Agenda - Council - 07/13/1999 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

The following is an examination of each of the five factors la--d out in Lenz compared to the pending issue. The Decision Being Made is When to Send the Comprehensive Plan to the Metropolitan Council Review. M.S.§473.858 directs that each local unit of gove~vanent submit its comprehensive plan to the Metropolitan Council for review, and therefore, pursuant to State law, whether or not to send the Comprehensive Ptan for review is not discretionary with the City Council. The Nature of the Financial Interest. There are no facts to suggest that the Mayor has a financial interest in seeing that the City's Comprehensive Plan be submitted to the Metropolitan Council and finally adopted. It should be noted here that Mayor serves on the Committee without 'compensation, but he-does the. receive reimbursement for his reasonable expenses. This reimbursement does not create a disqualifying financial interest and is not inconsistent with the City Charter provision, Section 2.4 addressing incompatible offices. The Number of Interested OffiCials, The Mayor is the only member of the City's five member Council who has any official relationship with the Metropolitan Council and therefore the only interested official, The Need, if any, to have Interested Persons Make the Decision. If the Mayor were to abstain in the decision mak!ng action on the question, the remaining four Council members are a sufficient quorum to make the decision, and therefore there is no absolute necessity for the Mayor to take part in the decision. The Other Means Available, if any, for an Opportunity to Review the Decision. Under Minnesota law, City Council decisions are reviewable by appeal to the District Court and to the Minnesota Court of Appeals. Based on the above, it is my opinion that Mayor Gamec would not have a conflict of interest in taking part in the decision to submit or not submit the City's new Comprehensive Plan to the Metropolitan Council. In the event future issues present fact situations which do create potential conflict of interest, the Committee's bylaws and Minnesota law allow the mayor to avoid such situations by abstaining fi-om voting on the affected action. The bylaws of the Committee address conflicts of interest as follows: Conflicts of Interest. No member shall vote in any committee deliberation relating to issues and proposals in which said member has a conflict of I I I ! I I I I I i I ! ! ! I I I