My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-04-83 CCM
LakeElmo
>
City Council
>
City Council - Final Meeting Minutes
>
1980's
>
1983
>
10-04-83 CCM
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2025 8:18:57 PM
Creation date
10/2/2019 8:01:08 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
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 MEETING 10-4-83 Page 12 <br />Discussion on the criteria for determining who has priority with <br />this assistance. <br />M/S/P (Dunn/Morgan) To send a letter to the Environmental <br />Protection Agency thru the Minnesota Polution Control Agency <br />asking to take a certain number of failing septic systems ahead <br />of schedule. <br />(Motion Carried 5-0) <br />Larry Bohrer stated that we are not receiving a grant for the <br />$103,000 that is proposed to be the cost of the design of Step 2 <br />work. Instead of the grant, they have developed a chart that <br />gives an allowance for Step 2 work. He estimates between $30,000 <br />and $33,000 of this will be eligible for that allowance. It is <br />given to the City in two halves, half of that $30,000 to $33,000 <br />is given to the City when the design is 50% over and the. other <br />half is received by the City when the plans and specifications <br />are complete. The City does need to address how to handle the <br />interim financing of about $70,000. <br />Eder - I think we should ask the County for some money since they <br />gave some to all the rest of them. <br />Whittaker - What we will have to do is use the Council <br />Contingency Fund until we collect these back assessments which <br />means it will leave us with less of a margin of safety. But the <br />alternatives are bonding, or something like that, which will cost <br />us more money. <br />Eder - What we need is a proposal where our City Administrator <br />is working with the engineer as to how we are going to finance <br />this, how much we are going to charge the property owners, and <br />have it back in here on the 18th. I don't think any resident of <br />Lake Elmo should have to foot any of this bill at all. <br />Fraser - I agree with working it out but, I would say not to rule <br />out a consideration for some sort of pre -payment by the resident. <br />If that doesn't seem feasible as you work on it, drop it, but put <br />it into the initial thinking, at least as an option for those <br />that want it. <br />M/S/P (Dunn/Mazzara) Motion to have City Administrator come to <br />the City Council on the 18th of October with all of the <br />suggestions,ie: bonding, take it out of reserves, what the <br />interest rate that we will accrue. In effect, deferring the <br />agreement until the next meeting. <br />(Motion carried 5-0) <br />12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.