Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTranscript 04/18/2005 City Council Meeting April 18, 2005 Deputy Mayor Williams comments on Council Rules of Procedure/filling Council vacancies: "I think Mr. Bloor's statement, `laboring under a misunderstanding' is a five-star statement. (Repeated because Attorney Bloor didn't hear the comment) I think that Mr. Bloor's statement that everybody has been `laboring under a misunderstanding' is a five-star statement in and of itself. This thing has been a misunderstanding from the get-go —between publicity and public information, between some inaccurate media coverage, and that being disseminated widely and repeated over and over again. We followed the law. Now that law may not have been what everybody out there thought we should be doing, because this Council did follow the law. There are six elected representatives that got into a room and debated about what to do, and we went into that room with an intent of figuring out the next step in the process, and what was said behind closed doors remains behind those closed doors. But if you can glean what people have said publicly and have been quoted in the paper, it's pretty easy to figure out that nobody could agree about what to do behind those closed doors. So we came out, and everyone that was sitting here had the opportunity to make a motion. I paused for a respectable amount of time, and I made one. And to my dismay and amazement, I got a second. And to even further dismay, there were four people out of the six that voted in favor of the recommendation. That's how government works —it's a representative government, it's a republic. I'm looking at this thing, and I don't know if it'll be controlled in the future by the initiative and referendum process, that's one of my first questions —will this fall under the initiative and referendum process later on? (Bloor answers no.) Under Section 14, Council vacancies, the first paragraph that is in there now, it says `however, that in specific situations, the Council may by majority vote revise the process'. Can you give me an example, for the record, for legislative intent what we mean by that `in specific situations'. (Answered by Bloor) Well, then, I guess is that something we could strike, or is it going to be argued over in the future, or should we strike it or just leave it in there. (Answered by Bloor) I think it muddies the water just a little bit. If we're going to be clear cut about this, `provided, however, the Council may by majority vote revise the process and leave out `that in specific situations' because that just prompts more argument over what is a specific situation. Ten days —those are calendar days or business days? (Answered by Bloor) So, if we start on a Wednesday of one week, you're going to end up by a Friday of the next week, of you start on a Monday of one, you're going to end up mid-week the following. (Other brief interjections by Council on the time frames) And the reason I'm bring that up is that a lot of people get ten days and two weeks mixed up sometimes, so I see of not less than ten days we had, I think, a full two weeks, I'm not sure, I don't remember to tell you the truth, but if somebody publishes —I'm thinking we need something in there at some point to give a date certain. I guess that would be taken care of in the publication, when you publish for letters, so it needs to be due by—OK that concern goes away. The candidates will then be interviewed during a public Council meeting. I'm assuming that line means that every candidate that submits a letter will be interviewed, regardless of the number. I see heads shaking yes, and I see heads shaking no. So that's why I'm asking. (Answered by Bloor to the affirmative) Yup, that's how I read it too, so you mimeograph the thing off and spread it around town, let people sign the bottom of it and send it in. OK,just looking this thing over. (More commentaries from Council that this could be amended so that Council could narrow it down) Well, we've been down that road before, but the number was just eight instead of one, so if you think we're going to be sitting here with fifty applications piled up, saying we're only going to take five or ten out of those, we're going to back into the same kind of discussion then as we are right now, because we followed the law. So, I know there is a very vocal group out there that wants this to happen. I don't like it, I don't support it. If someone makes a motion about it, and it gets seconded, I'm going to watch up and down this aisle here and see how many votes there are. I will not support this, but I won't be the only one to vote against it. The Council rules say that if I keep my mouth shut, I am automatically considered a yes vote. If there are no other objections, I'm going to keep my mouth shut unless somebody else says no on this."