HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-02-04 City Council Work Session notesWork Session
February 4, 2008
Joint Meeting between Charter Commission and City Council
Issues to be discussed include Clerk Administrator title-inconsistencies, fees in Chapter 7.04,
Section 8.04 regarding assessments, Section 3.02 regarding Council liaisons, Administrative
Offenses, Section 2.02 regarding the EDA and the PCSC, etc.
Section 2.02. Roger thinks the PCSC is a good thing; eliminates the politics of the council
appointing police positions. It was noted that politics still exist, except it’s in the hands of three
people rather than five. Roger indicated everything is political. The Charter could be amended
to say that it does not apply to the PCSC or it could be disbanded (or used as more of an
advisory board.)
The EDA is outside of the requirements of the Charter, outside of the controls of the Charter.
Rob says leave the EDA alone--the districts will be expiring. Chair Thomas indicated changes
would be necessary regardless, Rob directed the Charter Commission to make the language
correct.
Section 3.02. Can we delete that as an option? There are other aspects aside from just deleting
it. What was the original intent? Roger quoted Bill Doty’s interpretation of the original intent.
Was section 3.02 ever successful or necessary? Maybe council members should talk to senior
employees. Look into the issue and re-address. Jonathon said intent is to improve
communication
Working on Administrative Offenses-No further comment
Section 8.04. Charter has confusing requirements. The Charter is inconsistent with city’s
present assessment policy. With the new financing plan, whether intended or not, options are
being taken away from the Council and as well as a residents. Charter needs to be amended
sooner rather than later. City needs to move forward with projects, residents need to be
involved. Roger agrees with some of the comments. What do special assessments apply to?
Charter language needs to have safeguards. Wording is poor in Charter? Does Charter clearly
define how a streets project moves forward? Any assessment should be petitionable.
Valerie Amundsen asked whether the unaffected people could raise a petition. It was pointed
out that unaffected residents could and can petition. Joe stated the language in question is for
assessments, not the petition process.
Clerk Administrator language. Have Scott Riggs review the statutes and provide an opinion.
Section 7.04, Fees. Charter commission will be providing Council with a Charter amendment
to resolve new found inconsistencies and ambiguities.
Jonathan and Barbara reminded the public that there are a number of positions available on the
Charter Commission.