11-01-2007 Charter Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

Charter Commission October 11, 2007 Page 6 DRAFT 221 Commissioner Carlson asked what would prevent the City Council from okaying a developer 222 coming in, and the developer asking the City to put the roads in. He questioned if there is 223 anything to stop this without a referendum. 224 225 Ms. Marty replied she has never seen a city that allowed this. 226 227 It was the consensus of the Commission to defer to Ms. Marty for proposed language. 228 229 Bullet #11: Ms. Marty stated that the proposed language in this provision (establishing an 230 equitable fee structure to be paid by developers to cover construction traffic damage to existing 231 roads and also make them pay for increased infrastructure demands caused by the developer) 232 results in "impact fees" and these fees are illegal in this state. Ms. Marty agreed to research this 233 issue further. 234 235 Bullet #12: Ms. Marty suggested the Commission not adopt a standard petition form to be used 236 by residents. Instead, she proposed having a sample form available to residents but not a 237 required form. 238 239 Additional Concerns: 240 241 Items A and B: Ms. Marty stated she is okay with the first part of this section with respect to 242 analyzing the council task force amendment to see what citzen rights would be lost. She 243 requested an explanation of the second sentence regarding whether this proposal if ratified 244 establishes a funding source (as per the city survey question). 245 246 Chair Duffy stated the impetus for change to the Charter centers around the City Council claim 247 that 60% of residents want to change the Charter. She stated the Commission wants to know if 248 the proposed amendments change the funding source. 249 250 Ms. Marty stated if the City wants to establish, for example, a "road maintenance" fund, with 251 1/10 of 1% of money going into this account, and when the account gets big enough, the City can 252 spend the monies without going to a referendum. 253 254 There was significant discussion regarding use of City funds and the need for Charter amendment 255 to get away from referendums. 256 257 Item C: Ms. Marty recommended against including a requirement in the Charter to seal coat 258 every "x" years, overlay every "x" years, or including a clause with respect to following the 259 City's Pavement Management Program. She stated this level of detail does not belong in a 260 Charter; rather, it belongs in an ordinance or resolution. 261 262 Chair Duffy stated the City has recently approved a Pavement Management Plan which includes 263 a schedule for seal coating, etc. She asked if there is any recourse available if the Pavement 264 Management Plan is not followed. 6