2003-01-27 Minute
RICHFIELD CHARTER COMMISSION
Meeting Minutes for
Monday January 27, 2003
Call to Order:
President John Easterwood called the commission to order at 6:30pm in the Executive
Conference Room of the Richfield City Hall.
Roll Call:
Present: Ruth Jensen, John Easterwood , Bill Bullock, Arnie Auchstetter, Tom Ulmer,
Kristal Stokes
Absent: Jan Anderson , Mike Sandahl, Edwina Garcia, Gordon Herboldt, Edward Thom,
Amy Zabransky
Excused
Richard Morey and Joe Novak
GUESTS: Gertrude Ulrich, Corrine Thomson
Minutes:
The approval of the meeting minutes from Thursday January 14, 2003 has been tabled.
Review Charter Concept and Role of the Charter Commission:
Gertrude Ulrich gave a presentation that in the early 70’s Richfield became a city, before
that time it was a village and before that it was a township. The population was 54,000.
Charter + independence. Statutory=legislature determines the governance. Clayton
Lefevere who is an expert on Municipal law and Betty Carr LWV (League of Women
Voters) the Chamber of Commerce brought it to the council. There were heated
meetings and lots of discussion especially around the following topics:
Referendum, budget, Public hearings and meetings, which are different. Charter “Force
and effect of Law” held in great esteem by council, staff and Residents/ State law allows
for charter cities. However, the charter must only address matters of local concern.
Charter cities-Bloomington, Minneapolis, St. Paul, Duluth, Robbinsdale, Brooklyn Park
and Golden Valley.
Plan A City-City Council, mayor and clerk-No city Manager (CC & Mayor hire and sign
contracts)
Pan B city- City Manager (hires and fires) The City Manager and Mayor sign contracts.
Section 2:03 and 3:01
New reading would not force meeting on first business day of the year.
Section 2:03 updated to provide for new and prior Office holders.
The committee had concerns-will this delay commission interview. It was decided that it
would not. The Group was ok with this as written. One question that did come up was
must vs. shall for council discussion. It was decided that shall is not a synonym to must.
Chapter 5
Remove conflict with case law. Add land use or zoning. Tighten up the process for
initiative and referendum to bring it within the community. City of Minnetonka-
organization of charter-concise, well organized. Corrine Thomson will have copies made
and distribute to the Charter commission members for reference and consideration.
The committee suggested that it include a formation designation for forms and to
consider adding as an appendix.
Circulator files affidavit. It was decided that this was OK as written, but that it would be
brought up at the study session for council discussion. Another suggestion was that the
number of days that the clerk has to verify the signatures should be changed to 10 and
not 5. The circulator files affidavit.
Chapter 7
Board of Equalization- City Council can decide to turn the responsibility over to the
county through a prescribed process not thru charter amendment. Budget process is not
a repeat but a process of gathering and receiving information. Public Meeting=any
meeting of City Council is open to the public no requirements for public comments.
Public Hearing= requires published notice and therefore expensive, requires public
comment to be heard.
Questions that we will bring to the City Council
1) Which people need to be at a hearing vs. meeting? What is the difference?
2) What is the financial difference for hearing vs. meeting-public notice formal vs.
informal?
3) What is the role of planning commission with regards to the preparing or
reviewing of the budget?
Respectfully Submitted
Amy K. Zabransky,
Secretary Richfield Charter Commission