My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Minutes - Charter Commission - 10/27/1983
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Minutes
>
Charter Commission
>
1983
>
Minutes - Charter Commission - 10/27/1983
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/28/2025 1:28:33 PM
Creation date
4/1/2004 8:40:47 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Charter Commission
Document Date
10/27/1983
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Commission proceeded to review and amend Chapter 8, Revision 2. <br /> <br />Chapter 8.01 <br /> <br />No change. <br /> <br />Chapter 8.02 <br /> <br />No change. <br /> <br />Cha~ter 8.03 <br /> <br />Delete the last sentence. <br /> <br />Commissioner Lichter stated that this should be checked with Mr. Dorn. <br /> <br />Commissioner Data pointed out that Mounds View's charter was scrutinized by <br />the Attorney General's office. <br /> <br />Commissioner Lichter agreed to deleting the last sentence of 8.03. <br /> <br />.Cha~ter 8.04 <br /> <br />No change. <br /> <br />Cha~ter 8.04.01 <br /> <br />Discussion ensued regarding whether or not to go with a 3 petition system. <br /> <br />Commissioner Lichter suggested raising initial petition requirements to 51% <br />and allowing for one petition in opposition. He feels that a 3 petition system <br />is too complicated. The 3 petition system favors the developer; developer <br />gets two attempts at a project and the opposition only gets one attempt to <br />stop it. <br /> <br />Commissioners Sieber and Bauerkemper are in favor of the 3 petition system. <br />Commissioner Data abstained. <br /> <br />Commissioner Sieber, in reply to Commissioners argument, stated that the burden <br />is on the people in favor of a project because in order to get it done they <br />may have to petition twice. We also have to keep in mind that redevelopment <br />will happen in Ramsey one of these days, we just can't focus on new development. <br /> <br />Commissioner Data stated that he is in favor of the 3 petition system. <br /> <br />It was also pointed out that in order to avoid the 3rd petition, the opposing <br />petitioners should strive for 51% signatures. <br /> <br />Commissioner Greenberg summed it up as the first petition being the initiative <br />and the counter petitions are the referendum with Council serving as election <br />judges. <br /> <br />Commission consensus is to leave this section as is, to go with a 3 petition <br />system. <br /> <br />CC/October 27, 1983 <br />Page 11 of 14 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.