Agenda - Charter Commission - 02/23/1984

Home

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