Agenda Packets - 1999/08/09 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

for many years. He stated that the reason for this is not to limit debate,but to provide the Council a reasonable amount of time for consideration of the issues, and that they not be required to make decisions at a very late hour. Council Member Stigney stated that he was also a Member of the Charter Commission, and requested, in light of the importance of this issue, moved that the Council extend the time allotted Mr.Dody by and additional three to five minutes to complete his comments. Mayor Coughlin stated that he would request that this extension be applied to all residents present. Council Member Stigney agreed. Mayor Coughlin stated that he would second the motion for the purpose of discussion, and the reason he would not support it was that they either stand by the rules or they don't. He stated that he had already flexed the rules to accommodate Mr. Dody's comments. He added that an assumption had been implied that because of this rule,they did not want to entertain the discussion, and that this was not the case. Ms. Olson stated that she would like to offer a compromise to the situation,requesting the Council make the recommendation to add this matter to the next Council Agenda in a similar form as that of a conditional use permit request. She stated that this would allow the Charter Commission as much time for discussion as the Members required. Mayor Coughlin stated that the matter was on the Council Agenda at that time, and added that if the Council was perceived as not listening,they could be thrown out of office. MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Coughlin: To Call Off the Debate and Call for a Vote. Ayes—3 Nays— 1 (Stigney) Motion carried. MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Coughlin: To Extend the Time Allotted to Any and All Persons Present to an Additional Three to Five Minutes for Their Comments. Ayes— 1 Nays—3 (Coughlin, Quick, Thomason) Motion failed. Julie Olson, Chair of the Charter Commission, asked that she been faxed a letter written by City Attorney Long,in regard to some potential alternatives as suggestions. She stated that City Attorney Long did not know where the previously copied Charters originated. She stated that in reviewing the documentation on behalf of the Charter Commission and the citizens, it was very clear that the copies came from the City. She stated that this letter also contained an attachment, which was forwarded to the attorney from the League of Minnesota Cities. She stated that prior to the matter going to the citizens,the alternatives were clearly stated that if they chose to bring the matter to a ballot, and it was passed, the end result would be that it would become part of the Charter. She stated that the City Administration,the City Attorney or City Council does not have the right to state that the provision does not have the right to be in the Charter. She stated that is the right of the citizens. She stated the neither City staff or City Council can make a codicil to the Charter. She stated they can request that happen, and put a recommendation to the Charter Commission,but they can not do that themselves, or omit the term limit provision from being in the Charter. She stated 17C:\ADMIN\MINUTES\CC\072699CC.MIN