My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Minutes - 2005/06/13
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2005
>
Minutes - 2005/06/13
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/5/2025 4:16:59 PM
Creation date
3/5/2025 4:16:59 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Minutes
MEETINGDATE
6/13/2005
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Mounds View City Council June 13, 2005 <br />Regular Meeting Page 9 <br />Mayor Marty asked when the public hearing would take place. <br />Public Works Director Lee stated that the public hearing would be scheduled for the second <br />Council meeting on July 25, 2005. <br />Mayor Marty suggested submitting a note in the Mounds View Matters that would notify the <br />residents of the project. <br />Council Member Stigney stated that they are expecting to take 35-percent from the special <br />project fund and also looking at possibly a Medtronic proposal that would bring in approximately <br />$865,000 to the City and if they have that big project come in or other special projects he would <br />like to see that money added back to the special projects fund. He stated that they need that <br />money for future projects and if they have access to money to replace he would like to see that <br />happen. <br />Mayor Marty asked how they would word it if the park dedication fund comes into a windfall, <br />that this could be setup as a potential loan. <br />Council Member Thomas suggested stating that in Item 4 that at least 65-percent of the total <br />project cost on the park dedication and up to 35-percent for the special projects noting that it <br />would provide more flexibility. She stated that the whole point is if they have a windfall in the <br />park dedication it is never a pay back situation it comes directly out of that fund. She stated that <br />• if they change the wording it makes the percentages more flexible and if the money is not there it <br />stills allows the ability to do this. <br />Council Member Stigney expressed concerns that it does not address paying back the special <br />projects fund. <br />Mayor Marty stated that he likes Council Member Stigney's suggestion to make it a <br />reimbursement process. <br />Public Works Director Lee suggested removing Items 2 and 4 from the proposed resolution for <br />further review at the public hearing. <br />Council Member Gunn asked why they are ordering the public hearing when they are approving <br />the bidding. <br />Council Member Thomas explained that the public hearing is for the public input. <br />Community Development Director Ericson clarified that the approval of the resolution ordering <br />the project does not mean they are authorizing or awarding the project. He stated that this would <br />provide staff with the time they need to work through the verbiage in time for the public hearing. <br />• <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.