02/14/1979 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

'. Jim Saul, Planner, replied the proposed recommendation was in compliance with the LCDC goal. The only requirement under Goal 1 is that the City have a citizen involvement committee. If the Council designates itself as the citizen . involvement committee, or assigns that to the Planning Commission, then there must be a separate evaluation mechanism. In the past, the CIAC was to perform the evaluation function. Mr. Saul continued that since this new committee would have representatives of the Council, Planning Commission, and citizens at large, it would be legitimate under the goal to have the citizen involvement committee within the evaluation mechanism specified. He said the proposed recommendation had been reviewed by LCDC and was acceptable. Regarding the exceptions, he said those only apply to specific actions such as agricultural land, etc. He noted this was a process question. Mr. Lieuallen moved, seconded by Mr. Haws, to amend the motion to designate one City Councilor, one Planning Commissioners, and five citizens, two of whom would be selected by the Mayor/Council process and three selected by the Neighborhood Leaders Association. Mr. Lieuallen felt strongly about the number of citizens in relation to the number of elected officials. Regarding the number of Councilors and Planning Commissioners, Ms. Schue said the current system had resulted in problems. One Planning Commissioner did not provide enough communication between the CIAC and the Planning Commission. She felt more representation between both the Council and Planning Commission would ensure working out compromises and, thus, problems such as the recent one, would not continually be coming to Council. Mr. Lieuallen felt one of the problems regarded the level of staff involvement with the committee. It felt it to be less a dispute between the Planning Commission and CIAC than between the CIAC and staff. He felt it important, if ~ it were going to be a citizen involvement committee, that enough citizens be .~ represented. Also, he felt it important that the committee not rely heavily on staff involvement. Mr. Delay said he would oppose the amendment because he felt it very important to have a high level of consensus between the Council, Planning Commission, and the community. He noted a need for better rapport between the Planning Commis- sion and Council, and more involvement by the Planning Commission and Council in this area. He felt the committee could use neighborhood leaders and other interested citizens for the task forces to deal with specific issues and, thus, get more citizens involved. Ms. Smith said perhaps Mr. Lieuallen's suggestion could be incorporated next year, but her maj or concern now is to see the commi ttee be formed and start working. Ms. Miller said she envisioned a small steering committee with a larger number of citizens being involved through task forces. If that did not work, more citizens could be involved later. Vote was taken on the motion, which failed with Smith, Delay, Miller, and Schue voting no; Lieuallen, Obie, and Haws voting aye. 2/14179--10 . qz.