My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
07-13-2006 Charter Packet
LinoLakes
>
Charter Commission
>
Agenda Packets
>
1981 - 2021 Agenda Packets - Charter Commission
>
2006 Packets
>
07-13-2006 Charter Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/27/2021 6:20:45 PM
Creation date
9/15/2017 11:42:29 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Charter Commission
Charter Meeting Type
Regular
Charter Document Type
Packets
Supplemental fields
Date
7/13/2006
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
38
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Memorandum <br />From: Paulette Warren, Chair, Lino Lakes Charter Commission <br />To: City of Lino Lakes Charter Commissioners <br />Date: June 23, 2006 <br />Ref: Proposed Charter Amendment, Process Update <br />In our July 13 meeting we will be determining whether we wish to accept, <br />reject or revise the charter amendment brought to us at the last meeting with <br />regard to whether sitting Council members may also participate as Charter <br />Commission members. <br />Your subcommittee of Mike Trehus, Cori Duffy and Caroline Dahl has been <br />studying this issue and will make their recommendation at the meeting. In <br />order to understand the "next steps" to be taken, it's also helpful to understand <br />the process we are undertaking. I have been in communication with the City <br />attorney, as requested by our Commission, in order to more readily understand <br />the options open to us. <br />Please refer to and read the letter of May 12 from Barry Sullivan. Subsequent <br />to receiving this letter, I have summarized our options below. Mr. Sullivan has <br />reviewed this summary and indicated that it is accurate. Therefore, I present it <br />to you in addition to his letter. Please be certain to review both before our <br />meeting. <br />Regarding the proposed amendment which was drafted in response to the <br />citizen petition obtained by Robert Benning: <br />1. We have the obligation to either accept the amendment as written, reject it, <br />or make a recommendation for revision. <br />2. If we fail to take timely action, the City Council can vote to place the <br />proposed amendment on the ballot as is. Failure on our part to take action of <br />any kind will be treated as a rejection of the proposed amendment. The vote by <br />the Council to place the proposed amendment on the ballot need not be <br />unanimous to pass. A simple majority is all that is necessary. <br />3. The Council, on our recommendation, could instead choose to approve the <br />amendment as is without going to ballot. To do this, the Charter Commission <br />would first submit our approval of the proposed amendment to the council and <br />also include a recommendation to the Council to follow the process outlined in <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.