PC 070809 - Laserfiche WebLink

Chair Pearce stated that she thought this only applied to general citizens and not to City employees. She indicated that she would like to see what applies for the State regulations, such as TB screening. Chair Pearce inquired if the City was saying that the exemption issue does not arise unless someone asks to be exempt. Ms. Stern replied that the State will license businesses that characterize themselves as child care, and if businesses believe they are a private recreation, the State will typically provide exemptions. Chair Pearce inquired if the City will still require the State to license a business that the State deemed exempt, which in the past, they have been extremely reluctant to do. Ms. Stern replied that staff’s argument is that they should not be exempt because they do not meet exemption categories. She added that staff believes there are categories that some businesses would fall into. 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. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, July 8, 2009 Page 11 of 15