Minutes - Charter Commission - 03/29/2010

Home

fires City staff. State Statutes says the City Council does not have the authority with regard to the hiring and termination process. Another difference may be related to finances, what amount the Administrator or Manager may be able to authorize to be spent. The Council could give the City Administrator additional spending power. In 2006, the Charter Commission recommended the City Council go to a City Manager form of government. That would be effective 1/1/2011. He explained the way the first amendment was made under Subdivision 7 of the State Statutes. The process is as follows: the Charter Commission recommends an amendment to the Council. Council holds a public hearing and unanimously — all seven members (cannot be done if one or more members is absent) vote in favor. There is a 90 day period following publication and then that ordinance amends the City's Charter. The current City Council has chosen a different method to amend the City's Charter. He noted Ordinance #10 -03 would reverse Ordinance #06 -35 and not go to the City Manager form of government. The current City Council wants it to stay as it is. As governed by State Statute, this particular ordinance does not have to have a unanimous vote. The ordinance, adopted by Council, being presented to the Charter Commission tonight, is for the Commission to review and make comments. The Commission is not authorized to veto it — only comment and send back to the City Council. The Council may put it forward to the voters and the amendment would only become effective by the voters. Mr. Goodrich believed that the gist of the current City Council's discussion is that they feel this is a significant change by the City and they feel it should be voted on by the voters of the City. After reviewing the ordinance, the Charter may approve, reject, or suggest a substitute language; however, you cannot stop the process. Chairperson Deemer stated that to avoid a special election, the Charter needs to make a decision sometime in July. Commissioner Cleveland recollected that this amendment to go to City ,Manager was pushed forward to get better candidates coming in for the City Administrator position. She felt that normally, a question such as this should have gone to the voters. Commissioner Anderson stated that an amendment can be done either way. From her standpoint, a unanimous vote of the Council should be more for housekeeping type Charter amendments and the more substantial changes should go to the voters. Commissioner Anderson talked about an incident years ago in the City of Ramsey where the City Administrator recommended the person be retained as a full -time permanent employee, but three members of the Council did not agree. At the end of her probationary period, the Council voted the employee out. She sated it "was not a pretty sight to see her let go against the recommendation of the City Administrator ". She felt that this is an example of what can and has happened in this City. If it had been a City Manager form of government, this type of action would not have prevailed. Commissioner Cleveland stated that would be a comfort to her as a citizen if the City Manager had more control of that. The Council is not working on a daily basis with the employee, but the Manager is. Charter Commission — March 29, 2010 Page 3 of 9