Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View City Council September 27, 2004 <br />Regular Meeting Page 10 <br /> <br />Ms. Thomas stated that that she didn’t know that they had a provision currently in the Charter for 1 <br />what happens if it’s not. 2 <br /> 3 <br />Mr. McCarty stated that that has been a problem all along. He stated that the currently Charter 4 <br />does exactly what the current proposal does in terms of time frame, and that insufficient petitions 5 <br />go back to the committee, and they have 30 days to file additional signatures, make corrections, 6 <br />and bring it back to the Administrator. He stated that is all in conformance with 410, Minnesota 7 <br />Charter Laws, on the basis of recommendations from the League of Minnesota Cities. 8 <br /> 9 <br />Mr. McCarty stated his concern that once you start amending, changing, and revising the City 10 <br />Charter, you start a slippery slope that is hard to come back from, and some day there will be 11 <br />something that is very, very important that is going to get slipped through. 12 <br /> 13 <br />Ms. Thomas stated that unfortunately the Charter doesn’t have a time limit, and neither does state 14 <br />statute, and it has caused some significant issues, and this was discussed at length with the 15 <br />League and the representatives. She stated they had looked for model charters all over the 16 <br />country to see if anyone had anything, and it doesn’t exist. 17 <br /> 18 <br />Council Member Stigney asked the City Attorney what the best course would be as far as 19 <br />proceeding on this item. 20 <br /> 21 <br />City Attorney Riggs stated that if there is a belief there is an inconsistency, that is something that 22 <br />can be discussed with the Charter Commission. He stated that the Council could make basically 23 <br />typographical corrections, but if there was anything beyond that, it should go back to the Charter 24 <br />Commission and be noticed to the public. 25 <br /> 26 <br />Mayor Linke asked that if they postponed the vote on this and sent it back to the Charter 27 <br />Commission, and then they bring it back, and then they do the second reading, would that be 28 <br />sufficient, even though they held the public hearing on the first part. 29 <br /> 30 <br />City Attorney Riggs stated that they had to start over, and that there is a very defined and built-in 31 <br />public hearing process in the statute. He stated the conservative route would be to err on the side 32 <br />of public notice, and that is what he suggested that they do. 33 <br /> 34 <br />Mr. McCarty stated that in terms of the Mayor’s Powers and Duties, the only change that they are 35 <br />suggesting is that the word “duties” be stricken, and the word “authority” be inserted. He stated 36 <br />that taking the word “duties” away, it means that the mayor doesn’t have authority to run City 37 <br />Hall. He asked if they extract his authority in the City Charter, can he then step away from his 38 <br />perceived authority in state law? 39 <br /> 40 <br />Mayor Linke stated that he still read that in the second paragraph. 41 <br /> 42 <br />Council Member Quick stated that it’s given to the mayor by the Council. 43 <br /> 44 <br />Mayor Linke stated that that is by state law. 45