07-09-2009 Charter Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION June 1, 2009 APPROVED 46 maintained at city hall. Mr. Doherty reported that the city has no legal obligation to be 47 the commission's repository of data unless that duty is first accepted by the city. Charter 48 commissions have an obligation under data practice law to take care of their own 49 information. Mr. Doherty did not receive access to the e-mails between commission 50 members that he requested and that are public data. In reviewing the commission 51 minutes, there was no evidence that the charter commission ever approved the 52 expenditure of funds (for signs and brochures). There is reference to something like a 53 subcommittee and, if that group did exist, it is under the same obligation to maintain data 54 and make it public. 55 56 A council member suggested that the report seems to indicate that there were some 57 activities that weren't within the scope of the commission's legal charge; are there any 58 consequences for those actions? 59 60 Mr. Doherty reviewed the section of the report that relates to signs and brochures used by 61 the commission. To the extent that those were not legal and allowable expenses, the city 62 should not have paid the bill if and when it was presented. Further the commission has 63 no authority to enter into a contract or to order goods. Regarding the commission's Web 64 site, while the site is prepared and paid for by other than the city, if it represents the 65 commission, it cannot contain advocacy or preferential information; it must be neutral to 66 any ballot questions. 67 68 A council member suggested that the bills were prepaid by the city. 69 70 Responding on a question of consequences, Mr. Doherty explained that there is little that 71 could occur in that area between the city and the commission since the commissioners are 72 appointed by the chief judge. It would be up to the judge to deal with issues. It would be 73 within the council's purview to inform the chief judge of issues if they deem that is 74 necessary. The council doesn't make appointments to the commission, the chief judge 75 has that responsibility. An individual could pursue a complaint under fair campaign 76 practices. 77 78 A council member suggested that the council must consider the matter of intent. If there 79 was something done that could be considered illegal, did the commission know that? It 80 may be prudent to put something together to inform the commission of what is legal and 81 what isn't. Mr. Doherty suggested the League of Minnesota Cities is a good resource for 82 assistance in that area. The council member added that individual charter commission 83 members shouldn't be mnz7led on issues; they are volunteers. Mr. Doherty pointed out 84 that the Web page was presented as belonging to the commission however. Mr. Doherty 85 further explained that the commission has more limitations than the city council and 86 cannot even offer an information piece — the commission is not allowed to present that 87 type of information. The city, on the other hand, cannot advocate but can provide 88 information. 89 2