My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 2005/09/26
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2005
>
Agenda Packets - 2005/09/26
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:50:11 PM
Creation date
8/1/2018 12:29:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
9/26/2005
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
9/26/2005
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.
/
210
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 August 22, 2005 <br />Regular Meeting Page 42 <br /> <br />An audience member stated he thinks this is a “David and Goliath” situation and Mounds View 1 <br />is David. He stated that Mounds View got snuckered by Medtronic and asked who did the 2 <br />negotiations. He asked why this was not open to a competitive marketplace sale and why one 3 <br />entity was allowed to come in and also triple the average TIF District life by throwing money at 4 <br />the school district and paying for some fireworks. He stated it is a competitive marketplace but 5 <br />he knows there are some golf course haters who want to get rid of it no matter what. 6 <br /> 7 <br />An audience member asked about the streets and when something will be done. He stated he is a 8 <br />believer in the Council and Mayor doing their jobs but the Charter has given the opportunity and 9 <br />if the Charter made a mistake the matter should be turned over to the voters and let them make 10 <br />the decision. He stated Medtronic is a great company but he thinks they took advantage of 11 <br />Mounds View. He urged the Mayor and Council to go into the neighborhoods and tell their 12 <br />constituents about the terms of the contract. He stated he would prefer Medtronic to the golf 13 <br />course but wants it done right and falling over for the first offer doesn’t get it. 14 <br /> 15 <br />Joan Dofney, 7801 Gloria Circle, stated it is a great project and will cost a lot of money. She 16 <br />stated she went out to get signatures on the petition and found it was an easy job. She stated she 17 <br />was blown away by the number of people willing to sign and does not think there is anything to 18 <br />fear to let people vote. She felt if the City could get more money from Medtronic for the City 19 <br />that would be great, noting that Medtronic has a lot of money. Ms. Dofney stated if they get to 20 <br />vote, a lot of people will come to the voting booth. 21 <br /> 22 <br />Mary Kay Walsh stated if they get 30 days to remedy the petition they will do that. She thinks it 23 <br />is valid to have a petition because the Charter says they can have a referendum on the sale of 24 <br />land. She stated if they need more names, they will get them and asked for the opportunity to get 25 <br />those names in the next 30 days. 26 <br /> 27 <br />MOTION/SECOND. Stigney/Gunn. To adopt Resolution 6608 Determining the Sufficiency of 28 <br />Referendum Petition Pursuant to City Charter; Finding the Referendum Question Invalid; and 29 <br />Declaring that Such Question Shall Not be Certified for a Special Election. 30 <br /> 31 <br />Councilmember Stigney read the resolution in full. 32 <br /> 33 <br />Councilmember Flaherty asked the City Attorney whether the passing of the resolution allows the 34 <br />petition committee to rectify the petition. City Attorney Riggs responded that they can do so to 35 <br />make the petition sufficient but that does not mean the petition is valid based his legal opinion 36 <br />dated August 11, 2005. Councilmember Flaherty asked if they still have recourse. City Attorney 37 <br />Riggs stated they do have that option under the Charter provision. 38 <br /> 39 <br />Councilmember Thomas stated she does not want to offer false hope because there is no 40 <br />recourse. She stated this is a deliberate action that she has agonized more over than the actual 41 <br />sale itself. She stated she does not have to worry about the sale, she made that decision. The 42 <br />difference of opinion is whether the City got the best deal and she does feel they got a fabulous 43 <br />deal and the best one this Council could negotiate. 44 <br /> 45
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.