04/24/1978 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

.~ Mr. Delay said Council could do as it wished, the ordinance has an effec- tive date in it. Council could vote unanimously on the first motion and 4It each then vote his/her intent on the second reading. This was not the point, but rather whether or not Council wants the ability to have areas. of the city exempt from this tax to further the economic forces needed to assist the downtown area, to get more high-density housing, and to create an environment that will be consistent with the Plans and Policies already adopted by Council. He said the merits of such flexibility could then be discussed in the resolution allowing for exempted areas. Mr. Lieuallen felt Council should vote to defeat the motion and allow Council the ability to make those exemptions. Mr. Obie said he could understand the concern regarding housing, but he wondered why should the commercial interests in the downtown area receive any different treatment than othe"r commercial interests in the city. Mr. Lieuallen requested a point of order in that such discussion on merits of such exemptions would come after defeat of the present motion. Mr. Delay agreed that those issues should be debated when considering ex- emptions. However,he commented, in general that isolating commercial or residential areas when considering forces that come together to create revitalization of an area which is very difficult to do. He said it was a Question of whether or not improving residential areas would improve com- mercial development, or vice versa. He said it was very difficult to separate commercial or residential interests as a fine tool to deal with such issues is not available. ~ Question was called for vote on the amendment by Mr. Haws to delete exempted areas. Motion carried with Hamel, Williams, Haws, and Obie voting aye; Delay, Bradley, Lieuallen, and Smith voting no; Mayor Keller voting aye to break the tie. Mr. Lieuallen requested that at some future time the Council be allow&d to hear some arguments from those who oppose the exemption of areas. Mr. Obie questioned the effective date of April 11, as to whether Council was on sound legal grounds. Mr. Bradley noted the ordinance without an emergency clause would allow it to go into effect 30 days from the date it was passed. However, the effect would be that the bill would be retroac- tive to April 11. He wondered if that in itself would not create an emergency clause and requested an explanation. Manager said at the April 10 meeting it was reported at the first reading that April 11 date should be filled in. This was to avoid any confusion in the effective date in the ordinance and to discourage a situation as occurred with the deluge of applications regarding panhandle lots. Vernon Gleaves, 975 Oak, asked for a point of order regarding whether or not the date of April 11, 1978, was inserted in each blank in the ordinance prior to the time it was read by the Council on April 10. Mayor Keller - 4/24/78 - 10 2.85