Laserfiche WebLink
COUNCIL MINUTES October 8, 2012 <br /> APPROVED <br /> 1 CITY OF LINO LAKES <br /> MINUTES <br /> 3 <br /> 4 DATE : October 8,2012 <br /> 5 TIME STARTED : 6:30 p.m. <br /> 6 TIME ENDED : 8:05 p.m. <br /> 7 MEMBERS PRESENT : Council Member Stoesz, O'Donnell, Rafferty, <br /> 8 Roeser, and Mayor Reinert <br /> 9 MEMBERS ABSENT : none <br /> 10 <br /> 11 Staff members present: City Administrator Jeff Karlson; Community Development Director Michael <br /> 12 Grochala; City Attorney Joseph Langel; City Engineer Jason Wedel; Chief of Police John Swenson; <br /> 13 and City Clerk Julie Bartell <br /> 14 <br /> 15 PUBLIC COMMENT <br /> 16 <br /> 17 No one addressed the council regarding a matter not on the agenda. <br /> 18 <br /> 19 SETTING THE AGENDA <br /> 20 <br /> 21 The agenda was approved as presented. <br /> 23 SPECIAL PRESENTATION <br /> 25 Charter Amendment Update—Community Development Director Grochala offered information on <br /> 26 the charter amendment that will appear on the November 6,2012 ballot. He stressed that city <br /> 27 residents should get informed about the amendment that involves how the city deals with public <br /> 28 improvements. He noted that information is available on the city Website and at a kiosk at city hall. <br /> 29 One question often asked is what is the history on this topic. He noted a report done by a citizen task <br /> 30 force in 2008 that makes recommendations on improving the public improvement process. The <br /> 31 amendment on the ballot in November is essentially the ordinance recommended by the task force <br /> 32 with a couple changes, one being adding a reverse referendum that would bring a question to the <br /> 33 voters. He compared the proposed public improvement process to the current process. <br /> 34 <br /> 35 Council Member Roeser confirmed that it was a citizen group that originally brought the changes <br /> 36 forward, not the city council. Also he noted that the amendment would be a continuation of this <br /> 37 council's efforts to reduce government. <br /> 38 <br /> 39 Mayor Reinert offered the following points: <br /> 40 - This proposal is about city roadways, not those under the jursidiction the county or state; <br /> 41 - The process is not about maintenance of roadways,but when a road requires reconstruction; <br /> 42 - In most cities,the city council makes the decision and everyone is billed for the work. But 30 <br /> 43 years ago,this city made a different choice recognizing that an increase in property value may <br /> 44 occur and he agrees with that different choice. However, since that other choice was decided, <br /> 1 <br />