Laserfiche WebLink
Planner Dillerud stated he has spoken to a facilitator, whose work he had <br />observed, and she advised him that the City should plan on a minimum of <br />$5,000 to handle the planning and execution of the Public Input component <br />of the project. Dillerud added that the facilitator's task would go beyond the <br />attendance and conduct of the forums —to strategies for marketing the <br />forums and sorting out the forum outcomes. <br />M/S/P Siedow/Hunt — to authorize the Mayor and City Administrator to sign <br />an agreement for professional facilitator service with Sarah B. Harris, Real <br />Estate Strategies, with a fee not to exceed $5,000. (Motion passed 4-1:Dunn: <br />she hates to spend money for a facilitator.) <br />F. Update on Metropolitan Council Meeting: <br />Mayor Hunt reported that he, Council members Dunn and DeLapp, <br />Administrator Kueffner, and Planner Dillerud attended this afternoon's Met <br />Council meeting. At the meeting, the Met Council asked if the City is in a <br />position to consider some options for future development similar to, or some <br />iteration of, the three Future Land Use maps submitted by the Met Council; <br />and, gave the City until tomorrow (Wed) to make a decision. All three of the <br />options assume construction of the Lake Elmo Interceptor Sewer. If the City <br />has interest in considering options, the Met Council would not take action on <br />August 24`". <br />Mayor Hunt stated he would like to have time to digest the comments; and, <br />asked that the City Attorney look over the transcript of the Met Council <br />meeting; and, to invite the Planning Commission to a workshop. <br />Council member Armstrong stated the City Council should tell the Met <br />Council that we find the three options unacceptable, and we continue to <br />advocate self determination for the City in planning matters. We have spent <br />years developing our comprehensive plan, and we do not want sewer in the <br />City. Council member Dunn agreed that she does not support extensions of <br />any sewer in the City, except the existing WOKE that will serve a large <br />portion of the I-94 Corridor area for Business Park development. <br />Council member Siedow indicated that even he thought the Met Council <br />options proposed too much density. He added that the longer Lake Elmo <br />waits to develop; the land will be too expensive to develop at a lower <br />density. <br />LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MNUTES AUGUST 6, 2002 9 <br />