10/25/1993 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

1 1 1 259 COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 25, 1993 system. PUBLIC HEARING, CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS, LAKE DRIVE (COUNTY ROAD 23) AND HIGHWAY 49 (HODGSON ROAD) INTERSECTION An extensive feasibility report for this improvement has been prepared and received by the City Council. The only property to be assessed for the improvement is the owner of Government Lot 1, Section 30, Mr. George Reiling. Mr. Reiling has met with staff to discuss the proposed assessment and has requested further information that will be reviewed with him and his potential buyer in the next two (2) weeks. If the public hearing is held tonight, Mr. Reiling would certainly petition against the improvements. The staff is recommending that the public hearing be opened and then continued for the actual presentation at the next Council meeting scheduled for November 8, 1993 at 6:45 P.M. Mayor Reinert opened the public hearing at 7:15 P.M. Council Member Elliott moved to continue the hearing to November 8, 1993, 6:45 P.M. Council Member Kuether seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. OPEN MIKE Dean Smith, 193 Elm Street - Mr. Smith presented a letter to the City Council regarding a complaint against Officer Sal Costa and another police officer that was riding with him at the time of an incident involving Mr. Smith. He explained that he is planning to file a complaint against Officer Costa and was considering filing the complaint with Anoka County. Mayor Reinert said that the complaint will be referred to the City Administrator for investigation. Mr. Schumacher explained that the City has a specific format to be used when receiving citizen complaints and this format will be used for this complaint. Mr. Smith will be contacted and given a follow-up report in the matter. Harold Bisel, 6381 - 20th Avenue - Mr. Bisel explained that he has raised questions regarding the Apollo Drive improvement not because he opposes the improvement but because he believes that the City Charter was violated. He said he understood that the petition received by staff was a petition against assessments and not against the project. However, there is no provision in the Charter for a petition against the assessments, only against the improvement. Therefore, it is his feeling that the petition submitted to staff should have stopped the entire project. Mr. Schneider explained that he met with the landowners opposed to be assessed and helped them prepare the petitions against the PAGE 9