Laserfiche WebLink
South Bend Redevelopment Commission <br />Regular Meeting —June 6, 2003 <br />6. NEW BUSINESS <br />A. Public Hearing <br />(1) continued.... <br />In addition, prior to the meeting I spoke with <br />Mr. Masters by telephone and it was my <br />understanding, unless that has changed, that <br />the remonstrance was being filed in order to <br />preserve Mr. McNease's rights in this <br />matter. Mr. McNease and Mr. Masters were <br />agreeable to continue negotiations with <br />respect to this property and would, therefore, <br />suggest at this point that the Commission <br />hold off making final decision on the <br />remonstrance. The remonstrance can be <br />revived in the event that negotiations break <br />down. The remonstrance is filed timely, <br />consistent with the statute and by agreement <br />may be held in abeyance until such time <br />that, if we are unable to reach an agreement, <br />then it would be revived and all of the <br />statutory rights would kick in at that point. <br />Jim, is that correct? Your understanding of <br />our agreement? <br />MR. MASTERS: No. If the Commission <br />votes to put this property on its acquisition <br />list, then you also have to take into account <br />our remonstrance. The time runs, we have <br />thirty days to file suit in court to challenge <br />this acquisition. If we enter into some kind <br />of agreement, that agreement could extend <br />the deadline for filing suit. <br />MS. GREENE: You want them to go ahead <br />and act on the remonstrance? <br />12 <br />