My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Council_Minutes_1980_02_11
MoundsView
>
City Council
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
1980-1989
>
Council Minutes 1980
>
Council_Minutes_1980_02_11
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/10/2011 2:13:09 PM
Creation date
2/7/2011 2:26:05 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
21
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
MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNICL Regular Meeting <br />Page 5 February 11, 1980 <br />raised some question concerning some of <br />the language of the resolution which was <br />answered by' the City Attorney. (Note: <br />Mayor McCarty arrived during the discus- <br />sion of this item at 8:42 p.m.) Rowley <br />moved the adoption of Resolution #1072 <br />and dispense with the reading and it was <br />seconded by Ziebarth. <br />The motion carried. <br />5 ayes <br />0 nays <br />Councilmember Forslund noted her concern <br />over Item G and wanted to ensure that on <br />the original resolution and copies being <br />sent forward to Ramsey County that the <br />description of the properties be attached. <br />Ziebarth moved that Resolution #1073 be <br />approved by the City Council and ensure <br />that the attachment of the land description <br />noted by Ramsey County on November 27, 1979, <br />be included on the original resolution and <br />the copy sent to Ramsey County, dispense <br />with the reading. It was seconded by Rowley. <br />5 ayes <br />The motion carried. 0 nays <br />Councilmember Rowley had requested that <br />this item be pulled from the Consent Agenda <br />in order to ascertain whether or not the <br />Administrator found out why the individual <br />had been relieved from previous position. <br />The Administrator stated that he had not, <br />however, the Public Works Superintendant <br />had stated to Nelson that he felt comfor- <br />table hiring this individual. Further, if <br />it did not work out, the individual would <br />be let go by the City. Nelson further <br />stated that the CETA program was paying <br />100% of the costs of this employee. <br />Rowley moved the <br />10. ITEM G <br />RESOLUTION 1073 <br />CONCERNING FORFEITED LAND <br />11. ITEM J <br />RESOLUTION 1076 <br />HIRING CETA POSITION <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.