10/24/1972 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

'area annexed,- then 'that continties--;;; park properEy .---OfherwIse;-property for : that purpose must be purchased. He explained that this measure would provide . funds for purchase of. lands for future park use. A small fraction will be used for development at the present time, but the major portion is for buying land . and holding for development as money is available and as population demands the use. Comm . Mr. McDonald felt there should be more publicity on this point to dispel con- 10/18/72 , fusion in the voters' minds thereby gi ving the measure a better chance for approval. File Q';,Gree'tJngs,Oregon Association oj'Child Care - The AsS.oci~i:.ion i~. holding its 'annual conference at the Country Squire on November 2,1972 beginning at 1:30,p.m. Comm . and asked ,for someone from ;he co~ncil to extend a welcome. Council members were 10/18/72 asked to ~nform the Manager s off~ce if anyone could be present. File . . R. Lea~ue of Oregon Cities Meeting, November 12-14, 1972 - Council members were asked to ~nforrr: the M~ager's office of any suggestions they have for program items for . the meet~ng. C~ty vehicles will be traveling to Portland each day if anyone wishes. Corom to attend only part of the meetings. Reservations are being made through the 10/18/72 Manager's office. ' , '1 -F~ e Mr. Mohr moved seconded b:>: Mrs. Beal to ap~rove ~ affirm~ and file as noted Items A through R. Rollcall vote. All councllmen present votlng aye~ motion carried. I IV ~ Ordinan ces ...,.--. . :ouncil BilLNo.9.: "" Re.~n4'i?g, tnfo;rnl~tLon:orRmtiness. and ,,0 ccnpat ion Taxation . _ (Parklng Program} ~'s1ioou.tted ald read the TlX'st tnne on October 9, 1972 and held for In- _ formation from City Attorney's office ~ was brought back for consideration. Mr. Mohr moved seconded by Mrs. Beal that the bill be read the second time by council bill I number only ~ with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered at ! this time. Questions asked at the Octoher 9 weeting w:ithregard to Pacific Northwest Bell's operation were answered by City Attorneyts offi6e:The franchise provides that any payments by the Company under its frnachise with the City would be credited toward any license of occupancy tax~ which would mean that this occupancy tax would be productive only if greater than the franchise fee. Under PUC ruling~ payments of any proposed tax by Pacific NOrthwest Bell would have to be billed back to customers. City Attorney feels there would be no problem of protecting confidentiality of reports given the Finance Department. Manager said the Downtown Development Board recommended deletion of the requirement for reporting of gross sales by professional occupancies~ leaving in the requirement for re- jpo;r:>t ing of gX'o&.s. squa;r:>e fOGtage oioffi-oe&. and nl1lIlhe;ro.f .~loy€!s;., The RQard _ feels.. gross ~les. would not he.. an ap,pJ'op.:i?tat e.,~~~~, fox' de.te;cil.:tn.tng; parking t de:mandof professional of.fices:~ . In answer to Council1llan Hersnnerts question. about problems . Pacific Northwest Bell antici-. .: pated in reporting gross sales because of accounting procedures ~ Manager said under fran- chise requirements they keep the necessary records on local sales; their question was how to keep track of long distance calls. Mrs. Campbell asked if ail professional people in the downtown area will be exempted from any proposed tax by deletion of the gross sales reporting requirement. Manager replied that the Board does not feel use of gross sales is a good basis upon which to develop a formula for their portion of a tax. Some other type of measurement will be developed for professional people. Councilman McDonald left the meeting. Councilman Williams suggested that the ordinance provide for the maximum penalty allowed for release of confidential information and that it should clearly state such to be the penalty. Orval Etter of City Attorney's office explained that the Charter provides the maximum penalty is $500 and incarceration. Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Hershner that Section 3 Subsection (2) of ~he proposed ordinance be changed to read: "Any person who divulges confidential in- formation in violation of this ordinance may be fined up to $500 and incarcerated ~ .'. or the maximum penalty provided by City Charter ($500 fine and 100 days imprison- ; :ment) . Mrs. Campbell said it was her understanding only the Finance Director would have access to the information reported under the ordinance. Manager said it would be reasonable to antici- pate others than the Director would be doing calculations, but it would be someone re- sPQnsih.;!.e qn~ the ~for.mation WQuld be very closely guarded. '3/9' 10(24(72 - 14