CCP 01-29-2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e . . ARDEN HILLS SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 2,2001 D 5 l~i'"T""-T // -;, ; ';.;,.;;,~ I i"<<'t.t" .Ii notify each member to advise them of their appointment/reappointment. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). ADMINISTRATOR COMMENTS City Administrator Lynch noted the QuitClaim Deed that is ready for signature. Upon return from Washington, D.C., the deed will be recorded. He advised that the deed had been reviewed by City Attorney Filla and no problems were detected. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Grant announced the first Board meeting of the Ramsey County League of Local Government on Friday, January 5,2001, at the AMM building. Councilmember Larson commented on the information from Osseo regarding the Local Oovermnent Aid (LOA) increase and asked about the intent to pursue a change in LOA. Mr. Lynch stated this information was received from Osseo at the request of the Chair of Operations and Finance Committee and is being provided to the Council to aid in their decision making process. He advised that Representative Krinke, Senator Reiter, and Operations and Finance Committee members are expected to be in attendance at the January 16, 2001 W orksession. Councilmember Larson stated he believes it would be worthwhile to proceed if the City can marshal similar arguments and rationale. Discussion occurred regarding the level of HAC A and LOA received by Arden Hills and other communities that have had HACA and LOA levels adjusted. Councilmember Rem reported the Web Site Development Task Force final report will be available for the January 8, 2001 Council meeting. With regard to 2001 City appointments, Councilmember Rem stated she would attend the Restoration Advisory Board/TCAAP meetings if it doesn't conflict with Council meetings. Councilmember Rem reported that everyone is quite pleased with the Valentine Park rink and an open skating event will be held on Sunday, January 7, 2001 with refreshments provided. Councilmember Rem asked about the sump inspections. Mr. Post stated this was an attractive inspection program because it was a cost effective method at an incremental cost of $8 per inspection. However, the City received mixed results since the subcontractor had both good quality and poor quality crews doing the inspections. He advised that staff met with the City's contractor, and a compromise was reached to pay one-half of the inspection bill. Mr. Post stated the inspection program did not turn out the way it was envisioned due to the subcontractor's performance.