My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 2003/10/13
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2003
>
Agenda Packets - 2003/10/13
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:50:33 PM
Creation date
8/8/2018 11:29:12 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
10/13/2003
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
10/13/2003
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
195
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 September 22, 2003 <br />Regular Meeting Page 9 <br /> <br />tied up on a call then there are no officers on duty and a lot of the other times only two officers 1 <br />are on duty. He then said that for safety reasons it is not good to have one officer working alone 2 <br />in a city of this size. He further commented that the reason for the two officers is that crime rates 3 <br />support having additional police services here. 4 <br /> 5 <br />Council Member Marty indicated that court citations last year were 500 but for this year so far 6 <br />118 but traffic administrative offenses were 48 last year and this year are 362. He then said he 7 <br />feels this is good news for the City because the City gets 100% of the fees rather than the County 8 <br />getting a portion. 9 <br /> 10 <br />Council Member Stigney indicated a resident called him about an article in the Star Tribune that 11 <br />said the Attorney General is looking into administrative offenses so there is some controversy on 12 <br />that. 13 <br /> 14 <br />Mayor Linke indicated that when this City started the program many years ago it was anticipated 15 <br />that would happen because the County is losing revenue especially since more cities have started 16 <br />doing it. 17 <br /> 18 <br />Chief Sommer indicated that Staff has received numerous requests from other cities for the 19 <br />policy. 20 <br /> 21 <br />Council Member Quick indicated that City Attorney Dick Meyers recommended the 22 <br />administrative offense policy. 23 <br /> 24 <br />C. Resolution No. 6088A Approving the Contract Award for the County Road 25 <br />H Sidewalk Project 26 <br /> 27 <br />Public Works Director Lee indicated that after speaking with the City Attorney it was determined 28 <br />that the contract cannot be awarded on the alternate alone. He then indicated that Staff 29 <br />recommends rejecting the bids and rebidding for spring of 2004. 30 <br /> 31 <br />MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Quick. To Rescind Resolution 6088. 32 <br /> 33 <br /> Ayes – 3 Nays – 2(Stigney/Marty) Motion carried. 34 <br /> 35 <br />MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Stigney. To Approve Resolution 6088A with Option One Not to 36 <br />Award the Contract at This Time. 37 <br /> 38 <br />Council Member Marty indicated he made a motion for option five and he thinks should stick 39 <br />with that should go back and look at this for next year and go that route. 40 <br /> 41 <br />Council Member Gunn indicated she would like to stick with option five. 42 <br /> 43 <br />Council Member Stigney agreed and indicated that he has had several calls inquiring about it for 44 <br />discussion tonight. 45
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.