The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal AboutCharter Review Committee Minutes 10-13-1994 Charter Review Committee tTh Meeting Date: October 13,1994 Present were: Michael Logan, Chairman, Don Acker, Vice-Chairman, Jean Spieker, David Ragan, Lester Strother. Also present were City Secretary Terri Willis, staff representative, and City Attorney Paul Wieneskie. Councilmember Nelda Stroder was present as a member of the audience. 1. Meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. by Chairman Logan, who noted as four members were present we could open the meeting while awaiting the arrival of the fifth committee member and the City Attorney. 2. Don Acker made the motion to accept the October 6, 1994 minutes as written. Jean Spieker seconded the motion. Carried unanimously. D. Acker's signature is required on these minutes as he was acting Chairman for the meeting. (L.Strother arrived 7:32) 3. Chairman Logan confirmed with City Secretary Willis Mr. Wieneskie was scheduled for tonight's meeting. Chairman Logan suggested we take a few moments to cover any questions regarding the meeting with the City Attorney. D. Ragan requested clarification of the purpose for the presence of the Attorney. Chairman Logan stated he would be here to provide advice as we discuss our ideas and to offer his legal opinion on these matters. J. Spieker advised she had reconsidered her view of runoff elections for councilmembers. Chairman Logan stated it would be best to discuss items as their section came up.City Attorney Paul Wieneskie arrived. He agreed the best plan would be to go over our suggestions from the Amendment Suggestion List attached to the October 6, 1994 minutes. Review notes: Chairman Logan read aloud each change the Committee suggested and, as necessary, gave a synopsis of our goals to clarify our intent for each recommended change. 2.01 Boundaries and Limits . P. Wieneskie agreed the change was a good idea. Chairman Logan questioned if specifics would be helpful to add to the Charter. P. Wieneskie felt it best to leave this item vague to avoid further change to the Charter as boundaries change. D. Acker also felt it is important that a single place within the City be established where citizens and staff obtain their information as to property boundaries. All agreed. L. Strother questioned the "heretofore been established and now exist " wording. P. Wieneskie advised as boundaries change from time to time this would cover "now" without having to annex or de-annex as the case may be. Consensus of the Committee is to keep the change. Section 5.01 City Officials. Covering changes to amount for incidental expenses. D. Ragan noted the increase would amount to an additional $1700 per year. J. Spieker stated the goal was to remove a possible reason ford some one to not serve on the Council. There is an inherent cost associated with serving on the Council. Terri Willis confirmed that most Councilmembers did not even put in for expenses, except in the case of a trip. Chairman Logan also noted a Councilmember would still be entitled to claim expenses even if an increase was given. During this discussion D. Acker requested clarification of the use of"Councilmember" vs."Councilperson" in our Charter. P. Wieneskie mentioned in his opinion, it was less awkward. Chairman Logan suggested this is one of the items we could decide if we go to print. Consensus of the Committee to keep the monetary change. Section 5.02 P. Wieneskie noted this is actually a change in Federal law. This clause has been ruled an invalid restraint and would not be upheld if challenged in the City. He further noted this change has been defeated by the Richland Hills' citizens in previous elections. Chairman Logan suggested we consider noting this Federal change in our statement of intent on this recommended Charter change. Consensus of the Committee is to keep the change. Section 5.03 see new Section 5.12 to be added. Discussion on this item was held at this point. Chairman Logan asked P. Wieneskie's input as to the legality of term limits. P. Wieneskie stated that there are challenges to this rule at State levels, but very rarely at the city level, and at the city level this restriction has been around for quite a while. His question concerns the "/"(slash) in the section. There are several ways we can use the restrictions, i.e.. three terms on the council, three as the Mayor or three on the Council, two as the Mayor . He can draft the section to reflect our intent. D. Acker stated our intent is for no one to serve more than six years total, consecutively. D. Ragan expressed his disagreement with the idea of term limits. He feels it is a citizen's right to serve as long as his fellow citizens feel he is doing a good enough job to re-elect him. J. Spieker spoke for term limits as a way to encourage new participation in the Council, and further stated the restriction did not inhibit the citizen from serving on a committee or board. D. Acker re-affirmed the goal is to encourage new input and pointed out this would mean someone must only sit out one term and then could serve six years again. D. Ragan felt you would break the continuity if someone could not be continuously re-elected. L. Strother felt that was the idea and is in favor of term limits. Chairman Logan stated at this time we appear to be 4-1 in favor of term limits. D. Ragan reiterated his opposition to all term limits and wanted the record to so state. After further discussion the following points of term limits were established: a person may serve three terms as Councilmember and or Mayor then a break is mandatory(total consecutive service three terms in the two positions), a partial term would not count toward the term total, the effective date would be May 1996, any member serving at that time would not have his previous terms counted toward the total. Chairman Logan stated the vote was 4-1 with David Ragan expressing the dissenting opinion. 5.08 Judge of the Election. D. Ragan spoke in favor of runoffs for Council places. His view is the Mayor and Council elections should be the same, an election should be done properly. L. Strother questioned the cost. City Secretary Willis stated it would be approximately $2000 per election. D. Ragan pointed out this would not be every year. primary level. He felt there was merit to both points of view. D. Acker states he now agrees with D. Ragan, in the last 5 elections there would have been no runoffs. L. Strother is in favor of runoffs for all positions. Chairman Logan solicited the opinion of each member and stated the vote is 3-2, with Jean Spieker and Michael Logan expressing the dissenting opinion. Section 5.12 New section discussion held at 5.03 6.04 City Manager Sub-section 3. item h. The majority of the Committee is agreed this section needs to be changed. In this review several concerns emerged over establishing a Civil Service System for our City, would it accomplish the benefits we envision, what time frame would be required to enact the ordinance necessary to this potential Charter amendment? City Attorney Wieneskie expressed his personal opinion that we consider fixing the section in the Charter instead of rewriting. The benefit in a Civil Service System established by the Charter would be the provisions would be explicitly stated by ordinance, and corrected or modified by ordinance if needed instead of Charter amendment. Former members of the grievance committee itself have expressed dissatisfaction with the way the Charter now handles this section. Councilmember Stroder expressed her concern if the grievance committee appeal is referred to the Council this could be considered interfering with the City Manager's job. P. Wieneskie stated to include the grievance commission within the Civil Service System provision could give the mistaken impression of encompassing power to the commission. A lengthy discussion ensued, with the end result we will continue discussion at our next meeting to consider establishing: 6.04 A. A(City) Civil Service Commission established by the City Manager B. A Grievance Committee composed of Five citizens etc. Chairman Logan established the consensus of the Committee is to draft the contents of the provisions. Section 6.08 1. Judge of the Municipal Court. City Attorney P. Wieneskie advised the State law provides only one way to replace the Judge of the Court of Record and that is by appointment. 6.08 2 Clerk of the Municipal Court. State also establishes the rules for this. All agreed to follow P. Wieneskie's recommendations for these Sections. 4. No members of the public were present. 5. Our next meeting will be October 24, 1994, 7:30 P.M. Chairman Logan ascertained this date will also be agreeable to City Attorney Wieneskie. We will continue at Section 9.04. Meeting adjourned at 9:04 Respectfully submitted, ,�( Secretary hair an