Laserfiche WebLink
<br />City Council Study Session - 11/15/04 <br />Minutes - Page 18 <br /> <br />Councilmember Schroeder noted that the public had not seen the <br />information yet; and questioned Mayor Klausing's consistency in <br />policy regarding information brought to the table without <br />previously being shown as an agenda item. Councilmember <br />Schroeder reiterated his concern that his discussion would be <br />limited since he had not had time to review the information. <br /> <br />Councilmember Schroeder left the Council meeting at 8:58 p.m., <br />noting he was leaving in protest. <br /> <br />Councilmember Ihlan reviewed her proposed ordinance; noting <br />she had invited Professor David Schultz to speak to the issue at a <br />future meeting; and that her intent would be to have this <br />proposed ordinance passed prior to the 2005 elections. Ms. Ihlan <br />reviewed the key points of her proposed ordinance to require <br />public disclosure of the identity of campaign contributors in city <br />elections. <br /> <br />City Attorney Squires advised that he had provided no opinion as <br />to the sample St. Paul ordinance; but noted it was difficult to <br />prove implicit consent. <br /> <br />Discussion ensued regarding candidate and campaign committee <br />disclosures at a minimum with the main focus on candidates for <br />city office; definition for city ballot questions and rationale; and <br />Councilmember Ihlan' s willingness to use the City Attorney <br />draft ordinance as a basis for discussion. <br /> <br />Councilmember Ihlan noted that Professor Schultz would be <br />available for the November 22, 2004 meeting. <br /> <br />Mayor Klausing suggested Councilmember Ihlan discuss dates <br />with City Manager Beets, given other agenda items. <br /> <br />John Kysylyczyn, 3083 N Victoria Street <br />Mr. Kysylyczyn concurred with Councilmember Schroeder's <br />comments; and opined that it was unfortunate that the City <br />Council had double standards. Mr. Kysylyczyn further opined <br />that this was a "Senator John Marty issue," and that the issue had <br />failed on a state level several times. <br />