CC_Minutes_2013_0325 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday,March 25,2013 Page 21 to Verizon; and in entering into that obligation, it was already in place for all oth- er providers as well as for recreational users. Again, Mr. Miller advised that the Board was not attempting to limit that access,but simply wanted it formalized. Councilmember McGehee stated that, one thing she had found most distressing historically, was the vagueness of City contracts. With Mr. Miller stating that the City had an obligation to users and park access without having a formal right to use it beyond its historical use, Councilmember McGehee opined that this created a problem for her. While the City Council can approve this, Councilmember McGehee opined that the City be more diligent in its attention to detail for con- tracts to actually protect what the City was doing. From her perspective, Coun- cilmember McGehee opined that it would be damaging to have to give up that route and have a southern access, since there were no other options; and reiterated the need for the City to be more aggressive in getting these things done and use more care in the future. In all fairness, Mayor Roe opined that there were such issues in any organization, many not within the control of thecurrent City staff or city council members, and that they were being rectified now. Mayor Roe noted that, if the access agreement was not approved, the City would experience a problem with all users. Mr. Miller noted that the City had committed to the tower construction years ago; and prior to being developed into today's park use. Councilmember Willmus concurred, noting that revenue from the tower leases were what had made that park possible. Mr. Miller concurred; and noted that there had been no apparent problem until Verizon had a discussion with the St. Paul Water Board and the Board found no previous pathway agreements had been put in place, with the "access to tower" language inadvertently left out. At the request of Councilmember Laliberte, Mr. Miller advised that addressed the lease revenue uses and if there would be any cost for the use agreement with St. Paul Water, with direction to staff from the Parks & Recreation Commission on their preferences and those items needing additional work. Mr. Miller advised that the Commission did not formally adopt those items, but provided their con- ceptual preferences. Mr. Miller reiterated that the Variance Board approval was unanimous since there were only two (2) members on that particular Board. Mr. Miller noted that there would be no cost for the access agreement with St. Paul Water. Mr. Miller advised that revenues derived from tower rentals were directed to the City's IT function and intentionally designed to make sure those rentals provided