To the editor:
As members of the Petition Committee we are writing to provide key context regarding the Proposed City Charter Amendment to establish a Municipal Services Commission. The Petition Committee did not approach the process in an unorganized or uninformed manner, quite the opposite in fact. The committee had several discussions with community members about the concept and also researched and weighed the pros and cons very carefully before proceeding as a committee. Then once the decision was made to proceed, we pooled resources and hired legal representation to guide us through the Charter Amendment process which can be very detailed and specific.
The legal guidance that the Petition Committee received is that there are two legal paths available to residents via the Petition process. The first path is to “attach thereto the text of the proposed amendment in full” for circulation. The second optional path is for amendments over 1,000 words that states “a true and correct copy of the same may be filed with the city clerk, and the petition shall then contain a sum-mary.” In this second optional path the City Charter Commission has to review the Proposed Char-ter Amendment and then approve a “summary” for circulation.
The context missing for all the residents of Luverne if they only read the paper or look at the Charter Commission meetings is that the Petition Committee has not yet been able articulate the two paths to the full City Council or Charter Commission members at a public meeting. We then read the article from the June 25 Rock County Star Herald coverage of the Charter Commission meetings and see that it is missing this very important context. There are two paths for resident driven Charter Amendment Petitions to move forward to the November ballot, and the Petition Committee used the full text path to better inform the residents on the matter vs. the summary path.
Petition Committee members, Barb Daly, Eric Oye, Mike Raddle, Lori Hallstrom and Isaac DeBoer
