Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-12-2007 iffed Mounds View Charter Commission Minutes • Meeting June 12, 2007 ' a' 1. Call to Order—The meeting came to order at 7:06 pm. 2. Roll Call— Present: J. Thomas, J.Miller, M. Haubrich, C. Mueller, B.Thomas Excused: B. Doty, T. Vang Absent : 3. Approval of agenda Motion by B. Thomas, second by J. Miller to approve agenda as written MOTION APPROVED Approval of minutes Motion by M.Haubrich, second by J. Miller to approve minutes of date as amended MOTION APPROVED 4. Citizens comments from the floor None 5. Reports of the Chair Chair discussed the status of Resolution 2007-0la as it was discussed by the City Council. 6. Reports of members None • 7. Unfinished Business None 8. New Business Chair presented proposed amendments to the draft creating 2007-01 b, as well as two options to improve the flow chart for Section 5.06 on Initiative. Changes discussed included: • Correcting language on lines 130-131 to account for the option of amendment as well as a ballot measure • Adding the sentence"Any amendment to the proposed ordinance must proceed accordingWubdivision 2 of this section." • Move the language on lines 138-140 to the opening paragraph of 5.06 • Remove the words"could still be"on line 137 and insert"is". • Remove the word"approving" from line 143 • Change lines 147-154 to read as"Council must either adopt the proposed ordinance according to subdivision 1 of this section or place the ordinance, as presented by the Sponsoring Committee, on the ballot as provided in Section 5.05. If the Sponsoring Committee does not submit a statement of disapproval, the ordinance can proceed,as amended, in accordance with Section 3.05 and is subject to the referendum process as defined in Section 5.07 of this Charter. Upon holding a first reading,the City Council choose to submit the ordinance, as amended, as a ballot measure." rr Motion by B. Thomas to approve Resolution 2007-01b, as amended, and submit to the Council • for Second Reading. J. Miller seconded. MOTION APPROVED Mounds View Charter Commission Minutes • Meeting June 12,2007 Chair presented second draft of a memo to the City Council asking for direction on recent requests. Commission directed that the last option on a list of considerations on page 2 of the memo be removed. Motion by M. Haubrich to approve memo as amended and submit to the City Council. J. Miller seconded. MOTION APPROVED Chair discussed the status of research for discussion of Section 8.04 and the materials provided by the League of Minnesota Cities. 9. Adjournment Meeting adjourned at 9:22 pm. • • City of CHARTER COMMISSION MEETING Mounds , 11 • 7:00 PM Tuesday, Jun 12, 2007 tfk- i- 4 View Mounds View City Hall Preliminary AGENDA 1 I Charter Commission ,, p Chair 1. Call to Order Jonathan J Thomas 763.784.5205 ' 2. Roll Call Vice Chair Bill Doty Jonathan J Thomas Michael Haubrich 763.786.3421 _ Bill Doty — Thai W Vang 2"d Vice Chair _Jean Miller — Jean Miller — Barbara Thomas _ 763.786.3959 - — Secretary 3. Approval of agenda and minutes Barbara Thomas 763.780.6226 Review and approve agenda Michael Haubrich `= Approval of May 8, 2007 Minutes 651.205.6848 Thai W Vang 4. Citizens comments from the floor 63.792.1750 5. Reports of the Chair Short review of Chapter 5 status. 6. Reports of members 7. Unfinished Business 8. New Business 45 min, Review Resolution 2007-01b. 25 min. Discuss Memo to City Council. 10 min. Discuss information relating to section 8.04. 9. Adjournment III 10. Next Regular Meeting Date - Jul 10, 2007 Jim Ericson From: Jim Ericson Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2007 2:15 AM To: 'Jonathan J Thomas' Cc: Kurt Ulrich; sriggs@kennedy-graven.com; Rob Marty(MV); *MVCouncil Subject: Ordinance 790 - Possible Revisions Attachments: Initiative.doc Initiative.doc(36 KB) Jonathan: You indicated that if anyone had comments or suggestions regarding Ordinance 790 to let you know. I have a few comments and suggestions regarding the ordinance which I hope will be considered prior to its second reading. I recognize and appreciate the amount of work that went into the drafting of the ordinance so I offer these recommendations with all due respect. With the exception of the first comment, all will refer back to the line numbering in the Charter Commission' s final mark-up version. 1. I would *strongly* encourage the final version of the ordinance to SHOW the changes being proposed as we do with all other ordinances. Naturally, this would impact the readability of the ordinance, but if a resident wants to track what is being changed, the changes need to be identified. Of course, that' s just my opinion. 2 . Lines 8-9. This is a correction to the old language. . . I would suggest adding a comma after the phrase "except an emergency ordinance" . The phrase is a parenthetical element and should have a leading and trailing comma. 3 . Lines 10-11. I share Scott ' s concern about requiring a specified effective date. 4 . Line 15. You indicated that if we miss a deadline with the Bulletin, we can publish an ordinance in the "other" official newspaper. According to Section 12. 01 of the Charter, the Council is to designate an official newspaper of general circulation. Nowhere does it mention TWO official newspapers. The City Attorney has consistently suggested against publishing anything "official" in the Pioneer Press because the Charter does not recognize a secondary or additional official newspaper. (That and the fact that no one would be looking for the notice in the Pioneer Press and would consequently accuse the City of doing something underhanded. ) 5 . Lines 15-16 . I share Scott' s concern about an explicit window for publishing an ordinance. While it does not happen often, it HAS happened where the newspaper has failed to publish a public hearing notice or an ordinance. If a window needs to be there, I would recommend adding a week, changing 17 to 24 . Also, why require a "do not publish before" date? Given the newspaper' s deadlines, such a requirement is effectively unnecessary. 6. Line 73 . This is a correction to the old language. . . "them" should be "it" . This is referring to each signature (singular) not signatures (plural) . 7 . Line 106. I would suggest changing "cannot" to "does not" . (One would assume that an insufficient petition CAN be made sufficient. ) 8 . Line 110 . Why 9 days? There is an allowance if 10 days in Line 108 and 10 days in Line 114, why 9 days in Line 110? 1 I 9. Lines 113-114. What does it mean where it says the Council shall direct the administrator to "file the petition as noted"? 10. Beginning on Line 120. The word "measure" is used a few times. Should the title of the section read "Ballot Measure Requirements" rather than "Ballot Issue Requirements" ? Just a thought. 11. I had the most difficulty absorbing the "Initiative" section (Lines 135-170) , and I'm sure it was a section that the Commission labored with as well. Please consider the suggestions (attached as a Word file) as potential opportunities to improve the readability of a long and complicated paragraph. I illustrated the proposed suggestions by striking the deleted language and underlining the added language. 12 . Lines 182-185. The Council is to immediately adopt two resolutions. Can this be accomplished in ONE resolution? If so, could this be revised to say something like, "the Council must immediately adopt a resolution to suspend the effective date of the ordinance until it is decided by a vote of the public and arrange to place the measure on a ballot as provided in Section 5.05 of this Charter. " ? Also, what constitutes "immediately"? Does this mean at the very next regularly scheduled Council meeting or does the Council need to schedule a special meeting? 13 . Line 185. There is an inadvertent hyphen between the words "the voters" . 14 . Line 203 . In line 201, official was replaced with officer. To be consistent, the word official's in line 203 should be replaced then with officer's. 15. Line 212. Again, need to be consistent with the titles officer and official. Official was deleted in Line 201 and replaced with officer. Same should occur in line 212. 16. Line 213 . The following is written: "If the City Council is ABLE to declare the petition sufficient. . . " Able is a passive verb. . . I would suggest revising it to read, "If the City Council declares the petition sufficient. . . " 17. Lines 216, 218 and 221: Again, the titles official and elected official are used, which is inconsistent with Line 201. Perhaps line 201 should be changed back to official. That's all. I hope my comments and suggestions are received in the helpful spirit in which they are offered. I know the Commission has gone to great lengths in its preparation of the draft ordinance and you all should be commended for your efforts. Sincerely, Jim Ericson 2 ti In standard ordinance fashion, the deletions are stricken and additions underlined and bolded. Section 5.06. Initiative*. Subdivision 1. An ordinance may be proposed by petition. The exact text of the proposed ordinance must be stated at the head of each page of the petition or attached thereto. Within sixty (60) calendar days after final determination of the petition's sufficiency under the provisions of Section 5.03 and 5.04 of this Charter, the Council must either adopt an ordinance agreed to by the Sponsoring Committee or pass a resolution to place the measure on a ballot. If the Council elects to adopt the ordinance, it shall do so in accordance with mould hold--a first reading of the ordinance, as defined in Section 3.05 of this Charter, charter. The Council . . - , which does not exclude the referendum process as defined in Section 5.07, or may propose an amendment to the petitioned wee. If the first reading is approved as presented, the ordinance shall be scheduled for a second reading and public hearing. If the ordinance receives a majority vote of the Council in its favor,it shall become effective thirty (30) calendar days after adoption unless the ordinance specifies a later effective date. If the Council does not approve the ordinance,it must follovrtthe lalletiirg process as indicated in Subdivision 3 below. Subdivision 2. If an amendment is proposed by a majority vote of the Council, it must be presented to the Sponsoring Committee prior to approving the first reading of the proposed ordinance. The Sponsoring Committee shall have fourteen (14) calendar days from the receipt of the amended proposed ordinance to approve or disapprove the amendment by majority vote, and file a statement with the Clerk-Administrator. Upon receipt of filing a statement of disapproval from the Sponsoring Committee, the Council must either adopt the proposed ordinance as originally presented as stated in the original petition, or place the ordinance it must be placed on the ballot. 1f there is no proposed amendment, or should Should the Sponsoring Committee agree to the proposed amendment or does not file a statement of disapproval, the amended ordinance shall be scheduled for a first and second reading and public hearing. If the ordinance receives a majority vote of the Council in its favor, it shall become effective thirty (30) calendar days after adoption unless the ordinance specifies a later effective date. If the Council does not approve the ordinance, it must follow the balloting process as indicated in Subdivision 3 below. Subdivision 3. If the ordinance amendment is required to be put on a ballot by resolution or by failing to approve the ordinance, the City Council shall proceed as provided for in Section 5.05 of this Charter. If a majority of those voting on the ordinance vote in its favor, it shall become effective thirty (30) days after certification of the election results unless the ordinance specifies a later effective date. If the majority does not vote in favor, the ordinance shall not be enacted and the measure is prohibited from being brought forward again as an initiative within six months of the election certification. If the petition committee does not file a disapproval statement to a proposed amendment, the Council shall hold a first reading of the amended proposed ordinance and proceed with the normal adoption process, which does not exclude the referendum process as defined in Section 5.07. If the Council does not approve the ordinance, it • . •- . • --• • •: - . (Amended, Ord. 650, 8-16-2000)