11-29-2007 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

Charter Commission November 29, 2007 Page 6 APPROVED x122 It was the consensus of the Commission that no changes were required in Section 8.05. 223 224 Section 8.06. Public Hearing 225 226 Commissioner Bening expressed concern that the last sentence regarding the notice of public 227 hearing is by itself and felt it was the Commission's intent that notice be sent by certified mail to 228 only the property owners benefiting from the project. 229 230 Ms. Marty stated that notice is never sent to everybody, only to the affected property owners. 231 232 Commissioner Bening suggested amending this section to delete the last sentence and amending 233 the third sentence to read "In addition to the requirements in state law, the notice of the public 234 hearing that is sent to the owner of a lot shall be sent by certified mail, and shall include the 235 information described in Section 8.05, as it applies to that lot." 236 237 Commissioner Dahl stated the notice should only be sent to the affected property owners. 238 239 Commissioner Trehus noted that the terms property owner and affected property owner were 240 previously used and Section 8.06 refers to "lot." 241 242 Ms. Marty stated "lot" is a concept defined in Section 8.04, subd. 4. She agreed that Section 8.06 ,.43 should use the term affected property owner. 244 245 It was the consensus of the Commission to strike the last sentence of Section 8.06 and to amend 246 the third sentence of Section 8.06 to read: "In addition to the requirements in state law, the notice 247 of the public hearing that is sent to the affected property owner shall be sent by certified mail, 248 and shall include the information described in Section 8.05, as it applies to that affected property 249 owner." 250 251 Section 8.07. Indication of Preferences 252 253 Commissioner Trehus stated that there are different ways that preferences can be indicated and 254 recorded and asked if there is any way to state that when preferences are sent in, that they not get 255 lost and also to state that the preferences are public information. 256 257 Ms. Marty replied that requiring that nothing be lost is a lofty goal and it is important to remain 258 realistic about this, adding it is not possible to write regulations in the charter. She stated the 259 other issue raised by Commissioner Trehus is having secret ballots. This section requires that 260 they be signed by property owners. She stated if there is a question and the ordinances adopted 261 allow those preferences to be private, then the question would have to go to a judge in camera 262 and the judge would double check the legitimacy of the counting. She stated she did not know 263 how that could be applied to this provision. 264 6