My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2002_1021
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
200x
>
2002
>
CC_Minutes_2002_1021
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 9:42:09 AM
Creation date
11/1/2006 8:38:09 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
10/21/2002
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
40
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 />Regular City Council Minutes -10/21/02 <br />Page 15 <br /> <br />asset to the community. Councilmember Klausing stated <br />that his concern was to do what was, in his opinion, in the <br />best interest of the residents of the City. <br /> <br />Councilmember Kough expressed his support of the <br />College; stating the need to take a stand to continue our <br />support, and that every time the Council took a vote, they <br />were liable for litigation. <br /> <br />Councilmember Maschka asked for clarification on what <br />was required for the vote; with City Attorney Tom Scott <br />verifying that it required a simple majority rule. <br /> <br />Councilmember Schroeder stated that he had heard enough <br />information from our Bond Counsel that they seemed to be <br />softening in their stand, and in the future may change their <br />interpretation. Councilmember Schroeder stated that, with <br />the information and provisions provided by staff and <br />Northwestern College, he thought there was little risk to <br />City residents, and spoke in support of the motion. <br /> <br />Mayor Kysylyczyn asked for a clarification of the City's <br />Bond Counsel whether it was their position that this action <br />would be illegal. <br /> <br />Ms. Grain responded in the negative, stating the firm was <br />not making that statement; only stating that, in their <br />opinion, the standing law was not applicable for <br />authorization of the issue; and they didn't think they could <br />give an unqualified opinion that this was a valid issuance. <br />Ms. Grain stated that an issue such as this was "on the <br />edge;" and they were not advising the City NOT to <br />approve the issue; just advising the City that there <br />appeared to be a question of law, and because of that <br />question of law, they wouldn't provide an unqualified <br />opinion that this was a valid issue. <br /> <br />Mayor Kysylyczyn stated that the provisions of the <br />contract appeared to eliminate risk to the citizens and any <br />financial impact to residents; and stated he would support <br />the issue, as the segregation of funds appeared to be <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.