The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2015-10-08 Charter Commission Agenda PacketCorcoran Charter Commission Annual Meeting Agenda Thursday, October 8, 2015 6:00 PM 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of Agenda 3. Approval of Minutes a. Draft Minutes of 10/23/2014* 4. Open Forum 5. Old Business 6. New Business a. Election of officers* i. Chair ii. Secretary b. Review of Correspondence during 2014* c. Discussion on future agenda items d. Update on Commissioner Appointments 7. Information Exchange 8. Adjourn City of Corcoran Charter Commission Minutes Thursday, October 23, 2014 The Corcoran Charter Commission met on October 23, 2014, at City Hall in Corcoran, Minnesota. Present were Commissioners Asleson, Gmach, Kluck, Lother, Theis, and Tilbury. Commissioner Cossette was absent Also present were City Administrator Martens and City Clerk Heinecke. Commission Chair Lother called the meeting to order at 6:00 pm. 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Approval of Agenda MOTION: made by Gmach, seconded by Kluck to approve the agenda as presented Voting Aye: Asleson, Gmach, Kluck, Lother, Theis, and Tilbury (Motion carried 6:0) 3. Approval of Minutes a. Draft Minutes of 12/20/2012 MOTION: made by Theis, seconded by Kluck to approve the 12/20/12 Draft Minutes with corrections as discussed. Voting Aye: Kluck, Lother, Theis, and Tilbury Abstain: Asleson, and Gmach (Motion carried 4:0) Commission discussed the minimum and maximum number of commissioners allowed, along with adding more members to facilitate retiring members. Staff was directed to verify any TIF spending differences for home rule charter cities and statutory cities. 4. Open Forum-None 5. Old Business-None 6. New Business a. Commission Chair named the new appointments in 2014.  Richard Asleson  Thomas Cossette  George Gmach  Kenneth Kluck  Brian Lother 7. Election of officers MOTION: made by Gmach, seconded by Theis to appoint Commissioner Lother as Chair. Voting Aye: Asleson, Gmach, Kluck, Lother, Theis, and Tilbury (Motion carried 6:0) MOTION: made by Kluck, seconded by Tilbury to appoint Commissioner Theis as Secretary. Voting Aye: Asleson, Gmach, Kluck, Lother, Theis, and Tilbury (Motion carried 6:0) a. Review of Correspondence during 2013. Commissioner Lother noted the 2013 Charter Commission meeting was not held. Commissioners agreed October is the preferred month for the annual meeting. b. Discussion on future agenda items. Commissioners discussed the addition of more commission members early 2015. The suggestion is to add 2 members in 2015 and 2 in 2017; this will facilitate a 2 year rotation for new members. City of Corcoran Charter Commission Minutes Thursday, October 23, 2014 MOTION: made by Tilbury, seconded by Asleson to direct staff to solicit 2 additional commission members in 2015. Voting Aye: Asleson, Gmach, Kluck, Lother, Theis, and Tilbury (Motion carried 6:0) Motion: made by Gmach, seconded by Tilbury to adjourn. Voting Aye: Asleson, Gmach, Kluck, Lother, Theis, and Tilbury (Motion carried 6:0) Meeting adjourned at 6:18 pm ________________________________ Jeanie Heinecke – City Clerk CITY OF CORCORAN 8200 County Road 116, Corcoran, MN 55340 763.420.2288 – Office 763.420.6056 – Fax E-mail - general@ci.corcoran.mn.us / Web Site - www.ci.corcoran.mn.us MEMO Date: January 2, 2015 To: Charter Commission Members From: Brad Martens, City Administrator Re: Follow up from October 23, 2014 meeting ______________________________________________________________________ Attached to this memo you will find the draft minutes from the October 23, 2014 meeting and two additional documents as requested by the members. Please review the minutes and contact Jeanie Heinecke with any suggested changes while the information is relatively fresh. The next meeting is tentatively scheduled for October 8, 2015. The minutes will be officially approved at that meeting. Attachment: 1. Draft Charter Commission Minutes – October 23, 2014 2. League of Minnesota Cities Presentation – Understanding Charter Cities 3. Minnesota Statutes – Chapter 410 10/1/2015 1 Understanding Charter Cities Amber Eisenschenk League of Minnesota Cities July 2013 Overview What is a Charter City? What are the differences between statutory and Charter cities? How does a Charter relate to state law? What are Advantages/disadvantages of a Charter? How did we get Charter? What is the Charter Commission? How does a Charter get amended? 10/1/2015 2 Enumerated Powers The Rest Federal Government Founding Fathers State Governments A Few Towns, Cities, and Counties City Government in Minnesota Not created by, but subject to the Federal Constitution Created by the Minnesota Constitution Created by State Statute 10/1/2015 3 Trivia Question: How many cities are there in Minnesota? a) 1,254 b) 542 c) 854 c) 853 Two Types of Cities Statutory Cities Home Rule Charter Cities Only 107 (12.5%) of all MN cities are Charter Cities! 10/1/2015 4 Authority for City Type Statutory Cities are authorized and empowered by MN Statutes, Chapter 412. Charter Cities are authorized by MN Constitution, Article XII, section 4 and MN Statutes, Chapter 410 Powers of a City Statutory cities can only adopt ordinances when authorized by state law to do so. Home rule charter cities can adopt ordinances on all appropriate subjects unless prohibited by law. 10/1/2015 5 General Powers of A Statutory City to Provide Services Police Fire Sanitation Street Utilities Zoning Parks Recreation And Many More! Examples of Statutory Cities Centerville (Pop. 3644, Anoka County) Hugo (Pop. 8760, Washington County) Forest Lake (Pop. 16800, Washington Cty) Andover (Pop. 29262, Anoka County) Oak Grove (Pop. 7455, Anoka County) North Oaks (Pop. 4200, Ramsey County) 10/1/2015 6 Home Rule Charter Cities Ideally, Charter provides only fundamentals of organization of city (simplicity and brevity) + a “broad grant of authority” to council Then council is free to exercise broad authority by ordinance Forms of Charter Government Weak Mayor- Council Strong Mayor- Council Council-Manager Commission 10/1/2015 7 Common Charter Provisions Ward System Initiative and Referendum Comprehensive grant of power or “all powers” clause Size of Council, quorum Charter Commission Structure Examples of Charter Cities Lino Lakes (Pop. 18725, Anoka County) Ham Lake (Pop. 14508, Anoka County) Blaine (Pop. 51002, Anoka/Ramsey Cty) Coon Rapids (Pop. 62243, Anoka County) White Bear Lake (Pop. 24922, Ramsey/Washington County) Two Harbors (Pop. 3675, Lake County) 10/1/2015 8 Charter in Relation to State Law On a given issue, what if State law is silent, but Charter addresses the issue Charter is silent, but State law addresses the subject Charter and State law have different provisions on same subject (conflict) State law silent, Charter isn’t Could the State delegate the authority expressly? Preemption? If so, Charter provision likely valid 10/1/2015 9 Charter is silent, State law isn’t If a charter is silent on a matter that is addressed for statutory cities, and no law prohibits the charter from addressing the matter, and no law states that a charter prevails over general law on the matter, THEN the charter city can apply the general law on the matter Charter differs from State law General rule: State law wins to the extent the charter provision is in conflict with State’s policy City attorney should advise whether a conflict exists A.G. opinions or case law? Detectible policy that applies for all cities? 10/1/2015 10 Do Charter Cities have to follow… Statutory City law (Minn. Stat. Ch 412) Planning & Zoning law (Minn. Stat. §§462.351- .365) Special assessments law (M.S. Ch. 429) Criminal code (M.S. Ch. 609) Charter law (M.S. Ch. 410.04-.33) Clean Indoor Air Act (M.S. §§144.411-.417) Powers of a city Statutory cities can only adopt ordinances when authorized by state law to do so. Home rule charter cities can adopt ordinances on all appropriate subjects unless prohibited by law. 10/1/2015 11 Advantages Local solution for local issues Encourages an informed electorate As simple or complex as city needs May provide for initiative, referendum, recall, and election of council by wards Disadvantages Costly Applicability of statutes, court rulings and AG Opinions less clear Skillful drafting harder with fewer resources Amendments/abandonment time-consuming, complicated, difficult to pass 10/1/2015 12 How did we get a Charter? City residents or local clubs expressed interest in a Charter Cf. Judge of district court appointed Charter Commission Draft submitted to clerk, council Charter voted on by public in an election The Charter Commission A permanent body Usually appointed by a district court Must meet at least once per year Failure to meet does not end existence Have between 7 and 15 members 10/1/2015 13 Charter Commission Members Must be qualified voters of the city May hold offices, such as councilmember; but not judicial Limit on successive terms? “Upon the expiration of each term, the chief judge shall appoint new commission members.” Minn. Stat. §410.05, subd 2 Appointment of Charter Commission Members Chief Judge usually appoints Listens to information Considers suggestions from charter commission or council, or citizen petitioners Appointees have 30 days to file acceptance and oaths with court clerk 10/1/2015 14 Charter Commission Functions Study the local charter and government Draft a proposed charter Convene either at their direction, or direction of council or voters to Consider proposed charter amendments, or Propose charter amendments Changing A Charter Through Amendment 5 ways to propose modifications to a Charter Generally modifications submitted to voters Amendment needs 51% favorable vote 10/1/2015 15 Abandoning a Charter Abandonment process is identical to Amendment process 51% of voters must approve abandonment Proposal for abandonment must state statutory govt form that will replace Charter Questions? Call the League of Minnesota Cities Amber Eisenschenk 651-281-1227 or League Website www.lmc.org