My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2010-07-26 Regular City Council Agenda
Public Access
>
City Council Agenda
>
2010
>
2010-07-26 Regular City Council Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/26/2010 11:11:53 AM
Creation date
7/26/2010 11:10:55 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
137
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
Mr. Glickert moved to adopt Bill 9073 and was seconded by Mr. Crow. <br />ROLL CALL VOTE was: <br />AYES: Mr. Price, Ms. Ricci, Mr. Kraft, Mr. Crow, Mr. Glickert, Mr. Sharpe, and Mayor <br />Welsch <br />NAYS: none <br />Bill 9073 became ordinance 6815. <br />2. <br />BILL 9074 - An ordinance amending Chapter 2.12.010 of the University City Municipal <br />Code, relating to the appointment of the City Attorney. <br />Ms. Ricci moved to approve Bill 9074 and was seconded by Mr. Kraft. <br />Mr. Price noted he believed this bill was against the City Charter. He mentioned Article II, <br />Section 16, Legislative procedures and Section 17, Powers of the Council. He stated that <br />Article 1, Section 2, states that University City has a Council/Manager form of government <br />and to remove the City Attorney from the power of the City Manager is a violation of the <br />Charter. He stated that with Council hiring the City Attorney, the attorney could possibly <br />change after every municipal election. Mr. Price wanted to know with this bill who the <br />attorney was going to report to and who would execute the position. <br />Mr. Kraft said managing the City Attorney would be the least problem, as Council rules by <br />the majority. He stated the Director of Law was set up by an ordinance and is not governed <br />by the Charter. <br />Mr. Crow felt it was a violation of the City Charter. He stated this bill moved the position <br />from being professional to being political. <br />Mr. Price noted that everyone falls under the City Manager. He said there is no procedure <br />connected with this bill and it does not follow protocol. Mr. Price asked Mr. Kraft where his <br />legal opinion came from. He asked that Mr. Kraft provide him with a written report of where <br />his legal advice came from. <br />Mr. Sharpe noted he was disappointed with the poor procedure and should have had <br />perimeters and procedures in place first. <br />Ms. Ricci stated the proper procedures have not been done by the City for awhile as in <br />budget transfers. She noted the Charter does not talk about a City Attorney. Ms. Ricci <br />noted the powers of the Council in Section 17 (2). This bill is just changing an ordinance <br />and is nothing against Mr. Mulligan. She said the Charter never envisioned a life time <br />appointment and change is not bad and should be by a majority vote. <br />Mr. Price said this is just giving Council an expansion of their power. He said the City <br />Attorney is being compromised by the Council. <br />Ms. Ricci noted the job of the Council is to advise this body to fulfill their obligation. She <br />said independent legal advice whether good, bad or ugly; you don’t want a yes person. Ms. <br />Ricci said to make a good decision it is a matter of process. <br /> 5 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.