2014-02-10 Reg - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

that you want by the question that you ask. It seemed to her that the questions Ms. Pumm asked might not have been the right questions. Ms. Carr asked Ms. Forster if she had been made aware of Resolution 2006-9, which was approved nine months after the election and was addressed the Clerk’s responsibility to check the payment of taxes and provided due process for the candidate. Ms. Forster stated that she had not been made aware of the Resolution until last Thursday. Ms. Carr asked Ms. Forster if it was also her contention that the candidate had no right to due process, which she found shocking. Ms. Forster stated that while anyone has a constitutional right to vote, there is no constitutional right to be a candidate. So while Resolution 2006-9 did provide for due process she was unaware of the resolution. Ms. Forster stated that however the Judge did determined and ruled that there was no right for the City Clerk to conduct any type of investigation. Ms. Carr then stated that she had a letter from Dowd Bennett dated January 21, 2014 and addressed to the City attorney. She stated that the first time she saw this letter was when her hardcopy packet was delivered on Thursday, late afternoon. Ms. Carr stated that since Ms. Pumm is the employee of the Council, she asked why this letter was not provided to her as a duly elected member of this Council. Ms. Carr expressed her displeasure with the fact that the dissemination of information, or the lack thereof, continues to be a point of contention, and in this case Council was completely shut out of the process. She stated that in 2006 Mayor Welsch had demanded her rights as a Councilmember to oversee any election process and anything that dealt with the City Clerk and that the City Attorney had sent the Council a memo essentially telling the Council to “butt out.” She found that disturbing and stated that any legal action involving the City Clerk should have been brought to the Council – at least informing the Council that there was legal action involving an employee of the Council. Ms. Forster advised Ms. Carr that she does not work for the Council; she works for the City Manager. Ms. Carr noted that the next time the Council needed an attorney she would remember that. Ms. Carr then asked Mr. Walker if he could provide her with an explanation of who had made the decision to not inform Council about the receipt of this letter. Mr. Walker stated that the City receives letters from attorneys virtually every day. Ms Carr replied, “None, involving our employee, though.” Ms. Carr again asked Ms. Forster whether she had had a conversation with any member of Council with respect to the letter from Dowd Bennett. Ms. Forster stated that she had not. Ms. Carr then asked her colleagues, addressing each Councilmember one-by- one, by name whether they had had any conversations with the City Manager, City Clerk or the City Attorney, in regards to this matter. Councilmembers Price, Sharpe, Glickert, Crow, Kraft and Mayor Welsch all stated that they had not. For the record, Ms. Carr stated that she had also not engaged in any conversation with the aforementioned parties. Ms. Carr asked Ms. Pumm if she had conveyed any of this information to Mr. Pace. Ms. Pumm stated that although she had received an email from Mr. Pace, she had not responded. Ms. Carr stated that she had been told on numerous occasions that Mr. Pace had asserted that this issue was under consideration by the City Clerk and City Attorney, so she is curious to know how Mr. Pace had obtained this information before Council knew anything about it. 11