Minutes - 2005/08/22 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View City Council August 22, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 42 • An audience member stated he thinks this is a "David and Goliath" situation and Mounds View is David. He stated that Mounds View got snuckered by Medtronic and asked who did the negotiations. He asked why this was not open to a competitive marketplace sale and why one entity was allowed to come in and also triple the average TIF District life by throwing money at the school district and paying for some fireworks. He stated it is a competitive marketplace but he knows there are some golf course haters who want to get rid of it no matter what. An audience member asked about the streets and when something will be done. He stated he is a believer in the Council and Mayor doing their jobs but the Charter has given the opportunity and if the Charter made a mistake the matter should be turned over to the voters and let them make the decision. He stated Medtronic is a great company but he thinks they took advantage of Mounds View. He urged the Mayor and Council to go into the neighborhoods and tell their constituents about the terms of the contract. He stated he would prefer Medtronic to the golf course but wants it done right and falling over for the first offer doesn't get it. Joan Dofney, 7801 Gloria Circle, stated it is a great project and will cost a lot of money. She stated she went out to get signatures on the petition and found it was an easy job. She stated she was blown away by the number of people willing to sign and does not think there is anything to fear to let people vote. She felt if the City could get more money from Medtronic for the City that would be great, noting that Medtronic has a lot of money. Ms. Dofney stated if they get to vote, a lot of people will come to the voting booth. • Mary Kay Walsh stated if they get 30 days to remedy the petition they will do that. She thinks it is valid to have a petition because the Charter says they can have a referendum on the sale of land. She stated if they need more names, they will get them and asked for the opportunity to get those names in the next 30 days. MOTION/SECOND. Stigney/Gunn. To adopt Resolution 6608 Determining the Sufficiency of Referendum Petition Pursuant to City Charter; Finding the Referendum Question Invalid; and Declaring that Such Question Shall Not be Certified for a Special Election. Councilmember Stigney read the resolution in full. Councilmember Flaherty asked the City Attorney whether the passing of the resolution allows the petition committee to rectify the petition. City Attorney Riggs responded that they can do so to make the petition sufficient but that does not mean the petition is valid based his legal opinion dated August 11, 2005. Councilmember Flaherty asked if they still have recourse. City Attorney Riggs stated they do have that option under the Charter provision. Councilmember Thomas stated she does not want to offer false hope because there is no recourse. She stated this is a deliberate action that she has agonized more over than the actual sale itself. She stated she does not have to worry about the sale, she made that decision. The difference of opinion is whether the City .got the best deal and she does feel they got a fabulous deal and the best one this Council could negotiate. •