My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 2016 08 16
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
2016 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 2016 08 16
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/19/2022 3:13:39 PM
Creation date
9/7/2016 8:23:19 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Original Hardcopy Storage
9C1
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 2016 08 16
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
City Council <br />Meeting Minutes <br />August 16, 2016 <br />Page 10 of 12 <br />Councilmember Stolzmann asked if this requires a further commitment from our staff. <br />Mayor Muckle stated this should not be a larger commitment from us as a practical <br />matter. <br />Councilmember Stolzmann stated the City recently passed a resolution regarding <br />completion of the Northwest Rail to Boulder County, and parts of this document appear <br />to be counter to that. It doesn't seem to support Northwest Rail. She added it doesn't <br />seem to her that the document supports HOV3 in the manner we want. She noted the <br />MCC meetings are not open to the public and she doesn't feel that is consistent with our <br />goals. <br />Councilmember Leh stated his appreciation for Councilmember Stolzmann's comments <br />and noted the MCC does do a great deal of work. He stated he would hate to support <br />the MCC in a way that would get in the way of the City's goals. He asked if this <br />document would specifically help the MCC. Mayor Muckle noted it would help direct the <br />MCC's lobbyist and staff during the legislative session when items move through the <br />legislature quickly before the MCC can react as a group. Councilmember Leh asked <br />how the Mayor would respond if the MCC took a position at odds with the City. Mayor <br />Muckle stated the MCC works as a consensus group, so if Louisville is against <br />something the MCC as a group would likely not lobby on it or the group as a whole <br />would have to change the policy to reach consensus. Mayor Muckle stated there are not <br />likely to be any issues the MCC decides to pursue that the City doesn't support. <br />Mayor Muckle noted the language regarding HOV3 was meant as a push back to the <br />state regarding the automatic switch to HOV3 next year regardless of the traffic levels, <br />not that there was not support for it. The MCC simply doesn't want the change to occur <br />until the capacity requires it. He added his reading of the language regarding rail <br />appears to fully support completion of the Northwest Rail. <br />Councilmember Loo stated we have been very successful on the US36 corridor and in <br />transportation generally because of the MCC and we should not end support of the <br />MCC now. <br />Councilmember Leh stated his faith that the Mayor will represent the needs of Louisville <br />with the MCC and noted the group has been critical in getting work done. He stated he <br />would like to find a way to clarify how the Council controls statements made on its <br />behalf; there should be a process and some working principals to use when that <br />happens. <br />Mayor Muckle stated he will try to make more consistent reports on what the MCC is <br />doing, however it is hard to do that in a timely manner given the meeting schedule. This <br />item is really about giving the MCC lobbyist the direction they need to work with <br />legislators not so much that each of these items is an absolute priority <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.