Minutes - Council - 04/08/2008 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

He stated that PACT is happy to accept anyone and feels it is important that the enrollment remains open. He stated that to comment on Councilmember Jeffrey's statement that this resolution will have no bearing on the courts, he agrees and questioned why the resolution was even being discussed and what it would accomplish. He stated that he is hearing that this issue is sending a negative message to the 420 students and families who don't live in Ramsey and feel they are not welcome. He stated that he also feels the message is being sent to Anoka-Hennepin and Elk River Schools of "thank for you taking our kids, but now we don't want your kids." He stated that he doesn't believe that the Council has considered the long-term ramifications of the message being sent. He stated that he believes rejecting this resolution and not getting involved in the.legal case is in the best interest of the Council. He stated that he feels it is in everyone's best interest to work together and sit down with District 11 and talk about how to best serve the needs of the residents of Ramsey. Councilmember Elvig stated that he is put off by some of Mr. DeBruyn's comments and he feels. this is not a black and white issue. He stated that he is not advocating that all students of PACT should come from Ramsey. He stated that he also does not agree that the City is sending the message "your kids are not welcome here". He stated that he does not support a lawsuit in this situation, but the Council is here discussing a resolution that is looking for the opportunity for Ramsey students to attend a school in the community that their tax dollars are supporting. He stated that this is an open community and he would just like to see more participation with the Ramsey residents. Mr. DeBruyn stated that although the agenda states the discussion tonight is for the resolution, he feels that the way it is worded makes it very clear that it is talking about the same thing in quoting Statute 124D. He stated that he recognizes that the Council is not part of the litigation and reiterated that he does not feel it is in anyone's interest to support this resolution. John Cairns, legal representative for PACT, stated that he represents almost all of the charter schools in the State and noted that he doesn't understand why at a time when the City wants people to be interested in the City, that they are sending the message that they don't want people to come to our City because they are going to close the wall around it. He stated that the role of Councilmembers representing people comes down to loyalty issues. He stated that there are 2 Councilmembers whose children are involved in this. He stated that this resolution will only help 25 or 30 families. He stated that, for him, as an attorney, his first loyalty is to his client, so he sees that there is a conflict for Councilmember Dehen in where his first loyalties will lie. He stated that he does not see how the Council can come to the conclusion that speaking on behalf of less than 50 families is in the best interest of the City, especially when there are 2 people sitting on the Council that are directly effected. He stated that he feels that is a terrible message to send. He stated that he has a high degree of respect for people who sit on Council's because there is a lot of responsibility involved. He stated that he does not feel this is about the people who elected the Council, but about 2 Councilmembers who have children that they want to get into PACT. He stated that the Council should consider where their loyalties lie. Councilmember Dehen asked how Mr. Cairns proposes that the other people in the community are notified who may not have had an opportunity to hear about this issue. City Council / April 8, 2008 Page 9 of 20