Final report of the Havre Local Government Review Study Commission

2016·5.8 MB·English

Final Report

Of the
Havre Local Government Review

Study Commission
2016

Table of Contents

1 Lolierto the eitizcas ofthe City of Havre
Th. Comparison ofthe existing indtproposed form of government
I, Final Report :
Iv. Cextifcates
Evhibit A: Ceident othe Proposed Flan of Charter Couuissten" anager
Ishibil By Certificate ofthe Propesod Findings and Resormmetions

Tenihit C:Canificate Bsinhliahenent of the Dlectom Tate
Feninae Dd: Cenficae Hstablishment of te Olfeia} Ballot
[LGLLER TO PBR CUTTBENS OF CTP OF HAVRE, MONTANA

FINAL RRPORT
‘August 10, 2016
Clty of ave from the Loval Govermmestt Review Stacy Commission

To the Citizens of Cire oLfasre:
eo ee ceeds Cormisionencedby the voters enslovemis 20% of

Sane og pret nol reportoyeushectranact Ay uf HOWE

te prpose ft ty amis, eid in sata ew, to ty he west en an
aan at gaverrmet and procures or df offeal zrmscoment see mid
re a Seer avai a ne own ofthe ate” Aer completing hese
Far ee ait the responsi of the suey comson ta suit afar,
ow ha of thee erpronresanarenimentrothesdstformcHgaveramen orale
eegtersnve Forms ofgovertmert tote quai era

never ase hs ree, hi sd uncon steht aves ntreformaton om ema DS
ee tng end recor ware sled om wc govement ea enn
esa acres of tiny coma wer pentivepebit: Commi
srg torres coouniyerganisstlon oexpnn the novk Fhe commision and
Er a a ets sriconcer ut hove pore Pub beam were ean rine
Mivoyeettzon inp wis wlized a5

se recommenaions refi. thoughts morons of ete wh paripated in public hearing, hes who
a ee rane tae wh rape tose, atin woe iependert
Hore ol the study consnsson.

ania fnmel repute preset our ecomirton oan ternae For of goverment thee fea
Ee remnmentalrdcer expected by thepeapsbeen today andinwhefuture, Cur cnceen
re a great government eet espana ocala nd prove he
eee itor devolution tatoo probes We feel the cine of Hawecanarinvethose
Sete Comission Matas fn wt sa genera pow

cuples ofthe entre INAL REPORT an be abtined. at tie GA of Hovre offses, 204” Street between,
‘he fours of Bom to Som, Mondoy tua Frid,

“The question of adopting ths alternative form of government willbe placed
‘onthe ballot November 8, 2016.

Respectfully submitted,
{Cty af Havre Government Steely Cormmissianers

toe LO Jay Semele lee
i chaenon: rey 6 eis Gfptnge Cp Wiehe.
Commissioner: Jowell. Sensun: gl yaya

Chairperson: Da
REPORT SUMMARY

“The City of Havre Local Government Study Commission having thoroughly studied our present torm of
city government and the alle-nalive [ors of government available to cities under state law and
having studied the future governmental needs of this city, recommends the following:

1

City of Havre should adopt effective July |,2017, the commission manager farm of
government with self-government powers. Creating a commission of seven (7} members will
provide a leyslative body large enough to insure adequate representation and small enough
‘tobe efficient. The method of election- four (4) members elected by district and two members
and Mayor elected atlarge—will allow the inLerests of each district to be represented, but at
‘the sarne time those elacted at-large will provide a city- wide perspective.

A. Eindings of the Study Commission
[After an intensive study of almost two years, itis the decision of the sturly commission to
recommend changes in the structure and power uf city government that will provide a
governmental framework to meet the changing needs of ths city. Problem areas that
‘were identified during the course of the study oy research, discussion, public hearings,
testimeny af public officials, and citizen surveys indicate that in exercising ils’ raditional
functions, under the current form of city government lacks the professional experience it
needs, IF city government isto play @ wider role i must have adequate legal authority to
‘act; it must also have more canteol aver its organizational srurture so that it can ack
effectively and oversee the performance of city functions,

The “traditional” farm of city government has existed in City of Haure since the creation of
the city in 1802, aad is basically the same government as was originally described in the
+1489 Canstitution, The form still reflects its’ “tracitional” rola asan administrative arm of
the city government in its argunizalional structure. Its duties are detailed in state law, and
its’ authority Lo deal with lacal problems is limited.

the needs of the city, however, have changed since 1891; with patterns shiting and
citizen demands for services rising, The changes are placing heavler new demands on city
_government to provide more services such as sewer, waler and refuse disposal bath
‘within and outside the city mits. To effectively respond to these growing needs, city
government must mauiy ts’ structure and authority.

Other areas of concern also emerged during the course of the study which affected the
study commission's choice of an altemative form. Citizen resgonse to the survey which
‘was conducted, and testimony at the public hearings, indicated that citirens are
concerned about ocal decisions net being made at the local level, abuul Une quality of
services (especially roads), about the level of taxes, and about the ack of professional
‘management and perceived citizen parteipation in chy government.

Findings of the Study Commission (continued)
a

‘These frustrations and expectations of citizens and local officals alike, in addition tothe
‘changing role and complexity of ety government, and growing nceds ofthe cty, led the
study commission te identify these main goal:

1. Improve communication between the Council and the Uepartments;

2. Identity Emergency plans ofthe Cty

3. See what support or road blocks exist to forming a Charter with Self-Governing

4. Issues concerning public input to the City government;

5. Decide the Form of Government that would be advantageous for a move elficien!
running ofthe City:

5. Which City Services could/should be consolidated with the County;

In an attempt to achiove these goals, the study commission recommends a
Manager/Commission form of government with sell government pawers.

Key Provisions of the Proposal
1, Self-Government Powers

Under the 19/28tate Constitution, the potential power and authority of local
government has been changed. Traditianally, Ihe pawer aver gavernmental
concerns ofthe cityhas been the prerogative af the state!

leuislalure: decided what city government should do.and how it should do i.

stature, The

The new constitution provides that "self government powers” can be adopted by cities
along with an alternative form of government. The adaption of selt- government
powers would alter the trcitional relationship between the state and the city. Certain
areas of cantiel would be Lransferved fron the stale legislaLure to the city cammission,
Some decisions that are now macle on a state-wide basis by the legislature could be
made at the city level State-wide uniformity, while still mandated in certain areas,
could be replaced in other areas with procedures tallored to the particular necds of
pur city. Self government powers would mean greater flexibility in shaping our
governmental structure, greater power to solve our own problems, and mare
responsibilty to recognize and deal with these problems.

Koy Provisions of the Propasa! fcontinued)
‘Separation of teaistrive ond Administrative Functions

In its traditions! role ws xn administrative arm of state government, the
Orgsnizaliomal structure of the city may hve been adequate. Nowever the
existing Mayor/City Council form has weaknesses Lo adequately handle the ever-
Increasing responsibilities in city government.

‘The existing government lacks a professional administrative head, a person
responsible for supervision of the functions and services provided by city
‘gowernmentto see that the goals ofthe city are carried out as efficiently as
possible, At present, these functions and services are pravided by tne Mayor and
ight (8) Council members, six (6) Department Heads, four (2) City/County Boards
and two (2) City Boards. The current cily government has the authority to
ravrdlinale these offices and dards to supervise their programs. Many arc
substantially independent at any control

Tine proposed torm of government 9 commission of sevan members will act 95.2
legislative buxly with the power to formulate city policy. The comnissioners and
-Mayar/Chairperson will have the authorily to enact ordinances ta carry out that
policy. The responsibilily wf administering and enforcing these ordinances lies
with the city manager

chinfirinistroive Officer

“The city manager, a professional administrator hired by the commssinn "on the basis
‘ol merit only! is responsible for the administration of the programs and policies
etermmined by the commission, Subject to the commission's general directian, the
manager contfols the hiring and fring af ety personnel, ireers and supervises the
administration ofall departments, prepares the budget, and isin charge of the
business affairs of city government. The manager serves atthe pleasure of the
commission and may be replaced at any time [with a majarity vate)

satotion
Creating.a commissian of seven (7} members will provide a legislative bocy large

Ta insure adequate rupresentation and small enough to be efficient, The
method of eleslion- four [4] members elucted by district and two members and Mayor
elected at-large-will allow the interests of each distril Lu be represented, but at the
sane Line those elected at large will provide a city. wide perspective.
Table 1: Cty of Havre Organizational Chart ~Current Farm —Counci/Mayor

HAVRE VOTERS

elect

[emycounc | (MAYOR _
a or |

Appoints with

Consent of Council

Police Chief Fire
Chiet
Director of Public Works
Finance Director/Clerk
Director of Park/Rec
Boards/Councils
Table 2: Cty of Havre Organizational Chart ~ Proposed Form —Commisson/Manager

HAVRE VOTERS

Elect

|

COMMISSION

Appoints Manager a: Chief
Executive

MANAGER

Appoints

Police Chief |
Fire Chief
Director of Public Works
Finance Director/Clerk
Director of Park/Ree
Boards/Councils
CITY OF HAVRE COMPARISON OF SPECIFIC CHARACTERISTICS OF
THE EXISTING COMMISSION/EXECUTIVE AND THE PROPOSED
AMENDED CHARTER & COMMISSIONIMANAGER

ae ee SMMSSON-EXESITIVE [ecassiONWANAGER | SHARTER
Jcovernarent |

a boon ee

|ineemmsiavenscitim |The corimicionmnerfom (ohich ayn _|ar powers
fine wren ay be cate Jefoc iw couned rsnanertere) cunsicatan foes ee,
lance, sent Jest omreiason (rich may beeaid ne ogee. and
[mayor ce eecommasen- [cnn anda minegarsopciricd by be |adniniave ree
Frayer) consis can xmas, wn al Bete tic sain [an rps a
Ved aammicon (as, (ofenreneleslgmeionent Themaregs te spavortestteny

fay eared ese tbo [shake vexprctiate bvenein frtee—[pinnas
Ibomchandone.tenie! —fadnhisbacn afl eal gave is
freon ory blue nage bylaw rancor

Vetonedi se myer we fscuton

‘ponesor pasate a pave

frst nme | oe Ws, co ecole
rion f Patenshinmgiedtr en otis [per

Fer ote en, bs

jaavon, irra 7 foci:

vine, poet arate it
rept esr ris

soumman orcas scape ombiy Wococntn

a a mi Le
ce tte ptacare mess mam cater, me wren
iin rbe0 eft commie ote cepoa

emer | Reem cn
Jr ote rina
Ta RT Accom a cay SES

PUTS OF ue conan
ede rime ya
[1 emia wi tocoment st br rps: ins and exe te
i cma be of
errr came ony pes mill te omic
Jr mayor, temp siny | Apia gnome em

smoincer, > fyi mis ftp mei

scHARMAN | fit te mse
| conanus:

3.30
[POWERS 3-20 The pn of

he pha goverment sabi oe sulfa

pve cermin te poss af te acl

elie acs shi:
cece he pes oe

Socal goremmet ua by SetFgovenment panes,
iii

bs, Gosel Govan Ho
ures
HreawstTiON

[af The oar ans opin anager ao
[o) nani sal veto tong
eeoonbes: lar end anos te
rere pores Tima

[ scuasor the fate ote Toon 3 rae
Ine targercove Drm caro
Jhxcrongspereng aegis ad wee
faces volver (ol oesseesgentn tr mr voutl
[irae paresctalTrnmenpayen pons
fat own noes () anc Tour
[estyose ater eatin vs peta

Jncesoan, ros at el 8 Town aeeias
Lersence wih die crane hss Le
[mrad 9 tavarmarst, 2017. Spo esse