Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> - <br /> Mr. Williams wondered if the language would appear to preclude a Council <br /> member appearing in court to discuss what happened at a council session <br /> involving quasi-judicial functions. Mr. Long said that, for a number of <br /> e reasons, that will not occur. A writ of review would be proper action in that <br /> instance and it would never involve testimony by council. <br /> Council has received a memo dated August 4 from the Library subcommittee with <br /> regard to appointment of the city librarian and suggested rewording of <br /> Section 7. Mr. Williams wondered if the language as drafted would preclude <br /> the Manager from appointing a librarian pro tem, absent a city librarian. <br /> Mr. Etter said the language as drafted would bring the appointment under <br /> the complete prerogative of the City Manager. <br /> Assistant Manager said that the present charter refers only to the library <br /> board's appointing the librarian. Other actions of the library board <br /> were controlled by state law. The draft indicates that powers and <br /> responsibilities of the library board is a matter to be developed by ordinance <br /> form or under state law, whichever council chooses. <br /> Mr. Williams stated Council should understand that there were no clear <br /> directives emerging from the subcommittee session with the library board. <br /> He feels the library operation should come under the purview of the manager <br /> and that the library board should perform an advisory function. <br /> Manager felt the direction given was that the Board be included in the charter. <br /> Mr. Etter explained that state statutes now authorize a council to prescribe <br /> the library board role. He feels any needed changes here could be effected <br /> by ordinance. If reference to the librarian is eliminated from the charter, <br /> - council could change the setup subject to the requirement in the charter that <br /> employees of the city be appointed by the city manager. There would be no way <br /> for council to take away the library appointment from the manager. Under the <br /> revised wording submitted, Manager would appoint the librarian but would be <br /> limited to appointing someone recommended by the library board. Mr. Williams <br /> said his perception of the outcome of the subcommittee meeting was that the <br /> charter provision would stipulate the library as part of the city and an <br /> ordinance giving rules and procedures by which the library board would operate <br /> would be drafted, with council making a moral commitment to adopt that ordinance <br /> at some future time. Mrs. Beal said it was her understanding that the city <br /> manager would be responsible for appointing the librarian but that the <br /> appointment by the manager should be subject to the approval of the library <br /> board. <br /> Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mrs. Shirey that reference to the library <br /> as a separate entity with powers and responsibilities be deleted from <br /> the charter and that operation of the library board and its relationship <br /> would be handled by ordinance at some future time. Motion carried <br /> unanimously. <br /> Sections 43 and 44 on EWEB remain the same. <br /> Section 24 - Page 5 (Vacancies - Filling) was the point of much discussion <br /> at the EWEB/Council subcommittee meeting and the draft remains unchanged. <br /> e Mrs. Beal, subcomnUttee member, said she is not sure Council would want the <br /> EWEB board to fill its own vacancies. Mr. Williams said he had a problem <br /> with Council filling vacancies for appointments made by the public. Mr. Murray <br /> believes Council should fill those vacancies, as the primary political body <br /> of the City. Mr. Haws feels the real issue is whether EWEB board members <br /> Jf I( 8/9/76 - 25 <br />