Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View City Council June 12, 2000 <br />Regular Meeting Page 15 <br /> <br />MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Marty. To Authorize the Mayor and Interim Clerk Administrator to <br />Sign a Three-year Extension for Auditing Services with Kern, DeWenter, & Viere for the Years <br />Ending December 31, 2000, 2001, and 2002. <br /> <br /> Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. <br /> <br />E. Consideration of Sergeant’s and Patrol Contracts. <br /> <br />Interim Administrator Ulrich stated before the Council was a report, which outlines the changes <br />that were made to both the Sergeant’s and Patrol Unit contracts. He stated electronic copies of <br />both contracts were provided in the Council’s packets, however, staff observed language in those <br />documents that required to be addressed, and this was resolved that date, therefore, the contracts <br />are in final from and awaiting execution. He indicated all of these items were discussed at <br />previous Closed Sessions, and he was available to address any further questions at this time. <br /> <br />Mayor Coughlin stated the Council was required to tape the Closed Session discussions, which <br />were not broadcast due to the nature of these negotiations. He inquired if those tapes become <br />public record when the contracts have been accepted. <br /> <br />City Attorney Long stated this was correct. He advised that the City is required to maintain those <br />recordings, and if the contracts are ratified, the tapes become public record. <br /> <br />Mayor Coughlin stated these discussions would be made available for public review. <br /> <br />MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Marty. To Approve <br /> <br />Council Member Stigney inquired if it would be acceptable to discuss the specific terms of the <br />contract at this time. <br /> <br />City Attorney Long advised that the Council could hold an open discussion pertaining to the <br />terms of the contracts, however, unless the contracts are to be ratified, they would not desire to <br />reiterate the previous taped discussion. <br /> <br />Council Member Stigney stated he had previously expressed concerns regarding some of the <br />items contained in the contracts, primarily the change in the manner in which the City pays for <br />insurance under these contracts. He explained that previously, a fixed amount of money was <br />paid for insurance, however, both contracts have been amended to change this to an 80 versus 20 <br />percent split, with an increase of 15 percent, which is negotiable if it exceeds that amount. He <br />advised that this changes the form in which this has always been done in the past, and is contrary <br />to the practice of the vast majority of cities in the State. He indicated this would have a ripple <br />effect in terms of all City employees, and it was detrimental to the taxpayers, therefore, he did <br />not support it. <br /> <br />Council Member Marty stated he did not believe that this was presented as the exception to the <br />vast majority of the cities in the State, but rather, that it is beginning to become more of the <br />norm. He stated it was also presented that the pool of Police Officers from which to draw is not <br />as great as it previously has been. He explained that in order to retain employees, this was an