Laserfiche WebLink
City Council Regular Meeting — O1/31/05 <br />DRAFT Minutes - Page 38 <br />Discussion included review of language of Paragraph 13 of the <br />Contract for Exclusive Negotiations; future negotiations of <br />expenditures and incurred costs; Mr. Casserly's drafting of <br />documents to protect the interests of the City; accounting versus <br />legal request for City Attorney review; and whether review by <br />the City Attorney was within the scope of their retainer. <br />City Attorney Anderson questioned the propriety of the motion <br />in that it assumed an outcome prior to an investigation and <br />appeared argumentative; and questioned whether a formal <br />motion by the City Council to reach an Exclusive Negotiation <br />Agreement and demand payment at this time would negate <br />further negotiations as outlined in Paragraph 13. <br />Terry Moses, 1776 Maple Lane <br />Mr. Moses addressed different interpretations of whether the <br />attorneys were reviewing or drafting documents for the benefit of <br />the developer or the City. <br />Roll Call <br />Ayes: Kough and Ihlan. <br />Nays: Maschka, Schroeder and Klausing. <br />Motion failed. <br />Klausing moved, Schroeder seconded, to direct staff to report <br />back to the City Council on items reimbursable under Paragraph <br />13 of the Exclusive Negotiations Agreement between Rottlund <br />Homes and the City of Roseville. <br />Further discussion ensued regarding City consultant drafting of <br />agreement issues and whether the documents protected the <br />interests of the City and the protection of the public's interest. <br />Roll Call <br />Ayes: Maschka, Kough, Schroeder, Ihlan and Klausing. <br />Nays: None. <br />Councilmember Ihlan <br />Councilmember Ihlan noted that, at a future meeting, she would <br />be bringing forth a policy recommendation for discussion <br />regarding charging expenditures against future tax increment <br />