Laserfiche WebLink
5. In addition to the above enumerated factors, this <br />Council finds that public policy would be served by reimbursing the <br />Council Members for the attorneys fees they have incurred. If <br />these fees are not reimbursed, the case could have a "chilling <br />effect" upon the ability of the City Council to maintain dedicated, <br />informed, and conscientious Council Members in the future. If the <br />general citizenry of Hugo believes that.even Council Members acting <br />reasonably and in good faith will still be burdened by attorneys <br />fees, for defending their actions, this would have a negative <br />effect on the City's ability to function into the future. <br />6. This Council is also guided in its decision by the <br />fact that the individual council members attempted to settle the <br />case early on. After the suit began, they were advised, by their <br />attorney, that the first meeting was a technical violation of the <br />law. They were ready to admit that fact and move on. However, the <br />Plaintiff insisted that the second meeting was also a violation. <br />The bulk of attorney's fees were incurred in defending against the <br />allegation of the second meeting. For that meeting, all council <br />members were exonerated. <br />7. While through this document the Council is voting <br />to reimburse all members, this body finds that Council Member <br />Barnes should be fully reimbursed for her attorney's fees even if <br />the District Court rules against reimbursement for the other four. <br />Ms. Barnes was found to have not violated the Open Meeting Law. <br />She should not be required to incur fees when she has done nothing <br />wrong. <br />NOW, THERE'F'ORE, be it resolved by the City Council, City <br />of Hugo, Washington County, Minnesota, as follows: <br />1. That the attorney's fees incurred individually by <br />Council Members Stoltzman, Barnes, Miron, Jesinski and Brunotte, <br />shall be paid for by the City of Hugo. <br />2. That the attorney's fees incurred by Council Member <br />Barnes shall be paid for by the City of Hugo and the District Court <br />should consider paying her attorney's fees separate from the issue <br />of whether or not the District Court approves of the reimbursement <br />for the other four council members. <br />3. That pursuant to Minnesota Statute §465.76, this City <br />Council shall seek judicial review of this decision through <br />District Court Judge Gary R. Schurrer. The City Attorney is <br />directed to prepare the necessary Petition for Review, and/or other <br />necessary documents to perfect said review by the District Court. <br />4. That the City Treasurer of the City of Hugo, shall <br />not release any reimbursement check to any City Council Member, <br />unless and until this decision has either been approved by Judge <br />6 <br />