Minutes - 2005/08/22 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View City Council August 22, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 43 • Councilmember Thomas stated she is a member of the Charter Commission, knows every word of Chapter 5 intimately, and worked untold hours on the language to try to correct the errors that she and Mr. McCarty know are weak spots that 30 years ago no one could have envisioned. She stated that in another 30 years there may be problems that today the Charter Commission cannot possibly envision in how it is worded. Councilmember Thomas explained that it comes down to all those extra things and taken aside, it is not about "is it a good deal." Two hundred some petitioners are not registered but she has every faith they could come up with more than enough signatures given the opportunity. Councilmember Thomas stated she has to decide that whether defending the Charter, which she works on every month to be the best representation and uphold the rights of the citizens to act in their government, is this the place that they can and/or should act. And, regardless of what we would like to give as a power to residents, some powers are taken away by the State. She stated she knew it would start to become a problem and had coffee with Brian Amundsen for three hours. She explained that Mr. Amundsen sits on the Charter Commission with her and both knew of the weakness in the Charter and whether or not this would be eligible for a referendum. Chapter 5 does not have that language and does not address the problem of an administrative action versus a legislative one. Councilmember Thomas stated the Council has the City Attorney's legal opinion. She asked what if the situation were reversed and the City had property they wanted to purchase; would the City go through all of this. She stated the City does not. The Council does it on a regular basis • and despite all the arguments about what is the proper properly to purchase, whatever the dealings of the City, we know it is an administrative action done by this body with all deliberate care and thought put in to it. However, it is the Council's responsibility to make that choice. Councilmember Thomas stated she cannot get away from the fact that regardless of the extraneous details that go around it, this is the sale of a property. It is the City's responsibility to make the best judgment it can and it's a fully administrative action. She stated that she cannot come to any other conclusion. Councilmember Thomas stated for the record that an RFP is not the standard way for a city to ever sell property. Especially if they want to have any choice in the development which is Mounds View's goal, to get the best development they can get. Councilmember Thomas stated she was not 100% sure that she had made up her mind until listening to this discussion. She stated she thinks referendums are allowed but in this case does not think it is allowed. Councilmember Flaherty stated the reason he asked the attorney if there is recourse on the petition is because he said he was all in favor of petition and it was a mechanism for citizens to use. He stated he previously indicated that he would not stop the petition based on a legality. He stated he disagrees with the petition because it was based on misinformation, and people who signed were not given all the information. However, he stands by his conviction and will do • what he said he would do.