My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-03-87 CCM
LakeElmo
>
City Council
>
City Council - Final Meeting Minutes
>
1980's
>
1987
>
11-03-87 CCM
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2025 7:46:00 PM
Creation date
10/2/2019 8:10:14 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
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 MINUTES NOVEMBER 3, 1987 PAGE 10 <br />City appeals it or not, there is no legal implication upon him". <br />In order to set the matter to rest; Tom felt he finally did what he <br />should have done a year ago. He filed a suit against the City for <br />Declaratory Judgement action. Tom stated "what Judge Kalina did, <br />which he feels he was totally in error in that particular case, was no <br />consequence to him. If you are trying to imply that my wife somehow <br />is not of good character because she voted on it --you are dead wrong <br />both from a legal and moral standpoint". Tom added "I know, and you <br />know, you raised it for political reasons to benefit your crowd that <br />come down, including Mr. Madson. You and Mr. Moe can do as you see <br />fit". <br />Councilman Graves responded to Mr. Armstrong "that your opinion is <br />only as good as your own voice and opinion are registered." Graves <br />had consulted with other attornies who could differ with Armstrong's <br />opinion. Tom asked if Graves would like to name them. Graves <br />responded "No, I would not". <br />City Attorney Knaak advised the Council not to respond further and <br />encouraged Mr. Armstrong to recall what lawyers are required to do <br />with communication during litigation and to direct any further <br />comments to him. Armstrong responded that this would be settled in <br />Court. <br />9. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT <br />A. Manning Avenue Maintenance Agreement <br />Washington County has built a new segment of County Road 15 (Manning <br />Avenue) to bypass the winding section between Downs Lake and Horseshoe <br />Lake. The County will be acting to officially turn back segments of <br />the area to the City of Lake Elmo and West Lakeland Township. The <br />County agreed to cover the cost of road maintenance for two years, <br />plus putting on a new blacktop overlay and installing street signs at <br />CO. 15 and a warning barricade at 20th St. <br />The County has requested that the City of Lake Elmo perform the road <br />maintenance work for the next two years and bill the County for the <br />cost of this work. The Maintenance Dept. has responded that it can do <br />this extra work. <br />Councilwoman Armstrong stated they had no preference as to what name <br />should be used for "old" Manning Avenue. <br />M/S/P Armstrong/Graves - to authorize the City Administrator to send a <br />letter of understanding to Washington County Public Works indicating <br />the agreement that the City of Lake Elmo will maintain old Manning <br />Avenue and bill all related cost to the County for reimbursement of <br />work done during the next 24 month period. (Motion carried 5-0) <br />B. 1987-1988 Consulting Audit/Accounting Agreement <br />The City's consulting auditing firm, Voto, Tautges, Redpath & Co. has <br />submitted its standard agreement for auditing/accounting services for <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.