Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br /> • C=TY OF S T _ ANTHONY <br /> C=TY COUN C= L <br /> EXE C UT 2 VE S E S S 2 ON M=NUTE S <br /> APR 2 L 1 1 , 3- 989 <br /> 1 The Executive Session was convened at 9:49 P.M. with Mayor Sundland and <br /> 2 Councilmembers Marks, Ranallo, Enrooth, and Makowske all present. <br /> 3 The work session had been requested by City Manager David Childs, who <br /> 4 sought Council direction on the following: <br /> 5 Negotiations with Park Board About Gross Golf Course Assessments <br /> 6 Mr. Childs reported the parties were split 50/50 on the amount the Park <br /> 7 Board would be willing to pay. He said if the City went along with that <br /> 8 split, he was certain there would be acknowledgment in the contract that <br /> 9 even though the City had no real right to prohibit truck traffic in that <br /> 10 area, the City would continue to try to keep trucks off the boulevard. <br /> 11 He reported the Park Board was adamant about nullifying the original <br /> 12 agreement and the City Attorney perceived there was little chance of <br /> 13 achieving that and thought if the City split the assessment with the <br /> 0 6 4 Park Board they'd be getting $27,000 .00 more than they would have <br /> without making the attempt, and it would cost between $10,000.00 and <br /> $15 ,000. 00 to go to court to get the whole assessment. There's also <br /> 17 a chance the .judge would rule against the City or award the Park Board <br /> 18 part of the value even if he ruled against the agreement.. There was <br /> 19 agreement that the precedent for the Park Board paying only half of the <br /> 20 assessment against their property would beset for future disagreements <br /> 21 between the parties 20 or 30 years down the road. It was also agreed <br /> 22 that any attempt to assess the golf course for 100% of the costs to <br /> 23 seal coat the years later, if the City changes its ordinance to assess <br /> 24 all property owners for a shore of those costs would also be perceived <br /> 25 by the Park Board as an attempt to nullify the original agreement with <br /> 26 the City. If the City seal coats the Boulevard in 5 years, the general <br /> 27 consensus was that even though the Park Board is billed for the full <br /> 28 amount of its share of the costs, they would probably protest paying <br /> 29 any more than half. <br /> 30 Council Direction <br /> 31 Staff to proceed to draw up the documents agreeing to split 50/50the <br /> 32 assessments with the Park Board. <br /> 33 Marlene Tessier Case <br /> 34 The City's adjustor perceives some percentage of liability for the City <br /> 5 and there are already $10,000.00 in medical costs involved which the <br /> 1 <br />