My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Minutes - Council Work Session - 11/10/2003
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Minutes
>
Council Work Session
>
2003
>
Minutes - Council Work Session - 11/10/2003
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/24/2025 4:14:31 PM
Creation date
1/12/2004 10:43:24 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Council Work Session
Document Date
11/10/2003
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Another issue to be cautious of is social gatherings where there would be a majority of the <br />Council in attendance, which would generally not constitute a meeting, but if Councilmembers <br />were to discuss any sort of City business at the function it could be a violation of the open <br />meeting law. Mr. Goodrich explained that telephone conversations or e-mail could constitute a <br />violation of the open meeting law if used to discuss City business with other Councilmembers. <br /> <br />Councilmember Kurak inquired if there was an item placed on the agenda that she had questions <br />about and she contacted another Councilmember to see how they felt about the issue would that <br />be considered a serial meeting. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich replied no, but if a Councilmember were to talk to every Councilmember <br />on the same issue it could be considered a serial meeting. <br /> <br />Councihnember Kurak inquired as to how the serial law applied to staff. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich explained that staff is not a member of the City Council so the law <br />would not apply, but if someone were to prove that staff took a consensus of the Council on an <br />issue in order to avoid the public process it could be a problem. <br /> <br />Councihnember Kurak questioned the explanation of abstention as defined in the League of <br />Minnesota Cities document. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich explained that if a member of the Council were to abstain from a vote <br />the City would still require four votes to pass a motion. An abstention does not reduce the <br />amount of votes needed for a super majority vote. <br /> <br />Councihnember Kurak inquired if there is a list of guidelines to determine when a <br />Councilmember should abstain from voting on an issue. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich replied that a Councilmember should abstain from voting on an issue if <br />there is a conflict of interest or appearance of a conflict of interest. Some Councilmembers may <br />choose to abstain from voting on an issue if they did not have enough time to review an item on <br />the agenda or for approving meeting minutes for a meeting they were not present at. <br /> <br />Counci hnember Strommen inquired if a Councilmember could abstain from voting on an issue <br />just to avoid a vote. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich replied yes explaining that a Councilmember is not obligated under <br />statute to vote. <br /> <br />Councihnember Pearson inquired if a Councilmember were to vote on an issue because at the <br />time they were not aware of a conflict of interest, but later it becomes an issue, who would have <br />to make that determination. <br /> <br />City Council Work Session/November 10, 2003 <br /> Page 2 of 7 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.