Posted by Jeremy Shulkin
The Economic Development Committee came prepared to vote on the Montvale Historic District’s expansion that, among other parcels, would annex a tennis court on the property of 1 Montvale Road. In an opening speech, Councilor Phil Palmieri lamented that an agreement couldn’t be reached between the two parties (the District and the homeowners at 1 Montvale) and made it clear that from a legal stand-point the committee couldn’t offer suggestions or amendments to the proposal. After some initial confusion on which one of the three items relating to the Historic District they were voting on, Palmieri, Clancy and Haller voted to send the matter to the City Council tonight for a vote on whether or not it should be advertised. (The votes: Palmieri-Yes, Haller-Yes, Clancy-No.) If there had been one more “No” vote the matter would have been dropped and the District would not have been allowed expansion.
Ok, so here’s what that means: If the measure to advertise the issue passes during City Council (it sounds like it will be voted on tonight) then a notice will be in the paper that essentially says “Hey! In two weeks the City Council will vote on this issue.” At that City Council meeting they will actually vote on whether or not the District will expand.
Here’s the thing, though. The way that the City Councilors vote tonight will probably be an indication of how they will vote in two weeks. If they vote to advertise then that means the district will probably expand. If they vote not to advertise then the district probably won’t expand. Stick around for tonight’s liveblog to see how the never-ending story rolls on.