Order-Other - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

11 Respondent’s election to two officer positions and actual attendance over the past three years belies any claim that either respondent or his leadership caused membership or attendance deficits. Petitioner failed to prove her claim that respondent’s actions “resulted in Commission membership and quorums being unobtainable.” (Pet., July 11, 2019 at 1.) Over the past three years, the opposite is true. 8. The record does not support a conclusion that respondent acted or failed to act in a manner that touches on his qualifications for the office of Charter Commissioner. No one questioned respondent’s fitness for office. 9. The closest petitioner came to an allegation impacting the performance of respondent’s duties was to assert that the City of Mounds View Charter Commission “is unable to effectively operate due to respondent’s actions.” However, as noted above, the allegation is unsupported by the record and appears disingenuous. Per Finding of Fact No. 29, petitioner at most demonstrated that petitioner, the Mounds View City Council, and one or more members of the Charter Commission do not agree on what constitutes a productive or meaningful Charter Commission meeting and they may not share the same philosophy about how to conduct or prioritize Charter Commission business. Yet, diversity of opinion and outlook are normal and arguably desirable features in the membership of a public body. In the final analysis, petitioner’s vague and unproven allegations do not rise to the level of “sufficient cause” and they eerily resemble the vague and unproven allegations that Justice Mitchell described in Hart as an exercise in “excess of power, and equivalent to an arbitrary removal.” 53 Minn. at 244, 55 N.W. at 120. Hart demonstrates that little has changed in politics since 1893.