My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02 City Council (08/12/02)
City-of-Paris
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2001-2010
>
2002
>
12 - December
>
2002-12-09
>
02 City Council (08/12/02)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/8/2005 11:21:00 AM
Creation date
12/6/2002 9:43:06 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
AGENDA
Item Number
2
AGENDA - Type
MINUTES
Description
City Council
AGENDA - Date
8/12/2002
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
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
City Council Meeting <br />Aug. 12. 2002 <br />Page 12 <br /> <br />meeting Mr. Parson agreed that it would be a difficult task to match the CAFR <br />review and the cash settlement arrangement because the two time frames do not <br />match. <br /> <br />Mr. Anderson stated that after this meeting, Mr. Bass and Mr. Parson left with <br />a better understanding. He said the problem with the county is that over time <br />positions change, and judges change. They have discussed all these issues in <br />the past with different judges. <br /> <br />Councilman Plata asked if Mr. Bass was at this meeting. City Attorney Schenk <br />advised that when Mr. Bass brought up the meeting, Mr. Schenk had suggested <br />in writing that the attorney stay at home. Mr. Bass turned down the offer <br />stating that he was to do this for the county. Mr. Schenk stated that he included <br />Mr. Klinkerman as being accessible for the meeting, but that arrangement was <br />turned down. <br /> <br />City Attorney Schenk advised that he did include in the packet newspaper <br />articles from the Paris News and the first one is back under the category of <br />future meetings with the county. In the materials there is an article that ran <br />back in February having to do with discussion of these issue. City Attorney <br />Schenk said, at that time the city forwarded an agenda to the Commissioners <br />Court of items that they felt was appropriate for discussion. He advised that <br />part of the response from them was ~this agenda does meet the Open Meetings <br />Act." The City Attorney requested a verbal opinion from the Attorney <br />General's offices and he suggested there might be a need for detail regarding <br />which streets, and he did agree that the agenda did in fact meet the Open <br />Meetings Act. He said the other comment attributed to Judge Superville at that <br />time, is the reason why we are putting these items on the agenda is because <br />~what the Mayor wants is money, the Mayor will not come out and say, I want <br />the county to send more money." City Attorney Schenk told the City Council <br />that is what the whole issue is about. The county wants to spend less money <br />on ambulance service. He was amazed of that sort of a comment, because yes, <br />indeed it might involve money, it might involve other areas where the city can <br />share in cooperation, but if this is not a money issue, then he did not know why <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.