Agenda Packets - 2012/09/24 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Commissioner Removal Report September 24, 2012 Page 2 It is the City Attorney’s opinion that the throwing of beverage containers into a neighbor's yard over the course of several weeks may not constitute "just cause" for removal of the Commissioner from office. First of all, he asserts that this type of behavior does not relate to his work as a Planning Commissioner. Second, the littering violations are not of a substantial nature (seven pop cans and one water bottle compared to throwing bags of trash or large items, etc.). Third, the littering only affects one other person and not the rights and interests of the general public. Based on these factors present in this situation, it can be argued that the Planning Commissioner's behavior—disappointing as it may be—may not meet the "just cause" standard for removal, as it is a fairly high standard to meet. Recommendation: Based on the above information, analysis and City Attorney’s opinion, it would appear difficult for someone to successfully argue that the City Council should remove the Planning Commissioner from office. If, however, the City Council does determine there are sufficient grounds to warrant removal of the Planning Commissioner, the Council will need follow City Code Section 401.03, Subd. 1a. and provide him with notice of the reasons why he may be removed from office and allow him an opportunity to respond to the allegations via the public hearing that must be held. In addition, pursuant to the City's ordinance, at least four Council members must vote in favor of the removal. In the event that the City Council decides to remove him, it should make sure that detailed findings are made regarding why the Council believes that his actions constitute "just cause" for removal from office. Respectfully submitted, ________________________ James Ericson City Administrator