Failure of facts were prominently displayed on the front page of the Suburban dated February 9th, 2012 Issue #67

The article in question is titled “City Council Consider Proposal For Pool Hall”

There are a few discrepancies in the article. This could be avoided if the editor would include all of what is said. Not just bits & pieces.

If you watch the video of the 2/7/12 City Council meeting, you will hear, starting at 27:20, Mayor Green ask if there is anyone else that would care to speak for or against Mi Hacienda.

Silence passes, Smithey of District 4 then makes a motion to close the public hearing, 2nd by District 2 Councilmember Cannon.

Mayor Green states, “a motion and a 2nd have been made, would you please vote.” You can hear Mrs. Harris ask if they would be able to ask any questions. Mayor states “they will, they have to close the public hearing first, then they will get into it.”

Vote: 7-0

After the vote to close the public comment portion, Mayor then states, “The Chair at this time will entertain a motion.”

8 seconds of silence pass.

Smithey begins, “Well, can we ask some questions, or do we have to make a motion first.”

Cannon: “Ya, cause I got some concerns about some of the elements of this.”

Mayor Green: “Okay, we normally make a motion to put it on the floor and then we have discussion, but if you choose not to do that then I guess we (inaudible) discuss.”

Smithey: Well, if that’s our normal situation I move to approve.

Leslie Thomas: (inaudible due to not speaking in the microphone, or it was off.)

Smithey: “I move for approval of the request, I want to discuss it, I have some questions I want to ask. If that’s what I gotta do to discuss, that’s what I’ll do.”

Cannon: “Well I’ll 2nd it so we can discuss it, if that’s what it comes down to.”

Mayor: “Okay, now the motion is to approve the request to issue the SUP for Ezequiel Lopez…Okay…..alright….discussion.”

Discussion then follows. There will be no transcription of the next 20 minutes of video, you can see the entire City Council Meeting for yourself here.

The remaining part of the article left out some other pertinent details.

Suburban: Over twenty percent of the surrounding property owners sent letters in opposition to the change in zoning.

DV: The above is true, but you forgot to add that all property owners and or residents, within 200 feet of said property, received a letter from the City stating what changes were being proposed. Not all were sent back. You can find the ones that came back to the City in the council packet posted here on DV. Including this one from Dan Jesperson – Click Here.

Suburban: “When it appeared that a super majority vote was not likely, Smithey pulled his motion. He put forth another motion to remand the request back to the P&Z Commission.”

DV: Seems that the Suburban wants you to believe that Smithey and Cannon were ready to grant the SUP and overturn the P&Z vote. The first motion was made by Smithey & Cannon only to start discussion. After discussion and all questions were asked by attending Councilpersons, Smithey made a motion to send it back to P&Z, so Mr. Lopez could re-apply, with different conditions.

Results of the vote to send SUP back to P&Z -

One would be lead to believe that the four members of Council that voted for this item to be returned to P&Z are trying to give a small business owner a fair shake at doing what’s he thinks is right for his business. If it goes through, it goes through. If not, then so be it.

When the article is compared with the City Council video, it should have you singing…

Did the taxpayers on Sesame Street have to reimburse Big Bird for 4 bowls seed?