Minutes - Council - 03/27/2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

City Attorney Goodrich replied that if the Court would go in favor of the residents of Richfield then the issue would come back before the Council for further consideration depending on how the Court opinion was worded and what the facts were. Councilmember Hendriksen noted that Councilmembers who don't like the density transition ordinance as it stands might find it difficult to make changes if it is enacted by the residents. Motion by Councilmember Hendriksen, seconded by Councilmember Zimmerman, to adopt the December 2000 version of the Density Transition Ordinance. Further discussion: Councilmember Zimmerman stated that when he ran for office last fall one statement he made was that he would protect existing neighborhoods and he hoped that the residents would take his vote as sincerity to that. A roll call vote was performed by the Recording Secretary: Councilmember Hendriksen aye Councilmember Anderson no Councilmember Kurak no Councilmember Zimmerman aye Mayor Gamec no Motion failed. Councilmember Hendriksen stated that he felt that there were two paths the Council could take. He felt that they could move forward and direct staff to set an election date, or give the petitioning group an opportunity to respond to the legal opinion. He firmly believes that under the test of manifestly unconstitutional or reasonable doubt the Council needs to schedule the election. Motion by Mayor Gamec, seconded by Councilmember Kurak, to take no further action on the February 16, 2001 Charter Referendum Petition. Further discussion: Councilmember Zimmerman inquired as to what happens if no action is taken. City Attorney Goodrich explained that if an election is not scheduled the petitioners are free to go to district court and force the election or the Council could try to work with the sponsoring committee to amend the existing ordinance with the provisions of the Charter. Councilmember Hendriksen stated that the result of the current motion would not only refuse to put the issue before the voters but would also deny the petitioning committee from having fair representation on the matter. He appealed to Councilmember Anderson to recognize the unfairness in the situation and, at a minimum, give the circulating committee an opportunity to get a legal response. Councilmember Anderson stated that the Council should accept Mr. Thomson's opinion prior to making a motion on what direction should be taken. City Attorney City Council/March 27, 2001 Page 14 of 22