Laserfiche WebLink
Commissioner Anderson commented that she believed the intent of the amendment was to limit <br />the amount of franchise fees that could be charged, rather than not allowing them at all. <br />Chairperson Field stated that the amendment as proposed would limit the increase in costs that <br />results for a utility company to implement its service, which would be negligible. <br />Commissioner Anderson believed that the intent was to ensure that the franchise fees would only <br />be used for improving roads and to have additional controls. <br />Chairperson Field stated that the amendment would match the actual expense for a utility company <br />to implement their service, rather than allowing the City to raise revenue through that purpose. <br />City Administrator Ulrich stated that other options were discussed with the Charter Commission <br />five or six years ago to make the Charter more consistent with the ordinance, to use that method <br />for only road funding and with caps but that did not move forward. <br />Commissioner Sivertson stated that in those discussions it was determined that the Charter cannot <br />engage in budget issues and that is why the discussion ended. <br />Chairperson Field called for votes on the motion to approve the amendment to Section 10.4 of the <br />Charter, which adds the phrase "except that any franchise fees imposed under State Statute must <br />be limited to defray an actual increased municipal costs accrued as a result of utility operations <br />and may not be used to generate revenue." <br />A roll call vote was performed: <br />Commissioner Bendtsen aye <br />Commissioner Sivertsen aye <br />Commissioner Deemer nay <br />Commissioner Leistico nay <br />Commissioner Fuhreck nay <br />Commissioner Anderson nay <br />Commissioner Moore nay <br />Chairperson Field aye <br />Motion failed. <br />5.5 Review Amendments to Chapter 4 of the Charter — Nominations and Elections to be <br />in Conformity with State Law <br />Chairperson Field reviewed the staff report noting that the purpose of the case is review Chapter <br />4 of the Charter, Nominations and Elections, to conform with State law. A lengthy discussion <br />ensued when the Commission discussed the topic at the February and October 2019 meetings and <br />a consensus of the Commission was reached. The City Attorney was asked to revise Chapter 4 of <br />the City's Charter to remove the language conflicting with State law, remove duplicative language, <br />remove the need for primaries — with one option to remove primaries all together and another to <br />Charter Commission/ August 27, 2020 <br />Page 8 of 11 <br />