Agenda - Council - 02/13/2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

the ordinance itself, What she would be voting for would be to not hold the special elecfioh hrid to continue working on the Density Transition Ordinance. Ms. Kurak stated that the Oh~.tl4ing '.:-:,. she found confusing during the last Council meeting is why Councilmember Hendfiks~';felt that'? the Density Transition Ordinance had to be adopted by the end of the year. The oni'~ii~S~Umption she could make is that Councilmember Hendriksen assumed that she would no~ ¥0~e"in~'~favor of any such ordinance. Councilmember Kurak wanted to clarify that the only~i~g she ~01~id be voting for at this time would be to not spend City tax dollars to have an eie~t[on when City Council, have the ability to adopt an ordinance that would/work for~the entire Councilmember Hendriksen replied that he did not recall anyo~i~.::~tating~it~ the Transition Ordinance had to be adopted before the end of the ye~i};~He"~uld have thought that clearly with as much land as Councilmember Kurak owns thafgi~would al~'~tain. Motion carded. Voting Yes: Mayor Gamec, Counci~members Anderson,. and Kurak. Voting No: Councilmembers Hendriksen and Zimmerman. :.¢ i}i5:"i~i!?)~, Councilmember Hendr/ksen stated that he wanted to discuss fha-Qi~i'~ter implications now that the special election has been rescinded. Mayor Gamec replied that the CounCil will continue to work on':~he~-,"Deh'sity Transition Ordinance. Councilmember Hendriksen ~tated th~ he had requasted',:thiit.th~'~:discussion of the Charter implications be added to the agenda as ~:. ;ase and lie' f0~nd ~"0bj;ct}°nable that the Mayor was willing to handle the first portion of the chse~and,-h0Yfhe second'} Mayor Gamec replied that the Council can discuss the Charter implications, he was only trying to limit public e,omment, .-)---.. i~.- ~: -~: City Attorney Goodrich staiedthat he had beefi h~ked if the Council has an obligation to pass a Density Transition Ordinance.and the answer~'i0, that was yes. He explained that the Council does have an obligati°n. t6implement the'iCharter provisions, but if the Council continues to discuss the ordinance, then they are compF~'ing with the regulations and he is comfortable that the Council.is doing. Tke .other side is that the Charter Amendment was adopted in 1997 and is a k0mdwhat persuasive ~argum~ent,_but as long as the Council is pursing a Density Transition Ordinancdflien they are foIt0wing the requirements. Councilmember Hendriksen stated that the Charter Amendment has never affirmatively been ruled invalid. The City received a legal opinion regarding the Charter Amendment, which he feels is seriousiyi~flawed As of this moment, the City has a valid provision which is part of the Charter. ~' Councilmember Anderson replied that there is still the question if the Charter is constitutional. -64- City Council/January 9, 2001 Page 18 of 34 I I I I I I I I I I I I I