Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
Mounds View City Council July 9, 2007 <br />Regular Meeting Page 4 <br />what was called ambiguity was left to best fit the median needs of the community and any • <br />further changes would require significant philosophical debate. <br />Ms. Thomas said that this is at a stage where decisions need to be made and, if this does not <br />move forward, they will put it to a vote. <br />Council Member Mueller said that in cleaning these chapters up and developing the flow chart, <br />the document becomes easier for residents to use. She then said that it may not be the perfect <br />document but it is an improvement and she feels it is important for the Council to accept the hard <br />work that has been done to this point. She further said that some of the issues raised will need to <br />be put to a vote as they will change the intent of the Charter. <br />Mayor Marty said that he appreciates the work of the Charter Commission. He then said that <br />this is not perfect but it is much better than it was before. <br />Ms. Thomas said that the Charter Commission, City Attorney, and City Staff could, if the <br />Council had something specific on an amendment to allow the Council to make further <br />restrictions on the petition sufficiency, bring that amendment back to Council fairly quickly. <br />However, if that one amendment would not be enough, then it would take much more time and <br />would require a philosophical debate. <br />City Attorney Riggs said that the Charter Commission has done a great job and he is able to put <br />aside his concern on the publication dates. He then said that the issue of whether there is a • <br />petition that is sufficient and whether there should be a sentence to cover circumventing the <br />process. <br />Ms. Thomas said that the Charter Commission has discus5ed that but feels that it would be easier <br />for Council to do that by Ordinance than it would be to add it to the Amendment. <br />City Administrator Ulrich requested Staff be allowed time to work on the language to address <br />the sufficiency issue and bring this back to the next meeting. <br />Council Member Mueller pointed out that Mr. Thomas had asked for input from Council on <br />things that members would like to see. She then said that she understands that a frivolous <br />petition could delay action on an Ordinance but she believes that the body of this could be <br />accepted now and add to the wish list for the Charter Commission to look at a definition of a <br />frivolous petition and how to handle it. <br />David Jahnke said that he did not think that Council Member Stigney's comment was offensive <br />because he meant that this is so close to the finish line it should be finished. <br />Council Member Stigney said that he would like the problem of sufficiency addressed but it <br />could be by Staff, the Charter Commission or Council. The other two things were discrepancies <br />between the language and the flow chart and it is important to correct them. <br />• <br />