Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1976 09-02 CHCMMinutes of the Proceedings of the BROOKLYN CENTER CHARTER COMMISSION Public Bearing, Social Hall Thursday, September 2, 1976 Cali* to order: The meeting was called to order by Chairman Henry Dorff at 7 :40 p.m. Present: Commissioners Henry Dorff, Rich Higgens, Viola Kanatz, Orlander Nelson, Cheryl Asplund, *Iona Hintzman, Edwin Theisen, James Millen, and Frank Kampmeyer. Absent: Commissioners Betty Johnson (ill), Mildred Hendrickx (out of town), Bob DeVries, Glen Bullick, Barbara Swart (couldn't wake it) and Walter Vennewitz. Ward System: Chairman Dorff limited presentations to 4 minutes. Councilman Maurice Britts listed advantages of ward system as smaller, less money needed for campaigns, closer to people, each area of the city represented,.citizen knows who to call. His campaign cost between $1800 and $2000. ,Disadvantages of T.jard system are vote trade offs, will not know the whole city, interest in orm problems, the ward boss, no checks and balances, if he doesn't vote right he won't be re- elected. Advantages of the at large, the candidate can still win election, looks at the problems of the c,Yhole city, and has to know the whole city. Disadvantages of the at large takes more money to campaign, not as close to the people. Ne can't compare Brooklyn Center to a Minneapolis ward, but we can compare it to Crystal. Crystal has four wards and two sections. It has a mayor and 6 councilmen. The citizen votes for two councilmen. If we go to a ward, the council should be expanded. Some at large people should be elected such as Crystal. Crystal likes what they have, closer to the people. Be sure to have balances, enlarge the council to 7 members 2 half at large or 2 at large. Dave Kanatz stated that the system as it is now cuts off people who want to serve, increased costs to campaign. It would be great to have a senior citizen on the council. Encourage people to run for office by reducing scope of campaign to a ward. Howard Heck stated that the at large system has served Brooklyn Center well. Five people are interested in an issue on the council. With the ward one councilman will be making the decision for his area. Any candidate worth his salt will get out and know the community. He presented map of city showing residences of councilmen since 1961 which showed an excellent spread in the community. The cost of a campaign is not excessive, makes for healthy competition. There is a better choice of candidates. We should continue with the at large system. The at large system is fair in that people from all over the community run for office. Dawn Kiefer stated that Brooklyn Center is divided in several ways: is by schools districts, freeways and highways, and two legislative dis tricts. The ward system would cut us again. Disunified city if divided one more time. page 2 Charter Commission September 2, X976 Arnold Foslien is interested in Brooklyn Center and its future. We have honest government in Brooklyn Center which has improved as years have gone by. He does not favor a ward system. He lived in Minneapolis formerly. It is healthier here. We can lick City Hall in Brooklyn Center. T-Te don't have ward heelers in Brooklyn Center and we don't hear that dirty word, gerrymandering. TJe should be cautious of changing our system. Ted Hillard has had unique exposure to municipal government the oast 15 years. He has observed the ward system and the at large system. Dave Kanatz and Dick Forstrom have summarized the pros and cons of the ward system and there is little to disagree with. Tleigh in your own mind the accountability and responsiveness of coucnilTnen. There tends to be a demarkation between a large community and a small commun- ity. Brooklyn Park operates well under the ward system because of disparities. Brooklyn Center is largely developed and more homogene- ous. Councilmen need to be responsible to citizens and to the whole community. In the ward system they tend to be much more concerned with own ward which detracts from the community. Perspective of entire city needs are impgrtant. In the ward system, one man is the decision maker for his ward. Tendency to provinciality outweighs given citizen's concern. The citizen can talk to one councilman rathern the five councilmen. Vern Ausen was pro ward when running for the council. He has changed is his thinking. Brooklyn Center is unusually divisive. Council members elected at large would tend to unify Brooklyn Center. If we divide into 4 wards, they will not be concurrent with the school districts. A councilman serves the whle city. The councilman does a better job when he has to consider all diverse problems in the community. He has to be highly motivated to campaign the second time. He recommends we not change the system. Phyllis Plummer represents the League of Women Voters Board and an ad hoc committee that has been meeting; through the summer. Brooklyn Center is already divided. Unless more substantial reason is given for the ward system, we should retain the at large system. Government works because of the people involved rather than the system of election. Phil Cohen stated the community was cut up. Few things hold us together. When ward lines are drawn, they become unequal right away. If we divide into wards, councilmen will protect the interest of the ward, and get involved in trade -offs. At the present time all the council is accountable to all the voters. Campagin costs will vary. Costs have accelerated. The council should be accountable to the entire electorate of Brooklyn Center. Stay with the at large system. Lee Binger represents the Citizens for Better Government tonight with a membership of over 100. This organization held a discussion on the ward system with 53 members and guests present. Ten days later a straw vote was taken of the 53 who attended. They were interviewed by Lee Binger and Tony Schelonka. Results were as follows: ward system 0 0% at large system 49 92% combined system 4 8% page 3 Charter Commission September 2, 1976 40 Tony IZueflei stated that all councilmen vote on all matters and should be knowledgeable about the whole community. The candidate has Mi square miles to campaign and he doesn't see a problem. He covered 4500 homes in 10 weeks which is 3/4 of the single family dwellings. It is not an unreasonable demand of a candiate. His campaigns cost $1500 each. Divisions in the community were the main concern at the town meeting_;. He favors the at large system. Bill Fignar states there are political trade -offs in the ward system. His two campaigns cost $1500 with union shop printing and he disputes the $4200 figure. He works in the community, hears concerns from citizens and responds to calls. In the ward system you call your own councilman. The ward system is cheaper and easier to campaign, but he wouldn't guarantee the most qualified people would run. The ward system tends to create political dynasties. He walked evenings and Saturdays and hit the majority of ourses starting August first. Local elections could be held in odd numbered years with two councilmen elected every two years. He opposes the ward system. By creating wards the only people who benefit would be the political party. Gene Lhotka, council candidate left questionnaire as he went door to door. It is not a scientific study. The ward system has the advantage in that it is accountable and responsible. He received 514 responses to his questionnaire. The question "Is our city government responsive to citizens of Brooklyn Center yes 220 42.8% no 199 38.7% 50 -50 or no answer 95 18.5 Government is not accessible to them. The ward system brings people closer to councilman. "Do you feel you are adquately informed yes 112 21.7% no 363 70.6% no answer 40 .7% "Would you support a ward system for election of councilmen yes 286 55.6% no 120 23.3% no answer 108 21.1% I personally am for the ward system. Bob Jensen stated that he doesn't agree with the statement that the at large system is not responsive. He didn't hear the argument that the ward system would be more responsive. Present and past councils have been quite responsive. Nothing he heard would prove that the ward system would be more accountable. Dick Rodenborn stated that a lawn sign today costs 75(,% and 2,000 lawn signs cost $1500. An at large race is for the rich and affluent. The constituent can be turned out of office in a ward when he is not tune with the voters disproving that partisan politics dominate wards. Ron Visness talked about liars and statisticians. It is incredibly naive to infer the sample survey is what people in Brooklyn Center think. page 4 Charter Commission September 2, 1976 0 Henry Bogucki tried to reach professors in political science departments. He interviewed a student who had just graduated and would be teaching at Hamline. The new graduate said it doesn't make any difference whether the election system is ward or at large, it is the quality of the people that are candidates that is important. The ward system is needed to get representation of minority groups. The thrust today is on the professional, administrator. Vern Velasco stated that all can vote for all councilmen. With the ward system you can vote only for a neighbor. There is no trouble petting financing and workers to campai n. Mayor .Pete Meitsma of Crystal stated that Crystal had the combination system already described. The ultimate test is the quality of the people on the council. He doesn't find provincialism. The councilmen vote on the merits of the city -wide case. Local government should be as small as you can make it. It is easy for a person to enter politics. Three years ago his campaign cost $600. He and his opponent agreed agreed not to use la *m signs. People of modest circumstances can aspire to political, office. The Crystal council has unusual diversity, wide range of voacations and opinions. Crystal has had wards for more than 16 years. There are no ward heelers and no political dynasty. Campaigns in the wards are different. Issues have been city wide. No politcal party is dominate. Lawn signs not needed in a ward system campaign. All councilmen bring unique qualifications to the council. Only one councilman was actively involved in the community organization before running for council. Next meeting: The next meeting of the Charter Commission will be Wednesday, September 15 at the Social Hall. Adjournment: Motion by Commissioner Kanatz, seconded by Commissioner Hintzman that the meeting be adjourned. Motion carried. Chairman: Henry Aorff Secretary: Barbara Swart Respectfully submitted: Barbara Sexton Secretarial Assistant C]