Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> F. Guidelines for Financial Assistance on Historic Landmarks - Proposed resolution <br /> has been distributed to Council. Agreement needs to be reached for a maximum <br /> spending limit in special hardship cases. The normal limit is $5,000. <br />e Joyce Benjamin, City Attorney's office, said the code provision states that <br /> a n~ximum limit must be set. Without that limi t, the code would have to be <br /> changed. <br /> Mayor Anderson suggested that $20,000 would seem reasonable for special <br /> hardship cases. Nr. Murray ~.,ould hope, however, that the initial principles <br /> would be adhered to in every possible instance, i.e. that money be provided <br /> to encourage rehabilitation but not to completely fund it. <br /> Nr. Bradley noted that, ~n the prol~sed resolution, Section I (2) states <br /> "unusual" circu~stances and Section 1 (3) states "special" circumstances. He <br /> would favor making the wording consistent. <br /> It was the consensus that the word "unusual" should be used <br /> throughout. <br /> Mr. Keller moved seconded by Mr. Williams to set a $20,000 limit On cases Comm <br /> invol ving unusual circumstances and that the guidelines as proposed 6/2/76 <br /> be adopted. Motion carried unanimously. Approve <br /> G. Charter Revision Schedule - Memo from Manager suggesting schedule for reviewing <br /> the charter revision draft has been distributed to Council. <br /> Suggested dates for Council discussion are June 16, 23 and 30. Council <br /> deliberations would be held June 30-August 9, with a public hearing on July <br />- 12. Ad hoc Council subcomndttees dealing with areas of special concern would <br />-- present reports and recommendations at the August 4 Committee meeting and a <br /> second public hearing would be held on August 9. August 16 would be the deadline <br /> for Council action if the charter is to be presented to the electorate at a <br /> special election on the suggested date of September 21. <br /> Mr. Murray wondered if there would be substantive changes; Assistant Manager <br /> answered that, as a general principle, the adjustments are mainly to remove <br /> procedural language. There ~re gray areas, he added, on what is substantive <br /> and what is editorial and the Ad Hoc Comndttees were to deal with substantive <br /> change areas. <br /> Mayor Anderson felt that, if there were highly devisive issues, it would be <br /> Council prerogative to determine which should be isolated or if they should <br /> appear on the ballot. Two vital areas would be the relationship with EWEB <br /> and collective bargaining. Mrs. Beal felt the area of assessments was vital as <br /> well. <br /> Manager noted there is a great deal of detail in the charter on assessments. He <br /> also mentioned the effective date of the completed revision, if adopted, might <br /> be postponed for perhaps nine months so that all ordinances might be appropriately <br /> worked out. <br /> Mrs. Beal said she would be very reluctant to work on such areas as collective <br /> bargaining, freeway amendmen t, etc. without having full presentation by <br /> parties on the other side. Staff agreed and indicated that was one of the <br />e reasons for using the Ad Hoc Committees. Comm <br /> Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mr. Haws to accept the charter review 6/2/76 <br /> calendar as proposed. Motion carried unanimously. Approve <br /> 6/14/76 - 13 <br /> 000 <br />- <br />