Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View City Council September 24, 1984 <br />Regular Meeting Page Four <br />type of motion, would not allow the flexibility to <br />proceed with the lawsuit. She also pointed out the <br />Council is unified in proceeding with the lawsuit, <br />but the Councilmembers have different beliefs on <br />how to proceed. She added that she would personally <br />favor a motion to proceed with the lawsuit. <br />Councilmember Doty stated he is opposed to the <br />current Master Plan, and he agrees with the <br />importance of moving the runway. <br />Councilmember Doty stated he demanded that Council- <br />member Blanchard vote. Councilmember Blanchard cast her <br />vote as present. <br />Counciim=.uuer Linke stated he would uphold <br />Councilmember Blanchard's abstention as he feels it <br />should be up to each Councilmember to vote their <br />consience. <br />Attorney Meyers reviewed the ordinance and advised <br />it would require a mandatory injunction to make a <br />Councilmember vote. <br />Alice Fritz, 8072 Long Lake Road, asked why the <br />ordinance regarding no alcohol consumption in the <br />City parks was not being enforced. She also stated <br />she had heard the Park and Rec Commission and <br />Festivities Commission were planning a beer garden <br />for the next Festival in the Park. <br />Mark Mack, 4068 Glenhaven, stated that he was a <br />member of the Festivities Commission and they had <br />taken no action on it yet but were considering it <br />due to budget problems. <br />Mayor McCarty directed Staff to send a letter to <br />all organizations using the City parks, citing the <br />ordinance. <br />Paul Ritelle, 3989 Central Avenue NE, Minneapolis, <br />stated he was the attorney for Greg Johnson, and <br />asked the Council if they would consider reaching <br />a pretrial settlement, before the scheduled court <br />date of October 8. He explained he and his client <br />feel they have an excellent chance to win in court, <br />but want to avoid incurring futher costs and the <br />anger of the neighborhood over the use of the <br />property. He stated Mr. Johnson was willing to <br />agree to not sell his property to anyone who would <br />intend to rezone for commercial purposes, and the <br />sold use would be the continued operation on a <br />limited basis of the Highway 10 Radiator Shop, <br />and they would erect a fence to separate them from <br />the residential property owners. He added that <br />Mr. Johnson would also agree to continuing his <br />operation on a conditional basis, under a CUP. <br />