12 ATTACHMENTS - Laserfiche WebLink

Chair Pearce inquired what the rationale is for the School District requesting to be considered exempt for facilities that use their premises. Ms. Stern replied that this is based upon a conversation with a School District representative who went through most of these facilities and determined they were licensed. She added that there was one facility that the District actually ran, for which it has its own standards for background checks and other requirements. Chair Pearce stated that she is loath to get the State involved in licensing entities they feel are exempt. She added that she believes some of the State's exemptions are murky and that the City has had trouble with this in the past. She indicated that she would like to see the City utilize its authority with regard to health and safety for minors in the City and try to provide an additional level of protection. Chair Pearce stated that she was not sure she agrees with the liability argument, but if the City is not doing the background checks and CPR training, then it should have some degree of protection in the end, and governmental immunity is a good argument. She added that she is loath to exempting all athletic facilities unless she sees that the co- sponsorship with the City includes things that would impact the health and safety such as background checks and other things. She noted that the pool is a permanent facility and is used all the time; however, she would be opposed to additional exemptions just because they have co- sponsorship if it does not tie into the health and safety issues the Commission is concerned about. Chair Pearce stated that she agrees with what Mr. Hirst said with respect to the ages of 15 or under. She indicated that she was more inclined to say "under 18" because children are either minors or adults. Chair Pearce indicated that she was leaning toward not having the State involved in licensing entities that are exempt and that she felt the City can work things out and control it at the City level. Chair Pearce inquired if applications are currently on hold because of review. Mr. Dolan replied this is a complex issue and that he had hoped to have the matter to the Commission sooner. With respect to the question of unintended consequences, he stated that he believes there are some and are in limited areas. He noted that if the City calls an entity a child care and forces it to get a license, the entity is automatically in the "E" occupancy classification, which has some separation requirements which can result in cost of additional construction or can be solved with sprinklers. Mr. Dolan stated that there is not a lot more information he could provide and that each building will have a different circumstance. He noted that in Jack Balch's building, the "E" occupancy was not an issue because the entire building was categorized as "E He pointed out that it is not about what is going on in the building but about what is next to each other, and in this case, the separation of uses was resolved by calling the entire EXCERPTS: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, July 8, 2009 Page 9 of 12