11/22/1976 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Manager called attention to correspondence received by the Council at this meeting from David Filer) member of the East e Skinner Butte Friends and Neighbors) requesting a public hearing b~fore the full Council. Councilman Murray asked whether those making the appeal would have the opportunity at the November 22 Council meeting to give testimony. Stan Long) assistant city attorney) advised that the issue would have to be considered under Fasano regulations. Testimony in addition to that given before the hearing panel would not be taken unless the bearing was reopened; this would require a two-thirds majority vote of the Council. He said th~t vote could be be taken at this time; it would not be finalized until the November 22 meeting so further public hearing) should it be decided to reopen) could not be held until the December 13 Council meeting in order for notice of the hearing to be given. Councilma~ Keller called attention to the report and noted that the hearing panel made its decision based on the facts presented.. The major thing) he said, was that since so much of the testimpny at the hearing was based on hearsay the hearing panel coula make no other decision than the one it made. Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Haws to hold a hearing on the issue before the full Council at its December 13 meeting. e Mr. Murray'asked whether there would be any drastic conse- quences becasue of having to delay a hearing until December. Mr. Haws wondered if written testimony could be submitted so that the hearing could go ahead on November 22. Mr. Long answered that there was no authorization for that procedure although it was a reasonable alternative. Councilman Keller said he would oppose the motion because adequate testimony had been given before the hearing panel from both sides of the issue. Having served on the panel and also having driven the area, he felt the decision made would not be changed by another hearing. Councilwoman Beal wondered also about ramificaitons of a delay) whether the developers of the project had deadlines to meet. Mr. Long said that under Fasano a simple state- ment with regard to delay) without getting into the merits of the varianJes themselves) would be permissible on the basis that type f information was needed to decide a procedural question. Otto Poticha, one of the applicants for the variances, said the project had been in process for four months now; another month would not be of major importance. Certainly it is a delay, he said) but of no great consequence. e , Minutes 11/22/76 -21 517