My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2016-03-22_PWETC_AgendaPacket
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Agendas and Packets
>
201x
>
2016
>
2016-03-22_PWETC_AgendaPacket
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/17/2016 3:26:28 PM
Creation date
3/17/2016 3:21:04 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Agenda/Packet
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
3/22/2016
Commission/Committee - Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
65
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
804 Member Cihacek opined that his concern was that in not having that piece of the <br />805 information and process, it wasn't allowing him to do his job of engagement and <br />806 information processing as part of his decision-making on the PEWTC and <br />807 subsequent recommendation to the City Council. <br />808 <br />809 Chair Stenlund noted that it was up to the PWETC majority. <br />810 <br />811 Member Cihacek suggested a subcommittee of the PWETC review the proposals. <br />812 <br />813 If the majority decided to pursue this option, Chair lund advised that he <br />814 would support the full PWETC reviewing the prop versus a subcommittee. <br />815 <br />816 Members Thurnau, Seigler and Heimerl agreed that fthe PWETC was to be <br />817 involved in reviewing the proposals that it be done by the entire PWETC as a full <br />818 commission. <br />819 Ar <br />820 Member Cihacek reiterated that he was happy to let the City Council make a <br />821 determination as to whether or not the PWETC should be involved or if it should <br />822 be left at the discretion o aff. Member Cihacek opined that the PWTC didn't <br />823 need to make that decision, but his interest was in presenting the argutent to the <br />824 City Council, and let the public ariv City Council speak to it; with staff advising <br />825 the commission of the City Counci Sequent decision. <br />826 <br />827 Member 'gler d that staff should perform the review; reiterating that he <br />828 didn't w S to be involved as a group or individually; and agreed that staff should <br />829 be left alone t do their <br />830 TV <br />831 Motio <br />832 Member i acek moved, Member Wozniak seconded, recommending to the City Council <br />833 that they accept the RFP as revised. <br />834 <br />835 Ayes: <br />836 Nays:0 <br />837 Motion car <br />838 <br />839 7. Review arc)2016 eeting <br />840 • Mr. Culver 21WETC <br />d that the Lake Owasso private drive storm sewer project <br />841 was an item needed to address next month, with the potential for <br />842 a possible assessment and recommendation of the PWETC to the City Council <br />843 accordingly. <br />844 • Community Solar (tentatively scheduled) <br />845 <br />846 However, Mr. Culver suggested a field trip in honor of Chair Stenlund's last meeting, <br />847 including a tour of the Upper Villa Re-Use System and Corpus Christi Basin, and if time <br />848 allowed, possibly another stormwater-related project: the St. Croix Lift Station <br />849 Rehabilitation. <br />Page 19 of 20 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.