My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2006_0313_Packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2006
>
2006_0313_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/12/2014 1:36:40 PM
Creation date
8/26/2009 3:32:39 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
200
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
City Council Regular Meeting — 02/27/06 <br />DRAFT Minutes - Page 10 <br />Council action. Councilmember Pust questioned whether <br />airing the information by April 5, 2006, as proposed, was <br />perhaps premature; but noted that all of the proposed <br />subcommittees would want to review this information, <br />whether or not the Planning Commission saw it first; but <br />again personally opined that compilation of the information <br />was necessary. <br />Councilmember Kough opined that the Comprehensive <br />Plan was important to the City and that the community <br />should be involved early in the process to determine goals <br />and the decision-making process. Councilmember Kough, <br />however, expressed concerns that the goals represent those <br />of the City Council, not a consultant, and the proposed <br />workshop may be premature at this time; but when it <br />happened, the Public Works, Transportation and <br />Environment Commission, as well as the Planning <br />Commission, should be involved, as well as all <br />departments. <br />Klausing moved, Pust seconded, approval of Workshop #3, <br />as identified in the Staff Report dated February 27, 2006, <br />for presentation to the Commission on April 5, 2006, with <br />$2,000 (partial funding) for research and presentations <br />from Roseville's Community Development Department <br />Professional Services line item, as well as continued pro� <br />bono support and contributions from DSU. <br />Councilmember Ihlan spoke in opposition to the motion, <br />reiterating her original comments; and further added her <br />personal opposition to hiring Mr. Shardlow, given her <br />perception of his non-neutrality in the Twin Lakes <br />Stakeholder Task Force, referencing written comments <br />fr�jtt reports related to that process and project suggesting <br />Mr. Shardlow's attempts to exclude those opposing the <br />proposed Twin Lakes redevelopment. <br />Councilmember Pust questioned the information referenced <br />by Councilmember Ihlan; but focused on and spoke in <br />support of the request for Workshop #3 with Mr. Shardlow; <br />the value of the past demographic information; and videa- <br />R <br />t <br />. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.