Laserfiche WebLink
PLAPINIMG COK4ISSION <br />T(V�41 OF LOS ALTOS HILLS <br />MLIUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING <br />January 24, 1973 <br />Reel PC 12; Side 2; Track 2 000 - 1109 <br />Chairman AcReynolds called the regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the <br />Town of Los Altos Hills to order at 7:55 P.M. in the City Council Chambers of <br />the Town Hall, 26379 Fremont Road, Los Altos Hills, California. The following <br />members answered roll call: Present: Commissioners Lachenbruch, Mueller, <br />Spencer, Perkins and Chairman .'k Reynolds. Absent: Comnissioners t4eisbart and <br />Magruder. <br />CITY COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE: Councilman Miller. <br />APPROVAL OF MINUTES: January 10, 1973. Commissioner Art Lauchenbruch stated <br />that he had two corrections on Page 2, Item 3. 1) and Item 3. 2), as follows: <br />3. 1) The misrepresentation in this report of the word "minority", i.e., <br />minority = low income; low income = minority. The interchangeable <br />use in this report of the terms "minority" and "low income". Failure <br />to make a distinction between the meaning of these terms only com- <br />plicates our already difficult problems. If an anolicant is refused <br />a loan because of low income, it is logically, ethically, and legally <br />different than refusal because he is a member of an ethnic or racial <br />minority. A similar argument applies to low density zoning. <br />3. 2) The implication that business should be run for the nublic welfare. <br />Business should have a right to make legitimate judgments relative <br />to risks in its loans, etc. Business should be run accordion to law, <br />and laws and effective enforcement should assure the rights of minorities. <br />Landlords and lending institutions should not he criticized for making valid <br />legal judgments, based on their profit motive, e.g., in judging the risk of <br />applicants. The validity of the lav -income criterion is not addressed in this <br />report. Ethnic and racial criteria are neither legal nor valid, and this report <br />properly emnhasized the need for law enforcement in that area. <br />MOTIOM, SECONDED ANO CARRIED: Commissioner Mueller moved, seconded by McReynolds <br />and carried by majority vote (Commissioners Perkins and Snencer abstained, due <br />to their absence at the meeting at the last Planning Commission meeting) to <br />approve the January 10, 1973 minutes with the above corrections. <br />COMMUNICATIONS: Letter from !like Anderson, age 14, of 12519 Valley View Drive, <br />os tos, re: suggested uses of El Retiro property in Los Altos. The City <br />Manager was asked to respond to this c ommunication. <br />