My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 2019 09 03
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
2019 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 2019 09 03
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/19/2022 3:14:59 PM
Creation date
9/19/2019 9:27:33 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Original Hardcopy Storage
9C1
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
City Council <br />Meeting Minutes <br />September 3, 2019 <br />Page 3 of 14 <br />Vote Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote <br />Director Zuccaro noted this could come back at a future quasi-judicial hearing and <br />Council should be thoughtful about taking comment outside of a quasi-judicial hearing <br />City Attorney Kelly added that with it being tabled, comments taken tonight would be <br />similar to those taken during a pre -application period Mayor Pro Tem Lipton stated he did <br />not want to do anything that might be prejudicial later on <br />Members discussed the various options related to an application that is still quasi-judicial <br />and whether tabling it removed it from that process <br />Councilmember Maloney stated comments tonight may be speculative about something <br />that might happen and added this item could come back to a different council <br />Councilmember Loo and Councilmember Keany agreed <br />A majority agreed to not take comments <br />Mayor Muckle stated with tabling the item there is no set time for any further discussion or <br />consideration If any new proposal and ordinance come to Council it would all be done <br />with proper notice again <br />Councilmember Leh stated he understands people may be frustrated with this direction, <br />but taking comments now would be taking comments on a proposal that no longer exists <br />Councilmember Stolzmann stated public notices had been made that there would be <br />comments tonight, so she understands how people are frustrated She noted the City is <br />both the applicant and the decision maker here, so she would prefer comments, but <br />understands why that is not being done She encouraged people to send comments to <br />Council if they would like to get comments to Council <br />Director Zuccaro stated that by tabling the ordinance it is still active so all comments <br />would still need to be limited to a public hearing <br />Councilmember Loo asked about the advantages and disadvantages of withdrawing the <br />application <br />Director Zuccaro stated withdrawal would clarify the application was closed and the quasi- <br />judicial process is done <br />City Attorney Kelly stated her understanding was the application was not moving forward <br />in its current form If that is not the intent, the quasi-judicial status would remain in effect <br />as long as there was an active planning case <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.