HomeMy WebLinkAboutJanuary 18, 2001, MinutesCOLUMBIA HEIGHTS CHARTER COMMISSION
JANUARY 18, 2001
7 P.M.
GAUVITTE ROOM, JOHN P. MURZYN HALL
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by President Theresia Synowczynski at 7 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Members present: Bill Antzaras, Charles Christopherson, Mel Collova, Tammera Ericson, James Fowler,
Michael Hartel, Ted Landwehr (7:11 p.m.), Tom Ramsdell, Clara Schmidt, Joe A
Sturdevant (7:02 p.m.), Theresia Synowczynski
Members absent and excused: None
Members absent and unexcused: Janis Larson, Brian Peterson
Also present: Jim Hoeft, City Attorney; Carole Blowers, Recording Secretary; Councilmember Bruce
Nawrocki
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Motion by Bill Antzaras, seconded by Tom Ramsdell, to approve the minutes of October 19, 2000, as presented.
Motion passed unanimously.
CORRESPONDENCE
The Recording Secretary stated several pieces of correspondence has been received/sent since our last meeting:
·
A letter asking not to be reappointed had been received from Joel Cason
·
A letter asking to be reappointed had been received from Brian Peterson
·
A letter was sent to Chief Judge Quinn transmitting both of these letters
·
A letter was sent to Joel Cason, thanking him for his service on the commission
·
Information was sent to all Charter Commission members asking for their meal selections for
next week’s annual dinner
·
Tonight’s agenda with previous meeting’s minutes sent to all members.
NEW BUSINESS
Election for offices of President, Vice President, and Secretary took place.
Motion by Theresia Synowczynski, seconded by Jim Fowler, to nominate Tami Ericson for President. Other
nominations were called for twice. There being none, the question was called. Motion passed unanimously.
Motion by Bill Antzaras, seconded by Jim Fowler, to nominate Joe Sturdevant for Vice President. Other
nominations were called for twice. There being none, the question was called. Motion passed unanimously.
Motion by Mel Collova to nominate Jim Fowler for Secretary. No second was received.
Motion by Joe Sturdevant, seconded by Mel Collova, to nominate Clara Schmidt for Secretary. Other
nominations were called for twice. There being none, the question was called. Motion passed unanimously.
January 18, 2001
Page 1
The officers for 2001 are:
President Tami Ericson
Vice President Joseph Sturdevant
Secretary Clara Schmidt
The meeting was then turned over to the new President, Tami Ericson.
STATUS OF COMMISSION
The Recording Secretary stated that Brian Peterson has asked to be reappointed, and nothing has been heard
from the Chief Judge yet on this reappointment. There are still two openings besides that at this time.
The President stated there were two applications for membership to the Charter Commission received, one from
Bob Buboltz, and one from John Banyard. Their applications were reviewed. Motion by Michael Hartel,
seconded by Joe Sturdevant, to advise the Chief Judge there would be no problem appointing both of these
individuals. Motion passed unanimously.
Theresia Synowczynski stated that there is one citizen that should not be appointed to the Charter Commission,
that being Don Jolly. Mr. Jolly has stated publicly in our local newspaper that he wants to be appointed to the
commission, but only to abolish it.
Discussion then ensured briefly regarding abolishing the charter and how that could be done. The City Attorney
stated that there are two ways, one being the City Council could initiate that action and have it put on the ballot
for the people to decide. Another way would be if a majority of the Charter Commission members voted to
abolish it, then the City Council would have to vote unanimously to abolish it.
ANNUAL DINNER MEETING
The annual dinner meeting is next Thursday, January 25, 2001, at The Shorewood Inn, with a brief meeting at 6
p.m., and dinner at 6:30 p.m.
APPROVAL OF ANNUAL REPORT
A draft of the 2000 annual report of the Charter Commission was prepared by the Recording Secretary and
provided to all members of the commission for their review/approval. Motion by Tom Ramsdell, seconded by
Theresia Synowczynski, to accept the report as prepared. Motion passed unanimously. The Recording
Secretary will forward the report to the Chief Judge and the City Clerk.
OLD BUSINESS
Discussion of Chapter 8, Section 77, Special Assessments
The City Attorney explained that regarding this section, we could either keep the current language in the charter
or adjust it according to State Statutes 429. We still have to comply with State Statutes. The City Attorney
explained the two main differences between State Statutes and the Charter language.
The first difference is that State Statutes call for a simply majority vote of the city council to approve the special
assessment project. The Charter states that a 4/5 approval vote of the council is needed.
The second difference is that State Statutes state that the special assessment levied cannot be more than double
the assessed value. The Charter states that the special assessment cannot be more than 50% of the assessed
value.
The rest of Chapter 429 of State Statues must be followed, per the City Attorney.
January 18, 2001
Page 2
Councilmember Bruce Nawrocki arrived at the meeting at 7:27 p.m.
Ted Landwehr stated he liked the 4/5 vote required by the charter. Tom Ramsdell thought the simple majority
would be all right. President Ericson pointed out a discrepancy in the comparison of statutory vs. charter
provisions chart to the City Attorney.
The City Attorney stated that it takes a simple majority of the council to accept the bid of the lowest responsible
bidder for the special assessment project.
After discussion, it was decided that the City Attorney would go through the wording of this section and clean
up the procedural language and present language to the commission at their next meeting in April.
Discussion on Chapter 9, Sections 87-92, Eminent Domain
The City Attorney stated we have to follow State Statutes 117 dealing with Eminent Domain. State Statutes
463 allows for eminent domain for streets, roadways, and along parks. The City Attorney stated that recently
this statute was declared unconstitutional.
Theresia Synowczynski wondered if we could highlight certain main sections of the statues if we are going to
reference specific State Statutes. It was also suggested that perhaps an appendix could be placed at the back of
the Charter regarding State Statutes 117, as well as referring to it in this chapter. The pros and cons of doing
that were discussed. Ted Landwehr questioned if the charter doesn’t deviate from state statutes that much, why
change it? The City Attorney stated that it doesn’t address enough of the specifics. He felt we could take out
almost all of Chapter 9, and just insert a brief paragraph with reference to State Statute 117. The City Attorney
will have suggested new language on this section for our next meeting.
Discussion of Chapter 10, Sections 93-101, Franchises
The City Attorney explained that the State Statutes restrict cities from treating franchise applicants in a different
manner--must negotiate on same terms. He explained the charter has additional requirements as well, and they
are not unconstitutional or interfere with any state or federal laws. For example, with the charter, if there were
two franchises competing, and the same terms were negotiated, there is the possibility that citizens could come
up with a referendum to stop one or the other (see Section 99).
Theresia Synowczynski asked about whether there is a user fee for using the street. The City Attorney stated
that we do not need to address this in the charter. The League of Minnesota Cities has generated a model Right
of Way ordinance.
After discussion, it was decided to have the City Attorney clean up the procedural language in this chapter as
well, and bring it to our next meeting in April.
Discussion of Chapter 11, Public Ownership and Operation of Utilities
The City Attorney will clean up.
Discussion of Chapter 12, Section 109, City Property Not Lost by Adverse Possession
The City Attorney did not feel it was a problem to leave in.
Discussion of Chapter 12, Section 111, Vacation of Streets
There was a question raised about the wording “subject to popular referendum” in this section.
January 18, 2001
Page 3
Discussion of Chapter 12, Section 112, Damage Suits
It was questioned if this is all covered by State Statutes, does it need to be in there? The City Attorney felt
several of these were transition issues when Columbia Heights went from a village to a city. A lot of these
things do not have to be in there now.
Discussion of Chapter 12, Section 114, City to Succeed Rights and Obligations of Village
The City Attorney suggested this section be removed.
Other New Business
Theresia Synowczynski suggested that perhaps the Charter Commission would like to invite the City Manager
th
to our April 19 meeting. She also brought up that in the past, a yearly joint meeting with the City Council has
been held. Tami Ericson will contact the City Council and the City Manager regarding both items.
The President noted on John Banyard’s application that he had checked three other boards/commissions he was
interested in serving on. The Recording Secretary was asked to contact him and verify that he was interested in
serving on the Charter Commission before sending his application on to the Chief Judge.
NEXT MEETING DATE
Our next regular meeting date is April 19, 2001, at 7 p.m. at Murzyn Hall.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Clara Schmidt, seconded by Mel Collova, to adjourn the meeting at 8:17 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Carole J. Blowers
Recording Secretary
January 18, 2001
Page 4