1991.07.15 CC Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

City Council meeting of July 15, 1991 Page b Miron made motion, brunotte seconded, that Mr. PLlleo is not required to obtain a Special Use Permit, based on the recommendations of the DNR and the RCWD. VOTING AYE: Brunotte, Jesinski, Miron, Stolt man VOTING NAY: McAllister Motion Carried. JIM LEROUX LETTERS OF MAY 15 1991 AND JUNE 24 1991 At the July 1, 1991 meeting of the Hugo City Council, Councilman McAllister requested that the two letters submitted to the City Council for Jim Leroux: be placed on the agenda for review and response. The letter written by Mr. LeroUN was critical of the manner in which the City Council conducts its public hearings. Specifically, he cited the manner in which the City Council conducted the capital improvements public hearing at the Hugo School in 1988. For those of you who were not in attendance at that meeting, a public improvement hearing was conducted pursuant to Chapter 429 of the public improvement code. The meeting was held in the summer of 1988 at the Hugo Elementary School. Approximately 200 people were in attendance and the hearing toot, appro:;imately three hours. Public testimony was taken for 1 1,`2 hours, and everyone was given an opportunity to speak at this hearing. The staff prepared a presentation explaining the scope of the project, and the meeting was chaired by the Mayor. The city staff and consultants answered technical and financial questions raised by the audience and City Council. With thr exception of the Homestead Ave. portion of the project, which received considerable opposition, the capital improvements received overwhelming support from the audience. At the close of the hearing, each member of the Cita: Council expressed their thinking with regard to the scope of the project and whether to proceed as recommended. After a discussion by the members of the City Council, the Homestead Ave. portion of the project was deleted from the resolution and said resolution ordering the improvement passed on a four -to -one vote of the City Council. The City Administrator stated that the information provided in Mr. Leroux's letter of May 15, 1991, would appear to be totally inconsistent with what actually toot. place at the public hearinq. Mr. Leroux stated that he was lettinq the Council know his feelinqs about how they conducted their- business. Councilman McAllister felt it important that if allegations were made against the Council or Cite; staff, that it was important that it be the "truth" . Councilman Jesinsk.i commented on the inaccuracies in Mr. Lerol{>;'s letter. Mr. Leroux, said he would stand behind the content of his letter, with the exception of the vote. Councilman McAllister noted that Mr. Leroux, was an elected member of the Board of the Anotia Electric Cooperative and asked him a number of questions regarding the staff and operation of the Board. Mr. Leroux: responded regarding staff size and how the board of Anoka Electric operates. Mr. McAllister noted the professional manner in which the AEC'_ agendas are prepared and the amount of staff input that is provided. He noted that he had secured copies of AEC Board Minutes and noted the voting record of Mr. Leroux as a board member- over a two month period. Mr. L.ernu;; responded and questioned the ethics of Mr. McAllister in doing an