My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CCWS 04-21-2003
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2003
>
CCWS 04-21-2003
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:11:26 PM
Creation date
11/9/2006 1:40:47 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General (2)
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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
<br /> ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION <br /> APRIL 21, 2003 2 <br /> ~---- <br /> . Ms. Carlson said if it were up to her, it would not. She said the library board had <br /> worked hard to keep the costs low, therefore hoping the Ramsey County Board <br /> would be supportive of this project. <br /> Mayor Aplikowski reported that she had received a fair number of calls from <br /> people who wanted to see the Arden Hills branch stay open. <br /> Ms. Carlson stated the budget and proposal was uncertain at this time, explaining <br /> the library board was clearly at the mercy of the State budgetary situation and the <br /> levy limits set forth, as well. <br /> 2.B Open Meeting Law <br /> Mr. Filla reviewed the State of Minnesota Open Meeting Law. He noted that if any <br /> Councilmembers attempted to "get around" the open meeting law by meeting as a <br /> quorum of 3 or more members, by physical meeting and/or e-mailing, and voice <br /> mail, that they were af risk of violation. He suggested that the Supreme Court has <br /> become rather narrow in its judgments. <br /> . Councilmember Rem asked if there was a violation if she attended an Arden Hills <br /> public meeting and was a part of the audience. <br /> Mr. Filla said the deciding factor for violation is whether or not the quorum is <br /> receiving Arden Hills information at a meeting. He nofed the fine is rather minimal <br /> at $300, but legal fees could be in excess of$13,000. He said the bigger problem is <br /> voice mail and e-mails between the Councilmembers. <br /> Councilmember Grant asked if a "third-person" conversation, e.g. a staff member <br /> relaying informafion to other Councilmembers, could be considered a violation of <br /> the open meeting law. <br /> Mr. Filla said his conservative answer was, "yes". He reminded the council that <br /> the public perception may be an additional concern. <br /> Councilmember Larson asked if there was a risk of violation if more than three <br /> members attended a political caucus or other public meeting. <br /> . The Council discussed amended agenda's and the deadlines for submitting agenda <br /> items to staff. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.