My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
10-13-2011 Charter Packet
LinoLakes
>
Charter Commission
>
Agenda Packets
>
1981 - 2021 Agenda Packets - Charter Commission
>
2011 Packets
>
10-13-2011 Charter Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/27/2021 12:58:55 PM
Creation date
9/1/2017 11:19:23 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Charter Commission
Charter Meeting Type
Regular
Charter Document Type
Packets
Supplemental fields
Date
10/13/2011
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
31
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
COUNCIL MINUTES September 12, 2011 <br />APPROVED <br />136 implication on bond ratings, raising capital, etc. The mayor suggested that there are two questions: <br />137 does the city want a tax cap and, if so, how that is done. Mr. Trehus further reviewed the proposed <br />138 tax cap amendment, noting that it allows for consideration for growth, not incenting or punishing that <br />139 type of thing. The proposed amendment also addresses special levies and tax increment financing. <br />140 <br />141 Mr. Trehus was asked to drill down deeper on the Chapter 1 amendments. Section 1.04 reiterates <br />142 state statute and firms it up by putting it into the Charter and stipulates further that one of the duties of <br />143 the Commission is to inform residents of the meaning or impact of a proposed charter amendment. <br />144 Section 1.05 requires that ballot wording be reviewed by the Commission. It adds a funding <br />145 requirement for information given on amendments so that both sides will be treated fairly and equally; <br />146 in the past, there has been a problem and the new language would avoid similar problems in the <br />147 future. He noted specific elements of a past referendum and information given and how the process <br />148 failed to provide enough appropriate and clear information. The Charter Commission thought that <br />149 should not be allowed to happen again. <br />150 <br />151 Caroline Dahl, 1101 Holly Court, Lino Lakes Charter Commission Chair, first noted that the <br />152 Commission was not invited to attend the council's recent work session discussion on the <br />153 amendments and they wouldn't normally attend unless asked. She shared a note from a commissioner <br />154 clarifying that last year's budget cut was very small (.4 of 1 percent). Also the last two years the city <br />155 has been under a tax cap but that it will expire as it was not renewed by the State Legislature. The <br />156 reason that the tax cap and other amendments are being proposed isn't necessarily for this council but <br />157 for the future. State law has been known to change and it makes sense to have the language in the <br />158 Charter. <br />159 <br />160 Rosemary Storberg, 6978 Lake Drive, Charter Commissioner, noted that three of the current council <br />161 members were sitting in 2008 and she would ask them why the newsletter on the amendment wasn't <br />162 handled differently? The mayor noted that he recalls that it was suggested that the Commission <br />163 submit a page for the newsletter but that there was disagreement on content so the Commission never <br />164 officially submitted anything. Ms. Storberg added that the Commission should have the same <br />165 opportunity to provide information to the public. Also she said she's heard the warning about harm <br />166 to the city's bond rating before (when the charter was originally approved) but it never panned out. <br />167 The bottom line is that the City Charter is a document that is needed and wanted by the residents of <br />168 this city. <br />169 <br />170 Tim Henderson, 6987 West Shadow Lake Drive, noted that he admires everyone involved in this <br />171 discussion and for their service. What he would like to see for the charter amendments is a citizen <br />172 vote; that would be the optimum. He urges caution in not handcuffing future city leaders as <br />173 consideration is given to the amendments. <br />174 <br />175 There being no further speakers, the public hearing was closed at 7:59 p.m. <br />176 <br />177 City Attorney Langel reviewed his written memorandum regarding the proposed amendments. The <br />178 basic issues with the Chapter 1 amendments are that they are mainly duplicative to state law. The <br />---� 179 Commission has made the argument that the state law could change however even if that occurs, it <br />180 raises the question that a charter cannot contravene state law so putting the language into the charter <br />4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.