My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-13-1992 CC
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1992
>
10-13-1992 CC
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:50:32 PM
Creation date
7/17/2018 7:52:10 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
10/13/1992
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
10/13/1992
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
99
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 Page Seventeen <br /> •egular Meeting October 13, 1992 <br /> law may have a similar provision. <br /> Councilmember Blanchard stated that the sliding fee option is <br /> not fair to residents. <br /> Councilmember made a motion to implement the 3% franchise fee <br /> across the board with a sunset clause after five years which <br /> would end in December of 1998. <br /> Councilmember Rickaby asked what that would raise. <br /> Orduno responded that it would raise $207,960. <br /> Councilmember Wuori seconded the motion. <br /> Councilmember Blanchard stated that with the franchise fee <br /> of 3% across the board everyone would pay equally., <br /> Charlie Hall stated that the Council did not listen to the <br /> people. <br /> Judy Trude stated that this will hurt businesses but that doing <br /> a flat 3% is easier. <br /> Councilmember Rickaby stated that many business people were in <br /> attendance and nearly unanimously, except for Charlie Hall, <br /> preferred the property tax increase. <br /> Charlie Hall stated that 6 to 12 business people talked to the <br /> Mayor and Samantha. 100% of those persons favored the property <br /> tax increase. <br /> Councilmember Blanchard stated that she could only vote on what <br /> she felt was best for the residents of the City. <br /> Mayor Linke admitted an error on hie—part_and_should have went <br /> for 12% on property tax increase limit. One option the City could <br /> - •- • • • • - • • • 0 . <br /> - 'b crease s raig across e •oar• or <br /> the franchise fee and an 8.3 increase in property taxes. <br /> Charles Miller stated that the City would be giving up its 4% <br /> buffer if it went with 1% on the franchise fee. Miller stated <br /> it would be better to put the 8.3% on the property taxes and <br /> save the 4% franchise fee as a buffer to use if necessary. <br /> Miller asked if the franchise fee is implemented at 3% would there <br /> still -bean increase in property-taxes: - — <br /> Mayor Linke responded in his opinion there would not be. <br /> Barb Haake suggested the franchise fee implementation be tabled. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.