My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-03-83 CCM
LakeElmo
>
City Council
>
City Council - Final Meeting Minutes
>
1980's
>
1983
>
05-03-83 CCM
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2025 8:18:57 PM
Creation date
10/2/2019 8:01:06 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
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
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MTG. - 5/3/83 Page nine <br />�- do have an attorney retained. Also, I'm a little bit uncomfortable with the <br />City asking for a declaratory judgment on the action that they took; that action <br />should be coming from adjacent landowners. <br />Dunn withdrew the motion; Morgan withdrew second. <br />• Eder - I appreciate your patience and cooperation and you've been helpful to <br />the City Council by controlling yourselves; I want to commend you and hopefully <br />as I mentioned earlier, whether this issue is right, wrong or indifferent, it is <br />a sense of awareness as to what's happening to the law and the world around us. <br />Hopefully, you'll increase the participation. Procedures we've followed have <br />been the same going back several years, but maybe we need to look at them, <br />rethink them. If you have comments in that regard, you're welcome to send them <br />to the City Office as to what should be changed in the code; plus if you're get- <br />ting information and how the Newsletter could be improved for greater awareness. <br />9. OLD BUSINESS <br />Item 7.A., Cottage Grove Ravine, Cont'd... <br />• Whittaker - Framework for joint powers hasn't been discussed yet, most of the <br />discussion was that each city would have one vote. <br />• Eder - Couldn't a city have more than one representative and still have one <br />vote? <br />• Tom Armstrong - You should try to get in there a complete veto. There are a <br />lot of things that could be negotiated and the agreement could be worked out in <br />a number of ways. I'm willing to work on that and I've got the resources to do <br />it. I've put together here a 3-page handwritten motion which I'll give to <br />Larry. Basically it quotes the statute on the first page and states the <br />philosophy and policies for adoption by the City of Lake Elmo. A lot could be <br />added onto later, but if this could be accepted in principle and if the Council <br />would adopt this motion with whatever changes you'd like, then from that <br />position we could do some negotiating and be in a position to come up with a <br />favorable agreement. <br />• Tom Armstrong - (In answer to Mazarra's question regarding engineering costs), <br />you can't assess it out because it's not an improvement under 429; you can't put <br />a tax on that particular area because it can't be done until it's too late <br />legally; and the thing would be to take voluntary donations but it's never going <br />to raise the money needed. You may be able to negotiate this entire agreement <br />without the engineering cost of determining the amount; engineering figures are <br />what they are. <br />• Eder - you could put them on notice that you would expect in that budget the <br />cost of determining this. <br />• Whittaker - I think we should give it a try; my feeling is that they're going <br />to ask us to have that engineering data before they negotiate the agreement. <br />• Eder - we don't know until we try it. (Fraser agrees.) <br />• Tom Armstrong - Either in that motion or a separate motion, I would appreciate <br />the appointment basically to assist the City in their negotiations of this. <br />• Fraser - Let's state here that those meetings the City Administrator would <br />attend he would continue to attend. <br />M/S/P Dunn/Fraser that Tom Armstrong be appointed City representative to <br />assist in negotiating this agreement with the Cottage Grove watershed district. <br />(Carried 5-0) <br />M/S/P Morgan/Dunn that the policy statement written by Tom Armstrong be <br />accepted by the City for a negotiating position. (Carried 5-0) <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.