My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2006_0227_Packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2006
>
2006_0227_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/9/2014 3:41:31 PM
Creation date
8/26/2009 3:32:18 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
284
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
City Council Regular Meeting — 02/13/06 <br />DRAFT Minutes - Page 2$ <br />Councilmember Pust noted that, in the past she had no� been <br />supportive of the concept, but that through additzor�a� education, <br />she had become more supportive and recognized the advantages <br />for third party candidates. However, Councilmember Pust <br />questioned �he timing, dissimilar to 2043, in the Council being <br />asked ta consider an ordinance at this timc. <br />Councilmember Maschka noted the proposal's failure in 2003 <br />due to palitical re�sons, and questions the atmosphere at the <br />legislature for another attempt. <br />Mr. Kennedy expressed expeciations of a dif�erent legislative <br />atmospher� at this time. <br />Counci�member Ma�chka noted the continuing existence of <br />opposition from strong lobbying groups. <br />City Attorney Andersan expanded his legal comments and <br />cautioned the City �'ram having such an ordinance on the books <br />prior to legislation, in accardance with Minnesota Statute, <br />Section 205.02, rela�ed ta primary, special and general elections <br />and the differences specific �o Charter City provisions addressed <br />in Section 205.065; and considerations of the Minnesota State <br />Canstitution's Equal Proteciian ClauSe. <br />Mayor Klausing polled the Council to determine a consensus. <br />Counci�member Pust was not supportive of an ordinance, but <br />was willing to consider a resalution of support. <br />Councilmember Kough spoke against instant runoff elections; <br />opining that primaries were important to voters. <br />Councilmember Ihlan expressed her willingness to cansider the <br />ordinance, noting that Ianguage regarding the effective date of <br />such ordinance in Section 3 of the propased ordinance addressed <br />the City Attorney's observations and co:�cerns. <br />Councilmemb�r Maschka, while suppoi-tive of pursuing <br />legislative innovations at a State level, que�tioned if this was the <br />appropriate vehicl� to pursue such innova�ions. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.