Laserfiche WebLink
Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Field, Commissioners Deemer, Bendtsen, M. <br />Anderson, S. Anderson, Niederhaus, Niska, Sivertson, and Zaetsch. Voting No: None. <br />4. APPROVE MINUTES <br />Commissioner S. Anderson asked whether the font size of the text on the Charter Commission <br />packet's cover page could be enlarged. <br />City Clerk Thieling apologized for the small font size, and added it is a software default that City <br />staff has not been able to change. She added the City Council packet's cover page has the same <br />appearance. <br />Motion by Commissioner Deemer, seconded by Commissioner S. Anderson, to approve the <br />following meeting minutes as presented: <br />1) Regular Charter Commission Meeting dated April 23, 2014 <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Field, Commissioners Deemer, S. Anderson, M. <br />Anderson, Bendtsen, Niederhaus, Niska, Sivertson, and Zaetsch. Voting No: None. <br />5. COMMISSION BUSINESS <br />5.1: Franchise Fee Ordinance <br />Chairperson Field noted that the Charter Commission is present tonight to discuss possible <br />options related to the proposed franchise fee ordinance, in light of the City Council's discussion <br />at its June 10, 2014 meeting. He added the City Council did not have a unanimous or even <br />majority consensus to move forward with the proposed ordinance. <br />City Attorney Langel presented the staff report, indicating the purpose of this Case is for the <br />Charter Commission to consider whether to pursue a Charter amendment concerning franchise <br />fees in light of the City Council's decision not to approve the proposed Charter amendment <br />ordinance. <br />City Attorney Langel reviewed that since last October, the City Council and the Charter <br />Commission have exchanged proposed amendments to the City Charter that would provide <br />limitations on the use of franchise fees. At its last meeting of April 23, 2014, the Commission <br />modified the draft amendment and sent it back to the Council. On June 10, 2014, the City <br />Council considered the proposed amendment but a motion to introduce the ordinance failed. <br />There was a lack of consensus with respect to moving forward with franchise fees and under <br />restrictions. Without unanimous approval by the Council, the Charter amendment requires voter <br />approval. <br />City Attorney Langel explained that pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 410.12, absent a <br />voter petition, the only means by which the amendment can be put before the voters is if the <br />Charter Commission votes to do so. Because of the July 8 Statutory deadline for submitting the <br />Charter Commission/ June 25, 2014 <br />Page 2 of 9 <br />