Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View City Council November 15, 1999 <br />Regular Meeting Page 18 <br />Council Member Marty stated he had brought forward Council Member Stigney's point earlier, <br />and asked the Finance Director if there was any possible way to dedicate more than 1.5 percent. <br />• He stated City Administrator Whiting had indicated they might be able to utilize TIF or General <br />Fund dollars for this purpose. He stated at this time, he had not received a definite response, as <br />the budget was still under consideration. He stated that if they were able to obtain more than 1.5 <br />percent this would be ideal, however, this determination would come forward during the budget <br />discussion. <br />Mayor Coughlin clarified that within the resolution, at two points, it is indicated that at least 1.5 <br />percent, and in his understanding, the spirit of this language is that, as much as they can dedicate, <br />they will, and this provides a margin to work with. <br />Council Member Stigney stated his point in making the amendment was to clarify that it would <br />be 2 percent, whereas presently no one is certain if it will be increased beyond that point. He <br />pointed out there were additional funds coming in from the Theatre Project and so forth, <br />therefore, the percentage could be increased to allocate more funds towards the street <br />reconstruction projects, and he believed they could easily have taken the additional .5 percent out <br />of the General Fund. <br />Mayor Coughlin explained that the Theater Project funds would not be fully realized this year, <br />and furthermore, all were well aware of the levy restrictions of .93 percent in the City. He <br />pointed out that they are fully aware of the maximum amount of funding coming into the City, <br />and it is incorrect to indicate there is money "sitting around" that could be utilized. <br />• Council Member Stigney disagreed. <br />Council Member Quick moved the question and closed off the debate. <br />Ayes - 4 Nays - 1 (Stigney) Motion carried. <br />City Attorney Long noted a technical matter in terms of four votes in relation to the Charter, and <br />thought it would proper to change that number to three, during the Charter discussion, otherwise <br />the resolution will indicate another four-vote requirement. He advised the word "four" should be <br />changed to indicate "three," in order to be consistent with the Charter. <br />Council Member Quick inquired if the City Attorney's comments were out of order, as the <br />Council is now required to vote upon the matter at hand. <br />Mayor Coughlin advised the City Attorney's comment is in order, as it is a point of order. He <br />explained that procedural questions take precedence over the vote. <br />Mayor Coughlin with the understanding that the vote would be made with the indication of three <br />votes, rather than four, as per legal counsel, called for the vote. <br />Ayes - 4 Nays - 1 (Stigney) Motion carried. <br />City Administrator Whiting advised that further discussion of this resolution would be <br />worthwhile, in terms of the policy implications City Attorney Long brought forward, and <br />whether or not the Council desired to revisit the matter. He stated it appeared the requirement of <br />