03/13/1972 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

his vote he should abstain; othenzise, he can be pe.rmitted to vote. Generally a person in that situation will be able to make his own decision as to whether to vote. - Planning Director commented on the difference between the Planning Conmrrs- sion and the Council in that the Conmrrssion members are appointed and Council members elected. He said planning activities involve matters requiring certain skills thereby bringing to the Conmrrssion people who are more apt to have confli cts . Manager said there is a reverse twist too, since a Council member may jeopardize his position with his employer if he votes contrary to what his employer thinks. Mrs. Campbell suggested a hearing might be helpful in order to determine the public's attitude on the subject. She mentioned application of such a policy for other boards and conmrrssions, and said it was previously discussed in regard to EWEB because of the bearing a Water Board member's interest would have on making a dee-sion with regard to providing water services. Mayor Anderson said in that case, as with the Council, members are elected and voters would render the decision if there is confli ct. Mrs. Beal replied that since EWEB members do not file a list of properties there is possibili ty that a confli ct is not known by the voters. e Mayor Anderson said before a public hearing is called there should be some proposal people could speak to. If the Council feels there should be some legislation to meet this problem, then a proposal should be submitted for hearing rather than having a thetorical exercise of general discussion. Mrs. Campbell said she thought Mr. Mohr's suggestion to adopt a policy state- ment similar to the Planning Conmrrssion's was a concrete proposal. Mr. Mohr said his idea was to see if there is a problem; once it is identified then a proposal could be drafted, but he said he is not sure a problem has been identified yet. Mr. Williams said rules governing senators and congressmen at the Federal level make conflict of interest a matter between the legislator and his con- stituents, that there are no legal requirements. Mayor Anderson suggested the minutes of this discussion be tagged for future reference so that it could rest for the time being. Mrs. Beal asked if the City Attorney could prepare a model for discussion for some agenda not too far in the future. Mr. Mohr said in view of not having any problem identified it would appear not to be practical and sug- gested the discussion be continued later. Comm 3/1/72 File - L. Laurelwood Club Lease - Manager said nothing has been heard from Mrs.Johnson since a copy of Manager's memo to the Council with regard to continued opera- tion of Laurelwood Club was mailed to her. He said the City's position is the same, that unless the City is provided with substantial reason o/hy an extension is necessary there seems to be no reason to allow it. A deadline has been established and neighbors are aware of it. Councilman Mohr commented on the contradiction between Mrs.Johnson's state- ment and the City's about her understanding wi th regard to continuing the operation' with an earlier closing time. She claims she was never offered, the opportunity to continue the operation if she agreed to close at 1:00 a.m. The City claims this was thoroughly discussed and that Mrs. Johnson said she could not operate unless the club stayed open until 2:30 a.m. Manager read the Parks Director's memo reviewing the meeting between the Parks Di- rector and Mrs. Johnson and her attorney. Mr. Mohr said it appears to be a matter of offering her the opportjnity to continue operation with a 1:00 a.m. closing time or continuing the deadline for termination of the lease. In answer to ques tion from Mr. Williams the Manager said the same problem exists, there has been no improvement. . Mayor Anderson ruled Mrs. Campbell's question out of order with regard to use of the building for senior citizen activities, saying the issue under consideration is determining whether a nuisance exists and whether the lease should be extended or left in effect. Mr. Mohr reviewed the history of complaints received from the neighborhood and the extension of closing time to 2:30 a.m. granted by OLCC. He concluded the only proposition which could be offered would be in the 1:00 a.m. closing hour if it caused no problem and if Mrs. Johnson agreed to that kind of settle- ment. Manager said extension of closing time to 2:30 a.m. increased an al- 08 3/13/72