My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 2001/12/10
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2001
>
Agenda Packets - 2001/12/10
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:51:38 PM
Creation date
8/29/2018 11:22:07 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
12/10/2001
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
12/10/2001
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
181
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 November 26, 2001 <br />Regular Meeting Page 5 <br /> <br />City Attorney Riggs indicated that any item pulled from the Consent Agenda needs to be handled <br />in the same fashion as other items on the agenda. He then indicated that Roberts Rules of Order <br />is not a clear edict or law and the procedure depends on what Council wants to do. <br /> <br />Council Member Stigney indicated that it seems illogical to move approval of the item prior to <br />discussion. <br /> <br />Council Member Thomas indicated that the matter was discussed by full Council and everyone <br />agreed that to bring order to the discussion Council would change its procedure to have a motion <br />on the floor. <br /> <br />MOTION/SECOND: Thomas/Quick. To Approve Consent Agenda Item 6E as presented. <br /> <br />Council Member Marty questioned why this employee was being given a half step increase rather <br />than a full step. <br /> <br />Acting Chief Brennan indicated that because this employee was hired in at Step 4 she was told <br />that she would not move to Step 5 until her one-year anniversary but there is a six-month review <br />that usually contains the step move. <br /> <br />Council Member Marty asked when the step increase is typically given. <br /> <br />Acting Chief Brennan indicated that a step increase is usually given at the six-month process. <br /> <br />Council Member Thomas indicated that to her recollection Council had determined that due to <br />the employee staring at Step 4 she would not go to Step 5 after six months but would be required <br />to wait until one year and the half step covers an increase for the six month period. <br /> <br />Council Member Marty asked City Administrator Miller to research the matter and bring it back <br />before Council at the next meeting. <br /> <br />MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Stigney. To Table Resolution 5654 to the December 10, 2001 <br />Pending Further Information. <br /> <br /> Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. <br /> <br />MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Stigney. To Approve Consent Agenda Item 6F as presented. <br /> <br />Council Member Quick questioned whether there were some changes to the licensing for the <br />Lions. <br /> <br />Mayor Sonterre indicated that the previous owner of the establishment, prior to passing away, <br />had expressed an interest in changing the licensing. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.