Charter Revision Commission Meetings

Minutes Charter Revision Commission Meeting Wednesday, September 11, 2019 at 3:30 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 3:30 p.m. 2. Approval of Minutes A. August 26, 2019 A motion was made by Commission Member Hajek and seconded by Commission Member Poletes to approve the minutes. Voice vote to approve. 5 Yes: Hajek, Poletes, Smith, Thimjon, Zylstra; 0 No: (None). Motion Passed. 3. Old Business A. Charter Article VI – Elections, Section 6.02(c)(5) – Powers and duties of the districting commission; hearings; submissions, and approval of plan (5) Upon rejection of its plan, the commission shall prepare a revised plan and shall submit such revised plan to the city council no later than 21 days after the initial plan is rejected. Such revised plan shall be deemed adopted by the city council unless disapproved within 14 days by the vote of two-thirds of all of the members of the city council and unless, by a vote of two-thirds of all of its members, the city council votes to file a petition in the Circuit Court, Minnehaha County, for a determination that the plan fails to meet the requirements of this charter. The city council shall file its petition no later than 10 days after its disapproval of the plan. Upon a final determination upon appeal, if any, that the plan meets the requirements of this charter, the plan shall be deemed adopted by the city council and the commission shall deliver the plan to the city clerk. The plan delivered to the city clerk shall include a map and description of the districts. At the previous Commission meeting of August 26, 2019, Commission Member Carl Zylstra asked for research and clarification of the steps to be taken if a petition filed in Circuit Court pursuant to Section 6.02(c)(5) leads to a rejection of the plan proposed by the Districting Commission. In response, Tom Greco, City Clerk, explained that the Districting Commission would be required to develop a new or modified plan because Charter Section 6.02(b)(3) states, in part, "the commission’s term shall end upon adoption of a districting plan, as set  forth in section 6.02(c)." Accordingly, the Districting Commission is required to remain in session until a plan is adopted. B. Charter Article V – Financial Procedures, Section 5.12(b) – City council action on capital program (b) Adoption. The city council, by resolution, shall adopt the capital program with or without amendment after public hearing and on or before the 30th day of September of the current fiscal year. At the previous Commission meeting of August 26, 2019, Zylstra asked for research and clarification of the steps that must occur if the City Council fails to adopt the Capital Program by September 30th. As background, the Charter already states that if the City Council fails to adopt the Budget by September 30th, then the budget proposed by the mayor shall go into effect. In response, Shawn Pritchett, Finance Director, noted that failure to adopt the Capital Program in its entirety is not entirely necessary because the budget only includes the first year of the capital program expenditures. C. Charter Article IV – Departments, Offices, and Agencies, Section 4.03 – Legal officer There shall be a legal officer of the city appointed by the mayor effective with the advice and consent of a majority of the eight members of the council. Notwithstanding Charter Section 2.05(b), the legal officer may be removed by the mayor during the mayor's four-year term of office only with the consent of a majority of the eight members of the council. The consent of a majority of the council is not required for the expiration of the legal officer's term of office that occurs upon the mayor's expiration of term of office. The legal officer shall serve as chief legal advisor to the city council, the mayor and all city departments, offices and agencies, shall perform any other duties prescribed by state law, by this charter or by ordinance, and shall handle or monitor the representation of the city in legal proceedings. At the previous Commission meeting of August 26, 2019, Zylstra asked for research and clarification on whether the City Attorney is subject to termination without City Council approval between mayoral terms. In response, City Attorney Stacy Kooistra explained that the Charter's reference to "mayor's term" in Section 4.03 refers to one four-year term. If a mayor is re-elected, then per ordinance, all appointive officers requiring the advice and consent of the Council (which includes the City Attorney) remain in an acting appointive status for up to 60 days. During that time period, the mayor may reappoint or remove the officer. It is during this 60-day period where the consent of a majority of the Council is not required. It was also noted that when termination of the City Attorney is subject to Council consent for removal, the mayor may not break a tie vote because Section 4.03 expressly states, "...the legal officer may be removed by the mayor during the mayor's four-year term of office only with the consent of a majority of the eight members of the council." 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)  Zylstra asked that the Section 8.01(d), Proposal of Amendment, be added to the list so that the Commission may address petition signature requirements to align the Charter with the requirement set forth in the State Constitution. 4. New Business A. Charter Article III - Mayor Smith went section-by-section within the Article and asked Members if they had any questions or proposals. There were no questions or proposals. No formal recommendations were made by the Commission for Article III. B. Charter Article II – City Council Smith went section-by-section within the Article and asked Members if they had any questions or proposals. There were no questions or proposals, however, Zylstra observed that while Section 2.05(c), Interference with Administration, requires Council Members to deal with administration employees solely through the mayor, Section 2.09, Investigations, equally provides significant oversight authority to the Council. No formal recommendations were made by the Commission for Article II. C. Charter Article I – Powers of the City Smith went section-by-section within the Article and asked Members if they had any questions or proposals. There were no questions or proposals. No formal recommendations were made by the commission for Article I. D. Janet Brekke Presentation: Charter Article II – City Council, Section 2.01 Council Member Janet Brekke opened the presentation by explaining this was a follow-up to a presentation she made to the Commission in July and that it now includes a formal recommendation. She reviewed the Council's general powers and duties and executive power provided by the Charter in order to explain that the Charter recognizes the City Council as an independent, respected partner responsible for establishing the policy for operating city government. Additionally, she noted the mayor is responsible for managing the day-to-day government operations and that the Council shall… avoid management and administrative issues. Brekke's proposal is to add the following sentence at the end of Section 2.01, General Powers and Duties: "The city council shall create and adopt a citywide long range strategic master plan which shall be reviewed and updated annually." She also provided sample ordinance implementation language. She then reviewed Charter Section 5.11, Capital Program, and a sample implementation ordinance fort that section as well. Brekke provided the Commission with five strategic plans from various cities and the Sioux Falls School District and cited them as examples of what a plan may look like, but also noted that she envisions the one in her proposal being significantly more  comprehensive and lengthy. Brekke concluded by showing a listing of the 22 current city master plans and their costs. She estimates the plan provided for in her proposal would cost $300k - $500k. Smith asked if Brekke was making a formal recommendation and she stated she was. Smith also asked if other cities that do this type of planning have enabling language in their charters, ordinances, or state law. Brekke indicated that she did not know. Smith also asked if the City Council previously attempted to incorporate strategic planning into their operations. She explained she was not aware of any past efforts. Smith also asked for clarification on the School District's process, specifically if it is required to develop a strategic plan by law. Brekke believes they engaged in the process through a local policy. Smith asked if Brekke had concerns about a part-time Council taking on such a task. Brekke indicated a good deal of time would be required at the beginning. Lastly, Smith asked if her language is the same as that proposed in the current petition effort. Brekke explained that it was and explained that she approached the group once she heard of their efforts and asked if they could include the same language in their proposal. Zylstra asked if it may be more appropriate for this requirement to be placed in Article III, Mayor, with, for example, an additional requirement for it to be adopted by the Council. Brekke indicated it should be a function of the Council as the policymaking body. 5. Public Input There was none. Smith reminded the public that there were some similarities between Mr. Kirby's proposals and Mr. Matthius' proposals. As Smith had done during previous meetings, he encouraged Mr. Matthius to indicate whether three of his proposals would be satisfied under Mr. Kirby's proposals. 6. Open Discussion Commission Member Anne Hajek asked for clarification on the process to add items from the recommendation list to the agenda. Smith reviewed the process discussed at the meeting of July 18, 2019, by stating items placed on the List of Formal Recommendations will not be placed on an agenda unless moved by a Member to do so. Any items not discussed by the conclusion of the November 6, 2019, meeting will be placed on the agenda for the meeting of December 11, 2019. A motion was made by Commission Member Thimjon and seconded by Commission Member Hajek to add Formal Recommendations 1, 3, 6, and 8 to the October 16, 2019, meeting agenda. Voice vote to add Formal Recommendations. 5 Yes: Hajek, Poletes, Smith, Thimjon, Zylstra; 0 No: (None). Motion Passed. Zylstra asked the Commission to discuss the question of whether the City Attorney serves as a voting member of the Commission. He explained that the Attorney is designated an "ex-officio" member by ordinance and that ex-officio members of any organization vote unless otherwise noted. Smith cited  Ordinance Section 32.001, which states, "the commission shall consist of five members appointed by the mayor with the advice and consent of the city council." He believes this suggests the City Attorney is not a voting member, but acknowledged there may be ambiguity. He indicated that although Robert's Rules of Order defines the role of an ex-officio member, the same document also yields to existing laws--in this case the aforementioned ordinance. Hajek asked if the City Attorney has ever voted on the Commission; no Members believe the Attorney ever voted. Kooistra believes that a voting City Attorney is counter to the Charter's intent for the Commission and would likely be a conflict of interest to vote. Smith further added that the question would have to be resolved prior to making any formal decisions to place items on the ballot. Zylstra indicated he would make a motion at a forthcoming meeting that the City Attorney is a non-voting member. 7. Adjournment A motion was made by Commission Member Thimjon and seconded by Commission Member Poletes to adjourn at 4:29 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: October 16, 2019 November 6, 2019 December 11, 2019 All meetings at 3:30 p.m. at Carnegie Town Hall