02/12/1979 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Lieuallen, that the bill be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered at this time. Mr. Haws moved to table the motion to allow discussion on each item separately. Motion died for lack of a second. Mr. Lieuallen moved, seconded by Ms. Miller, to amend the pro- posed ordinance and direct staff to prepare further amendments to the ordinance to exempt all developments in the central planning district. Mr. Lieuallen then distributed a map indicating the area which he was asking for exclusion was lettered Item C. After considerable discussion as to whether this amendment should stand, or a new ordinance brought back to address this issue, Mr. Lieuallen, with consent of Ms. Miller, withdrew his motion at this time. e In response to a question from Mr. Obie in Section 7.275 regarding the definition of "financial support," it was noted the definition was included in the ordinance and was in all three alternatives under Section 7.279(3}. It is existing language in the code, but this attempts to more clearly define what is in the present code, which is presently ambiguous. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, to amend the motion to delete Alternative 3 and substitute Alternative 1 under Section 7.279(3}. In clarification for Mr. Haws, Manager said, an an example in Alter- native 3, private property developed in the renewal area generally receives financial support from the City, i.e., hotel development. Mr. Lieuallen's motion was directed at a much larger geographic area and would be much more comprehensive in exemptions. Mr. Haws opposed Alternative 3 because it would exempt certain types of development that are occurring in certain parts of town. Mr. Lieuallen said Alternative 3 gives the Council more latitude and ability to implement its policies. He said many different kinds of developments could take place. It would give the City an opportunity to reduce the tax and encourage proposals that will be of benefit to the entire City. Council would consider exemptions on a case-by-case basis, not a geographical basis. Mr. Haws was concerned that many people philosophically opposed the tax and yet it was forced on them. Now, he said, the Council is going to start giving exemptions. He felt this would result in more people opposing the tax because they do not understand it or feel they are being unfairly treated. e i7 2/12/79--13