Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout19860109 Charter MinutesCHARTER CQMMISSION MINUTES January g, 1g8b The meeting was called to order by C. Caturia at 7:34 in the City Hall Council Chambers. Present: J. F~IcGree, J, Gilbert, ~. Caturia, D. Dobrick, S. Anent, W. Hartman, Earl Beltz and J. Johnson Absent: Marie Bolden and Naike Hovgaard Public: T. Nesbitt, F. Trautmann, L. Stoffel and E. Kaiser C. Caturia asked for a motion to accept the minutes of December 12, 1985, W. Hartman maned to accept and D. Dobrick seconded with the following corrections. ~g W. Hartman re part -- Head of Police Dept, is Police Chief answers to City Manager. D. Dobrick -- corrected spelling of M. Werner's name e instead of a, C. Caturia reported on the City of Mounds View: 1. 12,900 population 2. Mayer/council form of government 3. 4-members and mayor elected at large 4. follows the same format as Hopkins and it has been in operation since 1958 5. very few compliants, economical and efficient. J. Gilbert reported on West St. Paul: 1. 4-council persons elected every two years 2. City Manager form of government 3. I~Iayor votes on specified matters 4. All city information sent out through sewer billing C. C~.turia introduced Marie Bolden's statement of policy which will provide the voting format on Charter changes. C. Caturia asked the Commission to deal with these issues brought forth in the Statement of Policy --- came to a conclusion -- meet and submit to the council/mayor for any discussion and appropriate action.. W. Hartman asked about the housekeeping matters already done by Commission and the need to complete the rest of the Charter. This will be completed at the February meeting. W. Hartman, inquired about an attorney being brought in to clarify whatever issues that are proposed. C. Caturia stated all decisions reached by the Charter Commission should be reviewed by an attorney far legality. J. NlcGree suggested that changes could be submitted to league of MN Cities. It was suggested at this time to ask the league for the name of an attorney to handle our questions. W. Hartman has agreed to get in touch with the Zeague about sending someone down for the February meeting. J. McGree asked if the ward system is eliminated would voting be all in one place? C. Ca-~uria answered -- there isn't~.any need to change present voting locations but what we really are changing is the campaign methods. W. Hartman stated ~-- voting can be done by precincts instead of wards as it is in Hopkins. - Page 2 - J. McGree -- need to put in the Charter about changing:the word wards to precincts but leave the boundary ~.ines the same as wards. J. Gilbert asked how would party caucuses be handled when wards are eliminated -- would it be one big caucus? It was de~;ermined that the caucuses would be done by precincts instead of wards. W. Hartman convents an At-Large election: campaigning mare difficult -- it would benefit whole city by candidates being less provencial in their thinking. D. Dabrick m- research is needed in the meaning of precincts and wards. #1 It is the Commission's recommendation. that the ward system be discontinued in Hastings and -that all references to e: ward system be removed from the Charter. After discussion on the above proposal no action was taken for the present time. #2 It is the Commission's recommendation that all elected Council persons be elected at large to serve City residents' needs and that each representative serve 4-year terms. J. Johnson recommends one person per ward, two at large with mayor voting on every ~esaue. Hastings voters will not accept an all a-t-large system. C. Caturia questioned -- do we favor at large representation? Do we wish to retain a 4-ward system? If we do elect at-large, would terms be staggarded? L. Stoffel -- disagrees with the all at-large system -- because of the difficulty of people running in wards 1 and 2 --- at large s,y~tem council persons wouldn't be considerate of other areas --- new people in town would need to knoarn throughput city instead of their immediate area. 4J. Hartman waved to accept ~- Tt is the Commission's recommendation that all elected Council persons be elected at-large to serve City residents] needs and that each representative serve 4 year terms, two council persons elected in each even numbered election year. Earl Beltz seconded. Vl~o~ion pa~sedJan~ carbeet~Pand Janice Johnson ~r3 In order to increase efficiency, the Commission recommends -that the City Council be reduced in size from eight representatives to four beginning with the 1986 elections. D. Dobrick -- changing the 8 to 5 will make it more acceptable to the voters. In 198b it should go slowly and phase out council persons as terms empires. Two council persons be elected for a two-year term as not to have all new people every four years. W. Hartman moved to accept -- In order to increase efficiency, the Commission recommends that the City Council be reduced in size from eight representatives to five including the mayor beginning with the 1986 elections. D. Dabrick seconding. Motion passed and carried. #~4 The Commission advises that the Mayor become a full-fledged member - Page 3 - of the Council with voting power on all issues but no veto power. Janice Johnson moved to accept with W. Hartman seconding. Motion passed and aarried. #5 Sharon Avent moved to accept -- The Commission advises that the Mayor be allowed to initiate discussion at Council meetings, but further recommends that the Mayor must relinquish the Chair shauld he/she desire to take a particular stand on an issue. Dick Dobrick seconded. Discussion: S. Avent questioned Roberts Rules of Order presiding over a meeting and making changes against RR of 0? Z. Stoffel -- things can be set by Charter then follow with RR of 0. Fred Trautmann--stated the presider may relinquish the chair by RR of 0. J. McGree inquired as to how are items not on the agenda handled? W. Hartman --- Hopkins does not add items that are presented after Thursday noon for a Tuesday meeting. Z, Stoffel stated that at the end of Council meetings the audience is asked if they have anything they wish to bring up. After same discussion on the matter it was decided on that anything that ~.s not on the agenda brought up for discussion shauld be directed to Staff for investigation before any action is taken. Proposal #5 The motion was passed and carried. ~#6 The Commission recommends that the Mayor be allowed to second motions already on the floor. 4~, Hartman moved to strike this proposal second by Judy Gilbert. The motion was passed and carried. ~7 J. I~icGree moved to accept -- The Commission recommends that the Mayor serve a 4-year term. S. Avent second. The motion was passed and carried. ~8 The Commission recommends that the City Administrator be the Chief Executive Officer of the City of Hastings Police Department and that the Mayor be relieved of this responsibility. W. Hartman stated -- Hastings should have a City Mgr. form of govt. --- C.Manager .or City Administrator is Chief Executive Officer --- Chief of Police like any other city employee - can be hired or fired. Z. Stoffel -- there is nothing but pressure on other cities with the Chief of Police under City administrator. There are presently three lawsuits involving Police Chiefs anal Cities. She recommends hearing from Chief Plath before any decision is reached. A Police Chief cannot be dismissed without going through the Civil Service Process. question -- Check on Civil Service Process on removal of Police Chief by C.h.and/or C. Mgr. contrary to Council wishes% Dick Dobrick recommended voting on Proposal 9 before 8. Dick Dobrick moved -- The Commission recommends that the City administrator or City be the Chief Executive Officer of the City of Hastings and be - Page ~. - responsible for the day-to-day operation of the City. Earl Beltz seconding. The motion was passed and carried. #9 Wint Hartman moved to accept -- The Commission recommends the Chief of Police be appointed by and be responsible to the City hdministrator or City Manager. Dick Dobrick seconding. Motion was passed and carried with S. Avent voting n~,ye - Judy Gilbert abstaining. C. Caturia. asked if we should consider a City Manager form of govt.: February Meeting: 1. The difference between a City Administrator and City Manager. 2. Hear from Chief of Po~.ice and Police Chiefs Assoc. on the merits of Chief of Police being under the I~iayor. 3. Representative from League of MN Cities 4. Review of Sec. III to clear-up any "housekeeping" items. 5. :review proposals to see what would pass Council vote. Janice Johnson asked about changing the meetings to enable M. Bolden and M. Hovgaard to attend meetings. It was decided to have meetings on the third Wednesday of the month subject to the approval of M. Bolden. PLEASE NO'I~E HERE JANICE JOHNSON HAS SPOKEN TQ MARIE BOZDEN ABOUT CHANGING MEETING DAYS SHE RECOMMENDS ~-- NCB CHANGE FGR THE PRESENT TIDE. MEETING -- I'EB. 13, 1986 Jeanne ~1cGree moved far adjournment with Earl Beltz seconding. Motion was passed and carr~.ed. Adjournment at 9:45 PM