Minutes - 2000/04/24 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View City Council Apri124, 2000 Regular Meeting Page 24 City Attorney Long indicated there had been questions pertaining to the procedural issues related to amending the Charter. He stated this could be done by ordinance, as set forth in Subd. 7 of the State Statute, and this is the procedure by which the Charter Commission recommends and the City Council adopts. He advised that another procedure is the Citizens Petition process, which is specified in the Charter. He indicated the third procedure is "Amendments Proposed by the Council, "and that is set forth in Subd. 5, Section 410.12 of State Statutes, which indicates "The council of any city having a home ruled charter may propose charter amendments to the voters by ordinance. Any ordinance proposing such an amendment shall be submitted to the Charter Commission. Within 60 days thereafter, the Charter Commission shall review the proposed amendment, but before the expiration of such period, the Commission may extend the time for review for an additional 90 days by filing with the City Clerk its resolution determining that additional time for review is needed. After reviewing the proposed amendment, the Charter Commission shall approve or reject the proposed amendment, or suggest a substitute amendment. The Commission shall promptly notify the Council of the action taken. Upon notification of the Charter Commission action, the Council may submit to the people in the same manner provided in Subd. 4... (City Attorney Long stated Subd. 4 is the petitions process, which would be submitted directly without requiring the actual gathering of signatures) ...the amendment originally proposed by it or the substitute amendment proposed by the Charter Commission. The amendment shall become effective only when approved by the voters as provided in Subd. 4." City Attorney Long explained that essentially, the Council could submit Charter amendments for consideration on the ballot. He indicated this would require the review of the Charter • Commission, which would have a total of 150 days for the review. He advised that if there is no agreement of the Charter Commission, or if the Council does not chose to accept the Commission's amendment language, the amendment could go to the ballot as originally proposed by the Council. Council Member Stigney inquired regarding the Council vote required to commence this process. City Attorney Long stated the Statute does not specify this, therefore, it would require a majority vote. He stated it would not require a unanimous vote, and in staff's interpretation, the majority vote of the Council would be required in order to submit it to the Charter Commission, and then to the ballot. He explained that this differs from the unanimous vote that is required to adopt it as an amendment. Council Member Coughlin stated in light of the discussion at the Special City Council Meeting that evening with Mr. Jim Brimeyer, in regard to a City Manager form of government, he would suggest for Council consideration that they commence the research into this process. He indicated that if they were intending to put something on the ballot in November, it would probably be in order to begin this process relatively soon. MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Coughlin. To Direct Legal Staff to Draw Up Proposed Language for a Resolution Working on the Language for the Charter for a City Manager Form of • Government as Opposed to a Clerk Administrator Form of Government.