02/10/1975 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e U . Agenda Items, Council Orientation Session - Mayor Anderson requested C '1 be b 't' ". ounc~ mem rs to su m~ ~n wr~t~ng any agenda ~tems they wished discussed at the orientation session scheduled for Thursday, February 6. He asked that they bear' 'd th . ' 1 ". ~n m~n e meet~ng would ~nvo ve d~scuss~on of Counc~l procedures and operating pol 'c 1 ' , ,h' h ' ~ yon y, not ~ssues w~th WH~C the Counc~l was confronted. V. Ordinance, Transferring Additional Duties to Hearings Official - Councilman Haws in- quired about the status of the ordinance which would transfer certain items now heard by the Planning Commission to the hearings official. He said the issue had not been fully explored by the Council and he wondered whether staff time should be wasted in preparing the document if there was some chance it was not wanted by the majority of the Council. He had concerns with the entire procedure which he said he would like to bring up. The Mayor suggested discussion at the end of the meeting if time was available after discussion of regular agenda items. John Porter, planning director, did review briefly the history of the hearings official position and recent Council approval of concept of expanding the duties of that position to include hearing of zone changes. Mr. Porter said his understanding of Council action was for staff to draft an ordinance which would effect the change, present it to the Commission IUl: l<ecommendation to and ultimate action by the Council. The draft was prepared and public hearing was scheduled before the Commission at its February 4 meeting. He added that copies would be available for Council prior to that time, e At the conclusion of other business, Councilman Haws named concerns that had been brought to him as complaints (not necessarily in his position as councilman, he said) which he would like other Council members to consider and discuss at some later time. They were (1) taking testimony in public hearing on appeal from de- cision of the hearings official after testimony had been presented once in public hearing before the hearings official; (2) length of time from developers' viewpoint for processing permit requests; (3) fee schedule for permit applications wherein costs of processing were not covered by the fees charged to developers; (4) notifi- cation procedure; and (5) placement of mobile home parks through the conditional use permit procedure. Mayor Anderson noted that the permit fee schedule had recently been reviewed and he questioned whether the Council would want to go over it again at this time. Mr. Haws was <aware of that, but he thought other Council members in discussion of the concerns named might suggest what could be done. W.Lobbyist, Field Burning LegiSlation - Councilman Hamel asked if the person hired as lobbyist at the State LegisJature in the field burning issue would be needed in view of the statements from legiSlators that they were more or less in favor of permitting burning. And if the lobbyist was not needed whether the $5000 fee would have to be paid anyway. He called attention to Representative Fadeley's statement that letters should be written to all legislators, not just to her alone, with re- gard to field burning. Mayor Anderson answered that Ms.Gale, the lobbyist, was in close touch with the issue in Salem and keeping the city abreast of the situation. He noted that the ban was in effect at this time. There was no urgency until either legislation was introduced in the LegiSlature or the Governor's office submitted legislation. Then the city's strategy could be devised. e Councilman Haws asked if the city had a written contract with Ms.Gale, whether the city would be obligated to pay her if the issue was resolved at the end of this month. Manager answered that the arrangement with Ms.Gale had not yet been put into contract form but that a letter of understanding had been prepared obligating the city to a monthly payment on the basis of one-quarter of her time. The ar- rangement could be cancelled wi th two weeks notice and the ci ty was not commi tted to the $5000. It was his Judgment that the maximum amount, if MS.Gale's services ~re used until the end of the session, would be about $3500. 2/10/75 - 19 ~I Camm 1/29/75 File Camm 1/29/75 File Camm 1/29/7 5 File