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