Agenda Packets - 1999/08/09 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Charter,and if the Council thought there were unlawful items in it,they should request it be"cleaned up,"before authorizing the expenditure. Mayor Coughlin restated his motion to direct the Clerk Administrator to accept post and publish the adjusted Charter including the added term limit provision, and to request that the Council request that the Chairperson and Commission Members to revisit all items in the Charter which have been deemed unconstitutional by various court actions, and to direct the Administrator to include a separate document outlining the summary of the Minneapolis Term Limits Coalition vs. Keith Supreme Court ruling and a summary explaining why this provision is unconstitutional. Mayor Coughlin stated that this was to post on the Website and elsewhere, the Charter as it was voted upon. He added that he voted for term limits at the time. He stated this was also to acknowledge that the provision was duly voted upon and approved by the populous, and to acknowledge the fact that it is, at present, unconstitutional, unless a constitutional amendment be enacted at the state level. He added that it also preserves the right of the Council and the City to not withhold any information from those people seeking re-election. He stated that he saw this as a compromise. Council Member Quick inquired regarding whether or not a time constraint should be placed upon the removal of any unconstitutional items in the Charter. City Attorney Long stated that they were presently in the process of updating the Code book, and incorporating all the ordinances that the Council passed in the last year, and would include the Charter, but had the question as to which provision of the Charter they should include. He stated if the Charter Commission were to act within the next sixty days, and vote to remove the term limit provision, and any others deemed unconstitutional,they could have it back before the Council for action, and the new, "cleaned" up Charter could be printed with the Code to avoid the cost. He stated that from his perspective sixty days would be a reasonable amount of time. Council Member Quick inquired if Mayor Coughlin would accept the sixty day time frame as an amendment to his motion. Mayor Coughlin stated that the Council could not dictate the timing of the Charter Commission,however,they could state sixty days, and the Council could consider their options at that point. Council Member Thomason stated that she would agree to this. Council Stigney requested clarification of the language"publish the adjusted charter,"to indicate "publish the Charter including the added provision of term limits:"He stated that he did not believe it was correct for the Council move upon this matter, as it was within the purview of the Charter Commission. Mayor Coughlin stated that to an extent,the Clerk Administrator does have the right to post the Charter or raise questions regarding it. He added that this was simply an attempt to resolve the matter at the Council level, and place it out of the Council domain. City Administrator Whiting stated that the last Council discussion of the matter had taken place almost three years prior, and at that time, it had been decided to remove the term limit provision from the Charter. He stated, in light of this, and for the benefit of the public who might think this was this had been done, he had placed the matter on the Council Agenda to provide public 21C:\ADMIN\MINUTES\CC\072699CC.MIN