Agenda - Council - 04/10/2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Mayor Gamec stated that if people want to present a petition they should hire their to review the document. Councilmember Hendriksen stated that the Citizens are in charge of the Ci~:i~56~;:tl~'~ 'Council. Whether the City Attorney reviews the petition before the signatures are cp, lt~{~3 or artsci} ~pes not cost the City anything. He would say that it would cost the City less ~ii~se it would r~diibe~ the amount of time staff has to spend on petitions that are re-submittect~'~ ~4;~i!'!: ,i~ . Councilmember Zimmerman stated that ultimately the voters ar'bsgring::f~ecide this issue and for that reason it does make sense to have the City AttO~ review'"~{~e petition prior to Councilmember Kurak stated that she.cannot agree ~th":th~gi:because yeti:dent8 bringing forward a charter amendment have to do so on their own behai~'. '~::'' Councilmember Hendriksen replied that they are not asking t~?i'iQ)~ Attorne~ to create the petition, they are only ask/ng him to determine if the petition is manifestl~:unqofisflNtional. Councilmember Hendriksen state4~{::~-h~ Qit~ ~as builders who hire ~rhi~ts who turn plans over to City Engineers to recej',;~:th~i~ 8~inion arld-:~ ~feso,urces of the Oi~ to determine how it looks. In this situation the Cie Attom~ill review t~/e~efiii'rn.;on~'Way or another and include the time of the City Clerk. He stated tlia{',~he is di~'~O~oint~'i'ih~{: he found out what the City Attorney's ruling was when he opened his'-~ket:'i; :?: ' Motion by Mayo?::Gam~:di::;S~conded by CouriCilmember rurak, to temporarily deny the authority of the City. A~o~ey to r~W any petition~: ~egen_~:gd by a petitioning group, until the City receives an:opi~on from Ke~dy and Graven--f:e~i}ai-ng the matter. Furth:&.idiS~hS~ion: CourtS'ember Hendri~rh stated that having the City Attorney review a petition prior:'{~,: ~tS:.cirCUi:~iti~':~°~5;}"sh~n}e the position the City Attorney was in during the meeting. Even~iyhe City Attom~)~Sill have to make a ruling as to whether or not the .=:~::s/'-~'~iU~on is manifesti~ Unconstitutional. The only thing Kennedy and Graven could do is give an ~.:"~.i:i~.i~;"'oi~:5~: whether or nrt'~{;iis legal. Mr. Hendriksen inquired if the City Attorney felt it was necessarys; }eceive an o~ii~idd~0m Kennedy and Graven. City Attorney Goodrich replied that they would ~6f);be able to"i~,X;'& a legal opinion, but could give the Council input on conflict of interest. He s~at~ that th~Council needs to decide if they want to use City funds to view outside petitions. C~n'Cilmember Hendriksen replied that ultimately the City Attorney will be reviewing the.Petition anyway so do they want to save the costs of having the City Clerk eval_u~a.t_e .,the sufficienC~:~f the petition each time it is submitted. Mayor Gamec suggested referring the '.,'~ssue back,:to':the Charter Commission. Councilmember Anderson inquired if the petitioning "~o~p. cOuld:;challenge the City Attorney's legal opinion. City Attorney Goodrich replied yes, exP!aiffing that the group could challenge his opinion in court. Councilmember Hendriksen qU~fi0ned the difference between manifestly unconstitutional and bad law. City Attorney -68- City Council/February 27, 2001 Page 18 of 22