My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
08-21-90 CCM
LakeElmo
>
City Council
>
City Council - Final Meeting Minutes
>
1990's
>
1990
>
08-21-90 CCM
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2025 7:00:37 PM
Creation date
10/2/2019 8:17:05 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
73
PDF
View images
View plain text
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES AUGUST 21, 1.990 PAGE 3 <br />6. Resolution No. 90-28: Adopting the Proposed Budget and <br />Proposed Tax Levy for 1991 <br />Finance Director, Marilyn Banister reported the proposed levy and <br />budget have to be certified to the County by September lst. Our levy <br />limit is $679,756 which is the amount of property taxes to be <br />collected in 1991 to provide our city services. In addition to the <br />General Fund tax levy, we have the Park Bond, the Landfill Referendum <br />and the Equipment Certificate. <br />Councilman Williams asked the Council to consider holding a referendum <br />on a special levy ($50,000 is the minimum at this time, but would like <br />to have $100,000) for a public information campaign aimed at <br />influencing the county's decision on the landfill site. Based on the <br />4 to 1 vote for the last referendum, Williams noted the citizens of <br />Lake Elmo want the City to do just about anything they can to fight <br />this landfill. Williams explained there has never been a landfill <br />stopped in Minnesota because of an EIS and ReAPP doesn't trust the <br />process because the process has never protected a City like Lake Elmo. <br />Councilwoman Armstrong stated she didn't think the referendum was <br />needed because we get free publicity from the newspapers, we have <br />great volunteers for the landfill fight and felt $50,000 was a gross <br />amount of money. Armstrong indicated ReAPP and the City should <br />concentrate their efforts on influencing the Washington County <br />Commissioners, who will. eventually decide the fate of the landfill, <br />not the public as a whole. She voiced her confidence in DPRA in <br />putting together a good report to give to the County. <br />Councilman Hunt reported he was aware the commissioner representing <br />Lake Elmo is opposed to the landfill and found little outside support <br />had been generated for the fight. Hunt felt the siting of a landfill <br />would be a political decision and the way you influence that decision <br />is to rouse the public because putting a landfill in the park is more <br />than just a Lake Elmo issue. <br />Mayor Dunn didn't think we needed high -paid professionals to come up <br />with a "Catchy Phrase", but felt the City and ReAPP could make a <br />concerted.effort to send out some type of informational sheet to every <br />neighborhood. Dunn felt the EIS process would be the way to stop the <br />landfill. <br />Councilman Graves suggested the City and ReAPP consider a pamphlet <br />similar to that produced for the first landfill referendum to further <br />inform the public about the issues which would only cost a couple <br />thousand dollars. Graves noted the Council must cut expenses by <br />$80,000 out of the proposed budget for 1991. Even though he hadn't <br />made up his mind to support the additional referendum, Graves <br />indicated he didn't want the landfill. and it wouldn't hurt to have the <br />additional funds in the total cost of the levy. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
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).