Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, February 25, 2008 <br />7:00 o’clock p.m. <br />___________________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />*11. LIQUIDATION OF COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER VEHICLE <br /> <br />McMillan moved, Rahn seconded, to approve the sale of a 2001 Ford F-150, VIN <br />#2FTX18L61CA20352, through a sealed bid process, with the minimum bid being $4,500.00. <br />VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. <br /> <br />CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT <br /> <br />Attorney Mattick noted a letter has been received from MnDOT regarding the classification of Orono’s <br />roads and that the City Administrator has drafted a letter in response to that. Mattick suggested the City <br />Council have one more meeting with representatives of MnDOT to see exactly where they stand on this <br />issue and whether it can be resolved in some fashion prior to sending any letter. <br /> <br />Mattick stated it is his understanding the Screening Board meets May 28th or 29th, and suggested the <br />City Council decide who should attend the meeting. Mattick suggested the Mayor attend along with at <br />least one other council member. <br /> <br />Mattick stated following his review of the materials concerning this issue, it is his impression that <br />MnDOT has focused on the issue relating to the calculation of city streets and the fact that some of the <br />City’s roads are termed private roads. Mattick noted there is no definition of city streets in the statutes <br />and that he has been unable to find any case law dealing with the definition of a city street as it relates to <br />this situation. Mattick noted MnDOT is required by the applicable statute to produce rules on how to <br />govern the process, and within those rules is a definition on city streets. The rule says any street which <br />is under the City’s jurisdiction is considered a city street. Mattick noted the City has retained <br />jurisdiction over all of their private roads within their easement documents and that in his opinion this <br />issue needs to be discussed further. <br /> <br />Murphy asked which MnDOT representatives Mattick is suggesting the City meet with. <br /> <br />Mattick stated the primary person the City has been discussing this issue with is Julie Skallman but that <br />she is not the ultimate decider of the issue. <br /> <br />Murphy stated he is in favor of sitting down with MnDOT before sending another letter but that there <br />are a large number of people at MnDOT who report directly to the Commissioner and only a handful of <br />people that actually make the policies. Murphy indicated he has previously discussed this issue with <br />Senator Gen Olson and that he would recommend the City develop a list of bullet points of what has <br />transpired and then discuss this issue thoroughly with Senator Olson. <br /> <br />White indicated he is in favor of meeting with MnDOT and also with discussing the issue with Senator <br />Olson. <br /> <br />Moorse noted the City is not aware of when the special subcommittee is meeting and they will need to <br />find out that information. <br /> <br />Murphy stated the definition of city streets and how it relates to funding should also be discussed. <br /> <br />Bremer indicated she also is in agreement with the recommendation of Attorney Mattick. <br /> <br /> <br />PAGE 11 of 12 <br />Item #02 - CC Agenda - 03/10/08 <br />Approval of Coucil Minutes 02/25/08 [Page 11 of 12]