My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 1983/08/12
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
1980-1989
>
1983
>
Agenda Packets - 1983/08/12
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/17/2025 10:53:13 AM
Creation date
3/17/2025 10:53:12 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
8/12/1983
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
101
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 '� l� �"�j ?�°`I July 25, 1983 • <br />Regular Meeting; , :! a y Y-J'-s' . , ry'n 1' Page Four <br />------------------------- a=�,�=--t--�4- - f------------------ <br />Herman Growe asked what the plans are for the empty land <br />by the Church, and questioned whether a day care center <br />was planned. 0 <br />A representative from the Church stated that they plan <br />to expand to the north and slightly to the east, and <br />that it would be added to the present building. <br />Director Johnson added that a day care home, licensed <br />for up to ten children, could be allowed but he was <br />not aware of one being planned at the time. <br />Clerk/Administrator Pauley explained that Acting Chief 10. 2nd Quarter <br />Smith had a family emergency and was not able to be 1983 Departme <br />at the Council meeting, but that Officer Brick was Head Rpt. - <br />expected to stop in and give the report. Acting Police <br />Chief Smith <br />Mayor McCarty questioned item 5, to review developer 11. Consideration <br />applications as received or as necessary, and asked of Amendment <br />why, since they are supported by administrative fees, to Contract <br />there would be an estimate in the contract, for Professia <br />Services with <br />Clerk/Administrator Pauley replied that Mr. Johnson's John Johnson <br />contract provides that he work so many hours for the <br />City, and that it was necessary to estimate the number <br />of hours for the remainder of the year. 0 <br />Councilmember Linke pointed out that the hours listed <br />on the July 25 memo have not changed from what was listed <br />on the June 29 memo. He also pointed out a difference <br />in the maximum hours listed for the MSA 1983 resurfacing <br />project, being 122 on one memo, and 112 on the other. <br />Director Johnson replied that the hours have not changed <br />as those project have been at a standstill since the end <br />of June. He explained that it appears to be a typographical <br />error in the difference of hours• and that he didn't have <br />his back-up paperwork with him, but he believed that 122 <br />hours was the correct figure. <br />Couhcilmember Linke questioned the 30-40 hours to prepare <br />plans and specs for the 1983 MSA resurfacing program, <br />since Technician Kampel had been authorized overtime to <br />work on them. Director Johnson replied Mr. Kampel's time <br />is for drafting work, and that he will be working with <br />him and directing him on the project. <br />Councilmember Linke expressed concern with getting locked <br />into the maximum number of hours listed. Director Johnson <br />replied that the contract states them as "up to". Is <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.