BA Amundsen IDR April 11 Part 3 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Attachment 1 — Response to City Letter of July 11, 2019 Case File 62-CV 19-4965 capacity to the Commission. Commission Bylaws in the officer duties state that the Chair acts as primary liaison to city staff in implementing the decisions of the Commission and that the Commission Secretary submits a copy of the Chair's annual report to the Court and to the City Administrator. (Attachment 3, Article U, Section 2 and Section 4) My comment to City Administrator Zikmund was in the context of Mr. Zikmund and the Chair not returning my phone and email messages for ten days, prior to the May 21 meeting, requesting the "trial" Time Saver minutes, so they could be submitted to the Chair as required by Bylaws. Mr. Zikmund stated that the process had changed and could only say the Chair made the change in consultation with him. He then told me he had invited City Attorney Riggs to the next Commission meeting. The Letter states that "... with the indifference and rejection of advice from the City Attorney (who is council to the Commission) the relationship with City Staff is less than desirable and in fact, difficult." • I disagree with the statement on a number of items. • I have no indifference to the City Attorney. • 1 do consider advice from the City Attorney, but also seek to verify the advice by separate research. During the Commission's May 21, 2019, meeting City Attorney Riggs and I agreed on some points. • MN 410.06 states the Commission is authorized to employ an attorney o "...the commission may employ an attorney and other personnel to assist in framing such charter, and any amendment or revision thereof, and the reasonable compensation and the cost of printing such charter, or any amendment or revision thereof, when so directed by the commission, shall be paid by such city." • To my knowledge and during my tenure the Commission has not made a motion to employ an attorney. • The Commission Bylaws do not set a relationship with the Council's attorney or name them as automatic counsel to the Commission. • 1 disagree with the Letter's assertion that my relationship is difficult with city staff. The relationship with the former City Administrator Ericson, Mayor Flaherty and Mayor Marty were congenial and professional. I also feel that my relationship with Mr. Riggs is congenial and professional. As recently as May 21, 2019, immediately after the meeting we exchanged pleasantries. lie also stated he doesn't take any offense to my questions personally and understands I'm simply asking for informational purposes. Paragraph 10 (top of Letter page 3) The Letter states that at the May 21,2019, meeting I undermined the chair by introducing and insisting on an amended agenda without providing a printed version in advance to the Chair. • I disagree with the statement. My intent at that meeting was to simply ask the Commission to follow the Bylaws' agenda format. At the May 21 meeting the Commission approved the motion to follow Bylaws specified agenda format. It would have been presumptuous of me to bring a printed proposed agenda not knowing what agenda the Commission would approve. No disrespect was intended. Page 10 of 13