03 ATTACHMENTS - Laserfiche WebLink

(_ Councilmember McGovern voiced concerns relating to the business having no outside or playgrounds for children, suggested the City review this in the future and believed fingerprinting and background checks was extremely important for all employees. She said she viewed the Craig's List flyer for a freestyle contest posted after Mr. Pfund was to cease operations, questioned a handgun being on site. Ms. Decker said Mr. Pfund acknowledged the handgun was real and a part of the martial art study. Councilmember McGovern voiced concerns about long-term reliability such as the possibility of future things being constructed without permits, the need for a handgun on site, flyers on the Internet and the operator not ceasing operations when told to do so. Councilmember Sullivan questioned the letter from the State granting the waiver and asked for staffs comments. City Attorney Roush said in order to get the waiver, certain requirements must be met; the activity must be less than 12 weeks in length. Based on Mr. Pfund's presentation, he has gotten around the issue by having continual contracts of 12 weeks' duration which seems contrary to what the intent of the regulation is, of not having something going on for more than 12 weeks. Staff is having difficulty reconciling the actual operation with the definition and this is where the problem lies. Councilmember Sullivan questioned current operations and said the staff report talks about a drop in program where kids are not required to sign in and out. He voiced concerns about kids coming and going in an industrial park; however, now Mr. Pfund is proposing and agreeing to have them signed in and out. He questioned if this was the actual practice or was it to satisfy the requirement. Ms. Decker said it is staff's believe Mr. Pfund is responding to the Planning Commission's determination and denial based on his correspondence dated April 29th clarifying his operations to meet those particular statements made by the Commission. However, what is before the Council is the Planning Commission's action, which is having children being picked up from schools and brought to his facility from the hours of 11:30 a.m. to 6:15 p.m. for 20 students, and for 10 students over the age of 16, having classes in the evening from 6:45 to 9:00 p.m. So, it is not a situation where the Council can consider a revised plan. Councilmember Sullivan clarified drop-in facilities similar to those like the Boys and Girls Clubs and confirmed with Ms. Decker these facilities were mostly for teenagers who could come and go, and that there was a time when the State created such a policy for these types of clubs due to neighborhood needs. Councilmember Sullivan referred to the background check and questioned if it was adequate. City Manager Fialho said he was not familiar with the organization; staff has tried to process the application on the grounds it was submitted, that the basis was a land use decision and staff has treated it in this regard. City Attorney Roush agreed and said staff is trying to determine whether the use is appropriate and one the Council is comfortable with. Councilmember Sullivan confirmed that staff's primary concern is the proposal as submitted which is not consistent with the location as far as kids coming and going in an industrial park or where there is a lot of traffic. The second issue could be that based on staff's understanding of the operation, it is really not consistent with the waiver letter from the State. He asked if the City could place additional requirements on facilities like this and City Attorney Roush said the City is not bound by the regulations that the State has promulgated because it is not in statute; that the City is free to interpret to review what the use is and characterize it as what staff understands it to be, and make recommendation to the Council based on their interpretation of the use versus what the State would like to say it is. City Council Minutes, May 6, 2008