Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 10/07/2005 5726 CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING Port Angeles, Washington October 7, 2005 CALL TO ORDER - Mayor Headrick called the special meeting of the Port Angeles City Council to order SPECIAL MEETING: at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Mayor Headrick, Councilmembers Braun, Erickson, Munro, Pittis, Rogers, and Williams. Members Absent: None. Staff Present: Manager Quiun, Attonley Bloor, M. Madscn, S. Roberd~,:' S. Johns, S. Martin, and N. West. Public Present: M. & R. Jones, A. & C. Turner, K. Winther, R. & M. Gotham, P. Vanderhnof, A..Bi~tlon, C. McCain, P. Walker, E. Petersen, J. Hoare, J.,Gardincr, C. Miller, T. Root, J. Vanderhnof, C. Kidd, A. Holzschuh, T. Jeunings, B. Melville, and T. Bihn. All others present in the audience failed to sign the roster. PLEDGE OF The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Councilmembet Braun. ALLEGIANCE: Farmer's Market CUP Farmer's Market CUP Appeals: Appeals Mayor Headrick opened the meeting by informing those present that the closed record Farmer's Market appeals hearing is a quasi-judicial proceeding that will be conducted with fairness and procedural due process. The Mayor stated the purpose and ground roles of the hearing and further outlined the process that would be followed. He indicated that, at the conclusion of the hearing, the Council may or may not deliberate the matter. The Council could opt to continue the meeting to a future date, depending on the issues raised. In determining whether the Planning Connmssion decision should be sustained, Mayor Headrick indicated the Council must decide if the Planning Commission's factual fmc~mg s were supported by evidence in the record, and whether ~e Planning comrmssion correctly applied the law. He added that the burden of demonstrating the invalidity of the Planning Comr~ssion's actions is on the appellants. Mayor Headrick summarized the various options available to the City Council at the conclusion of the hearing. He posed specific questions to the Council as relates to appearance of fairness issues, and as to whether any member of the Council engaged in communication outside the hearing with opponents or proponents on the issue. Councilmember Braun disclosed a conversation he had some months ago with one of the appellants. Similarly, Councilmember Williams disclosed a brief conversation with one of the appellants some time ago. Additionally, he referred to a meeting of the Port Angeles Business Association from which he departed due to a discussion on the Farmer's Market. Councilmember Pittis noted he was a member of the Planning Comn~ssion in 2003 at which time the Farmer's Market CUP was considered. Attorney Bloor indicated that Councilmember Pittis' prior service on the Planning -1- CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING October 7, 2005 Farmer's Market CUP Commission and subsequent graduation to the City Council would not by statute be a Appeals (Cont'd) disqualification. Mayor Headrick noted that one of the appellants, as well as others, appeared before the City Council on the matter of the Farmer's Market and its impact prior to the time the issue went before the Planning Commission. Mayor Headrick continued to pose other questions to the Council related to the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine, and Councilmember Munro disclosed that he has an office located above Laurel Street. Discussion ensued with regard to the content and nature of the records prepared for the Council; Attorney Bloor clarified that this is a closed record appeal, so the City Council is limited to the record created before the Planning Commission~ He added that the City is not authorized to change or augment that record. Councilmember Williams posed a procedural question with regard to a letter submitted by the Port Angeles Business Association stating an objection to the Conditional Use Permit. An officer of the PABA, Cherie Kidd, was present during a vote concerning the letter, and she also serves as Vice Chair' of the planning commission. Councilmember Williams indicated that Ms. Kidd made the motion before the Planning ~s~tN~'~.;,---~ ~ Commissionto approve the CUP, which passe~c~by a 4- 3 vote. He questioned whether "~1~) ~~ there may be an appearance of fairness issue~"~Following discussion, Attorney Bloor advised the Council that it could choose to proceed with the appeals hearing, or it could ~~-~ ~~ send the matter back to the Planning Commission for a determination as to the appearance of fairness matte~e. A question was raised as to what would happen with the  Farmer's Market in the interim if the matter were returned to the Planning Commission, and it was determined that the CUP extension and associated conditions would still be considered valid. . Mayor Headdck as to whether of the appellants wished to object, should inquired any ~ the Council choose to proceed with the hearing in view of the matter raised by Counciimember Williams. In the absence of legal counsel, Peter Vanderhoof spoke on behalf of the Farmer's Market by expressing an objection to that informatiunnot being made available and considered by the Planning Commission during its deliberations. Following further discussion and clarification, Councilmember Erieksun moved to send the issue back to the Planning Commission to make a determination as to whether there was a violation of the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine. The motion was seconded by Couneilmemhar Pittis and carried 6 - 0, with Couneilmember Williams abstaining. ADJOURNMENT: ~ee~ was adj ourne~at 6:40^~m. / -2-