Laserfiche WebLink
Page 5 <br />November 13, 1995 <br />Mounds View City Council <br />came up with a list of proposed funding, however the council has not had a great deal of time to <br />discuss this proposal in detail. He stated he has spoken with the auditor who has indicated that he <br />does not see a problem in using these funds for this particular project. <br />Mayor Linke stated he is aware that the council was not going to take action on this item until the <br />November budget meeting, if they went through the budget process using tax money to fund the <br />project. The new proposal does not have new tax funds involved in it. The proposal would involve <br />amending the 1995 budget to allow for the transfers of funds to the project account as follows: <br />- transfer of approximately $82,000 from the Franchise Fee Account from 1994-95; <br />- transfer of approximately $41,000 from Special Projects Fund (interest); <br />- transfer of $31,000 from the Undesignated General Fund (coming from the end of the 1994 <br />budgetary year); <br />- transfer of $25,000 from the Street Light Utility Fund; and <br />- transfer of $10,800 from the Recreation Activity Fund. <br />Mayor Linke stated this is his proposal. He does not know the feelings of the other council members. <br />He felt this item should be brought up as there will not be a council work session between this meeting <br />and the next. <br />Ms. Blanchard stated she has a big problem with the proposal. She does not have a problem with the <br />bridge itself, but rather with the presentation tonight. Residents were told at the last two meetings <br />• ~ that a decision on this would not be made until November 29th. The residents who attended previous <br />meetings are under the understanding that they have another week to prepare their positions and present <br />them to <br />the council. She does not feel that going ahead with this is being open to the people. Also, one of the <br />council members is not present and she feels she also should be present and give input on this item. <br />She would therefore, like to recommend that this item be tabled for two weeks. <br />MOTION by Ms. Blanchard to table Item 11 (A) until the November 27 1995 council meeting. <br />MOTION FAILS FOR LACK OF A SECOND. <br />Council member Quick stated the council was talking about the budget and the discussion went around <br />the fact that the budget they were dealing with included a 3 % tax levy, therefore the increase in the tax <br />levy is what the council was referring to. <br />Council member Trude stated this is also the way she recalls it. If people wanted to have their taxes <br />raised for the bridge or not raised because of the bridge, then the council would need to make a <br />decision at a tax payer hearing or that appropriate time. Since that time, the council has been able to <br />work with the auditors and come up with funds that replace those tax funds so that it is not necessary to <br />raise the levy. At that point, she does not think there will be any taxpayers complaining. The people <br />who have contacted her as a council member includes a list of 72 names for the bridge and six against <br />it. The six residents were against it because they were concerned it would impact them personally in <br />their taxes next year. She believes that a lot of the people at the council meeting would be happy to <br />see the council take action at an open forum. It is a public meeting, it is cable-televised and the <br />