Laserfiche WebLink
<br />BALLOT PROPOSITIONS FOR AMENDING THE CITY CHARTER <br />AS APPROVED BY THE SAN MARCOS CITY COUNCIL <br />FOR THE MAY 7,1988 ELECTION <br />WITH EXPLANATIONS <br /> <br />1 . <br /> <br />Sec. 2.03, Subsections (a), (b) and (c), Extension or <br />detachment of boundaries, which deals with annexation procedures, <br />should be deleted in their entirety and the following adopted in <br />their place ( a copy of the existing Sec. 2.03 (a), (b) and (c) is <br />attached as Appendix A): <br /> <br />Sec. 2.03. <br /> <br />Extension or detachment of boundaries. <br /> <br />"The City Council shall have power by ordinance to fix <br />the boundary limits of the City of San Marcos and to provide <br />for the alteration and extension of said boundary limits, the <br />detachment of territory and the annexation of additional <br />territory with or without the consent of the territory <br />and inhabitants annexed or detached, in accord with applicable <br />state annexation laws." <br /> <br />JUSTI FI CATION: <br /> <br />Each time the legislature meets, it makes revisions in the <br />annexation laws which must be followed by the City of San Marcos. <br />Having specific, rigid provisions in the City Charter renders such <br />provisions obsolete when the legislature makes changes. City <br />legislation in the annexation area has been virtually supplanted <br />by legislative action. Making this change will eliminate cross <br />checking between the State law and the Charter, reduce confusion <br />and help reduce procedural errors in the annexation process. <br /> <br />2. <br /> <br />Sec. 3.02 (a)(3) should be deleted. It provides that a council <br />member "shall not be in arrears in the payment of any taxes or <br />other liabilities due the City." <br /> <br />JUSTIFICATION: <br /> <br />Judicial decisions made since the Charter was originally written <br />have held that a provision requiring a person not to be in arrears <br />in a payment of taxes or other liability due to City in order to <br />run for office on the City Council is unconstitutional. <br /> <br />3. <br /> <br />Sec. 3.02 (a)(4) should <br />underlined provision. <br /> <br />be <br /> <br />amended <br /> <br />by <br /> <br />adding <br /> <br />the <br /> <br />following <br /> <br />"Shall not hold any other office or employment under the City <br />government while a member of said Council, except a member of the <br />City Council may be appointed by the City Council to represent said <br />