HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-12-1994 MOUNDS VIEW CHAR'I'ER COMMISSION MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 12, 1994
I. Call to Order
Second Vice Chair Richard Oman called the Special Meeting to order at 5:30 p.m.
in the Mounds View City Hall.
II. Roll Call
Present: Lloyd Bardwell, Virgil Beyer, Jerry Linke, Dave Long, Duane McCarty,
Richard Oman, Bob Toborg, Julie Trude, Russell Warren, Arlene Werdien, Bill
Werner and Ruth White.
Absent (excused): Len Burgers, Sue Hankner and Laurie Schley.
A letter from Laurie Schley was circulated to the commission stating her opinions on
• the issues and amendment process. A few brief comments were made about her
concerns.
Dr Purpose of Special Meeting
Jerry Linke asked that the record note that he and Julie Trude had called this special
meeting, as permitted under the by-laws. The meeting was called so that the
commission could answer questions raised by the City's attorney, Mr. Jim Thomson
of Holmes and Graven, regarding the proposed charter amendment on term limits.
The by-laws limit a special meeting to the agenda stated in the notice of meeting.
Every commission member was served notice of the special meeting at their home.
� Discussion
of Question
�L t1T1_ ] 1 7 1
a Discussion Question 41: "The proposed charter amendment states that 'no
person may file to be a candidate.' On its face, the amendment would not prevent a
person from conducting a write-in candidacy. The question I have is why did the
•
Duane McCarty believed the language clearly described an 8 year total. Other
commissioners disagreed with his interpretation. A polling of the commissioners
found that 6 believed the language was meant to limit service to 8 years and 5
commissioners believed the language described 8 plus 8 for a total of 16 years
service (one member abstained and said it's not clear). A majority found the
language unclear (8).
Duane McCarty moved to amend the language as follows to clarify the intent,
second by Virgil Beyer:
"Section 4.02, paragraph 1 shall be numbered Subdivision 1.
Subdivision 2. Term Limits. Notwithstanding any other
provision of law to the contrary, no person may file to be a candidate
for election to a term that would cause the person to serve more than
eight total years in the office of Mayor or in the office of City
Councilmember combined.
Subdivision-3. Service after January 1, 1990 shall count in
• determining total length of service.
Subdivision 4. Severability. If any part of this section shall
be declared unconstitutional by a court, all others shall remain in full
force and effect."
Jerry Linke stated that 8 years total in office continues to present a constitutional
issue. People eligible to hold office under our state constitution are prohibited by
this amendment from filing for office and voters are limited in who they may elect
to office. He noted that the City of Minneapolis had voted today to not put similar
term limit language on the ballot. The Minneapolis council and their charter
commission considered the term limit proposal to be unconstitutional. However,
the Committee on Term Limits was planning to force the issue and had been
threatening to file papers in court against Minneapolis for refusing to put term limits
on the ballot. Jerry Linke noted that even though commission members had been
assuming the League of Minnesota Cities would defend Mounds View in a similar
lawsuit, the League had been contacted and it was not their intention to defend
• Mounds View in such actions. LMC would not defend Mounds View in seeking a
Councilmember Trude's particular situation was described as an example. She was
filling the remainder of a term that occurred with a council vacancy. She was
elected to serve one and one-half years. If she completes one full term in addition to
the partial term she would be prohibited from filing for a second full term because
the language states "no person may file . . . for election to a term that would cause
the person to serve more than eight total years." After only five and one-half years
in office this amendment would prevent filing because her total would be nine and
one-half years.
Under the proposed language all persons who fill vacancies would have a limit of
less than eight years. Someone could be appointed to serve less than one year, even
as little as one day of a term and then they would only be allowed to file for one full
term because filing for a second full term would bring them just one day or a few
months over the eight year limit. A person in the later case would be limited to four
years and some months of service under this amendment.
• Several commissioners thought this was unfair; they were concerned that fewer
people would now run in elections for partial terms. Other commissioners
considered this type of turnover of politicians to be beneficial to the city; more
people could serve; there would be new people all the time.
The commission agreed that the amendment did not address this case very well but
the language had to be read literally so in fact some persons would not even be able
to file for a second full term because of the limitation on filing.
Motion by Richard Oman to strike subdivision 3 of the proposed amendment. The
maker and seconder accepted the motion as a friendly amendment. After further
discussion the maker and seconder agreed to reword subdivision 3 as follows in
order to avoid retroactivity:
"Subdivision 3. Service before January 1, 1995 shall not count in
determining total length of service."
•
-5-