05-31-2012 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

Charter Commission May 31, 2012 Page 4 -135 Section 3. Process by 100% petition — Council is proposing changing the existing charter to be 136 consistent with the process outlined in Ch. 429 137 Section 4 Process by less than 100% petition —If 50% of abutting owners file an objection 138 before or after the hearing a special meeting will be held at least 45 days later ( a change from the 139 current 60 days) There is nothing comparable to this in Chapter 429. After the second meeting 140 if more than 50% of abutting owners file the petition against within 30 days of council ordering 141 the project, the project cannot proceed. 142 5 Referendum — could possibly be a referendum ordered on selling bonds but if have at least 143 20% cost of the project cost covered by special assessment the City can sell bonds without a 144 further referendum. If less than 20% likely to need a referendum unless there is some exception 145 in the law. Under the current Charter the City has to hold a City-wide referendum if anything less 146 than 100% of the project is going to come from City general funds. The proposed change would 147 be to have a reverse referendum — rather than a mandatory referendum. Is a petition signed by 148 12% of the votes cast in the last general election is filed within 30 days after the project is 149 ordered a referendum will be required. The reverse referendum only kicks in if any part of the 150 project is to be funded by property taxes, 151 Commissioner Sutherland raised a question as to the mechanism for notifying the rest of the Lino 152 public in advance of the referendum. Mr. Bubel indicated that there would be published notices 153 of all of the meetings but every property owner would not receive a letter in the mail describing 154 the Council action. 155 Commissioner Gunderson asked how payment for a project by property taxes or the general fund 156 would be differentiated. She also inquired how a general citizen would know if a project was 157 being paid for out of the general fund or through a special levy. Mr. Bubel acknowledged that 158 not all aspects of this process had been thought through and that it would be important to make 159 clear to citizens when get to final decision point there was a potential for a referendum. 160 Section 6 Reconsideration — adopt language from MN Statutes Chap 475 that is current bond 161 code that applies any time there are bond elections in Minnesota. The thinking is adopting a rule 162 that is used in other kind of election law 163 Commissioner Bretoi offered his perspective that it would be helpful in the development of a 164 feasibility study if the City worked with a neighborhood upfront to get input about its needs and 165 preferences rather than coming with a "Cadillac" version of proposed improvements. 166 Section 7 Cost increase — the Charter has a unique provision that states that bids cannot exceed 167 estimates by greater than 10%. Mr. Bubel stated there wasn't a comparable provision in 429 so it 168 would be eliminated in the proposed amendment. 169 Commissioner Sutherland asked what the rationale was for not including the provision. Mr. 170 Weddell indicated that most engineering companies will inflate their bids somewhat in order to 171 ensure that the project will go through. There can be a two year lag between the time that a 172 design is originally submitted and building actually begins. Due to the long time frame, the final 173 bid could be greater than 10% and under the existing charter the project would have to be killed 174 and started from scratch. 175 8. Special Areas - Council's proposal is to remove the special areas. 176 All but two cities are under 429 except Lino Lakes and Moundsview. Moundsview does not 177 have the city-wide referendum requirement. - 178 179 4