CC MIN 1970 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

92 The County had requested exclusion of proposed State College site from the District, and Department of Public Works concurs. In the discussion which followed, it was learned that, when or whether the site is developed as a college or not, City is committed to provide certain improvements and construction of a trunk utility line is planned by extension of the Cordilleras line. Motion carried on roll call vote, Councilman Arnett being noted absent, t of Council poke re ardin cost of ailed w same e a o s. ation Councilmen Henderson and Keckley each stated their preference to abstain from voting on the matter, having indicated intentions to file as candidates in the forthcoming Municipal election. Mayor Bury concurred abstention would be appropriate. Councilman Rosselli expressed objection that the City's taxpayers pay this expense, feeling that the small amount involved can easily be paid by those seeking office. Mayor Bury noted that because of the recent agreement with the County Election Department, there would be a substantial reduction in costs, and that this pro- posal could serve to encourage persons with limited resources to run for office. The candidate qualification statement is not a requirement, and the City Manager explained that in the previous campaign, the statements were printed and the participating candidates later reimbursed the City their proportionate share. The bill has always been honored in the past, however, he pointed out that it was conceivable that an unsuccessful candidate could refuse to pay, and the City would have no recourse but Small Claims Court. It was felt the cost to the City is very nominal, and that it affords each candidate an equal opportunity to place his qualifications before the voters. It was recommended by Staff that the City pay this cost, for which adequate funds are budgeted. Councilman Rosselli felt that the amount involved did not impose a hardship to pay a pro -rata share, and that holding office is a privilege and offers many benefits. Councilman Petersen stated that it seemed the most worthwhile of a candidate's election expense to have the campaign statement in every home in Redwood City, and that since it appeared the cost would be lessthis year, candidates should be able to pay this expense. It was brought out that the County requires an advance deposit, with any surplus refunded later. Councilman Weymouth believed the statement puts everyone on an equal basis, and that if it would relieve the bookkeeping, possibly a flat rate might be appropriate, without trying to determine cost, and suggested a rate of $35 to $50 as a deposit. City Attorney was asked for his recommendations, and he advised that the matter would be of an administrative nature, since the statement is not mandatory, whether to require a deposit in advance, or wait for determination of actual cost. Council- man Henderson indicated her support of the Staff recommendation, feeling that the question was being overlooked of encouraging individuals to be candidates.