Item A - Process Session - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mayor and City Council April 1, 2004 Page 3 or national entity (for example, Councilor Taylor's and Councilor Nathanson's service on NLC committees, or Councilor Pape's and Councilor Kelly's service on LOC Board and committee). In those situations, the elected official cannot be removed by the Council, but instead, could only be removed, if at all, by the appointing entity. Although the Council's powers are more limited in this situation, the Council could choose to deny City reimbursement of expenses for attendance at meetings (assuming that it is the City, and not LOC or NLC, that is reimbursing the elected official for the expenses). Thus, should the Council want the ability to "instruct" elected officials in these circumstances, the Council could change its reimbursement resolution to prohibit reimbursement by the City in the event that the elected official states a position that is inconsistent with officially adopted policy. In summary, the Council does have some authority to require elected officials to take positions at meetings of intergovernmental committees that are consistent with "officially adopted policies" of the City. Depending on how the Council would want to enforce such a requirement, changes may be necessary to the City code and the reimbursement resolution, in addition to the Operating Agreements. Should the Council decide that it wants to impose such a requirement, the Council will need to define the circumstances under which the requirement would apply, including what is meant by "officially adopted policy" and how to deal with situations where there are conflicting policies. Once the Council decides how to deal with these questions, we can then determine what documents (Operating Agreements, City code, other resolutions) need to be amended. HARRANG LONG GARY RUDNICK P.C. - CITY ATTORNEYS GK:abm