My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Minutes - Council Work Session - 11/17/2009
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Minutes
>
Council Work Session
>
2009
>
Minutes - Council Work Session - 11/17/2009
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/17/2025 2:27:53 PM
Creation date
1/12/2010 11:17:41 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Council Work Session
Document Date
11/17/2009
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
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).
View images
View plain text
<br />Mayor Ramsey stated this would only work if the City taxed by districts. <br /> <br />Councilmember McGlone agreed with the flat fee. <br /> <br />Councilmember Look believed Council needed to' delay the reconstruction somehow and manage <br />this so 30 years from now a future Council was not facing the same issue. <br /> <br />Councilmember Look recommended the residents fill out a survey if the residents preferred <br />assessments, or a flat fee for road reconstruction. He noted this could be done on the website. <br />He believed the residents had to be warmed up to the road reconstruction concept. <br /> <br />Councilmember Elvig believed there would be a big impact to the residents if the charges were <br />not spread out over time. <br /> <br />Councilmember Look stated he would like to charge for sealcoating and maintenance on the <br />roads, but overlay was different. <br /> <br />City Administrator Ulrich stated the first step was to have a reconstruction program, which the <br />City did not have. . <br /> <br />City Engineer Himmer believed the first step was to get resident input and, while that was going <br />on, staff could evaluate what needed to be done and the cost. <br /> <br />City Administrator Ulrich stated he would prefer to get the costs first and then get the resident's <br />input. <br /> <br />Mayor Ramsey agreed with an annual payment going towards a future cost. <br /> <br />Councilmember Elvig stated there would also be opposition to this from residents who already <br />had assessments on their property due to road reconstruction and now those residents would be <br />paying additional taxes for an assessment they were already paying for. <br /> <br />Mayor Ramsey noted there was also the issue of residents who lived on private streets. <br /> <br />It was Council's consensus for staff to prepare five, ten, and fifteen year plans and the costs <br />involved for all plans and bring the information back to Public Works for review. <br /> <br />A comment was made about all the City streets having a nine-ton restriction. <br /> <br />Public Works Director Olson responded a nine ton road qid not last any longer than a seven ton <br />road. He noted a seven ton road was a good road on the sand. He indicated a nine-ton road <br />would not save anything in the long run. <br /> <br />4) Clarify Intent of Municipal Sewer and Connection Policy <br /> <br />City-Engineer Himmer reviewed the staff report. <br /> <br />City Council Work Session / November 17, 2009 <br />Page 4 of8 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.