Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.b. City Elections • CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: APRIL 2, 1996 AGENDA ITEM: CITY ELECTIONS AGENDA SECTION: NEW BUSINESS PREPARED BY: SUSAN M. WALSH AGENDA N[ ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT ATTACHMENTS: STUDY APPROVED BY: A few weeks ago staff introduced to the city council the concept of holding the city election on even-numbered years rather than odd-number years. The purpose of this agenda item is to have preliminary discussion and direction on whether the city council would like to see the elections changed to even-numbered years. If the city held its elections on even-numbered years, the city would eliminate the election costs and staff time is incurred when we hold our own election. In 1995, the cost for running the city election was a little over that g ty $5,100 and approximately 80 hours of staff time for Administration Secretary Jentink and myself to prepare and assist the judges in conducting the election. These costs will increase due to inflation and additional precincts caused by population growth. If our local election was held on even-numbered years with the state and federal elections, the cost for Rosemount's share of the ballot would be approximately$600. Other advantages are voter convenience and a higher participation rate in our city's election. The disadvantage is the possibility of our local election being lost in the state or presidential election. This could mean that voters who went to the polls to vote for their presidential candidate may not be as well informed about candidates for mayor or council. Rosemount's average voter turnout at city elections is 35%. Voter turnouts out at the 1994 state election and 1992 presidential election were respectively 59% and 76%. Research staff at the League of Minnesota Cities provided me with the following information: • Out of 847 cities responding to survey, 737 hold even year elections, 93 hold odd year elections and 47 hold annual elections. • In the metropolitan area, 103 cities have even year elections, 31 have odd year elections and 6 hold annual elections. Staff also introduced changing the mayoral term from two years to four years. Out of the 10 larger Dakota County cities, 6 cities have four-year mayoral terms. Although there is no specific data, research staff at the League of MN Cities estimate the majority of cities in the metropolitan area have four-year mayor terms. Attached for your review is an excellent study a committee of the city of Eden Prairie completed. It lists the advantages and disadvantages of a four-year term vs. a two-year term. There is no recommended action needed from the council at this time. If a consensus is reached/from the members of the council to go to even year elections and a four year mayoral term, the next step would be for staff to present information for council discussion on how the transition from odd year to even ear and to a four year mayoral term could be accomplished. RECOMMENDED ACTION: t MAR-28-1996 14:34 T P.02/85 • RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE MAYORAL TERM 375 MAYORAL TERM STUDY COMMITTEE Gen ' l & Spec. Memo 5-1-89 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA MAY 1989 Whether the term of office for the Eden Prairie mayor should be extended from two years to four has been the focus of study and discussion for the Mayoral Term Study Committee over the past two months. Ramifications from such a decision have philosophical and operational importance. Arguments to retain a two-year mayoral term are valid. After considering the issues surrounding four- year terms, Committee members found the reasons for extending the mayoral term to be more compelling. For reasons stated throughout this report, the Committee recommends that the City Council adopt an ordinance this year which establishes the mayoral term to be four years. The Essential Issues: Under the statutory Optional Plan 8 (council-manager) form of government which Eden Prairie operates, a city council is comprised of a mayor and four councilmembers. The mayor serves a two-year term and councilmembers have stagged four-year terms. With this plan, voters have the opportunity to change the majority of a city council every two years. Duties and responsibilities of a mayor are substantially the same as other members of the council. All councilmembers and the mayor are elected at large. The mayor's vote counts the same as that of any other councilmember's, and the mayor does not have any veto authority. Mayors perform many ceremonial • functions. Most of the mayor's obligations are technical in nature and done on behalf of the council: the mayor presides at council meetings, signs legal documents, and has titular responsibility for some state and federal laws. A two-year term makes the position of mayor different from other councilmembers and provides a logical opportunity for the mayor to assume leadership on the council . Nothing in the structure of this system, however, directly establishes this leadership. What distinguishes the mayor's office is largely symbolic. Several advantages would exist if the mayoral term were extended to four years. These benefits, which will be discussed more fully below, include greater stability and continuity on the council, fewer distractions from constant campaigning, and an improved quality of decision-making. Given that the mayor has no real additional authority or power, the term of office should be equal to that of other councilmembers. Essentially, the Committee focused on a few questions. What are the benefits to voters to be able to change the majority of the council every two years? What advantages could be realized with a longer mayoral term? Is the community better served by a longer mayoral term when compared to the ability for the voters to change the direction of the council more frequently? Primary Advantages of a Four-Year Term: A two-year mayoral term satisfies a political philosophy that opportunities for major changes should be frequent. Another, equally valid philosophy holds that responsible governance results from persons who are elected to offices with more "secure" tenure. One need only look to the federal system with two-year representatives, a four-year president, and six-year senators to see both of these lines of thought at work. The following advantages derived from a four-year mayoral term would better serve the Eden Prairie community. III MAR-28-1996 14:35 P.03/05 - 2 - 1) Avoid Disservice to Community from Frequent Change: Having frequent -i.e., two year - changes on the council introduces possible volatility into the council 's business. Volatility may result in short-term time-frames and lack of resolve to carry out decisions. Over time, council actions may be inconsistent. Consequently, effective policy-making and efficient service delivery could be impaired. 2) Continuity: Any person elected to a city council takes several months to learn what is involved with his/her position. The community benefits from a councilmember's ability to use his/her experience and historical knowledge gained on the Council for decisions which need to be made. Having the potential for a mayor who may serve only one two-year term deprives the community of these advantages of continuity. 3) Improved Quality of Decision-making Process: The quality of a decision-making process is affected by the environment in which the decision is made. Having continuity, having enough time to see policies and programs implemented, not having to be concerned about how actions will affect an election campaign which starts up again within a few months, all will help the mayor serve the community more effectively. 4) Avoid Distractions of Frequent Campaigning: No sooner does one get elected to be mayor than one looks ahead another 16. - 20 months for an election campaign to begin again. Campaigning can take a significant amount of time away from the business of the Council. This amount of time has increased as the City's population and the amount of money spent on mayoral campaigns have risen dramatically. Some persons believe that this constant campaigning would make one more influenced by popularity than what is goad policy. A four-year term would permit a mayor to focus on community issues instead of being distracted frequently by the pressures of an imminent election. 5) Mayor's Voting Power is Equal: As has been mentioned before, the mayor's powers are not that much different than his/her colleagues on the council, particularly when it comes to voting on decisions. Given this equality, why should the mayoral term be any different than that of other councilmembers? Why should she/he have less time to act on and accomplish a campaign agenda than any other councilmember? The Committee could find no compelling reason why the mayor should be treated differently. 6) Change Well-Received in Other Cities: As part of its research, the Committee sent a short survey to several metropolitan communities which have switched to a four-year mayoral term. Of the eleven communities responding, all but one mentioned that the longer term had been well-received; public reaction was minimal (if any); and no negative impacts were identified. . In the remaining community, a small outlying city, some unfavorable public response came as a reaction to the incumbent rather than the concept of a four-year mayor. MAR-28-1996 14:35 P.04/05 r 7) Drawbacks Based on Personalityz Not Term: In their survey comments, respondents mentioned only one negative result which could come from a longer term of office: a city would face the possibility of having a poor mayor for four years instead of two. In reality, this potential exists for anyone else elected to serve on the council . This drawback stems from personality issues rather than structural ones regarding a four-year term. 8) Elections Send Messages: While a change of the majority of a Council is possible at every election, such wholesale changes rarely occur in actuality. If two council seats changed during the non-mayoral election year, voters would still be sending strong messages to the other councilmembers that change is desired. Public Comment: Given the sixty-day period in which to prepare this report to the City Council, Committee members relied on their own experiences, observations, and discussions as well as responses to a survey of other cities. Committee members could not identify how to gather meaningful and valid public comment during its study period. Council may receive public comment during its consideration of an ordinance to establish a four-year term. Attention should be given so that the comments relate to the concept of a four-year term and not to the incumbent mayor. How To Change The Term: The City Attorney advises that the only way a statutory city such as Eden Prairie may change the mayoral term is by ordinance. Statutory authority for an advisory or binding referendum on this matter does not exist. The ordinance would be effective for the next election scheduled for the year after which it was adopted. For example, an ordinance adopted in 1989 would affect the election in 1990; if it were adopted in 1990, it would apply to the 1992 election. The Committee recommends that the Council adopt an ordinance in 1989 to extend the mayoral term to four years. To do so. would have the mayoral race occur in an off-year (i.e., non-presidential) election. In this way, the mayoral election be less likely politicized with national issues. Additionally, the mayoral race could increase voter interest and turnout in off-year elections. The Committee further recommends that this ordinance proceed through the Council through the normal review and consideration process. Publicity should be handled through usual channels. * * * * * * The Mayoral Term Study Committee is proud to have served the Eden Prairie City Council . We are pleased to present this report to the Council and trust that Councilmembers will give due regard to our findings and recommendations. Councilmember Jean Harris, Chair Chuck Ruebling 10860 Forestview Circle 55344 17195 Daniel Lane 55346 Dean Edstrom Councilmember Doug Tenpas 10133 Eden Prairie Road 55347 10005 Amsden Way 55347 Marge Friederichs Rick Wolf 6421 Kurtz Lane 55346 . 12520 Cockspur Court 55347 Fred LeGrand Craig Dawson, Staff Liaison 9866 Linden Drive 55347 Assistant to the City Manager