Letter
to City Council 4.4.14
Note:
That the landfill extension is eventually necessary is not in
question.
A
brief commentary concerning the over use of the emergency clause when
enacting resolutions and ordinances.
Example:
At
the last meeting the resolution to extend landfill capacity was
questioned by some council members but the rush to enact via the
emergency clause appeared to stifle the debate.
With
the most extended passage format of three separate readings and then
30 days to become effective, the resolution would have become
effective on May 17th.
A first reading in March and 2nd
3rd
tonight would mean an effective date of May 3rd.
Or all three reading last month would have made the date April 20th.
The
most recent data from OEPA indicates that, using last years tipping
rate, current capacity will last until the 1st
of December of this year.
Allowing
for the usual two months for construction a July or August start date
would have been more than adequate.
Did
council really need to eliminate time for council members and the
public to examine the issue and then make an informed decision? Was
the issue so urgent that the resolution had to go into immediate
effect? Should the voter's right of referendum be nullified because
we just wanted to get the issue passed in a hurry? Was the
immediate passage of the resolution necessary for the preservation of
the public peace, health and safety of the City and its citizens?
Paul
Hunter
No comments:
Post a Comment