01-12-2012 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

Charter Commission January 12, 2012 Page 2 46 UNFINISHED BUSINESS 47 48 Charter Amendments. 49 50 Commissioner Trehus discussed the referral to the Commission from City Council and staff 51 regarding election timing changes in State law. He noted that an earlier request by the 52 Commission to Council for funding for attorney's fees to review the proposal had been rejected, 53 but felt that a second request was appropriate. 54 55 MOTION by Commissioner Trehus, seconded by Commissioner Sutherland, requesting Chair 56 Dahl to write to Ms. Marty asking for an estimate of the fees required to review the draft 57 amendment language from City Staff. Upon receipt of the estimate, the Chair is further directed 58 to write to the Council requesting the necessary funds. 59 Motion passes unanimously. 60 61 Commissioner Trehus reviewed the background on the Tax Cap amendment proposal and the 62 Chapter 1 proposal to clarify the role of the Charter Commission. These amendments have been 63 in development for over two years of very hard work by the Charter Commission, its 64 subcommittee, and its attorney; and have been discussed with the City Council in joint meetings 65 during that period. The two amendments were submitted to City Council on July 28, 2011 to be 66 adopted by ordinance, which requires a unanimous vote of the Council following the 67 Commission's recommendation. Neither amendment request received council support. At the 68 Oct. 13, 2011 meeting, Commissioners voted to have the Commission's attorney review the 69 opinions that had been obtained by the Council's attorney and financial consultant. The review 70 was to take place after 1/1/12 so that funding to pay for the review would be available. Ms. 71 Marty's response had not been obtained until Jan. 12, and was distributed at the meeting. Her 72 position differs significantly from the opinions obtained by the council in that she recommends 73 that the amendments proceed as originally drafted. 74 75 Commissioner Storberg requested clarification as to whether Ms. Marty disagrees with the 76 opinion rendered by the City attorney Joseph Langel. Commissioner Gunderson asked whether 77 there is a firm or a single attorney representing the City. 78 79 As Council Member Rafferty was in attendance he clarified that Mr. Langel is under contract 80 with the City. Commissioner Storberg asked Council Member Rafferty why the City changes 81 attorneys when new attorneys may have to start from scratch in gaining knowledge and 82 background about the issues about which they are providing Council. Council Member Rafferty 83 indicated that decisions about engaging outside counsel were made to be mindful of economics. 84 Getting back on topic, Commissioner Trehus stated that both amendments have been through a 85 peer review process, and recommended that the Commissioners vote at this meeting to have the 86 amendments placed on the ballot for the November 2012 election. 87 88 MOTION by Commissioner Lyden, seconded by Commissioner Sutherland, to have both 89 amendments and their ballot language placed on the ballot. 90 Motion caries. Opposed: Commissioner Timm. Abstaining: Commissioners Helgemoe and Penn 2