Laserfiche WebLink
5. Review List of "Future Topics for Discussion" <br />Council received a calendaz with work session dates to the end of the year as well as future <br />topics listed. The list addresses the level of City Council goals as presented at the strategic <br />planning session in the beginning of the year. <br />Councilmember Dehen inquired why we are not addressing assessment for roads. That has been <br />a City Council priority for some time now and that will affect the budget - it should be brought <br />back for discussion. <br />Councilmember Elvig stated that with regard to road maintenance, we would have to find a way <br />to pay for it if we are not assessing - we may have to create a district for that if we are allowed to <br />do so. <br />Councilmember McGlone stated he would like to add some things. He would like an analysis <br />done of the number of parks within the City of Ramsey. He would like to find a way to re- <br />channel some of these park funds and put them into parks like Central Park, etc. or for <br />connecting trails instead of having little neighborhood parks all over the place. <br />Councilmember Elvig responded that the policy in the past has been that developers had the <br />option to either pazk dedication funds or land to develop with that community. Most found the <br />community park was better for selling. The problem is, it's usually dedicated as a park and the <br />property can't be sold for something other. <br />Councilmember McGlone asked if the City Attorney could look into if any of these park <br />properties could be re-designated. He commented that a lot of money is spent on these parks that <br />are underutilized when we could re-funnel that money and make better parks. <br />Consensus of the Council was to have the Attorney look into Councilmember McGlone's <br />suggestion. <br />Councilmember McGlone added that the City has 51 pazks - we do not need any more unless <br />they are made better and connected. <br />Consensus was to change the policy we have to park dedication fees only if we can use the <br />money toward other parks. <br />Councilmember Dehen relayed a story of a resident at the dog park whose puppy was attacked <br />and the owner of the attacking dog did nothing about it. He stated he would like to see more <br />signage about not allowing aggressive dogs in the dog pazk and that there be more "bite" in our <br />ordinance re dangerous dogs. <br />Consensus was to review the potentially dangerous dog portion of Code. <br />City Council Work Session -May 4, 2010 <br />Page 12 of 13 <br />