03/26/1980 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e Mr. Haws stated that this was a good example of wasting a lot of time during a meeting asking questions that could have been asked prior to the meeting. He stated that he was ready to vote and would be leaving at 1:30. Ms. Miller stated she felt this item should be held over until the next meeting and a public hearing should be held. Ms. Smith stated she would like a response to this since the deadline is April 7. Mr. Long responded that they could not meet the deadline if it were held over. Mr. Delay felt the staff had responded to issues raised by the Council; the question is how to get the most effective use for the monies spent. There are differences in approach between the two staffs but apparently there are ways for this to be resolved. He does not have a problem with the City and County pursuing separate models of implementing the program. It will probably be necessary to hold this item over. Ms. Schue stated she agreed with Mr. Delay and Ms. Miller. She thought the discussion wa~ of a philosophical nature on what the most effective structure should be. She further stated that it would be inequitable for a City Councilor to serve on the board in the same way that a County Commissioner does since City Councilors are not paid. If there are constructive facts that need to heard then the council should listen. Mr. Miller stated if the item would be held over they would not be able to get the letter to Seattle by Monday, April 7. e Ms. Smith moved, seconded by Mr. Obie, that council approve Staff Recommendation B--City/County program operator/consortium board-- in concept; that staff begin drafting the necessary paperwork and information to send to the Department of Labor within the time guidelines; that if the council desires to have additional input and/or a change of direction at their next meeting, they will have the right to do so; but that in essence the process is to be started or the possibility of a consortium would be lost. Mayor Keller restated the motion: "The motion is to approve Staff Recommendation B in concept and it would be discussed next week; staff is to go ahead with the necessary work." Mr. Lieuallen stated he was in opposition to the motion and was angry that they are now up against a tight time line. Mr. Delay stated that the council set this meeting up without calling a public hearing; if someone is at fault it is the council. Council has a responsibility to make timely decisions. He would hear from any interested parties today. He is not sure he supports the motion and asked for clarification. Ms. Smith stated the intent of the motion was to direct staff to move toward the consortium or the City would not have the opportunity to work as a consor- tium for the next year. Mr. Long stated that they must present what the model would look like to the Department of Labor. ,. 3/26/80--11