My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 2005/08/22
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2005
>
Agenda Packets - 2005/08/22
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:49:37 PM
Creation date
8/1/2018 10:26:49 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
8/22/2005
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
8/22/2005
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
406
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 July 11, 2005 <br />Regular Meeting Page 2 <br /> <br />made that they got a good deal adding that when you think about the concessions the City is 1 <br />getting it is a tremendous amount and he thanked the Council. 2 <br /> 3 <br />Carol Mueller, 8343 Groveland Road, referenced the current issue of the Sun Focus Newspaper 4 <br />stating that it has a great, well written, non-biased, factual article about the June 20th Town Hall 5 <br />meeting. She stated that it includes a lot of good quotes from both the residents and the Council 6 <br />adding that it is her hope that the public knows that this information is available in the Sun Focus 7 <br />Newspaper. She suggested that the Council read the article noting that it would be worth their 8 <br />time to see it. She stated that it does help to put things into perspective. She noted that she also 9 <br />read the May/June Mounds View Matters newsletter that included the City of Mounds View 10 <br />Mission and Value Statement. She referenced Item 3, Ethics and Integrity stating that she agrees 11 <br />with the statement and reviewed with Council. She expressed concerns stating that she is 12 <br />wondering if perhaps the value statement, in its’ entirety, was have been set aside in our 13 <br />eagerness to get rid of a drain on the City budget. She stated that she believes the public was not 14 <br />treated fairly when the decision was made last August to empower the City Staff to do everything 15 <br />they needed to do to work out a plan with Medtronic for the property. She stated that if the 16 <br />decision, at that point in time, was to go forward, that in essence meant that the property was for 17 <br />sale. She stated that the City does lose integrity when the City sells something to a private party 18 <br />without offering it up for bids the way it normally should happen. She acknowledged that 19 <br />Medtronic is a wonderful company and she acknowledged that many are saying that the golf 20 <br />course is a huge drain on the City adding that she questions the ethics and integrity of the way all 21 <br />of this was put together. She stated that for the record, she is not for or against this, she is just 22 <br />thinking the City lost sight of their values and some of the vision. She noted that Dan was not 23 <br />able to attend this evening but has a quote from Dan, he told her that a baby born on June 27th 24 <br />would go through preschool, elementary, middle and high school along with college, and 25 <br />possibly start their own family before they would see the tax benefit of this 25-year tax increment 26 <br />funding deal. She stated that this is a rather profound statement noting that our children would 27 <br />be quite old before realizing any benefits. 28 <br /> 29 <br />Council Member Stigney stated that he couldn’t disagree more with what Ms. Mueller just said. 30 <br />He stated that to attack the integrity and ethics of the Council is inappropriate unless you have 31 <br />direct statements to make. He noted that she referred to the process of going out for bids and 32 <br />clarified that the City does not own the property and it would be hard to go out and ask for bids 33 <br />on property that the City does not hold the title. He indicated that the Sun Focus article Ms. 34 <br />Mueller referenced specifically states this as the reason the City did not go out for bids on the 35 <br />property. He stated another reason why the Council wouldn’t want to go out and ask for the 36 <br />highest bid is that it could be an asphalt company and asked if Ms. Mueller felt that would be a 37 <br />better option than Medtronic. He clarified that it is not his intent to put her down but she is 38 <br />attacking the integrity of the Council and he feels that the Council did have entirely good 39 <br />integrity as far as what was directed to Staff to see what negotiations could be worked out with 40 <br />Medtronic and identify the legislative issues through the process. He acknowledged that Ms. 41 <br />Mueller is not happy with the plan adding that it is his hope that it does take affect. 42 <br /> 43 <br />Ms. Mueller stated that if the City did not have the power or authority to take bids for the 44 <br />property how does the City have the authority or power to sell the property. She stated that if it is 45
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.