Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View City Council 4 October 8, 1984 <br />Regular Meeting __'' Page Three <br />--------------------------------------------------------------- <br />ram ' Planning Commission's rezonings. <br />Attorney Meyers asked the Council to specify what <br />findings were being made to support the denial of <br />the motion. The Council replied Resolution No. <br />123-84 of the Planning Commission. <br />Mayor McCarty read a memo he had presented to the <br />Council earlier in the evening regarding proposed <br />Ordinance 383, and asked that it become part of <br />the minutes. <br />Motion/Second: McCarty/Doty to deny Ordinance No. <br />an uture Councils may take up at the proper <br />time. <br />2 ayes 3 nays <br />Councilmembers Linke, Blanchard and Hankner voted <br />against the motion. <br />There was considerable discussion among the Council <br />members, with accusations being made that this item <br />was a political issue, and accusations regarding <br />party endorsements. <br />Councilmember Hankner stated that many months ago <br />the Council had discussed this item at an agenda <br />session, and she had proposed a task force to <br />review it, with four members of the Council stating <br />they could agree to that. She explained a search <br />had begun for a task force, but it became too late <br />in the budget process to set one up. She reviewed <br />the proposed increase, stating it is about average <br />of cities the same size in the metro area, and the <br />salary increases were proposed by for Staff/ met. <br />eeunellmembere: She also pointed out there had been <br />no increase in the Council salaries since 1972 and <br />for the amount of work the Council puts in she felt <br />this was fair. <br />Councilmember Blanchard stated she felt now was the <br />time to vote on it, and she was in favor of having <br />the first reading of the ordinance. <br />Mayor McCarty stated he felt if an increase in <br />compensation was in order for the Council, they <br />should take it on a biannual basis and give the <br />residents the opportunity to approve it at the <br />ballot box. <br />i <br />There was considerable discussion among the <br />Council regarding rzagAY-4iRa whether a special <br />election would fulfill the requirement for <br />the ordinance to go into effect. <br />9. 1st Reading <br />of Ordinance <br />No. 383 <br />Motion Failed <br />