Ordinance No. 743 (Motion Failed)

Home Browse Search

Mounds View City Council September 27, 2004 Regular Meeting Page 10 • Ms. Thomas stated that that she didn't know that they had a provision currently in the Charter for what happens if it's not. Mr. McCarty stated that that has been a problem all along. He stated that the current Charter does exactly what the current proposal does in terms of time frame, and that insufficient petitions go back to the committee, and they have 30 days to file additional signatures, make corrections, and bring it back to the Administrator. He stated that is all in conformance with 410, Minnesota Charter Laws, on the basis of recommendations from the League of Minnesota Cities. Mr. McCarty stated his concern that once you start amending, changing, and revising the City Charter, you start a slippery slope that is hard to come back from, and some day there will be something that is very, very important that is going to get slipped through. Ms. Thomas stated that unfortunately the Charter doesn't have a time limit, and neither does state statute, and it has caused some significant issues, and this was discussed at length with the League and the representatives. She stated they had looked for model charters all over the country to see if anyone had anything, and it doesn't exist. Council Member Stigney asked the City Attorney what the best course would be as far as proceeding on this item. City Attorney Riggs stated that if there is a belief there is an inconsistency, that is something that can be discussed with the Charter Commission. He stated that the Council could make basically typographical corrections, but if there was anything beyond that, it should go back to the Charter Commission and be noticed to the public. Mayor Linke asked that if they postponed the vote on this and sent it back to the Charter Commission, and then they bring it back, and then they do the second reading, would that be sufficient, even though they held the public hearing on the first part. City Attorney Riggs stated that they had to start over, and that there is a very defined and built-in public hearing process in the statute. He stated the conservative route would be to err on the side of public notice, and that is what he suggested that they do. Mr. McCarty stated that in terms of the Mayor's Powers and Duties, the only change that they are suggesting is that the word "duties" be stricken, and the word "authority" be inserted. He stated that taking the word "duties" away, it means that the mayor doesn't have authority to run City Hall. He asked if they extract his authority in the City Charter, can he then step away from his perceived authority in state law? Mayor Linke stated that he still read that in the second paragraph. Council Member Quick stated that it's given to the mayor by the Council. 0 Mayor Linke stated that that is by state law.