Laserfiche WebLink
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION January 3, 2012 <br /> APPROVED <br /> 1 CITY OF LINO LAKES <br /> 2 MINUTES <br /> 3 <br /> 4 DATE : January 3, 2012 <br /> 5 TIME STARTED : 5:30 p.m. <br /> 6 TIME ENDED : 9:50 p.m. <br /> 7 MEMBERS PRESENT : Council Member Stoesz, O'Donnell, <br /> 8 Rafferty, Roeser and Mayor Reinert <br /> 9 MEMBERS ABSENT : None <br /> 10 <br /> 11 <br /> 12 Staff members present: City Administrator Jeff Karlson; Community Development <br /> 13 Director Michael Grochala; Public Services Director Rick DeGardner; Public Safety <br /> 14 Director John Swenson; Economic Development Coordinator Mary Divine; City <br /> 15 Engineer Jason Wedel; Finance Director Al Rolek; City Clerk Julie Bartell <br /> 16 <br /> 17 Oath of Office—the Oath of Office for the position of Council Member was <br /> 18 administered by the City Clerk to new Council Member Dale Stoesz. <br /> 19 <br /> 20 1. Otter Lake Road Feasibility Study—Community Development Director <br /> 21 Grochala and Engineer Jim Studenski of TKDA presented the study in written form and <br /> 22 reviewed its content. The report is on file and includes information on improvements <br /> 23 (streets,traffic signal, storm sewer, sanitary sewer and watermain). <br /> 24 <br /> 25 A council member asked if the City of Hugo is expected to contribute for project costs <br /> 26 and Mr. Grochala explained that they probably would not since this is considered a local <br /> 27 road and will remain so for the foreseeable future. When questions were raised by the <br /> 28 council about right of way costs, Mr. Grochala responded that while the city has not <br /> 29 gotten appraisals at this point, there are figures included in the report and those estimates <br /> 30 he feels are conservative. Staff would prefer to have assessment agreements with the <br /> 31 properties involved before proceeding but he is uncertain if that will happen. A council <br /> 32 member questioned access plans to proposed commercial areas and staff explained the <br /> 33 proposed access initially and as growth occurs. When city resident Mike Trehus asked if <br /> 34 the city is contributing funds to this project, Mr. Grochala explained that it is planned to <br /> 35 be 97% assessed with a small amount for sewer upgrade. Staff added that the proposed <br /> 36 project costs have stayed down in the current economy but that could change; the project <br /> 37 still makes economic sense at this time. <br /> 38 <br /> 39 2. Fiscal Disparities—City Administrator Karlson noted that the council reviewed <br /> 40 this resolution a few weeks ago and requested additional information on fiscal disparities. <br /> 41 He introduced Anoka County Commissioner and Board Chair Rhonda Sivarajah. <br /> 42 Commissioner Sivarajah explained that the fiscal disparities program began in 1971 and <br /> 43 was initiated by an Anoka County legislator. She explained the ratios and process and <br /> 44 suggested that while it probably wouldn't be a program that was implemented today, it <br /> ,e' 45 has good objectives still. It recognizes that much infrastructure was going to the south <br /> 1 <br />