City Council Minutes 1991 07 16 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

... back to a vote of the people when we recognize there was a problem? We corrected it and have the ability now to readdress it as per the ordinance. We should correct it and bring it back in ordinance form and allow this board to be the one to determine this is the correct way or no, we leave it as Ordinance No. 1034. Hornbostel: I have strong feelings on that. The inequity was included in something that went to the vote of the people. I think the people voted on it, we didn't know there was a problem, they didn't know there was a problem. I'm just advocating we be up front about it. It is mostly housekeeping. When you have something that is a vote of the people and was approved by the vote of the people, I don't feel real good about reversing that. They voted on that and they ought to know if there are changes that make the situation different. They need to know that. The only way to reverse that in a really up-front manner is to take it back to them. Carnival: I am not suggesting that because we don't go back to the vote of the people we are not being up front by doing something behind the voters back. Your comment about it being housekeeping and the fact that we already did adopt Ordinance No. 1034 would indicate that we have the ability as a Council to call public hearings, allow the public to show support or lack of support for a particular item that this Council is considering. There were no negative comments addressed at any of the public hearings. That would indicate to me that the citizens are using our expertise along with the staff's to bring forth an ordinance that would deal with certain issues that are somewhat confusing, not that we are hiding anything. I think we made it very clear that the intent of the election was exactly what we adopted as 14