My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Minutes - Council Work Session - 01/24/2012
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Minutes
>
Council Work Session
>
2012
>
Minutes - Council Work Session - 01/24/2012
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/14/2025 12:16:27 PM
Creation date
3/20/2012 2:49:46 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Council Work Session
Document Date
01/24/2012
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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
City is thinking about not charging for sealcoats and overlays, residents will counter petition <br />every project. <br />Councilmember Eldig agreed there will be a lot of pushback so there should be consensus with <br />the Council on what it supports. <br />Mayor Ramsey asked the Council whether there was consensus to move forward with a franchise <br />fee plus 50% assessment on reconstruct projects. <br />Councilmember McGlone stated he wants to go all the way. <br />Mayor Ramsey stated he supports support 50 %. <br />Councilmember Wise slated he supports a franchise fee only and no assessments. <br />Councilmember Strommen stated she supports a mixed proposal to provide balance. <br />Councilmember Tossey stated he agrees with Mayor Ramsey that this is a way to subvert the <br />Charter, so he supported a mix. <br />Councilmember McGlone stated the Council had already approached the Charter Commission to <br />change the petition levels but the Commission would not consider it. He stated he wants to solve <br />a problem that is looming over this Council and residents forever. Councilmember McGlone <br />pointed out that everybody has to pay the City's one -half of the assessment anyway. <br />Councilmember Backous stated he supports all franchise fee with no assessment because the <br />assessment process is inefficient. He thought the City could start with a franchise fee that is <br />lower than $28 /month. <br />Councilmember Tossey stated if there is only a franchise fee, then he would support $14 /month <br />and adjust it downward as the number of customers increase. He asked if the project can be <br />bonded based on that revenue stream. <br />City Administrator Ulrich stated he does not think that is an option but will research that issue. <br />Councilmember Elvig noted that whether paying one -half or the whole assessment, each resident <br />will get clipped at some point and have to pay its portion. He stated an assessment would add a <br />tremendous burden on people now, and he thinks there will be pushback and counter petitioning. <br />He favored a franchise fee at $14 /month in addition to a funding mechanism to help pool funds <br />to eliminate a deficit. <br />Councilmember Strommen explained her concern about all franchise fees is that the rate may not <br />be high enough to fund everything and result in "kicking the can" or having to increase the fee. <br />She stated she could support the full franchise fee, if needed, but did not want to "kick the can" <br />down the road. Councilmember Strommen stated the problem is here and the Council needs to <br />face it now and solve it. She noted the fee can be lowered if other funding is found. <br />City Council Work Session / January 24, 2012 <br />Page 7 of 9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.