12/03/2007 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION November 5, 2007 DRAFT 257 Rice Creek Watershed District Appointment — Administrator Heitke noted that this is 258 a reminder to the council that the city may chose to participate in this process. The 259 hydrological area that has an open position does contain a portion of Lino Lakes. 260 It may be good in the future to discuss with and submit a list in conjunction with other 261 cities in the district. 262 When a board representative who does live in Lino Lakes is considered for 263 reappointment, the council would like to hear from them. 264 West Oaks Sewer and Watermain Extension Petition - Engineer Studenski explained 265 that the city has received a petition from residents of the West Oaks Subdivision to 266 pursue the extension of sewer and water services. This is not an area scheduled for the 267 requested improvements or street reconstruction. Study of this request means that a 268 feasibility study would need to be prepared and since that involves a cost to the city, staff 269 requests council direction on how to proceed. 270 The council was concerned that these will be expensive improvements. Is there a way to 271 pass on the cost of the feasibility study? Also, the petition only requires fifty percent; 272 what do the rest of the residents think? 273 Getting feedback from all the residents could be an option. The engineer could send a 274 letter providing cost estimate information and other details and asking if residents would 275 be interested in paying for the feasibility study. 276 What does the submission of a petition require from the city? The city is only required 277 to accept the petition. 278 One council member suggested that there could be a meeting held at city hall providing 279 more details but the city engineer replied that there would no doubt be a low turn out so 280 that's not the best way to reach the most property owners. The suggestion was then to 281 offer the opportunity of a meeting in the previously mentioned letter. 282 The council will receive a draft letter at the December work session and can then await 283 feedback. The need for neighborhood meetings can be determined. 284 Communication Policy (Reinert, Bergeson agenda request) — The question relates to 285 establishing a policy regarding communication expectations. 286 Ideas for requests going in: shouldn't sit idle for many days (response within 24 hours 287 during the week - even a response about when a full response will be available); 288 courteous communication should be the key. 289 One suggestion is that a standardized form could be forwarded through the city clerk. 290 The city clerk could be responsible for forwarding the request to appropriate staff with an 291 estimate for response time. A copy to other council members should be a part of the 292 process. 293 One concern of the past has been excessive data requests that take huge amounts of time 294 and resources. All requests could be tracked and reported on a regular basis. 295 A council member commented that it would be a waste of time to track requests since 296 provision of public data isn't a option but a legal responsibility.