My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Gordon Ziebarth Correspondence
MoundsView
>
City Commissions
>
Charter Commission
>
1978-1989
>
1979
>
Correspondence
>
Gordon Ziebarth Correspondence
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/23/2018 3:03:07 PM
Creation date
8/23/2018 3:03:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Misc Documentation
Date
12/31/1979
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
43
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).
View images
View plain text
INITIAL RESPONSE TO CHAPTERS 1-3 OF PROPOSED CHARTER <br /> Gordon Ziebarth <br /> It is my intent to respond to the first three chapters of the proposed <br /> City Charter at this time. This, however, should not be construed as the. <br /> first and last time concerned members of the community have an opporjunity <br /> to have such input. In the process of comparing this proposal with other <br /> charter, the model charter and state statutes it is apparent that some <br /> sections were changed for a specific reason, some were changed because they <br /> were in a model charter and others were partially "distorted" in order to <br /> dilute some perceived power of the council. My initial responsethen will <br /> be directed toward better wording and-also toward gaining a better under- <br /> standing <br /> nderstanding of the Charter Commissions intent with regards to the present <br /> language. I will reserve the right to agree or disagree with the Charter <br /> once the refinment stages are completed. <br /> Section 1.01. Copies should be available during regular office hours <br /> but the "any time" gives the appearance of at the drop of a hatjwhich may <br /> in fact not be possible. <br /> Section 2.01. I understand that the intent of the Charter is to establish <br /> a"Weak Mayor-Council Plan". I think it should be stated as such. However,. <br /> the plan may in fact be a hybred of the"Commissioner Plan" based upon reasonable <br /> interpretation if you consider the last sentence of section 2.08 and the <br /> diminuation of the role of administrator under Chapter 6. <br /> QUESTION: What is the intent of the Chatter Commission? <br /> Section 2.03. This section reads more clearly if you add-"and who shall <br /> be. elected at large." at the end of the first sentence thus eliaimativgfit <br /> from the second sentence. <br /> Section 2.05. This section by its wording causes confusion. You have <br /> drawn a distinction between member of the council and councilmember with <br /> section 2.03 but have failed to include the mayor in"the failure of any — <br /> and councilmember without good cause to perform ,. ." in the next to last <br /> sentence. I suggest a set of definitions be included. I also suggest the <br /> wording in the model charter. <br /> C <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.