AgdaPkt 2002-11-04 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

,- --, , OCT 2 4 2002 CITY Oi CITY CLERK ierno Privileged & Confidential To: Mayor Claire and Members of the City Council Copy: Ed Everett, City Manager Bruce Liedstrand, Community Development Director From: Stan T. Yamamoto, City Attomey Date: October 23, 2002 Re: Opinion of City Attomey Re: Innovations-Successful Salon Services, Inc. (Appellant) Public Headng November 4, 2002 Please find attached the opinion of this office with respect to the correspondence submitted by the law firm of Allen Matkins Leck Gamble & Mallory LLP, on behalf of appellant. While opinions of the City Attorney are generally privileged under the attorney work product rule, the situation in this instance is somewhat different. Here, the matter arose as part of a public hearing and the City Council has directed the City Attorney to advise it as to a matter of record. The advice provided by the City Attorney addresses a legal interpretation of the City's Zoning Ordinance. As some consideration will be given to the opinion of the City Attomey with respect to determining the appeal, the advice of the City Attorney should be a matter of public record and available to the appellant and other members of the public. As a matter of courtesy 'he a' ~ellan+ shall receive a copy of this opinion no later than October 29, 2002. Furt;,er, th,~ opim,,n will be made available to the general public as any other attachment to the City Council agenda packet. I would suggest that the City Council not engage in any conversations with the appellant with respect to the opinion or any other related matter prior to the meeting. The appellant, as well as the general public, are entitled to know the basis upon which the City Council makes its decision. If private conversations are held by members of the City Council, other members of the Council as well as the general public will not have had the benefit of such information at the time a decision is made. Privileged & ConfidenUal 1