CC_Minutes_2006_0508 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

City Council Regular Meeting - 05/08/06 Minutes - Page 18 Councilmember Ihlan opined that the proposed amendments were not those previously discussed and identified by staff; and further opining that the current ordinance did not need to be amended, simply enforced. City Attorney Anderson took issue with Councilmember Ihlan's opinion, referencing his finn's original legal opinion dated April 5, 2006 addressing specific liquor code questions of Councilmember Ihlan; and providing a background and analysis to determine whether existing Code was consistent with Council desires and expectations in processing liquor violations; in addition to Roseville Code consistency with Minnesota State Statute. Mayor Klausing noted that the designation in the proposed language amendments stated recommendations of the "City Manager," rather than "staff;" but the rationale was similar to the process followed in land use and other recommendations to the City Council and didn't create a substantive difference in his opmlOn. Councilmember Kough concurred with Council member Ihlan; opining that past events needed to be avoided in the future, with the City Council maintaining authority, not the City Manager. Councilmember Maschka opined that, as was common with ordinance adoption, amendments and fine-tuning were often needed during practical use and application processes. Councilmember Ihlan reiterated her desire for a zero tolerance level in Roseville for serving alcohol to minors; and expressed her frustration and anger and the implications to community values. Councilmember Ihlan cited past practice and the three 2005 non-compliance cases not heard by the City Council. Mayor Klausing clarified that, while people may approach the issue differently, no one was disputing that individual Councilmembers and the City Council as a whole, took non- compliance and serving alcohol to minors as extremely serious Issues.