Laserfiche WebLink
<br />SPECIAL CITY COUNTY MEETING - August 1, 2007 <br /> <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />Monday night's meeting he felt Council needed to reconsider in order to take action on this since there <br />were no subsequent changes that needed to be approved. <br /> <br />Mayor Harpstead stated he believed that the new agenda allows it to be reconsidered. <br /> <br />Councilme11lber McClung felt that Robert's Rules of Order says something slightly different. He felt that <br />things would then go through reconsidering votes with a new agenda, when a vote they didn't like was <br />taken and they wanted to bring it back up again. <br /> <br />Finance Director Sue Iverson indicated she talked to Jerry Filla and they checked Robert's Rules of <br />Order and read them very thoroughly. She indicated Mr. Filla said it is a new agenda and that anyone <br />can make a motion and it is not reconsidering, but new. <br /> <br />Mr. McClung asked how this resolution was different than the resolution that failed on Monday night. <br /> <br />Mayor Harpstead stated that the real rule is that within any meeting the same motion cannot be <br />considered twice, and that idea was 100 percent. <br /> <br />Finance Director Sue Iverson indicated Jerry Filla confirmed this. <br /> <br />Mayor Harpstead stated that otherwise there is the potential that an outgoing Council could make a <br />motion and then an incoming Council couldn't act on it. He stated you have to enable a new body to <br />entertain a new motion even if it's identical. He asked Mr. McClung if his primary concern was about <br />not having time to review the material. <br /> <br />Councilmember McClung confirmed this. <br /> <br />Mayor Harpstead indicated that he wanted to discuss the paragraph on the bottom of page 2 (Item E) <br />where it stated that the accompanying plans submitted by the grantee must conform with Metropolitan <br />System Plans of the Council. Alternatively, the Comprehensive Plan is deemed to comply with this <br />condition if the Council concludes a review that the plan is not likely to have a substantial impact on or <br />contain a substantial departure from Metropolitan System's Plan and allows the plan to go into effect <br />without plan modification. He indicated that, in other words, Council could corne up with a plan that is <br />not consistent with it, but to make sure they sell it. He stated that the only area in the System Plan that <br />seemed to have anything inconsistent with their expectation was the 2030 population number of 22,000. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holden indicated she asked for verification on the number of households and population <br />and wanted to verifY that Mayor Harpstead indicated the whole foundation of this Comprehensive Plan is <br />based on those numbers. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Barton indicated that the Comprehensive Plan covers a period of 10 <br />years and the system statement goes out to 2030. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holmes questioned why they would not change the numbers when they had requested it. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Barton indicated the problem was that when this was distributed in <br />September of 2005, there was only a brief period in which you could request a change, but since there <br />was no City Planner or Community Development Director on staff at that time, the window to request the <br />change closed. She indicated that she and City Planner James Lenhoff met with Metropolitan Council <br />staff and again recently to discuss the numbers. She stated the Metropolitan Council is not concerned <br />that the numbers are lower than what they are proj ecting as long as they are not higher. <br /> <br />