Laserfiche WebLink
194 <br />3/6/72 <br />A special meeting of the Lino Lakes Village Council was called to order on <br />March 6, 1972, by Mayor Bohjanen. Present were Mrs. Swanson, Mr. Marier, <br />Mr. Bohjanen and Mr. Cardinal. Mr. Jaworski was absent. <br />Mr. Cardinal moved to waive notices for this meeting since it was announced <br />at the last regular Council meeting. Seconded by Mrs. Swanson. Carried <br />unanimously. <br />Mr. Bohjanen explained the purpose of this meeting was to go over the <br />Metropolitan Sewer Board Survey of 1971 questionnaire, fill it in and decide <br />how we are going to come up with monies to pay the Sewer Board billing. <br />Guidelines were requested of the Attorney, Engineer and Mr. Strand as to what <br />should be done. <br />Mrs. Emerton went through Page 1 of the survey, filling in spaces not already <br />filled. She indicated A.2. would be December 31, 1971. B.2. Operational <br />expenses should be zero. There was much discussion concerning Capital under <br />B.2. Money was received from Jandric project on December 10th, although <br />there was no service into their lines in 1971. Ir. Gotwald said he and Mr. <br />L'Allier went down and discussed this $25,713 bill with the sewer board. <br />They felt they shouldn't have been billed and they didn't attempt to pay it <br />because there was no flow. They were still billed out Metro didn't fight it. <br />Although a portion is for flow, we must pay the amount for capacity. It was <br />decided to leave B.2., Capital, at zero also because this was an advance on <br />the total bill. They weren't dumping into the interceptor although eight <br />houses were hooked up locally during December 1971. <br />C.1., Service Charges is zero. <br />C.2., Connection Charges is zero. <br />The Connection charge was set at $500.00. The question was asked if this <br />was a temporary setting or not. The minutes to the December 13th meeting, <br />page 10, paragraph 2, were referred to. It was decided from these that <br />nothing definite was set. This charge was only set arbitrarily and is sub- <br />ject to change. The hook up charge is to defray the cost to the Sewer Board. <br />There will be separate charges for interceptor and lateral hock ups. <br />Mrs. Emerton noted that hook -up funds were kept in an account titled, Debt. <br />Redemption Fund #3. The minutes to the December 14th meeting were referred <br />to. For the record, this $500.00 hook -up fee is no part of the assessment, <br />it is required before giving building permits. Those paying it didn't <br />actually have municipal sewer usuage (or flow) at the time. <br />Mr. Gotwald stated that if there was no use in December this first sheet <br />shouldn't be filled out or you'd be admitting usage. It was therefore <br />decided, after discussion that all totals on page one should be zero. <br />Page 2, Survey of 1972 Budgeted Municipal Sanitary Sewer Expenditures and <br />Revenues. Mr. Gotwald noted that the sewer lines are 99% in and the lift <br />station isn't going to be put in until April. He will phone in the actual <br />cost to this date. He also has the unit breakdown for sewer and water. <br />This form is just asking for sewer costs, so he will phone this in also. It <br />was discussed that this same formula can also be applied to all fiscal <br />engineering, attorney, etc. fees. Under E.2., Capital, this would indicate <br />a bond resolution breakdown. Mr. Gotwald will also phone this into Mrs. <br />Emerton. <br />Mr. Gotwald felt that several things on this form are premature. We don't <br />know what the assessment figure will be or the maintenance costs. The sewer <br />rental charges will be on a quarterly basis for maintenance per year. No one <br />