Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View City Council September 22, 2003 <br />Regular Meeting Page 9 <br />1 <br />2 <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 <br />6 <br />7 <br />8 <br />9 <br />to <br />11 <br />12 <br />13 <br />14 <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />~2 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />26 <br />27 <br />28 <br />29 <br />30 <br />31 <br />32 <br />33 <br />34 <br />35 <br />36 <br />37 <br />38 <br />39 <br />40 <br />41 <br />42 <br />4 <br />~3 <br />45 <br />tied up on a call then there are no officers on duty and a lot of the other times only two officers <br />are on duty. He then said that for safety reasons it is not good to have .one officer working alone <br />in a city of this size. He further commented that the reason for the two officers is that crime rates <br />support having additional police services here. <br />Council Member Marty indicated that court citations last year were 500 but for this year so far <br />118 but traffic administrative offenses were 481ast year and this year are 362. He then said he <br />feels this is good news for the City because the City gets 100% of the fees rather than the County <br />getting a portion. <br />Council Member Stigney indicated a resident called him about an article in the Star Tribune that <br />said the Attorney General is looking into administrative offenses so there is some controversy on <br />that. <br />Mayor Linke indicated that when this City started the program many years ago it was anticipated <br />that would happen because the County is losing revenue especially since more cities have started <br />doing it. <br />Chief Sommer indicated that Staff has received numerous requests from other cities for the <br />policy. <br />Council Member Quick indicated that City Attorney Dick Meyers recommended the <br />administrative offense policy. <br />C. Resolution No. 6088A Approving the Contract Award for the County Road <br />H Sidewalk Project <br />Public Works Director Lee indicated that after speaking with the City Attorney it was determined <br />that the contract cannot be awarded on the alternate alone. He then indicated that Staff <br />recommends rejecting the bids and rebidding for spring of 2004. <br />MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Quick. To Rescind Resolution 6088. <br />Ayes - 3 Nays - 2(Stigney/Marty) Motion carried. <br />MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Stigney. To Approve Resolution 6088A with Option One Not to <br />Award the Contract at This Time. <br />Council Member Marty indicated he made a motion for option five and he thinks should stick <br />with that should go back and look at this for next year and go that route. <br />Council Member Gunn indicated she would like to stick with option five. <br />Council Member Stigney agreed and indicated that he has had several calls inquiring about it for <br />discussion tonight. <br />