My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-28-2010
MoundsView
>
City Council
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
2010-2019
>
2010
>
06-28-2010
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/22/2013 1:49:06 PM
Creation date
8/13/2010 3:55:08 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
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
• PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL <br />CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW <br />RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOT <br />Regular Meeting <br />June 28, 2010 <br />Mounds View City Hall <br />2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 <br />7:00 P.M. <br />1. MEETING IS CALLED TO ORDER <br />2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE <br />3. ROLL CALL: Flaheriy, Hull, Mueller, Gunn. <br />NOT PRESENT: Stigney. <br />4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA <br />A. Monday, June 28, 2010, City Council Agenda. <br />• MOTION/SECOND: Mueller/Hull. To Approve the Monday, June 28, 2010, agenda as <br />presented. <br />Ayes — 4 Nays — 0 Motion carried. <br />5. PUBLIC INPUT <br />Tom Winiecki, 2740 Sherwood Road, questioned who was responsible for maintaining the <br />infiltration basins or rain gardens. Mayor Flaherty indicated the City is responsible for the grade <br />and placement of the rain gardens, but the homeowner needs to maintain the boulevard, including <br />the infiltration feature. City Administrator Ericson reiterated that homeowners were responsible <br />to maintain and mow grass in the City easements. <br />Mr. Winiecke suggested the City fix Harvey Kowalzek's property immediately as it could not be <br />mowed. Public Works Director DeBar stated a punch list was being worked on at this time and <br />the City has encouraged the contractor to complete the work by the end of June. He explained <br />the City was having trouble with the subcontractor and the City did have funds in escrow to <br />assure that the work would be completed. <br />The Council further discussed the general contractor used for Project A. The Council was <br />generally not in favor of using this contractor for future projects given the poor performance <br />• provided by the chosen subcontractor. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.