10-28-63 Council Committee of the Whole Meeting Minutes

Home Browse Search

Be it remembered that the Common Council of the City of South Bend, Indiana, met in the Committee of the Whole in the Council Chambers on Monday, October 28, 1963, at 8 :10 P.M., with all members present. The meeting was called to orde by Councilman T. W. Lehman, Chairman, who presided. Communication The Clerk read the following Communication: October 26, 1963 Common Council Municipal City of South Bend Office of the City Clerk City Hall South Bend, Indiana Gentlemen: I wish to advise that I have examined an Ordinance set for public hearing on the 28th day of October, 1963, title as follows: "AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING AN ORDERLY PROCEDURE BY WHICH EMPLOYEES MAY BE HEARD CONCERNING BUDGET ITEMS WHICH EFFECT THEIR SALARIES AND WAGES AND BY WHICH EMPLOYEES MAY PRESENT GRIEVANCES WHICH RESULT FROM DIRRENCES OF OPINION BETWEEN SUPERVISORS AND EMPLOYEES UPON WORKING CONDITIONS" This Ordinance was not prepared by the office of the City Attorney, nor was it submitted to the City Attorney for examination prior to introduction before the Council. I have examined same and believe that the form of said ordinance as adopted would be subject to attack on the basis of its uncertainty, the conflict between various sections contained therein, the misleading title covering certain subject matter within said ordinance, and lastly, because-of a conflict of assignment of wages of the Indiana State Statutes. I would advise that this ordinance be redrafted and submitted to the Council at its next regular meeting, correcting these problems as heretofore referred. To elaborate further, I will point out the following: 1. Section 1 contains certain items which are contrary to what the title infers. 2. Sections 2 and 3 refer to "ultimate employing authority ". Section 2 does not define said authority, but Section 3 refers.to the Mayor as the ultimate employing authority, and then further refers to provisions involving the State Labor Commission. Consequently, the ultimate employing authority is conflicting and ambiguous. 3. Section 5 refers to deduction of wages from the employees by the City, and payment thereof to a counsel. The word counsel is not defined and it is unclear as to whether it may be an individual, association, corporation or otherwise. Subsections 2 and 3 of Section 5, conflict inasmuch as sub - section 2 states that the check -off shall be for a period of one year, and sub - section 3 states that it may be terminated on written notice. These subsections are conflicting. .The title appears only to refer to Section 1, whereas Section 2 refers to the joining of a union and representation by counsel. The title refers to working conditions, yet Section 3 contains matters of discharge and termination. The title makes no mention of the provisions contained in Section 5, in reference to deductions from the employees wages. I therefore recommend that a new ordinance be prepared and introduced before the Council,.containing a title embrac all subject matter within the ordinance and an avoidance of the conflicts as pointed out above, and that the Public Hearing set for the 28th day of October, 1963 in reference to this ordinance as presently drafted shall not be had. The notice of publication which appeared in the South Bend Tribune and The Record (as required by law) setting the hearing on this ordinance, did not by virtue of the present title inform the public of the total subject matter covered by this ordinance. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Irving J. Smith IRVING J. SMITH IJS :kp Councilman Glass made a motion that the communication be accepted and placed on file. Councilman Krueper seconded the motion. Motion carried. Councilman Coleman made a motion that on the basis of the communication from Mr. Smith, the public hearing set for this meeting be dismissed. Councilman Glass seconded the motion. Motion unanimously carried. ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AND SUPPLEMENTING ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 3702, AS HERETOFORE AMENDED AND SUPPLEMENTED (Lots I through 9 Hamilton Terrace Addition) This being the time heretofore set for public hearing on the above Ordinance, proponents and opponents were given an opportunity to be heard thereon. Mr. Robert Herron, 2225 N. Johnson Street was heard. Councilman Coleman made a motion that the Ordinance go to the Council as unfavorable. Councilman Krueper seconded the motion. Motion carried. ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 3702 COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA, AS AMENDED (Section 23 -d) This being the time heretofore set for public hearing on the above Ordinance, proponents and opponents were given an opportunity to be heard thereon. Miss Virginia Guthrie, Executive Secretary of the South Bend Civic Planning Association, was heard. Councilman Ladewski made a motion that the Ordinance go to the Council as favorable. Councilman Allen seconded the motion. Motion carried.