Laserfiche WebLink
City Administrator Schroeder explained that it is not even physically possible to bring sewer and <br />water to some areas in the City. For example, a resident on Ermine and 180th called in concerned <br />that they would be getting City sewer and water. That's about four to five miles front the pipe and <br />2,000 households. It will not happen. <br /> <br />Commissioner Anderson suggested maybe we should be looking at other ways of assessing <br />sewers. <br /> <br />Mr. Schroeder stated that people were voting on this amendment because of economics not how <br />many more houses we should have in Ramsey. <br /> <br />Commissioner Mare felt that the vote was for both economics and growth. <br /> <br />Chairperson Steffen stated he did not know if this question will come up again but he felt that the <br />question of the Charter's validity is a more important question. Retroactivity is a miscarriage of <br />justice - it's grossly unfair. The City has not yet decided to contest that issue. He felt it should be <br />contested. If you do not, you contemplate how amendments will be done to this charter. A group <br />of people will attempt to reverse actions and they will get it reversed. He reiterated that the validity <br />of the Charter process is an issue. He felt that the issue of retroactivity is very serious and should <br />be before a court system. <br /> <br />Mr. Schroeder stated that, at the last meeting, one of the residents across the street from City Hall <br />asked the City Council to direct the City Attorney to seek an answer on just that question. She said <br />it's not fair that she has to pay because she was in favor of it. Her neighbors do not have to pay <br />and they are receiving some benefit. Eventually the City Council will have to take a position. <br /> <br />Commissioner Donovan inquired if any calls came in relating to the Ramsey Resident article. <br /> <br />Mr. Schroeder replied that he expected calls, but received none. <br /> <br />Chairperson Steffen stated he had received a call. The questions asked are does it only apply to <br />those opposed. He disagreed that it should, and stated that it needs to be de'At with by the City <br />Attorney. He stated that he took the lead to get a different result. He did not believe any more <br />action will be taken on this question by the Charter Commission. It's in the hands of the City <br />Council. He did not believe that the Charter Commission has the standing to raise the issue of <br />retroactivity but if City Council does not act on that (retroactivity) that it should be brought back to <br />Charter. If people do not agree with City Council they can get the percent of signatures needed and <br />get it Charter amendlnent. <br /> <br />Mr. Schroeder stated that you need a "drop dead" date or no decision would be made. <br /> <br />Chairperson Steffen stated that maybe we will take that up after we see what City Attorney <br />Goodrich's research says. He used a bridge location for an example and stated that the City <br />Council makes a decision on this location. Ten percent of the people do not like the location. They <br />can cause a Charter amendment and overrule the City Council's decisions. The situation across the <br />street (Haubrich Addition) was minor; however, things could get very serious. <br /> <br />Charter Commission/July 18, 1996 <br /> Page 2 of 4 <br /> <br /> <br />