Remarks by Martin Pyne
165 remarks on the record, newest first · Page 6 of 7
- Play at 1:12:53
“What would that mean in this case? Because we are the final point of decision.”
Planning Commission · Aug 10, 2026
- Play at 1:13:02
“Okay. I was going to potentially suggest that, but I wanted to make sure it wouldn't break something horrific. Thank you.”
Planning Commission · Aug 10, 2026
- Play at 1:16:58
“I have a parliamentary inquiry on that actually. Okay, so a three to three vote is not an action. On a three to three voting motion does not carry. It is my understanding that it is in order following a motion that does not carry to make subsequent motions.”
Planning Commission · Aug 10, 2026
- Play at 1:17:21
“What I'm proposing is that we vote on motion. What I'm proposing, and I believe it would be in order, so correct me on this if I'm wrong, is we do actually vote on an actual alternative. And if it's clear that if a motion to take an alternative does not carry, I believe it would then be in order to vote. Since we have not passed a motion and the item would still be before us, we could then have another motion afterwards, that would be a motion to continue.”
Planning Commission · Aug 10, 2026
- Play at 1:18:01
“I'm suggesting, and again, I don't, and again, this is, I'm not even saying this is going to happen. Commissioners, Chair Cerrone has not raised his mic yet. Like I don't, I'm just, so maybe this just, so maybe there, and we haven't had, we have had commissioners not kind of have opinions, but not speak directly in motion. So I'm not even saying it's going to be a 3-3 vote, but like if, What I'm saying, like if when I, the course of action I'm saying is let's say this motion goes three, three. Okay. So if like, if it goes, okay, so there's three things that could happen. The motion goes,…”
Planning Commission · Aug 10, 2026
- Play at 1:19:23
“The motion on the table is alternative two.”
Planning Commission · Aug 10, 2026
- Play at 1:19:39
“Well, we would not have made a final determination. We would have built on alternative two. We could still adopt a different alternative.”
Planning Commission · Aug 10, 2026
- Play at 1:19:56
“Or alternative four, which would be a continuance.”
Planning Commission · Aug 10, 2026
- Play at 1:20:06
“Sure. The point is, we don't have to tie ourselves into parliamentary knots trying to take this motion off the table if we're worried about it going 3-3.”
Planning Commission · Aug 10, 2026
- Play at 1:20:33
“Right. I'm just saying we don't get stuck. If there's three to three, we can still do something afterwards. If we can get something else that has more than three votes.”
Planning Commission · Aug 10, 2026
- Play at 1:20:56
“No, that's not what I'm trying to do. What I'm trying to do is say, if this goes 3-3, I want to move a continuance afterwards, is what I want to do. yeah you're looking to see yeah if there's a three three vote without making that a formal vote i do want to make that a formal vote i want to take the vote on the motion and if it passes it passes and if it fails two to four then we vote on then i'll move alternative one if it fails three three i want to move up i want to move a continuance”
Planning Commission · Aug 10, 2026
- Play at 1:21:44
“Right. But I'm saying we don't have to move on from this item after the first vote.”
Planning Commission · Aug 10, 2026
- Play at 1:21:54
“No, because, okay, I'll put, but I'll, I don't agree because if the alternative, if this was, let's say this failed 2-4, would it not be in order to, I think it would be clearly in order to move alternative one if this failed 2-4.”
Planning Commission · Aug 10, 2026
- Play at 1:22:15
“Is it not a failed vote under Sturgis? Is it not?”
Planning Commission · Aug 10, 2026
- Play at 1:22:24
“Okay. I would respectfully request that you cite the provision of Sturgis where it says this, because I disagree.”
Planning Commission · Aug 10, 2026
- Play at 1:22:47
“It is my understanding of general parliamentary law that a tie vote is considered to have failed on the tie. I would respectfully request a direct citation if I'm wrong about this. Because frankly, this is... I would be attempt, because frankly, I fairly strongly disagree. And if it's not a direct citation, I would be prepared to ask. Well, this isn't actually before the body yet, properly before us, because we haven't actually gotten to that point in the tree, but.”
Planning Commission · Aug 10, 2026
- Play at 1:23:29
“I apologize. I apologize to everybody. I thought this was going to be very straightforward.”
Planning Commission · Aug 10, 2026
- Play at 1:29:31
“I agree. My point was only that it does not stop us from acting on further motions.”
Planning Commission · Aug 10, 2026
- Play at 1:29:52
“Yes, I, I agree with that. It's just my intention if this is 33 ways to offer a a continuance and I hope the continuance would not be deadlocked.”
Planning Commission · Aug 10, 2026
- Play at 1:30:07
“That's fine. The argument was that this was going to preclude further action. I would have. asked my colleagues to vote against, even if they thought, even if they were supportive in order to avoid that. But I don't think that's necessary. Thank you.”
Planning Commission · Aug 10, 2026
- Play at 1:32:01
“Thank you, Chair. Before I make an, I'm prepared to offer another motion, but I would actually, be prepared to yield to Commissioner Shukla because Commissioner Shukla, I'm not sure, I think you are the deciding vote on whether we have four votes to do something tonight. So I'd be interested to hear what you'd be interested in doing.”
Planning Commission · Aug 10, 2026
- Play at 1:33:40
“Thank you. Okay. In that case, I am going to move alternative one, deny the appeal and uphold the decision of the director of community development to deny the true will parent based on the recommendings findings for denial and attachment to.”
Planning Commission · Aug 10, 2026
- Play at 1:45:25
“Thank you, Chair. Thank you, staff, for the presentation. I just had one question, and it's that in the bonus, in the density bonus request letter on attachment five, there's 20 waivers listed in the staff report. We have 16 waivers. What's going on?”
Planning Commission · Aug 10, 2026
- Play at 1:46:02
“Okay. Honestly, the biggest reason I asked is I agree with the comment that Well, I'm not going to say before the public hearing that I agree with inherently that they were unnecessary. I will say that the waivers that I noticed that were in the letter that were not on the staff report were the ones where I was planning on asking the applicant to be very specific on how they physically precluded the development of residential sites. Because I actually thought most of the letter in attachment five was actually very, well put in that it very specifically stated how a lot of the waivers were…”
Planning Commission · Aug 10, 2026
- Play at 1:54:52
“Thank you, Chair. Just for mostly just for the record, waiver 16 pedestrian walkway. Is it that is it applicant's position that the The site constraints that would that don't provide space mean that if we added the drive walk I walkway next to the drive by we basically have to remove units because there's not enough space right now so we'd have to either make the units on economically smaller we just have to take some out entirely.”
Planning Commission · Aug 10, 2026