Laserfiche WebLink
Now, because you have three options, it might <br /> be extremely difficult to receive a majority of the votes <br /> cast on ,any one of _those options. Therefore, you have a <br /> built-in bias in favor of the status quo under this particular <br /> method. <br /> This is, after much discussion, the best that <br /> some of the most experienced and knowledgeable people in this <br /> state could come up with. And, even, in spite of all their <br /> efforts--which I am very grateful for, certainly they tried <br /> to assist us in every way they can--they suggested that this <br /> is full of problems. They realize that it ' s full of problems <br /> and not, in fact, suggesting that this commission adopt this <br /> proposal. However, they did say that the best that the <br /> commission can probably do is to bite the bullet and to eliminate <br /> two options. Leaving only the status quo and one option to be <br /> voted upon leaving the possibility of a clear majority. They <br /> strongly recommended that I recommend to the commission it <br /> reconsider or whatever the number of options that it has <br /> because of the impropriety or difficulty of forming ballot <br /> language to conform to the statutory requirement of having a <br /> majority approve the particular amendment. <br /> I hope you can all understand why this is still <br /> a very incomplete proposition. It doesn ' t really change <br /> anything from what was proposed previously last week. You <br /> still have the problem of majority, which is the most significant <br /> one. And, when you imply that people are voting for the status <br /> quo simply because they vote no on one of these, that may be a <br /> wrong assumption. <br /> MR. TRULSON: Mr. Chairman. Seeing the problem <br /> that has been presented by the three options, I would like to <br /> move to amend Section 3-2 to have one option and that is option <br /> #3 , as it is now listed on the board, with the 5-4 council <br /> makeup. There would only then be the status and one option on <br /> the ballot. <br /> MR. ISHIDA: Mr. Chairman. Before any second <br /> is made, or not, can we have discussion? <br /> CHAIRMAN SCHUTTE : Would there be a point of <br /> order on this? <br /> MR. TRULSON: Mr. Chairman. I believe that we <br /> have amended the rules of procedure at a prior meeting so we <br /> could do what we are presently doing. A second to the motion <br /> would merely get in on the floor to discuss. <br /> CHAIRMAN SCHUTTE: Mr. Trulson, it' s my under- <br /> standing that the rules of procedure was dispensed with for <br /> that particular meeting to accept such testimony. I don ' t <br /> think those rules have been suspended for this particular <br /> meeting. They would need a majority vote, I think , of the <br /> commissioners in which to suspend the rules of procedure for <br /> any particular meeting to introduce any past work. <br /> -4- <br />