04/28/1975 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

and property owners should be given some consideration. He noted a recent study conducted by University students showing different groups of people living withi~L the area - older people, people having business interests, and the young, extremely mobile group - making it difficult to feel the needs of the neighborhood. It ... bothered him. he said, when a group of people could move in and take over the ~ neighborhood, especially when they become disenchanted and move one while the prop- erty o~ers have to stay. .. Public hearing was closed. there being no further testimony. Assistant Manager said his personal observation was that these types of disputes would develop on major issues within neighborhood groups and he wasn't sure the public hearing process would do more than air the issues. He thought taht some charter modification might be necessary. fie suggested that the Council consider having two of its members meet with representatives of the two groups concerned with the Westside Downtown Association in an attempt to resolve the issue before any decis!ion was made on the petition. wi th regard to the charter. Councilwoman Shirey concurred with that suggestion with the condition that if no solution was forthcoming something other than revocation of; the Association's charter be worked out. She said she had worked with Mr. Pietka in forming this group and felt one of the problems could be the nature of the neighborhood, that usually tenants' problems were those of never having sense of community, and this could be a chance to develop that. She thought revision of the charter would be necessar~ perhaps to bring the business and residential interests together. Councilman Murray noted he had received a letter from Mr. Pietka suggesting that (0937) he (Murray) disqualify himself from voting on this issue because of his involvement with the Westside Neighborhood Quality Project. He declined. because he said that had occurred some time ago. Also, the ward from which he was elected was very near ~ the Westside neighborhood with a great deal of interaction, and he felt an obligation - to represent his ward. He said he was interested in the outcome of this dispute because of his representation of the area with regard to community development. And finally, he said, since he was the prime author and sponsor of the neighborhood organization policy, it would be irresponsible action on his part not to take part in the decision. Councilman Bradley expressed concern about the voting requirements, that one had to attend a previous meeting to be eligible to vote. And. he wondered if that par- ticular requirement could be deleted from the charter at this meeting, saying he would not like to see it remain in the charter while attempting to resolve the differences between the two groups. . Councilman Hamel commented that there was some talk of buying C-2 property with the possibility of having it rezoned to residential. If this was th~. case, he said, he thought the issue should be resolved now. . 4/28/75 - 4 Mr. Murray moved;.second by Mr. Keller that the Council postpone con- sideration of the petition for a period not to exceed two months, and that during that time representatives of the Council meet with repre- sentatives of both groups having an interest in the Downtown Westside Association - current leadership and spokesmen for the dissident group - to see if a workable accommodation could be reached. that accommodation to direct itself specifically to provisions in the policy that organiza- tions should be open to the total area and diversity of interests in the neighborhood and should be open to any tenant or property owner in the neighborhood, and that the bo-ndary appropriate for the organization should be that geographical area suitable for effective planning, and that an or- ganization as long as it remains organized and active in solving current problems and planning and keeping the neighborhood informed will continue to be recognized. - .' 2.09