Laserfiche WebLink
-2- <br />by the Planning Commission, not the City Council, and it would be ' <br />inappropriate for a member of the Council to justify or defend the <br />proposed rezonings to any opponent. Also, as the staff member who <br />worked predominantly with the Planning Commission during the process <br />of developing the comprehensive rezoning, Frank Kampel, is no longer <br />with the City, there is no staff member who would be fully informed <br />of the reasoning for each of these individual rezonings being <br />recommended. <br />A final item that was raised during staff conversations regarding <br />those rezonings determined to be controversial is the need for the <br />City Council to make a decision prior to the public hearings as to <br />w}1PtI'fer !fir .^.�,t yv�.1 are inclined to give serious consideration to <br />each rezoning individually. If it is your conclusion on an informal <br />basis that you do not feel a certain rezoning or rezonings are <br />proper, the need to proceed with the public hearing is highly <br />questionable and staff would recommend that you meet with the <br />Planning Commission to discuss those which you might feel are <br />questionable before holding the hearings in order to avoid the <br />creation of unnecessary controversy. <br />RECOMMENDATION: Staff would recommend the following actions be <br />Taken by the City Council: <br />1. Discuss the selection of an advocate to speak on behalf of <br />the rezonings at each of the public hearings with Planning f <br />Commission Chairperson Peg Mountin and provide direction <br />regarding this item. <br />2. Review each of the individual rezonings which has been iden- <br />tified as being controversial, listing attached, and determine <br />whether or not you are inclined to support each of these <br />individual rezonings prior to public hearings being scheduled. <br />If you find that it is the general concensus that some of <br />these rezonings are questionable, staff would recommend that <br />a meeting be held with the Planning Commission to review the <br />rationale for those rezonings in question. <br />3. Based on the direction given and conclusions reached in reviewing <br />recommendations No. 1 and 2, by Consent Agenda at your meeting <br />on April 9, 1984 schedule public hearings for the controversial <br />rezonings pursuant to the listing provided earlier in this <br />memorandum. <br />DFP/pf <br />