Laserfiche WebLink
Commission Response: Commission consensus is that the Charter Commission did <br />react defensively towards City Accountant Moen~s recommendations initially, <br />but after more meetings and research, the Commission came to understand Ms. Moen's <br />recommendations and a vast majority of those recommendations were incorporated <br />into the charter. <br /> <br />Item #9: <br /> <br />Mr. Deemer's Comments: "Page 8-3/7, Last Seven Lines. With all the protection <br />you built into this chapter, this is too long a period to just wait. It could <br />be better to specify the award for the bids could not occur for sixty days. <br />This gives everybody protection and doesn't hold everything dead still for 2 <br />months. Also note the use of his/her again in this section." <br /> <br />Commission Response: Commission consensus is that with this charter, the <br />developer will know the rules and should get a feeling for the project before <br />initiating procedures. There is no rule that the developer must cease all <br />work during the 60 day interim; the developer just takes a risk that the work <br />done during the 60 day interim might be for not. This is not a 'just waiting' <br />period; the charter is giving the citizens the opportunity to consider the <br />project and oppose, if they so desire. <br /> <br />Item ~10: <br /> <br />Mr. Deemer's Comments: "Page 8-4/7, Section 8.05.02. <br />Same concerns as brought out in Item ~3. <br /> <br />'last city wide election'." <br /> <br />Commission Response: Commission response is the same as in Item ~3. <br /> <br />Item ~11: <br /> <br />Mr. Deemer's Comments: "Page 8-4/7, Last Line. <br />term, you should use plain English." <br /> <br />'De Novo'. This is a lawyers <br /> <br />Commission Response: Commission consensus is that Mr. Deemer's point is a good <br />one; if the use of this term really bothers Mr. Deemer that much, he can propose <br />an amendment to the charter. <br /> <br />Item #12: <br /> <br />Mr. Deemer's Comments: "Page 8-5/7, Section 8.05.04. This is blatant <br />discrimination against the elected officials. It is in conflict with the <br />recall procedure. Nowhere do you limit the citizen to number of repetitions <br />of an issue, not even in the recall procedure." <br /> <br />Commission Response: Commission consensus is that you can't limit the citizens <br />right to do petition; the citizens are the owners and can do what they want with <br />what they own. <br /> <br />Item #13: <br /> <br />Mr. Deemer's Comments: "Page 9-1/7. Acquisition of property should be limited <br />to the municipal boundaries. RE: Anoka owning land in Ramsey. Enough said." <br /> <br />Commission Response: State statute prevails and the City cannot do eminent <br />domain on anything outside City boundaries. <br /> <br />CC/March 8, 1984 <br /> Page 4 of 6 <br /> <br /> <br />