My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2003-12-06 Commission Memo to Council re Quorum Membership and Process
MoundsView
>
City Commissions
>
Charter Commission
>
2000-2009
>
2003
>
Correspondence
>
2003-12-06 Commission Memo to Council re Quorum Membership and Process
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/29/2020 5:48:57 AM
Creation date
1/29/2020 5:48:56 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Misc Documentation
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 1
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).
View images
View plain text
m v City of <br /> Mounds <br />View <br />Charter Commission <br />Chair <br />Jonathan J Thomas <br />763-784-5205 <br />Vice Chair <br />Michele Sandback <br />763-783-1770 <br />2nd Vice Chair <br />Daniel Freimuth <br />763-780-3371 <br />Secretary <br />Brian Amundsen <br />763-786-5699 <br />Bill Doty <br />763-786-3421 <br />Matthew Eenigenburg <br />763-783-7216 <br />Jean Miller <br />763-786-3959 <br />William Mori <br />763-784-3645 <br />Barbara Thomas <br />763-780-6226 <br />William Werner Sr <br />763-784-3603 <br />December 6, 2003 <br />Response to City Council comments of Nov. 24th regarding requests from the Mounds <br />View Charter Commission, Jonathan J Thomas, Chair. <br />First, I would like to apologize for not being able to attend the meeting where the Charter <br />issues were discussed. It was a very great disappointment to watch a replay of the <br />meeting after having been called by a resident and asked to do so, because it seemed that <br />the members of the City Council were apparently not given the necessary information to <br />be able to reasonably discuss and proceed on the items the Charter commission had sent <br />them for review. For the record, there were no issues raised that had not been clearly and <br />publicly presented already. I will attempt to list the issues that seemed to be raised and <br />state a simple brief response. All of the actions and many comments regarding these <br />issues are recorded in the minutes that are filed in the Charter Commission Public Book <br />which is available for review to the public at City Hall, and at every meeting of the <br />Charter Commission. <br />Has the Charter Commission done any business without a quorum ? <br />No; the Charter Commission operates according to its Bylaws that state in <br />Article III section 3: <br />“A majority of qualified and acting members shall constitute a quorum for the <br />purpose of conducting the Commission’s business and exercising its powers and <br />for all other purposes, but a smaller number of members may adjourn from time <br />to time.” To clarify this, the number of members required to vote on issues must <br />be more than half the number of currently active members. This means that if <br />there are 9 active members, a quorum would be 5. We currently have 10 active <br />members so a quorum is 6. <br /> <br />Was changing the number of members from 15 to 11 done properly ? <br />Due to the difficulty in maintaining a roster of 15 members a significant amount <br />of discussion with the current and previous District Court Judges and Clerk of the <br />District Court was used to evaluate the proper consideration and process, which <br />ended up in the recommendation that the Charter Commission amend its Bylaws <br />and send a copy of the amendment to the District Court which would then change <br />its records to reflect the new roster requirements. As we had less than the 11 <br />acting members at the time it did not impact any members serving at the time. <br />The amendment was Adopted by unanimous approval of the nine members <br />present at the June 12, 2003 meeting of the Charter Commission. <br />Is it proper to use “replacement language” for a portion of the Charter, and if so <br />does the entire text need to be underlined ? <br />Where the order and association of ideas is substantial enough to make the <br />“Strikeout/Underline” method confusing, it is common practice to use the <br />“Replacement Language” method. As to the question of style, it is stated in the <br />header and there is no statute requirement or suggestion for the style to be used.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.