Loading...
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