Laserfiche WebLink
AUGUST 20, 1975 <br />The Special Meeting of the Lino Lakes City Council was called to <br />order at 9:00 P.M. by Mayor Bohjanen. Councilmembers present: <br />Jaworski and Marier. Absent: McLean and Zelinka. Mr. Locher, Mr. <br />Gotwald and Mr. Starr were also present. <br />Mr. Ray Payne, Metropolitan Waste Control Commission, Mr. Jim Barton, <br />Metropolitan Council Staff and Rep. Nelson were also in the audience. <br />Mayor Bohjanen announced the purpose of this meeting: the memo on the <br />sewer problems and their porposed solution as prepared by Metropolitan <br />Council Staff. Mrs. Peterson and Mr. Burandt had been invited to attend <br />this meeting but could not due to a prior scheduled meeting. Mr. Boland, <br />Mr. Dougherty and Rep. Oberstar also had prior committments. <br />Mayor Bohjanen asked Mr. Gotwald if he had a further report other than this <br />memo and Mr. Gotwald said, No. <br />Mr. Jaworski asked Mr. Ray Payne if the Metropolitan Waste Control <br />Commission had been included in the discussion that was the basis for <br />this memo? Mr. Payne said they had not. Mr. Jaworski understood the <br />cha -rge from the Metropolitan Council was that the discussion <br />should be with the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission staff, Metropolitan <br />Council staff, and representatives from Lino Lakes. <br />Mr. Payne said that was true, however, they have prepared their recommenda- <br />tions based on this memo and had delivered it to Mr. Boland on this date. <br />Mr. Marier asked Mr. Barton how this one -sided report came about? Why <br />weren't the other parties included in the discussions? <br />Mr. Barton said that he was not in on these meetings and he did not <br />have an answer. He had received a copy of the recommendations from the <br />Metropolitan Waste Control Commission on this date and did not feel that <br />he was in a position to discuss those recommendations. <br />Mr. Jaworski asked why this type of procedure. One staff presents a <br />proposal, another writes a rebuttal, and the report goes from one staff <br />to another and back again. If all interested parties were included in one <br />discussion thisidealy could be avoided. <br />Mr. Barton said he felt that progress has been made. When Mr. Marier asked <br />for a conclusion date on this, Mr. Barton said within the next several weeks, <br />by the end of the month at the latest. <br />Mr. Jaworski asked the purpose of all the requirements listed in this <br />memo. He felt that the problem should be solved and then talk about <br />these other things. <br />Mr. Barton agreed, however, he felt these are things that the Council <br />should be aware of and thinking about. <br />Mr. Jaworski apologized for his use of the word, but he felt these <br />requirements are a means of blackmail. He thought the Metropolitan <br />Council was using the interceptor to say 'either you do things our <br />way or no interceptor.' Mr. Jaworski felt that the Comprehensive Land <br />Use Plan confirms many of the items listed in this memo and that this plan <br />is the result of Metropolitan Council's recommendations and not necessarily <br />that of the City. <br />