My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-06-92 CCM
LakeElmo
>
City Council
>
City Council - Final Meeting Minutes
>
1990's
>
1992
>
04-06-92 CCM
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/29/2025 3:36:32 PM
Creation date
10/2/2019 8:22:31 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 6, 1992 2 <br />Steve DeLapp, 8468 Lake Jane Trail, indicated he received a <br />copy of an 18 page letter with exhibits written to the Met <br />Council by Mayor Johnson and Councilman Mottaz. Who paid <br />for the distribution of these 30 copies? When did the City <br />Council authorize two of the Council members to write a <br />letter in their official capacities as Mayor and Council <br />person? Do the other council members think it is <br />appropriate or inappropriate for information to be provided <br />to them thru the City Administrator's office? <br />Mayor Johnson explained that the comments made in this <br />letter to the Met Council were relative to a letter they <br />(Met Council) mailed to the City Administrator covering <br />policy and procedure issues. Policy and procedure issues <br />should be addressed to the council and not to the city <br />administrator. In particular, they stated a conclusion that <br />the Mayor and Councilman Mottaz have disagreed with. The <br />letter asked a Met Council staff member to address future <br />correspondence on policy and procedure issues to the City <br />Council and further goes into the reasons. Copies were made <br />by himself on the City's copy machine for every Council <br />member and all the planning commissioners for the purpose of <br />putting together the comp plan and the latest amendment. <br />Councilman Mottaz commented it was entirely appropriate for <br />him to make a statement as city council person whenever he <br />chooses without getting permission from this council or <br />anyone else as long as he is not stating a position of the <br />city or making some claim to be speaking for the city. <br />Councilman Johnson felt it was totally appropriate for the <br />city administrator to ask for and receive a position from <br />the Met Council as to what their understanding as to the <br />status of the Lake Elmo Comp Plan. The Council should <br />receive all communication regarding policy issues and felt <br />this information has been communicated back to the Council. <br />The letter even though not written on city letterhead leads <br />to some confusion on the part of the Met Council and <br />accomplishes nothing. The issue about what Comp Plan we are <br />under is much to do about nothing because the Future Land <br />Use Map in the 1990 document is the map we will operate <br />under. <br />Councilman Hunt indicated he felt the letter takes a strong <br />stance and almost implies the City Administrator has not <br />done a good job of communicating to the Council when quite <br />literally she had done an excellent job. Although the <br />letter from the Met Council was sent to the city <br />administrator a copy was communicated to the entire council. <br />The council sets policy and the staff are the people who <br />implements those policies in the city. Any individual on <br />the Council has no more power on setting policy or running <br />the City than any other person in the entire City. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.