Laserfiche WebLink
<br />In response to Councilman Haws, Assistant Manager explained that 3% interest <br />would be charged on the deferred amount under present city policy. He fur- <br />ther explained the difference between this type of deferment and that when <br />easements were required for sewer lines crossing private properties. He <br />said the subject property was in one ownership. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Councilwoman Beal thought the policy should be reviewed sometime because an <br />owner of a large parcel of property could defer payment on a sewer assessment, <br />with no interest charge. Don Gilman, assistant public works director, ex- <br />plained that that applied only when a sewer line ran through private prop~ <br />erty on which an easement had been granted. If the sewer line ran in a <br />street on which private property fronted, then the assessment would be <br />levied., He further clarified policy with regard to deferred assessments <br />for paving. <br /> <br />Vote was taken on the motion to accept the petition. Motion <br />carried unanimously. <br /> <br />Corom <br />4/2/75 <br />Approve <br /> <br />M. Charter, Friendly Area Neighbors (FAN) was presented. Copies of the Ch~rter <br />together with letter from the group and minutes of their organizational meet- <br />ing were previously distributed to Council members. Assistant Manager said <br />that staff had no objections to approval of the charter. However, attention <br />was called to the provision for membership to be established by "entering <br />one's name and address on the membership list." He said other charters had <br />been more explicit. It was also noted that the executive committee of this <br />group was attempting to operate on a rotating basis for sharing leadership. <br />And the language dealinq with the way the executive committee would relate <br />to the entire group was rather loosely worded. <br /> <br />Fran Barka~, speaking for the FAN organization, said no one in the group <br />had been involved in the organization of a similar group, and they felt <br />that rather than setting up a complicated procedure a simple charter would <br />more adequately serve their 'needs. She said that although the chairmen <br />would change for each meeting, there was a representative appointed to <br />speak for the group on a permanent basis. Also, the executive committee <br />was in the 'process of defining its relationship to the group and that would <br />be added to the charter and bylaws when it was determined. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Councilman Haws asked for staff comment on the absence of any provision <br />for notification of meeting time and place. Also, on the provision for <br />acceptance of absentee ballots. ~oberta Deering, planning, explained that <br />some of the existing neighborhood groups accepted absentee ballots, others <br />didn't. It was something staff felt should be left to the individual groups. <br />Ms. Barkan said that notices of meetings were now included in the group's <br />newsletters but were not included in the charter. <br /> <br />Mr. Keller moved seconded by Mr. Williams to approve the charter <br />at the April 14 Council meeting if provision for notices of meet- <br />ings to the membership was included before that time. Motion <br />carried unanimously. <br /> <br />Corom <br />4/2/75 <br />Approve <br /> <br />Assistant Manager said that amendments to the Charter had been developed as suggested <br />by the Council but the group would not have the opportunity to act on them until its <br />next meeting and asked that Counc~l actio~ b~ held until FAN action was taken. Council ~ <br />indicated its intent to hold the 1tem unt1l the amended Charter was brought back (see . <br />motion below on adoption of consent calendar). <br /> <br />4/14/75 - 24 <br /> <br />r1\o <br />