My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-03-2000 CC
MoundsView
>
City Council
>
City Council
>
Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2000
>
01-03-2000 CC
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/29/2018 2:44:10 PM
Creation date
8/29/2018 2:43:51 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV City Council
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
1/3/2000
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
47
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).
View images
View plain text
Mounds View City Council December 13, 1999 <br />Regular Meeting Page 10 <br /> <br />ignored these suggestions, in that this matter was afforded the opportunity for consideration, <br />however, the presenter did not provide the information to the Council. <br /> <br />Council Member Stigney stated that all of his comments were provided to Council Member <br />Marty, as well as to the City Attorney. He reiterated he did not support this item, due to its effect <br />upon the taxpayers. <br /> <br />Mayor Coughlin stated as a point of order, major discussion of a motion must be made after there <br />is a motion to react to. <br /> <br />MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Thomason. To Approve Consent Agenda Item D as presented. <br /> <br /> Ayes – 3 Nays – 1 (Stigney) Motion carried. <br /> <br />Council Member Marty requested clarification if Item G, Awarding of Bid for the Electronic <br />Message Board, in terms of how the monetary figures differed from the original amounts <br />discussed by the Council. <br /> <br />City Administrator Whiting explained that the same two bidders resubmitted their bids. He <br />stated the company who questioned the accuracy of the specifications rebid at a higher amount, <br />and the company who previously won the bid, resubmitted at approximately $4,000 less than <br />their original bid, therefore the total cost of the electronic message board will be between <br />$40,000 and $41,000. <br /> <br />Council Member Marty inquired if this would be approximately $4,000 in savings for the City. <br />City Administrator Whiting stated this was correct. <br /> <br />MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Thomason. To Approve Consent Agenda Item G, as presented. <br /> <br /> Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. <br /> <br />8. UNFINISHED BUSINESS <br /> <br />None. <br /> <br />9. RESIDENTS REQUESTS AND COMMENTS FROM THE FLOOR <br /> <br />David Jahnke, 8428 Eastwood Drive stated he had recently seen two articles printed in the <br />newspaper, and although he was uncertain if they were directed toward him, he would like to <br />clarify his position in this regard. He stated he has always maintained that he will ask the <br />questions, however, he has never accused anyone of any wrongdoings. He indicated he will hold <br />the Council and the City accountable for the things they do, and he will continue to ask <br />questions. <br /> <br />Mr. Jahnke stated he has friends who live in the city of Cambridge, and was uncertain if people <br />were aware of what has occurred in this city. He indicated this is a sad story, and he wished that <br />all of the Council Members would read about what had occurred, when the citizens did not <br />question the goings on in that village. He requested that when the Council Members have the <br />opportunity, they research this matter, and learn what occurred in Cambridge when no one was
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.