from section 151-30 of the Revised Municipal Code:
If a proposal is tabled by a committee and no action is taken to remove it from the table or to reassign it during a period of six (6) months, the proposal shall be deemed postponed indefinitely and shall be removed from the calendar of pending proposals.Both Proposal 15 and 16 deal with expansions of existing TIF districts; the consolidated downtown TIF and the Fall Creek TIF, respectively. Both were tabled at the February 6, 2012, meeting of the Metropolitan & Economic Development committee of the Council. That started the clock ticking. Six months from that date occurred on August 6, 2012. These proposals are dead and must be reintroduced in order to be considered. Reintroduction would send them to committee where proper (both legal and ethical) notice could be made to the public and real input from the public could be given.
Posts
8 comments:
Good work, good news.
Proposal 15 was not tabled. It was postponed to a time uncertain. There is no such thing as a motion to table indefinitely. So while a tabled motion, upon which no action is taken, is removed from the calendar of pending proposals, there is nothing in the Council Rules or Robert's Rules of Order that requires removing Proposal 15 from the calendar of pending proposals. As you probably know, the Council rules provide that Robert's Rules govern when the Council Rules do not cover the situation. Bottom Line: The rule you are relying upon does not apply to Proposal 15.
You can only postpone to a time certain. They took it off the table, because they tabled it.
Well, you CAN postpone indefinitely - but that kills the proposal.
Lawyer, when a measure is postponed from consideration, it is tabled. In fact, that's the definition of tabling.
I have to admit that's a pretty creative argument, but not even close. Clearly the rule does apply. Now whether the council chooses to ignore its rules is a different question.
The council will ignore its rules, reinterpret them or waive them.
It is clearly in the public interest, from a number of important perspectives, that these proposals be reintroduced, sent to committee, and opened for public review.
A sane person would also demand that there be full disclosure regarding these requested expansions of the downtown TIF. So far the public knows more about what they tried to amend in (but did not accomplish) than it does about the TIF itself.
Riding on Monday night's process and outcome is respect for this Council.
Post a Comment