Agenda Packets - 2006/06/12 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View City Council May 22, 2006 Regular Meeting Page 28 Councilmember Stigney stated the purpose of the sprinkling system is to protect the building and 1 it is a small enough building with four exits points so people can leave the building. 2 3 City Administrator Ulrich stated the Random Park building occupancy is at about 120 people, 4 based on the square footage available for assembly. 5 6 MOTION/SECOND: THOMAS/GUNN. To authorize staff to proceed with the installation of a 7 fire suppression system in the Random Park building and to return with costs to monitor the fire 8 suppression system. 9 10 Ayes – 4 Nays – 1 (Stigney) Motion carried. 11 12 Councilmember Gunn suggested staff be asked to look into the cost to get a gate for the park 13 entrance so it can be closed at 10 p.m. and restrict car access. 14 15 Councilmember Thomas asked who would be responsible for closing and locking the gate. 16 17 Public Works Director Lee suggested this matter be placed on the Park and Recreation 18 Commission agenda for discussion and recommendation. 19 20 Mayor Marty asked about the possibility of wooden entry signs. Public Works Director Lee 21 stated staff has not done additional research on that matter but if the Council so directs, it can be 22 looked into. He advised that Clear Channel has contacted the City about coordinating with their 23 billboard sign and staff can look into that option as well. 24 25 Councilmember Thomas pointed out that wood was not specified and she would like staff to 26 research all options and costs. 27 28 C. Reports of City Attorney 29 30 City Attorney Alsop stated he was asked to address the issue of former Police Chief Tim 31 Ramacher’s request for the City to recharacterize the payments he has received for health 32 benefits. He referenced his memorandum and stated that based on the documents, video tape, 33 and witnesses he has concluded Mr. Ramacher did not have an option. He stated the key issue is 34 whether Mr. Ramacher had an option of a lump sum payment in 1989. Based on the evidence, he 35 came to the conclusion that Mr. Ramacher did not. City Attorney Alsop stated they have talked 36 to the people involved in the process who indicated Mr. Ramacher had no option for a payout. 37 He requested Council authorization to meet with Mr. Ramacher and staff to determine how to 38 correct this issue. 39 40 Councilmember Stigney stated he had no knowledge of options offered and the video he viewed 41 shed nothing on this issue. He pointed out it would be administrative staff, not the former Mayor 42 who had no authority to deal with it. Councilmember Stigney asked whether he talked to the 43 former City Administrator and Assistant City Administrator. He stated the Council did not direct 44