My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-26-90 Council Minutes
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1990
>
09-26-90 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/3/2009 3:04:10 PM
Creation date
7/31/2009 2:53:37 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
36
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
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />SEPTEMBER 26, 1990 <br />the necessity for retaininq walls. This information <br />was then to be presented to the City and details would <br />be worked out so that the project could proceed in <br />1992. Drabik pointed out that the City was waiting for <br />the information from the County. Drabik questioned why <br />the City and residents were not informed of the change <br />in status of the project. <br />Commissioner McCarty stated that he remembers <br />discussing various options, one of which was for paying <br />for the project through assessment. That option was <br />rejected. McCarty reported that the County's bonding <br />program is not the final answer, pointing out that the <br />Legislature has reduced the County's bonding authority. <br />McCarty pointed out that when Keller Parkway was <br />discussed, the County had $10 million per year in <br />bonding authority and that authority has been <br />dramatically reduced. McCarty stated that he regrets <br />the drop in communications on this issues, and he will <br />research the matter and report back to the City and <br />residents. <br />Scalze pointed out that after the meetings with the <br />County, 78 residents went home thinkinq that the <br />project would happen in three years. <br />McCarty again stated that he will go back to the County <br />and research what happened. McCarty stated that he <br />thought it was understood that the money was not there <br />in terms of 100% financing by the County, or a 75/25% <br />split on the shoulder portion of the improvement <br />between the City and County. McCarty pointed out that <br />it was his understanding that the assessment procedure <br />was not acceptable. <br />Drabik pointed out that at the meeting held on March <br />28, 1989 Mr. Kurkwald was present and the 1992 date was <br />given for the project. <br />Scalze agreed. <br />Mark Becker, Edgerton Street resident, stated that he <br />had concerns with the undergrowth of brush in the ditch <br />along Edqerton. Becker also had concern with the <br />drainage system along Edgerton. <br />McCarty requested that Becker communicate these <br />concerns with his office, and he will see that they are <br />addressed. <br />Bill Quirin, Little Canada Road resident, pointed out <br />that the County's rating factors do not take into <br />Page 24 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.