|
~~
<br />The PSinu'tes of. June 16, 1975, were reviewed.
<br />Upon motion of Commissioner Finney, seconded by ~ro~n+~issioner TAhitted,
<br />the (dins.,*.es of June lti, 1975 were apF~roved.
<br />The Minutes of June 17, 1975, were reviewed and a correction to be
<br />mane was pointed out.
<br />Uaon motion o.f Cozmissioner ?]hitted, seconded by Carimissioner Pinney,
<br />the Minutes of June 17, 1975, were approved subject to the indicated
<br />correction.
<br />The tdinutes of June 13, 1975, were approve~l on July 2r, 1975.
<br />The P4inutes of June 26, 1975, were reviewed.
<br />Upon motion of Commissioner Whitted, seconded by Commissioner Pinney,
<br />the Min-~tes of .'une 26, 1975: were appravec'..
<br />^he ~SinutPS of Jiliy 7, 197:x, were reviewed.
<br />Upon motion of Commissioner Whitted, seconded by Commissioner Pinney,
<br />the A-1ir.utes o.`_ July 7, 1975, wAre a~~nroveca.
<br />"•"'_le ~`_inates of Ju;_ 1~, ?_g
<br />y 7S, were .reviewer:.
<br />Upon motion o.f commissioner Finney, seconc?ed by Cor~missionPr Tn7Zitted,
<br />the .•!inutes of Juiy 19, 1975; tr~ere approved.
<br />The Minutes of July 15, 197x, were rpviewe~a and an insertion ~•ias
<br />suggested by the Board.
<br />upon :'notion of Commissioner Tn?hit•~ed, secnn~le~_1 by Comr:ii,;szoner ??inney,
<br />the Minutes of July 15, 1975, wera_ approve' subject to the suggested
<br />insertion.
<br />The .'.iii utes of July 4y, .1975, were revie~ted and corrections :vere
<br />pointed ovL--.
<br />UPo : *nation o.f Commissioner Finney, seronderi hy..Ccmmissioner '7hitted,
<br />,the Dlinutes of ~7uly ?.4, 1975, were approvers, aubject to the suggested cor-
<br />rections.
<br />Regarding the July 24th Minutes, Commissioner Walker questioned the
<br />action taker;, by the .aoard of
<br />r.. 'v. Bateman. Fie ~ ~grrali~ation an~3. Review on the rec»est of
<br />state__ tha~ Yr. Bateman hats atterptec? to get on the
<br />agenda of the Board of equalization and Review and hats not been al-rle to
<br />do so.
<br />Commissioner Walker moved that the r3oard .reco;isider the Ricllar~a.
<br />Bateman request.
<br />The motion died for t'_1e laclc of a seconrs.
<br />7iscussion ensued concerning the reasons for the poarrl's denial.
<br />The Chairman directed the County P,rlministrator to ta1.k Tvi_t'.t the
<br />Tax 5unervisor al;out the ratter and report bacle to the Foarci.
<br />Chairman Garrett referred to Item ~ 1 on the Agenda: (A11 persons
<br />desiring to present matters tr, the T3oarc? of Commissioner,, and who are
<br />not on the printed agenda of this meeting should advise the Chairman
<br />of their }?resence and the nature of their business.)
<br />Chairman Garrett stated that Glenn ~~'hitfield and me~-hers of the
<br />New Hope Improvement Association had requested the Board of Transportation
<br />to revises tf?e si eeu 7_imit on Whitfield 'toad anti. t`rat a warning light be
<br />installed nsar the moire Station and Rescae Sr~uad Buildings.
<br />The Clerk was requested to write the Board of Transportation on
<br />this matter.
<br />
|