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 one of nine commission members. One member is not responsible for the functionality of the whole. The Commission has not prohibited the Council's ability to send Charter amendment language to the Commission under MN 410,12 Subd, 5. The Commission is functional as stated earlier. No impediment exist for the Commission to contribute to Charter amendment processes. This is a subjective statement and an opinion, not a statement of fact. The Letter states that " The Council's analysis, observations, review and discussions lead it to the unfortunate but necessary conclusion that the removal of Mr. Amundsen is necessary for the success of the Commission and the City. The consequence of failing to take this action will result in a continuation of past Commission practice and dysfunction. The most recent events involving the Commission provide extreme clarity on this point." • I disagree with the Council's conclusion that my removal is necessary for the Commission to function and perform its purpose, • I disagree that the Commission has been or is dysfunctional for reasons previously stated. • I disagree that failure of the Court to take action will result in past Commission practices. In fact my removal could yield much more serious consequences for our citizens and city going forward. • I do suggest that this precedent might have a chilling effect to charter commissions and be a miscarriage of justice to me, while also blurring statutory authority of the Court and separation of powers between a charter commission and a city council. Paragraph 12 The Letter states that "In closing, the Mounds View City Council has minimal desire to harm or criticize a long serving individual of the community and prefers to focus on the viability of a functioning Charter Commission body." • I disagree with the statement. • I believe the Council has some level of desire to harm and criticize me and my character as evidenced in this request and heard at Council meetings. • The Letter states that the Council has had three meetings, I've identified five (6/3, 6/11, 6/18, 7/1, 7/8), where the Council spoke negatively at length about my character, actions, attitudes, motives, intent, and contributions as a commissioner. • The Council has not followed its own Statement of Values on numerous occasions. • The Mayor has spoken about me as an "old growth", incorrectly suggested my intent, has ignored Public input, and used negative language in describing my character. • I disagree that their focus is on a viable charter commission body, as stated in my cover letter • The Council's and city staff public statements have caused me and my family great harm. The Letter refers to the city appointed commissions and Comprehensive Plan Task Force and their functioning. • The Charter Commission is not appointed or under direction of the Council so comparisons to other city committees who do serve under Council authority and direction is irrelevant to this Page 12 of 13