27
May
May 24, 2010 - AH Council Meeting (audio)
Presentation of Certificates of Election and administration of Oaths of Office to newly elected officials: Place 3- Fred F. Prassel, Place 4 - Elliot Weser, and Place 5 - John Savage - Jennifer Reyna, City Secretary
An Ordinance approving Mayor's nominations to the City's boards and commission - Brian Chandler, Community Development Director
Appointing Yolanda Gutierrez to the Architectural Review Board
An Ordinance approving Mayor's nominations to the City's boards and commission - Brian Chandler, Community Development Director
Appointing Yolanda Gutierrez to the Architectural Review Board
Acceptance of a grant from the Brown Foundation, Inc. to the City of Alamo Heights in the amount of $10,000 for the Dog Park and $5,000 for the Community Garden - Brian Chandler, Community Development Director
Part 1
~39 min.
| Agenda | Action | Approved Minutes |
Comments
(8)
Show/hide comments
...
written by AH citizen , May 29, 2010
written by AH citizen , May 29, 2010
He was not asking approval atnext council meeting. Give him a break. Prassel just needed to pull microphone closer. He has no hidden agendas. Repeating.... Prassel asked for an appointed committee to study the form of an amendment to chArter which would allow initiative and referendum. The amendment to be put to vote in Nov. The. Mayor suggested that the governance committee would study it. I do not know who is on governance committee.
...
written by Fred , May 28, 2010
written by Fred , May 28, 2010
Why was he mumbling? He is an excellent speaker. I wonder if he drew the short straw?
...
written by Citizen 3 , May 28, 2010
written by Citizen 3 , May 28, 2010
He wanted it to be approved and in effect at the next council meeting. They had to explain the procedure to him. Can somebody explain the procedure to me? Is Common Sense out there? Isn't there a rule about how many signatures are required, isn't it based on the number of registered voters?
...
written by AH citizen , May 28, 2010
written by AH citizen , May 28, 2010
Yes, he proposed a charter amendment to be voted on in Nov election. It would be an amendment allowing initiative and referendum. Many municipalities allow initiative and referendum to overturn actiions taken by boards and council. The maor recommended that the governance committee(?), rather than a newly created committee appointed by the council, make a proposal to put on Nov ballot. Readers correct me if I missed something.
...
written by Citizen 2 , May 28, 2010
written by Citizen 2 , May 28, 2010
We were in the back and couldn't hear Councilman Prassel. Did he make some kind of a motion? It wasn't on the City's actions taken.
...
written by Mixed feelings , May 27, 2010
written by Mixed feelings , May 27, 2010
I would like a little more information at meetings.For example, the items in the consent agenda had little information and were voted on without discussion. The agenda itself could provide that information.
But I too am glad the three minute rule will be enforced.
But I too am glad the three minute rule will be enforced.
You must be logged in to post a comment. Please register (free) if you do not have an account yet.
Council can send the proposal to the appropriate committee. They will study it and bring it back to as a posted agenda item for discussion. Council could set the percentage of voters needed to bring a referendum. Of course, citizens could object if the percentage/ number is too low or too high.
Council can then vote to send it to the voters. Baker should have explained better to Prassel just how this works. I'm going to call Prassel and ask just what inspired him to decide we needed this.
Prassel is also incorrect about the IRR being left out of the Charter. It wasn't in the original Charter and therefore wasn't "left out". Of course, he wouldn't know that.
I found it curious that Prassel sent his reply instead of just speaking to the reporter. Did he need cliff notes or something?
There are a few other hurdles to cross before it goes to the voters but I don't know the time lines specifically.
Frankly, I have begun to think that the referendum, recall and initiative isn't a bad way to go. I would like to start with a referendum to permanently abolish all SUP's (Special Use Permits). That would be one way to permanently stop any present or future Council from allowing multi- story buildings in the city.
Recall may be needed if the new guys on the block, who now have controlling votes of Council, get carried away with their new found power - or their friends exhibit undue influence.
Initiatives can wreck havoc with a budget which the citizens would be most unhappy about. They will have to decide what is worth spending their "political capital" on. They don't have a lot of wiggle room really.