Laserfiche WebLink
Page 6 <br /> May 13, 1996 <br /> Mounds View City Council <br /> • <br /> The action taken by the Mayor and Council members Trude and Blanchard results in the following: <br /> - A $750,000 expenditure without public notice and input. No public hearing was held The public was <br /> given no advance notice of pending action. <br /> - A $750,000 expenditure with no market study or needs analysis. Questions about what would be a <br /> successful use have no answers. <br /> - A $750,000 expenditure with no survey of residents as to what they would want and support. <br /> - We now own a facility and have not identified a revenue source to cover unidentified operating costs. <br /> - We now own a facility and have not identified renovation costs including the removal of asbestos. <br /> - We now own a facility with no firm agreements with potential partners. <br /> - We now have staff spending time on the development of this project without deciding what in city • <br /> business will not or cannot be done. This may take additional staff at an undetermined cost. <br /> - The building and property will be taken off the tax roles which means you took money away from the <br /> county, school district and the city. This means either budget cuts or added costs to other property owners. <br /> - You ignored the advice of your own Economic Development Commission. They recommended keeping <br /> it on the tax roles. This was a very real possibility. <br /> - You ignored the advice of your own staff who cautioned against moving too quickly with not enough <br /> information. You put the staff in a very difficult situation. <br /> It appears to me and other residents that what we have to say does not matter than that you have no desire <br /> to consider our viewpoints except when it is convenient to you. Two other examples are: <br /> - When the council was considering the water meter change-out at the cost of about$580,000 council <br /> member Trude insisted that we needed many pubic meetings to hear residents'concerns. In that case we <br /> had a one year study that gave us necessary information. We all agreed to have many public meetings. <br /> Why wasn't this done in the case of the Bel-Rae? <br /> - Earlier this year at the work session the council agreed 4-1 to transfer the administration of the golf <br /> course from Parks and Recreation to Administration. The Mayor left town and asked council members <br /> Blanchard and Trude to table the item because he wanted to be present. They made every attempt to do <br /> just that. They would not allow me to complete my statements about the issue and said that we should wait <br /> for the mayor to get back. It seems they are unable to make decisions without him. Why is it all council <br /> members are not given the same courtesy to express their view and the views of those people they <br /> represent? <br />