CC_Minutes_2008_1027 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, October 27, 2008 Page 13 Councilmember Willmus, in response to Ms. Kough, noted the subsequent Attor- ney General opinion that the appointee would need to serve out the term until January of 2009, or the City Council would need to go through another appoint- ment process. Councilmember Willmus, in response to Councilmember Ihlan and her opinion that an appointee was not part of the democratic process, made reference to the appointment of Mr. Barkley to serve out the term of the deceased Senator Wellstone, and expressed disappointment that Councilmember Ihlan felt the need to proceed in the direction she was pursuing. Councilmember Willmus opined that it was his impression of the democratic process that it behooved the City Council to do what was in the best interest of the City of Roseville, and to move forward. Councilmember Willmus recognized Councilmember Ihlan's issues with the proposed Comprehensive Plan, however, opined that her approach was unfortunate. Councilmember Willmus noted the Steering Committee process; and opined that what former Councilmember Kough lived by was to have the best in- terest of Roseville in sight; and opined that he wasn't sure if Councilmember Ih- lan actions were indicative of that interest. Councilmember Roe sought clarification from staff as the process in place, and actual final approval by the City Council, following adjacent jurisdiction review and pending Metropolitan Council review and return of the document for final City Council approval. Community Development Director Patrick Trudgeon clarified that a second hear- ing before the Planning Commission and the City Council would be held in De- cember, with the plan then going forward to the Metropolitan Council; and fol- lowing their review, the City would formally adopt and ratify the Comprehensive Plan. Councilmember Roe opined that the Metropolitan Council had anticipated this process for submission during an election year; and potential final votes with a changing Council climate and personnel, and the need fora 4/5 vote depending on whether substantial changes were supported by sufficient votes. Discussion included past experiences and examples for review and approval and subsequent events (i.e. City of Lake Elmo; City of Ramsey); and case by case ap- provals. Councilmember Roe opined that he was inclined to seek the extension, based solely on whether the adjoining jurisdictions would meet their review deadline; however not under the guise that it would not precede to the Metropolitan Council by year-end if those reviews were completed. Councilmember Roe expressed his hope that a 4/5 or better yet, unanimous approval was possible.