HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondence After Posting of the Agenda Re Entertainment Permits Waiving annual public hearing on renewalsDear Commissioners:
At the public hearing on 8/15/16, I spoke on several issues. One was the
failure of the proposed ordinance [Section 6.b.iii] to reflect the prior
consensus of the Commission that an annual public hearing should not be
required if residents do not complain after formal notification by the
City.
This issue had been fully discussed by the Planning Commission on
12/7/15 (from 2:14 to 2:24 in the on-line recording). At that time,
Director Basham presented a slide that posed the question "Should the
City allow one-year renewal without a hearing unless a nearby property
owner/occupant files an objection?" After it was explained to the
Commission that all nearby residents would still receive a formal notice
of renewal from the City, the clear consensus was that no public hearing
or agenda item would be needed if there are no complaints. To create a
public record of staff's administrative renewals, Director Basham stated
twice that he could just report these during his Director’s Comments.
At the public hearing on 8/15/16, Commissioner Thomas asked (at 1:39:50
in the recording) whether "we want all of these to come back to us? City
Attorney Greyson replied that the preference of the Council was that all
renewals be done as a public hearing. She advised the Commission that if
they disagree, they could make an alternate recommendation to the
Council. Director Basham made an additional statement giving what he
stated was the City Council's rationale for requiring a public hearing.
The Commission was persuaded to retain the requirement for an annual
public hearing.
I believe the City Attorney overstated the Council's position on this
issue. At the Council meeting on 11/9/15, then Mayor Deaton (at 2:16 in
the recording) stated that she liked the idea of Director-based
approvals if there are no complaints or resident response after formal
notice of the pending renewal. She stated that she wanted Planning
Commission comments on this issue.
I agreed with Mayor Deaton in November and with the Commission in
December. Conducting a public hearing when there are no complaints after
active solicitation is a waste of time and money by both City staff and
local businesses. No doubt, the cost for renewal will be much greater if
a public hearing is required.
I will not be able to personally attend Tuesday's meeting, but would
strongly recommend that the Commission discuss this issue once again,
unbiased by any alleged Council preferences, in order to best serve the
public interest and to be fully responsive to Councilwoman Deaton.
Sincerely,
Robert Goldberg