Laserfiche WebLink
Section 3.06. I would suggest that this is a significant departure from <br /> both model ordinance and quorum requirements and opens up the door for some- <br /> one to abuse the intent of this section. I suggest a minimum of :.three members. <br /> QUESTION? What effect does the last sentence have on the ability Cf police <br /> to effectively protect city residents? <br /> Section 3.07. I would suggest a posting of resolutions rather than listening <br /> to all the verbage in some of those resolutions. <br /> Section 3.08. Second sentence- "shall be signed by the mayor, attested <br /> by theaclerk, and filed and preserved by him." makes for a better sentence. <br /> The model charter appears to have more succinct language for 3.07 and 3.08. <br /> Section 3.09. Before you agree with the wording (number of days) for <br /> this I suggest you ask Jeff Nelson to project the length of time it would <br /> take to pass and get into operation any ordinance considering two thing,5. <br /> The time which elapses from idea to passage and the negative effects it may <br /> have on city operations both in the courts(litigation) and city functions. <br /> Section 3.10. The cost in terms of time and money may be prohibitive. <br /> 3.11. <br /> I suggest the Charter Commission rethink the ordinance and resolution processes <br /> in light of the budget restrictions and effectiveness of the process. <br /> 4/5 vote to amend or repeal an ordinance sounds great if you don't want <br /> one changed but what problems do you see if we do need to change them. It <br /> ought to be an interesting process when it comes time to update the city <br /> code book. I am suggesting that the vote be the same as for new ordinances <br /> because the intent is the same, that is the need to change in order to keep <br /> up with a changing society. Lets not get ordinances imbedded in stone, especially <br /> bad ones. <br /> These are my suggestions for the present and although I may disagree with <br /> some of your statements I do agree with the process and its openess. I commend <br /> you on your hard work to date and encourage you on the remaining efforts. I <br /> suggest you be concise and to the point, it is easier to add good than eliminate <br /> the bad documents from a charter. G. Ziebarth. <br />