[1. CALL TO ORDER.]
[2. MINUTES.]
[00:00:12]
>>> WE'LL CALL TO ORDER THE CITY COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE FOR
[3. AUBURN PUBLIC LIBRARY.]
MARCH 18, 2025. WE HAVE THE MINUTES APPROVAL. ANY IN FAVOR>> ANY OPPOSE. THE MOTION CARRIES.
>> WE HAVE ONE POSITION UNEXPIRE TERM BEGINS IMMEDIATELY ON APRIL 2026 INCUMBENT SURRY HAS RESIGNED SINCE HE IS MOVING OUT OF THE CITY LIMITS. I WOULD LIKE TO NOMINATE CAITLIN ALLEN.
>> SECOND. >> ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS ALL
IN FAVOR. PLEASE SAY AYE. >> AYE.
[4. QUESTIONS ON THE AGENDA. ]
>> ANY OPPOSED, AND WE WILL CONFIRM THAT LATER ON IN THE AGENDA. ANY QUESTIONS TONIGHT RELATED TO THE AGENDA FOR THE SUBSTITUTE CITY MANAGER. MR. COMINGS. IF NOT I WANTED TO JUST HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH YOU MR. COMINGS RELATED TO THE ITEM WE HAVE THE ORDNANCE TONIGHT RELATED TO THE PLAIN UNIT DEVELOPMENT. THIS WAS POSTPONED FROM SECOND MEETING IN JANUARY I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I HANDLE THIS CORRECTLY. ONCE IT'S INTRODUCED. SO, CAN YOU KIND OF, GIVE US WHERE IT IS AT THIS POINT IN TIME. AND I'M TALKING ABOUT FROM A ROBERTS RULE.
>> YES, YES, VERY GOOD POINT. WHEN THIS ITEM WAS POSTPONED AT THE JANUARY 23RD COUNCIL MEETING, THERE HAD BEEN A MOTION FOR UNANIMOUS CONSENT MADE A SECOND FOLLOWED BUT A NO VOTE OCCURRED. SO WE'LL HAVE TO, THE FIRST ACTION I WILL MENTION WILL BE TAKING A VOTE ON THE UNANIMOUS CONSENT ACTION. AND THEN THAT WILL BE FOLLOWED BY A PUBLIC HEARING.
>> I DO HAVE A QUESTION ON THAT, BECAUSE I THOUGHT THE REASON WE VOTE ON UNANIMOUS CONSENT IS THAT QUESTION IS TO WAVE THE
FIRST READING. >> THAT IS CORRECT.
>> SO THIS IS, THE SECOND READING.
>> THAT'S CORRECT AS WELL. THE VOTE DID NOT OCCUR, WE NEEDED TO COMPLETE THAT ACTION TO VOTE FOR THE UNANIMOUS CONSENT. HOWEVER IF THERE IS A DENIAL UNANIMOUS CONSENT, THIS IS STILL THE SECOND READING. SO YOU MAY PROCEED WITH THAT.
>> GOT YOU, OKAY. >> SORRY IT'S A FORMALITY. BUT ROBERTS RULES LESSEN FOR TONIGHT.
>> WE'RE ALWAYS LEARNING. I APPRECIATE THE PATIENCE.
>> I STILL DON'T UNDERSTAND IT. I THOUGHT WHEN YOU HAD, HAD TO DO A CONSENT WAS FOR ONE PERSON TO NOT, DIDN'T WANT TO DO IT THAT NIGHT. I DIDN'T THINK HE HAD TO COME BACK AND DO.
>> WE DIDN'T GET TO THAT VOTE. THAT VOTE DID NOT OCCUR BEFORE
THE MOTION WAS MADE TO POSTPONE. >> WHATEVER YOU SAY.
>> WE'LL GO SLOW, CHIEF. >> I HAVE ONE AS WELL.
>> SURE. >> I BELIEVE THE COUNCIL RULES MAY HAVE BEEN MISINTERPRETED TO ONLY ALLOW ONE APPLICANT TO
SPEAK. >> ONE SECOND KELLY. I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE CLOSE THIS UP ON THIS. I AM GOING TO GIVE YOU YOUR TIME. BECAUSE I HAD SOMETHING ELSE I WANTED TO INCLUDE. ANYBODY ELSE, EVERYBODY ELSE OKAY WITH THAT. THERE WERE ALSO A COUPLE OF AMENDMENTS THAT WERE IN THE PACT PACKET THAT I
WANTED TO INTRODUCE. >> ONCE YOU GET READY TO TAKE ACTION ON THE ITEM, WE ARE REQUESTING YOU MAKE THOSE AMOUNTS AND MAKE A MOTION TO AMEND THOSE INTO THE ORDNANCE.
THOSE WERE INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET AND HOPEFULLY YOU HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THOSE. FIRST I WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE DEFINE THAT IT WILL RUN WITH THE LAND NOT THE ACTUAL APPLICANT. THE OTHER ITEM WAS ACTUALLY TO ADDRESS TWO THINGS. ONE WHICH IS THE SECOND ITEM THAT WE PROVIDED TO YOU. WILL CLARIFY THAT THE WOULD EXPIRE AFTER 24 MONTHS SIMILAR TO A PDD IF IT'S NOT EXECUTED. SO IF THE PUD IS NOT PERFORMED, THEN IT WOULD EXPIRE.
AND IT WOULD REVERT BACK TO THE PREVIOUS ZONING. THE SECOND ITEM ASSOCIATED WITH THAT, AND VERY MUCH AKIN TO THAT IS IF SOMEONE
[00:05:03]
WERE TO COME IN AND PURCHASE THE PROPERTY BEFORE THE PUD HAD BEEN PERFORMED. AND THEY DIDN'T WANT TO DO THE PUD THEY COULD REZONE THE PROPERTY BUT THEY WOULD HAVE TO PETITION THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND GO THROUGH THE REZONING PROCESS TO REVERT ITBACK. >> AND WE DID DISCUSS THIS AT
THE WORK SESSION LAST WEEK. >> THAT'S CORRECT.
>> SO EACH OF THESE WOULD NEED TO BE READ, EACH OF THESE AMENDMENTS WILL NEED TO BE READ INTO THE RECORD CORRECT.
>> YES, YES, SIR. YEAH. >> ANYTHING REGARDING THIS PARTICULAR TOPIC BEFORE I, MR. GRISWOLD REGARDING THE FORWARD.
ANY OTHER PROCESS WHERE WE ARE. WE'LL METHODICALLY WALK THROUGH THIS AND HOPEFULLY GET IT RIGHT, THANK YOU. MR. GRISWOLD.
>> I'M SORRY I JUMPED AHEAD. >> NO PROBLEM, NO PROBLEM. I BELIEVE THE COUNCIL RULES MAY HAVE BEEN MISINTERPRETED TO ONLY ALLOW AN APPLICANT TO SPEAK DURING A PUBLIC HEARING AND TO BE LIMITED TO FIVE MINUTES. I'VE ASKED THE CITY MANAGER AND THE MAYOR TO OUTLINE THE PROCESS TO CLARIFY OUR RULES. AND THEY SUGGESTED DISCUSSING IT AT AN UPCOMING COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE.
WITH COUNCIL'S CONCURRENT I WOULD LIKE THIS TO BE A TOPIC OF THE NEXT COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE PLEASE.
>> IS THERE ANY BEFORE WE TAKE A VOTE ON THIS. ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. GRISWOLD AS TO MAYBE DIG IN A LITTLE DEEPER.
WHAT HE'S ASKING FOR. IS EVERYBODY CLEAR ON THIS.
>> ON THAT, SO WHAT ARE YOU SAYING.
>> I AM SAYING WE NEED TO CLARIFY WHETHER AN APPLICANT IS RESTRICTED TO ONLY TALKING DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING. OR IF AN APPLICANT IS ONLY RESTRICTED TO FIVE MINUTES. WE MAY CHOOSE TO DO A DIFFERENT TIME. MAY CHOOSE TO LEAVE IT EXACTLY HOW IT IS. I WANTED TO HAVE COMMENTS AND COMMENTS THAT THEY WOULD HAVE LIKED TO HAVE HEARD THE APPLICANT SPEAK TWO MEETINGS AGO BUT BECAUSE OF OUR RULES AT THE TIME, YOU KNOW THEY WEREN'T ABLE TO HEAR HIS FULL EXPLANATION OF WHAT THEY UNINTENDED. I WAS UNAWARE OF THE FACT THAT WE WERE LIMITING AM APPLICANT. I THOUGHT AN APPLICANT WOULD COME UP AND MAKE THEIR CASE AND THEN WE WOULD HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING. I THINK WE NEED TO PROVIDE AN APPLICANT TO MAKE THEIR CASE. THAT'S MY
RATIONAL. >> YOU KNOW, RELATED TO THIS, OBVIOUSLY I WAS TRYING TO DO THE BEST I CAN AROUND THE MEETING.
THERE'S A, THERE'S A FAIRNESS THAT IF YOU GIVE AN APPLICANT X AMOUNT OF MINUTES THAT YOU GIVE AN INDIVIDUAL X AMOUNT OF MINUTES. PUBLIC HEARINGS HAVE ALWAYS BEEN GIVEN AN X AMOUNT OF MINUTES. THERE HAVE BEEN TIMES IN THE PAST WHEN THERE'S BEEN A PROJECT THAT HAD SOME A LOT TO IT. THAT WAS MAYBE COMPLICATED THAT WE NEEDED TO HAVE MORE TIME THAT WE HAVE CALLED A SPECIAL WORK SESSION AND THE STAFF HAS PRESENTED THE DETAILS OF THAT PROJECT. THE APPLICANTS HAVE BEEN THERE. BUT THEY HAVE NOT SPOKE AT THAT TIME. AND THAT HAS BEEN AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE COUNCIL TO UNDERSTAND FURTHER OF THE PROJECT. SO, YOU KNOW IF THIS IS WHAT THE COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO DO TO STUDY THIS. I'M CERTAINLY AS THE MAYOR GOOD WITH THAT. I WOULD JUST SAY THAT THERE IS SOME LEGAL MATTERS IN THIS THAT WE HAVE TO GET SOME INTERPRETATION AND UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT WE CAN AND CANNOT DO.
BUT IF IT'S A DISCUSSION EVERYBODY WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THEN WE WOULD LIKE TO SET THE TIME TO DO THAT IN THE FUTURE.
SO, ANYBODY HAVE AN OPINION ON THAT?
>> I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A DECISION IN THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE. I TEND TO BELIEVE THAT THERE WAS SOME SITUATION WHERE THE DEVELOPER HAD LONGER TO PRESENT HIS CASE. I THINK WE NEED TO BE FAIR TO EVERYONE. I WOULD SAY GET STAFF TO DO SOME RESEARCH ON HOW WE USED TO DO IT IN THE PAST.
>> YOU SAID THERE WAS SOME LEGAL ISSUES. WILL THE LEGAL PEOPLE BE
HERE TO ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS. >> I WOULD BELIEVE THAT IF WE WERE TO BRING THOSE TOPICS UP THAT WE WOULD HAVE THOSE RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO US. I WOULD ASK THAT WE HAVE THOSE RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO US. ANYONE ELSE. IS EVERYBODY GOOD THAT THIS BE INCLUDED IN THE NEXT COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, THAT WILL BE THE FIRST MEETING IN APRIL.
>> YES, SIR. >> WE WILL DETERMINE HOW MUCH TIME WE NEED FOR THAT LATER, SO EVERYONE CAN BE FLEXIBLE TO
THAT. WHAT TIME WE START. >> THANK YOU MR. MAYOR.
>> ANYTHING ELSE
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.