Laserfiche WebLink
MEMORANDUM <br /> TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL <br /> FROM: SAMANTHA ORDUNO, CITY ADMINISTRATOR <br /> DATE: NOVEMBER 20, 1991 <br /> RE: AMENDING LANGUAGE TO THE STREET LIGHT UTILITY ORDINANCE <br /> As discussed at the November 18th Workshop, I have researched the <br /> legalities of amending an ordinance at itq Second reading. <br /> Although it is not a common practice among municipalities, there is <br /> nothing in the statutes or the City's charter which prevents <br /> amending language at a second reading. <br /> The advice of the LMC attorneys and a consulting attorney that I <br /> spoke with (Mark Karney was not available) is that it is <br /> appropriate to amend an ordinance at the second reading as long as <br /> the intent of the ordinance is not "agreeably prejudiced" . The <br /> advice to us was that the following language is acceptable and <br /> legal. <br /> "This ordinance is automatically repealed as of <br /> December 31, 1993 unless earlier reenacted by <br /> the City Council." <br /> The language could be inserted as a new Section -- Section VIII, <br /> Termination Date. <br /> I am confident that this language and its corresponding action will <br /> best meet the concerns expressed by the members of the Council that <br /> a limited term or sunset clause should be imposed. <br /> This language allows for an automatic sunset unless reviewed and <br /> reinstated by the Council prior to December 31, 1993 . <br /> SO/mjs <br />