HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-11-16 CHC MIN
.
Ms. Czar introduced the discussion points in the paper regarding the differences that would occur
in practice and on paper should the City convert to a council-manager form of government.
There was discussion about the fact that the Charter, as currently written, designates the mayor
as the chief executive officer. There was consensus that the roles of the council-mayor-manager
need to be clarified in writing.
Mr. Valsvik asked about the difference between charter/statutory cities. Mr. Magnuson said
should the City adopt the manager form of organization, all advisory boards/commissions would
be dissolved; however, he noted that charter cities have a bit more flexibility in that issue. Ms.
Ruch pointed out that as a charter city, the City can design its own management structure.
Mr. Donnelly noted the personnel reporting structure does not reflect the documents, Policy and
Procedures manual, for example, that supports it, and said something needs to be changed. Mr.
Magnuson stated there is ajob description for Mr. Kriesel which is adopted by ordinance; he will
provide a copy of the job description for Commission members. Mr. Magnuson said Mr. Kriesel
is clearly recognized as the supervisor of all employees; he said Mr. Kriesel manages "through
consensus," a different management style than what might be expected of a "city manager." Mr.
Magnuson further noted that nearly every city employee is represented by a union; the city has
no merit system.
City Manager Proiect - Part II
Mr. Old noted that Mr. Kriesel was unable to attend due to a family matter. Mr. Donnelly asked
abut Mr. Kriesel's comments in the first discussion in which he indicated he was not real
supportive of a change. Ms. Czar said she thought that is because, with the exception of
hiring/firing, Mr. Kriesel is doing virtually all of the functions of a city manager and he does not
see the need to formalize that with a title "city manager." Mr. Magnuson suggested that perhaps
Mr. Kriesel's position is due to the fact that he thinks things are working well and there is no
need to "mess with it." Mr. Magnuson noted that initially one reason for considering the change
. was the issue of the Water Board; however, the Water Board has been removed from the current
discussions.
Approval of minutes: Mr. Kimbrel, seconded by Mr. Keister, moved approval of the minutes of
Oct. 19, 1998; all in favor.
Mr. Old called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. and welcomed students from Stillwater Area High
School government classes in attendance.
City Attorney David Magnuson
Others:
Tim Old, chairperson
Kathy Czar, Chuck Donnelly, Steve Keister, Robert Kimbrel,
Howard Lieberman (8:05), Nance Purcell (8:30), Mary Ruch and Don Valsvik
Present:
Charter Commission
Nov. 16, 1998
.
'<
Old business
Mr. Old stated he had not yet talked with City Clerk Modi Weldon regarding the publication of
minutes issue. He said he would do so by the December meeting.
. It was agreed to meet as scheduled in December - on Dec. 21.
Election of officers
Mr. Old opened the floor for nomination of officers. Mr. Lieberman nominated Ms. Ruch as
chairperson. Ms. Ruch declined and nominated Ms. Czar, who currently serves as vice chair. Mr.
Lieberman seconded Ms. Czar's nomination. Mr. Lieberman, seconded by Ms. Czar, nominated
Ms. Ruch as vice chair; Ms. Ruch declined, saying they thought it would be a good idea for a
new person to serve as vice chair. Mr. Lieberman, seconded by Ms. Ruch, nominated Mr.
Kimbrel as vice chair. Mr. Valsvik, seconded by Ms. Ruch, moved to chose the nominations; all
in favor. Mr. Lieberman, seconded by Ms. Ruch, moved to elect Ms. Czar as chairperson by
acclamation; all in favor. Mr. Lieberman, seconded by Mr. Donnelly, moved to elect Mr.
Kimbrel as vice chair by acclamation; all in favor. The terms of office are for two years,
beginning Jan. I, 1999.
Conflict of Interest update
Mr. Old reported that he had sent a letter and spoken with Mr. Magnuson regarding the adoption
of an enforcement mechanism. The Council has 60 days from the effective date of the Charter
amendment - until Dec. 21 - to adopt an enforcement ordinance, and it is believed the Council
will meet that timeframe.
Ms. Ruch brought the discussion to a close by asking members to consider what changes they
would support, what changes they would oppose, what needs to be changed and how to move
forward.
.
There was discussion about the potential that advisory boards/commissions could be dissolved if
a change is made and the boards/commissions become advisory to the manager. Mr. Lieberman
said he would be opposed to that, saying he felt it is important for citizens to have a sense of
empowerment through boards/commissions that are advisory to the council/mayor. Other
members noted that the boards/commissions might have a better sense of direction if they were
advisory to the manager. Ms Czar volunteered to check to see how other cities have structured
their advisory boards and committees.
Regarding development of operating/capital budgets, it was noted that Mr. Kriesel, with input
from department heads, currently has that responsibility. However, it is not documented on
paper. Mr. Magnuson stated that currently Mr. Kriesel performs all of the functions of a city
manager, as listed on page 11 of the paper, with the exception of No.2 -- appoints, suspends or
removes all City employees and administrative officers. There was discussion about the
appointment of the City Attorney under the manager form and whether it would be preferable to
leave that authority with the City Councilor with the manager.
.. There also was discussion about the difference in the ability to hire/fire employees should a
change be made. In the discussion, it was again noted nearly all City employees are represented
by a union with a grievance/firing process covered in the respective contracts.
.
.
. Mr. Donnelly, seconded by Mr. Valsvik, moved to adjourn at 8:50 p.m.; all in favor.
Respectfully submitted,
Sharon Baker
Recording Secretary