Laserfiche WebLink
• A <br /> Page 10 ADOQflRfl <br /> February 24, 1997 U �d u <br /> Mounds View City Council • <br /> Mike Coon,7851 Eastwood Road,stated he is opposed to the bridge because he feels the proposed location is <br /> not appropriate. He feels if the city were to build a bridge,it should be located at County Road I/Highway <br /> 10/Silver Lake Road,where there would be access to restaurants,convenience store,ballfields,etc. <br /> Chuck Miller,Lake Court Dr.,stated he also feels the location is wrong for the proposed bridge. The funds <br /> that are being proposed for the local costs are still taxpayer's money. He feels that money may be able to be <br /> used for other projects. Furthermore,he feels providing the bridge will only be giving people a false sense of <br /> security. <br /> David Long,7749 Knollwood Drive,stated he is in favor of the bridge. He wondered why people who were in <br /> favor of the bridge initially have not come to voice their objections. <br /> Bill Werner,2765 Sherwood Road,stated he thinks people have finally become aware of the costs hgvv <br /> decided to speak out against the bridge. He is opposed to the bridge. <br /> Council member Trude stated it saddens her that after a statement has been said enough time,people actually <br /> believe it to be true. She believes that is what has happened with the bridge project. The original budget was <br /> for$190,000. The ponding project was paired with the bridge project and funds were set aside in surface <br /> water management funds. The only cost that was not anticipated was$5,827.00 in legal fees E ,'"1T',11".11 fry <br /> traffic signal modification neither of which are major or significant cost overruns for the project. <br /> Ms. Sheldon explained that if the costs come in as estimated,there should be adequate funds to cover the <br /> 4110 <br /> anticipated costs. <br /> Mayor McCarty noted there are several references to the original$120,000 local share cost up to 1996. In the <br /> Fall of 1996 it escalated to$190,000 which represents a 30%increase. <br /> Ms.Trude stated that funds have been set aside for this project. If council members find it inappr•!tide to <br /> take moneys out of the various funds,the city could easily switch over to tax increment financing as a means of <br /> funding the project. These Binds can only be used for limited things and this bridge would qualify as an <br /> approved project. Ms.Trude stated this project can be looked at from an environmental standpoint,it will be <br /> an investment in the future of the community and it will encourage kids to use amenities on the other side of the <br /> highway. She feels the bridge will be used and urged the Council to stop and think. She feels legally the city <br /> is bound to the contract that they entered <br /> Mayor McCarty explained the tax increment financing process,and stated he feels it is more cost efficient to get <br /> rid of the tax increment financing bonds and districts and get those property taxes back on the tax roles so that <br /> the city can help out with other things. He is more concerned about education than he is about any lack of <br /> concern for safety on the part of parents for their children. <br /> Council member Koopmeiners asked how unanticipated additional costs will be covered. <br /> Ms. Sheldon explained that the federal funding will not cover more than$480,000. Therefore,if the total <br /> project cost is$600,000 or less,there will be a 80t20 split between the federal government and the city. <br /> Mr.Koopmeiners stated he is opposed to the bridge project,noting that there is the possibility that the city will <br /> need to come up with even more funds if they run into unanticipated problems. • <br />