My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
MIN CHC 1999-12-04
PublicDocuments
>
County Clerk - Council
>
County Clerk
>
Charter Commission
>
2000
>
Minutes
>
MIN CHC 1999-12-04
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/9/2018 12:38:29 PM
Creation date
3/6/2018 4:02:24 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
AGE/MIN (Charter Comm.)
Agency
Charter Commission
Year
1999
Meeting date
12/4/1999
Type
MIN
Document Relationships
AGE CHC 1999-12-04 SP MTG
(Related)
Path:
\County Clerk - Council\County Clerk\Charter Commission\2000\Agendas
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
65
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
YOSHIYAMA: It's not for the Prosecutor. <br />RAY: John. <br />SANTANGELO: Roland, I can't agree with you more. On the other hand, I'm going <br />to disagree. I think, if we look at this, the overall package that we put out has a <br />perception to it, and if we're trying to do good business, if we're trying to do good <br />government, then if I had a druther, I'd rather go with this mix of single member and <br />at -large versus a single member, at -Targe, a term - I mean, it starts to take on a flavor <br />of its own that could be very negative, and frankly, limiting major things. So non- <br />partisan and something like this, I think, has a much better chance than throwing <br />something that is - it is a buzz saw. <br />RAY: Want to put forth any sort of a specific proposal in regard to term <br />limits? There are lots of possibilities here. Eddie, you've got something to say? <br />ALONZO: <br />Council? <br />MARTIN: <br />Yes. What is the requirements for retirement from County <br />Ten years. <br />RAY: And that had a lot to do with the talk about it, as far as the ten year <br />• retirement, and I guess that's still the way it is. Actually, it was interesting. When that <br />discussion took place, that was incorrect. At that time, when it was voted on, you could <br />vest in five years, as an elected official, and most people didn't even know that. But <br />that's changed now. I think now it's ten years. It rolled over. When I was elected, I think <br />I was the last elected cycle, that if I'd have stayed in one more term, I could have <br />vested. So I could have vested in five years. <br />MARTIN: The old program? <br />RAY: Yes, under the old program. I believe it's ten years now but that <br />was part of the discussion, but they misunderstood it. <br />ALONZO: So if we went term limits, that means we go two terms or four <br />years, they won't get any - <br />RAY: Would not. And that was the whole public sentiment, this idea of <br />an ulterior motive and you're just running for the benefits. <br />HIGASHI: When we talk about term limits, we're talking in the office that it <br />serves. Is that kind of correct, Steve? <br />BESS: Yes. <br />21. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.