Page 3 of 7

Text read by the vision model; check the PDF for anything that matters.
Mr. TePaske asked council where it thought it stood in the sequence of approval of a subdivision located in the county. Attorney stated that as soon as all criteria of city ordinances are met, the council may act on the request and that the city ordinance is almost the same as the county requirements. Mr. TePaske stated that he has made the recommendation to the County Board of Supervisors that it not approve any subdivisions until the city has approved the first. Mr. TePaske addressed the issue of the fringe area study. The purpose of the fringe area study is the development of policy concerning zoning, subdivisions and annexations in rural areas. The county would like to find out what the city would like to have happen in order to develop agreements between the city and the county concerning rural development. He pointed out that policies could be modified if circumstances warrant it. Mr. TePaske received the maps from councilmembers with their recommendations drawn on them and will study the maps and report back to the council at the next meeting. Mr. TePaske stated that a public hearing will be necessary in order to finalize any plans. Mayor Brotherton appointed Cox and Rohret to work with Amanda Potterfield concerning the street in the Potterfield Annexation since the street has not been returned to its original condition previous to installation of water and sewer lines. Rohret stated that he thought the two attorneys should work something out since Mayor Brotherton has been dealing with the situation for several months without success. Attorney reported that the city already has a signed agreement stating that the road will be fixed. Stevens suggested that the attorney send a letter to Miss Potterfield requesting that the streets be fixed and if they are not fixed, the city will do the work and bill the owner. The damages are on the city portion of the road and city street. Council instructed attorney to send letter to Amanda Potterfield requesting her to repair driveway at Mary Ann Herdliska's property, streets and seed embankments in order to return streets and embankments to original condition before installation of water and sewer lines, within twenty (20) days of notice, or city will make necessary repairs and bill the cost to the property owner (Miss Potterfield) as a followup to original agreements. Mr. TePaske stated that the Board Of Supervisors requested that the stretch of road between the old city limit and the new annexation be maintained by the city because the city completely surrounds that 150 foot section of county road now. Mayor Brotherton asked what maintenance specification would be. TePaske stated that it should be maintained the same as the piece of road beyond it is maintained. TePaske offered to draft a specific agreement and send it to the city. Mayor Brotherton stated that it was an awfully big request. Mr. TePaske stated that the city did not ask the opinion of the county in this particular situation before approving annexation. Because of this, the county feels it is appropriate to enter into an agreement with the city to maintain the section of road which is county owned but which is inside the city limits. Mayor Brotherton and Cox will meet with Mr. TePaske and Bud Good to make recommendation to the council.

Sources

  • laserfiche: Minutes-10/13/1982 (2) (Minutes-10-13-1982 (2).pdf) — where it was found ↗ first seen Oct 12, 2026

This document's details as JSON

Data last updated October 15, 2026. Built from the archive's documents; see how the data is built.