My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
gr00090_000047_pg084
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
MNHistoricalSocietyFiles (CC Minutes page-by-page 1958-1981)
>
gr00090_000047
>
gr00090_000047_pg084
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/12/2011 6:09:14 PM
Creation date
4/12/2011 10:40:48 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 1
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
April 10, 1978 Page 2 <br />MAYOR'S PROCLAMATIONS <br />Administrator Achen read the proclamations declaring April 13, 1978 the Day of <br />the Nurse, and April 28, 1978 as Arbor Day. <br />DEVELOPMENT REVIEW POLICY - STORM DRAINAGE <br />Mayor Pickar asked the Task Force for an update of their progress. <br />Peter Sargent, chairman of the Task Force, announced that the Task Force had <br />elected Neil Loeding as their underchairman. He stated that they were in the <br />process of writing a statement of mission and direction, which would be completed <br />after one or two more sessions. He added that they did not get their survey <br />going yet and that the group is not moving as fast as what they had hoped for. <br />Mr. Sargent added that they had received copies of the Short, Elliott, and <br />Hendrickson report to review and maps of the City. <br />Mr. Sargent stated that part of the Task Force feels it would be advantageous <br />to go door to door in surveying the citizens but that the other part of the Task <br />Force feels that would take too long. <br />Attorney Meyers reported that there are two methods of imposing a moratorium <br />in the City that would be considered legal, one falling under statute 462.355, <br />subdivision 4, which states that a City is authorized to adopt an interium <br />ordinance, which would have to come through the Planning Commission, indicating <br />that they want a moratorium due to planning considerations. The other method <br />would be under common law. Attorney Meyers added that moratoriums have been <br />imposed by communities and enforced by the courts, subject to very strong <br />scrutiny. Attorney Meyers also added that the City must not forget the rights <br />of the property owners, and that the Council would have to declare a moratorium <br />based on the public health, safety and welfare. <br />Attorney Meyers stated that the City would have to show good faith in that the pro- <br />blem is being worked out, and that they would have to come up with an answer in <br />court on what the developers would have to do or what the City would have to do <br />to correct the problems causing the moratorium. Attorney Meyers read a portion <br />of the statutue which states that a moratorium must be in good faith. <br />Neil Loeding questioned what public welfare would consist of. Attorney Meyers <br />replied that it was a broad term used in the courts, which basically allows <br />the police departments power. <br />Duane McCarty, 8060 Long Lake Road asked if it was the City's position that they <br />would be taken into court over a moratorium. Attorney Meyers replied that he was <br />not aware of anyone planning to sue the City yet, but added that the Council could <br />not vote on issues dependent upon their fear of being sued. <br />Mr. McCarthy asked if the moratorium would be lifted by April 24. Mayor Pickar <br />replied that they were working on the issue presently but had not set a definite <br />date. <br />Councilmember Baumgartner questioned if a target date should be set. <br />Mr. McCarty agreed that the City should set a target date rather than let the <br />issue drag on. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.