My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council - 08/09/2010
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council
>
2010
>
Agenda - Council - 08/09/2010
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/18/2025 2:43:11 PM
Creation date
8/5/2010 3:20:04 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
08/09/2010
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
179
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 />Councilmember Elvig said we used to escrow for the first sealcoat to which Mr. Olson reported <br />we still do that. <br /> <br />Councilmember Elvig wondered how we could get an endowment like Minnetonka. <br /> <br />City Administrator Ulrich commented that cities used to be able to do that but the courts made <br />that go away. <br /> <br />Councilmember Wise commented on park fees and asked instead of having that go to parks - set <br />a percentage (25% or so) and put in a fund to start a maintenance fund for parks - then that <br />amount will grow. <br /> <br />Finance Officer Lund stated you cannot use park dedication fees for park maintenance. <br /> <br />Councilmember Dehen suggested taking less percentage for park dedication and take fees for <br />other things. <br /> <br />Councilmember Elvig wondered if the storm water management fees could be used for roads and <br />suggested maybe if we add curb we could use those fees. <br /> <br />Mr. Ulrich stated we could try to expand on these types of funds. <br /> <br />Mayor Ramsey asked if we are trying to lean in one direction here or just throwing around ideas. <br />He stated that 50% of our City wants to be rural - 50% is more dense and they like that. If you <br />are going to be dense there should be some benefit for these people. He stated he is in favor of <br />keeping assessments, as the fairest way is to do assessments. <br /> <br />Councilmember Look stated that there is a lot of talk about transportation taxing districts - we do <br />have the State's authority to do that. The issue becomes that of general fund taxation - the <br />dollars would be tied to our looming road problems. He asked what it costs annually and what is <br />the shortfall. <br /> <br />Mr. Olson stated we have 178 miles of roads. <br /> <br />Councilmember Look stated that this economic storm as we see it is this year - in 2012, we may <br />be coming out of it. In two to three years - what's the ramifications to the general fund to fix <br />roads that have to be fixed. What roads in the next three years absolutely have to be replaced - <br />look at the ramifications of these expenditures. <br /> <br />Mr. Olson stated that our maintenance costs continue to rise. We will "squeeze" but each year <br />we need more. <br /> <br />Councilmember Look stated he is in favor of assessing additional maintenance to the property <br />owner if they overrode the assessment. <br /> <br />City Council Work Session - June 29, 2010 <br />Page 7 of 10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.