Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-04-2011 Council Minutes CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION April 4, 2011 APPROVED 1 CITY OF LINO LAKES 2 MINUTES 3 4 DATE : April 4,2010 5 TIME STARTED : 5:30 p.m. 6 TIME ENDED : 9:15 p.m. 7 MEMBERS PRESENT : Councilmember Gallup, O'Donnell, 8 Rafferty, Roeser and Mayor Reinert 9 MEMBERS ABSENT : None 10 11 12 Staff members present: City Administrator Jeff Karlson; City Attorney Joseph Langel; 13 Police Chief Kent Strege; City Engineer Jim Studenski; Finance Director Al Rolek; City 14 Planner Jeff Smyser; Economic Development Coordinator Mary Alice Divine; City Clerk 15 Julie Bartell 16 17 1. Board of Appeals—Anoka County Assessor Linda Weiner was present. She 18 reminded the council that the city's Board of Appeals meeting is scheduled for April 25, 19 at 6:00 p.m. and also that at least one trained member of the council must be present in 20 order to conduct the meeting. 21 22 The council received the County Assessor's Report to the City of Lino Lakes Local Board 23 of Appeal and Equalization (LBAE) book. Ms. Weiner briefly reviewed the book, noting 24 in particular the information on the city's valuation change for 2011, the percentage of 25 foreclosure sales, qualified sales numbers as well as the number of new construction 26 units. She noted that she's received twenty five calls at this point, a low number, with 27 most asking questions about the relationship of their valuation to an increase in taxes. 28 She's heard from persons who have purchased foreclosure property and want their 29 valuation to be directly linked to what they paid. 30 31 A council member asked about the valuation of lots and Ms. Weiner suggested that isn't a 32 common concern since there have been very few lots sold; the value would likely be 33 based on the price paid minus the value of house on it. Regarding business valuations, 34 Ms. Weiner explained that her colleague (who was not present) mainly deals with that 35 element; he will be present at the board meeting. 36 37 In summation Ms. Weiner suggested that she anticipates few attendees at the board 38 meeting. 39 40 2. Anoka County Connect Fiber Project—City Administrator Karlson noted that 41 the council heard about the Connect Anoka County Project at their last work session but 42 some questions were outstanding. Also North Metro Cable Commission asked their 43 telecommunications attorney, Steve Guzzetta, to review the proposed services agreement 44 and he raised questions. Mr. Karlson introduced Assistant Anoka County Attorney 45 Kathryn Timm and Anoka County Deputy Administrator David Minke to discuss the 1 CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION April 4,2011 APPROVED 46 proposed project and the current status of the connectivity agreement. Mr. Karlson also 47 indicated that Anoka County representatives have met with concerned parties and have 48 done much to address outstanding questions. 49 50 Mr. Minke indicated that the agreement is not everything that all parties would have it be 51 but he feels everyone involved would say it's been improved with the latest review. Mr. 52 Karlson noted that one concern raised was the possibility of hidden costs to jurisdictions 53 that chose to participate in the network and Mr. Minke assured the group that there are no 54 costs involved to the city in the entering the agreement. Ms. Timm suggested that users 55 should think up front about where equipment would best be placed as conditions effecting 56 the service down the line (such as a in a non-temperature controlled facility) would not be 57 a responsibility covered in the agreement. 58 59 Mr. Karlson clarified that the private contractor involved, Zayo Bandwidth, will actually 60 own the network equipment and pipeline. He asked about the equipment replacement 61 clause in the agreement and who is exposed to the costs when it comes to play in 2017? 62 Mr. Minke added that he anticipates that by 2017 there will be some type of process and 63 system to handle the equipment question; overall the type of equipment that would be 64 replaced isn't expensive. 65 66 A council member mentioned that he is still struggling with the need for the project; there 67 is a cost to the taxpayers, including $2.8 million through the county. He's also not sure 68 that fiber is the latest technology and he questions the concept that this fiber has a 120 69 year life. Mr. Minke explained that the county's goal with this project is to have 70 connectivity to more of its sites, including sites to which they currently rent fiber and to 71 achieve that at a cost savings. He added that the concept of service for 120 years is not 72 necessarily real time but it is the figure chosen for the period that services will be 73 available to the county. Ms. Timm added that for the $2.8 million that Anoka County is 74 putting in, it is getting a$20 million network; she reported that the county has made the 75 decision to go on the project so it will happen. 76 77 When the Mayor asked if the network is not intended for home services, Mr. Minke 78 explained that the county has focused on services to government but it is reasonable to 79 think that others could come in and work with Zayo for services to other areas. For the 80 business community, Mr. Minke explained that they find the high speed services 81 attractive and having the fiber in place also adds to property values. 82 83 The mayor noted that the council is attempting to identify the pieces of the project and 84 determine what is good now and for the future in this city. Mr. Minke noted that there are 85 really three pieces to the puzzle: the government network that would connect 145 anchor 86 institutions (with a service connection right away or within five years); the business 87 community where Zayo will have fiber capacity to serve business customers; and the third 88 parties who could buy capacity through Zayo to sell to other users. 89 2 CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION April 4,2011 APPROVED 90 When City Attorney Langel was asked for his opinion on the contract, Mr. Langel 91 reported that he is okay with the contract language (legal terms); the policy issues are for 92 the council's consideration. 93 94 The council discussed the city's current connectivity services and determined that the cost 95 is lower now but the service that would be offered by this new system would be much 96 more powerful. 97 98 City Administrator Karlson said that he is confident that staff can do the necessary 99 background work on the contract within the next week; he received council authorization 100 to place the matter on the next city council meeting agenda. 101 102 5. Oppidan, 49/J development proposal - Economic Development Coordinator 103 Divine introduced two individuals representing the Oppidan project team to discuss their 104 prospective grocery store project in the area of Hodgson Road and Ash Street. The 105 representatives are Paul Tuczi of Oppidan and attorney Peter Coyle of Larkin Hoffman. 106 They have provided graphics through which they wish to illustrate some means for 107 addressing some of the issues discussed at the previous work session. 108 109 Mr. Tuczi reviewed the illustrations (on file in the Office of the City Clerk). He noted the 110 discussion points previously raised by the council regarding access points and noise and 111 lighting buffering. The plans have been amended to move the building back, add six 112 foot high berms and privacy fencing to minimize light and noise intrusion and have the 113 access points in line with the master plan for the area. For building design,they've 114 moved lighting inward and downsized the building. He noted that the proposed liquor 115 store would be articulated from the building itself. They propose storm water ponding to 116 a greater extent than regulations call for. In the area of roadway planning,the plans 117 include accommodation for future access to County Road J even though it isn't feasible 118 for them to purchase the land adjacent to that roadway at the current time. Retail in 119 addition to the grocery store is difficult to fill with the current economy but they plan to 120 develop the best site possible for those opportunities. Regarding the operator of the 121 grocery store, Mr. Tuszi reported that he had mentioned that it wouldn't be a Cub store 122 however, he can now report that there are three possibilities, one being a scaled down 123 Cub. 124 125 Attorney Coyle added that it is clear that there are public improvements required for this 126 project. There is a critical mass needed to support that type of effort and the economic 127 reality is that, absent this large a user, you probably couldn't justify the improvement 128 costs. The developer is interested in knowing the city's level of support. 129 130 The mayor asked if there has been a neighborhood meeting scheduled and Mr. Tuczi 131 replied that such a meeting would be the natural next step if there is any city interest in 132 proceeding. A council member noted that there's been some concern raised by an area 133 liquor store owner about over saturation of stores; he asked if the developer has 134 considered the viability of that use? Mr. Tuczi responded that they haven't done a 3 CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION April 4,2011 APPROVED 135 development like this without a liquor store and he's confident that the operation makes 136 sense in this area. 137 138 The council and staff discussed the possible use of tax increment financing. Economic 139 Development Coordinator Divine explained that there is currently a window of 140 opportunity allowed by state statute to utilize tax increment financing for retail projects. 141 The legislation is sunseting soon but it looks as if there may be an extension; this type of 142 financing would have a maximum district life of ten years. There is no doubt that it 143 would be requested by the developer to assist with financing the public improvement 144 element of the project. 145 146 City Planner Smyser noted that there would have to be some amendment to the approved 147 49/J Master Plan if the development were to move forward as proposed. 148 149 The mayor noted that he will be particularly interested in what residents have to say; he 150 sees that this is a little better project than what was proposed initially and it seems 151 prudent to at least consider it in the current economy.Neighborhood review and input is 152 important. He thinks the corner of 49/J should really be a part of a development plan; a 153 council member pointed out that a grocery development may improve the odds of the 154 corner property being developed. 155 156 The developers will take their revised plan to the neighborhood for review and return to 157 the council after that process. 158 159 3. GASB 43/45 - Finance Director Rolek reviewed his written report that outlines 160 assumptions relating to the city's financial obligations for certain post employment 161 benefits; the benefits discussed are healthcare costs for disabled public safety employees 162 and for the cost of allowing retired employees to remain on the city's healthcare plan at 163 their own cost. He is reporting this information because it is a requirement of the 164 Government Accounting Standards Board(GASB). 165 166 The council reviewed the information and Mr. Rolek reported that it will also be included 167 in the city audit review process. When the mayor asked if there are other unfunded 168 liabilities, Mr. Rolek mentioned the special assessment bonds for the Legacy project as an 169 example. He also noted that city employees are allowed to carryover a certain amount of 170 vacation and sick time and it is required that that be accounted for. 171 172 4. Five-Year Financial Plan—Finance Director Rolek distributed his report 173 outlining a draft of the 2011-2015 Five Year Financial Plan for the city; it is a summary 174 of what's been put together by staff to date. He noted that there are a number of things up 175 the air—including strategic planning and the organizational study—so that leaves factors 176 impacting the Plan yet to be determined and it has made forecasting difficult. For the 177 Plan, staff has used information that is available today and then weighted some figures 178 (fuel costs, health care for example)to reflect anticipated increases in the future. The 4 • CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION April 4, 2011 APPROVED 179 Plan assumes the same level of city employees. Mr. Rolek reviewed each area of the 180 Plan. 181 182 A council member recognized that this Plan is a requirement of the city charter. It is 183 obviously a preliminary review with more information and consideration ahead. The 184 council asked about the city's level of property tax delinquencies and Mr. Rolek 185 explained that the city is collecting up to about 96%of taxes due, down just a little from 186 past years. There was a thorough discussion of equipment replacement. 187 188 4.1 Financial Accounting Software Upgrade- Finance Director Rolek reported that 189 staff has been demoing software in the last few years. The city's current system is 11 190 years old and while it is functioning now and is being maintained, there will be no 191 enhancements available in the future. There are reserve funds set aside for a new system 192 and staff will continue to search for the best option with implementation possibility in the 193 next year to 18 months. 194 195 6. Sign Ordinance—City Clerk Bartell recalled that the council has recently 196 reviewed the city's sign ordinance as it relates to regulations during periods before 197 elections. The discussion included the odd year municipal election calendar, including 198 the absentee ballot period.The council moved to amend the sign ordinance to allow for a 199 30 day period for absentee balloting and election signs prior to the city's municipal 200 election. The city attorney has since reported that the city is required by state statute to 201 include a 46-day absentee balloting period prior to its municipal election. That 46 day 202 requirement has been confirmed by the Minnesota Secretary of State's Office also. The 203 sign ordinance amendment will be on the upcoming April 11 council meeting agenda for 204 second reading and passage. It was noted that the city's sign regulation period does not 205 legally have to be consistent with the absentee balloting period. 206 207 The council discussed how many absentee ballots are generally cast in a municipal 208 election, some concerns about having a longer period of sign allowance and also the value 209 of having consistency in the voting period and the balloting period. The Mayor noted 210 that he supports a 30 day sign period. 211 212 7. Animal Control Ordinance—Police Chief Strege noted that the council has 213 received some amendments to the city's animal control ordinance prepared by the city 214 attorney. The amendments are proposed to upgrade the city's regulations in the area of 215 dangerous animals. 216 217 City Attorney Langel remarked that the ordinance appeared to need tightening so he has 218 proposed some amendments that would clarify procedures, add some costs to the animal 219 owner and include an option for a hearing officer(instead of the city council)to handle 220 the process. Designation of the hearing officer is up to the council; someone they feel can 221 handle the hearing process and could make a well-reasoned decision. The officer could 222 be appointed even at the time the services are needed. He reviewed the proposed 5 CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION April 4, 2011 APPROVED 223 changes. The council requested that language be added that requires the animal owner to 224 meet requirements before an animal is released back to the owner. 225 226 The ordinance will come forward to the council for consideration of two readings and 227 passage. 228 229 8. Weekly Progress Report—Administrator Karlson noted that Dave Unmacht who 230 will be assisting the council with its strategic planning process will be at the next council 231 work session. Mr. Karlson anticipates setting dates with the council in May for the actual 232 planning process. The Mayor noted that he had the opportunity to meet Mr. Unmacht 233 and is impressed that he believes in focusing the process not only on establishing plans 234 but also on follow-up. 235 236 9. Regular Council Agenda—The agenda was reviewed. 237 238 The meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m. 239 240 These minutes were considered, corrected and approved at the regular Council meeting held on 241 April 25, 2011. 242 243 244 t45 246 Ju 1 nne Bartell, Cit Cl Jeff 'ei -rt, Mayor 247 6