2009-07-22n Z Fr
�_ Tl
w
VF I
s
K� REi _` " "!�L cc
i', , r
I M N
m r
, IMJ
- � �,; ?�i:ar'�. -...fig d,� • _�:� <, .�... �.".
' .� G ` 3� �m 3 `ids � �t-
�
�n .J R'f -+`'S 4K Am fKj- n ri- .ff ,"a �4 P�( '.a*3 rad uV r �?'f g - �� P z'A 41 � d
W i 7= p y v., f dt' a'1:.� ro'^ bN, " �'x � �� p ' `t;r'! �s a �a "'` ^j ¢aik P ,9e� fib✓ l.y- 1
,�', 'aid -.f�- e'er -t : �.fi5 � ='r ! n, -•J"
'- �r-l� ..a..��21:"<. ..�<'� � f"s�t.: ��h.n:."At`<R'..�� ��, 3. _a,r.k_..�. � �� �.:_.�.� �,��. 1- �r .,q _... 6.a., wF.__F•.";A1
Y;Z cb"P�F "N
Da
City Council Ordinance Review Subcommittee
Draft IVlinutes — July 22, 2009
Page 2 of 7
Hobin states that he feels that this kind of organization is what we are looking for.
Slate agrees noting that using the Word program it is organized so that you should be able
to open the ordinance book and find what you are looking for. He also states that he likes
the 1 , - , of 1 • rtments by
Hobin moved to agree with the general method of organization. Grimes seconds the
motion. 1 1'
2) Definitions
Avl comment I states:
I found some of these confusing and unnecessary. They go beyond even the list of
statutory de /nitions found in the General Laws at Ch 4 Section 7. Some of these
definitions are in the Charter, but definitions for Initiative Measure and Referendum
Measure are in the Charter and not here. It isn't necessary to repeat definitions that are
in the Charter, but I have retained them anyway. Definitions marked by an asterisk * are
in the Charter. They are all verbatim with the exception of City Officer. See comment at
that definition. I have deleted many provisions for simplicity and as being common
language anyway.
I was somewhat troubled by the conflicting section definition which I believe would be
difficult to apply and question whether the fact that the latest number of the provision
should prevail particularly since the entire Code will be reformatted into new numbered
chapters and sections. My objective has been to simply and stream line the code. I
anticipate that deletions will be disconcerting to some who believe that provisions should
be left in `just in case. " However, this can be antithetical to the concept ofstreamlining.
I'm just exercising my judgment that some faith has to be left to the certainty of common
sense because attempting to over define can cause uncertainty rather than resolve it. I
just see no reason to define the words may or shall in the Code. There are many other
definitions that I would delete, but I have exercised some restraint in this regard. Also,
many chapters contain their own definition sections. I did not address these because they
are specific to the chapter and the respective city agency that deals with them. I would
suggest though that the definitions section be moved to the beginning of each chapter
where they appear so that will be consistent throughout the code.
Grimes notes that out of 50 definitions, 20 changes have been made and she feels that is a
lot and is something that she would really have to take a look at. She notes that Atty.
Decoulos suggests that there is no reason to define "may" and "shall" and notes there is a
big difference between them. She noted that she would like to talk about this further.
Slate asks if there are particular words that should be left in. He suggests that the
Committee hold up on this section for further discussion on how to proceed with this.
not hired to make policy decisions.
Robin states that he looked at the definitions and some of the changes made eliminated
words that are antiquated and we are trying to make the document organized. He stated
that he did not see where any words that were taken out, changed the meaning of the
section.
Slate suggests that the definitions section be left as it was originally. Grimes agrees
noting that the word "may" is permissive and "shall" is mandatory, and Atty. Decoulos is
assuming that people know what they mean. She notes that these ordinances are the
laws of the city and if the definitions are left in there is no room for question.
Slate notes that it is not necessary to repeat definitions that are in the city charter. He
noted that he would be comfortable with the definitions being in one place or the other.
Grimes notes that the Charter Commission never defined city officers and left it to the
ordinance. She notes that the Charter calls for the Mayor to removed or suspend city
officers.
Slate suggests that the language in the current ordinance remain and that the Mayor be
designated as a City Officer and that the City Council consider adding the designation to
any city department head that is not currently listed as a city officer.
3.) Specification of City Officer
My comment 2 states:
This first sentence [in the definition of City Officer] is verbatim, from the Charter. The
list here that follows also appears at Chapter 17 -53 which also adds Director of
Planning and Development and Director of Public Safety. Notably missing is the Mayor
who certainly comes under the definition of the Charter.
Also some, but not all, of the provisions establishing department heads and directors
provide the designation of City Officer.
The only significance I could find as to an employee being designated as a City Officer is
that at 17 -4 service time for vacation time is cumulative but not consecutive and at 17 -53
they do not get monetary compensation for overtime.
Note also that at 17 -47 (h) the term "any department head of the city shall not be eligible
to receive accrued sick days at termination. " A department head would be more [the
comment states less in error] restrictive than the definition of City Officer under the
Charter and the itemized list under the section and under 17 -4. For example, the
Aa
I'M —RuLf to !Q010
10T
am 4 & 21
TZ� � Da�?� f kw , KNO - CaLk
d 7
"0 tc� Y i 1?
Q 11 UaP Df
� _q
Fr
STAN maD " izzk 0 , _n
IL
- N'Anqt�wll ta n gy, WI an N awf7mv PUNS as x2
G` ?Zrx nuf a
"a Y 0 yjAmilysm rm A;
A-4
ORO - Mq'R M'-!kv'J7
M M !
lilts OwNg Whim rAkqjImA 1 Tm � i :01TIf qT1
Afm Path ASOMPAS ma 5WAR-Mu
Lao
I C@ D
MAN RINUMS into gN 5RI77 1110 RKNT� 4um- qn; Imm ik kANIM
YON Mmunfunu 15�-Ahm—c �� m rn T� fir �7� 71 i
ITTANA! 1 P7�4
ITT
RIG anoloviEtsis KhRium 1; vshd W 20 & sipp ETA QTWIEUIP
MAP NNYAWAI, WO MIDII; Alto Na
As
Kamm��a hys w9m was h amm"'Li —� i2vj g
fm Z,'T"rRa-S ova
E
va, AS Am all? mi"arm ffin ;I
rj 4W M,,"
awn
W f - A
mv I IA
N -
;T i
t
rm
r
...........
ua ma Von - z. - vT
uU �R
rc Miu — Lu , ttgt !a�.
1110 urval; v "Ll avhaA 20A 200 IsKyougiv why �0 v1sq'IM Immui
;K120hus OR Wav minis 92 I a
v'S" T� OQH715� ull-112ZIMCUEE a I a
"a" tffl ) Lu m,
- rl a -, r -, PA
A"f2yt M k��q
I V tiLD
'Iffy urtnf�
11 2 vo 1 L- al z%eoyz "Kl - " - ! - 4T4Tvo'ga? ,-
IT? a
r�,, q� j — si i o
�
10
'It
Mt� 09 6�9�R� �tm �hv k�
an c'now"n,
[01 low Ls -
umqE� t0ia
, FFR , - 5 l uao 1 m 'tF7T
r - A
"U
H wsaouuiL �IiR �li ;IHA
T 1,
�-VPI �iik, 0e,'nev � T* 7yennmf?, afies 'Y'
Alul
7 �m� , eir , 2fi2 t
4, m]
Zk 'I'Ll ommuimvh
JJR
7P,
m nt!RL-a-�-7n� �742,
0 PuTn, FLI i
ak
xo'
in t a zi�p mv mU "ZIll"
QL,%
19
z N E 0 i lal 4� mall - lls SAWIF Runs Ah"'y T&lb m o
1111 Aft-to-UT 7m MW th � 7%, .7, n.
10 d
Lin AM& AMR QlNijqgwvqU!oxSA%j !'hm �,j RIPS mvt aw Whaammm Oz 02
ma Ugh aid; gnamgm 6
Z Y Tki7v, I U 1 X 0 Z 10 P C Z 10 Z P
'lohm cc"b"l miffLn w
7d�, p =ij,
CRI
a Into who Q; Qiyu NO g 1 91-1
FUTLzll
L5
1 , 7U �7.1- 0Of o�,f
,4
3
m RAWN13. mi '5yWWiTU-7Pl "If
a xx IL