CC_Minutes_2019_0708 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday,July 8,2019 Page 11 Councilmember Groff thought Ms. Jebens-Sing's skills in the interview process stood out to him from the other applicants, noting she did a great job of communi- cating and an important thing for a Commission. Councilmember Laliberte thought the City had great applicants and would benefit by the backgrounds and expertise any one of them would have brought to the Commission. Mayor Roe agreed with the Council and was supportive of the motion. Roll Call Ayes: Willmus, Laliberte, Groff, Etten, and Roe. Nays: None e. Consider Sanction of Planning Commission Chair Mayor Roe briefly highlighted this item as detailed in the RCA and related at- tachments dated July 8, 2019. Mayor Roe indicated in his mind the Council has the authority to take any of the actions in the RCA and he would defer to anyone who suggests otherwise who has the authority to make that judgement. He noted the Chair of the Planning Commission is also the representative on the Ethics Commission and the Chair of that group. Mayor Roe noted there are the meeting minutes, Commission Code, and an email from Chair Bull which does outline his thoughts in relation to some of the points related to that meeting. Councilmember Etten brought this forward because it is a unique but important case. He thought it was important for several reasons, the first being that the Planning Commission is the only legally required Commission. There are State Statutes stating the Planning Commission stands apart and is important because of what it considers the land use and other major legal decisions it helps weigh in on. The meeting and agenda item in question was a legally required Public Hearing so the City was doubling down on the legal piece from his perspective. This is a le- gal piece that is really different in the eyes of the City and exposed the City, po- tentially, to some legal concerns if things had turned a different direction. Councilmember Etten explained the decision of the Chair to stay on was despite a clear recommendation from the City's legal counsel suggesting recusing and sug- gesting that the City Ethics Code was not being violated because it is largely around financial considerations and was not a financial piece per se but rather the perception of inappropriate participation in this important hearing.