My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CCMin_88Jan13
FalconHeights
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
198x
>
1988
>
CCMin_88Jan13
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/15/2009 8:53:04 AM
Creation date
6/23/2009 1:56:15 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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
3 <br />MINUTES <br />JANUARY 13, 1988 <br />PAGE 3 <br />Council requested that Gedde give the Stratford problem top priority and <br />he indicated he will meet with the Fiscal Consultant and Attorney for <br />Stratford, and have more information for the January 27th meeting. <br />AMENDMENT OF DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT ~1 DEFERRED TO 1/27/88 <br />Fiscal Consultant Steve Apfelbacher reviewed a January 11, 1988 report on <br />tax increment projections (a copy of which is on file in the Clerk's <br />Office) indicating that Stratford Office Park will not generate sufficient <br />tax increment revenues to make the debt service paymentsin 1988-1989. He <br />recommended that the Council consider amending the Development Districts <br />the three tax increment plans to allow the possible use of increments from <br />from district to make debt service payments in another (Stratford Office <br />Park). Council expressed concern that such an amendment might excuse <br />Stratford's obligation to cover 25~ of a shortfall, and that it could <br />delay possible early pay-off of the other districts. Apfelbacher felt <br />that Council should not delay a decision on the matter as possible changes <br />in the law might prohibit the amending of the districts at alater date. <br />He also stressed that the amendment would not require transfer of funds <br />from one district to another, but would give the City that option. <br />Apfelbacher and Gedde will research the matter to determine whether or not <br />the amendment would release Stratford from their shortfall responsibility. <br />AMENDMENT OF SECTION 3-5.01 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO FALSE ALARMS <br />Council discussed the proposed amendment and concurred that based on the <br />cost of dispatching personnel and afire truck on a false alarm call, the <br />fire false alarm fee should be increased considerably. After Council <br />recommended a few changes in the document, Ciernia moved adoption of <br />Ordinance ~0-88-2 which carried unanimously. <br />ORDINANCE 0-88-2 <br />AN ORDINANCE AMENDING PART 5, SECTION 3-5.01 OF THE <br />MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO FALSE ALARMS <br />AMENDMENT OF SECTION 5-13.01 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO LICENSE AND <br />PERMIT FEES <br />Wiessner recommended that the false alarm fee schedule become a part of <br />the license and permit section of the code in order that all fees might be <br />reviewed at the same time, and would not require amending the false alarm <br />section each time a fee change is instituted, as fees are amended by <br />resolution. Ciernia moved adoption of Ordinance #0-88-3 which carried <br />unanimously. <br />ORDINANCE 0-88-3 <br />AN ORDINANCE AMENDING PART 13 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE <br />RELATING TO LICENSE AND PERMIT FEES <br />APPROVAL OF ANIMAL CONTROL CONTRACT FOR 1988 <br />Council approved an animal control contract with the City of New Brighton, <br />for the year 1988. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.