Agenda - Charter Commission - 05/19/2005

Home

~b/~.~/2005 00:45 LA~ OFFICE 2140 4TH AUE ~ 42?5543 ND.824 William K. Goodrich May 5, 2005 Page -~2- As you know, a charter amendment may be proposed in a variety of methods, including proposals based upon a petition of voters. Where the proposed amendment is based upon a voter petition, the statute clearly requires that the proposal "shall first be submitted to the charter commission for its approval as to form and substance." Minn. Stat. § 410.12, Subd. I (2004}. Further, the statute provides "all petition papers for a proposed amendment shall be assembled and filed with the charter commission as one instrument." 410.12. Subd. 3 (2004}. Subd. 4 of that statute provides "amendments shall be submitted to the qualified voters at a general or special election and published as in the case of the original charter." 410.12, Subd. 4 ¢2004). Importantly, the time period for an electio~ does not commence until the proposed amendment has been delivered from the Charter Commission to the City Council. See, Section 410,10, Subd. 1 (2004). The Charter Commission must first review such petitions. Section 410.05, Subd. 4 (2004) provides that the Charter Commission shall meet at least annually and must meet upon presentation of a petition signed by 10% of the number of voters or upon resolution of the City Council requesting the Charter Commission to convene and consider proposals, tn this case, it appears that the City of Ramsay skipped the first step. That is, the petition was filed with the City Clerk who verified the signatures and the City Council then determined the sufficiency of the Petition and scheduled an ejection, in my view, it is necessary for the petition to first be submitted to the Charter Commission for approval, it is only after the Charter Commission has completed its review that the proposal is forwarded to the City Council which begins the election time period. It appears the procedure used by the City of Ramse¥ in this matter is erroneous and the scheduling of the specie) election is unnecessary and premature. It is not appropriate for the City to view the work of the Charter Commission with respect to amendment petitions as superfluous or unimportant. The Charter Commission is charged by statute with the authority and responsibility to review and comment on proposed charter amendments. This is their function. It may very well bo that after proper review, the Charter Commission could have significant input and response to the proposals that have been submitted. They should be provided with this opportunity as the statute requires. I am requesting that you review this matter. In my opinion, the City Council should determine to return the petition to the Charter Commission for its proper review and approval, Once that process has been oompleted, the petition would be returned to the City Council which can then determine whether or not to schedule an election,