Chair Doty Correspondence - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Page 4 Section 5.05: Initiative. It appears from comparing your language with the Leagues 's language that the intent is to allow the public to have initiative over all aspects of the City Council . This would mean that the Council ' s powers are substancially diminished, furthermore, the League's Model excempt certain classifications from initiative. These include budget, capital programs, tax levies, and employees. To that end I would think it would be more prudent on the part of the Charter Commission to also exemptthese items from the initiative section. What may then occur is the City, as a whole, could be voting on who will be employees and who will not be as an example. It should also be noted that the League deletes the term resolution from initiative this is a good suggestion. The cost of an election is approximately $2 ,400 and it would be unfortunate for the City to be passing resolutions by election. Language contents in 5.05 makes it manditory for an election of these items. This certainly could have a negative impact on the ability of the City to function within the guidelines of the law in the need for voting on times of budget or tax levies. Hopefully, this is not the intent of the Commission. Furthermore, it is noted that the City Council has-the ability to aimend the petitions for ordinance under this language. The League's language is much better and does allow for that. It appears that under the present language of 5.05 this would have a detrimental impact on the Council 's ability to govern and infact would provide for unnecessary expenditures on the City's tax dollar. Section 5.06: Is not necessary. Section 5.07: Be reasonable to delete the reference to resolution. Section 5.08: Recall . It should be noted that the League's memo contains no language on recall . The reason they have done that is because of the rulings of the State Supreme Court which have held that recall is limited to maleficence or nonficence in office. Thus , the City Council is not compelled to act unless these conditions are present. The language which is set forth under section 5.08 is in essence wide open. Unless the Charter Commission clarifies this language the public has a potential of becoming frustriated in believing that they have a tool to control the City Council where in fact they have not. In that affect it will cause the City to legally fight recall issues with the public; costing a waste of time for the public and the Council,as well as a waste of money. This section should be completely reworked or deleted.