Laserfiche WebLink
-72- <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen stated that he did not think that anyone was claiming the vote taken <br />on December 11, 2001 was to approve the Comprehensive Plan. Currently the City has a <br />Comprehensive Plan in place and those properties are designated differently. Now there is an <br />amendment to the Comprehensive Plan they are considering. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich noted that all 13 amendments are being subject to change, but not being <br />adopted. There will be many amendments made to the Comprehensive Plan. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec returned. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen stated that there is a Comprehensive Plan amendment that will be <br />subject to a public hearing, he inquired if the land use map includes all 13 proposed changes <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich rept~"~ <br /> <br />Councilmember. Hendriksen stated i?tt then a change has occurred to the Comprehensive Plan. <br /> <br />C~ty Aaomey GoodncHmph~:::;that ~6:~:has been no change made to the Comprehensive Pi~ <br />by the action taken on Dec&~¢er~:~O01. ~% <br /> <br />Councilmember <br /> Hendfiksen <br /> stated <br /> thq~:.th~e~' a draa of a Comprehensive Plan mendment and <br />that amendment has changed as a result;hr the vote on,December 11,2001. <br /> <br />Ci, Attorney Goodhch replied ~at t~¢~5:~d C~prehensive Plan amendment has changed, <br />but it is only a proposal and can change again. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendfiksen inquired if the am~hdme~':~uld b~ ~oted on in its entirety. <br /> <br />Ci~ Attorney Goodrich replied that ~at decision is up to th~' CounciI'~}~ut noted that it could be. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendnksen stated that a Councilmember vote&t~:~d ~h~mendment pena~ing <br />to her propegy that included a l~d use, so in ~s opi~on ~¢E~Fevere's opi~on does not hold <br />up. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich replied that he ~did not agree. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen stated that if the City Attorney is stating that someone with a <br />significant financial interest could not vote on the Comprehensive Plan amendment then he <br />would not object. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich replied that the action taken on December 11ta was to schedule a public <br />hearing rather than voting on something that would give someone substantial financial gain. He <br />has not given an opinion if any Councilmember would have a conflict of interest for voting on an <br />amendment. <br /> <br />City Council/January 8, 2002 <br /> Page 22 of 27 <br /> <br /> <br />