02/21/1990 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e not set out to reduce the total number of signatures, this occurred out of a desire to gain uniformity with State and County processes. CIC does not feel that reducing the number of signatures will lead to abuse of the process. Responding to a question from Ms. Ehrman regarding the input CIC received from the community, Ms. Darling said that the CIC received two written statements from neighborhood leaders, one written statement from the Neighborhood leaders Council (NlC), and statements from three private citizens. Ms. Darling said that members of the CIe deliberated at great length the inclusion of a statement on the petition which would articulate the financial impact the measurement would have on the City; while they still feel this is very important, they could not identify a way to address this properly. CIe recommends that this issue be pursued separate from adoption of this measure. e Ken Tollenaar, CIC member and research associate at the Bureau of Governmental Research, provided information about the initiative/referendum and charter amendment processes in other cities around the country. He reported that in comparison to other cities within the state, the City's current requisite signature requirements for the processes are similar. He noted, however, that the City of Gresham has decreased its signature requirements to 3 percent for the initiative and 5 percent for the referendum, based on the total number of City electors registered at the time of petition filing. This change has had a relatively small impact on the City of Gresham. As evidenced from nation wide research, Mr. Tollenaar said that it is still uncertain what impact changing the signature requirement might have on initiative or referendum activity. In considering the total number of votes that would be required, Mr. Miller emphasized the importance of ensuring that any given measure is supported by a critical mass of voters. Mr. Biedermann underscored the importance that the CIC placed on the fiscal impact of an initiative on the City. The CIC would like the council to pursue some type of legislation at the State level. Mr. Biedermann mentioned that among the many ordinance improvements suggested by the CIe was a requirement that the City Attorney's Office review the perspective petition as it is filed to determine if there are any legal problems in drafting or ballot title. He noted that this issue has met with concerns at the staff level and should be discussed further. Mr. Sercombe said that specific concerns raised around this issue were that the five day requirement would be insufficient to conduct a substantive review of the measure to determine if legal difficulties exist, impartiality of the council when it has already taken a position on an issue, and City liability. He also noted that sometimes ballot measures are unworkable from the beginning; rewriting would not make them legal. Mr. Sercombe suggested that if there is support on the council of having City Attorney's Office e MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 21, 1990 Page 4