My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
10/04/1999 Park Board Packet
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Park Board
>
Park Board Meeting Packets
>
1999-2020 Park Board Packets
>
1999 Park Board Packets
>
10/04/1999 Park Board Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/24/2014 3:35:14 PM
Creation date
7/24/2014 1:31:15 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Park Board
Park Bd Document Type
Park Board Packet
Meeting Date
10/04/1999
Park Bd Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
168
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
• <br />• <br />COUNCIL WORK SESSION OCTOBER 22, 1997 <br />Mr. Montain explained that if the ballot question falls, he would ask for a joint Charter <br />Commission and City Council meeting to investigate a Charter amendment to allow for <br />street reconstruction. <br />Council directed Mr. Montain and Mr. Schumacher to get together and prepare a <br />resolution for Council consideration explaining the Council's position on this item. <br />The resolution will be placed on the October 27th agenda. <br />DISCUSS WATER SUPPLY PLAN, DAVID AHRENS <br />Council directed staff to place this item on the next Council work session. <br />I- 35W/LAKE DRIVE INTERCHANGE, TAGG ASSESSMENT, DAVID AHRENS <br />At the last Council meeting, all assessments were adopted with the exception of the Tagg <br />assessment. <br />Mr. and Mrs. Tagg were at that meeting and had objected to th d how <br />their property is classified by the Anoka County Assessor. t u;� ' °� noka <br />County Assessor was contacted and he and the Tagg et d s' =e a mutually <br />acceptable land classification. <br />The Taggs have requested the City of # `' assessment situation as was <br />offered to the properties along '` ained the Lilac Street situation was <br />different. Those property . ° or tition for the improvements. This was a City <br />project and those prop �•� e project were allowed to petition into the project and <br />accept an assess .� 5 . e Drive project was petitioned by the property <br />owners and asses nst the benefiting properties must be determined according <br />to the provisions e ity Charter. <br />The Taggs have requested that their homestead be separated from the balance of the <br />property and that there be no assessments until they hookup to utilities or develop the <br />land. Mr. and Mrs. Tagg were in the audience and explained that they cannot afford to <br />pay more taxes and assessments. <br />Staff was directed to review aerial maps to determine approximately how much of the <br />Tagg property is wetland and to prepare an assessment proposal. This information will be <br />brought to the next Council work session. <br />DISCUSS STAGGERING UTILITY BILLING ZONES, DAVID AHRENS <br />• <br />• <br />The City has 2100 utility accounts in eight (8) different zones. The accounts are billed <br />• quarterly. • <br />PAGE 2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.