My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Minutes - 2000/05/08
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2000
>
Minutes - 2000/05/08
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/6/2025 10:14:05 AM
Creation date
2/27/2025 10:41:23 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Minutes
MEETINGDATE
5/8/2000
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Mounds View City Council May 8, 1999 <br />Regular Meeting Page 10 <br />city's affairs." He inquired if this proposal would create another position, or simply a new title <br />• for the Assistant to the City Administrator. <br />City Attorney Long advised that technically, the City currently utilizes the title "City Clerk <br />Administrator," which represents that both functions are designated to the same person. He <br />stated with the City Manager form of government, there would be a City Manager, however, the <br />Council would also designate an individual on the staff to act as the clerk, to handle the record <br />keeping, etc. He explained that they would not necessarily have to create a new position, but <br />could simply designate that title, with a member of the existing staff filling that function. <br />Mayor Coughlin indicated that currently, the Administrator serves as Clerk, and the Deputy <br />Clerk is also the Finance Director, who performs some of the functions of the Clerk. <br />City Attorney Long stated this was correct. He explained that this would not create a new <br />position, and they could simply utilize both the title of City Manager and the title of Clerk. <br />Council Member Marty stated he would like to ensure that this would not require the hiring of <br />additional personnel. <br />City Attorney Long advised that under Chapter 6.01, Subdivision 3, the Manager would appoint <br />the officers and employees, and also hires and fires them, except in the case of the hiring of <br />Department Heads which requires Council approval. He explained that the recommendation is <br />• that if the Council does not approve the appointment within 30 days, the appointment is not <br />approved, which provides the Council with a ratification role with regard to the appointments. <br />He advised that currently, the Council is the appointing authority, and as such, they are <br />responsible for the hiring and firing of all personnel. He stated this would change, and the <br />Council would hire the City Manager, who in turn would be responsible for the hiring of all <br />personnel, with the exception of Department Heads, over which the Council would have some <br />ratification authority. <br />Mayor Coughlin stated it was his understanding that the city of Roseville's Charter Commission <br />was moving toward similar language. <br />City Attorney stated one of the disadvantages of the current system is that the Council, as the <br />appointing authority, is required to become involved in every potential termination, therefore, if a <br />termination matter comes forward, it must be dealt with at the Council level, as opposed to the <br />City Manager level. <br />Council Member Quick pointed out that by eliminating some of the paperwork Council must <br />consider in dealing with all of the decisions they are called upon to make, the workload on <br />everyone would be reduced. He added that there would be no need to hire another employee if <br />there was less work. <br />• Council Member Marty stated this would also assist in the expediency of running the day-to-day <br />operations of the City. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.