Why the "crossed-out" dates ??...  A little background...
 

At the City Council meeting 8-14-06, the motion was made and seconded 
to instruct the City Attorney to request the Attorney General's opinion on 
Finding #20 of the State Audit.  The City Attorney said that she would, 
before the next week, address the issue with outside counsel regarding the 
effects of three pending lawsuits relating to the assessment program.  
Therefore, the motion to obtain the Attorney General's opinion was withdrawn.
 
Then, at the City Council meeting 8-21-06, the City Attorney said that after 
discussing the matter with outside council, that it would be unlikely an Attorney 
General's opinion would have any negative impact on the pending lawsuits.  
Mayor Feichthaler moved  that the City go forward with the Attorney General's 
opinion. The motion was approved.  The Mayor said that he would like it 
drafted and then placed on an agenda as a Consent Agenda Item as soon as 
it was prepared so that City Council could vote on the matter.
 
The Bottom Line.....
 
It sure is taking a long time, since August 21, 2006, for the City Attorney to 
draft/prepare the request for the Attorney General's opinion and have it appear 
as a Consent Agenda Item.  One might assume that this request is going to be 
quite a "work of art" !  We will not forget about this issue !!  
THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT !!!