Agenda - Charter Commission - 10/10/1996

Home

Case #2: Rq-Visit Mayors Term Question Chairperson Steff'~n reported that he had also asked that this case be placed on the agenda. He did not expect that wl~en the Charter Commission brought to City Council the ordinance relating to lengthening the Mayors term that it would be controversial. However, they felt it was and the next issue is if City Cq~uncil will not pass this, what happens. City Council discussed putting this issue on the November~ ballot; however, they were told by Attorney Goodrich that this could be placed on the ballot as ag advisory question only. Mr. Steffen assumed the issue would be dropped if it was not adopted Os an ordinance. Since it wasn't, he felt it should be on the ballot as an issue for the residents to ~ote on - not as an advisory. Commissioner Anderson felt that this decision belongs to the people. To amend the Charter by ordinance is for ihe housekeeping kinds of things but substantive things should go to the people to vote on. These ~e philosophical kinds of things - balance of power kinds of things. Commissioner D, onovan felt, too, that the voted results of that question should actually count. He did not seed thi~ as an advisory vote. Let the people speak. He added that he did not see why Council thoughl~.this was sinister. We t',dked with people - we felt this was the best thing for the City. He adde0 that he has an entirely different philosophy than Mr. Terry Hendriksen. He (Donovan) did fl~ot look upon our elected officials as running rough shot. He felt the City Council is trying to do a!decent job of running the community. Chairperson Ste/ffen agreed with Commissioner Donovan's philosophy. We have a whole attitude of people who feel it would be better if the government did not do things. He expressed that he was quite stunn6d by the idea that this issue was controversial, but sinceit appears to be, it ,should be brought before the people to vote on it. Mr. Hendriksen has said that a two-year mayor s term is a way to ensujre a change of power on the City Council every two years. That has no validity at all. If you haole five members on the City Council and four believe in one point of view - three people up for ~lection does not mean they have the ability to change that mix of power. This is saying I have albetter chance out of three than two. If that's what you want, maybe you want to elect the entire ~City Council every two years. He did not feel changing the mayor every two years changes the pop~er. He questioned if the Charter Commission wanted to ask the City Council to back away frod~ the advisory election. He inquired if that was valid. He was concerned we do not have an adviso~'y question and a real question at the same time. Would the City Council pull off the advisory election if we proceed with the other. We do not need to do this in this election. Is there any goodireason to wait? Commissione~ Kiefer felt this would be a good election because of the larger turnout for presidential elections. Commissioner Marn agreed that it is much better to run it as a real vote. Commissioner Donovan felt it needed to be done by a majority and that it should be put on the November ballot. Commissioner Kiefer asked if the question could be submitted as such that it be on the ballot provided the advisory question is removed. Chairperson ~teffen suggested not wanting to do that. Motion by Commissioner Donovan and seconded by Commissioner Kiefer to submit the proposal to lengthen tt}e tem~ of the Mayor commencing with election year 2000 for the general ballot on November 1996. Charter Commission/July 18, 1996 Page 3 of 4