My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2006_0814
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
200x
>
2006
>
CC_Minutes_2006_0814
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 9:40:21 AM
Creation date
9/6/2006 4:21:33 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
8/14/2006
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
28
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 />City Council Regular Meeting - 08/14/06 <br />Minutes - Page 26 <br /> <br />Councilmember Ihlan spoke in support of the motion, <br />opining that a clear objective opinion was necessary for <br />the above-referenced concerns; and offered her support of <br />directing staff to consult with the League of Minnesota <br />Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT) staff to determine risk <br />assessment and cost assignments for any outside <br />consulting counsel. <br /> <br />Councilmember Ihlan further opined that independent <br />counsel was necessary, rather than someone previously <br />involved in this issue, since previous advice given to the <br />Council had proven invalid and was not objective and <br />more interested in ensuring that the proj ect proceed, and <br />outside counsel would not be politically motivated or <br />have an interest in previous approvals. <br /> <br />Councilmember Pust opined that there would be a <br />downside for potential conflicting advice, as well as <br />duplication of costs. <br /> <br />Councilmember Ihlan spoke in support of any additional <br />costs, assuming the LMCIT wouldn't include such costs <br />in their coverage, as invaluable and showed common <br />sense in receiving this advice now, and would prove <br />prudent in determining the next step for the City to take. <br /> <br />Mayor Klausing spoke against the motion, opining that <br />another outside counsel would have a lack of familiarity <br />with the case; and with the series of attorneys already <br />involved in the development process over the last five <br />years, and their varying roles, it was more prudent to <br />allow them to assess the appeal, make their analysis and <br />provide a recommendation to the City Council, at which <br />time the City Council could detennine whether outside, <br />independent counsel was indicated. <br /> <br />Councilmember Pust spoke in support of tabling the <br />motion until after next week's report from the LMCIT <br />Attorney. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.