This meeting tonight was to address Ordinance 1261 and Resolution 429 dealing with Stack Hill's final plat and the requested amendments from the developer. I should preface this review with a clarification that the town attorney stated at the last meeting that since the vote on this issue had been taken (and failed), the quasi-judicial nature of the issue was closed and council members were free to talk to anyone with no restrictions. ~ Karen
The meeting began at 7 pm with all council members present. After agenda approval, the mayor and town attorney began a lengthy discussion with the council on the proper procedure to reconsider Ordinance 1261. It was clear there had been a lot of discussion and research on this prior to the meeting.
Alberston felt that the quasi-judicial restrictions still applied to the council members after the vote on Monday. The town attorney outlined two scenarios 1) one approach was as he had advised the council on Monday (the matter was closed and restrictions had been lifted) or 2) the same process was on-going and council members should disclose exparte (private) communications and get them on the record before the vote. He now wanted to err on the side of caution and go through the appearance of fairness procedures. Huson felt if there was anyone at fault about exparte communications misunderstandings, it was the attorney's fault.
The vote for reconsideration received a second and the vote was 3-2 with Alberston and Stebner voting no. The motion to accept Ordinance 1261 was made and seconded. The town attorney read the appearance of fairness questions to the council, including asking them to outline any exparte communication they have had with anyone on this issue. Everyone but Alberston said they had communicated with someone on the issue. Each council member gave details of their communication with community members and the developer.
Then any community member was given a chance to challenge any of the council members ability to vote fairly. Bill Walker challenged only Hunt based on her disclosures. After Mr. Cohen acknowledged communication with each council member (including Albertson) Point Ruston formally challenged each of the council members. They pointed out a state law that said that if council members recusing (excusing) themselves from a vote (based on an appearance of fairness challenge) caused a loss of quorum, the restrictions did not apply and challenged council members should vote. If all exparte communication was disclosed they are allowed to vote.
Hunt stated she would recuse herself from the vote based on advice from the town attorney. Cohen felt it was not fair for the town attorney to advise one member to recuse themselves when every single member of the council had exparte communication on the same issue. After the challenges had been heard, the mayor opened discussion on the ordinance. Huson and Hedrick joined Hunt in recusing themselves. The mayor acknowledged that a quorum had been lost, so all three should stay and vote.
Albertson felt that 3 members of the council had been influenced improperly by exparte contact. An audience member commented at this point and was loudly graveled down by the mayor. Albertson felt the disclosures tonight were too vague. The exparte communication could have been something like if there was a change in a vote, there would be some consideration given by Point Ruston or some dedication of park space for that change of a vote.
Huson then read a statement stating his reasons for supporting this ordinance. He expressed his frustration with the council's struggle with this simple part of the development compared to the more complex lower part of the site. He was also frustrated that those voting no had no plan for compromise or moving the issues forward. Hedrick explained his reasons for supporting, which included his belief that the view corridor requirement was a taking of private property without a corresponding public benefit. Alberston stated why he was opposed.
Hunt apologized for causing all the trouble. She had second thoughts after her vote on Monday and told the mayor she would change her vote if she had the chance to vote again. She spoke to Cohen and many citizens on this issue since Monday. She said she would still recuse herself from the vote and left the room. Stebner wanted more training for the council on quasi-judicial issues.
The mayor called for the vote, which was 2-2. The town attorney asked him all the appearance of fairness questions, with the mayor stating he had not talked to anyone about this issue since the public hearing. Since the mayor did not acknowledge any exparte communication, no challenges were allowed. The mayor then cast the deciding vote, voting no.
Resolution 429 was placed on the table. This would finalize the Stack Hill plat without granting either of the two amendments (including the 7.5 ' side yard set backs that had been requested). The council discussed allowing this change and how to proceed. The mayor said Ordinance 1261 would have to reconsidered and the ordinance changed to allow that one amendment before the final plat was approved. The meeting adjourned without any action on the final plat.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
I wonder if there is any chance that MC construction would consider renaming the Town Point Ruston after they win their law suit.They might want to just call it Point Cohen.After more than 100 years of existance it looks as though Ruston will be no more.This suit will surely bring us to our knees.Thank you Dan,Wayne and Bob.
Jane says she was advized by her attorney to recuse herself.So she did just that.Leaving the three brain trusts to vote no on the final amended plat.Frustration,unfairness,incompitence and another wasted night in the chambers.And Wayne wants more training? This is as bad as it gets.
Ruston you've been a great Town to many families and residents.But the end is near.Cherish what you had.It will all be gone before you know it.
Jane, I thought you could figure out what room you where in tonight. I don't know what you are smoking or drinking for stress but it isn't helping.
You are definatly showing your incompetance and you are an embarrasment to the town.
All you seem to go by since you where "appointed" is nods & notes from Dan. Is there more to that influance than meets the eye?
Where is your personal experience with your J.C. Penny's stint helping you now? Oh that's it...Dan must be your new supervisor that you answer to. So much for independant thinking...
Jane, whether you understand this or not, you where the swing vote to help save our town & you blew it.
I hope tacoma takes over because its obvious the Town of Ruston is incompetent in running its day-to-day duties. We need to surrender all to Tacoma and deal with the fact that we live in Pierce County and soon will be officially Tacoma residents. You see the newsletter stating the town sold the school for 4.5 million and is now broke? B.S. someone does not know how to handle money and budget. Give up Ruston and give in to Tacoma or risk the Town trying to tax the hell out of all the businesses, hit the residents up for more tax money and running all the businesses out of town.
Wanted: Attorney. Town of Ruston. Contact Council member Albertson for appointment-literally.
You boys are putting on a clinic.
How is this going work when we find out that Dan,Bob and Britton coaxed Jane into recusing herself from the vote? (Depose)
This is called fairness?
It is impossible to do anything fair and positive with such Hatred in your viens.
Do you really think last nights agenda wasn't PRE-PLANNED? Do you really think those 7 people care about the Town??? Remember the Town attorney lives where? Court Street? Unless we get together as a Town we won't have one to worry about. What's the Mayor going to do arrest the entire Town at the meeting?
Both Wayne and Dan are going to get schooled in the fine art of law.
Law 101.Stealing private property
is still illegal.Even in Ruston.
Law 102.You can't create your own laws.Even in Ruston.
Law 102a.Ignorance and stupidity are not a defence.Even in Ruston.
Take your time with this training Wayne.Read each line slowly.
We don't want your head to explode.
Do you people do anything but whine and complain? Is this your idea of "civil"? Why don't you stop the name calling for 5 minutes and actually try to talk about the right decision? No, its so much easier to just throw insults. Doesn't it get old? How many times can the same 3 people who contribute to this blog (anonymously) write the same name-calling whiny complaints?
God help the people in Arizona.
Is it possible that the right decision was made last night? Is it possible that preserving views (and preserving property values) for the people that live in Ruston NOW is the right decision? Is it possible that you would complain no matter what the council did because the person who runs this blog has been badly defeated in the last two elections?
I have to disagree with the last couple of comments. You can't just dismiss other's opinions as "whining" just because you disagree with them. Everyone has a legitimate right to their views.
Not everyone agrees that saving a limited view of scrub trees will enhance property values in Ruston. That is a very different issue from the broader discussion of the value of preserving the new water views we enjoy from our homes. This view issue on Stack Hill is not the soapbox to stand on to argue that broader issue.
And harping on my personal loss in the last election has nothing to do with these issues or this blog. We get well over a 100 visits a day on the blog. Like it or not, this venue is providing a source of communication. I can assure you it’s not the same 3 people commenting repeatedly. It might be scary, but people actually think for themselves around here most of the time.
And one final note of reassurance (or not depending on your point of view), I'm not moving to Arizona. I still care deeply about Ruston and will continue to operate this blog despite having to spend some time down south occasionally over the next year.
Did I hear correctly that Dan Albertson threatened Jane C Hunt with a lawsuit if she changed her vote? Is that legal?
Hey Karen.Looks like you might be up to 6 people that blog on.
I dout that Dan Albertson would threaten Ms Hunt with a lawsuit.
Please try and state facts.
Just to clarify - I am not making these comments. I agree that rumors should be verified. There is no proof that Dan threatened to sue Jane if she changed her vote. Everyone should take these comments for what they are, people's opinions and potential rumors...
Snidey snide are the cabal. They don't take criticism well.
"...for the people that live in Ruston NOW is the right decision?"
Stay out of out town, for snides only to decide.
Anonymous # 8 I have to disagree.
There are way more than 3 people in your commnuity with common sence
and the ability to be fair.
I find it truly odd that the appointed mayor (who quit the council) wants to hire a city manager when he is retired and available to work. Sure the mayor has a life outside the town's business. What with his resume stating all that he could do back when he was elected to council, I would think he could do all things mayoral standing on his head.
Also, the "mayors corner" blurb in the town newsletter only repeated a portion of Steve Marcotte's assessment of the Ruston financial future. Mr Marcotte also stated that while the reserves would indeed be depleted over time, the revenue coming in from the Point Ruston project and the hated condo would also be ramping up in later years.
Much like a household, to use the mayor's analogy, we would have to tighten the budget and look at possible income sources. But, in my house, I certainly would not hire an expensive manager to handle my precious dwindling cash until I found another job. I expect I would use my own skills to manage the situation for a considerable savings.
Mr mayor, it is time to step up and live up to your resume. Do your duty and go to work. Hiring a city manager is admitting that your experience is not up to handling two construction projects and this tiny town.
Craig Fletcher
Post a Comment