Laserfiche WebLink
( - EE <br /> January 18,1984 <br /> I <br /> Then an <br /> be held where written comments would <br /> be <br /> EIS cocizpproximatelyuJu the scope would be determined an <br /> Sdraftsw circulated. In my re would bet opportunity <br /> foren writtenon the draft EIS an a public meting would <br /> held t Ldi cu comments <br /> plan,the draftEISand theshoreline <br /> This wouldabe6 a thesite <br /> the a nning Commission. x December and January, <br /> would be submitted to Ing Coamissionna City Council <br /> Februaryand planning commission would mek and <br /> t the <br /> Citt ECSwMarch,dual..Lmeted,anotherpublic hearing d be 4 <br /> held bythedC until and the permit decision would bem <br /> wouldn't be until Sptember of hl 5 before building permits awould <br /> be issued and construction would begin. <br /> m <br /> Councilman Gipson asked about the problem of the impact of ml 1 <br /> k on the community and r.Serackso said this x looked <br /> pointed a <br /> d ou Police ac Department hada as contacted and visited <br /> the California cities to hat the Navy impact was there. <br /> President Stephenson asked a what point t City p h Navy <br /> from settling here ea Bruce Jones,City Attorney,gave the following <br /> opinion: <br /> referendum and Initiative are legislative act the <br /> e A city's local p of referendum or initiative cannot <br /> bees d Ino osis o at Simile. ,local astate <br />{ law c exercisedinopposition federal law. T authority <br /> f the nC Congress the Secretaryof Defense regarding the esiting ofy <br /> federal miliary facilities i plenary. Thus,it is me opinion that <br /> either the City Count City of Everett no electorate <br /> through L initiativeorreferendum any power ohregulat decision' <br /> j of the U.S.Navy to laceafacility in Everett. (Note t n <br /> Navy representatives have indicated shat,as a policy G Navy <br /> 1 accede L certain permit review b the Ciy,butthati would' <br /> cast City inanadministrative and quasi-judicial,n legislative,' <br /> capacity. referendum or initiativeyrocees i limited to legis- <br /> dative matters y,not administrative matters.) • <br /> (( There aeauthority <br /> that the Everett City Council may <br /> its <br /> charterpors to call for anadvisoryelection onmattesin which <br /> the legislative powers of the City snable. Sec.11.4of <br /> the B City Charter.) t this power as (Sec. <br /> da <br /> that <br /> interfereit does not <br /> with state law or the administrative duties of <br /> elected offs era"• <br /> Councilman Overstreetasked i the City could send an information <br /> pamphlet in ty bills regarding the Navy d Mr.Jones said <br /> hicould be done. E; <br /> ponna eogle,0 5th SC reminded the Council that at e <br /> November lath hearing there were manyquestions asked and wantedt <br /> ow if there were any answers <br /> these questions. Councilman Pope .. <br /> '.. sCmaclthe <br /> Port <br /> Port of t <br /> , they <br /> Seattle, <br /> the City Council actually wasnot involvedi this, <br /> e s <br /> receiving an some of the questions end hepefulll <br /> wll however,have something available soon. <br /> F <br /> i Misa r enogle t en said she supported a voteof the tithes including <br /> all of those inhthe County also. !� <br />