My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2005_0509_Packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2005
>
2005_0509_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/12/2014 11:10:10 AM
Creation date
9/14/2009 10:01:52 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Agenda/Packets
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
235
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 — 04/25/OS <br />DRAFT Minutes - Page 26 <br />Mr. Casserly opined he was not in disagreement with the intent <br />of the friendly amendment; and that intent had been attempted to <br />be addressed on page 10 of the revised Term Sheet. <br />After further discussion, it was Council consensus that the <br />proposed friendly amendment exclude "null and void" language <br />in the last sentence, reading: <br />"If the City and Rottlund fail to �each ag�eement on a <br />Redevelopment Cont�act, this Te�m Sheet shall c�eate no <br />fu�the� legal obligations between the pa�ties. " <br />Klausing seconded the friendly amendment. <br />Roll Call [Amendment] <br />Ayes: Ihlan, Maschka, Schroeder, Kough and Klausing. <br />Nays: None. <br />Councilmember Kough read a position statement, summarizing <br />his opposition to the proposed project, concluding by opining <br />that he could not support the project until the community <br />supported it. <br />Councilmember Ihlan echoed Councilmember Kou�h's <br />statement; further opining her appreciation of the public <br />comment received previously, as well as tonight, suggesting the <br />City Council listen to the wisdom and thoughts of their <br />constituency; further opined the Council's inconsistency in <br />accepting a policy for subsidizing private development with <br />public funds; the lack of public benefit realized; unknown costs <br />for environmental clean up; no protection of Langton Lake Park; <br />increased public service requirements; and substantial risks to the <br />City with pending lawsuits. Councilmember Ihlan reiterated her <br />position related to the project and its various components and her <br />opposition to the project and to the proposedresolution. <br />Councilmember Schroeder reviewed the process and Council's <br />consideration of the project even prior to 2003, opining the need <br />to redevelop this area in the most efficient and economical <br />manner possible, having given consideration to alternative <br />methods. Councilmember Schroeder expressed appreciation to <br />staff for their persistent research and information-gathering <br />during the process. Councilmember Schroeder further opined <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.