City Council Minutes 2011 05 03 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Council Meeting Minutes May 3, 2011 Page 5 of 6 REGULAR BUSINESS ITEMS SUSPENDED City Attorney Light stated the purpose of the executive session is for consultation with respect to pending litigation (Hamon Contractors v. City of Louisville, Case No. 200CV920). The City Council is also requested to convene an executive session for the purpose of consideration of real property acquisitions potential purchase of land. City Clerk Varra read the statement from Section 2.90.050 of the Louisville Municipal Code, which outlines the topics eligible for discussion during an executive session. City Attorney Light cited the Statement of Authority for convening an executive session. Louisville Charter, Section 5 -2(3) Authorized Topics Consultation with an attorney, representing the City with respect to pending litigation, and Louisville Charter, Section 5 -2 (c) Authorized Topics Consideration of real property acquisitions, only with respect to appraisals and other value estimates and strategy, and C.R.S. 24 -6 -402 (4) (a) and the Colorado Open Meeting Law, Section .R.S. 24 -6- 402(4) (a). City Attorney Light requested two motions for executive session. MOTION: Mayor Sisk moved the City Council convene an executive session for the purpose of consultation with an attorney, representing the City with respect to pending litigation. He requested the executive session include members of the City Council, City Attorney Light and City Manager Fleming. Councilor Clabots seconded the motion. All were in favor. MOTION: Mayor Sisk moved the City Council convene an executive session to discuss real property acquisitions. He requested the executive session include the City Council, City Attorney Light, City Manager Fleming, Parks and Recreation Director Stevens and Michael Hattell. Councilor Dalton seconded the motion. All were in favor. Councilors Dalton recused himself from the executive session regarding the property acquisition. Councilor Sackett explained he recused himself from the executive sessions previously due to a potential conflict of interest, He stated the property in question is not visible from his home so he did not believe it would present a conflict of interest for him. Neighbors who have a view of the property from their homes have said they want to be represented. He felt strongly about representing his constituents in this potential land acquisition. City Attorney Light asked Councilor Sackett if his participation in the executive session would not implicate any personal interest. Councilor Sackett stated it would not implicate any personal interest. City Attorney Light reminded Council of their obligations under the Code of Ethics.