10-06-81 CCM - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

CITY OF LAKE ELMO, CITY COUNCIL MEETING, PAGE. 2 6. PROJECT 1006 - --Morgan - paralled this project with project,".1004 and 1005 - from a financial point of view the project got out of hand. M/S/ Morgan/.Mottaz tO+adopt Resolut on,81-64, A Resolution withdrawing and dismissing the City of Lake Elmo from its petition to the Valley Branch Watershed District for Project 1006. Discussion - --Eder - hoped to work through a negotiation process, then, if it could not be resolved we would pull out of the petition. There are some expenses that will not be recaptured. Critical to tie whatever new project there is into some decisions about the storage site and the I-94 Project. --Mottaz � Concerned with the assessment process, Alarmed with what this might do to ag land, —Fraser - not pleased with the 1006 material that came out - the possible assessment process left much to be desired - disappointed that it did not contain material that spelled out what would happen if action was not taken. Feels the action taken by the Council at the last meeting (withdrawing support) is adequately strong action, Not desirable to go another step and have a resolution withdrawing the petition, - Excessive action - Confident that the Cities,'. County and the Watershed can work this out. Concern about the money already put in being unnecessarily lost with withdrawl. --Al Dornfeldk.disappointed to see this motion. Report covers wide range of projects - Manager's did not endorse any of them - put them out in answer to a petition - Urge the Council to reconsider their action - At no time have the Managers operated in bad faith, - have shown in the past that they are willing to work and negotiate on these matters, Agrees -;need help with the assessment policy - no matter what project is done - no automatic answers;- need to work together. --Morgan - never agreed with the Main Stem approach - Present and potential storage,-).pdnding and run-off sites have not been considered. Build something that is going to be used every year - not every 100 years. Need to control your engineer. --Fraser - thinks this motion is an excessive reaction. Believes the cities and counties can work with the Watershed at resolving what needs to be resolved, --Morgan Watershed law should be changed - somehow have to get the engineers out of running the project and have the managers run it, --Mottaz disagrees the motion is excessive. Feels watershed action is excessive. Shoot more for the minimum, rather than the maximum. Stop whole thing now, get together with everyone involved and discuss a new philosophy and new approach. --Novak - Favors withdrawing with the intent of resubmitting another petition. This would not be necessary if we were honestly listened to all this time. Expressed to the managers, several times, that the route this was going.was not acceptable as to what was petitioned for. No assurance given that the additional areas, not petitioned for, will not be a part of the project. Cost and extreme hardship to '.farm land a major factor. Does not feel the City has been listened to,thereby, necessitating this extreme measure. Does not feel the Watershed has been responsive to Lake Elmo. --Dick Murray - Would not like to see the Council take this action, Suggested deferring for a time period and;, -sit down with the Managers and talk about the Proiect and cost and try to npani-;a+P_