My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 2006/10/23 (2)
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2006
>
Agenda Packets - 2006/10/23 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:50:38 PM
Creation date
7/18/2018 5:35:17 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
10/23/2006
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
10/23/2006
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
107
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Mounds View City Council September 25, 2006 <br />Regular Meeting Page 21 <br /> <br />City Attorney Riggs explained that in essence, there is a provision in the Charter that went into 1 <br />effect in 1979 for which there was no authorization. He stated absent of the authority, there needs 2 <br />to be a re-adoption of the provision. 3 <br /> 4 <br />Mayor Marty stated that for the City Charter to mean what it says, that part of the Charter needs 5 <br />to be re-approved or re-authorized. City Attorney Riggs suggested it be re-approved and 6 <br />clarified. He stated that the office is appointed by a district judge, not by the City. 7 <br /> 8 <br />City Attorney Riggs stated he could understand the argument both ways and that there is a lot of 9 <br />latitude and should be clarified. He stated one option is for the City to refer this matter to the 10 <br />Charter Commission for their recommendation. 11 <br /> 12 <br />Mayor Marty stated he did not know about the 2004 change until the issue was brought to his 13 <br />attention. He stated the Charter needs to be referred back to the Commission for clarification. 14 <br /> 15 <br />Councilmember Flaherty commented that particularly because a ruling was not made, the 16 <br />Council is back to square one. City Attorney Riggs replied that it does not stop future lawsuits. 17 <br />He stated there have been numerous occasions when Councilmembers have also been Charter 18 <br />Commission members. He said it has been acknowledged that that language does not apply over 19 <br />the 27-year history. 20 <br /> 21 <br />Councilmember Stigney asked if the issue was being forwarded to the Charter Commission for 22 <br />review, but asked if the Commission discussed it. City Attorney Riggs explained that the judge 23 <br />asked for a response and that the issue was never brought up in the Commission. 24 <br /> 25 <br />Councilmember Stigney asked if it is the Attorney’s intention to forward something to the 26 <br />Charter Commission. City Attorney Riggs suggested everything be forwarded to the Charter 27 <br />Commission for review. He recommended starting with the Charter Commission, which could 28 <br />then make a recommendation to the Council. 29 <br /> 30 <br />MOTION/SECOND: FLAHERTY/STIGNEY. To have City Attorney Riggs submit information 31 <br />to the Charter Commission for review and to authorize follow-up action for any filings that need 32 <br />to be completed. 33 <br /> 34 <br /> Ayes - -- 4 Nays - -- 0 Motion carried. 35 <br /> 36 <br />MOTION/SECOND: STIGNEY/GUNN. To cancel holding an executive session. 37 <br /> 38 <br /> Ayes - -- 4 Nays - -- 0 Motion carried. 39 <br /> 40 <br />12. Next Council Work Session: Monday, October 2, 2006, at 7 p.m. 41 <br />Next Council Meeting: Monday, October 9, 2006, at 7 p.m. 42
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.