Laserfiche WebLink
CITY OF GEM LAKE <br />RESOLUTION NO.2006-33 <br />14 September 2006 <br />A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTIONS NO. 1993-07 AND NO. 2004-06 <br />REGARDING GEM LAKE'S PARTICIPATION IN RAMSEY COUNTY <br />FUNCTIONAL CONSOLIDATION OF ROADWAYS BY ACCEPTING <br />CERTAIN PORTIONS OF THE PROPOSED ROADWAYS AND AMENDING <br />THE CONDITIONS OF SUCH ACCEPTANCE. <br />WHEREAS, The 1991 Minnesota Legislature established a Ramsey County Local Government Services Study Commission <br />to "report on the advantages and disadvantages of sharing, cooperating, restructuring, or consolidating..." activities in areas <br />of public service including public works; and <br />WHEREAS, the Gem Lake City Council did by means of Resolution No. 1993-07 agree to accept ownership of certain <br />Ramsey County roadways in the City of Gem Lake subject to certain conditions: and <br />WHEREAS, The Functional Consolidation Plan provides for reclassification of roadways and corresponding changes in <br />jurisdiction including the transfer of local and State Aid roadways between the County and municipalities; and <br />WHEREAS, Scheuneman Road (County Road #147) from County Road E (Ramsey County Road #15) north to Trunk <br />Highway 61, located in the City of Gem Lake, is presently under the jurisdiction of Ramsey County as a County Road; and <br />WHEREAS, Hoffman Road West (County Road #146) from Trunk Highway 61 north to County Road E (Ramsey County <br />Road #15), located in the City of Gem Lake, is presently under the jurisdiction of Ramsey County as a County Road; and <br />WHEREAS, These roadways have been determined to serve a local function only; and <br />WHEREAS, Revocation of "County Road" status may be accomplished by resolution of the Ramsey County Board of <br />Commissioners pursuant to Minnesota Statutes § 163.11; and <br />WHEREAS, It appears to the City Council of the City of Gem Lake that the streets hereinafter described upon turnback from <br />Ramsey County should be designated a City Streets under the provisions of Minnesota Law; and <br />WHEREAS, The Functional Consolidation Plan stipulates that Ramsey County shall improve the roadway to acceptable <br />levels prior to transferring jurisdiction over roadway segments from Ramsey County to municipalities, and the Ramsey <br />County Capital Improvement Program provides funding for these improvements; and <br />WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes §383A.16 requires that Ramsey County shall, before transferring jurisdiction over roadway <br />segments, improve each highway to a condition consistent with a Ramsey County pavement management score of ninety; and <br />WHEREAS, The City of Gem Lake desires to reconstruct both Scheuneman and Hoffman Road West as described herein <br />and fund the reconstruction project with Municipal sources, and up to $70,126 from Capital Improvement Funds for Ramsey <br />County Roadway Consolidation; and <br />WHEREAS, The City of Gem Lake has agreed that by accepting this jurisdictional transfer and receipt of up to $70,126 <br />collectively for the reconstruction of these segments of Scheuneman Road and Hoffman Road West from Capital <br />Improvement Funds for Ramsey County Roadway Consolidation that Ramsey County has fully discharged its obligations to <br />the City arising under Minnesota Statutes §§163.11 and 383A.16 and the Functional Consolidation Plan, and that it has no <br />expectation of funding of the ongoing maintenance of this segment by Ramsey County; Now, Therefore, Be It <br />RESOLVED, The City of Gem Lake does hereby concur with the Ramsey County Board of Commissioners revoking the <br />"County Road" status of Scheuneman Road (County Road #147) from County Road E (Ramsey County Road #15) north to <br />Trunk Highway 61 and Hoffman Road West (County Road #146) from Trunk Highway 61 north to County Road E (Ramsey <br />County Road #15), and accepts transfer of jurisdiction over these roadways to the City of Gem Lake, effective after the <br />Ramsey County Office of Budgeting and Accounting has encumbered the funds necessary to fund this reconstruction project <br />up to $70,126; and Be It Further <br />Page 3 of 8 <br />