Laserfiche WebLink
<br />City Council Regular Meeting - 09/27/04 <br />Minutes - Page 18 <br /> <br />noted that the post card Inailing provided both the October 6 and <br />October 14, 2004 opportunities to be heard by the Planning <br />Commission and provided for their appearance at either or both <br />meetings at their discretion and as their schedules allowed. <br /> <br />City Attorney Anderson addressed Councihnelnber Ihlan's <br />comments regarding due process; opining that when viewed by <br />the courts, they would make a determination as to whether the <br />Ci ty had provided both notice and an opportunity for affected <br />property owners to be heard, and that staff had provided that in a <br />manner beyond reproach. <br /> <br />Councilmember Ihlan reiterated her concerns regarding potential <br />legal challenges; and questioned the fairness of the proposed two <br />Public Hearing process. Councilmember Ihlan questioned <br />whether the City needed to address this as a policy issue; and <br />recommended re-noticing property owners and legal published <br />notice for one Public Hearing to be held on October 14, 2004. <br /> <br />City Planner Paschke questioned the City Council's involvement <br />in interfering with the Planning COlnlnission's management of <br />Public Hearings, whether a Hearing was to be continued, or who <br />was responsible for setting the Planning Commission's agenda, <br />as per City Code, noting the City Attorney's opinion that City <br />Code and State Statute intent had been met, if not exceeded. <br /> <br />Further discussion ensued regarding published and mailed notice <br />and timing; City Council authority; and opportunity to hear more <br />public input. <br /> <br />Councilmember Kough expressed regret that the n1istake had <br />occurred; but opined it may prove to be a positive opportunity to <br />provide the public more time to express their concerns. <br />Councilmember Kough spoke in opposition to sending additional <br />notices, citing the cost and potential confusion from another <br />notice. <br /> <br />Councilmember Maschka recollected that in the past, with the <br />major development of the area north of Rosedale, several <br />meetings may have been held due to the enormity of that project. <br />Councihnelnber Maschka spoke in support of stafP s actions to <br />