Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View City Council August 22, 2005 <br />Regular Meeting Page 43 <br /> <br />Councilmember Thomas stated she is a member of the Charter Commission, knows every word 1 <br />of Chapter 5 intimately, and worked untold hours on the language to try to correct the errors that 2 <br />she and Mr. McCarty know are weak spots that 30 years ago no one could have envisioned. She 3 <br />stated that in another 30 years there may be problems that today the Charter Commission cannot 4 <br />possibly envision in how it is worded. Councilmember Thomas explained that it comes down to 5 <br />all those extra things and taken aside, it is not about “is it a good deal.” Two hundred some 6 <br />petitioners are not registered but she has every faith they could come up with more than enough 7 <br />signatures given the opportunity. 8 <br /> 9 <br />Councilmember Thomas stated she has to decide that whether defending the Charter, which she 10 <br />works on every month to be the best representation and uphold the rights of the citizens to act in 11 <br />their government, is this the place that they can and/or should act. And, regardless of what we 12 <br />would like to give as a power to residents, some powers are taken away by the State. She stated 13 <br />she knew it would start to become a problem and had coffee with Brian Amundsen for three 14 <br />hours. She explained that Mr. Amundsen sits on the Charter Commission with her and both 15 <br />knew of the weakness in the Charter and whether or not this would be eligible for a referendum. 16 <br />Chapter 5 does not have that language and does not address the problem of an administrative 17 <br />action versus a legislative one. 18 <br /> 19 <br />Councilmember Thomas stated the Council has the City Attorney’s legal opinion. She asked 20 <br />what if the situation were reversed and the City had property they wanted to purchase; would the 21 <br />City go through all of this. She stated the City does not. The Council does it on a regular basis 22 <br />and despite all the arguments about what is the proper property to purchase, whatever the 23 <br />dealings of the City, we know it is an administrative action done by this body with all deliberate 24 <br />care and thought put in to it. However, it is the Council’s responsibility to make that choice. 25 <br />Councilmember Thomas stated she cannot get away from the fact that regardless of the 26 <br />extraneous details that go around it, this is the sale of a property. It is the City’s responsibility to 27 <br />make the best judgment it can and it’s a fully administrative action. She stated that she cannot 28 <br />come to any other conclusion. 29 <br /> 30 <br />Councilmember Thomas stated for the record that an RFP is not the standard way for a city to 31 <br />ever sell property. Especially if they want to have any choice in the development which is 32 <br />Mounds View’s goal, to get the best development they can get. 33 <br /> 34 <br />Councilmember Thomas stated she was not 100% sure that she had made up her mind until 35 <br />listening to this discussion. She stated she thinks referendums are allowed but in this case does 36 <br />not think it is allowed. 37 <br /> 38 <br />Councilmember Flaherty stated the reason he asked the attorney if there is recourse on the 39 <br />petition is because he said he was all in favor of petition and it was a mechanism for citizens to 40 <br />use. He stated he previously indicated that he would not stop the petition based on a legality. He 41 <br />stated he disagrees with the petition because it was based on misinformation, and people who 42 <br />signed were not given all the information. However, he stands by his conviction and will do 43 <br />what he said he would do. 44 <br /> 45