CCMIN092496 - Laserfiche WebLink

It was moved by Mr. Pico, seconded by Ms. Michelotti, to adopt staff recommendation but to amend Exhibit B as follows: Item IVA should be moved to become IIID. IV then becomes the actual City Council review of the process and appointment of the committee. Under item HI, it should be clear the entire process should involve community representatives in workshops (similar to the workshops held on refuse issues). Item VH should have a subsection D to include Planning Commition review and a subsection E for Council review and authorization. Item VHI should have a subsection C to include Planning Commission review and the existing C relettered to D for f'mal Council review. Mr. Tarver felt all the community has to be involved in this process. He referred to prior comments on the composition of the committee and whether some neighborhoods should have more weight than others. He hoped it will not get to that level. Council will have to make a determination about the structure and membership of the committee and will take input at that point. He did not want to start a conflict between staff and the community. However, staff has been doing this work for years and have gone through its own analysis. He believed that staff truly felt this was the right alternative and the interchange must be constructed. The citizens may get an education and may come up with alternatives that can be melded in with staff's concerns about traffic volumes and show us a way to do it without the interchange. Ms. Michelotti appreciated the comments and questions on the timeline and felt the discussions had clarified the matter. She pointed out Council does have the ability to put an issue on the ballot. She hoped the people had their questions answered. The roll call vote was as follows: AYES: Councilmembers - Dennis, Michelotti, Mohr, Pico, and Mayor Tarver NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None There was a break at 9:35 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 9:43 p.m. 09/24/96 -12-