|
Transcript of Meeting of April 29, 2000Page 32 of 64
<br />things that have been considered, whether the decision is made to go forward, or take them out, it’s not
<br />going to be a lot of work. If there are relatively minor changes made, that’s not a lot of work. To give
<br />you an example of a relatively minor change; the Fire Commission was written up with five members. If
<br />you want to change it to seven members, or nine members, and change how they’re selected, that can be
<br />done pretty quickly. Those kinds of changes are not a lot of effort. This might be a good time to give the
<br />Commission an idea of what, like mechanically, needs to happen to be finished. Step one is decide what
<br />goes on the ballot. Step two is there are a few fine points. Most of the things have been worked through.
<br />There are going to be a few fine points that have not been completely decided that need to be decided.
<br />Step three is for the Commission to approve the final language that would actually appear in the Charter
<br />if the ballot questions were adopted. Most of those have been drafted up and the way it would basically
<br />be enacted, or if there were slight changes made, those languages would be changed. Step four is to
<br />prepare the actual language that would appear on the ballot, like questions for people. And I would like a
<br />first crack at doing a draft of this but I’d like the Commission to have the final word, and read it and
<br />finally approve how the ballot questions appear. And step five is preparing a digest for the public of
<br />what these ballot amendments mean. The exact language sometimes doesn’t really convey to people the
<br />full importance of what is being discussed. The question that appears on the ballot is going to be a little
<br />condensed, is going to be shorthand or simplified, and the digest is something, really, in-between that
<br />gives a full explanation of that. And again, I would like to have a crack at doing that, but then have the
<br />Commission actually vote and approve that before it goes out.
<br />RAY: Sharron prepared a bunch of information for us in regard to cost for putting together information,
<br />brochures, mailing costs, newspaper ads, and radio ads that might possibly be in conjunction with some
<br />sort of a public relations effort. So, this is just for our information right now so we can kind of get a
<br />sense of these costs involved. One other discussion that has been ongoing is with the League of Women
<br />Voters in regard to our possibly participating in some sort of a joint voter information pamphlet which
<br />would, in their mind, include candidate profiles and information on candidates, as well as Charter
<br />information and, kind of, pros and cons type information, similar to the background information we’ve
<br />gotten from the League of Women Voters. We’re not, for whatever reason, communicating real clearly
<br />in terms of just who would do what and exactly what this would look like. My understanding is that the
<br />League doesn’t have, or couldn’t bring much in the way of financial resources to the table, so in terms of
<br />participating financially, my sense is that we would be paying for the majority of this, and then their
<br />contribution would be more in putting together the candidate information and developing the pros and
<br />cons portion. And then Chris has some reservations in regard to just some issues there. Do you want to
<br />speak to that?
<br />SANTANGELO: Before he does, I have an issue I’d just like to bring up and it might be encompassed
<br />in that. When it comes to the League of Voters, or any group that’s outside this body, I would feel
<br />comfortable in what we put together if they wanted to incorporate it, but for us to go into a union with a
<br />specific other organization that’s going to do pros and cons, and have other controversial issues, I’m
<br />wondering, and I would ask Chris, what’s the appropriateness of that? In theory I don’t have a problem
<br />with it, but in reality it never really works that way. I’d be more, at this point, in favor of us putting
<br />together the proper thing that comes from this Commission and then anybody that wanted to use it,
<br />would use it the way they saw fit.
<br />IRVINE: John, might I say, being a member of the League, I think they would be perfectly happy to just
<br />– Well, I can’t speak for the League actually. They’re trying to do a candidate brochure which would be
<br />candidate statements. It’s not anything that the League is writing up. League does have some pro/cons
<br />which they’d like to put in on the Charter issues but I think we could tell them look, we have our own
<br />digest. You can’t do that. League does this sort of thing nationally, or has in the past, and I think it
<br />wouldn’t be bad if they are willing to come up with more money than they’d indicated to John so far,
<br />and if we did candidates as well as our issues, in some kind of a mailing, although maybe it’s just too
<br />file://\\coh01\cohweb\council\charter_commission\minutes\minutes 04-29-00.html7/1/2011
<br />
<br />
|