Laserfiche WebLink
The Finance Committee asked that more information be brought back to them at a subsequent <br />meeting. <br /> <br />Case #2: Authorize Advertisement for Bids for Skid Steer Loader <br /> <br />Finance Officer Hart reported that included in the 1997 adopted General Fund Budget is $27,000 <br />for the purchase of a skid steer loader. This is an addition to the equipment pool and would be <br />utilized in various ways by both the street and the park departments. Because of the dollar <br />amount, state bidding laws required a sealed bid process. Public Works Supervisor Mevissen <br />prepared the specifications for the loader. She noted the alternative bids included for potential <br />future outlay for 1998, 1999, and so on. Ms. Hart called attention to the pending legislation <br />regarding non-taxability of capital equipment purchases, and suggested that the final <br />award/purchase may be delayed to take advantage of possibly reducing the cost by 6.5%. <br /> <br />Motion by Mayor Gamec and seconded by Councilmember Beyer to recommend Council adopt a <br />resolution authorizing advertisement of bids for a skid steer loader. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Gamec, Councilmembers Beyer, Beahen, Haas Steffen and <br />Zimmerman. Voting No: None. <br /> <br />Case #3: Consider Amending Proposed Towers Ordinance <br /> <br />Community Development Intern Skoog stated that if the Finance Committee proposes significant <br />changes to the proposed towers ordinance, another public hearing would have to be held. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec pointed out that it's questionable whether or not the City can regulate if towers <br />can only be placed on City property or not. We require a conditional use permit to locate a tower <br />and if we regulate that it can only be placed on City property, would we still require a CUP? <br /> <br />Mr. Skoog suggested that a CUP would only be required for location on private property - we <br />could exempt the CUP process if the tower is located on public land. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich suggested that a CUP would be required for location on either. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec inquired if the City could be held liable for anything if the tower was placed on <br />private property. <br /> <br />Mr. Goodrich responded no. <br /> <br />Tom Alexander, APT, stated he has been working with City staff on this proposed towers <br />ordinance. They have reviewed creating an incentive to place towers on City property and had <br />no reason to think an incentive could not be created. He felt that the CLIP shouldn't be required <br />and added that some cities do not want towers on their property so they have created an incentive <br />for businesses to allow these towers on their property. <br /> <br />Finance Committee/May 27, 1997 <br /> Page 2 of 5 <br /> <br /> <br />