Council Minutes

MINUTES/COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
Monday, November 13, 2000 - 6:00 p.m.---______

The city council met as the Committee of the Whole on Monday, November 13, 2000 in the council chambers with Mayor Brown presiding. Members present: Brooks, Bjerke, Stevens, Hamerlik, Burke, Glassheim, Lunak, Christensen, Klave, Bakken, Kreun - 11; absent: Council Members Gershman, Babinchak, Martinson - 3.

1. Proposed ordinance amending Sections 2-0101, 2-0301, and 2-0302 and repealing Section 2-0201 of the Grand Forks City Code heretofore effective relating to city council meetings, standing committees, and rules of procedures.___________________________
Council Member Glassheim questioned changes re. agenda, whether the position of gathering information was a decision making position or administerial position. Richard Warne, administrative coordinator, stated this is a person who gathers information and that what they anticipate is that the mayor will review the agendas before they are dis-tributed to the city council as part of the process; but the mayor could change that under the ordinance, that it’s to provide maximum flexibility for the administration to determine the best way to do it.

Council Member Glassheim also questioned whether there should be a set time by which items are to be put on the agenda, and would like to have something written in advance so that they don’t have last minute additions or subtractions from the agenda. Mr. Warne stated that was their objective and the reason is to provide some flexibility - that their plan is to deliver the agendas the Wednesday before the meeting and that all the materials that had to be in could best be set by the mayor’s office in consultation with the appropriate staff people, didn’t want to have to come back to amend the ordinance. He stated that the mayor will issue an executive order or other appropriate directive so will be in writing, but could be changed by the mayor. Council Member Christensen stated they are trying to establish a process and a procedure to expedite decision making - time isn’t the issue, that the issue is giving the executive some power, some flexibility, and he would designate the person who gathers the information; that trying to implement a process that the executive can function under.

Council Member Christensen moved to recommend the introduction of the ordinance, Council Member Brooks seconded the motion. (Mr. Swanson, city attorney, stated they are now meeting in a committee of the whole form which allows them to discuss and make recommendations to the city council, and after reconvening back to city council would be opportunity to take whatever final or preliminary action you deem appropriate.); that under committee of the whole, their recommendations are as if coming from specific standing committees.

Council Member Glassheim stated that his understanding of a committee of the whole
meeting was to have discussion before they make up their minds - to amend sections, etc. to get things out on the table and discuss them; and that the process he is interested in
is that there is something fixed beyond the executive’s decision but something fixed for the council which is a co-partner in these activities so they know and have a standard and with

MINUTES/COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
November 13, 2000 - Page 2 ---______

the public knowing when things are due, as well as department heads. He stated he is discussing a process but his process is not extensive flexibility or unlimited flexibility but within boundaries; and seems too flexible for him. Council Member Christensen agreed but as they are the legislative body and if the executive were to choose to abuse that, etc., council could change that rather quickly; he stated this is a work in progress.

Mr. Warne stated one of the reasons this is flexible is that the mayor can work with the council, and if something doesn’t work in consultation with council, they can change the time, one advantage of not actually having something specifically in the ordinance, that there’s room for flexibility and room for working with the council.

Council Member Klave questioned when this ordinance would be effective, and asked Mr. Swanson for an interpretation of effective date; Mr. Swanson stated that assuming they gave first reading this evening, could provide second and final approval at next meeting on November 20, and ordinance would be in effect as of November 21. He stated that the language here, which is our standard ordinance language by law takes it into effect the calendar date following the final approval. He stated their other option would be to have a specified date of effectiveness which would come in either on first reading or second reading and does have to be included before final approval. Council Member Klave stated he is concerned as to advancing the committees, that he hasn’t seen the timeline that the committees are currently taking to decrease the number of items before them. Mr. Warne stated the reason the committee agendas have not shrunk is because the council has not acted on the resolution to delegate the responsibilities to the committees.

Council Member Glassheim questioned the section relating to Order of Business, that he didn’t know of any legislative body where the order of business is not written and approved well in advance of any meeting; that he thought it should be written down, agreed to in advance and follow it. Mr. Warne stated they provided the council with a sample binder and agenda that included what they proposed to be the order of business - that if after trying this for a short period and council wants to change the order so can better accommodate the public or make a better decision, and rather than going back through the process of amending the ordinance, the mayor in consultation with the council can change the order for the next meeting - that it’s once again to provide flexibility so that the mayor and council can serve the people. Council Member Kreun stated they could add “without written notice to the council members” so if wanted to make an amendment to that effect, that the agenda wouldn’t change without a certain period of time or written notice or on order of business wouldn’t change without written notice to the council members, and would give them the flexibility.

Council Member Glassheim stated his concern with the moving from the announced work session to what’s then a preliminary approval and a voting session, that he would like to know the ground rules - that the council may recess or adjourn to a work session,


MINUTES/COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
November 13, 2000 - Page 3 ---______

information session and then can take final action at a work or information session, that if want to have a work session, have a work session with some time between the work session and final voting for consideration. Mr. Warne stated that the plan is to have a committee of the whole meeting or a work session where no votes would be taken, information would be presented, public comment would be taken and at the following meeting have the decision. He stated that from time to time there maybe items because of a grant deadline or a lawsuit or something that wasn’t anticipated that the council may want to take action on an individual item, that won’t be the standard practice, but maybe those rare occasions when it’s in the best interest of the city to take action, and have written the ordinance so that the council can if they decide to do that; that there’s maximum flexibility in place in the governing body to do what they believe is in the best interest of the city.

Council Members Lunak and Christensen called for the question. - The motion on the floor is to recommend to the council to give preliminary approval to the ordinance before you; that the call for the question should be passed, would be an immediate vote upon that motion. Upon roll call the following voted “aye”: Council Member Brooks, Bjerke, Stevens, Burke, Lunak, Christensen, Kreun -7; voting “nay”: Council Members Hamerlik, Glassheim, Klave, Babinchak, Bakken - 5. Motion failed as it requires 2/3rds vote of
committee.

Council Member Hamerlik stated one of his concerns (in Item 27), that any item not listed on the agenda shall be considered only by motion unanimously adopted by the council members present, and that correlates with what we used to have on any item brought up before the council, that if it’s deemed controversial, one person could vote against it and it would not be considered; and takes care of part of your concern, people not knowing if it’s committee of the whole and there’s action, but an agenda can be put on their desks before the meeting and can be changed, and that’s a concern of his - getting new information at the last minute.

Council Member Burke stated he was going to make a motion to adjourn the committee meeting so that they can get back to the special council meeting where they would have the same discussion, and just get the amendments on the floor and vote. Council Member Burke moved to adjourn the committee of the whole meeting; Council Member Hamerlik seconded the motion. Carried 12 votes affirmative.

Respectfully submitted,


John M. Schmisek
City Auditor
Dated: 11/24/00