04/03/84 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~tem #4: ' Mr. Deemer's ~mments: "Page 5-2/7, Section 5.04, Fifth Line. Thirty days is too long~ a pe.~zod to reapply because of insufficiency. There is no time limit before they f.~le the completed petition. You should force them to get it right the ~fiZ~t time with a short reapplication time, or start the process over, as there is n~ limit on this either. Either that or they should have to file the inte-~ ' ' tO~petztion, and register with the City, and have a time limit on the firs~ilpar~_ of the process. You should really think worst situation that could haP~)en,~and apply that to Chapter 5." Commission Response: Preparation of Section 5.04 was a judgement call; 30 days is sufficient~ time to make any corrections and not allowing a second chance is harsh. ' Mr. Dee~e~'s iComments: "Page 5-3/7, Section 5.05, Line 8. Sixty days is a very short ti~ ~ process an ordinance to the charter through public hearings, legal drafting and committees. Ninety days would be better, what is the rush anyway?~ if y, ou got this document right, why rush on changes?" Commission P~sponse: Mr. Deemer seems to be confused; this section deals with creating ~i~ ordinances, not amending he charter. The procedure for amending the cha~t~r ~s not addressed in this section because rules for ~unending charters are esta~blished by State law. Item #6 ~ ' Mr. Dee~.~r'S:iComments: "Page 5-3/8, Section 5.05, Line 10. Would be better if after th~I last public hearing on the ordinance. You are creating a vehicle for a very s~atl minority of citizens to force a special election every six months, justion a whim. May be very important to them, but they might have tunnel VisioD also. There are no safeguards on repetition of initiative for the sam~ subject." Commiss~On ~sponse: Commission consensus is that there should be no restrictions put on h~~w 0~ten citizens can petition. The City's biggest safeguard is the common s~nsel of the people and experience in other charter cities shows that the righ~ ofi initiative and referendum is not abused by the people. Item Mr. Dee~er'~ Comments: "Page 5-3/8, Last Line. 'providing the petition et al' . Thi~ is redundant and unnecessary." Comm£ssi~n ~.~esponse: This point is rather insignificant and no action will be taken by the Commission. Item Mr. De~mer'$ Comments: "Chapter 7. I agree with the City Accountant, Ms. Moen. I believe ~u should start listening to what she is saying, not just hearing words. I d~ not always agree with Ms. Moen, in fact we have had some very heated~isa%reements, but she does know the job and should have your respect. There:a~e hO~ financial problems now, why create any by not listening to the expert~" 7 CC/March 8, 1984 Page 3 of 6