07-26-1999 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

of a conditional use permit request. She stated that this would allow the Charter Commission as much time for discussion as the Members required. Mayor Coughlin stated that the matter was on the Council Agenda at that time, and added that if the Council was perceived as not listening, they could be thrown out of office. MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Coughlin: To Call Off the Debate and Call for a Vote. Ayes - 3 Nays - 1 (Stigney) Motion carried. MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Coughlin: To Extend the Time Allotted to Any and All Persons Present to an Additional Three to Five Minutes for Their Comments. Ayes - 1 Nays - 3 (Coughlin, Quick, Thomason) Motion failed. Julie Olson, Chair of the Charter Commission, asked that she been faxed a letter written by City Attorney Long, in regard to some potential alternatives as suggestions. She stated that City Attorney Long did not know where the previously copied Charters originated. She stated that in reviewing the documentation on behalf of the Charter Commission and the citizens, it was very clear that the copies came from the City. She stated that this letter also contained an attachment, which was forwarded to the attorney from the League of Minnesota Cities. She stated that prior to the matter going to the citizens, the alternatives were clearly stated that if they chose to bring the matter to a ballot, and it was passed, the end result would be that it would become part of the Charter. She stated that the City Administration, the City Attorney or City Council does not have the right to state that the provision does not have the right to be in the Charter. She stated that is the right of the citizens. She stated the neither City staff or City Council can make a codicil to the Charter. She stated they can request that happen, and put a recommendation to the Charter Commission, but they can not do that themselves, or omit the term limit provision from being in the Charter. She stated that the matter has gone to higher courts in other cities in other states, and has gone through the House and Senate of Minnesota. She stated that it was passed at the House, which determined that term limits were acceptable. She stated that the matter was going to the next level because it had been passed for three of the four cities that requested it. Planning Commissioner Laube stated that he was a member of the Mounds View Charter Commission, and that there were several concerns which required clarification. He stated that the United States Constitution has to be ratified by the State and the courts, and does not allow the Congress to admit any codicils. He stated that the citizens of Mounds View ratified this Charter, and asked what right the City had to add anything to it. He stated that he was not doubting City Attorney Longs abilities, but explained that he is the City's Attorney. He stated that the Charter provided monies for the purpose of retaining their own legal counsel, and that he felt the City Council should allot them money so that they can retain a charter attorney to advise them in this matter. He added that he believed term limits would be approved by the State of Minnesota in the future, and therefore felt that if the Charter Commission chose to leave this provision in the Charter, it was their right and the citizen's right to approve it. He stated that it was not the right of the City Council, adding that • the Council is elected by the citizens in the same manner they approved the term limit provision. He stated that the Council can request the Charter Commission to act, but they cannot demand it. Mayor Coughlin stated that this is why the matter is before the Council as a review. 17N:\DATA\US ERSUOANB\sHARE\MINUTES\CC\ 1999\07-26-99.MIN