Laserfiche WebLink
Councilor Kelly recalled that he had requested language related to public notice. Mr. Klein indicated text <br />regarding public notice would be prepared prior to the next hearing. <br /> <br />Councilor Kelly asked Mr. Klein to provide comment to the council regarding Ms. Segal's suggested text <br />changes related to the definitions of owner and claimant. <br /> <br />Councilor Kelly noted that the ordinance defined "family member" but the term was never used, except in <br />the definition of exempt land use regulation, and the definition of exempt land use regulation was never cited <br />anywhere in the ordinance. He suggested the term be deleted if it was not to be used. <br /> <br />Councilor Pap~ determined from Mr. Klein that the City's smoking ban was not a land use regulation and, <br />even if it were, it would fall under the exemption in Ballot Measure 37 related to public health and safety. <br /> <br />Councilor Pap~ asked Mr. Klein to comment on testimony regarding the definition of "property owner" and <br />"claimant." Mr. Klein clarified the definitions in the ordinance were taken directly from the text in Ballot <br />Measure 37. He said that staff did not make the definitions very specific because it did not know what the <br />courts would do or what claims would be coming forward. Staff had attempted to provide the council with <br />maximum flexibility as the City began to process Ballot Measure 37 claims. Once the City had more <br />experience implementing the measure, the council would be able to make changes to the ordinance. <br /> <br />Councilor Bettman agreed that additional language regarding public notice of hearings was needed. <br /> <br />Councilor Bettman asked how the ordinance could be modified to address the fact that some land use <br />ordinance added value to a property rather than detracted from it and allow the City to take that into <br />consideration as it calculated a claim's value. <br /> <br />Councilor Bettman suggested that the ordinance to be modified include language that precluded a property <br />owner who successfully sought an up-zoning for their property from making a Ballot Measure 37 claim <br />against the City. <br /> <br />Councilor Bettman wanted to know if the time limits for Ballot Measure 37 claims were limited to when the <br />heirs received a property or if the claims time limit went back to when the original family member purchased <br />a property. <br /> <br />Councilor Bettman noted the council's receipt of a suggestion that juries, rather than the City Council, <br />decide claims. She found that interesting, and asked for input from legal counsel as to the legality of that <br />approach. <br /> <br />Councilor Taylor also supported the inclusion of a provision calling for a required public hearing and she <br />supported broader public notice. She also wanted staff input on a suggestion received by the council that <br />claims be decided by the courts. <br /> <br />Mayor Torrey said the ordinance before the council created a set of standards under which all could make <br />claims. He said the fee being proposed was not unreasonable given that the City budget had not anticipated <br />the cost of the measure. He did not believe the City was getting the support it needed from the State in <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 15, 2004 Page 9 <br /> Regular Meeting <br /> <br /> <br />