Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-12-2012 Minutes1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 Charter Commission meeting April 12, 2012 Page 1 CORRECTED AND APPROVED CITY OF LINO LAKES CHARTER COMMISSION DATE TIME STARTED TIME ENDED MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS EXCUSED MEMBERS UNEXCUSED STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT OTHERS PRESENT: April 12, 2012 6:36 P.M. 9:36 P.M. Dahl, Lyden, Gunderson, Helgemoe, Timm, Bartsch, Penn, Storberg, Trehus, Turcotte, Williams, Aldentaler, Bretoi, Sutherland Zastrow None Jeff Karlson, City Administrator Councilmember Roeser(part) Councilmember Rafferty; Mayor Reinert (part); Citizen Tim Henderson (part) CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Chair Lyden convened the meeting of the Lino Lakes Charter Commission at 6:36 pm. SETTING THE AGENDA Commissioner Trehus asked to have one item added to Unfinished Business, Item 7C Update on the joint Commission/Council Task force and Commissioner Bretoi asked to have Item 7D Charter tax exempt zones (an item from the July 2008 meeting) added. OPEN MIC — Public Comments City Council Member Roesser commented on the Tax Cap prpopsal. He indicated he has a background in Accounting and Finance as well as in Property Tax. His perspective on the tax cap is that it is a levy lock which could have longer term implications for the cost of borrowing money resulting in negative outcomes for taxpayers. He also indicated this action could scare development away from the city. He "implored" the Commission to reconsider placing the amendment on the ballot in the fall. Tim Hnederson who was a candidate for City Council in the last election and who represents unionized city workers said he was attending as a neutral body. He has attended council meetings in other cities that are working to find a solution to fund road construction. Some of these cities are coming up with a franchise fee where road construction costs are assessed on a percentage basis. He offered an example of a fee that was $60 per household, which if assessed to the 6400 households in Lino Lakes would yield $384,000. Commissioner Bartsch asked if the fees go into the city budget — the response was yes. Mr. Henderson indicated that cities are charging a range of fees ranging between $5 and $10 per 1 Charter Commission meeting April 12, 2012 Page 2 46 household. He stated that he was concerned about having to vote on all road construction and 47 that a guaranteed fee that is allocated entirely for roads might be a way to fund the necessary 48 repairs. 49 Appreciation Certificates 50 Certificates were presented to Harry Carlson for 12 years of service to the City as a 51 Commissioner and to Steve Minar for 4 years of service by Vice Chair Dahl. Chair Dahl donates 52 the plaques at no cost to the Charter budget. 53 54 OPENING REMARKS — Chair Chris Lyden 55 56 Commissioner Lyden indicated he wanted to offer some "rules of engagement" for the work of 57 the Commission. He noted that he has some hearing loss and asked commissioners to speak 58 loudly so he could hear them. His philosophy is that when things go right the credit goes to the 59 whole Commission and when things do not go wrong the resposibility will fall to the Chair. He 60 suggested that commissioners "check their ego at the door" and that for the privliege of serving 61 the citizens the proper attitude is humility. He asked that commissioners behave with respect 62 toward one -another and that we do not have the right to tell another commissioner that their 63 perspective is wrong. Each commissioner has the obligation to define his/her premise in the 64 most positive way possible in an effort to influence other commissioners. 65 As commissioners we should strive to uphold the highest standards of integrity. He believes it 66 might be helpful to have pictures as well as some biographical information on the web site so 67 that citizens can approach commissioners if they encounter us in public settings. 68 Meeting procedures — Chair Lyden asked that all comments be directed to the Chair and that all 69 side conversations be eliminated. He also wants to ensure that the Commission is following the 70 approved Roberts rules procedures when calling the question. 71 72 73 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 74 75 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 76 77 a) April 8, 2012 with corrections. These have been appproved previously. Commissioner 78 Trehus indicated he had some corrections. Vice Chair Dahl asked Commissioner Trehus to 79 submit his comments and corrections and they could be reviewed at the next meeting. 80 MOTION by Commissioner Trehus, seconded by Commissioner Sutherland to table review the 81 minutes at the next meeting of the Commission. 82 Motion passes with Commissioners Gunderson, Helgemoe, and Gunderson abstaining. 83 84 b) January 12, 2012 minutes — these minutes were not distributed in the preparation packets 85 and thus were not available for review. 86 MOTION by Commissioner Trehus, seconded By Commissioner Turcotte to table the minutes 87 for review at the next meeting of the Commission. 88 Motion passes with Commissioner Sutherland abstaining. 89 90 2 Charter Commission meeting April 12, 2012 Page 3 91 UNFINISHED BUSINESS 92 93 Attorney Karen Marty expenses incurred — no new information. 94 95 Charter Amendments 96 Based on the Anoka County Elections and Voter Registration notice (January 2012) 97 Commissioner Trehus believes there is a potential for the City Council to attempt to block 98 Commission amendments from going to ballot. Since there are potential legal questions 99 involved, he believes the Commission should seek advice from its attorney. 100 Commissioner Bartsch questioned whether Commissioner Trehus anticpated legal manoevering. 101 CommissionerTrehus referenced recent articles in the Quad Press by Nicholas Bacchus that 102 suggested there could be attempts to block the legislation going to ballot. 103 Commissioner Bartsch clarified that he considers it important to seek a legal opinion which could 104 guide the actions of the Commission. 105 Chair Lyden noted that as directed at the last Commission meeting he requested from the attorney 106 the fees she would charge for reviewing the ballot language for two amanedments and was given 107 a $300 charge. 108 Commissioner Helgemoe asked what is the remaining budget for legal fees. Commissioner 109 Lyden indicates it is $720.00 110 111 Update on Task Force. Commissioner Trehus noted that since the discussion at the January 112 2012 meeting where the motion to participate on the joint task force was defeated there have 113 been a number of subsequent actions. 114 Since Mayor Reinert was in attendance at the meeting, Commissioner Storberg asked if the 115 ususal rules could be suspended to ask for the the Mayor's perspective. 116 MOTION by Commissioner Storberg, seconded by Commissioner Penn to suspend the regular 117 process of calling a special meeting so that the commissioners could have a discussion with the 118 Council members present at the meeting. 119 Commissioner Sutherland commented that it was perhaps premature to have a discussion and 120 that the Commission can ask for a joint meeting. 121 Motion was defeated. 122 123 Charter Exempt Zones. Commissioner Bretoi stated that he was concerned about information 124 in the Quad Press regarding tax exempt zones. In July 2008 the Commission had proposed the 125 issue be handled by ordinance since both the Council and theCommission were in agreement. 126 Commissioner Dahl indcated that at that time a decision was made not to proceed with the 127 changes but that it has been resurected. Commissioner Bretoi questioned why the issue has to go 128 to ballot since there as aleady a record of agreement that it could be handled by ordinance. 129 MOTION by Commissioner Bretoi, seconded by Commissioner Timm that the Chair 130 communicate formally to the Council to have the charter exempt zones be implemented by 131 ordinance. 132 Commissioner Sutherland asked if the langauge (from the July 17, 2008 minutes) could be made 133 available to all commission members. 134 The mover and seconder agreed to withdraw their motion until the pertiment minutes could be 135 provided to other commissioners. 3 Charter Commission meeting April 12, 2012 Page 4 136 137 138 MOTION by Commissioner XX, seconded by Commissioner XX, to 139 NEW BUSINESS 140 141 2011 Annual Letter to the Judge 142 Commissioner Timm proposed a couple of changes. She suggested that Vice Chair Dahl add the 143 number of years she served as Chair to the letter since Judge Hoffman is new and that the word 144 "Judge" be removed from his title in the address portion of the letter. 145 In the Minutes section, Commissioner Gunderson suggested adding since 2010 a Charter 146 Commissioner takes the minutes of the meeting which were previously taken by a legal secretary. 147 Under Charter Business additional text was added: The Commission voted and passed tow 148 amendments to be adopted by ordinance by City Council (as opposed to a public vote). These 149 proposals were not supported by the City Council. 150 Under Commission Activity Commissioner Sutherland offered some editorial changes. She 151 changed the word passed when referring to the Code of Conduct and Conflict of Interest to 152 proposed. 153 A fourth bullet was added as follows: Council referred a proposal to amend the Charter in 154 response to the Federal Mandate granting more time for absentee ballots. However, the Council 155 refused to fund review of the matter by the Commission's attorney so no action has been taken. 156 MOTION by Commissioner Sutherland, seconded by Commissioner Bretoi that the Vice cChair 157 send the letter as amended to the His Honor, Judge Hoffman. 158 The motion passes unanimously. 159 160 History of the 2008 Charter Amendment 161 The City Council notified the Commission in a letter dated March 13, 2012 that the Council has 162 been considering an amendment to The City Charter, Chapter 8 regarding Public Improvements 163 and Special Amendments. The amendment is based on the charter amendment proposal prepared 164 in 2007 by the Citizen's Task Force to Review Charter Provisions Pertaining to Public 165 Improvements (the "Task Force Amendment"). With a number of modifications made by 166 Council a new charter amendment ordinance has been prepared (the "2012 Council 167 Amendment"). On March 12, 2012 the City Council approved the 1st reading of the Amendment, 168 amending Chapter 8 of the City Charter Regarding Public Improvements and Special 169 Assessments. Council has requested that the Commission review the 2012 Council Amendment 170 and respond to the Council within 60 days of the receipt of the letter. The Council understands 171 the Charter Commission may extend the time for review by an additional 90 days (within the 60- 172 day period) if the Commission files with the Council a resolution determining that additional 173 time is needed. 174 Chair Lyden indicated that to meet the time frame there is likely to be a need for an additional 175 meeting within a month. The Council will have a second reading on August 13 as the language 176 has to be submitted for placement on the November ballot by August 24th. Chair Lyden has 177 asked the Community Development Director Michael Grochala to prepare materials that would --� 178 permit a productive discussion of the issues. Commissioner Srorbery ask for clarification on 179 what would be the expected outcome of the review of the additional material requested by Chair 4 Charter Commission meeting April 12, 2012 Page 5 180 Lyden. Chair Lyden commented that as a visual learner, it would help him to have "visual aids" 181 to gain a better understanding of the proposal. 182 Commissioner Storberg provided her interpretation of the Council's proposal which was as 183 follows: 184 "Actually a rehash of the Task Force amendment proposed in 2007 185 While the task force version does simplify the petition and counter petition language of section 186 8.04, Subdivision 1, it does so by making it more difficult for the citizens to voice their 187 objections to a project and petition against it. A synopsis of notable changes follows: 188 In 8.03, Subdivision 2 of the present charter a citizen vote on use of general funds is mandatory. 189 However, in the new version section 8.02 subdivision 5 requires a petition of 12% of registered 190 voters to put the question on the ballot, the same formula required for any initiative or 191 referendum under the charter. And the petitioners have only 30 days to it. Remember, in 8.04 192 subdivision 1 it was 60 days to get a petition from a majority of the affected property owners not 193 12% of the voting residents in just 30 days. 194 A new wrinkle: In the new section 8 (8.02 subdivision 4) the last sentence seems to suggest that 195 the council has given itself authority to initiate a project regardless of petitions by a 4/5 majority 196 vote. To quote subdivision 4, "when there has been no such petition (not less than 35% of the 197 owners) the resolution may be adopted only by vote of four-fifths of all members of the council". 198 This sounds like an open invitation to initiate projects whenever and wherever the council deems 199 appropriate without fear of any opposition. 200 Under the old charter section8, subdivision 4 prohibits bringing up the same project for a year if 201 it is voted down by the citizens. In the new section 8, subdivision 6 refers to Statute 475.58, 202 subdivision la, which cuts the wait down to 6 months and makes it one year after the project is 203 voted down twice." 204 There was discussion among the Commissioners regarding the need for a special meeting with 205 Commissioner Turcotte as well as Commissioner Bartsch asked why the Commission could not 206 take the matter up at its regular meeting in July. Vice Chair Dahl indicated that should the 207 Commission decide to draft its own amendment considerable additional time would be required. 208 Commissioner Gunderson noted that the Chair has the authority to call a special meeting at his 209 discretion. 210 Commissioner Trehus indicated that the Commission should have its attorney review the 211 proposed amendment. 212 MOTION by Commissioner Trehus, seconded by Commissioner Gunderson that the Chair and 213 Vice Chair obtain an estimate from the Commission's attorney for the fees required to review the 214 Council's proposed amendment as well as possible attendance at meetings, and then request the 215 additional funding from the City Council. 216 AMENDMENT by Commissioner Sutherland, seconded by Commissioner Timm to make the 217 request for 8 hours. 218 Commissioner Sutherland commented on the importance of making the request for funds very 219 specific. 220 The amendment passed with 11 in favor and 3voting against it. 221 The MOTION passes unanimously. 222 MOTION by Commissioner Gunderson, seconded by Commissioner Sutherland, that the Chair 223 send a request to the City Council for additional time to review their proposed amendment. 224 The motion passes unanimously 5 Charter Commission meeting April 12, 2012 Page 6 225 226 Additional Agenda Item: Discussion of Tax Exempt Zones 227 MOTION by Commissioner Bartsch, seconded by Commissioner Sutherland: 228 As it relates specifically to the charter exempt zones the Commission Chair will submit a letter to 229 the Council requesting that this issue be open to discussion. 230 The motion passes with 3 Nays and 1 abstention. 231 232 The next regularly scheduled meeting is July 12th, 2012. 233 234 ADJOURN 235 236 MOTION by Commissioner Timm, seconded by Commissioner Bretoi, to adjourn the meeting at 237 9:36 pm. Motion carried unanimously. 238 239 240 241 Respectfully Submitted, 242 243 Margaret (Marg) Penn 244 Secretary and Commissioner 6