If the rumor of the Mayor's veto of the two Ordinances is true the time the Council was notified is important. If the Ordinances were promptlt sent to the Mayor and her veto was sent more than 10 days after her office received them, then the veto can not be valid. Since her letter ov veto is supposedly dated Sept. 2,2010 that seems likely. Not on Monday's agenda but will be.
Below is the section from the city charter.
Ordinances adopted by the council shall be submitted to the mayor, and shall within 10 days after receiving any ordinance, either approve the ordinance by affixing his signature thereto or return it to the council by delivering to the city clerk together with a statement setting forth his objections thereto or to any item or part thereof. No ordinance or any item or part thereof shall take effect without the mayor’s approval, unless the mayor fails to return the ordinance to the council within 10 days after it has been presented to him, or unless council upon reconsideration thereof on or after the third day but not later then its next regular meeting following its return by the mayor shall by a vote of 2/3 of the members resolve to override the mayor’s veto.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think the vetoes will hold up because I don't think that corporation counsel would get the timing so wrong, which brings up the possibility of an override. That's interesting because it would require 5 votes to pass. I would love to see which way Burney, Rivers and Carter would vote.
ReplyDeleteA override would only show that there is a fight between the council and the administration. Why would the council want to fight with the administration? Nothing will get done in the city of plainfield. We as taxpayers dont need a WAR in the city of Plainfield. The Question is who do corporation council work for. He is very undercover he does not work in the best interest of the City of Plainfield
ReplyDelete