HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda CC 06.26.2001Council meeting date: June 26, 2001 Item No.:
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
SUBJECT:
Discussion of Council's proposed Charter revision issues and presentation from special
counsel concerning same.
ITEM SUMMARY:
This item continues the Council's discussions from the May 21 and May 31, 2001 City
Council workshops. Following an initial evaluation of the City's Charter, Mr. John Olson
of Olson & Olson, was provided with a list of the issues raised by the Council on May 21
and 31 and was requested to provide the City with a legal opinion concerning those
issues. Mr. Olson has responded to those concerns in an opinion provided to Council
on June 20. Mr. Olson will be present at this meeting to address any questions
concerning Charter revisions.
ATTACHMENTS:
List of Charter issues discussed at May 21, 2001 and May 31, 2001 meetings
Submitted By:
Cath een R. Riedel, Acting City Attorney
Council meeting date: June 26, 2001 Item No.: A
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
SUBJECT:
Discussion of Council's proposed Charter revision issues and presentation from special
counsel concerning same.
ITEM SUMMARY:
This item continues the Council's discussions from the May 21 and May 31, 2001 City
Council workshops. Following an initial evaluation of the City's Charter, Mr. John Olson
of Olson & Olson, was provided with a list of the issues raised by the Council on May 21
and 31 and was requested to provide the City with a legal opinion concerning those
issues. Mr. Olson has responded to those concerns in an opinion provided to Council
on June 20. Mr. Olson will be present at this meeting to address any questions
concerning Charter revisions.
ATTACHMENTS:
List of Charter issues discussed at May 21, 2001 and May 31, 2001 meetings
Submitted By:
�1 1%. 0.-*1% 0
Cath een R. Riedel, cting City Attorney
Notes from 5/21/01 City Council Meeting on Charter Review/Revision
• Remove superfluous language throughout the Charter (e.g. Section 1.05) that is overstatment of powers
(more said than necessary)
• Need much better index
• Remove comments about what was going to happen, since history no longer necessary (e.g. Century
Plan and districts)
• "Council" definition - is it council members and mayor or council members only
• Section 2.09 and 2.10 - language on majority death - or "qualified in serving" - make consistent
• Section 2.14 - not really what Council does
• Section 3.03 City Secretary, not Mayor
• Article III - not consistent with State Election Code
• Sections 4.01, 4.02, 4.03 - define consistent standard
• Section 4.06 - ordinance not passed at referendum election
• Section 4.07 - officer/official
• Section 6.02 - budget - longer than 30 days - standard requirement City today's time
• Section 6.04 - budget amendment
• Section 6.12 - audit not published
• Section 8.01 - electric utility sale
• Section 8.02 - remove public language
• Section 9.03 & 9.04 - check to see if language reversed in codification
• Employees to influence public policy only on own time and as a private citizen
• Section 9.06 duplicated language
• Sections 9.09, 9.10 and 9.11 - do not read correctly, as probably
• Addendum - delete 9.15 and 9.17 (interim provisions)
• Consider making police chief an appointed official
• require annexatio
• Mayor requested that legal counsel review list to see if these issues are ones that could/sh—ou-Mle
placed in Charter:
■ City Attorney should be "at will" along with all Council appointed officials.
■ Require that all assistants to Council appointed officials be approved by council.
■ Requirement that all budget hearings be held in the City (Hall, if possible).
■ Under Section 9.03; Restriction on use of official position/city property to act in contravention of
official policy. Perhaps statement that employees shall attempt to influence policy by utilizing
official channels. Any other involvement must be on own time, using own resources,a nd as
private citizen.
■ Restrictions on use of C.O. funding, perhaps formal process, percentage limitation, etc.
• Requirement t at a current inventory of (real) property owned by the City be maintained.
■ Requirement that on a regular basis, and after any revision, the charter have legal review for
consistency, compliance.
• Requirement that Council, on annual basis following elections, review Charter, just as it does
ethics requirements.
■ Requirement that City maintain an updated annexation policy (perhaps in comprehensive plan)
• Ql after is badly organized - looks like a patchwork quilt
• What is missing from comprehsive plan, i.e., what has not been don that is required? (Public transit, for
instance)
• Section 2.03 is out of compliance
• Requirements for iniative, referendum, recall are not properly defined under district system
• Section 9.02, open records, is not being practiced. Is this related to superior statute?
05/24/01