Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View Charter Commission May 21, 2019 <br />Regular Meeting Page 6 <br />responsible for making the technical changes to the meeting minutes. City <br />Administrator Zikmund reported this task would be completed by staff. He <br />indicated a substantive change would be made by the Commission at a meeting and <br />staff would amend the minutes to reflect the requested substantive change. <br />Amundsen stated he would be in favor of a three-meeting trial with TimeSaver to <br />see what the substantive differences were between the meeting minutes. <br />Thomas explained he could support the motion on the floor. He indicated this <br />group had copious minutes years ago when verbatim minutes were being provided <br />for each meeting. He discussed the amount of time it took the Commission to <br />review and approve these minutes. He stated after some time the Commission <br />agreed to reduce the level of detail that was included within the meeting minutes <br />and this was written into the bylaws. He reported TimeSaver was given no clear <br />direction on the March minutes and was doing more capturing of the events than <br />was preferred based on the history of the group. He stated going forward he <br />would like to see the minutes have less detail and less personal opinions. <br />Motion Approved <br />Review purpose, role and guiding principles. <br />Reyes-Johnson reviewed the purpose, role and guiding principles for the Commission <br />based on the discussion held at the March meeting. She requested feedback from the <br />group on how to proceed. <br />Thomas commented on the mission statement or purpose of the Charter that was approved <br />by this group in 2002. He asked if the Commission wanted to review the mission <br />statement, the purpose statement, or both. <br />Reyes-Johnson reported the Commission did not have a mission statement in the bylaws. <br />Amundsen stated he was confused and noted the mission statement does not capture the <br />duties intended by the statutes or responsibilities for this group. <br />Reyes-Johnson explained this was not intended to be a mission statement for the group but <br />rather was to clarify the purpose and role for the Charter Commission. <br />Warren thanked the Chair for creating a wonderful document and did not believe it was <br />necessary for the group to codify items that were common sense. For this reason, he <br />recommended the Commission let the statement stand as it was and that the group move <br />on to the next order of business. <br />Peterson questioned if the purpose or mission statement had to become part of the bylaws. <br />Thomas stated the statements were separate issues and were published in different areas. <br />He clarified the mission statement should remain separate and noted the purpose statement <br />1 <br />2 <br />3 <br />1 <br />2 <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 <br />6 <br />7 <br />8 <br />9 <br />10 <br />11 <br />12 <br />13 <br />14 <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />26 <br />27 <br />28 <br />29 <br />30 <br />31 <br />32 <br />33 <br />34 <br />35 <br />36 <br />37 <br />38 <br />39 <br />40 <br />41 <br />42 <br />43 <br />44 <br />45 <br />46 <br />47