Loading...
CHM 10/01/2012 CITY OF FRIDLEY CHARTER COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 1, 2012 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Braam called the Charter Commission meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Commissioners Peter Borman, Gary Braam, Marion Flickinger, Carol Hoiby, Bill Holm, Nancy Jorgenson, Ted Kranz, Rick Nelson, Barb Reiland, Pam Reynolds, Lois Scholzen, Cynthia Soule Members Absent: Commissioners Don Findell, Noël Ryan and Keith Shaw Others Present: Deb Skogen, City Clerk/Staff Liaison APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner Jorgenson MOVED and Commissioner Borman seconded a motion approving the meeting agenda. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BRAAM DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Reiland MOVED and Commissioner Hoiby seconded a motion approving the Charter Commission meeting minutes of May 7, 2012. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BRAAM DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS A. Ms. Skogen reminded the Commissioners their next meeting would be October 29th. The meeting was changed due to the general election the following week. B. The Commissioners discussed the 2013 calendar. After reviewing the calendar Commissioner Hoiby MOVED and Commissioner Reynolds seconded a motion setting the 2013 meeting dates on January 7, February 4, March 4, April 1, May 6, September 9, October 7, and November 4. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BRAAM DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED. DISCUSSION OF CHAPTER 5 Commissioner Reynolds had several questions about the changes to Chapter 5. She had not attended some of the spring meetings due to her great granddaughter's death and wanted to understand why the changes were being made. Adopted January 7, 2013 CHARTER COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 1, 2012 PAGE 2 Question 1. Section 5.03- Section 3 - she wondered if the section requiring a registered voter to circulate a petition was inconsistent with state law. Ms. Skogen stated Charter cities could adopt language that was more restrictive than state statute and this would not be inconsistent with state law. Question 2 - Section 5.03.3(3) - asked who would be responsible for a signature on a petition for an individual who said they were a registered voter but wasn't. Ms. Skogen said the circulator would ask the individual if they were a registered voter. If the individual said yes and signed the petition, it is the individual that would be responsible, not the circulator. Question 3 - Section 5.03.4,5,6 - Commissioner Reynolds wondered why these sections only referred to Ordinance No. 625. She did not think that was the right ordinance. Ms. Skogen looked in the appendix and found those sections were changed in Ordinance No. 625 and not numbered at that time. She found Ordinance No. 1142 which created the numbers. The Commissioners agreed Ordinance No. 1142 should also be referenced. Question 4 - Section 5.05 - Commissioner Reynolds asked why the percentage of signatures needed was changed from 10% to 15%. She felt that it might be too difficult to acquire that many signatures. Ms. Skogen stated voter registration fluctuates throughout the year and it is sometimes hard to remember to print a report of the total number of registered voters on January 1st of each year. The report can only be printed on that one day, as the voter registration system does not keep track of statistics. After reviewing how charter amendments are made, staff decided it might be better to be consistent with those amendments. Staff recommended a change from the total number of registered voters on January 1st to the total number of voters voting in the last state general election, which is the number used for charter amendments. The percentage was changed because the number of registered voters is always higher than the number of individuals who voted. After comparing the numbers the Commission determined to raise the percentage to 15%. Commissioner Holm used the following example to describe the change. If there were 100 registered voters, 10% would be 10 registered voters. If there were 85 people voting, 15% would be 12.75 or 13 voters. Commissioner Nelson felt the percentage about the same. Considering the cost of an election, if the issue was important enough, he felt the higher threshold more important. Commissioner Reynolds said this chapter reserves the rights to the people and felt the higher percentage would limit those rights. Commissioner Braam agreed with the higher percentage and felt there should be enough people interested in an issue if they were committing the city to a change. Commissioner Reynolds mentioned the number of signatures needed for the petition to approve a tax levy for Springbrook Nature Center. Ms. Skogen said the Springbrook Nature Center petition was in support of the Council to approve a tax levy and the actual question was put before the voters by a resolution from the City Council, not through the petition process. Commissioner Jorgenson said the citizens should have the right to petition for a legitimate issue versus circulating a petition due to personal reasons. Adopted January 7, 2013 CHARTER COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 1, 2012 PAGE 3 Commissioner Reynolds Question 5 - Section 5.06 - why was the number of days to ascertain signatures changed from 5 to 10 days for the original petition or from 30 to 10 days to circulate the signature pages if additional signatures were needed. Ms. Skogen said it was staff's recommendation to be consistent with charter amendments and that was the time provided in state law for charter amendments and would make our charter consistent with state law and easier to administrate in the future. She had a lot of experience over the past15 years and understands the differences, but that it is very confusing for someone who does not have the experience. The change would create consistency in the procedures for administering a petition for a charter amendment and for city code. Commissioner Holm then asked about the language in Section 5.07 and said 3 months was shorter than 17 weeks was inconsistent. The Commission discussed this issue and it was determined the City Clerk would review this section, as well as sections 5.14 and 5.19, again to see if the language was appropriate or if it should be changed. Ms. Skogen will prepare a report for the next meeting. (One big question - can a ballot question be placed on a primary election ballot and would the Commission really want a question to be placed on a primary election ballot with the lower voter turnout.) CHARTER BOOKS - REVIEW Ms. Skogen will prepare a print out providing the Chapter and most current date of amendment to the members for them to review with their books. This will allow them time to contact staff and let them know what pages or chapters they need to ensure their books are current. DISCUSSION OF PROS AND CONS OF BEING CHARTER CITY Commissioner Jorgenson was concerned the state is micro-managing cities with unfunded mandates and thinks it is an important topic to discuss. This issue was tabled. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Kranz MOVED and Commissioner Flickinger seconded a motion to adjourn the meeting. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SOULE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 8:18 P.M. Respectfully submitted, ________________________ ________________________ Debra A. Skogen, Commissioner Peter Borman, Secretary City Clerk/Staff Liaison Adopted January 7, 2013