My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-26-2001 CC
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2001
>
02-26-2001 CC
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:46:36 PM
Creation date
8/29/2018 9:25:59 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
2/26/2001
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
2/26/2001
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
61
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 February 12, 2001 <br />Regular Meeting Page 10 <br /> <br />he does not understand why the City would look into building another nine holes if it cannot <br />make the first nine work. <br /> <br />Dan Lamb of 2305 Sherwood Road stated he had attended the Rice Creek Watershed meeting on <br />the Greenfield ponding issue. Again, in his opinion, it lacked the information residents had <br />requested. Last September Mayor Sonterre’s e-mail stated he had compiled a list of questions <br />and forwarded them to Rice Creek. These questions were not answered and residents still have <br />not received the information. In essence, in his opinion, Rice Creek was not prepared to answer <br />the questions previously asked of them. Residents did have a list at the meeting aside from the <br />list the mayor had said he would provide. He then asked if the City could pull this together <br />somehow. <br /> <br />Mayor Sonterre stated he took issue with the comments of Mr. Lamb. He indicted everything <br />sent to him as liaison on the ponding issue was forwarded on to Rice Creek which he can prove <br />by providing information on all e-mails sent to him. All e-mails concerning the ponding issue <br />were forwarded to Rice Creek and Mike Ulrich. So, the statement Mr. Lamb made indicating the <br />questions were not forwarded to Rice Creek is false. <br /> <br />Mayor Sonterre then noted Mr. Lamb was on public record as saying he was opposed to the pond <br />in every way, shape and form. Mayor Sonterre also noted he has heard Mr. Lamb say that <br />anything he could use to derail the project he would so any comments made by Mr. Lamb to him <br />are viewed in that light. <br /> <br />Mr. Lamb stated Rice Creek had told him they had not received a list of questions. <br /> <br />Mayor Sonterre clarified everything sent to him on the ponding issue was forwarded on to Rice <br />Creek. <br /> <br />Mr. Lamb referred to a letter with highlighted items the City needed to provide before the project <br />could proceed. He then asked if the City had provided any of those items. <br /> <br />Council Member Marty stated the City has not provided any of that information. <br /> <br />Council Member Stigney noted it was mentioned at the meeting but council did not provide the <br />information. <br /> <br />Mr. Lamb asked if the City provided direction on any of the items in the letter. <br /> <br />Council Member Marty explained the City has not provided direction. The issue is merely in the <br />discussion stages at this point. <br /> <br />Mr. Lamb asked if the City has provided a rough estimate of spoils as requested in the letter. <br /> <br />Council Member Marty stated the City has taken no further action at all. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.