Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View City Council June 6, 2001 <br />Special Meeting Page 4 <br />B. Personnel Issues. Preliminary Consideration of Allegations or Charges <br />against an Individual Subject to City Authority. <br />City Attorney Riggs noted that per Minnesota Statute Section 13D.05, Subd. 3(b) Council was <br />required to close the session to evaluate and impose discipline. He noted he had received a <br />request from legal counsel for the individual against whom the charges are alleged that requested <br />the issue be handled in an open session rather than a closed session. He then asked Bruce Kessel <br />if he still wished the matter to be handled in an open session. <br />Mr. Kesel indicated that he did wish the matter to be heard in an open session. <br />City Attorney Riggs reviewed the procedure that would be followed indicating that the <br />allegations were distributed to Mr. Kessel on May 31, 2001 in a letter dated May 30, 2001. He <br />then indicated that the City. Administrator would provide a summary recommendation to Council <br />based on the allegations. <br />City Attorney Riggs noted that Mr. Kessel would be given an opportunity to respond to the <br />allegations contained in the May 30, 2001 letter and the summary recommendation of the City <br />Administrator. City Attorney Riggs indicated that the due process right of Mr. Kessel was to <br />respond to the allegations contained in the May 30, 2001 letter and the summary <br />recommendation of the City Administrator and explained that anything else should not be <br />i discussed. <br />City Attorney Riggs indicated he had received notice from legal counsel for Mr. Kessel <br />indicating Mr. Kessel would not be responding but noted that Council needed to offer the right to <br />respond to Mr. Kessel. <br />City Administrator Miller read a summary recommendation that recommended termination of the <br />employment of Bruce Kessel effective June 7, 2001. <br /> <br />City Attorney Riggs asked whether Mr. Kessel wished to respond to the allegations contained in <br />the May 30, 2001 letter or the summary recommendation of City Administrator Miller. <br />Mr. Kessel indicated that he did wish to respond and then began to read a letter from his legal <br />counsel that had been previously sent to City Attorney Riggs. <br />City Attorney Riggs interrupted Mr. Kessel and indicated he would not recommend reading the <br />letter as there were items contained in the letter that could be considered privileged and subject to <br />litigation. He then asked Council if they wished to accept the letter into evidence and advised <br />Council that the letter has threatened litigation against the City and advised Council not to make <br />any comments concerning the letter. <br />City Attorney Riggs noted that Mr. Kesel could read the letter if he wished but noted the second <br />to the last paragraph of the letter was inflammatory and asked that it not be read. He then noted <br />