Loading...
CR 2004-106 Revision of City Charter . .July 6, 2004 CoiIncilReport 2004-106 REVISION OF CITY CHARTER ORDINANCE 2004-925" Proposed Action , " ' Staff recommends that the Council approve the following motion: ApProve Resolution 2004.044, accepting Ordinance 2004-925, ordering its publication and settin~ a public hearing for August 4, 2004. . .,'. . '. This action will enable 'citizens to review the publishedordiriance and make comments at the public hearing. " Overview The Hopkins City Charter was adopted in 1947. It was last updated in 2002. ' Ordinance 2004;..925' was drafted by city staffand, distributed to the Charter Commission., The Commission met on April 27;2004 and again on June 22 and voted to recommend the adoption of Ordinal1ce 2004-925 by the ." Hopkins City Council. The proposed ordinance must now be published at least two weeks prior to a: public hearing. The City Council can only consider adoption after the publichearing~ . ' . Primary Issues to Consider . What.changes tlfebeing recommended in the Charter? . WhaHstheprocess for amending the City Charter? Supportine Information . Analysis of the issues.' . Alternatives . Charter Commission Resolution 2004-1 . Resolution 2004-044 . Ordinance' 2004.;925 . Memorandum from Wynn Curtiss . Council Report 2004~1 06 . .. Page 2 Analysis of the'!ssues What changes are being recommended in the Charter? , ,-.', ' ' . In2003tl1e City Council, as part of its budget cutting actions, contracted with Hennepin County for Assessing services. This contract is for six years. The Council wasthen faced . " -" . with the decision of whether it shol,lld continue to act as the Board of Equa1iza~ion (also known as the Board of Review.) OnJ anuary 6, 2004 the City Council voted to turn over the dutiesoftheBoardofReview to Hennepin County for a periodoqhtee years. In March, I was in the process of preparing fcir.the 2004 Chcuier Commissionmeeting, when I came across the following: "Section 7.03. BOARD OF EQUALIZATION. The Council shall constitute the Board of Equalization and shalltneet as such in the usual piace for holding' Council Meetings not later than June 1 ofeach year to eqm\li~e the assessments according to.. law, or at such other adjourned meetings as it maydesignate." I immediatelY contacted WynnCurtiss, of the City Attomey'soffice,to determine how " Section 7.03affected the Council's decision to transfer the Boardof Equalization (Revie~) . to the County, In his response, which is attached, MrCurtiss maintains that the Council's action and Section 7.03 are not in conflict. He also makes a recommendation as to how." Section 7 .03 could be amel.1ded. . "Had the Council permanently transferred its authorityto the County, I think a Charter amendment probably would be appropriate, but not necessary. lithe . ~ouncillater regained its authority, the deletion ofChartei Section. 7 ;03 would be . harmless. In the abSence of such a charter provision, M.S. 274.01aut()nlatically ..'makes the city council the Board of Review . Nothing really would change from what tl.1e city has done, inthe past. Even though the City Council has transferred its authority, retaining Section 7.03 would be appropriate. While the language of Charter Section 7.03 uses the word "shall," in my opinion the Charter language is not really in conflict with the. statute that allows the City Council to transfer the authority. If you were t()amend the Charter, I would only suggest amending to add the.following language at the beginning of the section: "Unless the City Council provides otherwise aspehnitted by law, ..." That language should provide the necessary flexibility for the Council to retain its authority or transfer it without being in conflict with the Charter language. " Although Mr. Curtiss cloesnot thillk that the Charter has to be amended, I recommended that , . ' " , . the Charter Commission approve amending Section 7.03 to clarify this issue. 2 '" ~. . ",hat is the process for amending the City Charter? The 'City Charter maybe~ei1ded by Ordinance using the following procedure: Upon recommendation of the Charter Commission, the City Council may enact a Charter Amendment ~y Ordinance; Such an' ordinance, if enacted, shall, be adopted by the Council by an affirmative vote of all its members after a public hearing Upon two ,weeks published notice containing ,the text of the proposed amendnient.andshall be approved by the Mayor and published as in the case of other ordinances. The City Council must adopt or reject the , proposed ordinance in total. It cannot amend the'ordinance: An ordinance amending a City Charter shall hot become effective until 90 days after Rassage and publication or at such later date as is fixed in the ordinance: , , , Within 60 days after passage and publicatiol). of such an ordinance, a petition requesting a" referendum on the ordipance maybe filed with the City Clerk. Such petition shall be signed' by. qualified voters equal iUllUmber to 2% of the total ,number of votes cast in the City at the last date general electi~:m or2,000, whicheverisless: ", If the, requisite petition is filed'within the prescribed period; the ordinance shall not become effective until it is approved by the voters as in the case of charter amendments submitted by the Charter Commission, the Council, or by petition of the voters, except that the Council may submit the ordinance at any general or special election held at least 60 days after submission of the petition, or it may . reconsider its,action il}.adopting the ordinance. ,'. Alternatives . , ." . " 1. Approye Resolution2004-044, accepting Ordinance 2004-925, ordering its publication and" settil).g a public, hearing for August4, 2004. ' 2, .', Do not approve Resolution 2004:..044 and send the proposed ordiriance back' to the Charter, Commission for further action. . . Staff recommends Alternative #1; , . 3 ," . CITY OF HOPKINS Hennepin County, Minnesota , . .- CHARTER COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.2004~01 ' RESOLUTION REGOMMENDING AMENDMENT bF THE . HOPKINS CHARTER BY ORDINANCE , , Whereas" the Hopkins Charter Commission h.as the authority under Minnesota Statute, SeCtion 410.12, subdivision? to recornmend amendments to the City Charter; and, ' , ' , "<, ' ." Whereas, the Commission has determined that the Hopkins City Charter should be ' . . , . .' . . , amended; . Now Therefore ' be it resolved by, the Hopkins Charter Commission that the Hopkins .', Municipal Charter be" amended by Ordinance 2004-925 enacted by the City Council of the City of Hopkins pursuant to Minnesota Statute 410.12. '. ~ . .-,. Pass(3d and adopted at a regularly scheduled meeting of the Hopki~s Charter Commission held at Hopkins City Hallon'June 22,2004. , ' , "'. ~' 'r. ..". . " , CITY OF HOPKINS Hennepin County, Minnesota ' RESOLUTION NO. 2004-044 " -, RESOLUTION ACCEPTING CHARTER AMENDMENT, ORDERING PUBLICATION . ' " AND SEtTING PUBLIC HEARING ' WHEREAS, the Hopkins, Charter Commission has presented to the Hopkins City Council a proposed Charter amendment in the form of Ordinance 2004-925,and WHEREAS, the Hopkins Charter C9mmission has recommended that Ordinance .2004- 92~ be,' approved by the Hopkins City Council in accordance with Minnesota Statute 410.12, . NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that t~e City Council of the City of Hopkins hereby accepts Ordinance 2004-925, orders it published in the official newspaper, ,and sets a public hearing for A!Jgust 4, 2004 at 7:30 p.m. for first reading of said ordinance. " . Adopted by the CityCouncil of the City of Hopkins this Sixth day of July 20()4. By Gene Maxwell, Mayor " ATTEST: TerryObermaier, City Clerk .. .. CITY OF HOPKINS " HENNEPIN COUNTY, " , ..' MINNESOTA. ORDIN~CE2004~925 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CHARTER OF THE CITY OF HOPKINS UPON RECOMMENDATION ,OF THE HOPKINS, CHARTER 'COMMISSION PURSUANT TO M.B.A. CHAPTER 410.12, SUBD. ,7 The City Council. of the City of Hopkins, ,'. upon recon;unEmdatiofl of and from the Hopkins City Charter Commission d.oes hereby ordain and thus amend and adopt' the following' changes, .,' 'deletions,. and amendments 'of or from, the following chapters and' sectionsiof the Hopkins City Charter: , . . , . Section 1. S,~ction 7.03, is amended as follows: Serition 7.03: BOARD ,OF EQUALIZATION. Unles~th~ City Council provides otherwise as permitted bylaw, the Council 'shall constitute the Board of Equalization and shall meet as such in the usual place for holding Council Meetings not later than June 1 of each year to equalize the assessments according to law" or at such ,.otheradjournedmeetings as it may designate,. Section 2. The effective date of thi,s ,ordinance shall be ninety . days after p~blica:tion; First, reading: . August 4,2004 Second reading: AUgust 17,200~ Date of Publication: August 26, 2004 Date Ordinance Takes Effect:. ,November 24, 2004 By. Gene Maxwell, Mayor 'ATTEST: Terry Obermaier, CityCl~rk '." " t " , ,',' ,', ,,. , I '. APPROVED AS ,TO FORM AND LEGALITY: City Attorney Signature 'Date, " 1- '. , ,ie' . <<(' , ' . Jim, , r h . d . I . 'k' '.' . '. ave revJ.ewe , your emaJ. , memo, Hop .J.I1S Charter SectJ.on 7.03 and Minn. Stat.. Section 274.01 Subds. 1 and 3 and I am not.convinced that you need to do anything more at this time. As I understand it, the Council agreed to transfer to the County its duties 'asthe BOard of Equalization for a period of three years~ That js specifically permitted by M.S.274..01 Subd. 3. The Council also could have transferred its duties to the County permanently. There is, however, no provision in the .statute for th.e Council to regain its aut~Ority once it makes a permanent transfer. Had the Council permanently transferred its authority to the County, I think a Charter amendment probably would.be appropriate, but not necessary. If the Council later regained its authority, the ,deletion of Charter Section 7.03 would be harmless. .In the absence of such a. charter provision,M .S.. 274.01 automatically' makes the c1 ty council the Board of Review. Nothing really would change from what the. city has done in the past. Even though the City Council has transf~rred its ~uthority, retaining Section 7.03 would be. appropriate. While the language of Charter Section 7.03 uses the.word "shall,"inI'r\y opinion the Charter language. is not really in conflict with the siatute that allows the City .. Council. to transfer the. authority. If.... youw.ere to' amend the Charter, I would only suggest amending to add the fol'lowing language at the beginning of the settion: ~Unless the CityC6yncil prbvides otherwise as permitted by law, .;." That .l'anguage should provide the necessary flexibility for the Coun6il to retain its authority or trahsfer it without being in conflict with the Charte~ language. .1 don t t see any reason whyth'e Council t s, action should cause any problems with the ongoing assess.ment and appeal ptocessby the County. If you have any questions., H,tme know. Wynn curtiss Miller, Steiner & Curtiss, P.A. .