My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2005-01-25_PWETC_AgendaPacket
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Agendas and Packets
>
200x
>
2005
>
2005-01-25_PWETC_AgendaPacket
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/22/2010 3:51:39 PM
Creation date
6/21/2005 11:00:34 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Agenda/Packet
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
1/25/2005
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.
/
26
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
<br />had said they were going after local advertisers. She said co-cxistence <br />wouldn't help in selling adveliising because you sell the market not just a <br />street corner. <br /> <br />Member Willenbring asked when ads were changed. Connie Barry said <br />they rotate ads every four weeks. <br /> <br />Member Marasteanu said he thinks the City should go with only one <br />company; the market isn't large enough to split. Member Rossini agreed <br />and said he didn't think co-existence would work. <br /> <br />Member Wilke asked for further clarification on the 8% being offered to <br />the City. Schwartz said that is what the eompanies were offering. <br />Member Wilke asked if they could request that RFP's be submitted to the <br />City and then take the best offer. Schwmiz said there has been so mueh <br />work done on this already, it probably wasn't a good idea to change course <br />at this point. <br /> <br />Schwartz said the only unanswered question seems to be about the non- <br />exclusive aspect of the ordinance. Can the City just accept one offer and <br />turn down others without any legal implications. <br /> <br />Member Willenbring said he wanted to go with co-existence. <br /> <br />Member Willenbring moved that a recommendation be made to the City <br />Council for co-existence of bus shelter companies. Member Wilke <br />seconded. <br /> <br />Ayes: I <br />Nays: 3 <br />Motion denied <br /> <br />Members Marasteanu and Rossini both reiterated their position of only <br />usmg one company. <br /> <br />Member Wilke moved to recommend to the City Council that they enter <br />into a franchise agreement with Transtop. Member Rossini seconded. <br /> <br />Ayes: 3 <br />Nays: 1 <br />Motion carried <br /> <br />Member Wilke asked Schwartz to make sure the Council knows how the <br />Commission agonized over this decision. <br /> <br />7. Water Service Ownership Recommendation (Continued) <br /> <br />This item was moved to the January meeting. <br /> <br />Page 4 of5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.