Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Councilmember Musgrove asked how much money Ramsey receives from the State government <br />to enforce the mask mandate. <br /> <br />City Attorney Langel replied that he is unsure of that answer. <br /> <br />Councilmember Musgrove commented that she believes that funding has come from the Federal <br />government but is not aware of funds that have come from the State for COVID. <br /> <br />City Administrator Ulrich confirmed that the City did receive CARES Act Funds but was unsure <br />that anything was specifically dedicated to enforcement. He noted that CARES Act funds were <br />Federal money distributed through the State. <br /> <br />Councilmember Musgrove stated that Ramsey recently passed a resolution to encourage local <br />legislators to work with the Governor to release the State from taxing funds received from the <br />Federal government. She believes that the mandates have come down at a great cost to the citizens <br />of Minnesota. She commented that the mask mandate is the visible thing that can be seen and <br />comes without funding for local cities to enforce. She noted that the Governor is not providing <br />criteria on when the pandemic will be considered over and asked whether the masks would <br />continue to be worn for three or four years. She believed that this would need to go back to court <br />in order to have answers for those questions and for businesses to be allowed to reopen and lives <br />to return to normal. <br /> <br />Councilmember Heineman stated that he is hearing that if a certain set of conditions occur and the <br />Governor issues an Executive Order, it would be holistically lawful regardless of preexisting laws <br />and statutes and whether it is perceived as unconstitutional. <br /> <br />City Attorney Langel commented that it is not that simple. He stated that the EMA has a process <br />that has to be followed and an Executive Order issued by the Governor is only good for a number <br />of days unless accepted by the Executive Council. He noted that it is presumed legal until such <br />time a court says otherwise. He commented that in Minnesota that has not yet happened. <br /> <br />Councilmember Heineman asked whether it is the duty of all to follow an Executive Order as law <br />until it is deemed a violation. <br /> <br />City Attorney Langel replied that it is the duty under State law to adhere to the Executive Order <br />until it has been deemed illegal and overturned. <br /> <br />Councilmember Woestehoff replied that City Attorney Langel has commented that the first <br />whereas statement is not within the authority of the City. He referenced the second whereas <br />statement, specifically the references at the end that make note of different sections. He noted that <br />those seem related to a healthcare facility and a patients bill of rights and asked for input from <br />legal counsel. <br /> <br />City Attorney Langel commented that without going through the details of the different statutes <br />he is not aware of any violation of the patients bill of rights under EMA created by the Executive <br />Orders. He commented that the whereas statement reflects arguments that have been made <br />City Council / March 9, 2021 <br />Page 10 of 21 <br /> <br />