Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-15-1988 Charter Minutes Charter Commission Meeting September 15, 1988 Meeting called to order 7:04PM. Members Present: Chairman Jerry Hanson, Eugene Blomquist, Kay Murphy, Bernice Juleen, Paul Howard, Sally Kuether, Ron Mikolai , Kim Olson, Curtis Pelarski , Al Ross, Warren Schlichting, Debra Smith. City Representatives: H. Bisel, Councilman R. Schumacher, City Administrator Absent: Member Royce Zaudtke Revised minutes of the December 30, 1987 meeting and working session notes of the August 11 , 1988 meeting were accepted. Motion by Al Ross to purchase a small file cabinet w/lock. Second by Bernice Juleen. Carried. Mr. Schumacher has made this purchase. Chairman Hanson reviewed a letter from David Kennedy, City Bond Counsel , dated Feb. 29, 1988 and a text change of Chapter V.III pro- posed by Mr. Kennedy. (Copy attached. ) Section 8 .01 . "Power to make improvements and levy assessments. " Reading the same as our Charter. Section 8.02 . "Procedures. " Holds constructed wording from Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429 . Section 8.03 . "Protest. " States a 15 day waiting period, after a hearing, before Council can order construction of a local improvement. Charter states ,a 60' day waiting period. Council process: Advertise Hearing. Send notices to property owners . Hold Hearing. Then wait 60 days. Mr. Schumacher stated the process and 60 day wait carries until 'the construction season is at an end. Eugene Blomquist questioned the sufficiency of protest. How does it correspond with M.S. 429? Mr. David Kennedy addressed the Commission, detailing his problems with Chapter VIII as bond counsel. The language "Benefited Property Owners" is unblear. . The petition process constitutes who and what percent? On the longview, if a project is challenged, what would be the decision of the court? Ambiquity in wording of the chapter makes interpretation difficult in evaluating bonds for their sale. Mr. Kennedy prefers to function with M.S. 429 ruling. Motion by Bernice Juleen to table this issue for further discus- sion. Second by Al Ross. Carried. Chairman Hanson asked members to study ambiguous areas that need clarification. Alternative would be to make 'special areas in the Charter to resolve problems. Kay Murphy will contact the League of Minnesota Cities. Charter excerpts of other local cities, regarding public improvements, will be secured for member's comparison. Motion by Al Ross to purchase twelve "Local Improvement Guide" booklets. Second by Sally Kueth-er. Carried. Motion by Al Ross for next meeting to be held Thursday, at 7PM October 20, 1988 . Second by Bernice Juleen. Carried. Motion by Curtis Pelarski to adjourn. Second by Sally Kuether. Carried. Adjournment at 9PM. Submitted by: Bernice Juleen 4 DJK DRAFT 3-17-88 TEXT OF PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 8 OF LINO LAKES CITY CHARTER r Chapter 8 of the charter of the. City of Lino Lakes is amended to read: 8 . 01 . Power to make improvements and levy assessments . The City may make any type of public improvements not forbidden by law and levy special assessments to pay all or any part of the cost of such improvements as are of a local character. The total assessments for any local .improvement may not exceed the cost of the improvement, including all costs and expenses connected therewith, with interest . No assessment shall exceed the benefits to the property. 8 .02 . Procedures. The procedures for conducting local improvement projects financed in whole or in part by special assessments against benefitted property are those provided by law and Section 8 .03 of this charter and must be followed exclusively. The term "by law" as used in this chapter means Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429 or any successor statute providing a uniform method of constructing local improvements in cities. qS_ 8 . 03 . Protest. Subdivision 1 . Not later than 1sS'days after the conclusion of the public hearing or adjournment thereof required by law to precede the ordering of the construction of a local improvement project the owner or owners of real property included in the area proposed to be assessed for the local improvement may file a written protest with the recording officer of the City. 'The protest must be, in the form prescribed by ordinance . Subd. 2 . If a protest is filed as provided in Subdivi- sion 1 , the City Council must , by resolution adopted at its next regular meeting or at a special meeting called for that purpose after the expiration of theqs day period for filing protests, determine the validity and sufficiency of the protest . If the protest is determined to be valid and sufficient as to a single parcel of property proposed to be assessed for the local improvement and the protest contains the names of a majority of the owners of that parcel of property, the City Council may not include that parcel of property in the local improvement project when ordered for construction. If the protest is determined to be vali d s nt and contains the names of owners of a ajority by area of all parcels of property proposed to be assesse for e ocal improvement, the City Council may not order the t� construction of the local improvement project . The resolution determining the validity and sufficiency of the protest must be published in the same manner as, and has the same effect of, a resolution determining the adequacy of a petition for a local improvement pursuant to law. t Subd. 3 . If a local improvement project or portion thereof is not ordered because of protest as provided in this section the City Council may not initiate proceedings for the same or a substantially similar local improvement project for a period of six months after the adoption of the resolution determining the validity and sufficiency of the protest, but the owners of property in the area proposed to be assessed may initiate proceedings for the same or a substantially similar local improvement project at any in the manner provided by law. Subd. 4 . An owner of property signing a protest under this section may withdraw his or her name from the protest at any time prior to the adoption of the Council resolution determining the validity and sufficiency of the protest . Subd. 5 . For purposes of determining the validity and sufficiency of a protest filed under this section the City Council may rely on such records as it deems advisable including those records usable for the purpose of mai e � ,,�,� notice as provided by law. �,Q ;,, � - _ -;, Subd . 6 . Except where a petition has been received from all owners of property proposed to be assessed for a : local improvement project. in the manner provided by law, the City Council may not,4,rorder the construction of a local improvement untildays after the conclusion of the public hearing or adjournment thereof required by law; to precede the ordering of a local improvement project . Section 8 .02 through 8 . 06 , inclusive, of the City Charter of the City of Lino Lakes are repealed. 05270388 .F16