Loading...
CHM 08/04/1976 } • IL SPECIAL CHARTER COMMISSION MEETING AUGUST 4, 1976 MEMBERS PRESENT: Raymond Sheridan, Charles Langer, Elaine Knoff, Harry Crowder, Robert O'Neill, Roy McPherson, Clifford Ash, Ole Bjerkesett MEMBERS ABSENT: Peg McChesney, Jerry Ratcliff, Jackie Johnson, Kenneth Brennan, John Swanson,Herbert Bacon OTHERS PRESENT: Bill Nee, City Mayor Walt Starwalt, City Council Carroll Kukowski, City Council Ed Hamernik, City Council Nasim Qureshi, . City Manager Marvin Brunsell, City Clerk Chairperson Sheridan called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m. Mr. Sheridan stated that this special meeting had been called to meet with the Mayer and the City Council for the purpose of discussing the possible changes to the section within our Charter of Section 5 .08. He stated that everyone should have a copy of Mayor Nee's letter to the Commission of June 18, 1976 . He said the purpose was not for harassment on either side but to sit down and have a "meeting of the minds" to maintain some continuity within the community and eliminate the possibility of any conflicts between functions within the city government . Mayor Nec reviewed his June 18, 1976, letter with the Commission. He said the question is really a fundamental question about his concern with the processes of Recall, Referendum, and Initiative. He said the Commission should. answer philosophically whether or not they think this process should be easily available. If the Commission believes it should be fairly easy to proceed with that sort of action, then something along the lines that he suggested needs to be done . He said that when people want the means to get to the government, he feels they ought -to have an easy way to get to them. Mr. Sheridan stated that the attitude of the Commission has been that the City Council are elected officials and they should have some protection and also latitude to work within. Now, he understands from Mayor Nee 's comments, that the Council wants it pinned down to where they wouldn't have that type of •latitude. n SPECIAL CHARTER COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 4, 1976 Page 2 Mayor Nee stated that the Charter, when set up, never anticipated that the petitioners we.egoing to have to raise $2-3,000 for litigation, but that is what it has come down to. He said he has put a lot of personal money in litigation. It doesn't seem that that was what was contemplated in the Charter. He said he didn't want to be stuck with what he has proposed in his letter--it should be something that comes from the Charter Commission. Mr. Bjerkesett stated that in reference to Mayor Nee 's comment in his letter that "I cannot find any evidence of any serious study of the question. . . .", he was chairperson of the subcommittee that worked on this particular section of the Charter. He said the thing Mayor Nee is referring to they discussed and did a certain amount of research on it . Mr. Starwalt stated that he disagreed' with Mayor Nee. He agrees the concept of Initiative, Referendum, and Recall petition is valid and good. There is no way that ought to be thrown out . He said h'e feels it should not be difficult to go through this process . He feels, with work and effort, that it is possible to get valid signatures for a worthy cause. If it is not worthy, the Council should not be bothered with it . 'Mr. Bjerkesett suggested that perhaps to resolve the matter, somebody should Y contact the Attorney General 's office and find out whether or not it is possible to place the restricted action via the Charter on a Council 's actions in relation to these petitions . What are the legal obligations of the Council now and is it possible that they could be charged with something because they accept what they n know to be false, whether or not the Charter can place any restriction on their voting? He stated that what it boils down to is, no matter what you do, no matter what kind of restrictions are placed on the Council, they still will and ought to • vote what their conscience dictates and suffer the consequences , whatever that might be, and perhaps go to court . It would be a penalty of some sort that the Mayor would suggest that would have to be inflicted in order to force the Council to act . He stated another question that could be asked is whether or not the Charter Commission has the power to require a City Council to accept a petition, whether or not the Council has a right to reject a petition, or an obligation to do so, if they know there is something faulty about the petition. Mr. Ash brought up the suggestion that maybe the City should provide some legal advice to the petitioners up to a certain amount of money if the petition is legal . He felt this could be a possible compromise. Mayor Nee agreed that this was a possibility. Mr. Sheridan stated that Mayor Nee had a good point that the City should consider and put something within the Charter, if the Commission sees fit . The City in no case should defend either side of an issue as fax as spending money, right or wrong. For the Council to be party to a court action to satisfy what the Council may feel is necessary to determine the issue, he certainly can see the validity in having something more restringent . • /" SPECIAL CHARTER COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 4, 1976 Page 3 With regard to the proposed change for Section 5 .08, Mr. Ash explained to the Council that the Commission felt that the City Council should be responsible to resolve the inconsistencies in case of inconsistency between two or more initiative ordinances approved by the electors . Mayor Nee stated that he could go along with Section 5 .08 if "higher percentage" be replaced with "highest number of votes". There was much discussion among the Council and Commission members about these issues . Mr. Crowder stated that there didn't seem any way that these problems could be resolved unanimously on both sides no matter how long the meeting continued, unless the Commission gets something from the Council that says they will vote unanimously if it is worded in a certain way. Mr. Sheridan asked if Mr. Bjerkesett and Mayor Nee could get together with Mr. Virgil Herrick. And, maybe, Mr. Herrick could go to the Attorney General and ask the Attorney General the questions that were. mentioned. He said that at this time the Commission does not have legal counsel . The Commission had asked Mr. Sheridan to ask Mr. Herrick if it was difficult to work for both the Council and the Charter Commission. Mr. Herrick said he would prefer not to represent both. At this point, the Commission has not discussed the appointment of new legal counsel . It would be in the best interest of both the City Council and the Charter Commission to have two different people representing them. Mr. Sheridan said that then they could get at least diverse views on the same subject . Mr. Sheridan said he would ask the City Council to go over those portions of the Commission's package and try to act upon them in a favorable majority. Those that the Council and Commission have differences on should be the Commission's responsi- bility to either correct a deficiency or find a medium point between the Council and Charter Commission and see if the issues can't be resolved that way or then go to the ballot. His personal opinion is that the fewer of these that are put on the ballot in a national election, the better off they would be. He said he feels a lot of it is just cleaning up wordage and bringing some of it back into the tune of the times . Mr . Hammer agreed that he is reluctant to put: these issues to the voters as the majority of them won't have a clear understanding of what they are about. Mr. Sheridan stated that the Commission has taken the position in a motion in February or March that they pass these proposed City Charter amendments on to the Council and see if the Council could pass all or a portion of it so that the Commission could then review the rejected portions and try to correct the deficiencies or the differences between the Council and the Commission and/or put it on the ballot in the fall of 1976 . This was the target date the Commission set up some time in 1975 so that it wouldn't drag on another four years . He said he hopes that a portion of these proposals can be cleaned up and out of the way so that they can go on to the compromises that are necessary within those proposals that are not acceptable to the Council or individuals on the Council . He said he did appreciate the good discussion at this meeting. r SPECIAL CHARTER COMMISSION MEETING, AUGUST 4, 1976 Page 4 Mr. Sheridan said he was sure Mayor Nee and Mr. Bjerkesett would get together with Mr. Herrick who in turn would write to the Attorney General for some feedback. Mr. Ash stated that right now, action on these proposed amendments has been tabled by the City Council so the Commission cannot do anything until they hear back from the Council . Be asked the Council to pass what they could and then they and the Commission could go from there. MOTION by Clifford Ash, seconded by Harry Crowder, that the Charter Commission encourages the City Council to go through the proposed City Charter Amendments, vote on them, pass what they can, and what they cannot pass , bring back to the Charter Commission for the Commission's study. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Sheridan assured Mayor Nee that something will be done. The Commission will look at these and act upon them. He cannot give Mayor Nee the assurance that it will come out to his liking. He stated that all Mayor Nee is asking the Commission to do is review some of these things and try to find a better way. Mr. Sheridan stated that if the Council had any further input other than that discussed at the meeting, they are to feel free to write or contact any member of the Commission personally. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 10: 15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Line Saba Recording Secretary w.w ••■