08/12/85 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Councilm~nber COx stated that Mr. Fountain stands in front of everybody and reads the letter, but why didn't Mr. Fountain read the whole letter and why didn't Mr. Fountain indicate that all members of COuncil were notified of the special meeting regarding a gambling license for the Lions. Mr. Fountain stated that COuncilmember COx can go suck his own eggs and proceeded to read that portion of the J. R. Gilbertson letter that COuncilmember COx referred to. Along side of COuncilmember COx's signature there is a written ooe~ent stating "If no oonflict with City Ordinances as viewed by City Attorney Willi~ Goodrich." Mr. Goodrich stated that the letter Mr. Fountain referred to arrived at his office on Monday morning and he doesn't know who brought it to his office. Mr. Goodrich stated that in response, he had a letter delivered to J.R. 's Saloon regarding the letter being invalid and that it gave no action on behalf of the Council and Council's action of June 25 still held. Mr. Goodrich stated that he also called Councilme~ber COx and told him that the letter was not legitimate and Councilmember COx agreed with that determination. Councilmember COx stated that he told Mr. Gilbertson that it's not the way to call a l~ ic meeting; it does not circumvent any COuncil process; it was an att~pt to help Mr. Gilbertson get things back in order. Councilmember Oox stated that Mr. Gilbertson is a businessman trying to support employees. Councilmember COx stated that there was no decision made on his part with that letter. Mr. Fountain stated that Mr. Gilbertson does not have the right to call a COuncil meeting; there is a question in regards to the legallity of how this COuncilmember COx stated that Mr. Berg was present at the time it was explained to Mr. Gilbertson how a special COuncil meeting is called. Mayor Heitman presented the subject letter and Councilmembers Sorteberg, COx and Reimann verified that their signatures are contained in that letter. Mayor Heitman inquired if the letter can be considered a violation of the open meeting law. Mr. Goodrich stated that all meetings of council, or any public body, must be open with proper notice given; the open meeting law does not address written meetings. ~e Supreme Oourt would look at the intent of the letter, what the council persons had in mind, whether or not their intent was to avoid public discussion. Mr. Goodrich stated that he cannot determine if this letter is a violation of the open meeting law; he did check with League of Minnesota Cities, Attorney General's offioe and the City's bond counsel; none of th~ say there is open meeting law violation. ~he decision should be made by a court and the citizens have a proper procedure and prooess to follow if they choose to pursue it. Mayor Heitman stated that the citizens brought it to the Council's attention; why do the citizens have to pursue it? Mr. Goodrich stated that the City of Ramsey has no interest in pursuing the July 9, 1985 Page 7 of 22