My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-15-81 CCM
LakeElmo
>
City Council
>
City Council - Final Meeting Minutes
>
1980's
>
1981
>
09-15-81 CCM
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2025 8:42:52 PM
Creation date
10/1/2019 4:08:17 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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
CITY COUNCIL 9/15/81 <br />PAGE 7 <br />----Mottaz - I agree esentially with with Tom is saying, I do not <br />want to pull out of the 100.6 project ; but, I think something is <br />necessary. (Feel) should take the approach Maynard suggested <br />and tell them to get back to what we were originally talking about <br />as 1006 and tell them we do not favor their continually enlarging <br />and expanding on the program, <br />--Morgan - Thinks that the Watershed law ought to be changed so <br />that the Engineer's can't run amuck. Goes along with Armstrong <br />and thinks we should pull out, . <br />--_Mottaz � still thinks that there has to be something, <br />—Armstrong - say, as the project exists right now, we rescind the <br />motion, and indicate we are willing to work with the Watershed for <br />what we originally talked about. Noted that the project does not <br />mention acquisition of storage sites, <br />*Amended M/S/P- Mottaz/Morgan the City Council of. the City of Lake Elmo <br />10/6/81 hereby goes on record and instructs the City Administrator to <br />inform the Board of Managers of the Valley Branch Watershed District <br />that the City of Lake Elmo withdraws the support of, the City of <br />Lake Elmo for Valley Branch Watershed District Project 1006; because <br />the project, as developed, is not what the City proposed in <br />petitioning for relief from flooding on Lake Elmo and Horseshoe Lake; <br />and because the project, as developed, is far beyond what is <br />appropriate to handle the problem, <br />Discussion <br />---Fraser would rather go direction suggested by Eder, which is <br />more moderate - given this motion and given a vote tonight would <br />want to abstain - would need to study it more, <br />--Eder <- could be worded strong and say if you don't eliminate <br />the Lake Elmo alternative we would herewith withdraw from the project, <br />--Mottaz - feels the motion is essentially what Eder proposed in <br />that we would then be supporting only what we had agreed to at the <br />outset, <br />—Whittaker - should specify that originally the plan called for <br />Tartan Park to solve their own problem or the problem through <br />Tartan Park, and that they agreed to do it, in addition, they C3Ms• <br />were going to contribute $200,000 towards the project, Also specify <br />that we don't outlet Downs Lake or Sunfish Lake, that we get back <br />to the original project, <br />Motion carried 5-0. <br />E. E"x'hauat�F'an - The Administrator presented another bid from Anderson <br />eating €or $121 to install a simple fan,w/duct work, and for $640 <br />for an electronic air cleaner, installed. <br />The Council authorized Don Anderson, Anderson Heating, to install a <br />a fan w/duct work, for $121. Work to be completed by October 6 <br />F, Resolution,of <br />m/5lr riottaz/riorgan to as <br />commending Bob Wier and Ken <br />this summer in the absence <br />%�-ko`b Wier and Ken Carroll - <br />op"=esolution 81-63, A Resolution <br />Carroll for the excellent job the did <br />of a Foreman. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.