01262004 Regular Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

"Emolovment records:" What exactly are "employment records?" If they are any of the records kept by many businesses, there are stiff penalties, fines and potential law suits should the business not protect those records from any general disclosure. "Res. umes:" Ifa person uses their P.O. Box as a return address on a resume in "the year preceding the election," is that person ineligible to serve as a member of City Council? Does a return address count as a "home address?" This again is an obscure form of documentation often protected under privacy laws. "Business cards:" Sitting council members need look no further than their purse or wallet to discover the problem with this type of documentation. The majority of business owners list their business address, a P.O. Box, or no address on their "business cards." "Government forms and loan applications.-" Again there are serious privacy and liability issues in the disclosure of most of these types of documents. Requirement (D) The person must,use the phone number at the residency as the person's home phone number; Perhaps nothing reveals the average age of us on the Commission more than requirement (D). Having a phone numbers ,at" a residence is quickly becoming a thing of the past. Landlines and home phones may soon be as hard to find as rotary dial phones. It is akin to requiring council members to lodge their horses at a local stable for the "year preceding the election," as the landline phone (tied to a specific residence or location) is in the process of fading into history with the horse and buggy. Conclusion: The members of the Charter Review Commission should be congratulated on attempting to "provide a more objective basis for determining residency." However, the harder we tried, the worse it seemed to get. The recommended cure~ it seems, is worse than the potential for abuse. The issue of residency is best left in the able hands of those best equipped to deal with those ambiguous and subjective issues of life...the voters. 2.. Section 7.01, regarding the composition of the planning and, zoning commission and q.ualificati0ns for its. member: No charter change is recommended. Rational: By attempting to insure (what some on the Charter Review Commission perceive as) "stability" to the planning and zoning commission, the unintended consequences may be excessive rigidity. Excessive restrictions on the City Council ability to appoint Commission members equally restrict the electorate to initiate change. If issues and disagreements arise between a City Council of currently elected public officials and commission members appointed by persons who were (potentially) rejected by the voters, it seems reasonable that the will of the electorate should at least have an oppommity to prevail. The city would be poorly served should the stability of the existing statute be codified into rigidity by being made a part of the city charter.