My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 2011/10/10
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2011
>
Agenda Packets - 2011/10/10
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:50:29 PM
Creation date
6/27/2018 1:42:05 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
10/10/2011
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
10/10/2011
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
88
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
Mounds View City Council September 12, 2011 <br />Regular Meeting Page 5 <br /> <br />Vikings were to locate on the TCAAP site. He indicated a moratorium was in place at this time, 1 <br />but the NFL was a powerful force that MAC could use to push an expansion through. Mr. Marty 2 <br />added that the Vikings were a Minnesota team and should not be funded by Ramsey County 3 <br />alone. He recommended the Council take no action and allow Ramsey County to work this out 4 <br />with the Minnesota Vikings. 5 <br /> 6 <br />Council Member Mueller stated a local business owner, who supports the development but was 7 <br />unable to attend, questioned how County Road H water runoff would be addressed as his site 8 <br />floods with each significant rain event. Ms. Haake stated she was unaware of this situation and 9 <br />recommended that this business owner speak with the Rice Creek Watershed further. 10 <br /> 11 <br />Council Member Stigney did not feel the Council was in any position to pass a Resolution of 12 <br />Support this evening given the number of new recommendations made this evening. He felt 13 <br />there was a great deal of information from Ramsey County that was still not available. In 14 <br />addition, there was no need for the City to pass a Resolution of Support, especially if Arden Hills 15 <br />was taking no action at this time. 16 <br /> 17 <br />Mayor Flaherty reviewed his proposed changes regarding the sound wall, that the airport remain 18 <br />unchanged, and that the proposed .5% sales tax was not supported by Council. He then reviewed 19 <br />Ms. Haake’s comments indicating the Council would reserve the right to withdraw support if the 20 <br />Stadium plans were to change; and that the City would not maintain, fund or assume any liability 21 <br />for the sanitary sewer or lift stations for this development. 22 <br /> 23 <br />Finance Director Beer clarified that any connection to the City’s sanitary sewer from this site to 24 <br />the City of Mounds View could only be completed through a joint powers agreement. 25 <br /> 26 <br />Council Member Mueller was in favor of passing a Resolution of Support as it allowed the 27 <br />Council to give the City a voice on the issue, keeping in mind the interests of the community. 28 <br />She supported the additional recommendations voiced this evening and felt the .5% sales tax 29 <br />issue should be the first “Whereas” within the Resolution. This would draw attention to the 30 <br />matter, noting that the Council does not support the sales tax increase. 31 <br /> 32 <br />Council Member Mueller did not want to see the City sit silent on the issue and felt the needs of 33 <br />the City should be heard by the County. 34 <br /> 35 <br />Mayor Flaherty agreed stating the Resolution would discuss the conditions for support for the 36 <br />City of Mounds View. 37 <br /> 38 <br />Council Member Gunn was in favor of the Resolution of Support with the recommended 39 <br />additions this discussed this evening. She felt if the City took no action, the City would lose its 40 <br />voice. 41 <br /> 42 <br />Council Member Stigney expressed concern that the stadium issue would not go to the voting 43 <br />public. He indicated the residents should make the decision on this important issue. He 44 <br />questioned why the Council would take action on this item until further information was 45
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.