Committee proposes changing City Council meetings, putting charter government on ballot

The Havre City Council Ordinance Committee approved two proposals Tuesday, changing how City Council holds its monthly meetings and changing the form of Havre's government, and the proposals were sent to the city attorney for review.

Mayor Tim Solomon brought up during a December council meeting the idea of changing the City Council meetings from twice a month to once a month due to a regularly low number of agenda items on the city's agenda.

He said during Tuesday's committee meeting that the agenda items could easily be consolidated into one meeting at the beginning of the month, allowing the city to hold a second meeting for committee work or educational sessions for the public and council members. He added that doing this could allow for more community involvement as well as council member involvement in city business.

Committee Chair Caleb Hutchins said the current ordinance requires the council to hold two meetings each month, on the first and third Mondays of each month. He added that the ordinance does specify that a special meeting can be called by either the mayor or three of the council members by giving a written notice of the meeting personally to the mayor and each member of the council three days prior to the special meeting. He said that special meetings need to specify a specific purpose and objective of the meeting.

The change in the ordinance would simply take out the language specifying the council meet on the first and third Monday of each month and replacing it with saying the council will meet on the first Monday of each month.

"Really, the only thing that we would need to change, as far as I can tell, is that first sentence," Hutchins said.

He added that the change would be giving the council some flexibility in how it holds its meetings because the existing language in the ordinance already states the council has the ability to call additional meetings to address issues if needed.

He said in an emergency situation or if any city business needs to be immediately addressed the city has the ability to hold a second council meeting.

After discussion with Solomon, Hutchins said, he has looked at other cities which conduct their monthly council meetings in a similar way. He said that having a second meeting each month specifically for committee work or educational sessions is a great idea.

Committee member Lindsey Ratliff said that the council only meeting once a month does not mean the council is doing less work but rather utilizing its time more efficiently.

Hutchins said that the city does not have to specify the second working meeting in the ordinance because by specifying the second meeting the council's hands would be tied and would leave little flexibility in what the council could do during the working meetings. 

Solomon said that even if the committees had no business that needed to be addressed during the committee meetings, the second monthly meeting can be used to hold workshops, training sessions and educational sessions for the community.

"It's a way to get more of their council involved in their actual committees for discussion," he said.

If the council holds meetings other than on the first Monday for any purpose, the public will be notified, Solomon said.

The change in the ordinance was passed unanimously by the committee and will be sent to the city's attorney.

"Because we've done that there is another ordinance that would need to be change slightly," Hutchins said.

He added that by changing how the council holds its meetings the city needs to make a small change to another ordinance on how ordinances are passed by City Council.

In order for an ordinance to be passed it has to be passed by the council on first reading, after which the ordinance is made available to the public and must be read and adopted by the full council no less than 12 days after first reading, Hutchins said.

But with the city changing from two meetings a month to one meeting a month the language has to be changed, he said. He added that rather than having the council having to vote after 12 days after first reading, the language should be changed to voting at two consecutive meetings. He said that phrasing the ordinance this way allows for flexibility and, although regularly an ordinance would take a month to pass an ordinance, in an emergency situation the council can call a second meeting and pass an ordinance on second reading.

The change in the ordinance was passed unanimously by the committee and was sent to the city's attorney for review.

Hutchins said he also wanted to discuss the possibility of getting the city's government changed from general government powers to charter self-governing powers and including this proposal on the ballot this fall.

He added that Havre does not have self-governing powers, which means Havre is not allowed to do anything outside of what is specifically specified in state law, which includes things such as a vacant property ordinance and a bed tax or tourism tax. 

"We are limited in what we can do as a council, we are limited in what we can do as a city, we are limited to what is explicitly laid out in Montana code," he said.

He said a number of cities across the state have self-governing powers and, in the past, Havre has tried to change the form of its government but the proposal was voted down.

Former Havre City Clerk and Financial Director Lowell Swenson, who worked on changing Havre's government to charter self-governing powers when it was last introduced on the ballot, said changing Havre's government into self-governing powers would be a large advantage to the city. He added that the structure of the city's government could remain the same, but the powers the government would have would be changed.

"I don't see any disadvantage in a charter," he said.

He added that most Montana cities with self-governing powers don't use those powers on a regular basis, but having a charter allows the cities to have more tools available if needed.

One of the reasons the charter was voted down previously was because it proposed introducing a city manager, which is a paid position with the manager acting as chief executive officer and making the role of mayor more of an honorary title, he said. He added that many people were concerned that having a city manager would be a large expense to the city of Havre.

"I really feel strongly that's the reason the charter's been voted down," he said.

He said that the city could enact a character without having to introduce a city manager and keep its structure. He added that if the city was interested in a manager it could put it on the ballot at a later date, but advised the council that, at first, it should just put the charter on the ballot without involving a city manager.

Hutchins said changing the form of Havre's government is not specifically an issue for the Ordinance Committee, but it is a good place for the discussion to start. He added that he will continue working on seeing what Havre needs to create a charter and will talk to Montana's Local Government Center as well as look at previous work Havre has done on writing a charter.

He added that the city should also look at bringing Local Government Center Director Dan Clark, who spoke in Havre last year about charter governments, back for another discussion about the issue.