2205 State Ave., Alamosa, CO 81101 • Ph: 719-589-2553 • Fax: 719-589-6573
Current E-Edition

News Obits Opinion Community Calendar Police Religion Sports Classifieds Home 

What part of ‘no’ wasn’t made clear?

Posted: Friday, Nov 15th, 2013

Special to the Courier

SOUTH FORK —The Rio Grande Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) this Wednesday clarified their motion to deny a conditional use for a 95-foot cell tower near the Ponderosa subdivision.

Summing it up, County Attorney Bill Dunn said the one yes; two no vote meant the conditional use was denied.

“No means no, period,” he said.

Dunn said he would reconcile the minutes to reflect the BOCC’s intent that AT&T could not reapply for the same location.

He was consulted for advice, since AT&T representative Geoff Squeir seemed to believe that the vote left the door open for his company to continue its application for the same location, since the required fees had been submitted.

Squeir reportedly assumed that AT&T wouldn’t have to pay the fees again.

The attorney said the final vote meant that the application needed to be viewed as denied, and that AT&T would have to amend its application for another location.

If the company had withdrawn its application, Squeir could ask for a waiver of the fees on a new request.

Land Use Administrator Rose Vanderpool said Squeir had been repeatedly calling, asking for the minutes of the Oct. 30 meeting. She asked what she sho

For the complete article see the 11-16-2013 issue.

Click here to purchase an electronic version of the 11-16-2013 paper.

Select Page:



Shoppe Hide


Copyright 2017 News Media Corporation

News    Classifieds    Shoppe    Search    ContactUs    TalkBack    Subscribe    Information    E-Edition    Business Portal