Laserfiche WebLink
Page 5 <br />November 27, 1995 <br />Mounds View City Council <br />determine whether or not this bridge was a good, usable amenity to the entire <br />community. The residents did not have an opportunity to ask the questions they <br />planned to on November 29th. He does not believe that the November 29th <br />discussion date was only in the event that a tax levy would be required. <br />Furthermore, it his understanding that per Code 203.8, Subdivision 5, a 4/5 vote <br />of approval is required to spend any money out of the Special Projects fund <br />which the city does not have at this time as it was passed on a 3/1 vote. <br />Mayor Linke explained that he asked the Auditors about the proposed <br />expenditure of the funds for the pedestrian bridge and they assured him that the <br />interest portion could be used for this project. <br />Mr. McCarty suggested that the City Attorney be contacted about this issue, as <br />he believes the funds were committed without a 4/5 vote. <br />Pam Starr, 7778 Woodlawn Drive stated she would like to applaud the City <br />Council for finally making a decision that is looking at the safety of the children <br />in Mounds View. She does not know how anyone can be so short-sighted that <br />they can say Mounds View cannot afford the bridge when there are children who <br />need to cross the highway. <br />Jim Schmitt, 5446 Erickson Road, stated there has been public input on this <br />issue since April. At the meetings he has attended there has been a greater <br />number of residents in favor of the bridge than opposed to it. Furthermore, at <br />the Public Hearing on the issue of whether the city would use tax increment <br />financing , he heard four out of the five council members state two different times <br />that they were in favor of the bridge, they just had a disagreement on taxes. He <br />stated the city must find funding for a project such as this. He has three <br />children and is active in youth activities in the community. They use the <br />community as a whole and he feels access is a problem in the community. The <br />bridge will greatly improve this problem. He is happy that the decision was <br />made. <br />Ms. Hankner stated the council decided they would not increase the taxes for <br />purposes of funding the pedestrian bridge, but that they would still go ahead with <br />the grant and directed staff to go into the budget and try to determine where <br />funds could come from. At that time it was still in the context of the 1996 budget. <br />For public purposes, the council let them know that it would be discussed as a <br />part of the 1996 budget on November 29th when they were to hold the Public <br />Hearing. It was still in the 1996 budget. <br />• <br />