CC_Minutes_2011_0912 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, September 12,2011 Page 37 ture was in place to service that development; with the City Council retaining the right to deny any application if infrastructure was found to be inadequate, and providing a basis for their denial. Mr. Bartholdi advised that, because the AUAR implied a mandate that certain mitigating factors had to be implemented, the in- tent of the ordinance was to implement development under a fair and equitable method for all. City Attorney Bartholdi addressed "other such arrangements" or alternatives ad- dressed in the ordinance language, including but not limited to bonding; Minneso- ta State Statutes, Chapter 429 and 444; and under certain circumstances, under Chapter 462.358 (subdivision statute); that all provide the City authority to have an involuntary Development Agreement to pay for reasonable costs of what is generated by a project. Mayor Roe stated that, as a government agency, the City Council was held to the expectation that they would be fair and reasonable, and perform to a higher stan- dard than being alleged by Mr. Rancone. Mr. Rancone expressed his hope that the City Council, and future City Councils from a political standpoint, were committed to that concept, and would stand be- hind it, thereby alleviating his concern. c. Discuss 2011 City Manager Goals Mayor Roe noted the submitted document developed by Councilmember Pust and thanked her for her work. At the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Malinen advised that he had not yet reviewed the goals with Department Heads to determine completion dates; but would do so at their staff meeting the following day. For the benefit of the public, Councilmember Pust tracked how the process had evolved to-date; and thanked her colleagues for their input. Councilmember Pust advised that the City Council had held a planning session in February of 2011 with City Councilmembers and staff; and at that session, a list of fifty-seven (57) priority items were identified to work on this year. Rather than thinking up new goals for the City Manager's evaluation, Councilmember Pust advised that she had used that priority list other than those items specific to the City Council; and inserted categories for use in evaluating the City Manager, and incorporating her thoughts for outcome measurements. Councilmember Pust sought further input from individual Councilmembers: any needing eliminated or any additions they might have. Councilmember Pust noted the timing or temporal scope of this document, and with it being September of 2011 already; opined that it didn't make sense to eva- luate City Manager Malinen within three (3) months of developing the goals; and