Charter Revision Commission Meetings

Minutes Charter Revision Commission Meeting Thursday, July 18, 2019 at 4:00 PM Carnegie Town Hall, 235 West 10th St., Sioux Falls, SD 57104 1. Call To Order Commission Members Present: Anne Hajek, Pauline Poletes, Justin Smith, Robert Thimjon, Carl Zylstra Commission Members Absent: None Commission Chair Justin Smith called the meeting to order at 4 p.m. 2. Approval of Minutes A. June 19, 2019 A motion was made by Commission Member Hajek and seconded by Commission Member Poletes to approve the minutes of June 19, 2019. Voice vote to approve. 5 Yes: Hajek, Poletes, Smith, Thimjon, Zylstra; 0 No: (None). Motion Passed. 3. Old Business Prior to discussing old business, Smith asked the Commission what their preference for managing public input was. It was determined that the Chair reserves the ability to limit speakers after five minutes. A. Charter Article IX - Transition/Separability 1) Section 9.05. Schedule, (f) salary of mayor and council members The mayor’s salary having been established in the amount of $75,000 by this provision in 1995, each other council member shall receive an annual salary in the amount of fifteen (15) percent of the mayor’s salary. The mayor’s salary shall automatically be adjusted annually for inflation or deflation with each other council persons salary thereafter adjusted to be equal to fifteen (15) percent of the mayor’s new adjusted salary. No meeting fees shall be paid to the mayor nor city council members. Smith provided background on the topic, indicating that it had been discussed in 2017 and 2018. The item was most recently considered at the last meeting, where members agreed to move it to the present meeting. He asked for any comments from the public and there were none. He asked the Commission for any comments or a motion: to recommend a change, to take no action, or to defer action to a future meeting.  Commission Member Carl Zylstra noted that this charter provision has remained unchanged since 1994 when it was first adopted, however, since then the City's population increased by approximately 75%, the number of City employees rose by approximately 48%, and the budget increased by approximately 111%. Accordingly, it was suggested that the issue to focus on may not be the City Council's salary, but instead the salary of the Mayor. The Commission also discussed the suitability of it making a recommendation on salaries or benefits or whether the decision could be addressed through ordinance, other legislative means, or by an independent salary commission. Commission Member Anne Hajek noted that previously-presented comparisons with other cities were noted with a conclusion that Sioux Falls Council Member salaries are generally higher than others. There is a belief that indivduals would seek to serve for the public services benefits provided, not compensation. Commission Member Bob Thimjon explained that a central reason this issue arises is because there are some who view the councilor role as full-time. The amount of time spent each week obviously varies, but the Charter still designates them as part time. A motion was made by Commission Member Hajek and seconded by Commission Member Poletes to take no action. Voice vote to take no action. 5 Yes: Hajek, Poletes, Smith, Thimjon, Zylstra; 0 No: (None). Motion Passed. B. Telephonic Participation in Meetings by Charter Revision Commission Members A motion was made by Commission Member Thimjon and seconded by Commission Member Zylstra to allow Commission Members to participate in meetings. Voice vote to allow meeting participation by teleconference. 5 Yes: Hajek, Poletes, Smith, Thimjon, Zylstra; 0 No: (None). Motion Passed. C. Discussion of Future Meeting Dates Smith noted that he had a conflict with the previously-agreed upon date of August 28th and polled the Commission about alternative dates. Without objection, August 26th was set as the date of the next meeting. He also noted that the November 6th meeting will be followed by a Planning Commission meeting in the same room at 6 p.m., posing a potential conflict. It was decided without objection to start the meeting earlier. Lastly, the Commission decided to begin all meetings at 3:30 p.m. because of the anticipated higher volume of topics to be covered. D. List of Formal Recommendations for Revision to the Sioux Falls Charter to be Maintained (The items on this list will be addressed at a future meeting and will be placed on the relevant Agenda at that time.) The Commission will maintain a list of recommendations made during meetings. The list includes the date the recommendation was made, who made it, the  recommendation, and the applicable charter article or section reference. Action will not be taken on the items unless moved by a member to place it on a subsequent agenda. Discussion followed about the specificity of recommendations and there was a general sense that recommendations should be as specific as possible. E. Historical Information on the City’s Adoption of the Home Rule Charter and Present Form of Government by Charter Revision Commission Member Pauline Poletes. Commission Member Pauline Poletes described the process by which a group of citizens led the effort to change the City's commission form of government to a home rule charter. In 1993, the League of Women Voters stated their support for a home rule charter and challenged the community to help with the effort. A group of citizens took up the challenge (the group would later form into Citizens for Modern City Government which Poletes was co-chair of.) After reviewing various options, the group focused on the mayor-council and city manager forms, ultimately recommending the mayor-council form. A draft charter was created and many meetings with the public were held to refine it. Among the focus areas were: 1) whether council members should be elected by district or at large; 2) pay for the mayor and council members; and, 3) roles of the mayor and councilors. Small groups were established to study these issues more throughly with the public. An overriding philosophy was that the mayor would serve full-time in a significant leadership role, while council members would be part time and focused on setting policy. Poletes was asked if she thought the same form of government would have been adopted if the city was the size it is today; she indicated the current form still would have been chosen. A question was also posed about how one would go about changing the form of government today. The amendment process as outlined in Article IX was briefly discussed within the hypothetical context of changing the structure of government. 4. New Business A. Charter Article IX - Transition/Separability Provision Smith reviewed the procedure for addressing possible amendments outlined in the previous meeting. He also noted that he would not read each section and article in the meeting, but instead identify section numbers to allow members to make any comments or proposed changes. Hajek asked whether Section 9.01(c) should remain in the Charter although it is obsolete. Smith explained that past commissions considered the same question and often concluded that obsolete language that has sunset has no affect, so removing it for clean-up purposes is not necessary. The Commission, however, retains the ability to propose an amendment to delete it. There were no recommended amendments to Article IX. B. Charter Article VIII - Charter Amendment  Zylstra asked about Section 8.01(d) insofar as whether the signature requirements were more or less stringent than Article 9.02 of the State Constitution. The charter, as written, requires a citizen petition to have signatures of at least "5 percent of the total number of registered voters at the last regular city election." The constitution states: 'not less than ten percent of those voting in the last preceding gubernatorial election in the affected jurisdiction may by petition initiate the question of whether to adopt or amend a charter." City Attorney Kooistra indicated he would need to conduct research on the question. The Commission discussed the provision of Section 8.02, Election, requiring the notice of the election with complete text of proposed amendments be published in "one (1) or more newspapers of general circulation in the city at least 30 days prior to the date of the election." Zylstra suggested that more effective means of communicating are available, however, no recommendation to amend was made. There were no recommended changes to Article VIII C. Charter Article VII - General Provisions There were no proposed amendments. D. Joe Kirby Presentation Joe Kirby reviewed several recommendations and provided the Commission with a document showing the recommended changes by section. His recommendations include: 1) return to plurality voting for council seats; 2) adoption of ranked choice voting; 3) reduce the legislative role of the mayor by eliminating his tie break vote (veto power would remain); 4) require a supermajority of 6 on bonding issues. Hajek asked Kirby whether the plurality requirement would apply to the mayor; he indicated it would apply only to council members. He was also aked if there was a dollar threshold for the bond vote recommendation; he indicated there was not. Zylstra asked Kirby what the vehicle was for adopting the charter in 1994. Kirby explained that the question was placed on the ballot by petition. Smith asked Kirby why there was a reference to Article IX, Section 2 of the South Dakota Constitution in his recommendation for amending Charter Section 6.01(a), Elections. Kirby explained that he believes home rule powers provided by the Constitution are more significant than many think. He placed it in Section 6.01 because he believes ranked choice voting (referenced in his recommendation for Section 2.02(b)) would require the City to adopt certain ordinances in order to provide for ranked choice voting. E. Janet Brekke - Article II Council Member Janet Brekke reviewed the general powers and duties of the council and executive power as outlined in the charter. She indicated that the charter provides for a strong council because "all powers of the city" are vested in it. And as the policy making body for the City, she believes the council should play a more significant role in strategic planning for the City. She provided examples of  cities that engage in strategic planning and suggested those that do so tend to be more successful. She also showed an example of strategic planning already occuring in the administration and stated that it was the first time any such effort had been undertaken. She identified two areas in which the Council has engaged in deliberate planning: setting legislative priorities and budget priorities. She feels this falls short of proper visioning and planning for several years into the future. Adopting strategic planning would be a check and balance on executive power and reassert the Council’s role of making policy for the City. During the presentation, Brekke handed out two pamphlets from the National League of Cities: 1) Rebuild and Reimagine America's Infrastructure; and, 2) "It Takes Cities to Move America Forward." She also provided the Commission with two surveys from the International City/County Management Association: 1) 2018 Municipal Form of Government Survey--Summary of Survey Results; and, 2) "Municipal Form of Government: Trends in Structure, Responsibility, and Composition (2006)." F. John Cunningham Presentation – Options on the Form of Government Cunningham outlined several forms of government to include strong mayor, weak mayor, and city manager. Sioux Falls has a strong mayor form of government. He explained that by virtue of the mayor presiding over the administration and the city council, the mayor has a strong ability to concurrently set policy and administrative goals. This becomes evident particularly when there are tie votes broken by the mayor--a mayor only requires the support of four members to advance his or her agenda. He presented two options for addressing this. The first is to remove the mayor's role as presiding officer of the city council. The second is to hire a city manager. He feels the first option is not optimal because the mayor would still have the ability to likely get five votes for preferred initiatives. He also believes the mayor's extensive administrative structure provides a significant capability to influence council members. Cunningham believes a city manager form is preferable to our current system and his first option. A city manager is hired by the city council and receives direction from the council through ordinances, policies, procedures, etc. This makes the council less susceptible to undue influence and strengthens its policymaking role. There is also a transparency component to each model. Under the strong mayor form, he asserts the mayor has the ability to withold information, influence elections, and deny services. Conversely, because the city manager receives direction from the council, he or she doesn't have to consider politics, but instead is judged based on merit and the ability to effectively carry out the policies of the council. Smith asked Cunningham if he was making a formal recommendation to the Commission that it propos a weak mayor or city manager form of government. Cunningham stated that was his recommendation. 5. Public Input Smith noted that Kirby's presentation included multiple formal recommendations that overlap with those made by Mr. John Matthius at the previous meeting. Accordingly, Smith extended an invitation to Matthius to attend the next meeting of the Commission to indicate if Kirby's recommendations would satisfy three of his recommendations.  John Cunningham commented on Councilor Brekke's presentation by stating that the Council has an oversight responsibility. He noted the charter provided for oversight of financial matters and that the council, through ordinance or resolution, can and should establish additional oversight mechanisms. 6. Open Discussion Smith explained that Cunningham's proposal may constitute a significant revision to the charter. Based on discussions earlier in the meeting, Smith asked City Attorney Kooistra to provide the Commission with an analysis of how extensive of an amendment Cunningham's recommendations would require and whether that extensive of an amendment is within the Commission's authority to address or propose. Thimjon suggested that before having the attorney conduct such an analysis, the Commission may first want to consider whether they want to pursue changing the structure of government to either of the recommendations. Hajek stated that she does not believe it is within the Commission’s authority to propose to alter the form of government. Smith explained that because the Commission decided to consider all recommendations from the public, it is important that the above analysis be conducted. Doing so would provide for a more informed future discussion. 7. Adjournment A motion was made by Commission Member Thimjon and seconded by Commission Member Poletes to adjourn at 5:49 p.m. Voice vote to adjourn. 5 Yes: Hajek, Poletes, Smith, Thimjon, Zylstra; 0 No: (None). Motion Passed. Thomas M. Greco, City Clerk Future Charter Revision Commission Meetings: August 26, 2019 – Charter Articles VI-V September 11, 2019 – Charter Articles III-I October 16, 2019 November 6, 2019 December 11, 2019 All meetings at 3:30 p.m. at Carnegie Town Hall