12/12/1990 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e reproduction would be approximately $5,000 and said that staff does not feel that it would be necessary in light of the extensive public information pro- gram already underway. Ms. Bascom moved, seconded by Ms. Ehrman, to not do a Voter's Pamphlet for the March election. Mr. Boles moved that it be included in the motion that the public information component be provided to the Citizen In- volvement Committee for their review. With the consent of the maker and the second, this was included in the motion. Mr. Gleason stated that in the absence of a committee to formulate ballot title wording, the City Attorney would be ultimately responsible for deci- sions on the ballot title. The motion carried unanimously, 7:0. V. WORK SESSION: BUSINESS LICENSE CHANGES Greta Utecht, Planning and Development Department, gave the staff report. She said that the City's general business license provisions were last re- vised during a major revamping of the program and its focus in 1985. While these regulations have provided a good framework for the individual types of business licenses now issued by the City, some general provisions need to be e modified in order to reflect current business practices, State laws, and local needs. Sections specific to detective and security agents and agencies also have come under scrutiny following recent staff experience with enforce- ment actions. During the November 5 public hearing on this issue, the coun- cil heard testimony from 11 security agents in opposition to the proposed changes. At that time, the council requested that staff provide more infor- mation on State regulations and requirements in other Oregon cities and more specific information regarding fees before making a final decision. Ms. Utecht said that in response to public testimony, staff has revisited this issue and made several revisions. She noted that under the proposed licensing system, persons applying for both investigative and security li- cences would only be required to pay one fee, noting that the application process for the two licenses is almost identical. Another public hearing on this issue has been scheduled for January 14. Responding to a question from Ms. Ehrman, Ms. Utecht said that some public concern has centered around the need to obtain two concealed weapons permits, both City and State. She said that if the City's testing and training for an armed officer is the same as the State's, it might be possible to waive the additional certification requirement. Mr. Green noted that some members of the security industry have voiced con- cern that they would not be able to pay the full burden of licensing costs. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 12, 1990 Page 8