My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 2002/02/25
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2002
>
Agenda Packets - 2002/02/25
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:46:35 PM
Creation date
8/8/2018 2:43:15 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
2/25/2002
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
2/25/2002
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
96
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 January 28, 2002 <br />Regular Meeting Page 13 <br /> <br />Mr. Jahnke commented that none of the speakers have ever said where the fault laid. He then <br />commented that the YMCA is responsible for accepting something other than what was ordered. <br />He further commented that enough time and money had been wasted on the issue and said it was <br />time to move on. <br /> <br />Council Member Thomas commented that all Council Members have the responsibility to review <br />the just and correct claims and the City needs to fix the problem. <br /> <br />Council Member Marty commented that, if Council approved it on the just and correct claims, <br />the City ultimately did approve the purchase. <br /> <br />Mayor Sonterre commented that City Attorney Riggs had said that, if Council approved the <br />purchase and it was statutorily improper, then the City would be liable. <br /> <br />Wendy Marty of 2626 Louisa Avenue commented that, if the Mayor had taken ownership from <br />the beginning rather than denying any wrongdoing and badmouthing her about a witch-hunt there <br />would not be any attorney’s fees involved. She then commented she thinks the Mayor should <br />pay the attorney’s fees. <br /> <br />Ms. Marty questioned whether the Mayor should be asked to pay interest from June 15, 2000 to <br />December 7, 2000 on the $4,120.00 which would be $219.77 and on the $703.33 from December <br />7, 2000 to January 14, 2002 which would be approximately $77.00 for a total of $300.00 owed to <br />the City. <br /> <br />Council Member Thomas clarified that the entire City Council was responsible and stated she did <br />not think it was appropriate to travel down that path any farther. <br /> <br />Council Member Stigney commented that he felt this matter should have been resolved a long <br />time ago and could have been if someone would have admitted to getting caught with his hand in <br />the cookie jar. He then commented he did not think it was necessary to have the City ask for <br />repayment by Resolution. <br /> <br />City Attorney Riggs indicated he had asked that the City request repayment by Resolution to <br />provide a way to track the matter. <br /> <br />Council Member Stigney clarified that the equipment ordered is what was received but the City <br />paid for other than what was ordered. He then commented that there has been a lot of time, <br />aggravation and money spent on this matter causing a big black mark on the City and he feels it <br />is time to move on. <br /> <br />Mayor Sonterre stated he disagrees with everything Council Member Stigney said and indicated <br />he had a dated copy of a fax order that indicates the equipment ordered which was what was <br />requested. He then commented that he never stocked or sold the equipment and had simply made <br />the opportunity available to the City by providing a catalog. He further commented that the
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.