My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-03-90 CCM
LakeElmo
>
City Council
>
City Council - Final Meeting Minutes
>
1990's
>
1990
>
04-03-90 CCM
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2025 7:00:37 PM
Creation date
10/2/2019 8:17:01 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
68
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 APRIL 3, 1990 PAGE 2 <br />What is the status of Section 32 between Lake Elmo and Oakdale? <br />Councilman Bunt explained the cities have some proposals, which <br />includes what each side claims they have to have, and placed in a <br />document. The major accomplishment they are attempting to do is <br />setting up an agreement where no land could ever transfer, in the <br />future, between Oakdale and Lake Elmo without the consent of. both <br />Councils. There are some significant legal questions as to whether or <br />not we can do this. <br />4. REAPP REPORT: <br />Todd Williams reminded the Council of the update meeting with DPRA and <br />REAPP scheduled for April loth at 5:00 p.m. At his request, Finance <br />Director, Marilyn Banister, totaled up the expenses for the landfill <br />through the end of 1989. Copies were handed out to each Council <br />member. <br />5. CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT: <br />A. 201 Users Fee (Continuation) <br />Action was continued until the April 3, 1990 meeting so that the staff <br />could get clarification on the audit charge and poll neighboring <br />communities regarding sewer rates. <br />M/S/P Hunt/Armstrong - to bring back 201 Users Fee for Council <br />consideration. (Motion carried 5-0). <br />1. Audit Charge: <br />The Council received a copy of the total audit fee, $800, allocated to <br />the 201 Sewer Fund.(See Attachment A.) Bohrer explained this was the <br />auditor's estimate of the time expended auditing that account. The <br />Council can decide whether all, part, or none of this $800 should be <br />charged against the Sewer Fund. Any part of the $800 not charged <br />against the Sewer Fund would have to be ,paid from general funds. <br />2. Comparison of Sewer Rates: <br />Bohrer contacted neighboring communities and other 201 communities to <br />determine a comparison of sewer rates. These findings are found in <br />Attachment B. <br />Bohrer indicated a comparison of the proposed Lake Elmo rates to the <br />previous example cities shows that Lake Elmo would be the cheapest of <br />the 201 communities and about in the middle of the sewered communities <br />polled. All of the sewered communities polled have a much larger <br />population served than Lake Elmo. Bohrer felt his recommendation for <br />$180 per year was reasonable when you look at what other communities <br />pay for similar systems for sewage treatment. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.