Laserfiche WebLink
412 <br /> October 11,1978 <br /> COUNCIL BILL 799-371 8194894444,90ttgoahedgeo1B4SWAIN.Norb.ixOwswuXam, <br /> Brad Cattle said he and CouncilmAn Lang.and Pope ha.been meehin9 with <br /> the towing people but had not finalized their meetings yet. He asked <br /> for a continuance of this ordinance. <br /> • <br /> =gsZ=1=Trr:=7!;'t::=VrtIce%:c=?=11Mt==ks. <br /> Roll was called with all Councilmen voting ye.excePt Councidman Michel- <br /> son who was excused. <br /> Motion Carried <br /> • • <br /> COUNCIL BILL 709-382 <br /> Final Reading <br /> An ordinance prohibiting age discrimination and discrimination based on <br /> whethek•a person has children and providing civil tanalties for the same <br /> Brad Cattle reviewed the history of the proposed ordinance stating he <br /> had prepared it from drafts from,San Francisco and Berkely,California. <br /> Mountlake Terrace had adopted an ordinanCe Very similar to ohio. The <br /> only difference in these other ordinances and this one prinmrily was <br /> that he had established it as a civil penalty whereas the other ordinances <br /> provided discrimination with a criminal offense. <br /> He then reviewed the ordinance including what is prohibited,providing • <br /> for eviction for cause,elderlY age Nediod e9e4Nti4., gal 19901!44 <br /> financial obligation prohibited,etc. <br /> Councilman Aldcroft asked who would enfaXce the ordinance and Mr.Cattle <br /> said being a civil penalty it would mean the person_being discriminated <br /> against would have to go to court a.file a charge against the land- <br /> lord. <br /> Councilman Pope asked if the City bad met with the apartment house <br /> 1 owners and the tenants and Mr.Cattle replied he had met separately <br /> with each of these groups. Primarily the apartment house owners would <br /> prefer the ordinance be dropped. The tenants group,of course,wanted <br /> the ordinance to be adopted but neither group had discussed making an,' <br /> amenUNents or changes to it to bring it more satisfactory to both oi tne <br /> groups. <br /> novel byZ.ouncitanrLangra seconded by Councilman Alderoft that the pro- ,• <br />• • <br /> Councilman Langus felt the City should not try to regulate PriVate enter- 1. <br /> prise as to how to run their businesses. He said he WaS very concorned <br /> with the children and family but he felt when the City stepped in and <br /> to.a person who he could•rent to that the City was delving into some- I <br /> one else's private concern. • <br /> Richard Swanson,an attorney representing the tenants spoke in favor of • <br /> the proposed ordinance and urged the Council to pass it tonight giving <br /> the family protection due them. <br /> 1 • <br />