My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN112090
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1990
>
CCMIN112090
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:55:23 AM
Creation date
10/29/1999 11:35:00 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
36
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
132 <br /> <br /> Mr. Butler commented that the proposed ordinance concerning <br /> Councilmembers running for Mayor may be good philosophically and <br /> that if it were adopted, a Councilperson's decision to run from a <br /> safe seat should be made early enough to provide other people the <br /> opportunity to file their candidacy for the vacant seat. In <br /> addition, a mechanism to have both seats filled at the same <br /> election should be put in place. He added, however, that he could <br /> not support the proposed ordinance because it is an infringement on <br /> the freedom of speech and the right of any citizen to run for <br /> office. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr inquired if the proposed ordinance on Councilmembers <br /> running for Mayor could be disregarded since it is preempted by <br /> State law. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush replied that a situation in which a Councilmember <br /> ran for Mayor from a safe seat without resigning and was elected <br /> could be challenged. The constitutionality and validity of the <br /> proposed ordinance would then be challenged in court and the judge <br /> would decide whether or not the proposed ordinance was preempted by <br /> State law. In the meantime, the elected candidate would hold <br /> office for the duration of that legal challenge. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr indicated that she could not support the proposed <br /> ordinance concerning Councilmembers running for Mayor because it <br /> presented a no-win situation. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer inquired if elected officials would be installed by <br /> the first meeting in December if the proposed ordinance on the term <br /> of office is approved at this time. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush replied that this proposed ordinance puts into place <br /> what the City has been doing as a matter of practice. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver commented that the proposed ordinance on the term <br /> of office is not necessary because the process works in terms of <br /> when the certification of election results come in, after which a <br /> special meeting is held to install the newly-elected officials. He <br /> suggested that it would be better to say that the installation <br /> would take place on the first meeting after the certification is <br /> received. <br /> <br /> - 34 - <br /> 11-20-90 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.