HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021/07/28 - ADMIN - Minutes - Charter Commission - RegularOFFICIAL MINUTES
CHARTER COMMISSION MEETING
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
July 28, 2021
5:30 p.m. – St. Louis Park City Hall
1.Call to order
Chair Maaske called the meeting to order at 5:31 p.m.
2.Roll call
Members present: David Ault, JC Beckstrand, Jim Brimeyer, Lynne Carper, Jim de Lambert, Terry
Dwyer, Sara Maaske, Andrew Rose, Erin Smith and Henry Solmer.
Members absent: None.
Others present: Melissa Kennedy (City Clerk), Soren Mattick (City Attorney)
3.Approval of minutes
a.Minutes of April 6, 2021 Charter Commission meeting
It was moved by Commissioner Rose, seconded by Commissioner de Lambert, to approve the
minutes of April 6, 2021 as presented. The motion passed 9-0.
4.Old business
a.Subcommittee recommendations related to review of Home Rule Charter sections
2.09, Interference with Administration, 12.01. Declaration of Policy, 12.18. Personal
Financial Conflicts of Public Officials, and 12.19. Financial Conflicts of Associates of
Public Officials; Contracts and Transactions Voidable
Commissioner Beckstrand outlined the subcommittee’s review process and presented the
proposed changes. He stated the commission is responsible for reviewing and maintaining the
Charter and effectively serve as the conscience of the community. He added the commission
has an obligation to ensure that the provisions of the charter are upheld. He explained
following their review, the subcommittee does feel changes to the Charter are needed to
provide greater oversight, transparency, and accountability.
Commissioner Brimeyer explained that the city attorney provided the opinion that statute does
not necessarily provide the Charter Commission with this type of authority over the city council.
However, the subcommittee feels that the proposed amendments do fall within the
commission’s purview to ensure that the charter is followed and enforced.
Commissioner Dyer stated the subcommittee’s intent is to make sure there are checks and
balances in place and that the council has oversight so they cannot solely police themselves.
Chair Maaske asked the subcommittee to summarize the changes that were proposed.
Commissioner Beckstrand stated that section 2.08 was amended to avoid potential conflicts of
interest that could arise with the city manager or city attorney investigating complaints related
to council violations of the charter. He noted there are still questions as to how or when
investigations are ordered. In Section 2.09 the subcommittee attempted to provide clarity as to
how to deal with council member who may be inappropriately interfering with administration
Charter Commission Minutes -2- June 16, 2021
and what constitutes an inquiry. They also attempted to clarify language related to what
interference is and how a potential violation is adjudicated. Minor edits were offered to chapter
12 to provide greater transparency and establish that a conflict should not be limited to only
financial interests.
Commissioner Dyer stated in section 12.14 the subcommittee felt that nonprofit associations
should be included because undue influence could still be a factor if a council member served in
a leadership role with the organization.
Commissioner Beckstrand noted in Section 12.18 the timing of recusal was clarified to establish
that it should occur immediately upon discovery of the conflict to avoid the potential for undue
influence to occur in other ways prior to a vote by the city council on an action item.
Mr. Mattick outlined several legal considerations related to the proposed amendments. He
stated the effect of the changes proposed to Section 2.08 would give the commission the
authority to look into the day to day activity of city departments and staff. H e noted the
standard legal premise in the state is that the charter commission is expected to operate within
statutory guidelines. State law does not currently provide for a charter commission to have this
type of oversight authority and the city’s form of government is the council-manager plan
whereby the city manager is responsible for oversight of the day -to-day activity of departments
and staff. He questioned if the commission’s intent is to have oversight authority over city staff.
Commissioner Brimeyer stated the intent was only to have oversight over council, not city staff.
Commissioner Dwyer suggested if the commission really wants oversight over the council it
should be in a separate section of the charter.
Commissioner Carper stated he understood the city attorney’s concerns and agreed that a
mechanism for oversight of the council was preferred, not city staff.
Mr. Mattick stated that the way 2.09 is written leaves questions regarding the logistics of the
investigation process and whether or not the charter commission could have separate
investigations of the same issue, meaning both the council and the charter commission could
be simultaneously engaged in independent investigations of the same alleged violation. He also
noted that the language does not provided the commission with final adjudication authority.
Commissioner Brimeyer stated in situations where there is a clear conflict of interest there
needs to be a process to compel the council to investigate the issue. He added the intent was
not to have concurrent investigations.
Commissioner Beckstrand agreed the intent was not to have dual investigations, noting the
subcommittee felt there should be a mechanism for the commission to collaborate with the
council and allow for an opportunity to ask the council to conduct an independent
investigation.
Commissioner Rose asked for each commissioner to provide direction on the two questions
posed related to oversight authority and simultaneous investigations.
The consensus of the commission members was that the commission should not have oversight
authority of city staff and that there be a single-track for investigations, meaning the
Charter Commission Minutes -3- June 16, 2021
commission would not undertake a simultaneous investigation of the same alleged violation of
the charter.
Commissioner Carper questioned if the commission should define a process or procedure on
how to handle situations in which the commission and the council have conflicting opinions
about whether an independent investigation is necessary. He also questioned how and who
would determine if a complaint was legitimate and expressed concern about the potential
volume of work.
Commissioner Brimeyer stated that type of detailed process should be developed outside of
the charter.
Commissioner Beckstrand agreed, noting the subcommittee attempted to build that type of
process but found it was too complicated to put in the charter itself. He reiterated the intent is
to make sure the council know there is an oversight mechanism.
The commission discussed next steps and directed the city attorney to edit the draft
amendments to reflect the commission’s intent to have no independent authority over city
staff and to provide a single-track method for investigations.
5. New business
a. Elect vice chair due to resignation
Commissioner Dyer resigned from the Charter Commission after seven (7) years of service
because he is planning an out-of-state move. The commission thanked Commissioner Dyer for
his work on the commission and wished him well in the future.
Chair Maaske asked for nominations to the fill the position of vice chair. Commissioner
Beckstrand indicated he would be willing to serve in the role.
It was moved by Commissioner Rose, seconded by Commissioner Dwyer, to appoint JC Beckstrand
to the position of Vice Chair of the Charter Commission. The motion passed 9-0.
6. Future meetings
The commission asked staff to coordinate an in-person meeting of the commission in July 2021.
7. Communications
8. Adjournment
It was moved by Commissioner Beckstrand, seconded by Commissioner Dwyer, to adjourn the
meeting. The motion passed 9-0.
The meeting adjourned at 6:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk