CC MINUTES 04221980 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

-4- Before voting on the motion, Councilman Ranallo moved that Sub- division 3 of Section 540. 00 of the ordinance should be amended to • set 65 rather than 62 as the age which will -qualify a person for one-half base rate charge. Councilman Marks said he concurred with the motion since he perceives the trend now is- towards later re- tirement. The amendment .carried unanimously. The amended motion also. carried unanimously. The question of whether the City should retain a community development consultant was reopened. Proposals , had.,been submitted from three consulting firms; TARS, BRW, Inc. and Westwood. Councilman Marks suggested it might prove helpful -to have such a consultant available for ready consultation. .if.- a .proposal should come in which warrants immediate consideration. Councilman Sundland wanted, instead, a determination made that, "never again will we be put in such a position that -we will be forced to react to any proposal which we have not studied carefully beforehand" . He_ wanted it clearly understood "the Council can be expected to react negatively to any proposal for which adequate time had .not• been provided for consideration" . . Councilmen Ranallo and Letourneau. indicated their agreement with this statement but -felt it .might be good to. get" some sort of con- sensus of the Council as to which consultant -might be called upon for their expertise when necessary. Councilman Ranallo- also saw the -interviews as. possibly providing .ano.ther source of :information • regarding community development alternatives. All necessary legal opinions should. .be .sought from the City Attorney whenever -possible �- since the City had just experienced _some "bad legal. advice" from another firm they had :retained in the Johnson Florist -litigation Since— the City' s Attorney could -not be utilized. because. of a conflict of interest. Motion by Councilman Ranallo. and seconded .by Councilman Sundland to direct the City Manager to set up one .interview of 30 to 45 minutes duration for three future. Council meetings where time will permit one consultant proposal presentation. 'Motion carried unanimously. ' r The .'latest courtruling in the ;Johnson';_Florist _litigation., , which.-would . ;! seem. to. demand -immediate :-issuance' of a _building :permit' to the :Johnson firm., prompted Councilman ..Ranallo� to .-conclude- ".The Court _has . taken- power away from the Planning. Commission--and .Council.. " ..However, -.he urged further negotiation. on -the .lighting ..for the new greenhouses and .notification of the neighbors of the .reasons-why.-the building permit had to be issued with no further -consideration of :the vari- ances for lighting and property- setbacks . .Although he .'had .not served as the City's. counsel .in this case, Mr. Soth advised the. Council they. ; . could have a ".closed meeting" with their special .counsel .since -such a meeting. seems to meet the ."client-counsel relationship regarding action in a litigation case" . He also -saw -issuance of the building • permit could .be delayed if the City can get the Johnson's attorney to stipulate that the order can be delayed the 30- days cited to file an appeal with the ' Supreme Court. The Council viewed such action as