Laserfiche WebLink
11. The public notice for the first reading of the Ordinance was defective in that it <br />constituted a denial of due process and violated applicable provisions of the <br />Government Code because, among other things, the notice did not reference the <br />Planning Commission's recommendation regarding the Ordinance, did not indicate the <br />staff was recommending additional changes not included in that recommendation, did <br />not provide any hint or suggestion that non-profit medical offices were going to be <br />treated differently than for -profit medical offices or that for -profit offices might be subject <br />to the Ordinance if they accepted any federal subsidies or reimbursements, and, most <br />importantly, the notice did not indicate that applications that had been duly submitted <br />before the Ordinance took effect were not going to be grandfathered in which is the <br />normal custom and practice with new zoning ordinances. <br />Conclusion. <br />In light of the above -listed problems underlying the Ordinance, SOS respectfully <br />requests that Ordinance either be sent back to staff to cure its deficiencies or that it at <br />least be clarified so that it will not apply to Turner's Application. Thank you. <br />Ernest W. ("Will") Klatte <br />Chair, SOS Board of Directors <br />Share Our Selves 9 1 P a g e <br />