Laserfiche WebLink
Item #4: <br /> <br />Mr. Deemer's Comments: "Page 5-2/7, Section 5.04, Fifth Line. Thirty days is <br />too long a period to reapply because of insufficiency. There is no time limit <br />before they file the completed petition. You should force them to get it <br />right the first time with a short reapplication time, or start the process over, <br />as there is no limit on this either. Either that or they should have to file <br />the intent to petition, and register with the City, and have a time limit on <br />the first part of the process. You should really think worst situation that <br />could happen, and apply that to Chapter 5." <br /> <br />Cormuission Response: Preparation of Section 5.04 was a judgement call; 30 days <br />is sufficient time to make any corrections and not allowing a second chance is <br />harsh. <br /> <br />Item #5: <br /> <br />Mr. Deemer's Comments: "Page 5-3/7, Section 5.05, Line 8. Sixty days is a very <br />short time to process an ordinance to the charter through public hearings, <br />legal drafting and committees. Ninety days would be better, what is the rush <br />anyway? If you got this document right, why rush on changes?" <br /> <br />Commission Response: Mr. Deemer seems to be confused; this section deals with <br />creating City ordinances, not amending the charter. The procedure for amending <br />the charter is not addressed in this section because rules for amending charters <br />are established by State law. <br /> <br />Item #6: <br /> <br />Mr. Deemer's Comments: "Page 5-3/8, Section 5.05, Line 10. Would be better if <br />after the last public hearing on the ordinance. You are creating a vehicle <br />for a very small minority of citizens to force a special election every six <br />months, just on a whim. May be very important to them, but they might have <br />tunnel vision also. There are no safeguards on repetition of initiative for <br />the same subject." <br /> <br />Commission Response: Commission consensus is that there should be no restrictions <br />put on how often citizens can petition. The City's biggest safeguard is the <br />common sense of the people and experience in other charter cities shows that <br />the right of initiative and referendum is not abused by the people. <br /> <br />Item #7: <br /> <br />Mr. Deemer's Comments: "Page 5-3/8, Last Line. 'providing the petition et al' <br />.... This is redundant and unnecessary." <br /> <br />Commission Response: This point is rather insignificant and no action will be <br />taken by the Commission. <br /> <br />Item #8: <br /> <br />Mr. Deemer's Comments: "Chapter 7. I agree with the City Accountant, Ms. Moen. <br />I believe you should start listening to what she is saying, not just hearing <br />words. I do not always agree with Ms. Moen, in fact we have had some very <br />heated disagreements, but she does know the job and should have your respect. <br />There are no financial problems now, why create any by not listening to the <br />expert." <br /> <br />CC/March 8, 1984 <br /> Page 3 of 6 <br /> <br /> <br />