This proposal was presented to the city council in a closed session at the end of our July 19 meeting. The motion to give preliminary approval and schedule a public hearing on the request failed on a 4-4 tie vote with Yvonne not in attendance. [Update - "Yes" votes: Bellamy-Small, Burroughs-White, Holliday and Perkins; "No" votes: Carmany, Gatten, Phillips, and Vaughan] Council members favoring the request were unhappy with the outcome and inquired about parliamentary procedure and other ways to be able to reconsider this request. It looks like they found that way with the passage of last night's motion on a 7-2 vote that signals ultimate approval at the next council meeting. [Update - "Yes" votes: Bellamy-Small, Burroughs-White, Gatten, Holliday, Johnson, Perkins and Vaughan; "No" votes: Carmany and Phillips]
Such is life in the political arena!
2 comments:
Sandy,
Just curious: who were the two who voted against the motion?
Also, who changed their votes from the previous vote, and why do you think they did so?
Sincerely,
Hardy
Tom Phillips and I opposed both the motion in closed session on July 19 and Yvonne's motion last night. Until the minutes of the closed session are made public , I'll have to respect closed session protocol and not reveal which two members changed their votes.
Post a Comment