1993.04.19 RESO 1993-0005 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

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