08/23/1976 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. of proposed city land site acquisitions, explaining that staff felt these should be kept in confidence rather than shared with neighborhood groups when it came to specific locations. . - Councilman Haws asked for staff comment on notification provisions (Section 3-d). '-' Assistant Manager called attention to serious time restraints sometimes faced by the Council, times when action has to be taken, making it difficult to give the associations ample notice, He recognized the fact that the groups themselves would let the city know if they were not getting notices on issues coming up for discussion or action, and staff would be held accountable to do the necessary. But he didn't think any regulation too specific could be imposed because of the time restraints sometimes involved. Councilwoman Shirey commented that she had helped organize a neighborhood associa- tion on the premise that it would be an organization to represent neighbors - people living near one another. Speaking to the issue of nonresident property owners voting in those organizations, she said they are not being prohibited from voting - they have the right to come before the Council to voice their feel- ings, She said that neighborhood groups have worked for years to achieve the present relationship with the city, that the city had come to accept groups on their own terms, accept and respect their input and in turn co-operate. This concept and design, she felt strongly, should not be destroyed. For that reason, she said, she would not vote for the amendment proposed by the Planning Commission. Councilman Murray said that as a member of the policy review committee he opposed the amendment, voted by a majority of the Commission. He noted that he was the author of the original policy adopted in 1973 and at that time the question of voting rights was a major controversy. However, he said, he still feels the e best policy is to let the groups themselves decide who shall and who shall not '- vote in each organization - a middle ground more in keeping with everything else in the organization policy and the whole idea of neighborhood groups. This recommendation was adopted by the policy review committee, recognizing it is a matter of course that residents of neighborhoods should be allowed to vote, He noted there had been no systematic exclusion of nonresidents - only two groups exclude absentee property owners from voting. As an aside, he said it was his own opinion that groups should allow absentee property owners to vote on the ground that it would give the groups more credibility, He said those groups which have allowed nonresident property owners to vote have found no "horrendous" disadvantage, Mr. Murray continued however that this debate was not about granting voting rights but about rules to be imposed on advisory groups. He said that it was im- portant to note the democratic tradition in this country consistently basing voting rights on residency, ownership is not looked upon as a factor in determin- ing who votes, It would seem unrealistic to stretch further for advisory groups than for the governing group, He added that recent Council actions would bear on this argument, requiring members of city boards and commissions to be residents of the city - not property owners, just residents, Also, in discussing Charter revision, city employes were required to live in the city - not to own property, just to be residents. So residency requirements, he said, were a critical element in the behavior of local government, making the Planning Commission's proposed amendment an inconsistent, unworkable, unnecessary, undemocratic, radical proposal which should be rejected soundly by the Council, - Councilman Keller said that if the idea was to have input and advice from neighbor- hood groups, then perhaps it would be appropriate for "input and flow" into those groups, He said he couldn't visualize in the ABC area "500 people roaring through the door" because one man owns property there, but he felt it would be unfair to 'iJ.7 8/23/76 - 5