pages: OpenGovernmentCommission/2021-11-01.pdf, 4
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
OpenGovernmentCommission | 2021-11-01 | 4 | to be done in secret from start to finish; this is an exception. In response to Chair Tilos's inquiry, Mr. Kuhn stated the public does not get to control the litigation; the details were disclosed and made available to the public; if the public wants to provide participation, they still have the ability to do so; they can voice their concerns and tell the Council to acquire more land; the open session resolution to acquire the property to begin with was done in accordance with the City Charter. Mr. Foreman stated he and Ms. Freeman are here because they think the citizens had a right to have the proposal presented to the public once the negotiations were completed; whether or not the Council made a good economic decision is not being challenged. Commissioner LoPilato stated the Commission needs to be cautious about too much party to party debate, which is outside of the procedures. In response to Commissioner LoPilato's inquiry, Mr. Kuhn stated the City was quickly approaching a trial date; typical when that happens, the parties want to continue the trail later or take it off calendar if they are engaging in negotiations; that happened in this case; there were preliminary discussions with Union Pacific in February; it took the City until September to get somewhere; the litigation was still active and pending at the time of the Closed Session; the dismissal of the case did not happen until after Closed Session was completed and the SA was signed. Mr. Foreman stated he just wanted the Commission to read the stipulation. Commissioner LoPilato stated that she has read and is familiar with the stipulation; it is beneficial to understand that when a SA is signed by one party, the offer can still be revoked; if an offer is made and an agreement laid out, then the other party listens to an open session and learns all the weaknesses of the City's case, the whole deal can be ended with a simple email to the City Attorney saying the deal is off. Mr. Kuhn concurred with Commissioner LoPilato; stated anyone can revoke a signature at any time. Commissioner LoPilato stated Mr. Foreman outlined what a compliant process under the Complainant's interpretation would look like; inquired what that timeline and process could entail. Mr. Kuhn responded City Council could have gone into closed session, discussed the matter, stated no decision was reached, put it on a future Council agenda in open session, get public input and reach a decision; he thinks it is form over substance because the public did have a chance to weigh in on the matter; Ms. Freeman even submitted a letter before the City Council hearing; the Recreation and Parks Department held public meetings about potential revisions to the Park layout and design; ultimately, the City Council gets to make decisions on pending litigation, weighing the risks and the budget; laying the cards out on the table for Union Pacific to see would completely change their Meeting of the Open Government Commission November 1, 2021 4 | OpenGovernmentCommission/2021-11-01.pdf |