLBEING OF NEWBURN AND COMMUNITIES ACROSS THE NATION.
NEWBURN IS VERY FORTUNATE TO HAVE THREE HISTORIC DISTRICTS.
WE HAVE THE DOWNTOWN HISTORIC DISTRICT.
WE HAD THE RIVERSIDE DISTRICT AND THE CAMPED AGAIN, DISTRICT, UH, BEING ON THE NATIONAL REGISTER, BRINGS US A LOT OF ADVANTAGES.
ONE FOR THE PROPERTY OWNERS MAKES THEM ELIGIBLE FOR TAX CREDITS, WHICH THERE ARE PROJECTS GOING ON IN THE DOWNTOWN AND AROUND CITY THAT PROPERTY OWNERS ARE BENEFITING FROM THAT THOSE TAX CREDITS.
AND THOSE ARE TAX CREDITS ON INCOME PRODUCING PROPERTIES AND NON-INCOME PRODUCING PROPERTY.
SO THAT IS CERTAINLY A BENEFIT TO OUR RESIDENTS.
UM, AND COLIN BARNETT'S 1986, THE IMPACT BOOK OF THE IMPACT ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION ON NEWBORN.
HE IDENTIFIED BENEFITS OF PRESERVATION.
I THINK THEY'RE OBVIOUS TO A LOT OF US, BUT SOME OF THE BIG THINGS WERE THE POSITIVE EFFECTS ON THE JOB MARKET.
THE INCREASES IN PROPERTY VALUES, WHICH QUITE TAX BASE, MINIMAL IMPACT, UM, UH, PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE.
AND OF COURSE WE ALL KNOW THE IMPORTANCE OF TOURISM TO NEWBURN, BUT THE BOTTOM LINE.
AND I THINK THE MOST IMPORTANT THING, AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT ALDERMAN PARK HIM POINTED OUT AT THE HPC MEETING THE OTHER NIGHT IS THE PARTNERSHIPS THAT HAVE COME OUT OF THE PRESERVATION MOVEMENT.
[00:05:01]
THE PARTNERSHIPS THAT HAVE MADE THIS TOWN AT THE VIBRANT GROWING CITY THAT IT IS.AND I'D LIKE JUST TO TAKE THIS TIME TO COMMEND THE VARIOUS ORGANIZATIONS THAT HAVE WORKED TOGETHER IN ORDER TO MAKE NEWBURN, THE GYM THAT WE HAVE.
AND THERE ARE ORGANIZATIONS LIKE THE HISTORICAL SOCIETY.
I THINK THEY'RE KIND OF THE BASE THAT STARTED A LOT OF THE MOVEMENT.
UH, THE PRESERVATION FOUNDATION WAS BORN OUT OF THOSE SWISS BEAR, WHICH HAS DONE A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT FOR THE COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS.
UM, THE, THE DOWNTOWN BUSINESS OWNERS, THE DOWNTOWN HOMEOWNERS AND THIS BOARD OF ALDERMAN OF COURSE, NEEDS TO BE COMMENDED FOR THEIR CONTINUED FUNDING THROUGH STAFFING AND OTHER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS THAT, THAT HELP, UH, NEWBORN BE THE PLACE THAT WE ALL THAT I GREW UP, THAT WE ALL LOVE TO LIVE AND WORK AND PLAY.
AND SO I JUST WANNA THANK Y'ALL AND, UM, HELP, UH, EVERYBODY, UM, TAKE SOME TIME TO APPRECIATE THE THINGS THAT PRESERVATION HAS DONE FOR THE TOWN OF NEWBORN THIS WEEK.
AND I'D LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION.
AND I HONESTLY LIKE TO THANK THE CITIZENS OF NEWARK FOR ALLOWING THE BOARD TO SUPPORT IT, BECAUSE MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT'S NOT TRUE.
THEY DON'T, UH, YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE SOME SERIOUS PROBLEMS IN TRYING TO KEEP UP THE HISTORICAL THINGS THAT THEY HAVE AS YOU AND I WERE DISCUSSING A LITTLE BIT BEFORE THE MEETING.
A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T KNOW THE HISTORY OF NEWBURN.
I DON'T KNOW AS MUCH OF IT AS I WANT TO BECAUSE I WANT TO KNOW ALL OF IT, BUT I KNOW A LITTLE OF IT.
AND A LITTLE OF IT IS THAT NEWBURN TRULY HAS BEEN SEVERAL CITIES IN ITS LIFE SPAN.
IT WAS ONCE THEY ATHENS OR MOBILE CAROLINA HAD THE BIG FIRE AND WENT BACKWARDS FOR QUITE AWHILE AND, UH, REVITALIZED AGAIN OVER THE LAST, I DON'T KNOW, 15, 20 YEARS PROBABLY.
AND, UH, YOU KNOW, IT'LL BE UP TO THE FUTURE GENERATIONS TO KEEP IT AND IMPROVE ON IT.
AND, UH, IT'S PRETTY INTERESTING WHEN I SPOKE TO THE BUYER, UH, BURN HERE IN 96 TO CELEBRATE THE HUNDREDTH, UH, PASSING OF THE 96 WHEN THEY GAVE US THAT FLAG 1896.
AND I TOLD THAT AUDIENCE IT, AT THE TIME, THE NEW BRIDGE WAS GOING UP NOWHERE NEAR AS BLATANTLY NEAR COMPLETION AS IT IS NOW, BUT IT WAS A STRANGE AND EERIE FEELING TO THINK THAT WHEN THE MAYOR, HOPEFULLY A HUNDRED YEARS FROM NOW COMES OVER AND MEETS WHOEVER THEY MAY OR MAY BE, WHO KNOWS IT WON'T BE ME.
THAT'S FOR SURE THAT THAT BRIDGE WILL BE AN ANTIQUE.
AND SEE, THE THING IS THAT YOU HAVE TO APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT AS SOME OF US WHO WERE COMING UP AS KIDS AT THE TIME, YOU KNOW, LOOK, THERE'S A LOT OF THIS STUFF IS JUST OLD HOUSES.
SO YOU REALLY HAVE TO HAVE AN APPRECIATION.
AND I THINK IN THE CITY OF NEW HAVEN, THAT THAT APPRECIATION HAS BECOME A PUBLIC ACKNOWLEDGEMENT BY EVERYBODY LIVES HERE, THE ONES THAT HAVE COME HERE AND THE ONES THAT LIVE HERE.
AND SO THAT'S REALLY GOING TO ENSURE, I THINK THAT THINGS WILL BE PRESERVED ON AND ON NOW.
SO APPRECIATE THE JOB YOU ALL HAVE DONE, AND ALL THE DIFFERENT ORGANIZATIONS HAVE DONE AND THE TAXPAYERS FOR LETTING US SUPPORT ANYBODY ELSE WANT TO MAKE ANY COMMENTS.
WELL, I THINK IT'S GREAT THAT IT WAS MORE, REALLY A PEOPLE'S PROJECT THAN IT WAS THE CITY BOARD.
AND ALL WE DID WAS DO A LITTLE FUNDING.
WE FUNDED AND FAN WHILE THEY DID THE WORK FOR MOST DEPARTMENTS OF MOST OF IT.
AND, UH, THAT MAKES IT SPECIAL.
UH, JOHNNY, DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE STATUS IS ON THE OLD SLAVE QUARTERS THAT THEY'RE RENOVATING IN JAMES CITY? ARE THEY STILL WORKING ON THEY'RE WORKING ON THAT AT THIS TIME? AND THEY'VE GOTTA BE A NICE ADDITION TO THE CITY'S HISTORY WHEN THAT'S FINISHED TOO.
AND THERE ARE A LOT OF SMALL HOUSES.
WE THINK THAT THE BIG HOUSE IS LIKE THIS, BUT THERE ARE A LOT OF SMALL HOUSES RIGHT NOW THAT ARE JUST WAITING.
THE ONE THING THAT I WISH IS THAT THE OLDEST HOUSE IN NEWBURN WAS OUT WHERE IT WAS.
WELL, I GUESS IT IS SEEN BY A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO GO INTO THE ATMORE OLIVER HOUSE, BUT BEING BEHIND THERE, YOU KNOW, UNLESS YOU GO UP TO THE, UH, REAR ENTRANCE UP OF THE ATMORE OLIVER HOUSE, YOU DON'T REALIZE THAT THE OLDEST HOUSE IN NEWBURG IS THE BRICK HOUSE THAT'S SITTING THERE AND USE THIS OFFICE, BUT I'LL BET IS PAYING FOR IT.
ALRIGHT, APPRECIATE THE PRESENTATION.
NEXT THING WE HAVE IS REQUEST AND PETITION OF CITIZENS.
AND I SEE MR. BAXTER'S UP HERE AGAIN.
UH, ONE MIGHT SAY SEEKING SATISFACTION, SO COME
[00:10:01]
FORTH.I KNOW YOU ALL LOVE TO GET PAPER
I'M GOING TO, I SPOKE TO YOU ALL ABOUT THIS A COUPLE OF MEETINGS AGO AND IS OUR CALL, OF COURSE, YOU ALL REFERRED IT TO THE CITY MANAGER TO HAVE HIM REVISIT THE ISSUE AND, AND DECIDED DR.
WEBB COULD BE GIVEN SOME CONSIDERATION ON THE LOWER ORDER TAT FEES FOR COPPERFIELD APARTMENTS.
UNFORTUNATELY, UH, MR. DEPARTMENT DECIDED NOT TO CHANGE HIS POSITION ON THE MATTER AND NOTIFIED US THE OTHER DAY.
SO WE ASKED IF WE COULD BE BACK ON THE AGENDA TO, AGAIN, PRESENT TO THE BOARD DR.
I'LL TRY TO JUST REVIEW BRIEFLY THE FACTS AS I UNDERSTAND THEM AND NOT GO TO THEM AGAIN, BECAUSE I DID PRESENT THEM TO YOU ALL A FEW WEEKS AGO, BUT BASICALLY DR.
WEBB HAS CONSTRUCTED SOME VERY NICE APARTMENTS IN COPPERFIELD, WHICH IS OFF OF THE ACADEMIC DRIVE NEAR THE HIGH SCHOOL.
HE IS ACTUALLY IN THE PROCESS OR WASN'T IN THE PROCESS OF BUILDING FOUR BUILDINGS ON A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT LIVES.
THE KEY DATES INVOLVED ARE IN APRIL ON APRIL 28TH, 1997.
HE ACTUALLY APPLIED FOR, UH, FOUR BUILDINGS OR INITIALLY THREE BUILDINGS, AND THEN A FOURTH BUILDING.
THEY WERE BUILDINGS 8, 9, 10, AND 11.
UH, THE STATE THEN REQUIRED BECAUSE OF THE SIZE OF THE PROJECT AND SOME CHANGES IN STATE LAW THAT ARE WRITTEN UPON, BE BUILT ON THE SITE AND BECAUSE OF THIS, THE CITY CORRECTLY.
SO DID NOT ISSUE THE PERMITS UNTIL, UH, DR.
WEBB PROCURED A PERMIT FROM THE STATE TO, FOR THE RETENTION POND.
SO THE PERMITS WERE NOT ISSUED AT THAT TIME.
WEBB RETAINED AN ENGINEERING FIRM AND THE WORK WAS DESIGNED AND IN ANOTHER KEY DATE, SEPTEMBER 29TH, 1997, THE RETENTION POND PERMIT WAS GRANTED BY THE STATE.
AND I THINK THEY'RE IN LAST, SOME OF THE CONFUSION THAT EXISTS HAS EXISTED BETWEEN, UH, CITY ADMINISTRATION AND DR.
WIDOW, UM, AFTER THAT PERMIT WAS ISSUED, UH, THE, THE, UH, BUILDING PERMITS WERE REQUESTED AGAIN.
AND I BELIEVE THAT THE FACT LINE SHOWS THE DOCTOR WE HAVE MADE MET WITH MR. HARTMAN AND DISCUSSED THE MATTER OF OCTOBER AND ALSO DR.
WEBB'S CONTRACTOR, JERRY SMITH HAD MET WITH, UH, THE CITY AND, UH, INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT AND SALT, THE PERMITS, AND WAS INFORMED THAT THE POND REALLY NEEDED TO BE CONSTRUCTED AND BUILT BEFORE THE PERMITS COULD BE ISSUED.
AND SO IN OCTOBER AND NOVEMBER, DR.
WEBER CONTRACT WITH, UH, A COMPANY TO CONSTRUCT THE POND AND THE POND WAS ACTUALLY CONSTRUCTED AND FINISHED IN NOVEMBER OF 1997, UH, ONE OF THE BUILDING PERMITS WAS THE ISSUE BUILDING A, UH, I THINK MR. HARTMAN WAS FAVOR OF THE DOCTOR.
WE HAVE WENT AHEAD AND ISSUED THAT ONE, UH, BEING OF THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE POND WAS, WAS ONGOING AND WOULD BE COMPLETED.
UH, ONE OF THE OTHER FACTORS THAT'S IMPORTANT IS THAT, UH, DURING THIS PROCESS, THE SUBDIVISION PLAN SHOWED A CIRCULAR STREET THAT WENT THROUGH THE SUBDIVISION.
AND BECAUSE OF, UH, THE, THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, NOT WANTING TO ENTRANCES SO CLOSE TOGETHER ON ACADEMIC DRIVE THE COST OF THE HIGH SCHOOL TRAFFIC, THEY DECIDED TO TERMINATE ONE END OF THE STREET, LET IT FLOW INTO THE PARKING LOTS OF THE TWO APARTMENT BUILDINGS, BUT THE CITY FIRE MARSHALL PREFERRED THIS BECAUSE OF THIS APP.
SO INSTEAD THE PLANS WERE REDESIGNED.
THIS WAS ALL HAPPENING IN 1997, THE PLANS WERE REDESIGNED AND THE CITY APPROVED THEM AND A NEW CO-VICE THAT WAS DESIGNED SO THAT EMERGENCY VEHICLES WOULD HAVE A TURNAROUND PLACE THERE.
AND UNFORTUNATELY THE OTHER TWO PERMITS WERE NOT ISSUED PARTLY BECAUSE, OR MAINLY BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT THE CITY ACTUALLY CLOUD THE DEPARTMENT OF INSPECTION HAD LOST THE APPLICATIONS.
AND WHAT I HAVE GIVEN YOU HERE, THE HANDOUT, WE HAVE THE COPIES THAT WERE STAMPED IN BY THE CITY FOR ALL THREE OF THE BUILDINGS, EIGHT, NINE, AND 10.
I'M NOT SURE WHERE THAT IS, BUT, UH, AID WAS ISSUED NINE AND 10 WHEN WE'RE NOT IN IS YOU'LL SEE BY LOOKING AT, BUT AS THEY WERE STAMPING ON APRIL 28TH, 1997, IT'S ALSO A STATEMENT BY DR.
WEBB'S CONTRACTOR IN THE PAPERS, MR. SMITH INDICATED THAT HE HAD ASKED FOR THE PERMITS IN OCTOBER THAT'S WHEN HE WAS TOLD THAT THE POND NEEDED TO BE.
MAYER WEB MET WITH MR. HARTMAN AND GOT THE PERMIT FOR NUMBER EIGHT, BUT NOT FOR THE OTHER THREE.
[00:15:01]
HE CAME BACK IN DECEMBER AND ASKED THE INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT, UH, FOR THE PERMITS AGAIN.AND HE WAS ADVISED THAT, UH, THE FILE HAD BEEN LOST AT THAT TIME, BUT NOT TO WORRY EVERYTHING WAS OKAY.
AS I MENTIONED TO YOU ALL LAST TIME, DR.
WEBB HAD NO KNOWLEDGE TAT FEES BEING CHANGED.
HE HAD ALREADY PLANNED HIS PROJECT, OBTAINED HIS FINANCING IN 1997, AND IT ACTUALLY BEGAN CONSTRUCTION, UH, SORT OF AT THE INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENTS, UH, SUGGESTION THAT HE GO AHEAD AND START LAYING WATER AND SEWER LINES, WHICH WAS ALL BEGUN IN 1997.
THIS SHOWS IN, UH, UH, THE, THE LETTER FOR MR. CARPENTER, THE CONTRACTOR THAT THIS WAS BEING DONE PATH WOULD BE CONSTRUCTED.
AND AS I RECALL HIM, THE APARTMENT INDICATED THAT WHEN A LOT OF CONTRACTORS, WHEN THE CITY KNEW THAT THEY HAD BASED THEIR PROJECTIONS ON THE OLD TAP FEES AND THAT THEY HAD BEEN UNDER CONSTRUCTION, THEY WERE ALLOWED THE PROBLEM IN THIS CASE, AS I SEE IT IS THAT UNFORTUNATELY WHEN THE PERMIT LETTER, WHICH I'VE GOT A COPY OF IN THESE PAPER WAS ISSUED BY DNA CHAR IN SEPTEMBER, THE COPY THAT THEY WOULD NORMALLY SEND TO THE CITY, WENT TO CRAVEN COUNTY, YOU'LL SEE THE CC THERE IS TO CRAVEN COUNTY AND NOT TO THE CITY OF NEWTON.
WEBB AT THAT TIME, BECAUSE HE IS, HE WAS IN A LOT OF HOSPITALS AND GOING THROUGH A LOT OF OPERATIONS THAT WENT TO HIS HOME AND HE NEVER SAW IT.
IN FACT, WHEN HE ENDED UP MR. HARTLAND MET, THERE WAS DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT.
WEBB DIDN'T HAVE A COPY OF IT.
AND OBVIOUSLY IT MUST'VE BEEN SITTING OVER THERE IN CRAVEN COUNTY, AND HE WASN'T SURE EXACTLY WHAT THE STATES.
SO THERE WAS A LITTLE BIT OF CONFUSION OVER THAT.
AND OF COURSE, THE REQUIREMENT THAT THE POND BE BUILT AS PART OF THE REQUIREMENTS, AND THAT WAS ALL DONE IN 1997.
AND I THINK, UH, MR. APARTMENT IS INDICATED IN SOME LETTERS THAT HE HAS WRITTEN TO US, THAT HE FELT LIKE IF DR.
WEBB, THEY ASKED FOR THE PERVIOUS SEAT, THAT THE GUY WITH THE FACTS ARE THAT HIS CONTRACTOR DID ASK AND WAS PERFECTLY WILLING TO PAY THE FEE AND WOULD HAVE CERTAINLY COME FORWARD.
IF THEY HAD NONE OF THAT, THE TAX THAT HE SAID, I BELIEVE THE RECORD SHOWS THAT THE TAB IS ACTUALLY CHANGED ON JANUARY 13TH, 1998.
AND THEN ULTIMATELY THE PERMITS WERE ISSUED AFTER THIS DAY, AS SOME MORE CONTACT IS MADE BETWEEN DR.
WEBB'S EMPLOYEES AND THE CITY.
AND I THINK THAT WAS WHEN THEY FINALLY FOUND OUT ABOUT THE TAP FEES CHANGING SOMETIME AROUND.
I'M NOT SURE THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN CLEARLY UP ON THAT SOMETIME AFTER JANUARY 13 IS WHEN HE FIRST, THEY HAD BEEN A LOT OF MEETINGS BETWEEN HIS PEOPLE AND HIM AND THE CITY, AND NOBODY HAD ADVISED HIM OF THE CHANGE.
AND, AND BECAUSE OF THE INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT, IT INDICATED THAT WE'VE LOST THE FILE.
DON'T WORRY, GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED AND GET THEM TO YOU.
AND MR. HARMON, IT INDICATED THAT UNTIL THAT POND WAS BUILT, AND THIS IS HOW HE ALLOWED NUMBER EIGHT TO GO FORWARD WAS HE JUST COULDN'T GET A SEAT UNTIL THAT WAS DONE.
AND HE MADE THAT VERY CLEAR TO DOC, AND THAT WAS FINE WITH THE WEB AS LONG AS HE COULD GET STARTED.
SO I THINK IN HIS CASE, HE'S OBVIOUSLY IN THE SHOES OF A LOT OF CONTRACTORS THAT HAD PLANNED UNDER THE OLD TAP FEES FILED HIS APPLICATIONS WAY BACK IN APRIL, THEY WERE HELD UP OR FOR A LEGITIMATE REASON TO POST THE STORM WATER PERMIT HAD NOT BEEN ISSUED.
THE CITY REQUIRED THE POND TO BE COMPLETED BEFORE THEY COULD ISSUE.
IT DID GET COMPLETED IN AROUND THE END OF NOVEMBER OF 1997.
HIS CONTRACTOR CAME BACK AND ASKED HIM IN, IN, IN 19, UH, IN, IN DECEMBER OF 1997 FOR THE TERMINIX.
AND HE WAS TOLD THAT IF I ONLY BEEN LOST, IT WAS OKAY, KEEP GOING.
WE WILL TAKE CARE OF IT, INSPIRE TO CRAVE AND COUNTY BY MISTAKE, SEPTEMBER AND A SEND THE PAPER, MR. MAYOR IN SEPTEMBER THE 19TH, I BELIEVE OF SEPTEMBER 29, 97, 97, YES.
OR 97, ITEM NUMBER FIVE ON THIS.
AND THE POND WAS BUILT BEFORE THE RATES WENT UP.
THE POND WAS STARTED IN OCTOBER AND COMPLETED ANOTHER ROOM WHO TOLD YOU IN INSPECTIONS OR TOLD THE CONTRACTOR THAT THEY LOST THE FILE, BUT TO PROCEED.
BUT MR. IPOD WAS THE INSPECTOR THAT MR. SMITH HAD BEEN WORKING WITH JOHNNY.
WHAT WAS IT LAST NIGHT? IF I MAY ELABORATE AND JUST DECIDE BETWEEN APRIL, THEY REALLY SUBMITTED IN OCTOBER
I'M NOT GOING TO SAY APRIL OF LAST YEAR, 97.97.
SO THEY WASN'T UPON AT THAT TIME.
AND WHEN YOU LOST THE FILE, IT WASN'T A LETTER FROM DAINER IN THE FILE.
[00:20:16]
I DON'T EVEN, THIS WHOLE THING HAS BEEN A MISUNDERSTANDING.AND THE REASON I'M UP HERE, JUST TRY TO BE TREATED FAIRLY ON THIS WHOLE ISSUE.
THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THAT IN 1997, AFTER I UNDERSTOOD FROM THE STORM WAR, PEOPLE BHNR THAT I HAD TO BUILD A POND.
WE SPENT THE NEXT THREE MONTHS, A LITTLE BIT OVER THREE MONTHS, GETTING THE PLANS FROM, WITH AN ENGINEER AND GETTING THEM DESIGNED.
AT THAT POINT, I HAD APPROVAL FROM BILL WITH THE EDGE AND ARM TO BUILD UPON IT, GIVE ME VERBAL APPROVAL, BUT I HADN'T SEEN ANYTHING IN WRITING.
I WENT BACK TO THE BUILDING, THE JURY SMITH AND WENT TO THIS INSPECTION DEPARTMENT AND TRY TO GET OUR PERMIT.
I ASKED WHEN I WENT TO BILL HARTMAN, I SAID, THIS IS A TECHNICALITY.
I'M READY TO GO WITH MY PROJECT.
I NEED TO GET STARTED ON MY PROJECT.
AND HE SAID, OKAY, YOU CAN GO AHEAD WITH YOUR PROJECT.
YOU KNOW, UM, IF INDEED WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS TRUE.
HE SAID, I WANT A DAY OR TWO TO THINK ABOUT IT.
AND I INVITED HIM TO CALL BILL MOORE TO CALL BILL MOORE UP WITH DHNR OR TO TALK WITH ANYBODY.
HE CALLED ME THE NEXT DAY AND SAID, OKAY, YOU CAN GO AHEAD, BUT YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET A PERMANENT OCCUPANCY PERMIT UNTIL YOU GET THAT POND BILL UNTIL WE GET THE FINAL APPROVAL FROM THE H AND O.
AND I SAID, OKAY, THAT'S FAIR.
THAT'S THAT I COULDN'T HAVE BEEN TREATED ANY BETTER.
AND SO WE WENT AHEAD WITH THE, UH, WITH THE POND CONSTRUCTION AND BY NOVEMBER, THE POND WAS CONSTRUCTED TO SPECIFICATIONS.
I ALSO CONTRACTED WITH GARY CARPENTER WITH GHC CONSTRUCTION TO GO AHEAD AND PUT ALL THE WATER METERS, THE RESTORING OF THE WATER METERS AND THE, AND THE WATER AND SEWER INTO THE REST OF THE APARTMENTS FOR THE WHOLE REST OF THE PROJECT.
AND HE DID THAT IN PLACE IN 1997, HE COMPLETED JUST ABOUT EVERYTHING.
HE COMPLETED, THE PARKING LOTS.
HE COMPLETED THE PANTS TO BUILDINGS, NINE, 10, AND 11.
HE DID NOT COMPLETELY FINISHED THE WATER AND THE SEWER.
HE DID NOT HAVE THE FINAL COMPLETION, BUT HE HAD STARTED EVERYTHING IN 97, BUT THE POND WAS COMPLETED IN 97.
IT DIDN'T TAKE HER FOUR OR FIVE DAYS TO COMPLETE THE POND.
I SPENT A YEAR, AT LEAST A HALF A MILLION DOLLARS ON THAT PROJECT.
I'D GONE THROUGH ALL THE APPROVAL PROCESS.
UM, WITH THE CITY PLANNING EVERYBODY UP THERE KNEW ABOUT THIS PRODUCT.
THIS WAS SORT OF A THORN IN EVERYBODY'S SIDE, BECAUSE IT WAS ALREADY APPROVED THAT IT HAD TO BE REDESIGNED BECAUSE OF THE STORM WATER, THE RETENTION POND, AND NOBODY LIKED IT.
UM, I MEAN, JOHNNY, THE FIRST ONE TO TELL YOU, UH, I DIDN'T LIKE WHAT I WAS DOING.
I'LL TELL YOU, I BUILT APARTMENTS IN, IN, UH, COLLEGE WAY OVER AT ROBIN'S NEST.
I BUILT, I BUILT A BUNCH OF LITTLE STRIP CENTERS, MINI STORAGE AND EVERYTHING.
THIS, THIS PRODUCT WAS A NIGHTMARE, BUT THIS WAS LIKE THE ICING ON THE CAKE.
WHEN I HAD ALREADY BEEN THROUGH ALL OF THAT AND ALREADY GOT THE PANS ON THERE AND TRY TO GET MY PERMIT BECAUSE I'LL TELL YOU EXACTLY WHAT I TOLD MY CONTRACTOR.
I SAID, THESE KINDS OF, WE HAD BUILT 140 UNITS AT, AT, UM, AT OUR APARTMENT COMPLEX SEVEN BUILDINGS PRIOR TO THIS.
AND EVERY TIME I WENT IN TO GET A PERMIT, TO BUILD A BUILDING, THEY WOULD CHANGE SOMETHING.
AND EVERY TIME WE'D HAVE TO GET BACK TO A RE AN ENGINEER AND GET UP HURRICANE TIE-DOWN, OR, OR THERE WAS SOME LITTLE, LITTLE TECHNICALITY THAT HAD TO BE ADDRESSED.
AND I TOLD MY, WHEN BILL MARVIN TOLD ME WHAT HE TOLD ME, I TOLD HIM MY CONTRACTOR.
I SAID, YOU GET EVERY ONE OF THOSE PERMITS.
I MEAN, BEFORE THEY CHANGED THEIR MIND AND GET THEM, AND I WANT TO SLEEP, HE WENT DOWN THERE.
THEY WOULD NOT GET HIM, BUT BUILDING NUMBER EIGHT, WHEN HE CAME BACK, I TOLD HIM AGAIN, I SAID, GOOD.
HE SAID, WE'VE GOT TO GET THE POND TO THEN I ASKED HIM AGAIN IN NOVEMBER, THERE'S AN AFFIDAVIT SENT HERE FROM HIM AND ALSO FROM THE GIRLS THAT WORK ON THEIR DESK, MY OFFICE MANAGER TO GET THE DAG-GONE FOR A MINUTES, WE TRY TO GET THE PERMITS AND BUILD APARTMENTS LETTER.
HE TOLD ME, HE SAID SEVERAL THINGS IN HIS LETTER.
HE SAID THAT IF I QUOTE FROM ISRAEL AND HE SAID, IF YOU CAN SHOW ME DOCUMENTATION FROM THE, FROM THE STATE APPROVING THE DETENTION POND AND STORM WATER PLAN IN 1997, IT MIGHT WELL CHANGE MY POSITION.
WELL, IT DIDN'T CHANGE HIS POSITION.
AND I FIND THAT TOTALLY INFLEXIBLE.
AND I I'M REALLY UPSET ABOUT IT, ABOUT THE WHOLE PROJECT, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, HE SHOULD HAVE CHANGED.
THE POSITION WAS IT'S NOT MY FAULT THAT THE HNR SENT IT TO, UH, TO THE COUNTY INSTEAD OF THE STATE CITY.
HOW MANY OF YOU HAVE EVER BUILT A RETENTION BOMB? I HAVE NEEDED, I DIDN'T KNOW WHERE THE HNR SHOULD SEND IT.
JUST BECAUSE THE CITY HADN'T GOT IT.
[00:25:02]
I DON'T THINK I SHOULD BE PENALIZED $30,000 BECAUSE OF THAT.AND I ALSO DON'T THINK I SHOULD BE PAYING LAST $30,000 BECAUSE RON LOLLIPOP WOULD NOT GIVE US PERMITS.
AND WE ASKED FOR THEM AND WE HAD ALREADY APPLIED FOR THEM.
MR. MENDEZ BRINGS UP OR IT BRINGS UP TWO QUESTIONS JUST FOR CLARIFICATION WAS HOW MUCH MONEY WAS INVOLVED.
AND WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE ORIGINAL FEE AND THE FEE THAT YOU'RE NOW BEING ASKED ABOUT.
RIGHT? THE SECOND QUESTION IS WHY WAS A PERMIT FOR ONE BUILDING ISSUED? AND THE OTHER'S NOT ISSUED IF THE RETENTION POND DID NOT AFFECT ALL THE BUILDINGS? I DOESN'T.
WHEN I MET WITH BILL HARTMAN AND I TOLD HIM OF MY DILEMMA, HE SAID, YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND BUILD THE BUILDINGS, BUT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE THAT, UM, APPROVAL FOR THE STORM WATER.
I THINK IT'S AN APPROVAL OR OF OUR PLAN FROM DHNR.
HE SAID, I COULD GET THE APPROVAL.
IF I COULD GET THE APPROVAL AND BUILD UPON, I COULDN'T OPEN MY APARTMENTS, NO WORDS.
I COULD SPEND ALL THE MONEY I WANTED TO, BUT UNTIL I HAD DEHN RS APPROVAL, THAT I WASN'T GONNA BE ABLE TO OPEN MY APARTMENTS FOR BUSINESS.
WELL, THAT WAS NO PROBLEM FOR ME BECAUSE BILL MOORE WITH AND R HAD ALREADY TOLD ME VERBALLY THAT MY PLAN WAS APPROVED.
I HAD WK DICKSON ENGINEERING FIRM TO DID THE PLAN AND THEY HAD SENT IT IN.
ALL I HAD TO DO WAS GET THE POND BILL AND GARY CARPENTER HAD BUILT A HUNDRED OF THEM BEFORE AND TOLD ME IT WOULD TAKE FOUR OR FIVE DAYS TO BUILD A POND, WHICH HE DID.
IT'S NOT A, IT'S NOT A GREAT BIG THING TO BUILD HIS POND.
IT'S A FOUR OR FIVE DAY CONSTRUCTION PROCESS THEY BUILT UPON.
AND THEN WE KEEP GOING OVER THERE TRYING TO GET OUR PERMITS, AND WE'RE NOT ISSUED OUR PERMITS, BUT YET THEY CHANGED THE TAX FEE ON US.
IT WAS A BUDGET I'D ALREADY SPENT MONEY PUTTING THE, PUTTING THE WATER AND SEWER LINES.
I AGREE WITH JOHNNY CLARK THAT THEY DIDN'T TELL US TO GO AHEAD AND DO IT.
WE WENT AHEAD, BUT THEY SAW WHAT WE WERE DOING.
THEY WERE OVER THERE INSPECTING BUILDING NUMBER EIGHT, AND THEY SAW US PUTTING THE WATER LINES AND SEWER LINES IN THE PARKING LOT AND PUTTING THE ROCK AND GRABBING, PUTTING THE BUILDING PADS IN THE BILL.
YOU HAD NO PROBLEM WITH THIS CHINA AT THAT POINT, I'LL SAY WHY HE DIDN'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM.
WELL, LET ME ASK THE QUESTION, MR. HARTMAN.
UM, THE TAP FEES ARE THEIR ASSESSMENT FOR EACH DEPARTMENT OR JUST FOR THE BUILDING, ADRIAN.
SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 40 UNITS.
AND MS. I RESPECT MR. HARTMAN'S DECISION THAT HE MADE AND I RESPECT YOURS, BUT TO STRIKE A COMPROMISE.
AND THIS IS UP TO THE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS.
WE GRANT YOU THE OLD RATE FOR 20 OF THOSE APARTMENTS.
THAT WOULD BE SPLIT IT DOWN THE MIDDLE, JUST AS A COMPROMISE TO YOU THAT MR. RHINOS, CAN I, CAN I, I OFFERED A COMPROMISE THAT THE WATER AND SEWER PEOPLE SAID WAS FAIR.
THE ONLY LOT THAT WAS AFFECTED OVER THERE WAS BUILDING, UH, NUMBER 11.
WHICH WE DON'T EVEN HAVE A PERMIT.
THAT WAS, THAT WAS A LOT THAT THE, THAT THE WATER RETENTION POND BE.
I TOLD DAVID MUSE ON, I TALKED TO HIM IN THE FUND AND I SAID, DAVID, I'LL TELL YOU WHAT WE HAD APPLIED FOR NINE AND 10, 8, 9, AND 10.
AND I SAID, BUT, BUT THAT BUILDING NUMBER 11 IS ON LOCK NUMBER FOUR.
AND THAT WAS THE ONLY LOCK THAT THE RETENTION POND WAS AFFECTED.
AND I TOLD HIM, I SAID, I WOULD BE WILLING TO PAY THE NEW TAP FEE ON THAT BUILDING.
AND I HAVE, I'VE ALREADY PAID THAT FEE.
AND I TOLD HIM, I SAID, THERE'S A COMPROMISE.
YOU SHOULD GIVE ME BILL HARMON GAVE ME NUMBER EIGHT ON THE, UNDER THE OLD TAP PEOPLE, BECAUSE I ALREADY HAD THE PERMIT.
I SAID, THE, MY COMPROMISE WAS GIVING ME BUILDINGS NINE AND 10, BECAUSE THEY HAD ALREADY BEEN APPLIED FOR IN APRIL.
AND WE HAD ALREADY BEEN IN CONSTRUCTION.
DAVID, YOU SAID THAT WAS FINE WITH HIM.
WHEN I TALKED TO BILL HARMON, YOU KNOW, I GOT NOWHERE.
UM, YOU KNOW, I NORMALLY DEFER TO THE, TO THE CITY MANAGER ON ALL THAT ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS.
AND MY IS JUST AS AN ACCOMMODATION.
WELL, I'M, IT'S UP TO THE GOVERNMENT BOY, IF I DON'T GET A SECOND AND THEN IT DIES, BUT THAT'S MY EMOTION THAT WE GIVE THEM HALF.
HOW MANY UNITS ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT FOR THE TWO BUILDING NUMBER ONE, BUILDING NUMBER, UM, UH, BUILDING NUMBER 11, THEN I FEEL IT WAS 14 YEARS AND THEY
[00:30:01]
WOULD, ONCE I'VE ALREADY PAID THE OLD TAPPING WE PAY, HOW MANY UNITS ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT FOR THE TWO IS 31 31 YEARS.WE ONLY TOLD THEM ABOUT 31, NOT 40, BUT WHEN YOU COUNT NUMBER 14, ALL THE LEVELS HAVE BEEN PAID FOR.
AND I HAVE ALL THE, WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT THAT OTHER THAN WE TALKING ABOUT EIGHT AND NINE RIGHT NOW, 99 TO 10 30, 1 31 YEARS, WHEN YOU, OKAY.
WELL, MY WISH IS FOR HALF OF THAT, I'LL SECOND YOUR MOTION.
IT'S JUST SO YOU CAN VOTE ON IT AND SEE HOW THE BOARD FEELS.
AND THAT'LL GIVE US A READING.
BUT BEFORE THAT, UH, WHEN THE CHANGE CAME AND THESE, THESE FEES HAVE TO BE CHANGED PERIODICALLY BECAUSE OF THE COST OF EVERYTHING WE DO GOES UP AND THE CITY, AS I'VE SAID SO MANY TIMES HAS NO MONEY.
WE GET ALL OF OUR MONEY'S FROM THE FEES FROM, UH, AD VALOREM TAXES FROM SALES TAX, POWER, BILL FUNDS FROM VARIOUS AND SUNDRY RESOURCES.
BUT IT ALL COMES FROM THE TAXPAYER IN ONE FORM OR ANOTHER, UM, AND A CONTRACT.
AND WHEN WE CHANGED THAT, IT CHANGED THAT FEE.
IT HADN'T BEEN RAISED IN A LONG TIME.
AND THEN A CONTRACTOR STOPPED ME ON THE STREET ONE DAY AND HE SAYS, I SURE WISH YOU'D LET US KNOW BECAUSE WE GET PLANS.
THEN WE GO OVER THESE PLANS AND WE BID BASED ON WHAT EVERYTHING IS GOING TO COST US THE MATERIALS, THE FEES, AND EVERYTHING ELSE.
AND THEN WE GET THE, WE GET THE JOB AND THEN WE'D GO DOWN TO BUY THE PERMITS AND FIND OUT THEY'VE GONE UP.
SO I'VE TALKED WITH BILL ABOUT IT.
AND HE SAID, WELL, YEAH, YOU KNOW THAT THERE IS SOME VALIDITY IN THAT IF IT DOESN'T SEEM FAIR THAT WE DON'T AT LEAST GIVE THEM A 30 DAY NOTICE OR SOMETHING SO THAT ANY JOB THEY'RE WORKING ON AT THAT TIME, THEY'RE BIDDING ON.
AT THAT TIME, THEY CAN FACTOR IN WHAT IT'S ACTUALLY GOING TO COST THEM.
SO THAT'S HOW SOME CONTRACTORS WERE ABLE TO GET, UH, GET THE OLD RATE ACTUALLY, AFTER IT WAS RAISED, AS THEY WERE GIVEN A BRACE PERIOD.
NOW, IF THIS HAD COME UP AT THAT TIME, WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN A PROBLEM.
NOW IT'S GOING BACK QUITE SOME TIME.
AND, UH, I DON'T KNOW WHETHER ANY OTHER PROBLEMS LIKE THIS WOULD COME OUT OF THE WOODWORK OR NOT,
AND, AND, AND THAT'S, THAT'S MY POINT.
EXCEPT THAT, HOW DID, HOW DID, HOW DID, HOW IS IT THAT NO ONE IN HIS ORGANIZATION WHO WERE REALLY SUPPOSED TO BE LOOKING AFTER HIS FINANCIAL INTERESTS AND GETTING THESE THINGS BUILT? WHY DID IT NOT OCCUR TO THEM TO BRING IT UP AT THAT TIME? BECAUSE THESE OTHER CONTRACTORS DID? YES.
I THINK MR. SMITH DID THE SAME AS HERE IN DECEMBER, TRYING TO GET FIRMS TO NOT BE.
AND I THINK YOU READ HIS STATEMENT THERE.
YOU SEE, HE DID TRY TO GIVE THEM AS LATE AS DECEMBER OF 97, UM,
I HAD, I HAD LIKE 13 YEARS FOR OPERATIONS BETWEEN NINE AND 19 96, 3 97 CAR.
SO I WAS IN AND OUT OF HOSPITAL.
I WAS FLAT ON THE BACK
AND BY THE WAY, MAX, DID YOU SECOND ROBERT'S YEAH.
GIVE IT ON THE FLOOR AND IT'S ON THE FLOOR.
AND IF YOU, AND IF YOU MAKE A MOTION, IF YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE A MOTION, I MAKE A SECOND.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE A BIG COMMENTS BEFORE WE VOTED ON IT.
AND THIS IS THE SOLAR IN RESPECT, BOTH SIDES, MR. HARTMAN.
HE WAS TRYING TO LOOK AT THE INTEREST OF THE CITY AND DO WHAT HE THINKS RIGHT.
BASED ON THE FACTS AS HE SEES THEM AND UNDERSTANDS THEM.
AND OF COURSE, UH, YOUR POSITION, BUT REALLY AS AN, AS AN OBSERVER OF THE THING, AND JUST LISTENING TO IT FOR AN EXAMPLE, YOU SAID THAT YOU WERE TELLING THE CONTRACTOR, YOU KNOW, TO GO AND BE IN DEPARTMENTS.
AND I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT I TRY TO PUT MYSELF IN THE OTHER FELLOWS POSITION, AND OBVIOUSLY HE WASN'T COMING BACK TO THE PERMITS.
AND I THINK HE ONCE WAS AFTER THE SECOND OR THIRD TRIP COMING BACK WITH THE PERMITS, HE SAID SOMETHING AGAIN ABOUT THE POD.
SO I GUESS THE PAWN WASN'T BUILT YET.
SO MAYBE HE DIDN'T QUITE UNDERSTAND THAT THAT WAS A HANGUP.
AND I CAN UNDERSTAND YOUR FRUSTRATION PROBLEM WITH BEING OUT OF THE LEAP, SO TO SPEAK FOR SOME TIME.
AND, AND, UM, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE THINGS THAT YOU MAY HAVE BEEN PUSHING OR
[00:35:01]
IN CONTROL OF YOU, WEREN'T THERE TO PUSH AND BE IN CONTROL WITH THEM.SO IF IT WAS ALL DONE OVER AGAIN, LET'S PUT IT THAT WAY.
I THINK THAT IT WOULD'VE BEEN A LOT MORE THINGS DONE IN TIMELY MATTERS AND SO FORTH AND SO ON, BUT, UH, IN DEFERENCE AND ALL OF THAT.
AND, AND ALSO BECAUSE THERE SEEMS TO BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR SOME MISUNDERSTANDING IN THIS THING, UM, YOU KNOW, I CAN UNDERSTAND THE MOTION AND THE SECOND ON IT.
AND AGAIN, NOT SAYING THAT THE HEART IS HIS CONCLUSION AND HE'S REACHED HIS WRONG CARLOS, HE IS A FIRE PERSON AND HE'S JUDGED IT ON HIS UNDERSTANDING THAT HIS OBSERVATION OF WHAT HE'S SEEN AND, UH, YOU KNOW, THREE BLIND MEN AND THE ELEPHANT, WELL, SEE SOMETHING DIFFERENT.
SO ANYWAY, IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION BY, YEAH, GO AHEAD FOR ME.
WELL, I GOT BILL'S LETTER BACK ON, ON HIS SECOND OR THIRD TIME INVESTIGATING THIS AND, AND I REALLY FEEL LIKE HE LOOKED AT IT WITH AN OPEN MIND ON BOTH IN ORDER TO ADVISE US ON WHAT TO DO AND UNLESS SOMETHING HAS BEEN PRESENTED TONIGHT TO CHANGE, MR. HARTMAN'S MIND, YOU KNOW, UH, HE'S DONE EXACTLY WHAT WE'VE ASKED HIM TO DO.
WHAT I WAS GOING TO ASK IS THE GENTLEMAN JUST SAID HE WAS PREPARED TO COMPROMISE.
AND I WAS WONDERING IF YOU OFFERED THAT COMPROMISE TO MR. HARTMAN IN YOUR DISCUSSION, YOU SAID THAT YOU HAVE PAID FOR EIGHT AND 11, AND THAT YOU WOULD HOPING THAT WE WOULD GIVE YOU THE OLD WEEK FOR NINE AND 10.
AND I WAS WONDERING IF YOU MADE THAT OFFER TO MR. HARTMAN.
UM, THROUGH DAVID MES, WE CERTAINLY DID BECAUSE, UH, YOU KNOW, I DIDN'T WANT TO HAVE TO COME TO THIS POINT.
AND I SAID, WELL, LET'S, LET'S, LET'S COMPROMISE ON THIS THING BECAUSE YOU KNOW, A LOT OF BUILDING NUMBER 11 WAS THE ONLY ONE AFFECTED BY THE RETENTION POND.
AND I CERTAINLY APPLIED FOR MY OTHER PERMITS AT 97.
AND THAT WAS THE CRITERIA HE HAD THAT IF I, IF I HAD MY PERMIT AT 9 97, I WOULD BE UNDER THE OLD TAX FEE.
AND I TRIED TO GET MY, MY FEET, UH, MY, MY PERMIT IN 97, IT WAS UNSUCCESSFUL.
I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE I CAN DO.
YOU KNOW, I SHOWED HIM, HE SAID, LAST MEETING, UH, YOU KNOW, TO YOU THAT IT'S, IF A CONTRACTOR, IF A DEVELOPER COULD SHOW THAT HE HAD SPENT MONEY AND HAD AN ONGOING PROJECT, HE WOULD CERTAINLY TRY TO BE FLEXIBLE.
WHILE I SHOWED THAT I SHOWED HIM THE PERMIT WE HAD IN 97, HE SAID THAT WOULD CHANGE HIS POSITION.
HE HADN'T CHANGED HIS POSITION.
SO, YOU KNOW, AN ANSWER TO YOU, MR. BOUNDARY, I MEAN, I THINK WE'VE SHOWED A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT ARE INCONSISTENT.
WELL, MY QUESTION WAS TO MR. HARTMAN, UH, NOT, NOT YOU, WHICH I WAS GOING TO ASK HIM FOR AN ANSWER IN A FEW MINUTES THAT IF ANYTHING THAT Y'ALL PRESENTED TONIGHT HAS CHANGED HIS POSITION, RIGHT? YEAH.
I WANT TO KNOW HOW YOU FEEL SO BAD.
UM, WELL, I CERTAINLY THINK IT'S WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF THIS BOARD TO COMPROMISE ANY OR ALL OF IT.
AND I WOULDN'T SECOND GUESS WHAT YOUR DECISION WOULD BE.
CAUSE IT'S NOT A, I GUESS IT'S NOT A REAL CLEAR ISSUE IN EITHER DIRECTION, BUT AS I'VE LOOKED AT IT, I'VE LOOKED AT IT EITHER THREE OR FOUR TIMES AT THIS POINT IN TIME AND TALK WITH OUR STAFF, TRY TO LOOK AT THE ISSUE OF LOSING THE PERMIT.
I DO NOT BELIEVE THE PERMIT WAS LOST FROM APRIL TO A CERTAIN POINT, BUT I THINK THAT PERMIT WAS IN OUR HANDS ABOUT THE TIME THAT DR.
WEBB WAS TALKING TO ME THAT, UH, APPLICATION WAS IN OUR HANDS.
UH, THE SET I DID STATE IN MY LETTER TO HIM THAT, UH, IF HE HAD SOMETHING THAT HE COULD SHOW ME THAT IT HAD BEEN ISSUED, THAT IT WOULD BE, UH, AN ISSUE THAT I MIGHT WELL RECONSIDER.
I DIDN'T SAY I WOULD RECONSIDER.
I SAID, I MIGHT WELL RECONSIDER.
AND I DID LOOK AT THE LETTER AND I DID, UH, AGAIN, GO WITH OUR STAFF.
I RESEARCHED THE INFORMATION AND WE HAD THE LETTER, WE HAD THAT LETTER IN OUR FILES.
WE HAD GOTTEN IT IN FEBRUARY OF 98.
AND, UH, THE LETTER WAS SENT TO DR.
HE MET WITH ME IN LATE OCTOBER IF HE HAD THE LETTER.
AND HE HAD THAT AUTHORIZATION AT THAT POINT IN TIME, WHICH I UNDERSTAND HE WAS GOING THROUGH SOME PERSONAL THINGS, BUT HE ALSO HAD SOMEONE DOING HIS BUSINESS FOR HIM ALONG THAT TIME.
ALSO, I CAN'T REMEMBER THE MAN'S NAME, BUT, UH, IF HE HAD THE LETTER, I KNEW HE HAD THE LETTER, THEN HE HAD THE CHANCE RIGHT THERE TO SAY, I'VE GOT IT.
AND W EVEN THOUGH IT WAS SENT TO CRAVEN COUNTY AT THAT TIME, THEN WE WOULD HAVE HAD IT IN 1997.
AND WE WOULD HAVE BEEN GLAD TO HAVE ISSUED THE OLD TAP FEES THAT HE WAS SEEKING RELIEF ON.
AND SO, UH, I DIDN'T SIT FEEL THAT THAT WAS, UH,
[00:40:01]
A GOOD MERIT.I MAY ASK YOU SAM, BRIAN, AND IF YOU DON'T MIND ME INTERRUPTING, WELL, I GOT THE GAB, YOU DON'T MIND, WOULD THERE BE ANY REASON THAT DR.
WAY WOULD HAVE HAD THE LETTER AND KNOWN OF THE LETTER AND NOT TOLD YOU? I CAN'T IMAGINE WHY HE WOULD HAVE, BUT I MEAN, I, I, I, OBVIOUSLY, I, OBVIOUSLY HE DID NOT KNOW HE HAD THE LETTER, BUT THE LETTER HAD BEEN SAID THE ISSUE WAS, UH, CRAVEN COUNTY HAD A LETTER BECAUSE CRAVEN COUNTY GOT THE LETTER AND SAID OF US, WE SHOULD GIVE SOME CONSIDERATION BECAUSE IT WAS REALLY SIN, BUT BY MISTAKE, BY THE STATE, WELL, IF THE STATE MAKES A MISTAKE, I DON'T KNOW THAT THE CITY SHOULD PAY FOR THE STATE'S MISTAKES.
WE HAVE AN, I UNDERSTAND THAT.
I'M SORRY FOR THAT, BUT, UH, THAT'S THE ISSUE.
AND SO, AS WE, AS WE WENT THROUGH THE ISSUES, ONE BY ONE, IT ALL CAME DOWN AND THIS LATEST PART THAT I'VE GOTTEN HERE, THE ISSUE THAT THEY'VE TALKED ABOUT TONIGHT, CONTINUALLY GOING AND GETTING PERMITS.
WEBB HIMSELF HAS SAID HERE THAT WHEN HE CAME TO ME, I SAID, ISSUE THE PERMITS, MY STAFF.
IF I TELL MY STAFF TO ISSUE PERMITS, THEN THEY'RE GOING TO ISSUE THE PERMITS.
AND IF THEY'RE GIVING SOMEBODY A HARD TIME ABOUT IT, AND A CONTRACTOR GOES OVER THERE, IF I WAS KNOCKED AWAY AND SOMEBODY CAME TO ME AND SAID, THIS IS THE THIRD TIME THAT I'VE GONE OVER FOR THEM TO DO SOMETHING TO MR. HARTMAN HAS TOLD THEM TO DO, I WOULD HAVE COME BACK TO MR. HARTMAN AND SAID, WHAT'S GOING ON? YOUR PEOPLE DON'T DO WHAT YOU SAY.
AND THEN AT THAT POINT IN TIME, HE WOULD'VE GOT HIS PERMIT AGAIN IN 1997.
SO I JUST FELT LIKE THERE WERE A LOT OF OPPORTUNITIES THERE THAT HE HAD, THAT HE COULD HAVE TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF THE SITUATION AND WOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO HAVE AVOIDED THIS SITUATION, UH, EVEN WITHOUT THE STORMWATER, UH, NOTIFICATION.
SO, UH, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, NOTHING HAS CHANGED.
I DON'T SEE THAT WE ARE REALLY RESPONSIBLE TO PAY THAT MONEY BACK OR TO PAY THAT OR TO GIVE HIM THE RELIEF THAT HE SEEKS.
I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND HIS POSITION, I THINK, AND I EMPATHIZE WITH HIS PROBLEMS WITH HIS WRECK AND ALL THE THINGS THAT WERE GOING ON.
I KNOW THAT IT WAS A, A LOT OF THINGS THAT WERE GOING ON IN HIS LIFE AT THAT TIME.
AND I, AND I KNOW THAT THERE WAS A PROBLEM WITH THE STATE MAKING AN ERROR, SENDING THE NOTIFICATION TO THE WRONG PLACE.
AGAIN, I, BASED ON THAT LETTER, I COULDN'T SAY, WELL, LET'S DO IT BECAUSE I'M NOT GOING TO PUT MYSELF IN A POSITION OF SAYING THE CITY OF NEWBURN SHOULD FORFEIT SOMETHING.
THAT COUPLE WOULD COME TO IT BECAUSE OF SOME MISTAKE THAT THE STATE MADE, NOT A MISTAKE THAT THE CITY MADE.
SO MY POSITION REALLY HASN'T CHANGED.
BUT, UM, I HAD THOUGHT AT ONE TIME MYSELF ABOUT COMPROMISING THIS AND JUST SAYING TO, UH, DR.
WEBB, WELL, WE'LL SPLIT THE DIFFERENCE IF THAT WILL SETTLE THIS THING, BUT REALLY, I COULDN'T FIND ANY JUSTIFICATION IN MY OWN MIND TO DO THAT, BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE TOTALLY WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF THIS BOARD TO DO.
IF YOU DECIDED TO MAKE THAT AN ISSUE, I CAN CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND WHY, AND I WOULD HAVE NO PROBLEMS WITH THAT AND ISSUE THE PERMITS.
AND THEY DO NOT USE, THEY ISSUED WHAT THEY ISSUED, WHAT THEY, HE REQUESTED AS I UNDERSTOOD IT FOR A BUILDING NUMBER EIGHT, AND THEY GOT RE HE GOT THE REDUCED TAP FEES FOR THAT BUILDING THAT WAS ISSUED FOR HIM.
BUT I DIDN'T PUT A LIMIT ON THE, ON THE NUMBER OF BUILDINGS THAT HE COULD GET.
I SAID, GIVE HIM HIS PERMITS BASED ON, UH, HE, HE WE'RE UNDER OUR POLICY.
WE WOULD NOT ISSUE THE PERMITS BECAUSE HE DIDN'T HAVE AN APPROVED PLAN.
AS FAR AS WE WERE CONCERNED FROM THE STATE.
CAUSE WE HAD NO NOTIFICATION, IT WAS APPROVED.
HE HAD INVESTED A LOT OF MONEY AND HE WAS WAITING FOR THIS PLAN TO COME IN AND HE ASSURES ME THAT IT WAS COMING.
SO WHAT I SAID WAS OKAY, IF YOU'RE WILLING TO RISK THE INVESTMENT AND PUT THE MONEY OUT THERE, THEN I'M WILLING TO LET YOU BUILD IT.
AND SO I DIRECTED THE STAFF ISSUE, THE PERMITS, IF THAT'S ALL THEY'RE STANDING IN THE WAY.
AND AS FAR AS I KNEW, HE GOT PERMITS ON ALL THE BUILDINGS AT THAT POINT IN TIME.
AND SO, UH, AND IF HE HADN'T GOTTEN PERMITS ON ALL THE BUILDINGS, THEN, UH, WE WOULDN'T BE HERE AT THIS POINT IN TIME.
BUT YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE CONSIDERATIONS THERE IS WHEN YOU HAVE TO GET PERMITS ON ALL THE BUILDINGS, YOU GOT TO PAY THE BUILDING FEES FOR ALL THOSE.
AND I CAN SEE THAT HE MAY HAVE DECIDED TO HAVE DELAYED A LITTLE BIT ON GETTING EACH ONE OF THOSE, BECAUSE IF I'M NOT GOING TO BUILD THIS BUILDING OUT, WHY DO I WANT TO PUT THE MONEY OUT TO GET A BUILDING PERMIT? BUT I'M NOT, I'M ONLY SPECULATING THAT.
SO THAT, THAT'S JUST MY, THAT'S MY LOGIC.
SO MR. MAYOR, SPEAKING TO THAT, THERE'S A WHOLE LOT OF MISUNDERSTANDING AND SAY, THIS DEPARTMENT IS SPECULATING.
THE DOCTOR WILL PAY A THOUSAND DOLLARS FEE JUST TO SAVE A LITTLE MONEY ON MULTIMILLION DOLLAR PROJECT.
ABSOLUTELY SERVE PERSONALLY LIKE THAT.
[00:45:01]
CURIOUSLY, THIS LETTER, YOU RECEIVED THAT.THE REASON THEY WEREN'T ISSUED WHEN NUMBER EIGHT WAS ISSUED BECAUSE THEY HAD THE FOUL NUMBER EIGHT, THEY HAVE LOST THE FILE ON THAT TEAM.
WE GET BACK TO THAT, THE CITY LOST THE FILE.
HE COMES BACK TO HIM IN DECEMBER TO GET IT.
BUT HE SAID THEY LOST IT BETWEEN APRIL AND SOMETHING ELSE.
DID YOU NOT? I STILL WOULD LOVE TO, BECAUSE LET ME SAY ONE THING.
I TOLD HER ALL I POPPED THIS MORNING AND I ASKED RON, I SAID WRONG.
DO YOU REMEMBER US GOING AND TRYING TO GET THE PERMITS? HE SAID, YES, I CERTAINLY DO.
AND I SAID, WELL, WHY WEREN'T THEY ISSUED? HE SAID, JOHNNY CLARK TOLD ME NOT TO ISSUE ANYTHING, BUT NUMBER EIGHT.
YOU KNOW, I THINK I'M THE UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
I MEAN, I WOULD BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF ALL OF US IF WE SELL THIS MATTER.
AND MY MOTION IS GRANT HIM THE OLD RATE ONLY ON HALF THE UNIT.
IS THAT CORRECT? LET'S CALL FOR THE QUESTION, BECAUSE AGAIN, WE'RE GOING TO GIVE HIM THE RATE SPLITTING
THAT'S HALF, HALF OF THE I THINK WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS HE DOES BRAND 50% OF THAT'S WHY NOT? WE'RE NOT CUTTING THEM.
WELL, WE'RE SPLITTING THE DIFFERENCE OF WHATEVER'S IN DISPUTE.
YOU'VE CALLED REQUEST AND MAX SECOND CALL BECAUSE I MIGHT HERE.
IF IT'S A VOICE, CLARIFY, CLARIFY.
I UNDERSTAND NOW THE WORDS, INSTEAD OF IT COSTING HIM $32,000 BECAUSE OF THE CONTROVERSY ON BOTH SIDES AND THE CONFUSION ON BOTH SIDES, WE'RE GOING TO SPLIT THE DIFFERENCE WITH HIM.
AND, UH, YOU STILL HAVE A 32 OR WHATEVER IT IS.
VOTE WOULD SAY SPLIT THE SPLIT THE DIFFERENCE.
YES, YES, YES, YES, NO, YES, YES.
ANYBODY ELSE? ONCE WE TAKE CARE OF THE MINOR PROBLEMS, SAY STEAM, 20, WHATEVER, 30,000 ANYBODY ELSE HERE? I THINK NOBODY ELSE WAIT.
I THINK THAT IS TO GET THEM ENOUGH.
A BE IN FRONT OF THE TAXI CAB, THEY MONDAY IMPRESSION THERE WAS GOING TO BE SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF.
WHEN SOMEBODY REQUESTED PROTECTION OF CITIZENS, IT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA.
AND WE'RE THE ONLY TAKEN UP ON THE MISCELLANEOUS CAN BE TAKEN OUT.
WHY DON'T WE TAKE IT OUT?
WOULD YOU EXPLAIN TO US WHAT THAT'S ABOUT IF YOU WANT TO, THIS IS A COPY OF A LETTER THAT I ADDRESSED TO MR. GEORGE, THE GEORGE SLATE JR.
CARE OF REGISTERED AGENT GEORGE SLAYED, JR.
BACK ON MAY 3RD GENTLEMEN, ENCLOSED HERE WITH, FOR SERVICE ON YOU.
AS A NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING, BE CONDUCTED BY THE BOARD OF ALDERMAN OR THE CITY OF NEW BONE.
THE 11TH DAY OF MAY IN 1999 AND THE CITY HALL COURTROOM AT 7:30 PM OR SOON THEREAFTER, THE MATTER MAY BE REACHED ON THE QUESTION OF THE REVOCATION OF YOUR TAXI CAB FRANCHISE, THE SORT OF YOUR FAILURE TO MAINTAIN LIABILITY INSURANCE IN FORCE AS REQUIRED BY THE NORTH CAROLINA GENERAL STATUTES AND SUB PARAGRAPH, A THREE, A SECTION 82 DASH 57 ON THE CITY CODE OF THE CITY OF NEWBURGH AND YOUR FAILURE TO PAY FRANCHISE FEES TO THE CITY OF NEWBURN AS REQUIRED BY SUB PARAGRAPH 84 SAID SECTION 82 DASH 57 OR THE CITY CODE OR THE CITY OF NEWBURN AND THE FRANCHISE ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF NEWARK.
WELL, YOUR INFORMATION SUB PARAGRAPH B OF SECTION 82 DASH 57 OF THE CITY CODE OF THE CITY OF NEWBURGH
[00:50:01]
PERMITS THE REVOCATION OF A FRANCHISE AFTER A PUBLIC HEARING CONDUCTED BY THE BOARD OF ALDERMAN EDITION, SECTION 82 DASH 54, THE CITY CODE AND TITLE CERTIFICATE TO BECOME BOARD UPON FADER BEGAN.OPERATIONS PROVIDES IF A CERTIFICATE IS GRANTED TO AN AFRICAN, THEREFORE PURSUANT TO THIS DIVISION AND THE APPLICANT SHALL FAIL TO COMPLY WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE STIFF SKIN.
AND AGAIN, OPERATIONS WITHIN 60 AFTER THE DATA IS
IF THE APPLICANT SHALL FAIL TO PLAY THE ONE AUTHORIZED TAXICABS IN OPERATION WITHIN 60 DAYS AFTER THE ISSUANCE OF A FRANCHISE, THEN IN THAT EVENT, THE FRANCHISE OR FRANCHISES FOR THAT TAXI CAB OR THOSE PACKS OF CABS, WHICH WERE NOT PLACED AN OPERATION JOB WITH THEM, NULL AND VOID, THE BOARD HAS BEEN ADVISED THAT YOU HAVE FAILED TO PLACE IN OPERATION.
SOME OF THE EIGHT CABS, WHICH YOU RAN THE FRANCHISE ON THE 28TH DAY OF JULY 8TH, 1998 AT THE PUBLIC HEARING WE REFERENCE MADE ABOVE YOU WILL BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE.
I SENT OUT THREE COPIES OF THAT LETTER.
ONE OF THEM ADDRESSED TO STEVEN SLADE, 10, 18 POLISH STRAIGHT NEWMAN.
AND SEE, WHEN I FOUND THAT THE SIGNATURE ON THE APPLICATION WAS ACTUALLY STEPHEN SLADE, WHOSE RELATIONSHIP TO MS. PLAYED.
I DON'T KNOW, UH, THE CITY CODE SAID IT SHOULDN'T BE ADDRESSED TO THE APPLICANT AT THE ADDRESS USED IN THE APPLICATION 10, 18 POLYP STREET WAS THE ADDRESS IT WAS USED IN THE APPLICATION THAT WAS RETURNED TO ME, ATTEMPTED NOT KNOWN.
UH, THE SECOND LETTER WAS SENT TO GEORGE SLADE JR.
THE FRANCHISEE 10 18 POLITICS STREET ATTEMPTED NOT KNOWN.
THE THIRD LETTER WAS NOT RETURNED TO ME.
THAT WAS THE ONE THAT WAS ADDRESSED TO THE CORPORATION AND CAB REGISTERED AGENT AT CLARK AVENUE IN THE BEST, WHICH I THINK IS PLAY ADDRESS.
I HAD A CALL A COUPLE OF DAYS LATER, UH, FROM, YES.
IS THAT YOUR NAME, SIR? UH, HE WANTED TO COME DOWN AND SEE ME.
I RETURNED THE CALL AND, UH, FIRST I THOUGHT I HAD GOTTEN THE WRONG NUMBER.
HE HAD LEFT A MESSAGE WITH ONE OF MY ACCURATE SAYING HE WAS THE NEW MANAGER OF SAFEWAY CALVES.
SO ANYWAY, WE DID TALK AND HE CAME DOWN TO THE OFFICE AND WE HAD A DISCUSSION AND I POINTED OUT WHERE THE PROBLEMS WERE AND SO ON AND SO FORTH.
UH, FROM WHAT MS. BROOKS TOLD ME, UH, STEVEN SLADE HAD OPERATED THE FRANCHISE FOR GEORGE FLYNN JR.
AND THEN ANOTHER TIME HE HAD OPERATED THE FRANCHISE FOR JOYCE LEE, JR.
WHAT CAN IS SAY TO YOU IS MY UNCLE.
UH, I POINTED OUT TO HIM, THE, I GAVE HIM A COPY OF THIS LOVE, WHICH HE HAD NOT RECEIVED.
APPARENTLY HIS UNCLE CALLED HIM AFTER HE RECEIVED A LOT.
AND I GAVE GEORGE A COPY OF THIS.
TOTALLY, OF COURSE HIS HEARING WAS SCHEDULED FOR THE NIGHT.
IT WAS NOT ADVERTISED AT THE PUBLIC HEARING.
IT REALLY ORDERED A SHOW CALLED, UH, TO WHY THE FRANCHISE SHOULD NOT BE REVOKED BECAUSE OF SEVERAL THINGS ADDRESSED IN THE LAW.
HE INDICATED THAT HE WOULD BE HERE TONIGHT.
AND I SEE HE HAS TWO OTHER MEN WITH HIM.
UH, ONE OF THE GENTLEMEN, GEORGIA SLADE, AND THE OTHER ONE, STEVEN SUEDE.
MR. SLAYTON, BECAUSE OF HIS HEALTH, HE WASN'T ABLE TO MAKE IT OUT THIS EVENING.
UH, AND STEVEN'S SLAVE, YOU KNOW, HE WASN'T, I GUESS WASN'T REALLY, UH, INTERESTED OR COULDN'T MAKE IT AS THAT HE'S WORKING ALSO THIS EVENING.
SO HE COULDN'T MAKE THE MEETING.
BUT, UH, AS I TOLD YOU BEFORE, UH, I'M GOING TO BE TAKING OVER THE BUSINESS AND I'M GOING TO BE MANAGING FOR MY UNCLE.
I'VE TALKED WITH HIM AND IF IT'S OKAY WITH HIM, BECAUSE, UH, THREE YEARS AGO I MOVED DOWN HERE MAINLY TO MANAGE A BUSINESS, MY UNCLE, BECAUSE MY AUNT HAD PASSED AND MY UNCLE WAS SICK.
AND THEN UPON MY COUSIN RETURNED IT TO NEW BERN.
YOU KNOW, I FELT THAT IT WAS HIS FATHER'S BUSINESS.
SO I LET HIM HANDLE HIS FATHER'S BUSINESS.
IF I KNEW, THEN WHAT I KNOW NOW, I WOULD NEVER HAVE LET THAT HAPPEN, BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT IT IS IN BAD CONDITION NOW.
AND I'M MAINLY HERE TONIGHT TO PETITION THE BOARD,
[00:55:01]
TO ALLOW ME A, A PERIOD OF TIME TO GET THIS BUSINESS BACK TO WHERE I HAD IT BEFORE HE TOOK IT OVER.WHEN I HANDED IT OVER TO HIM, WE HAD ALL EIGHT CALVES RUNNING.
UH, WE HAD NO PROBLEM PAYING THEM, SHOWING NO PROBLEM, PAYING ELECTRIC, ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
AND, UH, YOU KNOW, THESE GENTLEMEN, THE OTHER HAIR, YOU KNOW, THEY ARE WORKING OUT OF OUR CALVES AT THE TIME I WAS RUNNING IT.
AND THEY'RE MORE OR LESS HEAD, YOU KNOW, TO, YOU KNOW, GIVE YOU IDEA THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO MANAGEMENTS.
AND, YOU KNOW, ALL I CAN ASK IS THAT, YOU KNOW, GIVE ME A PERIOD OF TIME BECAUSE YOU KNOW, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT GETTING, YOU KNOW, THREE OR FOUR CARS BACK ON THE ROAD.
YOU KNOW, I GOT TOLD MR. WARD ATTORNEY WARD, I WENT ABOUT THREE WEEKS AGO TO PAY THE FRANCHISE TAX, YOU KNOW, UH, INCLUDING JULY, WHICH YOU KNOW, IS THREE YEARS PAYMENT AND THEY CAN CHOOSE TO TAKE THE MONEY, YOU KNOW? AND, UH, WE WENT DOWN TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND THEY TOLD US THEY HAD TO WAIT UNTIL THE OTHER THINGS WERE RESOLVED.
I DIDN'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT AND INSURANCE LAPSE.
I JUST HAPPENED TO BE IN THE CAB SAYING ONE DAY AND I SEEN A LETTER FOR MOTOR VEHICLE AND I OPENED IT AND IT SAID THE PLACE HAD BEEN REVOKED AS OF THE 21ST, WHICH WAS FOUR DAYS PRIOR TO THAT.
SO AT THAT TIME I GOT ON ALREADY AND PULLED ALL THE CARS OFF THE ROAD, TOOK ALL THE KEYS AND LOCKED THEM UP.
AND UPON SPEAKING TO MY COUSIN, YOU KNOW, HE TOLD, HE INFORMED ME THAT THE INSURANCE WAS STILL IN EFFECT.
AND SO BEING THE PERSON I AM, I CALLED THE INSURANCE COMPANY AND FIND OUT DIFFERENTLY.
SO I'M QUITE SURE THE STATE KNOWS DIFFERENTLY OFF OF THAT, OR THEY WOULDN'T HAVE REVOKED.
SO LIKE I SAID, I, I I'M AWARE OF ALL THE PROBLEMS WITH IT AND THE INSURANCE AND EVERYTHING.
I'M IN THE POSITION TO GO AHEAD AND GET THE CARS BACK, RUNNING THIS PLACE ON THE REVULSION RIGHT NOW.
SO I HAVEN'T BOTHERED PUTTING INSURANCE BACK ON THE CARS BECAUSE I HAVE ANOTHER TWO WEEKS BEFORE THEY'LL BE BACK.
SO WHEN THAT TIME IS UP, I WILL BE PUTTING THE CARS THAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW, BACK ON, YOU KNOW, INSURANCE ON THOSE.
AND DEPENDING ON THE TIME PERIOD YOU GIVE ME, I WOULDN'T PUT THE REST OF THE CARS BACK ON THE ROAD.
WHY ARE THEY OFF THE ROAD OTHER THAN THE INSURANCE ONLY MECHANICALLY? NO, THEY WERE RUNNING, THEY WERE RUNNING UNTIL I GOT THAT NOTICE SAYING THAT THE PLACE HAD BEEN REVOKED.
SO IT'S A MATTER OF JUST MONEY REALLY TO PUT THEM BACK ON THE ROAD.
WELL, FAR AS THE OTHER FRANCHISES THAT WEREN'T BEING CAUSED WHILE THEY'RE RUNNING, I CAN'T SPEAK FOR HIM.
SO BROWNIE, THERE WERE ONLY THREE CARS RUNNING AT THE TIME.
ACTUALLY, YOU TOLD ME THAT YOU ARE RIGHT.
I RECENTLY PUT SOME ON THE ROAD MYSELF.
DIDN'T YOU TELL ME THAT YOU ARRANGED FOR THE PURCHASE OF THREE NEW CARS? I SAID, I I'M WILLING TO PURCHASE, YOU KNOW, MORE CARDS TO GET ALL THE FRANCHISE RUNNING.
HOW MANY CARS WERE ACTUALLY RUNNING HIS TAXI CABS AT THE TIME ALL OF THIS CAME TO A HEAD FIRE AND THEN THE OTHER TWO OTHER TWO HAD DIFFERENT INSURANCE.
THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE SAME INSURANCE.
HE HAD NO TWO, TWO THAT I WOULD, YOU KNOW, HAD INSURED.
SO THERE HAD BEEN FIVE CARS RUNNING, ALTHOUGH THEY HAD EIGHT FRANCHISES.
AND SEE, ACTUALLY I JUST RECENTLY PUT THE OTHER TWO WITHIN THE PAST MONTH, A MONTH AND A HALF, OR, YOU KNOW, GOT THOSE RUNNING, YOU KNOW, CALLING MYSELF, TRYING TO HELP THE BUSINESS OUT A LITTLE BIT.
HOW MANY TOTAL DO YOU HAVE RUNNING NOW? THAT'S THAT'S PLACE IN TERMS OF INSURANCE AND TAX? YEAH.
ANOTHER THREE HAD BEEN REVOKED, SO THEY WERE, YOU KNOW, TWO OUT OF EIGHT, RIGHT.
JAKE, DID YOU WANT TO ADD SOMETHING?
AND THAT IF HE PAID THE $600 FEE THAT THE TAXI CAB COMPANY OWNED, HE MIGHT BE OUT OF MONEY AND WOUND UP WITH NO PERMIT BECAUSE WE WERE IN THE PROCESS OF PREPARING FOR A HEARING.
SO IT WAS IN HIS INTEREST THAT WE DIDN'T TAKE YOUR $600.
THIS ISSUE CAME TO LIGHT AS A RESULT OF A TRAFFIC ACCIDENT.
UH, THERE WAS AN ACCIDENT INVOLVING A SAFEWAY CAB AND ANOTHER CITIZEN.
AND WHEN THEY GOT INSURANCE INFORMATION.
UH, AS A RESULT OF THE ACCIDENT, WE FOUND OUT THAT THE CAB DID NOT HAVE ANY INSURANCE.
THE INSURANCE WAS ISSUED, I THINK 11 DAYS AFTER THE ACCIDENT OCCURRED SO THAT KEVIN OPERATING, I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG WITHOUT INSURANCE AT ALL, BUT THEN THEY DIDN'T GET INSURANCE ON THE CABS ABOUT 11 DAYS AFTER THE ACCIDENT.
THAT'S WHEN I FOUND OUT FROM MS. THOMPSON, THAT THERE WERE THREE YEARS IN THE REARS UPON THE FRANCHISE FEES.
AND THAT'S WHEN I NOTIFIED MR. WARD, UH, WE CHECKED OUT THE INSURANCE ISSUE SITUATION.
[01:00:01]
IT DID HAVE INSURANCE AT THE TIME, BUT IT JUST WASN'T AN EFFECT WHEN THE ACCIDENT OCCURRED BACK IN 98.SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW.
AND THAT'S WHY I WOULDN'T TAKE HIS $600 BECAUSE ANYTHING THAT WAS FAIR TO HIM TO PAY MONEY, HE MAY NOT HAVE A BUSINESS ON LATER ON THE ORDINANCE DOES REQUIRE THAT ANY CHANGE IN OWNERSHIP BE APPROVED BY THE BOARD.
THEY CAN'T SELL THE COMPANY TRANSFER SHARES OR DO ANYTHING LIKE THAT WITHOUT THE BOARD'S APPROVAL.
AND SO I KIND OF WARNED HIM THAT HE MIGHT NOT EVEN BE APPROVED BY THE BOARD TO TAKE OVER THE BUSINESS.
SO THERE WAS A LOT OF ISSUES FLOATING OUT THERE THAT YOU REALLY NEEDED TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT.
IF HE WANTED TO FORCE A CHECK ON ME, YOUR CASH, WE MIGHT'VE TAKEN IT.
BUT HONESTLY, AND HE'S JUST GOING TO BE RUNNING THE BUSINESS.
IF THE OWNERSHIP IS STILL THE SAME PERSON.
HOW DOES THAT WEIGH IN THE CRUCIBLE OF JUSTICE? IN OTHER WORDS, IT IS OKAY FOR HIM TO PAY THE BILLS AND LEAVE.
I WOULD SUGGEST THAT YOU GET A LETTER WRONG DISPLAYED, SAY THAT YOU'RE GOING TO BE MANAGING A COMPANY FOR HIS COOPERATION.
WHAT DO WE DO ABOUT THE OTHER THREE FRANCHISE INSTEAD OF INACTIVE? AND WE TAKE THEM BACK IN CASE THERE'S SOMEONE WHO WANTS ONE.
THAT QUESTION IS FOR THE BOARD TONIGHT.
AND IF IN FACT I SAW THREE CABS THERE PARKED FACING QUEEN STREET UNTIL YESTERDAY.
WHEN I WENT BY THERE YESTERDAY, I BELIEVE IT WAS THE CAB FOR OFF THE LOT.
THERE WERE NONE THAT I WAS NOT AWARE OF ANY TWO OTHERS THAT WERE BEING OPERATED, BUT I DON'T KNOW.
AND IF YOU SEE THE WAY I PHRASED THIS, I HAD BEEN TOLD THAT HE WAS NOT OPERATING.
ALL OF THEM HAVE PHRASED IT THIS WAY SO THAT IT COULD BE AGGRESSIVE BEFORE THE BOARD AND THE BOARD TO MAKE A DECISION AS TO WHETHER HE HAD FALKEN IT IN THERE.
WELL, I THINK THAT IF HE ARE YOU GOING TO REACTIVATE FIVE OF THEM, BUT YOU, BUT YOU CAN FORESEE AT REACTIVATING FIVE OF THEM REACTIVELY, WHAT PERIOD OF TIME CODE THAT AUTOMATICALLY, THOSE ARE, THAT ARE NOT OPERATED.
SO IT'S UP TO THE BOARD TO MAKE A DECISION AS TO HOW MANY HE HAD, NOT, WHETHER HE CAN NOW COME IN AND GO WITH IT.
IF HE HAS NOT BEEN OPERATING BUT FIRE AND THAT'S ALL HE'S GOT.
IF HE'S NOT BEEN OPERATING OPERATOR THREE, THAT'S ALL, HE'S GOT.
THE ONLY INSURANCE INFORMATION I HAVE, WHICH IS PROBABLY DATED NOW IS THAT HE HAS INSURANCE ON THREE OF THE CARS.
INSURANCE IS, IT WAS EFFECTIVE NOVEMBER 24, 98.
IS THAT YOU STILL HAD THAT THIS WAS ON 90 CHEVY.
I HAVE NO INSURANCE INFORMATION AT ALL ON ANY OF ITS CARS.
YOU SAID TWO OF THEM WERE IN YOUR, YOU HAD A DIFFERENT INSURANCE ON IT AND THEN THREE OTHER ONES THAT'S REVOKED.
HOW LONG IS THAT? THREE MINUTE.
I REALLY CAN TELL YOU, LIKE I SAID, I'M JUST GETTING BACK, UM, PROBABLY AT THE TIME OF THE ACCIDENT.
CAUSE ONCE YOU FIND AN INSURED TO PULL IT UP THREE OFF ABOUT
THEN IF YOU HAD FIVE CAMS OPERATING ON THE DAY OF THE ACCIDENT, YOU WOULD HAVE RECORDS THAT SHOWED THAT FIVE COUNTS WERE OPERATING WELL, YOU, YOU, YOU SEE WHAT I'M GETTING AT AL IF AT WHAT PERIOD WOULD HE NEED TO SHOW US THAT HE HAD FIVE BROUGHT HIM SO HE COULD GET 500 WITHIN 60 DAYS OF JULY 28TH? I BELIEVE IT WAS 1998.
THAT WAS THE DATE ON WHICH THE FRANCHISE ORDINANCE FROM THE DOMINANT ON SECOND READING.
SO YOU WOULD NEED TO GO BACK AND FIND SOME KIND OF RECORDS SHOWING HOW MANY CAMPS OPERATED ON THOSE DAYS, SOME DAY SHOW THAT YOU
[01:05:01]
HAD FIVE CALVES OPERATING.UM, LET ME CALL YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS.
THE LAST TWO THINGS THAT WERE SENT OUT TO THE CAB FRANCHISEE REFLECTED THAT THEY HAD TO HAVE THE CAPTION OPERATION WITHIN 60 IN ORDER TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CODE.
AND IT SAYS VERY SPECIFICALLY, AND I INCLUDED THAT AND WHATEVER IT WAS THAT I SENT OUT, I THINK IT WAS THE ORDINANCE SO THAT THEY WERE KNOW IT, BOY.
AND IF THEY WERE NOT IN OPERATION, IF THERE WAS NOT A CAB HUNTING FOR EACH PERMITTED, IT BECAME NULL AND VOID WITHIN 60 DAYS AT THE END OF THE 60 DAY.
SO THREE OF THEM FOR SURE IS NONE.
THREE OF HIS CAB FRANCHISES ARE NOT HIS CAFE RIO, THE EIGHT HOURS.
SHE'S SAYING THAT MOSTLY COULD POSSIBLY HAVE TOO MUCH LATER ON.
WELL, IT WAS ME OR SOMETHING THAT WAS AN ACCOMPLISHED FACT.
60 DAYS AFTER THE FRANCHISE ORDINANCE WAS ADOPTED ANY CABS THAT WERE NOT MEN BEING OPERATED.
IF HE HAD FRANCHISED FOR AGE AS A SLAVE DID WAS CORPORATION DID, IF HE ONLY HAD THREE CALVES OPERATING AT THE EXPIRATION OF 60 DAYS, THAT'S ONLY HE HAD REST OF THEM, BOY.
SO HE HAD TO GET UP AND RUNNING.
BUT WHAT I'M SAYING, LET'S FIND OUT HOW CAN WE FIND OUT HOW MANY WAS RUNNING AT THE END OF 60 DAYS? HOW CAN WE FIND THAT AGE? THE FRUIT
THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING HIM ABOUT THE DAY OF THE RIC.
WE ONLY HAVE INSURANCE INFORMATION ON ONE VEHICLE.
IS THAT, IS THAT RIGHT? THREE, THREE VEHICLES, NO INSURANCE, NO INSURANCE, BUT OKAY.
BUT THAT WAS THE ONLY ONE VEHICLE FOR ALL OF THEM.
IF THERE WAS NO INSURANCE
ASSUMING NONE OF THE FRANCHISES THAT HE WILL OP WAS OPERATING, HAD INSURANCE, NONE HAD INSURANCE.
WHAT IS THE BULLETS LIABILITY AND ALLOW HIM TO CONTINUE TO RUN THIS FRANCHISE, KNOWING THAT HE DIDN'T HAVE AN INSURANCE.
WELL, I MEAN, WHAT IS OUR OBLIGATION? AND YOU HAVE THE RIGHT UNDER THE CITY CODE TO REVOKE THE FRANCHISE BECAUSE HE OPERATED THE CANVAS WITHOUT LIABILITY.
NOW
HOW LONG HAD IT BEEN SENSITIVE? I DON'T HAVE ANY IDEA WHEN THESE THINGS EXPIRE.
IT SEEMS TO ME, THIS IS JUST, AGAIN, I THINK MR. BROOKS IS GOING TO DO A GOOD JOB, BUT IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THE INSURANCE WAS PURCHASED AFTER THE ACCIDENT, BECAUSE THEY KNEW THERE WAS GOING TO BE SOME PROBLEMS THERE.
SO THEY WENT 11 DAYS AFTER THE ACCIDENT AND GOT INSURANCE, ALL THE CALVES INSURED.
NOW, NO CATS ARE INSURED TO, I SHOULDN'T.
DO YOU HAVE ANY ON THE ROAD TO, ON THE ROAD? MAY I MAKE THIS TABLE AND GIVE THE CHIEF INSTRUCTIONS TO DETERMINE HOW MANY CABS HE HAD LICENSED WHEN THAT'S FINE.
SO NEW, MAY I RESPOND AND MAKE A COMMENT BEFORE YOU GO THROUGH THIS? UH, FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, YOU KNOW, THE WAY IT SOUNDS LIKE TO YOU TO, YOU KNOW, TO ME THAT, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT GOING TO GET ALL EIGHT OF MY FRANCHISE, YOU KNOW, UH, ALL OF YOUR FRANCHISE.
WE'LL MAKE SURE AN ACCURATE
AND HE'S LIKE MY FATHER, SO HIS FATHER IN HIS MIND AS WELL BEFORE.
BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT WON'T KNOW THERE'S FRANCHISES OUT THERE AND THERE'S A PROPER METHODOLOGY FOR ALL THE PEOPLE TO GET IN LINE AND GET THEM.
AND NOBODY HAS TAKEN THE FOR A WHILE TO GET THOSE BACKS TO NO, NO, NO, NO.
WHAT I'M SAYING, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE SAYING THAT PEOPLE IN LINE WAITING FOR FRANCHISES, WHY IS THAT ONE STILL SITTING THERE? SOMEONE'S WAITING FOR THE PLANT.
I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S NOT, THERE IS A METHODOLOGY FOR GETTING A FRANCHISE AND IT'S NOT JUST ASSUMING IT.
AND I MEAN, THAT WAS POINTING OUT TONIGHT.
SO WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT THE, THAT THE LAW AND THE THINGS THAT WE'RE HAVING TO FOLLOW IS THE REASON MR. WARD'S BRINGING ALL THIS UP.
NOT BECAUSE WE, YOU KNOW, INVENTING IT ON
[01:10:01]
THE WAY OR TRYING TO WORK WITH IT, BUT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU UNDERSTAND THAT IN ORDER TO DO THESE THINGS.I JUST LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION, HOW, HOW DO YOU NOT HAVE INSURANCE AND THE STATE DOESN'T SEND A GUY AROUND AND TAKE YOUR LICENSE PLATES? WELL, THEY DID DO IT, BUT I GOT A GUY.
THEY HAD A, HE USED TO HAVE A GUY THAT COMES AROUND AND TAKES THEM.
IF YOU DON'T TURN THEM AWAY PATROL, OH, I'LL TELL YOU TO SEND THEM, MAN.
IF YOU DON'T SEND A MAN, THEY'LL SEND SOMEBODY OUT, BUT THEY'LL MAKE IT OUT.
AND YOU LOSE YOUR LOT DRIVER'S LICENSE AND ALL KINDS OF, YEAH, I DON'T KNOW.
UNLESS YOU HAVE INSURANCE LAPSE AND YOU LOSE, YOU LOSE YOUR DRIVER'S LICENSE.
ALSO, IF I'M NOT, I KNOW IT'S A PRETTY, PRETTY HEFTY SITUATION.
BUT, YOU KNOW, ANYWAY, WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS TO MR. WARD HAS SUGGESTED THAT THE CHIEF AND YOU, AND WHOEVER'S INVOLVED GETTING TOGETHER AND THAT'S THE SIGN, HOW MANY CALVES THERE ARE, AND WHAT'S THE INTERIOR AND WHAT IT MEANS YOUR AND WHEN IT WAS INJURED AND WHEN IT WASN'T.
AND SO WHEN THEY WANT IT IS, WE'VE GOT TO WORK WITH LETTER BE NOW LISTEN.
SO IT'S JUST A CONTINUATION OF THE SHOW, CALLS HER, MR. MR. ROY, WHEN WE CONTINUE THIS MATTER, WOULD THIS BE A CONTINUATION OF THIS SHOW CALLS HERE? OKAY, WELL, YOU KNOW, HOW MUCH TIME DO YOU NEED? HOW MUCH TIME DO YOU NEED? OH, AT WHAT POINT IN TIME TO DETERMINE HOW MANY TAXIS HAD PROPERLY BEING AN OPERATOR
THE CODE PROVIDES THAT EVERY CAB HAD TO BE IN OPERATION WITHIN 60 DAYS AFTER THE FRANCHISE ORDINANCE WAS ADOPTED ON SECOND READING, WHICH I THINK WAS JULY 28TH.
IF HE DIDN'T HAVE ANY CABS IN OPERATION AT THE EXPIRATION OF THAT 60 DAY PERIOD, ALL OF THEM WILL GO 19 EIGHT.
SO THAT WOULD BE AROUND SEPTEMBER 27 OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
BUT THAT MEANS WE NEED TO KNOW THE BOARD NEEDED TO KNOW HOW MANY CABS WERE IN OPERATION AT THE EXPIRATION OF 60 DAYS FROM THE TIME THE FRANCHISE WAS GRANTED.
AND IN ADDITION TO THAT, HOW ABOUT, UH, HOW, HOW MANY VEHICLES WERE INSURED ON THE DAY OF THAT, RICK? AND LET'S JUST SUPPOSE THAT THE WHOLE THING IS, HAS GONE TO ZERO.
THEY DIDN'T HAVE THEM INSURED AND SO FORTH AND SO ON, AND THIS GENTLEMAN WANTS TO COME UP AND SO TO SPEAK, YOU GET IN THE CAB BUSINESS AND THE CHIEF THINKS HE'S CAPABLE, WE'LL DO IT.
WHAT WOULD HE HAVE TO DO ON HIS OWN FOR US TO BE ABLE TO GIVE HIM SOME FRANCHISEES, BACHELOR, HOLD ON THIS BOARD MAY PERMIT GEORGE SLADE, JUNIOR INCORPORATED TO CONTINUE TO OPERATE FRANCHISES.
IN OTHER WORDS, THE REPLICATION HAS TO BE DONE BY THIS POOL.
UH, THERE IS NO LEGAL LIABILITY FOR US ALLOWING TAXES TO OPERATE WITHOUT INSURANCE.
YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING? LIKE TOMORROW YOU CAN HAVE INSURANCE IN FORCE FOR X AMOUNT OF THEM.
THEY'RE RUNNING, THEY'RE READY TO GO.
THEY'LL HAVE LICENSE PLATES AND SAY, WE'LL KNOW, YOU KNOW WHAT WE'RE WORKING WITH.
MOSTLY WHAT WE WERE WORKING WHILE WE'VE BEEN WORKING, WE HAVE THEM.
WE'LL SEE WHAT THE PROMISE OF WHAT WAS GOING TO BE WORKING WITH MR. BROOKS, ARE YOU PRESSED FOR TIME IS WITH US CONTINUING AND DOING ALL THAT WE FEEL WE MUST DO.
DOES THAT HINDER YOU IN SOME WAY TO CONTINUE TO WORK? I'LL TELL YOU THE CABS TO WORK.
UM, WELL RIGHT NOW UNTIL THE REVULSION THIRD DAY REMOTION IS UP.
BUT ONCE THAT IS UP, YOU KNOW, I WOULD LIKE TO GET THOSE CALLS BACK ON THE ROAD AND GETTING SOME REVENUE COMING BACK IN QUITE A BIT OF, I THINK THE BOARD IS FROM WHAT I'M UNDERSTANDING WILL PROBABLY GO ALONG WITH YOU.
IF YOU'VE GOT YOUR DUCKS IN A ROW.
I MEAN, YOU KNOW, WE'D LIKE TO SEE SOMEBODY RUN INTO THINGS AND MAKE THEM WORK, BUT WE NEED TO GET A REPORT BACK.
AND I KNOW WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
IT'S TO, HOW ABOUT LAST SESSION? DO WE HAVE A WORK SESSION? THE 17TH.
THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE ENOUGH.
I DON'T WANT, HE WON'T BE ABLE TO GET HIS LICENSE PLATES BACK ON UNTIL THE 24TH.
NO, BUT WE'LL BE ABLE TO, JUST TO BE ABLE TO GIVE HIM SOME SORT OF GREEN LIGHT
[01:15:01]
ABOUT IF HE CAN HAVE HIS STUFF READY.SO HE'S BUSINESS WHEN YOU WERE APPLICATIONS UP.
SO YOU SAID THAT SHE SHOULD REPORT THAT TO US AT THE NEXT WORK SESSION.
AND THEN WE CAN GIVE MR. BOOK TO AN IDEA.
UH, YOU CAN GIVE THE CHIEF SOME ASSURANCE THAT IF HE'S THAT WAY, YOU WON'T HAVE TO BE THAT IF YOU DON'T WANT TO, IT, IT, YOU KNOW, YOU'LL BE ABLE TO PUT X AMOUNT OF CABS ON THE ROAD AT THE END OF THAT 30 DAY PERIOD WITH INSURANCE AND LICENSE PLATES AND CYCLE.
AND YOU'LL NOTICE SOMETHING ABOUT THAT, WON'T YOU, BUT IT ALSO DEFINES THE THINGS WERE REVOKED VERY WELL ONCE YOU'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT, WELL, HE'S A GOOD MAN.
I KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING, THE RECORDS AVAILABLE.
SO WE CAN LOOK AT THINGS AND SEE WHAT KIND OF CATS ARE OPERATING IN, WHAT TIME FRAME AND ALL OF THAT INSURANCE PAPERS AND ANY OTHER DOCUMENTATION THAT WILL BE VERY HELPFUL.
NOW, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT ONCE YOU REPORT BY THE 17TH OF MAY, WHICH THEY'RE OPERATING AND WAYNE HAD THEM OPERATED BY THE 28TH OF SEPTEMBER, BUT HE JUST GETS HIS RECORDS.
AND AGAIN, THAT'S JUST INSURANCE THAT'S TO GIVE US AN IDEA ON PAST HISTORY, WHICH REALLY DOESN'T HAVE A WHOLE LOT TO DO WITH WHAT YOU WERE PROPOSING TO DO.
WE WOULD JUST TRY TO TAKE A LOOK AT ACTUALLY HOW MANY FRANCHISES UNDER THE ORDINANCE WERE REALLY ALREADY GONE.
THAT MAY WE CAN'T REINSTATE THEM AS WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO SAY, BUT AT LEAST WE'RE TRYING TO GET A HISTORY WE'RE WORKING WITH
IF THERE IS A PROBLEM, YOU GOT ANY QUESTIONS, YOU CAN JUST CALL THEM.
BUT THE IMPORTANT THING TO ME AND I, AND I THINK THE REST OF THE BOARD IS TO BE ABLE TO SHOW THE PEOPLE THAT YOU'LL BE ABLE TO PUT CABS ON THE ROAD AND HAVE THE FINANCIAL PART, THE INSURANCE, AND ALL THAT BUSINESS THAT YOU PUSH THE BUTTON.
AND THERE, I MEAN, THAT'S WHAT YOU SAY.
HE, WE WANT TO HELP YOU DO IT, BUT WE WANT TO DO IT IN THE RIGHT WAY.
MORE OR LESS TELL YOU, NOW YOU SAY HOW MANY CALLS WILL RUN AT THE TIME OF THE ACCIDENT? WELL, WE DON'T NEED TO GO.
WE DON'T NEED THE CHIEF CHIEF, UH, MR.
THAT WOULD BE, HE WOULD BE PAYING MATT CONTINGENT ON THE FRANCHISE.
GOING AHEAD WITH WHEN HE PAID LMS DOWN HERE, MR. BROOKS IS THE
WHAT I'M SAYING THOUGH, IS THAT THE MONEY'S COMING OUT OF HIS POCKET.
IT'S UP TO HIM AND HIM AND HIS UNCLE.
BUT WHAT I'M, WHAT I'M SAYING FOR HIS BENEFIT IS THAT IF, IF HIS STAFF LOOKS LIKE IT'S COMING TOGETHER, LIKE YOU THINK IN A POSITIVE MANNER, YOU KNOW, AND AGAIN, THAT IS BETWEEN YOU AND YOUR UNCLE, BUT IF YOU'RE PAYING HIS DEBT, YOU KNOW, I ASSUME YOU'RE PAYING IT BECAUSE YOU FEEL LIKE IF YOU'RE GOING, EXCUSE ME, PROBABLY GET A FAVORABLE INDICATION FROM US TO GO AHEAD WITH IT, WITH THE BUSINESS.
SO ALL I'M SAYING IS THE CHIEF WOULD KIND OF HAVE AN IDEA OF, WELL, ALL THIS IS COMING TOGETHER.
YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING? NO WORRIES.
ONE OF MY, ONE OF MY PET PEEVES IS THE FACT THAT THERE'S SO MANY CARS, INCLUDING SOUTHERN CABS, OBVIOUSLY OUT THERE OPERATING WITHOUT INSURANCE AND BARBARA SAYING HE CAN'T DO IT.
AND MOST PEOPLE THINK YOU CAN, BUT YOU CAN'T BECAUSE THERE'S SO MANY COMPANIES THAT SELL INSURANCE AND YOU PAY BY THE MONTH BECAUSE INSURANCE IS SO EXPENSIVE.
YOU KNOW, I PAY MINE EVERY SIX MONTHS, YOU PAY ONE BOOK, YOU DON'T PAY ANYMORE.
NOW THE CHIEF CONTINUE FOR THE HIGHWAY PATROL TO COME, LOOKING FOR AN INDIVIDUAL TO TRY TO GET THAT LICENSE PLATE OFF THEIR CAR IS ABOUT THE SAME PRIORITY AS THEM CHASING DOWN A STRAY DOG IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
WAIT, WHAT BASICALLY HAPPENS IS EITHER BY DESIGN OR BY ACCIDENT OR BY CIRCUMSTANCE OR HAPPENSTANCE, PEOPLE DON'T PAY THEIR INSURANCE PREMIUMS HERE, INSURANCES REVOLT.
AND THEY GET A LETTER SAYING THAT WE NO LONGER HAVE DRIVING PRIVILEGE.
AS YOUR TAGS ARE NO LONGER GOOD.
AND OF COURSE, WHAT HAPPENS IS WE STOPPED THEM FOR A CHAPTER VIOLATION, BUT WE CHECKED AND WE FIND THAT NO INSURANCE WILL PULL THE TAG.
WE'LL ARREST THEM FOR DRIVING WITHOUT INSURANCE, AS A SEPARATE CHARGE FOR THAT.
BUT THAT'S A, IF YOU CATCH SOMEBODY, THEY ALSO HAVE THEIR DRIVER'S LICENSE SUSPENDED AT THE TIME.
[01:20:01]
THINGS GOING ON, BUT THE PROBLEM IS SORRY.I'M THERE'S SO MANY PEOPLE ARE DOING THAT BY OUR LIGHTER INSURANCE RIDER.
JUST PAY A DEPOSIT ON THE INSURANCE AND NEVER MAKE A PREMIUM.
AND I KNOW THEY'RE OUT THERE BECAUSE I READ ARTICLES ON THE MICRO HAD NO INSURANCE, NO INSURANCE OPERATOR HAD NO INSURANCE.
AND THE PERSON THAT GETS HIT IS JUST OUT OF LUCK BECAUSE GENERALLY THE PERSON WHO HIT THEM HAS NO, NO ASSETS AT ALL THAT THEY CAN GO AFTER TO HELP PAY THE BILLS.
SO, UH, SOMETHING STAYED ON TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT HOW YOU'RE GOING TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT.
THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN TELL IF THEY'VE GOT INSURANCE IS LOOK, CALL THE INSURANCE AGENT EVERY DAY AND SAY, IS IT STILL IN EFFECT? WELL, IT'S GOING LAST AND IT'S GONE SAT A DEAD.
SO MOVING ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA NOBODY'S GOING TO PULL IN.
I HAVE ONE FOR THE NEWBURN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION.
I WOULD LIKE TO NOMINATE STEVE WYNN 2 0 7 POLLOCK STREET.
THAT'S THE, UH, HOWARD HOUSE SAT BREAKFAST TEA WITH HIS WIFE, KIMBERLY OWN IT.
AND HE ALSO DOES HISTORIC RESTORATION WORK.
HE HAS COMPLETED, UH, ONE STRUCTURE AND HAS, UH, SEVERAL OTHERS IN LINE TO DO HE'S.
HE IS NOT A LICENSED CONTRACTOR.
HE WORKS UNDER OTHER PEOPLE'S LICENSES AND DOES WORK THAT DOES NOT REQUIRE THE CONTRACTORS LICENSE BECAUSE HIS MAIN BUSINESS IS RUNNING THE BED AND BREAKFAST.
SO HE HAS A BUSINESS INTEREST, BOTH IN OTHER PEOPLE'S HOUSES AND HIS OWN BUSINESS.
SECOND, ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.
I HAVE AN APPOINTMENT ALSO TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD, BUT J BARRINGTON FROM 9 0 4 LINN STREET, HE'S RETIRED AND HAS PLENTY OF TIME TO PUT TOWARDS OKAY.
ALL, IF I EVER SAY MISCELLANEOUS.
ONE THING I HAVEN'T BEEN ASKED, ASK IF THE REQUEST TO HAVE THE SPEED LIMIT ON NATIONAL TWENTY-FIVE MINUTES, ISN'T THAT A STATE CONTROLLED? WELL, I THINK THAT IS JUST IT FROM THE STAGE.
I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT IS THAT WE CHANGE.
THE SPEED LIMIT IS A NATIONAL AVENUE AT THE 25 MILES AN HOUR.
UH, WELL I CAN MAKE A RESIDENCE.
YOU ASK HIM IT WOULDN'T BE DRAWN.
YOU SOUND SOLOMON SPLIT THE BABY TONIGHT.
JUST LIKE SPLIT THAT, SPLIT IT DOWN AND I'LL TELL YOU WHY.
SO WE'LL I JUST WANT TO, I JUST WANT TO PUT IT ON RECORD THAT WE HAVE THE BUDGET WORK SESSION COMING UP ON THE 22ND OF MAY 8:30 AM.
ALL IN FAVOR OF A JOURNEY AND SAY, AYE, ALL OPPOSED.