CCMinutes - 04/12/04 Mtg - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Councilor Bettman remarked that the only employee of the council was the City Manager and the only influence on the organization as a whole that the council had was on the City Manager. She averred that the City Manager's assertion that the bargaining issue was pivotal and the council should not weigh in on it until it was resolved was all the more reason the council should weigh in on it. Mr. Taylor implored the council to allow the bargaining process to continue and continue to maintain the date the issue had been originally scheduled for a work session. Mayor Torrey indicated that he would vote against the amendment and the main motion in the event of a tie. He stated that the City Council hired the City Manager to take on this role and to undermine this role was in ;;very poor form." He agreed the council had the authority to address the job performance of the City Manager, adding that an evaluation of Mr. Taylor was coming up in the near future. However, he hoped that the council would not hamper the City Manager's ability to meet the responsibilities of his role within the City infrastructure. Councilor Taylor asserted that the council did not hire the City Manager to make policy. Councilor Kelly agreed that labor negotiations were the purview of the City Manager, but it was the council's purview to determine whether fundamental City services were supplied by public employees or private employees. Mayor Torrey called for the vote on the amendment. Roll call vote; the amendment failed, 5:1; Councilor Papd voting in favor. The vote on the main motion was a tie, 3:3; Councilors Bettman, Taylor, and Kelly voting in favor and Councilors Poling, Solomon, and Papd voting in opposition. Mayor Torrey cast a no vote and the motion failed on a final vote of 4:3. Mayor Torrey called for a break. The council reconvened after a five minute respite. Councilor Poling, seconded by Councilor Solomon, moved to amend the One-Year Action Plan by deleting acquisition of the Willakenzie School site as the use for $400,000 in funds for acquiring a site for future low-income housing and require staff to return to the City Council prior to purchasing additional land bank sites with these funds. Councilor Poling explained that he placed the motion on the table primarily for the reason that the school site would be better used for a park. He clarified that he supported purchasing property and banking it for housing, but in this instance, the neighborhood did not have adequate park space for its population. He related that the Harlow Neighbors voted unanimously to ask the City to purchase all eight acres of the site for park and open space uses. He noted he had intended originally to make a motion to pursue acquisition of the three acres of the Willakenzie School site for the purposes of park space and playing fields, in addition to the five acres at that site already being considered for purchase by the City for the same purpose. He stated that he had chosen not to make this motion at this time. However, he reiterated that it was his preference and the preference of the majority of the Harlow area citizens to make the eight-acre site a park and playing field area. Councilor Kelly said it was a parks versus low-income housing issue. He agreed there was a lack of planning that contributed to the lack of parks and open space set aside for the neighborhood in question. He related that he had served on the HPB and he stressed the amount of funds available for low-income housing construction was much smaller than the need for such housing. He underscored that low-income