HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977 04-27 CHCMMinutes of the Proceedings of the
BROOKLYN CENTER CHARTER COV1MISSIGN
TTednesday, April 27, 1977
Call to order: The meeting was called to order by Chairman Viola Kanatz at 7:37 p.m.
Present: Commissioners Cheryl Asplund, Robert DeVries, James Gillen, Richard Higgins,
Mona Hintaman, Betty Johnson, Frank Kampmeyer, Orlander Nelson, William
Hannay, Mildred Hendrickx, Viola Kanatz, Phyllis Papke, Barbara Swart,
Edwin Theisen, and Vincent Tubman.
Absent: None
Minutes: Motion by Commissioner Gillen, seconded by Commissioner DeVries that the
minutes be approved. Motion carried.
Kaleidoscope: Chairman of the Kaleidoscope booth, Commissioner Asplund, stated that
it was good PR for the Charter Commission to be there, only one person
asked for a copy of the charter. A history of the membership of the charter
commission was handed out. No one used the box prepared by Commissioner
DeVries to ask questions. The public had little interest in the Charter
Commission booth. It was better that the charter cor.�mission participate
than not participate. Workers were Commissioners Hannay, Papke, Higgins,
Hendrickx, Kanatz, Tubman, Hintzman, Johnson, and Asplund. The commission
expressed appreciation to Commissioner Asplund for setting up the booth.
Study Group III Report: Commissioner Theisen stated that Section 11.01 and 11.04
should be changed to agree with Section 11.05. The changes would require
approval by a majority of electors voting at a general or special election
in the acquisition and operation of utilities, lease of a plant, and sale
of a public utility. A public utility would include a sports arena,
stadium, ice arena or a natural monopoly. The changes would give a uniform
policy. The acquisition, operation, lease, and sale of a public utility
is of major significance that would affect all people in our community.
Chief Judge Donald Barbeau: Judge Barbeau was asked two questions. "TA ?hat is the
process by which appointments are made? and what should the role of a
Charter Commission be in this process
The practice of recommending commissioners: no laws say there have to be
recommendations or that the district judges have to take the recommendations
The chief judge appoints a charter commission committee among the 19 distric
court judges. This committee makes recommendations and appointments are
made by a majority vote of the 19 district judges. Copies of all letters of
application are sent to all judges. It is the right of the judges to make
choices. Judges become non partisan. Judges prefer to appoint people who
don't hold political office. They want more people participating in
government.
In most suburbs, the recommendations come from the city council which is ver,
political or from the city attorney which is more political. Brooklyn Cente
is the only suburb where the Charter Commission makes recommendations.
Recommendations from the charter commission are better received. Richfield
Charter Commission advertises, writes to groups, and then sends in all
applications. Charter Commission recommendations are the least political
and the most desirable. Brooklyn Center's recommendations will usually be
followed. Brooklyn Center's procedures are very good. The judges read all
page 2
April 27, 1977
resumes and there is no personal contact. The chief judge will send a*copy
to the charter commission of those who apply directly to him. Minneapolis
discovered they had too many applicants when appointments to the charter
commission were left to the city council. The law probably shouldn't be
changed in the matter of appointments to a charter commission. However,
the ,judges do have enough work to do.
Motion by Commissioner Theisen, seconded by Commissioner Hannay that the
charter commission hereby establish procedures by which new applicants are
screened rather than recommended to the chief judge and that the executive
committee present modifications of the Rules of Procedure at the next
meeting. Motion carried.
Chairman Kanatz requested that other commissioners lot suggestions to her
for changing the Rules of Procedure.
Study Group III: Commissioner Theisen stated that he had a vested and conflict of
interest in Chapter 11. He would submit his report but not be involved in
the vote on that chapter.
Reports of all three study groups will be postponed until the next meeting.
Next Meeting: Motion by Commissioner Hintzman, seconded by Commissioner Theisen that
the next meeting be tlednesday, May 25. notion carried.
Adjournment: Motion by Commissioner Gillen, seconded by Commissioner Nelson that the
meeting be adjourned. Motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 10:10 p.m.
Chairman: Viola Kanatz
Secretary: Barbara Swart
Respectfully submitted:
Barbara Sexton
Secretarial Assistant
0