HomeMy WebLinkAboutMay 18, 2000, MinutesCOLUMBIA HEIGHTS CHARTER COMMISSION
MAY 18, 2000
7:00 P.M.
GAUVITTE ROOM, MURZYN HALL
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by President Theresia Synowczynski at 7:05 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Members present:
Members absent and excused:
Members absent and unexcused:
Bill Antzaras, Charles Christopherson, Mel Collova, Tami Ericson, Jim
Fowler, Ted Landwehr, Janis Larson, Brian Peterson, Tom Ramsdell, Clara
Schmidt, Theresia Synowczynski
Joel Cason, Carol Crema-Klein
Also present: Jim Hoeft, City Attorney; Patty Muscovitz, Recording Secretary
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Motion by Bill Antzaras, seconded by Janis Larson, to approve the minutes of the January 20, 2000, meeting as
presented. Motion passed unanimously.
CORRESPONDENCE
President Synowczynski briefly advised commission members of the letter she wrote to the Mayor, City Council,
and City Manager on April 5, 2000, regarding the issue of the management of the Police Department as per
action taken by the Charter Commission at their January 20, 2000, meeting. There will be nothing further until
we receive a response from the City Council.
Synowczynski referred to a reappointment letter from the Judge reappointing Bill Antzaras with a term
expiration of January 25, 2004.
The Recording
meeting:
Secretary reported that the following correspondence had been received or sent since the January
On March 8, the comparison of statutory vs. charter cities was sent to all commission members by
the Recording Secretary
The reappointment of Bill Antzaras was confirmed by the Chief Judge in early April
A letter dated April 21st was sent to the Chief Judge with Mr. Antzaras' signed oath
A letter from President Synowczynski dated April 5th to Mayor and Council and City Manager
regarding the Police Department issue
A letter dated April 28th was received from Bruce Magnuson resigning his position as a Charter
Commission member.
OLD BUSINESS
Status of Councilmembers Voting on Boards/Commissions
Synowczynski stated the matter of Councilmembers voting on Boards and Commissions has been changed so
they are now only liaisons. The only question remaining is Councilmembers on the Economic Development
Authority (EDA). The City Council wishes to keep the EDA with more Council control. She agreed because of
all the dealings with the Federal government and funding. Hoeft indicated the EDA is at the maximum number of
members now. Ramsdell recommended leaving the EDA as is.
Status of Charter Commission Membership
Bill Antzaras has been reappointed to the Charter Commission and his oath of office forwarded to the Chief
Judge. Bruce Magnuson has resigned because he has a conflict on the Charter Commission meeting night. A
letter of appreciation will be sent to Bruce Magnuson for his years of service. We have thirteen members at the
current time. Janis Larson, whose term expires May of 2000, would like to be reappointed. Synowczynski stated
there is currently one resident is being considered for appointment. Brian Peterson stated his term expires in
October, and he does not anticipate extending the appointment.
NEW BUSINESS
Amendment to Special Assessments Section
Jim Hoeft brought forward a question from staff regarding changing the Charter to reflect Chapter 429, Special
Assessments. When the current language was put into the City Charter, it was the same as the State Statute, but
when the State Statute changed the City Charter did not. Hoeft stated it would be easier to match the statue, as
those are the requirements that must be fulfilled. He indicated all that is necessary is a reference in the City
Charter that special assessments will be made pursuant to Chapter 429 as amended, or to amend the City Charter
to read as the same as the statute does.
Hoeft indicated a Home Rule City can set assessments under their charter. Synowczynski requested he bring the
proposed language to the next meeting. She also requested Commissioners have copies of this State Statute to
compare to the City Charter at the next meeting.
Synowczynski referenced discussion at the last meeting regarding franchises and questioned if that is also
overridden by the State Statute? Hoeft will research this for the next meeting also.
Review of the Last Half of the City Charter
At the last meeting, the President asked each member to start reviewing the Charter, starting with Chapter 6, and
to bring in any proposed changes to this meeting.
Synowczynski stated that nothing has been changed in Chapter #6 since 1984 regarding powers of the City
Manager. She questioned if there is a law to follow regarding 53B, to appoint and except as herein provided,
remove the city clerk, all heads of departments, and all subordinate officers and employees in the departments, all
appointments to be upon merit and fitness alone? Hoeft stated that all the charter should do is indicate the city
manager has authority to hire and terminate department heads and staff. There are laws established regarding the
hiring/termination/veterans status, etc. and it is not necessary to list these in the charter, but only to state that it
must be the city manager's responsibility, not that of Council or other staff. Ramsdell asked if Council can
override a termination? Hoeft stated they cannot, as they delegate that authority to the city manager. They have
authority over the city manager if they disagree with his decisions.
Ramsdell referred to Sec. 53 and asked if the city manager is over the police department. Hoeft stated that the
police department is exempt from the city manager's control and is only under control of the Mayor. Ramsdell
indicated this would mean the organizational chart is incorrect
Synowczynski questioned section 56, and why there is a $3,000 limit, considering inflation. Collova stated that a
limit this low is difficult when emergency repairs are needed, such as boilers and HVAC systems. Hoeft indicated
these items are usually on approval at the consent level. Some items are $4,000 to $8,000 but are not significant
in the scheme of things. Ramsdell felt this was a good checks and balance system. Hoeft stated that an
emergency Council meeting may be called whenever necessary. Peterson suggested using a budget percentage, as
it would be more timeless. Collova stated that the State Statutes has a $15,000 limit, and suggest that amount be
used. Landwehr felt it should be left to the discretion of the Council. Hoeft stated that the amount expended
without Council approval may be set by resolution. He felt the concern with using percentages, would give
departments automatic authority for increases. Antzaras stated this dollar amount requires the city manager to
contact the council if there is a problem. Hoeft questioned if $3,000 is an appropriate amount and if it was
Council's intention to freeze the amount when this was approved. Antzaras asked what the dollar amount was in
the charter before 1990, and how often the amount has been changed.
Fowler felt a Council resolution setting the dollar amount may be the best solution. Hoeft stated that from an
operational standpoint, there has been frustration with the current level of $3,000, as staff must wait a week or
two to get an item on the council agenda. Hoeft stated that allowing council to set the amount by resolution is
the most efficient manner, and would allow them to give more or less lee way to the acting city manager of that
time. Upon discussion, commissioners agreed a simple majority vote on such a resolution would be sufficient.
Hoeft will prepare such language for the next meeting.
Synowczynski asked if Eminent Domain is controlled by State Statute. Hoeft discussed the basics of this process,
which must be followed pursuant to the statute.
On Section 57, Hoeft stated the City is required to follow statutes. Service contracts are not covered under this
section. He indicated there is no need to take bids for contracts under $25,000. The Legislature has discussed
raising this amount, but it failed. Peterson questioned if the charter could define or limit other contracts such as
service contracts, for standard practice. Hoeft stated the Council will require service contracts that are significant
to be bid out. Discussion included taking the "lowest, responsible bid". Hoeft stated that service contracts are
more difficult to define as they may not have a defined time limit, and that there are too many variables.
Peterson felt that Chapter 57 should be better defined. Hoeft stated that like special assessments you are referred
to a specific provision of the city code. Synowczynski suggested the Commission look at the corresponding
ordinance #1214. Peterson requested to see a copy of the municipal contract law for the State of Minnesota for
review at the next meeting to see how it impacts the Charter and affect this brief section.
Ramsdell suggested discussing Chapter 7 at the next meeting. Hoeft indicated this section refers to Taxation and
Finance which has basically been taken over by the legislature.
MOTION by Ramsdell, second by Schmidt to begin the next meeting with the review of Chapter 7 of the City
Charter. All ayes. Motion carried.
NEXT MEETING DATE
The next regular meeting date is July 20, 2000, at 7:00 p.m., at Murzyn Hall.
ADJOURNMENT
MOTION by Ramsdell, seconded by Landwehr, to adjourn the meeting at 8:20 p.m. All ayes. Motion carried.
Respectfully submitted,
Patty Muscovitz
Recording Secretary