My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2001-11-14 CC (2)
Centerville
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
1996-2022
>
2001
>
2001-11-14 CC (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/19/2007 9:17:30 AM
Creation date
1/19/2007 9:16:49 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
110
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 /> <br />MAY CITY FOOT CHRISTMAS PARTY FOR EMPLOYEES AND COUNCIL? <br /> <br />league of n'lin'-18SCita cities <br /> <br />415Cl <br />* 415c2 <br />* 215 H 1 <br />* 262 <br /> <br />Dece~ber 24, 1986 <br /> <br />Frank Kundrat <br />P.O. Bc:x: 966 <br />St. Cloud, Mn. 5630' <br /> <br />Dear Frank: <br /> <br />A~ a fOllcwup to our phone conversation about city-~ponso~ed <br />Christmas parties fo~ employees, I am sending you copies of a <br />couple of opinions of the Attorney General. The first, dated <br />Nov. 23, 1956, concludes that this would constitute a gift, and <br />that the oity would not therefor ha~e the authority to expend <br />funds for this purpose. <br /> <br />Also enclosed is an opinion dated Jan. 22, 1980, discussing the <br />issue ot bonus payments by political subdivisions. This opinion <br />notes that if there is a "prior understanding" that a bonus ' <br />would be payable, then this sort of payment could be considered <br />compensation for services rather than a gift, and would thus be <br />within the city's power'. It seems cl$ar that similar reasoning <br />would apply to a year-end party: If there was some prior <br />understanding that the city would sponsor s~ch a party. then <br />arguably the employees performed their services throughout the <br />year in anticipation of receiVing that party as part of thei~ <br />c~mpensation. Presumably, such a "prior understanding" could <br />arise either from some explicit action by the council, or from <br />an established practice on which employees have come to rely. <br /> <br />As we di&cussed. participation by council members would present <br />a special p~oblem. The party must be made "compensation" in <br />order for it to be a valid expenditure. However, ccunoil <br />compensation must be set by ordinance) and cannot be changed <br />until after the next election. Thus, council participation in a <br />party of this sort arguably would constitute an increase in <br />compensation, and thus ~ould not be dene. The safest oourse <br />might be to ask the individual council members to simply pay for <br />their share of cost of the food~ etc. Whether anyone would in <br />fact get excited about a mlnimal amount like this is, I sUPPo$el <br />open to some question. <br /> <br />I hope this will be of some help. <br /> <br />Sincerely, <br /> <br />Peter Tritz <br />, r', ., . ResearOh Direotor <br />, 1,. '... 'I I, H .1 V ~- r.....S.:.ft./'I ~J\if..' ,r)l-~ e. '::':2~ ,~:t" f;:,'.. /.)( ~:)!. r'7"i,'i' P' If..:~~.Or.~;~':1 5::) .J~ ::J'1 I E;~: c' j ~..l;;~ 7- 5600 <br /> <br />2,1;3/S0 . d <br /> <br />S3I1IJ NW ~O 3ri8~3l <br /> <br />CV : 50 100;:-9fj-(01 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.