09/06/1978 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

past action which brouqht Council to this point. In April 1977, Council had passed a resolution which was Dart of the process of nutting -- on the ballot the fluoridation referendum in June, 1977, at the request of various qroups who wanted the ordinance authorizinq fluoridation of the water repealed. That ordinance had originated in November 1976, when fluoridation was authorized, followed by the referendum and repeal. One of the conditions for putting the issue on the ballot in June was imposed upon its~lf by Council in its saying, regardless of the outcome of the June election, the issue would be placed on the November 1978 ballot. He said Council had the ontion of repealinq Resolution 2657 and not continuing with the effort, changing the date for an election, or following the resolution for the ~Iovember 1978 election. Mr. Haws felt the main issue was how Council would deal with placing before the voters referendum issues~ He felt it necessary for Council to adopt a policy to follow. Mr. Obie had voted in favor of the November 1978 election ballot measure, even though now he felt that Council's decision at that time was a mistake. He felt he would vote for placing it on the November 1978 ballot at this time, as the people are expecting to have the chance to vote. Otherwise, if Council had taken other action, voters in the community would have had the opportunity to circulate a petition to place the issue on a ballot themselves. Mr. Williams agreed with Mr. Haws that the issue is not fluoridation, but rather, how the Council is going to deal with such issues on an - overa 11 bas is. He favored a Charter amendment to deal with the State 1 aw requi rement by perhaps all owi ng Council to put such issues only on the next statewide election. Jovce Benjamin, Ci~y Attorney's office, said that could be done either by ordi~ance or Charter amendment. Mr. Delay agreed with Mr. Williams in that Council should try to ensure initiative oetitions are placed on elections wherein there would be a a lar"e turnout of voters. However, he felt the real issue was for the Council to remove itself from the business of placing such issues on the ballot entirely and leave that responsibility up to the voters of the community. He noted he would also support a Charter amendment to place such issues on a qeneral election ballot. He favored taking no action today, and further felt Council should own up to its mistakes, noting he felt it had been a mistake in the beginning for Council to be involved. Ms. Smith felt some ob 1 i ga t i on to the voters in the commun i ty who thou gh t they woul d have the two opportunities to vote on thi s issue. She felt she would support the original recommendation, and also supported the concept of having any initiative petition placed on a general election ballot. ~1r. Haws felt Council should not have placed the issue on the ballot in the first place. He exoressed beinq personally opposed to the issue, but felt it was in Council's best interest at this time to place the issue back on the ballot for voter consideration. -- 9/6/78--4 '01