04/11/1977 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. Mr. abie noted that he had several conversations with people in the community and that if the ballot were not held on that date there was talk of working toward defeat of the City budget and boycotting of William's bread. He noted he would support putting the issue on that ballot if those people would work on behalf of passing the budgets. Mr. Bradley was concerned, feeling that the City Council was being blackmailed. He said it should not be making decisions based on threats to the Council and that the Council does not know what other people who voted for fluoride in the water might do. He felt that the Council was making decisions based on what certain groups were saying and not on the substantive issues before the Council. He said the Council was assuming things which might not be true and recommended that the issue be put on a ballot after the June 28 election or in the general election, May 1978. Mr. Hamel said he had talked to many people regarding the fluo- ride issue. He said the City Council had told people how to get the issue back on the ballot and they had worked to do so. It was his feeling that if a group of people were interested in an issue on the ballot then perhaps there would be a better turnout for the June 28 election. e Mr. Delay said that he did not agree that the City Council was being blackmailed, but that it had a legitimate petition before it and should simply put it on the ballot. Mr. Haws moved seconded by Mr. abie to amend the motion to read: "And regardless of the outcome of the election it will be placed back on the general election ballot in May, 1978." Mr. Haws noted the reason for his amendment was to satisfy both philosphies, the one being for an immediate vote on the fluoride issue, and the second being the concern for having the issue on a general ballot with more people voting then. Mr. Bradley noted he would rather see the City spend money on setting a special election for this one issue and separate it from the budget elections to avoid confusion. Ms. Smith strong ly opposed this position, noting that the Council had a respon- sibility to all taxpayers and the cost of the election should be shared. e Mr. abie said he was very much in favor of the amendment, feel- ing it was a very serious and fair motion. He reiterated Mr. Williams' concerns about the issue being decided at a general election at which a large turnout (70 percent) voted, as opposed to having the issue voted upon in a special election where a much smaller turnout would be voting. He felt the amendment was the best alternative, as it would give an opportunity for all people interested in this issue to vote in a fair way. Vote was taken on the amendment which did not carry with Bradley, Haws, and abie voting aye; Hamel, Smith, Williams, Lieuallen, and Delay voting no. ..30L{- 4/11/77 - 25