Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980 05-28 CHCA BROOKLYN CENTER CHARTER COMMISSION Wednesday, May 28, 1980 City Hall, 8 p.m. AGENDA 1. Call to order 2. Introduction of two new commissioners 3. Roll Call 4. Minutes Did commissioners find additional minutes from November 22, 1966 and February 15, 1972? 5. Vacancy on Charter Commission 6. Hiring of Secretarial Assistant 7. Discussion of Amendments 3 and 25 8. Discussion of Amendment 9 Sec. 3.08 regarding supporting statement 9. Next meeting 10. Adjournment a REPORT TO THE CHARTER COMMISSION ON ETHICS AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST In 1979, the Charter Commission began a study of ethics in Govern- ment. The consensus of the Commission at That time was to strengthen existing language in the Charter and;to add further language restricting possible conflicts of interest. Discussion was centered on Sec. 2.04 of the Charter. On Jan. 28, 1980, the following amendments dealing with ethics were submitted to the City Council for their consideration. Amendment 3: Sec. 2.04 Subd. 1. INCOMPATIBLE OFFICES. No member of the Council shall be appointed City Manager, nor shall any member hold any paid municipal office or employment for the City, nor shall any member contract to supply Roods or services to the CitU and until one .(1) year after the Expiration of the memberk term as Mayor or Councilmember, no` former member shall be appointed to any paid appointive office or employment for the City, nor enter into any contract to provide goods or services to the City. Amendment 25: Sec. 2.04 Subd. 2 PRIVATE EMPLOYMENT No former Ma or or Councilmember may, within one (1) year after leaving TFe position. appear or participate in proceedings before the Council representing the interests of private persons. firms, or corporations. In their discussion, the Council objected rather strongly to these amendments and referred them back to the Charter Commission for further discussion. The objections to the amendments are detailed in the re- port I submitted to the commission in April 1980, and a copy is attached to this report. With the cooperation of Commissioner Escher further research began. The Leaque of Minnesota Cities was very cooperative wending copies of various City Charter excerpts and city ordinances from other communities. From these exemples and from ongoing Charter Commission discussions the following amendments were written. G May 7, 1980 Amendment 3; Sec. 204 A INCOMPATIBLE OFFICES Subdivision 1; Nomember of the Council shall be appointed City Manager, nor shall any member hold any other paid municipal office or employment for the City; and until one (1) year after the expiration of the members term or the members resignation as Mayor or Council member, no former member shall be appointed to any paid appointed office or employment for the City, except as provided in Sec. 2.05. Subdivision 2; Except as otherwise permitted by Mn. Statue, no member of the Council shall have any financial interest in contracts for goods or services with the City; and until one (1) year after the expiration of the members term or the member's resignation as Mayor or Councilmember, no former member may have any financial interest in the City contracts for goods and services with the City. Subdivision 3: Except as otherwise permitted by -law, no member of.the Council shall accept any rebate, gift, money, or anything of value from a person, firm, or corporation to which a contract has been made with the City. Ampndment 25: Sec. 2.04B PRIVATE EMPLOYMINT Subdivision4; No former Mayor or Councilmember may, within one (1) year after leaving the position, appear or participate in proceedings before the Council except to represent the former member's own personal interests as a private citizen of the City of Brooklyn Center. On May 7 1980 the Charter Commission met to discuss these admendments. After much debate the Commission felt that the present City Council would not accept' amendment 3, subdivision 2 and 3, and that we would have to take Amendment 3 to the voters. It was also pointed out that Amendment 3 could jeopardize all the other amendments submitted by the Charter Commission of which two or three years of study had been done. The Commission then tabled further submittal of Subdivision 2 and 3 to the Council. Commissioner Mik pointed out that perhaps our language in Amendments 3 would be more approiate in Sec. 12.0 of the Charter. The Commission did submit subdivision 1 of Amendment 3 and Amendment 25 to the City Council and was accepted into the Charter. A new point has surfaced since that meeting. Could we as citizens of the city direct our efforts toward an ordinance that would incorperate the language present in Admendment 3? This would invilve negotiations with the city staff and with the Council. the positive side of this idea is that it would avoid direct confron- tation with the City Manager and the City Council. On the negative half, if the Council should pass such an ordinance a future Council repeat it, whereas a charter change would be more permanent. At present there exists an ordinance detailing offenses for which a city employee may be disciblined. However, this ordinance does not include the City Council, City Manager, Volunteer Fire Dept, nor anyone who serves on the various Advisory Commissions. A copy of this ordinance is included in this report. A decision as to the direction the Charter Commision will follow in this matter probably should be made by the whole Charter Commission at this time. Our Study group will undertake this directive. J�Ies ct 1 submitted c E nest Er cksbn TO; Charter Commission FROM: Ernie Erickson SUBJECT: Amendment 3 In the reviewal of Amendment 3, I did a little research in the origin of this amendment. One of the first changes to Sec. 2.04 by a Study Committee was to add I� "or his resignation" after "expiration of term This seems to have been lost since the Council Presentation of Oct. 30,1978. At the City Council meeting of Jan. 28,1980, the Council members the Mayor raised a number of questions concerning the new additions to Sec. 2.04. Council member Kuefler asked if there was indeed a problem in this area. He felt the norma; functions of the Council dould deal with this and that a public forum was adequate to prevent the type of problem add2essed in Amendment 3. As a response, "the normal functions ofthe council can not deal with such afundamental safeguard of the public interest. The Charter is the basic grant of rights for any city. These conflict of interest phrases which we have added to Amendment 3 belong in the Charter and not in just some rules of procedure. In regard to "public forum the type of press coverage given to a small suburban City is inadequate, to research and investigate complex business dealing. f Does a problem Exist in this area? It has been the Charter Commission's intent to provide a solution before a problem does exist. Mayor Nyquist cited -an example of anindividual who could submit a low bid on certain goodd services and it could not be accepted because it would violate Amendment 3. In response to this,perhaps contract specifications were written so as to ensure that this individual won the Contract. Or perhaps there was some collusion bet- ween city officials and the individual in that the individual had access to competitors bids. These are examples of what could go through the mind of the public should this individual be awarded this Contract. In response to an example of an individual who submitted the only bid on certain'goods or services, perhaps competitors were so intimidated by that individua 1 "s prior council expkerence that they did not submit a proposal or bid. Council member Fignar was concerned with self-employed persons and the problems that this amendment may presen to their normal business functions. The answer would have to be that this amendment would have to apply to these individuals as well as to others. Anything other than abiding by these limitations would be a conflict of interest. One cannot be on the Council and be the recipiant of contracts to the city. Mayor Nyquist questioned bow far this amendment would be extended. His example was of a Council member or former Council member serving on the Board of a particular company or one who worked in a minor capacity supplying goods services to the City. I have taken the liberty (with the advice of serval Commissioners) or rewriting this amendment to remove the objections that Mayor Nyquist had. While researching State Statutes, I came across a Statute which I felt was worthy of discussion for the Charter Commission. I have included this 6n amendment 3 as Subdivision 3. I also added "purchase Orders" along with "contracts for goods services This, too is for the Commission's discussion. I have written to Stanley Peskar, Counsel for the League of Minnesota Cities, for his opinion on this amendment. I have also asked the League of Minnesota Cities for literature on conflits of interest, At this date I have not received anything from them. I wil bring to our next meeting anything I receive between now ohs April 23 meeting.0 On Mar. 16,1980 the Minneapolis Tribune published a scientific poll which stated k f that Minnesotans had more faith in State goverment than they did in their Local governments. This amendment could possibly help the image of our local government in Brooklyn Center.' llli 1. league of minnesota cities g April 23, 1980 Mr. Ernest Erickson Brooklyn Center Charter Commission 6800 Drew Avenue North Brooklyn Center, MN 55429 Dear Mr. Erickson: Thank you for your letter of April 14, 1980, requesting our comments and sugges tions on your proposed charter revisions as listed below. Amendment 3: Section 2:04 Incompatible Officer 0 Subdivision 1; No member of the Council shall be appointed City Manager, nor shall any member hold any paid municipal office or employment for the City; and until one (1) year after the expira- tion of the members term or their resignation as Mayor or Council Member, no former member shall be appointed to any paid appointive office or employment for the City. This type of provision is very common in most of the City-Charters in our files, however your provision is somewhat more restrictive in that it prohibits any em- ployment in a city job, whereas the charters I reviewed prohibit employment in positions created or where the salary of the city position was increased during the council member's term of office. I am enclosing a copy of the charter pro vision from the City of Albert Lea which has this language. The other concern with this type of provision is that your amendment does not define what a paid office is, that is many committee positions reimburse their members for certain expenses, or pay a nominal salary to help offset whatever expenses a mem- ber might have. Subdivision 2: Nonmember of the Council shall have any financial interest in purchase orders or contracts for goods or services to the City; and until one (1) year after the expiration of the mem- bers term or their resignation as Mayor or council member, no former member may have any financial interest in purchase orders or contracts for goods and services to the City. 300 hanover building, 4BO cedar street, saint paul, minnesota 55101 (612) 222 -2B61 April 23, 1980 Mr. Erickson Page 2 This amendment seems to conflict with the provisions of M.S. 471.87`- M.S. 471.89 (specifically M.S. 471.881) which set forth the circumstances under, which a city council member has a prohibited interest in a city contract. So far as your amend ment does not conflict with the statute, it would be OK, and%any cities insert the following language (at the beginning of the amendment) to avoid any conflict with state law "Except as otherwise permitted by law this would allow you to keep the main thrust of your amendment without a possibility of having it thrown out due to any conflict with state law. Another angle you might want to investigate on this would be to allow certain conflicts of interest or interested contracts but also require public disclosure of that interest. I am enclosing a couple of Charter provisions from other cities which outline this approach. These provis- ions also include the language of your subdivision #3 (below) and expand upon it in such a way that does not conflict with any state laws and also defines and de- tails the intent of what it is you are trying to accomplish with the amendment. Subdivision 3: No member of the Council shall accept any rebate, gift, money, or anything of value from a person, firm, or corporation to which a purchase order or contract has been made to the City. I hope this helps, we can be of any further help to you, please let us know., S'ncerely� Dan -Foth i Research Assistant DF:glb Enclosure