Laserfiche WebLink
Agenda Section: 8 . 1 <br /> WADS REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION Report Number: 91 -33C <br /> Report STAFF REPORT CouncilAti 6/24/91 <br /> 4. CE J Council Action: <br /> D Special Order of Business <br /> CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE JUNE 24 , 1 991 ❑ Public Hearings <br /> K1 Consent Agenda <br /> ❑ Council Business <br /> Item Description: RESOLUTION NO . 4099 AMENDING RESOLUTION NO . 3098 ESTABLISHING <br /> A UNIFORM SCHEDULE SCHEDULE OF FEES AND CHARGES <br /> Administrator's Review/Recommendation: <br /> - No comments to supplement this report <br /> - Comments attached. <br /> Explanation/Summary (attach supplement sheets as necessary.) <br /> SUMMARY; <br /> This matter was discussed at the June Work Session. <br /> In July, 1990, a public hearing notice was published which listed the <br /> proposed fee increase for On-Sale Liquor licenses . In the publication for <br /> the On-Sale with Cabaret, a portion of the fee schedule for that license <br /> was inadvertently omitted from the notice. The omission had a significant <br /> impact on the fee charged to businesses requesting licensing. <br /> Please refer to the attached Schedule A. <br /> In July, 1990, the Council passed Resolution No. 3056 which established a <br /> new fee schedule. In the resolution, the fee for On-Sale with Cabaret was <br /> different from the fee schedule which was printed in the public hearing <br /> notice. Again, the different wording significantly impacted the fees to be <br /> charged. <br /> In October, 1990, the Council approved Resolution No. 3098 which amended <br /> the July, 1990 resolution discussed above. At the time of the passage of <br /> this resolution, emphasis was on fees other than On-Sale Liquor licenses. <br /> Consequently, an error resulted in the wording of the fee schedule for On- <br /> Sale with Cabaret. <br /> As schedule A Indic-ates,-the- wording for all-three fee schedules for the -- -On-Sale with Cabaret are different with a considerable difference in fee <br /> charges. <br /> In researching the discrepancies, the minutes of the meetings did not <br /> clarify the differences in wording. After speaking with both <br /> Councilmembers and staff who were involved, it is evident that the intent <br /> of the Council was to raise the base rates of the fees, not substantially <br /> alter the wording of the fee schedul . <br /> Samantha Orduno, City A inistrator <br /> RECOMMENDATION; <br /> Motion to waive the reading and approve Resolution No 4099 Amending <br /> Resolution No. 3098 Establishing A Uniform Schedule of Fees and Charges <br />