My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Minutes - 2003/12/08
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2003
>
Minutes - 2003/12/08
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/5/2025 12:46:56 PM
Creation date
3/5/2025 12:46:56 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Minutes
MEETINGDATE
12/8/2003
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
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 December 8, 2003 <br />Regular Meeting Page 13 <br />• Mayor Linke commented that the interpretation of the Chair's bylaws may be correct but it seems <br />strange that 9 members could arbitrarily decide to reduce the number to 11. He then said that <br />there was not a quorum of the 15 set by the Court so there was not a quorum to make that <br />decision on the original amount set by the judge. <br />Council Member Quick indicated that eight would be a quorum. <br />Mayor Linke indicated he has not seen the minutes. <br />Council Member Quick indicated he read the state statute and it states that it will be 15. <br />City Attorney Riggs indicated that the statute says no less than 7 but no more than 15. <br />Mayor Linke indicated he did not think there was a quantity listed on the original petition. <br />City Attorney Riggs indicated that, if that is the case, then it is within the discretion of the Chief <br />Judge to set an amount. He then indicated that he, as well as Mr. Thomas, is looking for the <br />document and said that if no document can be found he would have to look to the interpretation <br />that there is no number and interpret from there. <br />• Mayor Linke indicated he has a hard time with that body making an arbitrary decision to ask the <br />judge to reduce the numbers without notification of residents and Council. <br />Council Member Quick indicated that if the court does not appoint then Council is to do so. <br />City Attorney Riggs indicated there is no responsibility for the chief judge that has not made an <br />appointment to notify the City. <br />Mr. Thomas explained that the process is that when there is a member that resigns or every two <br />years when terms expire those that wish to are allowed to submit an application to judge who <br />reviews and renews and sends oath of office for a maximum of 8 years. He then said that since <br />before he was chair most of the time there have not been 15 active members and the active <br />members have gone as low as 8. He further indicated that the judge has the clerk post for the <br />position in numerous ways and the City posts it as well by posting ads in the papers and on the <br />bulletin boards. He also indicated that he has communicated with Staff the number of active <br />members and what the current status of the members is. <br />Mr. Thomas indicated that every posting is sent to the City and all open position notices go to <br />City Staff so the number that is missing is not only sent to them it is posted on the bulletin board <br />and has been for five years continuously and he feels it is out of order to say that the issue with <br />maintaining active members has not been communicated. The information has been available <br />through minutes, the public book and on the bulletin board and it is not the fault of the <br />• Commission that people do not see the information that is available. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.