Laserfiche WebLink
. „ • ?,,.:.? <br />? <br />10.1-t#g uf Wvx#4 (PXxtts#Eb <br />0H10 44070 <br />OFFICE OF THE MAYOR <br />M. YVONNE PETRIGAC <br />MAYOR <br />T0: ALL NEMBERS OF COUNCIL 9 <br />FROM: MAYOR M. YVONNE PETRIGACI-A' 1 <br />DATE: MARCH 30, 1988 <br />RE: LINE ITIIM VETO, ORDINANCE 88-22 <br />Phone: 777-8000 <br />I am using the line item veto, as proscribed in the City Charter, for the <br />above captioned line in Ordinance 88-22. Reason: <br />I have been, still am, and will continue to be, an advocate of good planning <br />and zoning for our city. <br />In reviewing the City Charter with legal and planning experts in other cities, <br />the concensus of all these lmowledgable people is that this is an administration <br />function and for the good of the city must stay as such. <br />When Council hires a person that person, according to Charter, is "employed <br />for the proper discharge of the duties of Council". That means he works for <br />Council. I believe any person working for any type of good planning, zoning, <br />code review or land use must have the freedom to work with Council, Administration, <br />the corrmunity and corrmissions. <br />This position should be treated by Council the same as the Building Commissioner, <br />City Engineer, or any other department head. When Council employs one person <br />they in essence are saying to the Administration, "We do not need nor want <br />your help. That is why we are employing our own." Not only does this erode <br />the administrative function in government but it costs government because <br />the Administration still needs a person to work with the administrative entity. <br />With the many pressures we have on us such as financial constraints, I would <br />hope Council explores ways to work tagether with the Administration instead <br />of ways to put another wedge between the legislative and administrative branches <br />of government. <br />As a cooperative option I would suggest to Council that a person with responsibilities <br />for planning be included as a line item under the Division of Building, with <br />that person reporting to the Building Commissioner. The initial and inmediate <br />reason would be cooperative good planning and code review coupled with the <br />continuance of day to day operations and a win-win situation for our city. <br />MYP/pbf