Pueblo City Council Breaking Constitutional Law Transcript (June 26, 2017)
8:44pm
Steve Nawrocki: "Alright, Madam Clerk. I believe we're on Ordinances. 2nd reading, R-1."
Gina Dutcher: "Yes, that's correct. Public hearing for an ordinance submitting to the eligible electors to the City of Pueblo, Colorado at the General Municipal Election to be held on November 7, 2017, a proposed amendment to the Charter of the City of Pueblo, and fixing the ballot title therefor. Introduced June 12, 2017 by Councilman Ed Brown."
Nawrocki: "Thank you Madam Clerk. This is a hearing. Is there a staff report?"
Mr. Daniel C. Kogovsek: "Mr. President, members of Council, this ordinance refers to the registered voters of Pueblo for the November 7th election, a proposed charter revision, which would change the form of government, from "council manager" to "strong mayor council". Similar measure was referred to the voters in 2009. Under this proposal, if this Ordinance passes, all executive powers of the city, would be given to an elected Mayor. The initial salary of the Mayor would be $150,000 per year. If this passes, the first election of a Mayor would take place on November 6, 2018, and because that is a special election, the initial term of the Mayor would be for 5 years. Thereafter, the Mayor would be elected every 4 years. Under this Ordinance, the new Mayor, if this passes, would take office on January 8, 2019. This ordinance, if it passes, also gives city council the authority to hire personnel necessary to enable the council to adequately to perform it's duties, and the council could make those hiring decisions independent of the Mayor. I am available to answer any questions. I would like to publicly thank Nick Gradisar for working with me to get this ballot issue ready to present to the voters. There are 21 pages of changes to the current city charter, and so, Nick was kind enough to work with me to get them in a fashion that I think is fair and that is supported by this committee which wishes to campaign for this ballot question. If you put it on the ballot, it will be item 2B on the November 7th ballot, and that concludes my report."
Steve Nawrocki: "Yes Councilman? ... Councilman Nicoll, did you have a question?"
Chris Nicoll: "Yes I did. I wanted to ask about, there was another group that had been discussing..."
[Steve Nawrocki interrupts Chris Nicoll]
Steve Nawrocki: "Let's wait for that if you don't mind."
Nicoll: "Okay."
Steve Nawrocki: "This is a public hearing, so we'll have a chance once we do the motions to come back & discuss all of this as much as possible."
Nicoll: "Okay."
Nawrocki: "Okay. Alright, council, this is a hearing. Anybody else wishing to speak on behalf of this Ordinance, and we're going to limit it to 3 minutes per testimony, so, welcome, and you need to be sworn in."
Gina Dutcher: "Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you shall give before the Pueblo City Council will be the truth, the whole truth, & nothing but the truth."
Nick Gradisar: "I do."
Gina Dutcher: "Please state your name for the record."
Nick Gradisar: "Nick Gradisar!"
Gina Dutcher: "Thank you."
Nick Gradisar: "Members of the council, it's a pleasure to come before you this evening. We've had an opportunity to talk about this proposal a couple of times with ya. With me tonight are some members of the committee organized to elect a mayor who are still here, that have been active in this effort for the last 18 months, I think we've explained to you that we've been talking about this. We simply want to urge you to support this proposal for a strong elected mayor for the community of Pueblo. You know, the discussion in the community, with the people that we've talked to, people believe that we need a mayor. The question is, I believe, are we going to do this the right way, or are we going to do it the wrong way? This, I think, is the right way. This provides for full-time leadership & accountability, someone who will be a face for this community in Denver, in Colorado Springs, & in the United States. This is the kind of system that this committee believes that Pueblo deserves. This is not 1954 when we adopted this "council-manager form of government". This is not a simple world we live in today. It's much more complicated, and we need a different kind of leadership than the one that's provided for in the "council-manager form of government". Whatever problems you believe are important for this community to address, whether it's crime, drugs, gangs, animal shelters, are going to better addressed by having an elected mayor whose been anointed by the citizens of this community to deal with those problems than the current system of government. Idyllic memories of days of yesteryear in neighboring communities, and how they were led, is not a vision for the future in the opinion of this committee. This proposal allows the community to put someone in charge and to hold them accountable. It gives Pueblo the form of government, and the kind of leadership community of Pueblo deserves, and we urge you to support this. Thank you."
Steve Nawrocki: "Alright, thank you. Anybody else wishing to speak for this Ordinance?" ... "Seeing none, anybody wishing to speak against this Ordinance?" ... "Seeing none, the hearing is closed, asking for a motion to approve." [mumbles] "Alright motion made and seconded, Councilman Nicoll?"
Chris Nicoll: "Thank you. So my question I guess for staff, has anybody come forward with other concepts for the Mayor system of government, whether it be a weak mayor or a strong mayor?"
Sam Azad: "There is a concept of a facilitative Mayor that will be presented to you on July 10th councillor meeting."
Chris Nicoll: "So I guess my question is, as a council body, we've talked about putting this on the ballot so the voters can decide this matter as a charter amendment, a charter change. If another group comes forward and wants to bring forward their proposal whether it will be this type or another type, will the council put that item on that ballot as well, will there be two competing items on there, and the public will sort it out, or does it, what's the right approach here? I guess, when we first started talking about this, that concept hadn't been talked about, and I think it bears discussion. I've supported this idea in the past. We have to be fair in how we approach this, because it is an important part of our city's history here. Any comments?"
Steve Nawrocki: "Yeah, Councilman Aguilera."
Ray Aguilera: "Well, I personally think we gotta do for one group like we have to do for the other group. Nick, I know that you are opposed to any opposition, but... well don't the other group have rights? You know, everybody has an equal right, and if there's even another form, I think we need to accept whoever brings a form in, either that, or put it out so you guys have to go out and have to have signatures. But, that's what I'm saying. You gotta treat everybody equally. If you treat, if one group gets on without having to going to go out and getting signatures, then the other group needs to do the same thing, so that's where I'm seeing things from. Thank you."
Steve Nawrocki: "Alright, thank you Councilman Aguilera. Any other comments?"
Lori Winner: "Yes."
Steve Nawrocki: "Councilwoman."
Lori Winner: "It's my understanding that the weak Mayor is just basically changing the President of the Council's title from President to Mayor, so there's not really much of a change there. There's two things that people really dislike, and that's the way things are, and change. And I certainly think that Pueblo needs to change, and I'm going to support this ballot initiative."
Steve Nawrocki: "Any other comments? Councilman Brown."
Ed Brown: "[inaudible]" ... "This group didn't meet in a vacuum, it was bipartisan, and Nick said they have been working for 18 months, so I just, I just support this motion."
Steve Nawrocki: "Thank you Councilman Brown. Any other comments? Councilman Atencio."
Larry Atencio: "Yeah, I'm going to support this Ordinance also. And if another group comes forward and wants to put something on the initiative, we should treat everybody equally, all it would do, would make whatever groups work that much harder to achieve their goals, and there's nothing wrong with that, that's called democracy, so I'm in favor of this for now, let's see what happens with another group, and let's see what they come forward with, I'm not going to blanket say yes, I have to hear what they have to say first, but I don't see anything wrong with it, I support this one."
Steve Nawrocki: "Any more comments? Councilman Schilling?"
Bob Schilling: "I agree with everybody that this is a free country. I think we have to be real careful because if 100 people want to put something on the ballot, Ray what are we going to do? Then we'll confuse the heck out of everybody, and nobody will vote for anything. So I think, I'm with Larry, I'm not agreeing to a blanket thing, because I think there's a huge pitfall in that. If everyone of you here and 10 of your friends can all bring something, and we're going to put it on the ballot, and we're going to paralyze government, and that makes no sense to me. Thank you."
Steve Nawrocki: "Any other comments? Councilman Nicoll."
Chris Nicoll: "My question is a legal one... how does that work?" ... "[inaudible]"
Dan Kogovsek: "The Drafters of the City Charter had an answer back in 1954. What the Charter says is that, whoever gets the most votes, wins." (woman in background: "Yeah") "So if Strong Mayor gets more votes than the faciliative Mayor, then the Strong Mayor would win, & vice versa."
Steve Nawrocki: "So let me just like add a little bit more to this here, so actually we could potentially have 3 choices, or we could have 4, I guess, but the 3rd choice is to leave things the way they are. But if you have two ballot initiatives on, one is the facilitative mayor and the other is a strong Mayor, if one of those wins, there wasn't an option for... I mean, somebody has to win, if there's two, unless it's a tie vote... so automatically by default one of those would win... and we would be out, so I'm almost questioning... No? You said 'no', Councilman Brown? If one of th-, if we have two on the ballot, and I assume they both say if they win, they would take the place of the existing government."
Dan Kogovsek: "Well, that's right, if they pass." (man in background: "if they pass, yeah") "It's possible that they both could lose." (man in background: "it's possible") "If both win, whoever gets the most votes, wins."
Steve Nawrocki: "Explain to me how they could both lose."
Dan Kogovsek: "If the people vote 'no.'"
Steve Nawrocki: "Ok, but what happens with those who have more yes votes than the other one... isn't that a winner?"
Dan Kogovsek: "Yes, if they get 50%, plus 1 vote."
Steve Nawrocki: "So they have to have 50%..."
Dan Kogovsek: "Plus 1."
Steve: "Okay."
Dan Kogovsek: "If, so, it's possible."
Steve Nawrocki: "Okay."
Dan Kogovsek: "I mean, in 2009, 32% voted for a Strong Mayor. 68% voted no."
Steve Nawrocki: "Councilman Nicoll. (to Dan) Thank you Counselor."
Chris Nicoll: "Thank you Mr. President. And I bring this up because with the other group coming to present in the future, I don't want it to seem like we didn't consider this, and we didn't talk about it, so I think what we, what the summary of what we said here tonight is, even if they present, & they want to put something on the ballot, and they present it to us, and we decide, we vote on that & decide to add it, we can. But we're not precluding anything by taking a vote on this tonight even though they haven't come here and presented, so I think that's a fair statement. I think we've given this consideration, I'm going to support this tonight, but I just wanted to make sure we had a fair discussion about both ideas."
Steve Nawrocki: "Okay, and again, I thank, councillor thank you for asking about that. I think it's important because I've had people in the community ask about that because now they know there's another group considering, and there are some people who prefer the type of government we have right now, so I think it's important, and of course as this evolves we'll have to more information to the public, but the majority of this council did give direction to the city staff, city attorney, to move this forward and put on the ballot so I will support it tonight, so if there's no other discussion, I would ask you to proceed with the action."
[all 7 City Council members vote in favor of the ballot measure in 3 seconds]
Steve Nawrocki: "And it's unanimous. Okay Madam Clerk. R-2."
8:59pm.
Dan Kogovsek
Lawyer for the Government of Pueblo City
Steve Nawrocki: "Alright, Madam Clerk. I believe we're on Ordinances. 2nd reading, R-1."
Gina Dutcher: "Yes, that's correct. Public hearing for an ordinance submitting to the eligible electors to the City of Pueblo, Colorado at the General Municipal Election to be held on November 7, 2017, a proposed amendment to the Charter of the City of Pueblo, and fixing the ballot title therefor. Introduced June 12, 2017 by Councilman Ed Brown."
Nawrocki: "Thank you Madam Clerk. This is a hearing. Is there a staff report?"
Mr. Daniel C. Kogovsek: "Mr. President, members of Council, this ordinance refers to the registered voters of Pueblo for the November 7th election, a proposed charter revision, which would change the form of government, from "council manager" to "strong mayor council". Similar measure was referred to the voters in 2009. Under this proposal, if this Ordinance passes, all executive powers of the city, would be given to an elected Mayor. The initial salary of the Mayor would be $150,000 per year. If this passes, the first election of a Mayor would take place on November 6, 2018, and because that is a special election, the initial term of the Mayor would be for 5 years. Thereafter, the Mayor would be elected every 4 years. Under this Ordinance, the new Mayor, if this passes, would take office on January 8, 2019. This ordinance, if it passes, also gives city council the authority to hire personnel necessary to enable the council to adequately to perform it's duties, and the council could make those hiring decisions independent of the Mayor. I am available to answer any questions. I would like to publicly thank Nick Gradisar for working with me to get this ballot issue ready to present to the voters. There are 21 pages of changes to the current city charter, and so, Nick was kind enough to work with me to get them in a fashion that I think is fair and that is supported by this committee which wishes to campaign for this ballot question. If you put it on the ballot, it will be item 2B on the November 7th ballot, and that concludes my report."
Steve Nawrocki: "Yes Councilman? ... Councilman Nicoll, did you have a question?"
Chris Nicoll: "Yes I did. I wanted to ask about, there was another group that had been discussing..."
[Steve Nawrocki interrupts Chris Nicoll]
Steve Nawrocki: "Let's wait for that if you don't mind."
Nicoll: "Okay."
Steve Nawrocki: "This is a public hearing, so we'll have a chance once we do the motions to come back & discuss all of this as much as possible."
Nicoll: "Okay."
Nawrocki: "Okay. Alright, council, this is a hearing. Anybody else wishing to speak on behalf of this Ordinance, and we're going to limit it to 3 minutes per testimony, so, welcome, and you need to be sworn in."
Gina Dutcher: "Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you shall give before the Pueblo City Council will be the truth, the whole truth, & nothing but the truth."
Nick Gradisar: "I do."
Gina Dutcher: "Please state your name for the record."
Nick Gradisar: "Nick Gradisar!"
Gina Dutcher: "Thank you."
Nick Gradisar: "Members of the council, it's a pleasure to come before you this evening. We've had an opportunity to talk about this proposal a couple of times with ya. With me tonight are some members of the committee organized to elect a mayor who are still here, that have been active in this effort for the last 18 months, I think we've explained to you that we've been talking about this. We simply want to urge you to support this proposal for a strong elected mayor for the community of Pueblo. You know, the discussion in the community, with the people that we've talked to, people believe that we need a mayor. The question is, I believe, are we going to do this the right way, or are we going to do it the wrong way? This, I think, is the right way. This provides for full-time leadership & accountability, someone who will be a face for this community in Denver, in Colorado Springs, & in the United States. This is the kind of system that this committee believes that Pueblo deserves. This is not 1954 when we adopted this "council-manager form of government". This is not a simple world we live in today. It's much more complicated, and we need a different kind of leadership than the one that's provided for in the "council-manager form of government". Whatever problems you believe are important for this community to address, whether it's crime, drugs, gangs, animal shelters, are going to better addressed by having an elected mayor whose been anointed by the citizens of this community to deal with those problems than the current system of government. Idyllic memories of days of yesteryear in neighboring communities, and how they were led, is not a vision for the future in the opinion of this committee. This proposal allows the community to put someone in charge and to hold them accountable. It gives Pueblo the form of government, and the kind of leadership community of Pueblo deserves, and we urge you to support this. Thank you."
Steve Nawrocki: "Alright, thank you. Anybody else wishing to speak for this Ordinance?" ... "Seeing none, anybody wishing to speak against this Ordinance?" ... "Seeing none, the hearing is closed, asking for a motion to approve." [mumbles] "Alright motion made and seconded, Councilman Nicoll?"
Chris Nicoll: "Thank you. So my question I guess for staff, has anybody come forward with other concepts for the Mayor system of government, whether it be a weak mayor or a strong mayor?"
Sam Azad: "There is a concept of a facilitative Mayor that will be presented to you on July 10th councillor meeting."
Chris Nicoll: "So I guess my question is, as a council body, we've talked about putting this on the ballot so the voters can decide this matter as a charter amendment, a charter change. If another group comes forward and wants to bring forward their proposal whether it will be this type or another type, will the council put that item on that ballot as well, will there be two competing items on there, and the public will sort it out, or does it, what's the right approach here? I guess, when we first started talking about this, that concept hadn't been talked about, and I think it bears discussion. I've supported this idea in the past. We have to be fair in how we approach this, because it is an important part of our city's history here. Any comments?"
Steve Nawrocki: "Yeah, Councilman Aguilera."
Ray Aguilera: "Well, I personally think we gotta do for one group like we have to do for the other group. Nick, I know that you are opposed to any opposition, but... well don't the other group have rights? You know, everybody has an equal right, and if there's even another form, I think we need to accept whoever brings a form in, either that, or put it out so you guys have to go out and have to have signatures. But, that's what I'm saying. You gotta treat everybody equally. If you treat, if one group gets on without having to going to go out and getting signatures, then the other group needs to do the same thing, so that's where I'm seeing things from. Thank you."
Steve Nawrocki: "Alright, thank you Councilman Aguilera. Any other comments?"
Lori Winner: "Yes."
Steve Nawrocki: "Councilwoman."
Lori Winner: "It's my understanding that the weak Mayor is just basically changing the President of the Council's title from President to Mayor, so there's not really much of a change there. There's two things that people really dislike, and that's the way things are, and change. And I certainly think that Pueblo needs to change, and I'm going to support this ballot initiative."
Steve Nawrocki: "Any other comments? Councilman Brown."
Ed Brown: "[inaudible]" ... "This group didn't meet in a vacuum, it was bipartisan, and Nick said they have been working for 18 months, so I just, I just support this motion."
Steve Nawrocki: "Thank you Councilman Brown. Any other comments? Councilman Atencio."
Larry Atencio: "Yeah, I'm going to support this Ordinance also. And if another group comes forward and wants to put something on the initiative, we should treat everybody equally, all it would do, would make whatever groups work that much harder to achieve their goals, and there's nothing wrong with that, that's called democracy, so I'm in favor of this for now, let's see what happens with another group, and let's see what they come forward with, I'm not going to blanket say yes, I have to hear what they have to say first, but I don't see anything wrong with it, I support this one."
Steve Nawrocki: "Any more comments? Councilman Schilling?"
Bob Schilling: "I agree with everybody that this is a free country. I think we have to be real careful because if 100 people want to put something on the ballot, Ray what are we going to do? Then we'll confuse the heck out of everybody, and nobody will vote for anything. So I think, I'm with Larry, I'm not agreeing to a blanket thing, because I think there's a huge pitfall in that. If everyone of you here and 10 of your friends can all bring something, and we're going to put it on the ballot, and we're going to paralyze government, and that makes no sense to me. Thank you."
Steve Nawrocki: "Any other comments? Councilman Nicoll."
Chris Nicoll: "My question is a legal one... how does that work?" ... "[inaudible]"
Dan Kogovsek: "The Drafters of the City Charter had an answer back in 1954. What the Charter says is that, whoever gets the most votes, wins." (woman in background: "Yeah") "So if Strong Mayor gets more votes than the faciliative Mayor, then the Strong Mayor would win, & vice versa."
Steve Nawrocki: "So let me just like add a little bit more to this here, so actually we could potentially have 3 choices, or we could have 4, I guess, but the 3rd choice is to leave things the way they are. But if you have two ballot initiatives on, one is the facilitative mayor and the other is a strong Mayor, if one of those wins, there wasn't an option for... I mean, somebody has to win, if there's two, unless it's a tie vote... so automatically by default one of those would win... and we would be out, so I'm almost questioning... No? You said 'no', Councilman Brown? If one of th-, if we have two on the ballot, and I assume they both say if they win, they would take the place of the existing government."
Dan Kogovsek: "Well, that's right, if they pass." (man in background: "if they pass, yeah") "It's possible that they both could lose." (man in background: "it's possible") "If both win, whoever gets the most votes, wins."
Steve Nawrocki: "Explain to me how they could both lose."
Dan Kogovsek: "If the people vote 'no.'"
Steve Nawrocki: "Ok, but what happens with those who have more yes votes than the other one... isn't that a winner?"
Dan Kogovsek: "Yes, if they get 50%, plus 1 vote."
Steve Nawrocki: "So they have to have 50%..."
Dan Kogovsek: "Plus 1."
Steve: "Okay."
Dan Kogovsek: "If, so, it's possible."
Steve Nawrocki: "Okay."
Dan Kogovsek: "I mean, in 2009, 32% voted for a Strong Mayor. 68% voted no."
Steve Nawrocki: "Councilman Nicoll. (to Dan) Thank you Counselor."
Chris Nicoll: "Thank you Mr. President. And I bring this up because with the other group coming to present in the future, I don't want it to seem like we didn't consider this, and we didn't talk about it, so I think what we, what the summary of what we said here tonight is, even if they present, & they want to put something on the ballot, and they present it to us, and we decide, we vote on that & decide to add it, we can. But we're not precluding anything by taking a vote on this tonight even though they haven't come here and presented, so I think that's a fair statement. I think we've given this consideration, I'm going to support this tonight, but I just wanted to make sure we had a fair discussion about both ideas."
Steve Nawrocki: "Okay, and again, I thank, councillor thank you for asking about that. I think it's important because I've had people in the community ask about that because now they know there's another group considering, and there are some people who prefer the type of government we have right now, so I think it's important, and of course as this evolves we'll have to more information to the public, but the majority of this council did give direction to the city staff, city attorney, to move this forward and put on the ballot so I will support it tonight, so if there's no other discussion, I would ask you to proceed with the action."
[all 7 City Council members vote in favor of the ballot measure in 3 seconds]
Steve Nawrocki: "And it's unanimous. Okay Madam Clerk. R-2."
8:59pm.
Comments
Post a Comment