Laserfiche WebLink
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD APRIL 22, 1991 <br />MAYOR /COUNCIL REPORT CONTINUED <br />does not s:iggest to m•a that common sense was being applied by <br />those who were using it, whether or not the question that they <br />were addressing was correct, which leads me to believe that. I <br />have the feeling, from having listened to an abbreviated report <br />of the discussions between the Planning Commission and members of <br />the Council at the lase Planning Commission meeting, that feeling <br />has not gone away. <br />It also seems to ma, and I may bra wrong, that there is a <br />split personality within the Planning Commission. If it is not <br />precisely true that you get a different result, depending on when <br />you appear before the_ Planning Commission, it is true that you at <br />least would get treated in quite a drastically different way, and <br />you might benefit simply from having* your matter tabled in hopes <br />that another group of Planning Commission members were present'at <br />that next meeting. <br />I am also aware, at least it has been suggested by ..some' <br />members of the Council, and certainly the suggestions in the <br />various documents we get al-e such, that we are considering a <br />change in the function of the Planning Commission. The City of <br />Plymouth is having a deal of difficulty i1 their attempts to <br />change termms after an election. With a stagger-ad board on the <br />Planning Commission, in order to effectively change the make -up, <br />or tenor, of the Planning Commission, if Council so wishes, would <br />prove extremely difficult and would take three years. If we <br />change the Ordinance to provide a ono -year term, during which <br />time the Council addresses these matters, Council could make <br />changes in the Planning Commission, effectively. If my view of <br />the Planning Commission is correct, and it isn't . to say that I <br />object to individual decisions that they make about zoning, I am <br />at a complete loss to understand why we would went to have an <br />advisory body whose view of us was that it would be better if we <br />went away and d _ed quietly. And that it we were unfortunate <br />enough not .o follow the recommendation, which they absolutely <br />feel a.-.-e necessary, that we should perhaps be shot -at sunrise. <br />Even though I do not believe -that it _s necessary . for the <br />Planning Commission to be 'yes people', I still don't believe <br />that we should have a group that does not have anything in common <br />with the way that we run the City. I think if we make .this <br />change, we would be able to consider those problems. and-deal with <br />them. Otherwise, if we elect people for three -year terms <br />tonight, we will be very awkwardly placed, at least politically <br />and practically, to do anything about it. <br />I would like to say, and this contradicts some of my earlier <br />negative comments about the Planning Commission, that I 'think the. <br />Planning Commission does extremely good work. They work as hard <br />as they can and their zoning decisions are well thought out and <br />conceived, with the exception of this split personality. It <br />would be hard to do other than praise them for the work they did <br />- 15 - <br />