Laserfiche WebLink
Dick Hartman - There are some changes to the zoning ordinance I would like to <br />see and these proposed changes which the charter will allow being put to a vote, <br />should also be voted on at the charter election. <br /> <br />Chairman Heitman - If a given section of the charter is proven to be illegal, <br />then all sections of that charter related or interelated to that section also <br />become illegal. <br /> <br />Commissioner Bauerkemper - The zoning changes that Mr. Hartman wants would have <br />to be voted on after the adoption of the Charter by way of the Chapter 5, <br />Initiative and Referendum. You have to adopt the process to make changes <br />before you can adopt the changes. <br /> <br />Ken Peterson - Requested explanation on Section 8.05.02, regarding 25% of the <br />people being able to stop a project. <br /> <br />Commissioner Buchanan - When a project is less than 100%, a petition filed by <br />a number equal to 25% of the registered voters, can stop the project. <br /> <br />Commissioner Sieber - Twenty-five percent can force it to an election, not <br />stop it. <br /> <br />Ken Peterson - Stated that the charter reads 25% can stop the project as proposed. <br /> <br />Mr. Jack Ippel - This reads as though 25% of the people can stop a project even <br />if 75% are in favor of it. Mr. Ippel then referred to the summary that was <br />mailed out and noted that it says the Charter will allow the City to operate <br />in an 'effective manner'. Is the Commission saying that the current form of <br />government is 'ineffective'? The summary doesn't tell any of the specifics <br />and it is useless. <br /> <br />Commissioner Lichter - That mailing only summarizes a charter. <br /> <br />Mr. Jack Ippel - Earlier in the evening I requested a summary of changes <br />brought about by the Charter and I was told the public meeting notice mailed <br />to all residents contained the summary of the charter also. Now, the <br />Commission tells me the summary included in that mailing is referring to <br />charters in general. <br /> <br />Commissioner Sieber stated that he was incorrect earlier when he informed <br />Mr. Ippel that the mailing included a summary of the charter; that this <br />mailing does not compare the current form of government to what is proposed. <br /> <br />Mr. Ippel - Referring to 25% of the people stopping a project stated that throwing <br />road blocks in the way of the developer such as allowin~ 60~days after the <br />public hearing for a petition opposihg the project to be ~raised, will prohibit <br />development. <br /> <br />Commissioner Sieber noted that the 60 days waiting period is the only time <br />frame the charter requires; if there is no opposing petition the project <br />proceeds as though nothing has happened. <br /> <br />Commissioner Buchanan - There are some delays built in as protective measures <br />for the citizen and it is not a judgement on the current council. If all <br />the citizens did not want a project and 3 of the councilmembers did, the <br />citizens would be powerless. <br /> <br />Sp CC/February 15, 1984 <br /> Public Meeting <br /> Page 7 of 12 <br /> <br /> <br />