Laserfiche WebLink
Councilmember Heineman replied in looking at the City organization chart, Staff serves at the <br /> pleasure of the Council who represents the residents who are governed by the Commission so he <br /> thought it could be a possible way to circumvent the Council. He thought to be procedural, it <br /> would make sense to exclude Staff. He stated he has restrictions on what he is able to do based on <br /> different responsibilities he has so he thinks it should be allowed to exclude Staff. <br /> City Attorney Knaak echoed that statement made by Charter Commission Chair Fields that it has <br /> to be by ordinance and they have 60 days to respond. <br /> Councilmember Howell asked if there is a way that the City Staff can provide Charter Commission <br /> Chair Fields with an up-to-date Charter and make sure there is no question that he has the most <br /> current version. <br /> City Administrator Ulrich confirmed this. <br /> The consensus of the Council was to direct Staff and the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance <br /> that would accomplish what was indicated and bring it back to the Work Session on March 8, <br /> 2022. <br /> 7.10: Adopt Resolution #22-055 Rescinding and Replacing Resolution #22-008 Approving <br /> Development Agreement for Riverstone South <br /> City Engineer Westby stated this case and the following case were added today and apologized for <br /> that. He explained this is a procedural detail, reviewed the staff report, and recommendation to <br /> rescind and replace Resolution#22-008 so the Capstone closing can occur. <br /> Motion by Councilmember Specht, Seconded by Councilmember Musgrove, to adopt Resolution <br /> #22-055 Rescinding and Replacing Resolution #22-008 Approving Development Agreement for <br /> Riverstone South. <br /> Further Discussion: <br /> Councilmember Riley stated when he read the case it didn't make sense to him. He commented <br /> as City Engineer Westby had stated, there was a lot of discussion about the assessments and the <br /> agreements. The last version of it was passed October 26, 2021 and the explanation given now is <br /> they need more time to review it but will have it done in three weeks. He stated it didn't make <br /> sense and asked why there was a five month hold up. City Engineer Westby replied there has been <br /> a lot of discussions and meetings on this project. There have been meetings with both developers <br /> weekly, the current property owners, and Capstone. He stated draft assessment agreements were <br /> provided to them about two months ago but the City didn't receive a response. In the meantime, <br /> there were other pieces of the puzzle with other approvals and plans associated so there has been <br /> a lot of moving pieces. He stated he would accept responsibility for not following up with them. <br /> He stated he recently reached out to them and was told they hadn't forwarded the initial assessment <br /> agreements that were sent to their attorney and that they would send the new one on immediately. <br /> He stated that is the Pearson's end, which is not going to meet Capstone's development needs, <br /> which is to get started with the tree removal. He stated he couldn't speak to the delay. <br /> Councilmember Riley replied he is not inclined to allow this to go on. He stated the Council has <br /> City Council/February 22, 2022 <br /> Page 31 of 34 <br />