►
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
This
meeting
is
public
and
subject
to
the
open
to
the
minnesota
open
meeting
law.
For
the
record,
my
name
is
peter
ginder
and
I'm
the
chair
of
the
charter
commission's
amendments
review
committee,
and
I
will
now
call
this
meeting
to
order
and
ask
the
clerk
to
call
the
role
so
that
we,
we
may
verify
the
presence
of
a
quorum.
C
D
E
C
B
Eyes
that
motion
passes
and
the
agenda
is
adopted
next
on
the
agenda-
is
the
chairs
report
very
briefly,
there's
not
much
to
report.
As
members
of
this
committee
are
aware,
there
originally
were
two
matters
that
were
referred
to
this
committee.
One
was
an
amendment
to
get
rid
of
the
park
board.
That
proposal
was
withdrawn
by
the
proponent
and
that's
not
before
us,
but
we
have
before
us
today.
Then,
is
the
only
discussion
item
on
today's
agenda,
which
is
the
potential
amendment
to
eliminate.
The
part.
B
B
B
I
offer
that
as
some
background
as
we
move
into
this
discussion
of
this,
because
it
seems
to
me
to
a
degree
that,
in
light
of
the
relative
recency
of
the
last
referendum
on
this
matter,
that
one
of
the
things
we
have
is
that
it
may
be
a
bit
early
to
bring
this
forward
again.
B
E
Not
not
by
much,
though
I
I
think
it's
something
worth
looking
into,
but
not
at
this
time
with
the
amendments
that
we
have
on
the
charter,
I
think
moving
it
to
a
further
election
and
having
some
discussion
on
it
and
maybe
research
in
public
hearings,
and
I
think
with
it
not
being
complete
that
it
probably
should
come
back
to
us
complete.
A
Christopher
kozak,
I
guess
I
would
I
would
I
can.
I
concur
with
what
commissioner
mcphee
said,
because
it
sounds
like
there
are
some
missing
pieces
as
you
as
you
acknowledge,
mr
chair.
I
also
wonder
who
is
the?
What
is
the
genesis
of
this
proposal?
Where
did
it
come
from.
C
B
Yeah-
and
I
don't
recall
the
background
of
the
other
person
who
brought
this
forward-
okay,
it's
it's
a
purely
it's
a
it's!
It's
again,
it's
not
a
petition.
It's
it's
a
proposal
from
a
couple
of
citizens
that
we
don't
have
to
do
anything
on
or
we
can
decide
it's
a
good
idea
to
move
forward
on
and
again
I'll,
just
interject.
For
the
moment,
I
believe
it's
an
idea
worth
studying
that
the
board
of
estimate
is
kind
of
past
its
prime.
B
It's
deep
in
its
history.
It
was
put
in
there
because
the
legislators
didn't
fully
trust
the
city
council
and
as
a
practical
matter
now,
the
city
council
is
the
one
that
catches
all
the
grief
about
budget
pros
and
cons
and
really,
unless
you're,
an
afficity
auto
of
the
city
workings.
Nobody
really
knows
what
the
board
investment
does.
So
I
think
it's
it's
something
worth
considering,
but
if
there
are
other
members
or
other
charter
commission
members
that
have
further
comments.
A
A
We
need
a
long
discussion
because
I
know
there
are
people
who
truly
believe
in
it,
because
we've
heard
from
some
of
those
folks
over
the
last
several
years
and
but
the
idea
as
I
understand
it,
the
two-thirds
to
pass
a
budget
or
that's
a
that's,
an
awful
uphill
climb
and
too
many
too
often,
and
that
that's
that's
a
or
deadlock,
that's
a
prescription
for
deadlock,
and
I
don't
think
I
don't
think
we
need
that.
And
if
it's,
if
there's
a
serious
fight.
Well
then,
it's
going
to
be
two-thirds,
as
you
said.
A
If
the
mayor
were
to
veto
it,
but
so
that's
where
I
think
I
I
would
be
for
putting
it
off.
D
C
Mr
chair,
I'm
sorry
but
commission
chair
clegg
has
his
hand
raised,
and
so
does
commissioner
rubenstein.
Okay.
B
Let's
go
with
chair
clegg
and
then
I
apologize
and
then
commissioner
rubenstein
after
that.
F
Thank
you.
I
agree
that
this
is
appropriate
for
continued
discussion.
I
think
the
board
of
estimate
and
taxation
is
obsolete,
but
I
think
the
two-thirds
requirement
is
inappropriate.
It
should
be
an
absolute
majority
and
we
should
also
take
the
temperature
of
the
park
board
because
it
was
the
vigorous
park
board.
Opposition
to
this
that
killed
it
in
2009
and,
if
they're
still
at
the
same
place,
there's
not
really
much
point
in
putting
it
on
the
ballot.
F
Finally,
my
recollection
of
the
2009
proposal
was
that
at
the
very
last
minute
they
decided
the
ballot
question.
Language
was
not
to
eliminate
the
board
of
estimate
and
taxation,
because
there
were
some
references
to
the
board
of
estimate
and
taxation
in
state
law.
So,
instead
of
eliminating
the
board,
they
provided
that
the
council,
the
city
council,
is
the
board
of
estimate
taxation.
F
So
if
you
look
back
at
the
2009
amendment,
that's
what
it
was
changed
to
at
the
last
minute
and
we'd
need
to
do
some
research
to
see
where
those
references
are
and
if
we
need
to
do
the
same
thing.
This
time.
B
Thank
you,
chair
clegg,
and
before
I
go
to
commissioner
rubenstein.
Perhaps
I
know
the
clerk
mentioned
yesterday
that
the
the
new
city
lim
system
has
the
ability
to
offer
access
to
prior
amendments,
and
maybe,
if
they
we
could
be
linked
to
the
2000
amendment
and
the
documentation
in
the
not
only
from
the
charter
commission
but
from
the
city
council.
That
might
be
useful
as
we
move
forward
on
this.
B
D
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
I
whatever
I
was
going
to
say
I
think
has
already
been
said,
so
I
will
just
add
my
own
two
cents,
which
is.
I
think
this
is
a
very
good
idea.
This
time
has
not
come
that
we
may
end
up
with
far
too
much
on
the
ballot
in
november,
and
I
think
that
we
want
to
give
some
serious
thought
because
it
does
implicate
how
we
do
budget
and
how
we
do
unbudgeted
expenditures
in
a
way.
D
B
I
don't
see
any
other
hands
at
this
time
and
if
I'm
correct
on
that,
then
I
would
guess
that
we
would
need
a
motion
most
likely
to
postpone
this
matter
to
a
later
date
and
I'm
presuming
we
would
take
this
up
again
at
some
point
after
this
year's
election
and
start
looking
at
this,
we
will
still
be
busy
with
the
redistricting,
but
at
that
time
we
will
have
the
bandwidth
I
mean
as
as
indicated
earlier,
we
are
going
to
have
probably
five
amendments
on
the
ballot
this
year
and
we
are
still
not
done
with
the
reviews
of
any
of
them
really.
B
Second,
okay-
and
the
motion
is
to
postpone
this
matter
until
after
this
year's
election
is
that
is
it
iconic
motion,
commissioner
kozak
yep?
Okay,
with
that
motion,
is
there
any
other
discussion.
E
B
You,
and
with
that,
I
believe
we
have
concluded
all
business
that
needs
to
come
before
this
committee
excuse.
F
Me,
mr
chair,
excuse
me:
I
was
just
going
to
say
that
that
my
plan
is
to
have
the
report
of
this
committee
as
a
standing
item
on
the
charter
commission's
regular
agenda,
and
even
even
if
there
is
nothing
to
report,
that's
fine,
but
so
you
can
report
the
the
results
of
this
consideration
at
the
next
regular
charter.
Commission
meeting
it's
theoretically
possible
that
the
charter
commission
could
say
no
wait.
We
want
to
do
it
but
unlikely,
but
I'll
just
I
just
want
you
to
know
that
there
will
be
a
standing
committee
report.
B
And-
and
thank
you
chuckle
you're,
absolutely
correct-
we
do
need
to
have
the
full
commission
then
rule
on
this
to
postpone
until
after
the
election.
So
thank
you
for
bringing
that
back
to
my
attention
and
I
don't
see
any
other
discussion.
I
now
believe
we
have
committed
completed
our
agenda
and
without
objection
we
will
stand
adjourned.
So
thank
you,
commissioners
and
thank
you,
mr
clerk.