Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View Joint Charter Commission and Council Minutes — DRAFT <br />Tuesday, March 18, 2025 <br />1.Call to Order. Special joint meeting came to order at 6:30 PM. <br />2.Roll Call. Present: B. Amundsen, E. James, M. Meehan, K. Mills, J. Peterson, G. Quick, R. Scholl, <br />A. Urlacher, R. Warren <br />Excused: <br />Absent: <br />Also present: Council members Z. Lindstrom, J. Clark, S. Gunn, G. Meehlhause, K.A. Smith, <br />City Administrator Nyle Zikmund, City Attorney Joe Sathe <br />3.Approval of Agenda and Minutes . <br />A. Approve Agenda. <br /> Chair R. Warren introduced the Preliminary Agenda. Discussion was requested. <br />MOTION made, by R. Scholl, and seconded, by G. Quick, to approve the agenda as presented. <br />Motion Adopted 9-0 <br />4.Citizen's Comments from the Floor. <br /> None presented. <br />5.Joint Business. <br />A. Self Introduction of each member . <br /> Each member of the council and commission introduced themselves, how long they have resided in the <br />city, and community involvement they've had in the past. <br />B. Discussion of city charter and Chapter 4 Nominations and Elections – 4.05 Vacancy appointment <br />allowance . (The following notes highlight general discussion and are not a transcript of what was said.) <br /> Chair R. Warren requested that the secretary provide status of this issue. B. Amundsen reviewed the <br />Commission actions of 2024 and the decision to hold further discussion at this joint meeting, along with <br />additional items from the city administrator. B. Amundsen then turned to city attorney J. Sathe to review <br />memos previously sent. City Attorney J. Sathe reviewed two memos from March 18, 2025, about <br />comparison of our ordinance process to statute and on the charter amendment process. <br /> City Administrator N. Zikmund spoke about the charter's dual public notice for an ordinance and <br />about street levy exception from levy limit as policy issues. <br /> Chair R. Warren then reviewed the reason for looking at vacancy appointment and asked legal to <br />review the legal problem with the 2024 amendment language. City attorney J. Sathe referenced his memo <br />of September 19, 2024. Those items were regarding: <br />a.) a code issue conflict with a planning commissioner being on council, <br />b.) the statute duties of the mayor, in particular the emergency duties, <br />c.) clarification of who is reaching out to a potential appointee, and <br />d.) a suggested improvement that the elected person on a November ballot be immediately appointed, <br />rather than waiting for January, in case of vacancies at a November election. <br /> The commission and council then had various discussions about the language proposed. In a <br />discussion of what is “reasonable” amount of time for an appointee response, the city attorney described <br />“reasonable time” as a result of considering the totality of the situation and also the discretion of the <br />person reaching out to the potential appointee. <br /> Discussion occurred about what happens if the mayor vacancy is appointed, can another council <br />member run meetings? The city attorney said he can write language to accomplish that direction as long <br />as it is understood that the appointee assumes the mayors emergency duties, due to statutes. <br /> There was discussion of alternative vacancy filling methods: 1) could the acting mayor be <br />permanently elevated to mayor and then have the seat until the next mayoral election date, or 2) if an <br />Page 1 of 2 <br />5 <br />10 <br />15 <br />20 <br />25 <br />30 <br />35 <br />40 <br />45