MIN CHC 1999-05-26 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

• • • election, did you have any time line in here? WURDEMAN: No, it says, in fact, I'm glad you brought that up. I think that's a -, that's a -, something that should be addressed. HIGASHI: Yeah. YUEN: I think that -, if I'm not mistaken, I think that was a proposal of the Commission ten years ago but didn't pass. HIGASHI: Oh, yeah? YUEN: This was -, it was discussion that you shouldn't -, somebody should come in, I'm going strictly from memory, which is, you know, it gets worse with time, but the idea was if you would come into the clerk's office and say that you were going to start circulating a petition; that started your time running. And then you had so much time to get it done. And I think that's the one that -, one of the three -, two or three proposals that did not pass last time. WURDEMAN: The other provision that caused a lot of controversy last time was -. SANTANGELO: Where are -? Could you state when we do talk about this, just like if it's A, B, or C that you're referring -? WURDEMAN: Eleven-four(c)(1). If signers are not given an opportunity to read the full text of the proposed ordinance and so on, and if the full text of the proposed ordinance or ordinance is not contained in or attached to each signature paper, then the signatures aren't invalid. I don't know what that means because people when they pass these petitions around don't attach the full text of the proposed ordinance to each signature paper. I mean they leave them on the counter in a health food store or whatever and people come in and sign them, right? So I really don't have any constructive suggestions on that regard but it's something you might ponder over, is how to make that a meaningful provision. RAY: All right. WURDEMAN: Okay, this next one, as I said, 13-4, it's a small matter but Mike Matsukawa pounced on it. It's when you have a board or a commission, and some people don't show up, and they have a bare quorum, and they can't -, this happened in, I believe, the Planning Commission -, they couldn't get the votes to either approve something or disapprove it, and so they moved to continue it until the next meeting, until they would have more people, and he claimed that was an action and that they couldn't do that. So our recommendation is that action be defined as something dispositive of the matter and not just a procedural thing like continuing until the next meeting. Because the requirement is that to 19