Amundsen Ltr to Court Aug 2019 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Attachment 1 — Response to City Letter of July 11, 2019 Case File 62-CV 19-4965 The Letter states that public policy adoption and Charter updates simply fail by reliving the previous Commission meetings. • I disagree with the statement. • The Letter provides no evidence of reliving previous meetings. • The Commission's purpose is to be custodians of the Charter and address citizen petitions or Council resolutions for amendments, as stated in the Bylaws. • The Commission has no requirement to change any part of Charter on its own initiative. • Old business is a standard agenda item, and is designated in Bylaws. The Letter states that the Commission spent 8 plus years discussing issues related to revising Chapter 8. • The Commission's option in 410.12 Subd. 7 has no specific statutory timeline for Charter language considerations or amendments it undertakes by its own initiative. • Charter Chapter 8 did not have a citizen petition or Council proposed amendment to trigger a shorter timeline as specified in 410.12. The flow chart referred to by the Letter is a timeline illustration only and it is visual aid of the steps for the Council and public to follow. It was acceptable to the previous Council membership when unanimously approved for adoption by the Council. The second example of the Commission review of Chapter 4 Nominations and Elections was previously discussed. The July 16 Commission meeting was canceled by the 2" Vice Chair, out of order of proper descent of authority per Bylaws (Attachment 3, Article II, Section 3), under advice of the City Attorney (Attachment 11). Mr Thomas is the Commission Vice Chair and assumes those duties until a new chair is elected. Mr. Thomas has not resigned as acting chair or his commission. This again illustrates the conflict of interest of the City Attorney representing two different entities. The Letter states that the Council advocated for "simplification" in both cases. • I disagree. • No documentation or communication to the Commission of Council direction is provided. Paragraph 8 The Letter states that in January 2018 the Council established goals for Mr. Zikmund as a component of his hiring, to work with the Commission. • Mr. Zikmund did not reach out and attempt to work with the Commission in 2018 while I was serving as the Commission's chair. • Mr. Zikmund did not share any of the Councils concerns as listed in the Letter with me or at Commission meetings. Paragraph 9 The Letter states that the Council direction and support was met with resistance by me. • I disagree. • The Council direction, via the city administrator, regarding Commission activities and procedures is disputed. • The statutes provide no role for the Council and city staff as ad -hock members or advisory Page 9 of 13