Laserfiche WebLink
Charter Commission APPROVED <br /> April 13, 2006 <br /> Page 3 <br /> 89 Commissioner Handrick asked why a petition was presented. Chair Warren explained that <br /> 90 Commissioner Bening was involved with drafting the petition and can better speak to that <br /> 91 question. She stated it is clear there is a desire to avoid a potential conflict of interest. Chair <br /> 92 Warren advised that she had asked the City Clerk if other commissions had adopted similar <br /> 93 motions and, in fact,there are none. City Clerk Bartell noted the liaison system existed but not <br /> 94 as a voting member. <br /> 95 <br /> 96 Commissioner Montain explained that there have been committees, like the 2020 Plan,where <br /> 97 unpaid volunteers and the Mayor and Councilmembers have participated. However,they cannot <br /> 98 be on two groups where they received a stipend. <br /> 99 <br /> 100 Commissioner Bening explained that a year ago he had asked for this to be discussed but the <br /> 101 Commission decided to not discuss it at any time in the future. However, he felt it was important <br /> 102 enough that it should go to the voters and a new State Statute allowed it in last August. He stated <br /> 103 he felt it was beneficial to have residents decide that issue and that is what started the petition to <br /> 104 get names. He stated instead of trying to follow the petition process laid out in the Charter and <br /> 105 State Statutes which bypasses the Council and Charter Commission,he wanted to include them <br /> 106 so the petition was presented to the Council. He stated there are 500 some signatures on the <br /> 107 petition. <br /> 108 <br /> 109 Commissioner Montain asked why he didn't initiate a referendum instead. Commissioner <br /> 110 Bening answered that it was his choice to not do it that way. <br /> 111 <br /> 112 Discussion occurred regarding a potential concern that the Charter Commission may become <br /> 113 "stacked"by Councilmembers. <br /> 114 <br /> 115 Chair Warren stated the Council decided to go ahead with this and is selecting this time because <br /> 116 the situation does not currently exist and would not effect any individual. <br /> 117 <br /> 118 Commissioner Carlson stated the petition says "to stop a conflict of interest." He stated he <br /> 119 knows Councilmember Carlson had asked the City Attorney at the March 27 meeting if there was <br /> 120 a conflict to serve on both simultaneously and his response was "an unqualified no." He stated <br /> 121 that he wants people to consider a change without going to the citizens because this does not rise <br /> 122 to the level of going to a ballot. That should be reserved for very important issues that affect the <br /> 123 power of the people. He suggested the amendment be approved but modified and sent back to <br /> 124 the Council. <br /> 125 <br /> 126 Commissioner Trehus arrived at 7:03 p.m. <br /> 127 <br /> 128 Chair Warren stated the options laid out are to either accept this as it is written and proposed, <br /> 129 without change, for the fall vote; delay it for 60 days to study the matter further with notification <br /> 130 to the Council; or change it and send it back to the Council where it will either be approved or <br /> 131 not. She noted the revised timeline provided to the Commission for those options. <br /> 132 <br /> 3 <br />