Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-13-2006 Charter Minutes APPROVED - 1 2 CITY OF LINO LAKES 3 CHARTER COMMISSION 4 5 DATE April 13,2006 6 TIME STARTED 6:35 P.M. 7 TIME ENDED 9:05 P.M. 8 MEMBERS PRESENT Dahl,Aldentaler, Trehus (arrived at 7:03 p.m.), 9 Handrick,Bening,Duffy,Bor,Richard Williams, 10 Rosemary Williams, Storberg, Warren,Montain, 11 Zastrow,and Carlson 12 MEMBERS EXCUSED : Vacha 13 MEMBERS UNEXCUSED : None 14 STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT : City Clerk,Julianne Bartell(part) 15 16 CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL 17 18 Chair Warren called the regular meeting of the Lino Lakes Charter Commission to order at 6:35 19 p.m. on April 13, 2006. 20 21 APPROVAL OF AGENDA 22 23 Commissioner Carlson stated New Business and Old Business categories have been switched but 24 the By-Laws show the reversed order. He stated that in order to change the order of the meeting, 25 the By-Laws would have to be changed. The Charter Commission also follows Roberts Rules of 26 Order as defined in the Charter. 27 28 Chair Warren explained that the officers had discussed that in the last year or so,the meetings 29 have tended to go a bit long. The New Business items,which are the most important, are not 30 discussed until the end and if the meeting is running late,there is no time to complete them. 31 Because of that,the Old Business and New Business items were switched in order on this 32 agenda. However, Commissioner Carlson is correct that the reversed order is in the By-Laws. 33 Chair Warren encouraged Commissioners to keep their discussion tonight on topic so the agenda 34 can be completed in an orderly fashion. 35 36 MOTION by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Storberg,to continue with the 37 agenda as typed. Motion carried unanimously. 38 39 Agenda approved as revised to remove New Business Item 5C, Discussion of Term Limits of 40 Commissioners in By-Laws, add New Business Item 5F, Quality of Life Survey. 41 42 OPEN MIKE 43 44 No one was present for open mike. 45 Charter Commission APPROVED April 13, 2006 Page 2 46 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 47 48 January 12,2006 49 50 Commissioner Storberg referenced Page 5, Line 212,where she had asked to have her questions 51 about process answered. She asked if the Commission received any information on those 52 questions. Commissioner Storberg noted the actual questions she asked are not included in the 53 minutes so she would offer to listen to the meeting tape to write down the questions. 54 55 City Clerk Bartell stated she will verify that she has access to that meeting tape. 56 57 Chair Warren thanked Commissioner Storberg for being willing to listen to the tape and asked 58 her to type up the questions, and provide that document to her, Commissioner Dahl, 59 Commissioner Duffy, and staff so copies can be made for the Commission. 60 61 MOTION by Commissioner Montain, seconded by Commissioner Carlson,to approve the 62 January 12, 2006, Charter Commission meeting minutes. Motion carried unanimously. 63 64 NEW BUSINESS 65 66 Kennedy and Graven Charter Reviews: YMCA and Legacy 67 68 Commissioner Duffy stated she thought this item deals with invoice. 69 70 MOTION by Commissioner Montain, seconded by Commissioner Bening, to request officers to 71 look into this matter and place it on the next agenda if it is still relevant. Motion carried 72 unanimously. 73 74 Chair Warren suggested Commissioner Trehus be asked to research this issue and provide his 75 findings at the next meeting. 76 77 Commissioner Montain asked the Chair to review the Charter Commission budget to assure it 78 will be adequate. 79 80 Citizen Petition regarding Council Members on the Charter Commission 81 82 Chair Warren noted a petition was made to the Council and while not a legitimate petition,the 83 Council has the ability to take it on as an advisory petition. A proposed amendment is now 84 before the Commission that will prevent a Charter member from also being on the Council and 85 vice versa. 86 87 City Clerk Bartell presented and reviewed an updated timeline. 88 2 Charter Commission APPROVED April 13, 2006 Page 3 89 Commissioner Handrick asked why a petition was presented. Chair Warren explained that 90 Commissioner Bening was involved with drafting the petition and can better speak to that 91 question. She stated it is clear there is a desire to avoid a potential conflict of interest. Chair 92 Warren advised that she had asked the City Clerk if other commissions had adopted similar 93 motions and, in fact,there are none. City Clerk Bartell noted the liaison system existed but not 94 as a voting member. 95 96 Commissioner Montain explained that there have been committees, like the 2020 Plan,where 97 unpaid volunteers and the Mayor and Councilmembers have participated. However,they cannot 98 be on two groups where they received a stipend. 99 100 Commissioner Bening explained that a year ago he had asked for this to be discussed but the 101 Commission decided to not discuss it at any time in the future. However, he felt it was important 102 enough that it should go to the voters and a new State Statute allowed it in last August. He stated 103 he felt it was beneficial to have residents decide that issue and that is what started the petition to 104 get names. He stated instead of trying to follow the petition process laid out in the Charter and 105 State Statutes which bypasses the Council and Charter Commission,he wanted to include them 106 so the petition was presented to the Council. He stated there are 500 some signatures on the 107 petition. 108 109 Commissioner Montain asked why he didn't initiate a referendum instead. Commissioner 110 Bening answered that it was his choice to not do it that way. 111 112 Discussion occurred regarding a potential concern that the Charter Commission may become 113 "stacked"by Councilmembers. 114 115 Chair Warren stated the Council decided to go ahead with this and is selecting this time because 116 the situation does not currently exist and would not effect any individual. 117 118 Commissioner Carlson stated the petition says "to stop a conflict of interest." He stated he 119 knows Councilmember Carlson had asked the City Attorney at the March 27 meeting if there was 120 a conflict to serve on both simultaneously and his response was "an unqualified no." He stated 121 that he wants people to consider a change without going to the citizens because this does not rise 122 to the level of going to a ballot. That should be reserved for very important issues that affect the 123 power of the people. He suggested the amendment be approved but modified and sent back to 124 the Council. 125 126 Commissioner Trehus arrived at 7:03 p.m. 127 128 Chair Warren stated the options laid out are to either accept this as it is written and proposed, 129 without change, for the fall vote; delay it for 60 days to study the matter further with notification 130 to the Council; or change it and send it back to the Council where it will either be approved or 131 not. She noted the revised timeline provided to the Commission for those options. 132 3 Charter Commission APPROVED April 13, 2006 Page 4 133 Commissioner Bor stated that at the time Commissioner Bening presented this to the Charter 134 Commission, she did not have a lot of background about the motivation. At that time,there was 135 a Councilmember serving a dual role. She stated the verbiage could be clarified and she would 136 ask the Commission to study what the League of Cities says about Code of Conduct. 137 138 Chair Warren recapped that both Commissioner Carlson and Commissioner Bor think this 139 amendment should be reevaluated so it is in alignment with the Code of Conduct. 140 141 Commissioner Bening suggested an additional amendment to add a few words to the amendment. 142 143 Chair Warren drew the Commission's attention to the draft resolution and read the amendment. 144 She noted the underlined words show the proposed amendment to this ordinance. 145 146 City Clerk Bartell stated it was mentioned that a different process is allowed under State Statutes 147 under a vote of the Council. She referenced the October 7, 2005 letter from the City Attorney, 148 third paragraph, advising this is an advisory petition under Subdivision 5 of the State Statutes. 149 That language lays out the process, which is not a vote of the Council but to go to a ballot. 150 151 Commissioner Trehus stated the Commission can propose an amendment to the Charter,the 152 Council can approve it, and it would not require a vote of the residents. However, in this case the 153 Charter Commission does not have this option. 154 155 Commissioner Handrick stated any amendment to the ordinance by the Charter Commission has 156 to go to a vote of the people. Commissioner Trehus stated this is an advisory petition so it is 157 actually determined by a motion of the Council. City Clerk Bartell advised that it falls under 158 Subdivision 5 and is an amendment of the ordinance by the Council. 159 160 Commissioner Storberg suggested a vote be taken on whether it is important enough to put on the 161 ballot. Chair Warren noted that because of the City Attorney's legal opinion,the feeling of the 162 Commission on its importance of being on the ballot may not result in it being on the ballot. 163 Commissioner Storberg stated if the Charter Commission and Council both agree, it does not 164 have to go to the ballot. 165 166 Commissioner Montain pointed out that 528 people signed an advisory petition,the Council 167 recognized it, and passed it on to the Charter Commission. He noted that 528 people expect this 168 to be on a ballot and they and the Council think it rises to the level of importance to include on 169 the ballot. 170 171 Chair Warren stated there are two issues on the table;process and acceptance. She asked if the 172 Commission agrees with this amendment. She stated if the Commission agrees with the 173 amendment then the process can be determined. If not,the process issues do not need to be 174 clarified. 175 4 Charter Commission APPROVED April 13, 2006 Page 5 176 Commissioner Dahl referenced the new timeline that indicates the Charter Commission has two 177 options; 60 days (June 9) from date of Council referral or up to a 90 day extension, (September 178 7) is allowed with a Charter resolution;the Charter Commission may approve, reject or submit a 179 substitute amendment,notifying the City Council of their action." She noted that if the 180 Commission approves a 60-day extension, it would have to schedule another meeting. But, if 181 there is a 90-day extension,then the July meeting would be within that time frame. City Clerk 182 Bartell stated the deadline for getting it on the ballot is September 1. 183 184 Commissioner Bening noted that State Statute, Section 410.12,Amendments, lays out the 185 process and a delay for 90 days would kill this amendment. 186 187 Commissioner Trehus stated it can be changed or substituted and that's more than"tweaking"the 188 five amendment words. 189 190 MOTION by Commissioner Bening, seconded by Commissioner Montain,to approve the 191 proposed amendment as the City Ordinance provides. 192 193 Commissioner Carlson stated he opposes this motion because he wants to add words to the 194 amendment and discuss the process after the vote. 195 196 It was noted the motion on the floor does not include process. 197 198 Commissioner Trehus stated he does not support the amendment because it makes it look like 199 this is a"heinous thing"but there are a lot of positives in having a Councilmember on the 200 Charter Commission. However, he might feel differently if four or five Councilmembers were 201 on the Charter Commission. 202 203 Commissioner Montain stated that besides Councilmember Dahl there have been other Mayors 204 and Councilmembers on the Charter Commission in the previous 22 years and that has not 205 caused a problem. He does not like to limit the freedom of association or imply that the City 206 Council will be so powerful that they will sway the other members. 207 208 Commissioner Bening stated his support to approve the amendment. 209 210 Commissioner Carlson stated he is supportive of the amendment but not the process. Since the 211 process is not included in motion,he will not support it. 212 213 Commissioner Zastrow stated that Councilmember Dahl brought a lot of information to the 214 Charter Commission,which was a good thing. With this amendment if you want to be a Mayor 215 or Councilmember,you cannot do that while serving on the Charter Commission since both are 216 paid. He stated he is against the amendment the way it is worded. 217 218 Commissioner Aldentaler stated he is opposed to the amendment. 219 5 Charter Commission APPROVED April 13, 2006 Page 6 220 Commissioner Storberg stated she thinks the amendment is fine and it is a good time to consider 221 it since there is not a conflict now. She stated there is a potential to have 2-5 Councilmembers 222 on the Charter Commission; however, she does not think this should go to the referendum. 223 Commissioner Storberg stated she supports the ordinance process because there are other big 224 issues that should be handled and residents will not understand this amendment. 225 226 Commissioner Duffy stated she is opposed to the amendment the way it is written because it does 227 not allow for a liaison function. She would like to consider a liaison function and limiting to one 228 Councilmember being on the Charter Commission so there is not a future problem of"stacking" 229 the Charter Commission with Councilmember who have their own agenda. Commissioner Duffy 230 stated she would like to follow the process the way the Statute is written. 231 232 Commissioner Handrick stated she opposes the amendment as it stands but is not necessarily 233 opposed to having a Councilmember on the Commission because she found it to be beneficial. 234 She stated she would like to know the history of this request and why the Statute was changed by 235 the Legislature. 236 237 Commissioner Richard Williams stated he is opposed to the amendment as it is worded because 238 it indicates there has been a conflict. He felt the amendment should state, "to prevent a conflict." 239 240 Commissioner Rosemary Williams stated she is also opposed and would like it postponed so 241 there can be more discussion at the next meeting. 242 243 Commissioner Bor stated that nothing should be mean spirited and this consideration should be 244 done in the context that it benefits the City. She stated she is not opposed to the amendment but 245 would like the wording changed a bit. Commissioner Bor stated she wants to clearly understand 246 the legal aspect in terms of why it is forced to go on the ballot and stated her support to use the 247 referendum process for more important issues like the streets. 248 249 Chair Warren stated she is not opposed to this amendment but is opposed to not having a 250 connection with the Council. Her issue is similar to Commissioner Duffy's thinking to have the 251 amendment changed to the effect that if there is not a Councilmember on the Charter 252 Commission as a voting member, a liaison member will be required to sit on the Charter 253 Commission. She commented on the importance of the Commission developing a good working 254 relationship with the Council. 255 256 Commissioner Dahl stated she comes from the"other side of the table" so she asked to be 257 allowed to make comment last. She stated she believes in freedom of speech and likes 258 Commissioner Montain's comment about the importance of freedom of association. 259 Commissioner Dahl stated she does not believe she was ever a"conflict of interest"to the 260 Charter Commission but felt she was an extension of the Council and could help since she knows 261 who to go to. She does not believe she did anything wrong and respects the people who signed 262 the petition,which is their right to do. Commissioner Dahl stated she would prefer to add 263 language to the amendment,to hold a good discussion, and would support tabling if that is what 6 Charter Commission APPROVED April 13, 2006 Page 7 264 is needed. She noted there are other issues coming before the Commission and this item needs to 265 be addressed in an unbiased manner. 266 267 Motion failed with Commissioner Bening voting yes. 268 269 MOTION by Commissioner Trehus to notify the City Council of a need for an extension of an 270 additional 45-60 days,which will still allow time for the amendment to be placed on the ballot. 271 272 Commissioner Richard Williams asked if it cost a lot to place it on the ballot. Commissioner 273 Trehus stated there is already an election this year so it would not cost a lot. 274 275 Commissioner Trehus speculated on how residents will view this Charter amendment and stated 276 he thinks it is an embarrassment and should not be on the ballot. He stated he thinks this can be 277 considered by the Charter Commission and Council. 278 279 Commissioner Handrick stated her agreement that it would not reflect positively on either. 280 281 Commissioner Bor stated clarity from the lawyer is needed so the Charter Commission knows 282 what is possible. She stated she supports the motion for an extension. 283 284 Discussion ensued regarding the need for a legal opinion on whether it can be considered without 285 sending it to the voters and whether a Councilmember can be a non-paid non-voting liaison. 286 287 Commissioner Duffy seconded the motion. 288 289 Commissioner Montain noted a resident survey had been conducted to ask the people but now 290 discussion is occurring that this amendment should not be on the ballot. He speculated that the 291 500 plus residents who signed the petition and the Council expect it to be on the ballot. He asked 292 if a subcommittee should be formed to get additional information and then present a 293 recommendation and options at the July meeting. 294 295 Commissioner Trehus stated it is not his intention to show a lack of respect for the voting public 296 but believed the 500 signatures were obtained under the guise there was a conflict of interest. 297 298 Commissioner Montain called the question. 299 300 The motion on the floor was read. 301 302 Commissioner Trehus stated a date for the extension is needed. He stated it would be beneficial 303 to have some dialog with the Council before making a recommendation and suggested a joint 304 meeting be scheduled for July. 305 306 Motion carried with Commissioners Bening and Montain voting no. 307 7 Charter Commission APPROVED April 13, 2006 Page 8 308 City Clerk Bartell recapped that the extension has been requested with direction to seek an 309 opinion from the City Attorney if it can be a dual track process under Subdivision 7,which 310 provides the other process for the Charter Commission to send forth its own ordinance 311 amendment to the Council for approval. The Commission will look at that during the next 312 meeting. 313 314 Chair Warren asked who wanted to sit on a subcommittee to prepare language for an amendment 315 revision. Commissioners Dahl, Duffy, and Trehus volunteered to serve on a subcommittee. 316 317 Chair Warren stated she will contact the City Attorney regarding his opinion. It was agreed that 318 this information will be provided ahead of time so all Commissioners can read the suggestions 319 and be ready to discuss it at the next meeting. 320 321 Discussion of the Definition of the Commission's Role 322 323 Commissioner Bening stated he would like something in the By-laws so the topics before the 324 Commission are more focused. Commissioner Zastrow agreed that sometimes the Commission 325 is sidetracked because they do not know the process or what they are supposed to be doing. 326 327 Chair Warren stated she hears the request of Commissioner Bening to stay on track with 328 Commission business and not get distracted. 329 330 Assessable Projects/Neighborhood—Related Concerns 331 332 Commissioner Trehus stated he wants to find a way for Lino Lakes,when there are complex 333 projects,to put them on the ballot and be sure it is the right project for the neighborhood. Then 334 there would not be a split opinion on the project. He stated residents should be asked to vote on 335 projects that they support but he is not sure if it will require a Charter amendment or could be a 336 Council initiated policy. He stated if the Council is not willing and the Charter Commission 337 feels strongly about it,they could do a Charter amendment. 338 339 The Commission reviewed and discussed the April 5, 2006 memorandum submitted by 340 Commissioner Trehus that detailed seven options (A through G) in how to handle neighborhood 341 projects. 342 343 Commissioner Montain stated he is a member of the Park Board and is concerned with option E, 344 nonassessable project such as bike paths. He noted there may be a case where the Council 345 approves a path to link through a neighborhood but the neighborhood may not like it even though 346 it is appropriate. Commissioner Montain explained his concern is not the Chapter 8 items, but 347 the nonassessable issues that can be a tough decision of the Council. He does not support 348 including option E. 349 350 Commissioner Bor noted if the trail opportunity is in the Master Plan to link,then they would 351 offer it as an option with the project when it can be done at a lower cost. 8 Charter Commission APPROVED April 13, 2006 Page 9 352 353 Commissioner Dahl asked about option B, develop and require the use of standard petition form 354 to eliminate confusion. She explained that sometimes people will sign a petition for a feasibility 355 study but then, once more details are learned about the project and cost, signed another petition 356 to not have the referendum the ballot. 357 358 Commissioner Zastrow stated this is a Council issue and should not be discussed by the Charter 359 Commission. 360 361 Commissioner Storberg stated under the Charter only new development roads need to go to a 362 referendum and roads that need to be fixed and are supported would not have to go to the 363 referendum. Commissioner Montain stated that is not correct because new roads are paid by the 364 developer. 365 366 Commissioner Richard Williams stated someone put a lot of work into this memorandum and he 367 thinks there are some good points. 368 369 Chair Warren noted the City conducted a quality of life survey and three Commissioners attended 370 the presentation on Monday night. She referenced the details of the survey as shown on page 12 371 from Decision Resources. It indicates that they randomly selected 400 citizens to survey. Chair 372 Warren asked that question to be included in the record: 373 374 "The Lino Lakes City Charter limits the street reconstruction practices of the City. 375 Under the charter, the city may only use tax dollars for street reconstruction if one 376 of two conditions are met: first, a citizen petitions the City for a specific road 377 improvement AND a majority of the affected property owners support the petition 378 AND a referendum on the improvement is approved in a citywide election; or 379 second,the City Council initiates the project AND the project is approved by a 380 majority of the affected property owners AND a referendum is approved in a 381 citywide election. The City is, however, allowed to perform limited maintenance 382 of streets, such as filling pot holes and seal coating." 383 384 Chair Warren noted that the respondents indicated 66%were aware, 34%was not aware, and 1% 385 did not know or refused to answer. The next question asked was: 386 387 "The initial step in road construction is the development of a comprehensive plan 388 that would prioritize roads for improvement. In order to implement this plan, a 389 funding source would have to be established." 390 391 Chair Warren noted the respondents indicated that the majority favored a Charter change to allow 392 the City to establish a fund. She stated the Council has already moved into the arena to establish 393 a fund and the majority of the citizens surveyed have indicated they support a change to the 394 Charter. Chair Warren stated it has been discussed that perhaps a change to the Charter would 395 aid road construction so projects can move forward. The Council has taken a step ahead of this 9 Charter Commission APPROVED April 13, 2006 Page 10 396 issue by suggesting the process would be a fund that would call things into action but does not 397 address avoiding the process. 398 399 Commissioner Trehus stated this is the same question as on the 1996 citizen survey but it does 400 not say anything about whether they would still vote on the road, it only addresses establishing a 401 fund. 402 403 Commissioner Bening stated option F gets into the realm of too much detail in the Charter. He 404 stated standards are needed in the City for when a street is going to be reconstructed. One of 405 those standards is curb and gutter. The project has to be approved by a majority of the residents 406 affected by the project and then the question is whether the City voters want to fund it. As long 407 as more than 50%of the people affected understand the ramifications, it should go forward but it 408 must meet standards. 409 410 Commissioner Carlson stated he has concern with options E and F but likes the idea of a process. 411 With regard to option E,he noted that expansion of the trail system received a clear majority of 412 support from the residents surveyed but they do not want to spend much. He commented that 413 trails are part of a system and it is important to the community to have those connections. 414 415 Commissioner Montain stated his agreement with options A, B, C, D, and G and suggested 416 standard clarification language be offered to the Council regarding procedure. 417 418 MOTION by Commissioner Montain, seconded by Commissioner Bening,to strongly urge the 419 Council to look at options A, B, C, D, and G to help clarify the language used,which will help 420 projects to get approved. 421 422 Commissioner Bor thanked Commissioner Trehus for his effort and stated it is a Council and 423 staff issue to address process, as mentioned by Commissioner Zastrow. She stated if you look at 424 the survey of the 400,there is room for improvement, as the Commission knows. However, 425 residents do not want to pay for it. She stated that new developments will take advantage of that 426 but it is a separate process from the Charter. Commissioner Bor stated she is addressing option E 427 related to nonassessable projects, which she believes should be a separate process. She 428 suggested that Commissioner Trehus, as a citizen, should present it to the Council to be worked 429 out. 430 431 Commissioner Trehus stated if you want to see West Shadow or a similar project get 432 neighborhood approval,then option F is needed and it would be a mistake to not include it. He 433 suggested that with a complex project, like West Shadow,the City has to sit down and talk to the 434 residents, or they will not support the project. He stated the Charter is a good thing but he thinks 435 it could be better. He suggested forwarding this memorandum and the Commission's comments 436 to the Council and to request comments from the Council. Commissioner Trehus stated he will 437 vote against the motion because it excludes options E and F. 438 10 Charter Commission APPROVED April 13, 2006 Page 11 439 Commissioner Montain stated he thinks options E and F are too specific and the engineer and 440 staff should see what is going on with the project support. 441 442 Commissioner Storberg stated she has been hearing from residents that property taxes up 25% in 443 two years and they are blaming it on schools and Charter,which they believe are restricting 444 development. 445 446 Motion carried with Commissioners Trehus and Duffy voting no and Commissioner Dahl absent. 447 448 MOTION by Commissioner Trehus, seconded by Commissioner Storberg,to submit options E 449 and F to the Council. 450 451 Commissioner Montain called the question. 452 453 Motion failed with Commissioners Trehus and Storberg voting yes and Commissioner Rosemary 454 Williams absent. 455 456 Quality of Life Survey 457 458 Chair Warren encouraged residents to review the Quality of Life Survey to see if any of the 459 issues would impact the Charter. This item will be included on the next meeting agenda. 460 461 OLD BUSINESS 462 463 Road Reconstruction 464 465 Chair Warren stated this item was discussed under Item 5E. 466 467 Five-Year Plan 468 469 Commissioner Montain stated there is a lengthy nonanswer from the City regarding the Five- 470 Year Plan but it appears that nothing has been done on it and staff does not know when it will be 471 done. He emphasized that the Charter says there must be a Five-Year Plan and it has been on 472 their agenda for years. He stated if they do not want to do a Five-Year Plan, he would suggest it 473 be taken out of the Charter. 474 475 Commissioner Dahl stated her agreement about the need for a Five-Year Plan,which is to be 476 updated every year, and that an explanation is needed. 477 478 MOTION by Commissioner Montain, seconded by Commissioner Zastrow, to direct Chair 479 Warren to inform the City Council by letter that the Charter clearly states that the City have a 480 Five-Year Plan and the Commission is asking when will the Five-Year Plan finally be done and 481 voted on. 482 11 Charter Commission APPROVED April 13, 2006 Page 12 483 Discussion occurred regarding the date of the last Five-Year Plan. It was discussed that a Five- 484 Year Plan was approved from 1992 through 1996 when Mayor Landers was in office. 485 486 Commissioner Bor called the question. 487 488 Motion carried unanimously. 489 490 Eminent Domain 491 492 Commissioner Bening stated he raised this issue a while ago but after looking at the Statute and 493 proposed change in Section 1 he would recommend the Charter Commission take no action on 494 this issue. 495 496 Informational; no action needed so this item will be removed from Old Business. 497 498 Review of City Council Minutes 499 500 Commissioner Dahl suggested this item be removed from future agendas unless a Commissioner 501 has an issue with a set of minutes. If so, it can be added to that agenda. 502 503 MOTION by Commissioner Zastrow, seconded by Commissioner Duffy,to remove"Review of 504 City Council Minutes" from the Charter Commission agenda and if a Commissioner has an issue, 505 then it will be added to the agenda. 506 507 Commissioner Trehus stated it is good to have this on the agenda because then it will be 508 reviewed. 509 510 Motion carried with Commissioners Trehus and Aldentaler voting no. 511 512 Set Agenda for July 2006 Meeting 513 514 Chair Warren set the following agenda for the July 13, 2006 Charter Commission Meeting: 515 516 1. Call to Order and Roll Call 517 2. Approval of Agenda 518 3. Open Microphone 519 4. Approval of Minutes 520 A. April 13,2006 521 5. Old Business 522 A. Road Reconstruction and Council Response 523 B. Five-Year Plan Response 524 C. Quality of Life Survey 525 D. Kennedy and Graven Charter Reviews: YMCA and Legacy-Trehus 12 Charter Commission APPROVED April 13, 2006 Page 13 526 E. Citizen Amendment to Ordinance Amendment regarding Council Members 527 on the Charter Commission 528 6. New Business 529 A. Discussion of Outside Services 530 B. Discussion of Charter Budget 531 C. Discuss By-Law Revision to Restructure Meeting 532 D. Set Agenda for_,2006 Meeting 533 534 7. Adjourn 535 536 Consensus was reached that the submittal deadline will be three weeks prior to the meeting date. 537 Written assignments will be submitted to Chair Warren who will then forward the information to 538 City Clerk Bartell for inclusion in the meeting packets. 539 54o ADJOURN 541 542 MOTION by Commissioner Montain, seconded by Commissioner Trehus, to adjourn the meeting 543 at 9:00 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. 544 545 Respectfully submitted, 546 Carla Wirth 547 Timesaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. 548 13