09-12-2011 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

COUNCIL MINUTES September 12, 2011 APPROVED 136 implication on bond ratings, raising capital, etc. The mayor suggested that there are two questions: i37 does the city want a tax cap and, if so, how that is done. Mr. Trehus further reviewed the proposed 138 tax cap amendment, noting that it allows for consideration for growth, not incenting or punishing that 139 type of thing. The proposed amendment also addresses special levies and tax increment financing. 140 141 Mr. Trehus was asked to drill down deeper on the Chapter 1 amendments. Section 1.04 reiterates 142 state statute and firms it up by putting it into the Charter and stipulates further that one of the duties of 143 the Commission is to inform residents of the meaning or impact of a proposed charter amendment. 144 Section 1.05 requires that ballot wording be reviewed by the Commission. It adds a funding 145 requirement for information given on amendments so that both sides will be treated fairly and equally; 146 in the past, there has been a problem and the new language would avoid similar problems in the 147 future. He noted specific elements of a past referendum and information given and how the process 148 failed to provide enough appropriate and clear information. The Charter Commission thought that 149 should not be allowed to happen again. 150 151 Caroline Dahl, 1101 Holly Court, Lino Lakes Charter Commission Chair, first noted that the 152 Commission was not invited to attend the council's recent work session discussion on the 153 amendments and they wouldn't normally attend unless asked. She shared a note from a commissioner 154 clarifying that last year's budget cut was very small (.4 of 1 percent). Also the last two years the city 155 has been under a tax cap but that it will expire as it was not renewed by the State Legislature. The 156 reason that the tax cap and other amendments are being proposed isn't necessarily for this council but 157 for the future. State law has been known to change and it makes sense to have the language in the 58 Charter. x`159 160 Rosemary Storberg, 6978 Lake Drive, Charter Commissioner, noted that three of the current council 161 members were sitting in 2008 and she would ask them why the newsletter on the amendment wasn't 162 handled differently? The mayor noted that he recalls that it was suggested that the Commission 163 submit a page for the newsletter but that there was disagreement on content so the Commission never 164 officially submitted anything. Ms. Storberg added that the Commission should have the same 165 opportunity to provide information to the public. Also she said she's heard the warning about harm 166 to the city's bond rating before (when the charter was originally approved) but it never panned out. 167 The bottom line is that the City Charter is a document that is needed and wanted by the residents of 168 this city. 169 170 Tim Henderson, 6987 West Shadow Lake Drive, noted that he admires everyone involved in this 171 discussion and for their service. What he would like to see for the charter amendments is a citizen 172 vote; that would be the optimum. He urges caution in not handcuffing future city leaders as 173 consideration is given to the amendments. 174 175 There being no further speakers, the public hearing was closed at 7:59 p.m. 176 177 City Attorney Langel reviewed his written memorandum regarding the proposed amendments. The 178 basic issues with the Chapter 1 amendments are that they are mainly duplicative to state law. The 179 Commission has made the argument that the state law could change however even if that occurs, it L i 80 raises the question that a charter cannot contravene state law so putting the language into the charter 4