Laserfiche WebLink
Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth -2- February 11, 1985 <br />We should repeat our conference as to amending ordinances and <br />procedure with the present City Attorney and anyone he chooses to <br />bring with him. It would be scheduled in advance and held in our <br />office. While we have already fulfilled our contractual obliga- <br />tion as to this, under the circumstances there would be no cost <br />or obligation on the part of the City. We know it would be <br />helpful to you and we urge you to take advantage of our offer. <br />In our phone conversation I mentioned the revision service <br />offered by our firm and you asked that I outline it for you. It <br />works like this: <br />1. The City adopts o-dinances just as it would without our <br />service; <br />2. At the end of a twelve month period the C.ty sends us <br />copies of all ordinances adopted during that time; <br />3. We examine the ordinances to make sure the integrity of the <br />format is being maintained and we prepare a revision guide which <br />includes (a) the adopted ordinances with any comments we may <br />have, (b) statutes and Court decisions affecting the Code, and, <br />(c) suggestions as to changes found workable in other communi- <br />ties; <br />4. We hold a revision conference at the City Offices with the <br />City Attorney, staff and, if possible, Council representatives; <br />5. We prepare revision ordinances requested at that conference <br />for recommendation to the Council; <br />6. After adoption of revision ordinances we prepare amended <br />pages for printing and insertion in the Code; and, <br />7. We keep records from year-to-year as to the subjects <br />discussed and the disposition of them, which is important par- <br />ticularly where a decision is deferred until the next conference. <br />As I explained to you, we once tried to establish a "flat" fee <br />for revisions which we found unworkable. Our fee is based on <br />time and expense but since your City is in the Metro area there <br />would be no expense charge. A one year interval is the optimum <br />for cost effectiveness, a shorter interval has proven to be <br />unnecessary and a longer period increases the overall expense. <br />