Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View City Council October 11, 1999 <br />Regular Meeting Page 31 <br />City Administrator Whiting stated the ordinances which were provided to the Council Members' <br />• should indicate not only 4 percent, but a sunset date which was originally drafted as the year <br />2001. He pointed out that the discussion at the prior Work Session, and that date, has indicated a <br />sunset in the year 2000. <br />Mayor Coughlin asked the motioner and seconder if they would agree to an amendment of the <br />sunset dates as stated. <br />Council Members Quick and Marty agreed. <br />Council Member Stigney noted there was also a Special Projects fund by which they were going <br />to loan $200,000 to the golf course. He stated he was not aware what the total of that fund was, <br />however, this is also a possible revenue source, rather than increasing the franchise fee without <br />proper notification of the residents. <br />Mayor Coughlin explained that the interest of this fund is presently utilized in entirety to perform <br />chip seal and other road repairs. <br />Council Member Marty stated the one year sunset period had come forward during a Work <br />Session discussion of the issue. He explained the reason he had suggested one year increments <br />was because he did not desire to saddle a future Council with a decision that this Council has <br />made, as they have found to be the case in a number of situations. He noted Council Member <br />Stigney had indicated, and he agreed with him, that each Council should have the right and <br />. ability to make their own decisions, if another Council is able to find a better solution, this one <br />year sunset does not he their hands. <br />Council Member Stigney noted this fund was to be set up as a perpetual fund for street projects <br />only, and would not be utilized for any other purpose. He asked the City Attorney if it was true <br />that the City Council, on an enactment of three out of five Council Members, can change <br />whatever they want to do in regard to an ordinance. <br />City Attorney Riggs explained there are cities that have set up funds they agree to abide by, and <br />there are means to craft language, which restrains the ability of any Council to amend the <br />ordinance. <br />Council Member Stigney inquired if there were means to draft the language to insure that future <br />Council's would have to abide by whatever the present Council indicates. <br />City Attorney Riggs stated if that is the agreeable language of Council, they would be able to set <br />up funds that are restricted to that degree. <br />Council Member Stigney inquired if a future Council would not have the ability to overturn that <br />decision, for any reason. <br />City Attorney Riggs advised he would not go so far as to indicate that, as the City Charter <br />• provides the citizens the ability to undo any ordinance. He explained he could not provide a 100 <br />percent answer that this can never be undone, however, mechanisms can be put in place which <br />would make it very onerous to do so. <br />