07:04A major part of the meeting focused on the council’s challenge in communicating with department heads under the existing charter language. The charter currently implies that any inquiry could potentially escalate into a formal investigation, complicating straightforward communication. One council member expressed a desire to amend this aspect of the charter to facilitate direct dialogue, akin to communication in private business. The member asked, “I just got a couple questions.

The council’s discussion highlighted a need for all members to hear responses simultaneously to prevent discrepancies in the information received. Concerns were raised about the upcoming departure of a key department head, Miss Antinette, emphasizing the urgency of gathering necessary information before she leaves. One member remarked, “I don’t think it’s fair that we have somebody that’s just leaving us, and we have had no opportunity,” suggesting the necessity of a formal process to capture her insights.

Further complicating matters, the council acknowledged that any changes to the charter would require citizen approval through a vote. While one-on-one discussions were possible, they risked inconsistent answers and a lack of transparency. Council members suggested workshops as a potential solution. One member noted, “I love workshops because I love everybody getting together,” indicating a preference for collaborative forums to address these issues.

03:43The debate extended to a motion regarding the subpoena of Miss Antinette to ensure her presence for questioning. Although there was some debate over the costs associated with issuing subpoenas, a member clarified that while minimal, there were expenses involved in preparing them. Despite this, the necessity of the subpoena was underscored to secure the information needed before her departure. The council reached a consensus that discussions should occur in a public forum to adhere to the constraints of the sunshine law.

22:44In a recent session, council approved a resolution supporting the Doge effort, which is important for safeguarding the city’s projects included in the state budget. The city manager explained that the resolution was necessary due to concerns from the city lobbyist, who warned that without it, projects such as a new fire boat and stormwater retention systems could be jeopardized. The manager stated, “If council goes ahead and approves this, I will send it to the lobbyist this evening where he’s going to file it immediately.”

The resolution was passed unanimously after deliberation. This decision came amidst broader discussions on governmental spending resolutions and their implications for the city’s future infrastructure.

00:46Additionally, the meeting addressed concerns raised by attendees. Helen Doy Adams inquired about the status of the veterans advisory board and the timing of its inaugural meeting. The mayor assured that plans were underway and would be publicly announced. Adams also sought clarity about St. Cloud’s role in hosting the Veterans Day parade and the eligibility of her organization for city grants.

Josh Meyers, another attendee, raised concerns about potential Sunshine Law violations by the council, alleging inappropriate scheduling of meetings. Despite the mayor’s assertion of compliance with legal requirements and guidance from the city attorney, Meyers insisted on the need for adherence to proper procedures and hinted at potential litigation if violations persisted.

As the meeting progressed, the council touched on departmental reviews and the necessity for thorough understanding, especially with an upcoming budget exceeding $250 million. There was a suggestion to involve a third party for impartiality in investigations, while another member advocated for informal conversations with city staff to avoid formal protocols. The council expressed a desire to be proactive in understanding departmental functions while maintaining transparency and accountability.