HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995 11-15 CHCACity of Brooklyn Center
A great place to start. A great place to stay.
BROOKLYN CENTER CHARTER COMMISSION
AGENDA
NOVEMBER 15, 1995
7 P.M.
CONFERENCE ROOM B
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call 1p ea-Aber AS
3. Approval of Minutes of -Aagast'2`3, 1995
4. Correspondence
5. Old Business
A. Adopt -A -Park
B. Update on the Current Status on City Manager -City Council
Relationship
6. New Business
A. Appoint Chair for Sub Committee on City Manager -City
Council Relationship
B. Appoint Nominating Committee
7. Next Meeting Date
8. Adjournment
IF YOU CANNOT ATTEND THIS MEETING, PLEASE CONTACT
CAROLE BLOWERS AT 560 -0421 OR CHAIR. EILEEN OSLUND AT
537 -2858 PRIOR TO THE MEETING.
6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 City Hall TDD Number (612) 569 -3300
Recreation and Community Center Phone TDD Number (612) 569 -3400 FAX (612) 569 -3494
An Affirmative Action /Equal Opportunities Employer
KENNEDY GRAVEN
CHARTERED
Attorneys at Law
ROBERT A. ALSOP
ONALD H. BATTY
STEPHEN J. BUBUL
JOHN B. DEAN
DANIEL J. GREENSWEIG
DAVID J. KENNEDY
CHARLES L. LEFEVERE
JOHN M. LEFEVRE, JR.
ROBERT J. LINDALL
ROBERT C. LONG
JAMES M. STROMMEN
CORRINE HEINE THOMSON
470 Pillsbury Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
(612) 337 -9300
Facsimile (612) 337 -9310
WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL
(612) 337 -9215
JAMES J. THOMSON, JR.
LARRY M. WERTHEIM
BONNIE L. WILKINS
JOE Y. YANG
DAVID L. GRAVEN (1929.1991)
OF COUNSEL
BRUCE M.BATTERSON
ROBERT C. CARLSON
ROBERT L. DAVIDSON
WELLINGTON H. LAW
T. JAY SALMEN
October 16, 1995
Mr. Tony Kuefler
5943 Abbott Avenue North
Brooklyn Center, MN 55429
RE: City Council Salaries
Dear Mr. Kuefler:
You have asked for an explanation of the authority of the charter commission to regulate salaries
for the mayor and members of the city council.
Minnesota Constitution Article X11, Section 4 provides in part that "any local government unit
when authorized by law may adopt a home rule charter for its government." The words "when
authorized by law" mean that the city may have a home rule charter for its government when
authorized by the legislature to do so. In general, a city charter may govern the conduct of city
administration in the same manner and to the same extent as an act of the legislature. However,
this general rule is subject to several exceptions, one of which is that the authority to control city
administration by charter may be withheld, either explicitly or implicitly by the legislature.
In the absence of legislative limits, a great deal of control over setting city council salaries could
be provided by charter amendment. For example, a charter could provide that compensation be
in a specified amount, that compensation be on a per diem basis, or that compensation be
withheld in the event of failure to attend duly scheduled council meetings.
However, in the matter of setting salaries for city council members, the legislature has clearly
withheld this authority. Minnesota Statutes, section 415.11 deals with salaries of members of the
governing body in cities of the second, third and fourth class. Subdivision 1 of that section
provides, in relevant part, "notwithstanding the provisions of any... charter the governing body
of any home rule charter city may by ordinance fix their own salaries as members of such
governing body, and the salary of the chief elected executive officer of such city, in such amount
as they deem reasonable." The words "notwithstanding the provisions of any charter" are the
CLL95405
BR291 -7
I
Mr. Tony Kuefler
October 16, 1995
Page 2
words customarily used by the legislature to specify that charter provisions may not prevail over
laws adopted by the legislature. Therefore, in my opinion, a charter provision may not supersede,
limit, or regulate the authority granted by the legislature to the city council to set their own
salaries in such amounts as they deem reasonable.
Please let me know if you have any further questions on this issue.
Very truly yours,
Charles L. LeFevere
CLL:ckr
cc: Cam Andre
Eileen Oslund
CLL95405
BR291 -7
BROOKLYN CENTER SUB COMMITTEE MINUTES
is CITY MANAGER -CITY COUNCIL RELATIONSHIP
SEPTEMBER 27, 1995
7:11 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Present: Ulyssess Body, Sy Knapp, Eric Marquardt, Eileen Oslund, Todd Paulson, Rodney Snyder, Diane
Swanson, Janice Thielsen, Ted Willard, Bev Wolfe, Carl Wolter
Rod Snyder introduced Cam .Andre, Acting City Manager, to the commission as one of tonight's guests.
Mr. Andre outlined his work history briefly for the commission. Mr. Andre stated that for an optimum
relationship between the City Council and City Manager and City star the key is the City Manager
working with the staff. Also, the City Council selects a manager who meets their needs and requirements.
Mr. Andre stated that on an annual basis the following should be done: a process of evaluation; when
dealing with the performance of the City Manager, the meeting should be private; discussion of budget
constraints, especially dealing with social services.
Rod Snyder then introduced Celia Scott Svardal, former City Council member from 1979 to 1995. She
stated that direction needs to be established; more citizen committees and good communication between
the City Manager and Council members is needed; council members need to quit squabbling between
themselves and remember they are to serve the citizens of Brooklyn Center; and members need to have
more respect for each other.
Ms. Svardal recalled goal setting with the council and staff being done in the spring.
Some discussion following regarding the charge of the sub committee (studying the relationship between
the city council and City Manager; and whether the process of reviewing the City Manager should be
further discussed).
Motion was made to adjourn the sub committee meeting at 8:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
i r E k ''tom "`t" ".�L"
Carole Blowers
Administrative Assistant
November 15, 1995
To: Brooklyn Center Charter Commissioners -As Subcommittee of the Whole
From: Rod Snyder, Subcommittee Chair on City Manager Council Relationship
Re: SUMMARY OF ISSUES IDENTIFIED IN STUDY -GUIDE FOR COMMISSION
DELIBERATION RECOMMENDATION FOR COMMISSION CONSIDERATION
The following report, in response to a request by the Subcommittee at the September
meeting, attempts to summarize major issues identified as relative to the Brooklyn Center
City Manager Council relationship. This is presented in a format designed to provide a
common review and space for individual Commissioner notes.
The reports next outlines a proposed focus for Charter revision and recommends that
Commission Chair Oslund appoint a small Subcommittee charged with producing a draft
reflecting the sense of the Commission.
Subject to Subcommittee as a whole approval and /or modification, the agenda is as
follows:
1. Commissioners individually review the summary document (10 -15 minutes)
2. Document is reviewed by the Subcommittee as a whole with the purpose of
identifying points of agreement /disagreement;
3. Subcommittee as a whole, using the action recommendation as a starting point,
determines whether to pursue any Charter revision and, if so, within what
parameters;
4. If the decision is made to further pursue Charter revision in this area,
the Commissioners direct Commission Chair Oslund to appoint and appropriately
charge a small Subcommittee.
OUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?
CC 11/15/95 p.2 0'
SUMMARY:
March '95
(no quorum) Informal discussions re perceptions that Council and City Manager too often
seemed on "different pages apparent hassles over City Manager's evaluation.
commitment to look review pertinent sections of Charter.
OUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?
April '95
Commission reviewed Charter excerpts below -(1) expressed concern with the adversarial
tone of the charter as it referred to Council /Manager relationship, the appointment for
an indefinite period, and the lack of any reference to the setting of yearly goals and a
yearly evaluation of the City Manager; (2) committed to a study of Council -City
Manager relationships with focus on mutual goal setting City Manager evaluation
processes; (3) named a subcommittee chair; (4) determined to act as subcommittee as
a whole through study phase; (5) A smaller subcommittee to be established if it is
determined that we enter a writing phase; (6) Council and City Manager to be invited
to a June joint meeting with the Commission Subcommittee Chair to meet separately
with Council Members and City Manager for briefing and personal invitation;
(7) received from Minn. Sch Bd. Assoc.their current guidelines for superintendent review
and appraisal by school boards (a relationship parallel to that of city manager /council)
OUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?
is
cc 11/15/95 D.2 b
Council- Manager Charter Background:
Tone and focus of common council- manager charter provisions were noted to be a
product of the early 20th century reform movement in reaction to real and perceived
corruption of elected officials and belief that trained professional civil managers would
provide greater expertise and continuity to city governments.
Drafters of city charters establishing this new form of government structure commonly
focused on language designed to eliminate past problems. Most serious observers of
contemporary city government operations would agree that the early drafters did their
jobs well, within the breadth of their vision. This concern is reflected in Brooklyn
Center's Charter sections below. These five sections spell out the Charter's attention to
the relationship between the Council and the City Manager.
OUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?
Key responsibilities are established in:
2.01 ".....The Council shall exercise the legislative power of the City and determine all
matters of policy. The City Manager shall be the head of the administrative branch
and shall be responsible to the Council for the Drop_ er administration of all affairs relating
to the Citv.
Note:
a. the underlined wording establishes the City Manager's accountability relationship
to the citizens through the Council;
b. 2.06 2.08 below speak to this accountability, but in "after- the fact" and
negative adversarial rather than proactive ways;
c. in other sections the Charter addresses, in detail, separate responsibilities of the
City Manager, the Mayor, and the Council. The Charter fails to make mention
of, or proscribe how, the Council and City Manager will interface to ensure mutual
focus and maximum effectiveness;
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?
r�
CC 11/15/95 p.3
Further Charter provisions relative to interrelationships:
2.06 (line 9) "The Mayor shall study the operations of the City government and shall
report to the Council any neglect, dereliction of duty, or waste on the part of any officer
or department on the City."
Note:
a. an oversight or watchdog focus(important to have, but in the lack of other
wording -sets an adversarial tone);
b. the language does not reflect that the citizenry expects more than a lack of wrong
doing;
OUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?
2.08 (entire section) "INVESTIGATION OF CITY AFFAIRS. The Council and the City
Manager, or either of them, and any officer or officers formally authorized by them, or
either of them, shall have power to make investigations into the City's affairs, to
subpoena witnesses, administer oaths, and compel the production on books and papers.
The Council shall provide for an audit of the City's accounts at least once a year by the
State department in charge of such work or by a certified public accountant. The Council
may at anytime provide for an examination or audit of the City government, and it may
cause to be made any survey or research study of any subject of municipal concern."
Note: Same comments as in 2.06 above.
OUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?
CC 11/15/95 p.4
2.09 (entire section) "INTERFERENCE WITH ADMINISTRATION. The Council shall by
ordinance establish a merit system in all or part of the City administration, but neither
the Council nor any of its members shall dictate the appointment of any person to office
or employment by the City Manager except as provided in Chapter 6 of this charter.
Except for the purpose of inquiry, the Council and its members shall deal with and
control the administrative service solely through the City Manager, and neither the
Council nor any member thereof shall give orders to any of the subordinates of the City
Manager, either publicly or privately."
Note:
a. An important issue is covered in detail, albeit in negative tones;
b. note the historical context -in the early 20th Century interference and the spoils
system were a concern -Did early framers assume that the two branches of
council- manager government would just somehow "get it together
OUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?
cc 11/15/95 p.5
6.01 (line 4) "The City Manager.... shall be appointed for an indefinite period. The City
Manager shall be removable by the Council at will, provided, however, that if removed
at any time after one year of service, the City Manager may, within fifteen (15) days
after such removal, demand written charges and a public hearing on the same before
the Council; but pending and during such hearing, the Council may suspend the City
Manager from office with or without pay. Such public hearing shall take place within
thirty (30) days after the demand for the same and the written charges shall be furnished
to the City Manager by the Council at least ten (10) days before the hearing....."
Note:
a. some Commissioners have expressed concerns re "...appointed for an indefinite
period" rather then a fixed period of time. Others have indicated that the present
language actually gives Council more leeway in terminating an arrangement and
that the use of a "contract for a year" is permissible now;
b. the language above is very important to have legally and probably leaves a
negative image because, in the absence of any attention to an annual performance
evaluation process, it appears the City Manager is here for life unless fired for
i charges.
c. as it is possible for the City Manager to resign for professional reasons, it should
be the prerogative of the Council at some point to indicate that it desires a change
in management and that a new contract will not be offered.
d. it is to the mutual interests of the City Manager and the Council as well as the
Community, that a specific process exists that identifies agreed upon City goals for
the year and performance targets for the City Manager as administrator of staff
and Community leader. Only with a process that produces such clarity, can the
City Manager confidently proceed (or decide to go elsewhere) and his or her
performance be fairly evaluated a year later;
OUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?
CC 11/15/95 p.6
May 24, 1995
Commission received report from Rod Snyder as update since April meeting together with
consideration of refocus based upon recent City Hall developments.
1. On May 2 3 Commissioner Snyder, as directed, met separately with City Manager
Splinter and four of the five Council Members issuing them invitations to a joint
meeting of the City Manager, the Council and the Charter Commission for the
purpose of developing a "big picture" consensus of how the Council and City
Manager might interface in the most efficient and effective manner from which
the Commission could then identify foundational Charter inclusions /revisions and
the City Manager and Council could develop and implement specifics;
2. In all five meetings the responses were supportive and in many ways enthusiastic;
3. On Thursday, May 11, Jerry Splinter informed us that he was tendering his
resignation;
4. The Commission examined alternate courses of action and decided to:
a. postpone indefinitely the planned combined City Manager Council Commission
meeting;
b. to continue a formal study of the City Manager- Council relationship with Snyder
as Subcommittee Chair;
Commissioner Snyder reported that a review of Council minutes prior to 1994 and going
back to 1989 showed no mention of performance review or contract considerations
relative to the City Manager. He also indicated that Jerry Splinter, upon request, has
provided copies of appraisal instruments from Brooklyn Center and similar sized cities.
Commissioner Paulson reported in information requested from the National Civic League
Press. Decision made to order Model City Charter and two other books.
OUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?
CC 11/15/95 p.7
June 28, 1995
Decision was made to invite past Council Members, dating back ten years, to meet
individually with the Commission in August in order to gain their perceptions of City
Manager Council relationships in general and goal setting and City Manager performance
reviews in particular.
OUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?
August 23 and September 27, 1995
Commission, meeting in Subcommittee as a whole, held separate interviews with former
Council Members: Dean Nyquist, Celia (Scott) Svardal, Bill Hawes, Rich Theis,
Todd Paulson, Jerry Pedlar, Phil Cohen, Dave Rosene and also with
Interim City Manager Cam Andre. Communicated positions seemed to be:
1. several made mention of some form of goal setting existing, but none described it in
a context of a joint City Manager Council annual process. Interim City Manager
Andre did not seem to see value in such a process;
2. on the issue of City Manager performance review prior to 1994, the responses were
all similar -none ever took part in a formal review and salary figures were just a part
of action on the budget as a whole;
3. two or more( Pedlar Rosene) indicated personal experience with mutual employer
employee performance review as mutually beneficial;
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?
0 CC 11/15/95 p.8
SUMMARY
Commissioners have appeared to have much agreement about how they believe
relationships between the City Manager and Council should be effective and efficient
based upon mutually arrived at goals and priorities for the year. It would also seem that
an Commissioners believe that the City Manager ought to have a formal performance
appraisal annually within a process whereby the two parties exchange their written
perceptions of that performance and thereby reach a better understanding.
The primary objective of a performance appraisal should be growth in effectiveness.
The one key area upon which Commissioners may still differ is whether anything can or
should be changed or added to the Charter relative to City Manager Council relationships.
The Subcommittee Chair believes that Charter language change will not guarantee that
desired positive and productive relationships. Charter requiring annual formal
performance appraisal of the City Manager by the Council could produce a mean spirited,
unrealistic, unfair evaluation. If a Council were that unskilled, relationships wouldn't be
good anyway.
Without Charter language that establishes expectations of process, our own history would
suggest that is not i e y to happe i.
If one is to argue that the charter should not be burdened with details not needed, r
Charter provision 2.09 should be reread. The writers of that section rejected that the
Charter should not state the obvious.
OUESTIONS OR COMMENTS:
ti
4
t
C
0