HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/01/2011 Council Packet•
•
•
WORK SESSION AGENDA
CITY OF LINO LAKES
Monday, August 1, 2011
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
Community Room (not televised)
5:30 P.M.
7301 Apollo Court — Zoning Violation, Jenmar Equity, LLC
r2. Issue Tracker Demonstration, Jason Wendel
3. 80th Avenue — Zoning Complaint Update
4. Election related Charter Amendments
5. Weekly Progress Report
Regular Council Agenda
Adjourn
To follow on Friday
•
•
WS — Item 1
WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT
Work Session Item 1
Date: Council Work Session, August 1, 2011
To: City Council
From: Michael Grochala
Re: 7301 Apollo Ct. Code Enforcement
Background
In March of 2011 the City initiated a code enforcement action against property located at 7301
Apollo Court. Specifically, one of the uses of the property includes exterior storage of building
materials and product. Exterior storage is allowed in the LI, Light Industrial District by conditional
use permit provided certain conditions and locational requirements are met. The property at 7301
has not meet these requirements.
The property owner, Jammer Equity, LLC, was present at the June 13, 2011 City Council meeting
and requested an opportunity to address the council at a future work session. The City Council
discussed the issue at both the June 27 and July 11, 2011 work sessions. However, the property
owner and legal counsel were unable to attend those meetings.
Following discussion the council indicated no desire to amend the zoning ordinance to accommodate
this use at the given location.
The property owner is still requesting an opportunity to address the council and will be present at the
August 1, 2011 work session. A copy of the July 11, 2011 work session staff report is attached for
reference.
Council Direction
1. None required
Attachments
1. July 11, 2011 Work Session report — 7301 Apollo Ct.
1
WS — Item 2
WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT
Work Session Item 2
Date: Council Work Session, July 11, 2011
To: City Council
From: Michael Grochala
Re: 7301 Apollo Ct. Code Enforcement
Background
At the June 13, 2011 City Council meeting Mr. Bill Griffith, Larkin, Hoffman Law Firm, spoke to
the council at "Open Mike" regarding an ongoing code enforcement issue at 7301 Apollo Court. Mr.
Mark Dietz, owner of property, was also present. . Mr. Griffith, representing the owner, requested
an opportunity to meet with the council to discuss options to address the zoning violations. The
council directed staff to place the item on the next work session agenda.
Staff was informed that neither Mr. Griffith nor Mr. Dietz would be available to meet with the
council until the July 25, 2011 work session. The council briefly discussed this item at the June 27,
2011 work session. The council directed staff to place the item on the July 5 work session for further
discussion. The following analysis is the same as was presented in the June 27' 2011 report.
Analysis
Jenmar Equity, LLC owns the property located at 7301 Apollo Drive. The property is leased to two
business operations housed within the building; Superl, Inc. and Lakes Building Components, Inc
( "Lakes "). Lakes manufactures wood building trusses and is a new tenant of the building.
Lakes apparently occupied a portion of the building in late February. Staff became aware of the
change in use and occupancy of the building in March of 2011. As part of their operations both
building products (lumber) and completed trusses are stored around the perimeter of the property
including the front parking lot.
The property is located in the LI, Light Industrial Zoning District. The LI district allows exterior
storage by Conditional Use Permit. The property is adjacent to both a residential and rural zoning
district and across the street from I -35 W. The conditional use permit provisions are as follows:
Section 8.Subdivision 1.5. Open and outdoor storage (not outdoor sales lots) as an accessory
use provided that:
a. The storage area is landscaped and screened from view of neighboring uses,
residential zoning districts, and public rights -of way per Section 3, Subd. 4.Q of this
Ordinance.
b. Storage area is fenced in a manner approved by the City.
•
•
•
•
•
•
c. Storage area is blacktopped or concrete surfaced unless specifically approved by the
City Council.
d. All lighting shall be in compliance with Section 3, Subd. 4.F of this Ordinance or
other lighting standards in place at the time of project approval.
e. The storage area does not take up parking space or loading space as required for
conformity to this Ordinance and not in front yards.
f. The property shall not abut property zoned for residential, rural, or business use,
including land in a neighboring city. "Abutting" includes across a street. "Abutting"
does not include properties that touch only corner to corner.
g. The property shall not abut I -35W or I -35E.
h. The storage area shall not abut a school or a public park.
i. The ratio of storage area to building footprint shall not exceed 3.5:1.
j. Storage shall not include material considered hazardous under Federal or State
Environmental Law.
The existing site does not meet the requirements listed in items a, b, c., and e above and cannot meet
the provisions of items f and g above. Jenmar Equity was notified that while they could apply for a
conditional use permit they could not satisfy the conditions of approval and therefore would not
likely be approved.
Lakes Building Components was notified of the zoning violation as well as potential building code
violations on March 3, 2011. The building code issues related to alteration of the exterior building
wall without a permit (a two foot high by sixteen foot wide slot was cut out of the exterior building
wall) and the change in occupancy of the building. The matter was turned over to the City Attorney
in April of 2011 after no attempts were made to bring the site into conformance.
On April 14, 2011 a letter from the City Attorney's office was sent to Jenmar Equity LLC notifying
them of the violations. Correspondence between the City Attorney and the owner's attorney has
been ongoing. To date only the building permit issue has been addressed. No movement has been
made on the exterior storage violation. On June 7, the City Attorney again informed Jenmar that the
materials must be stored inside or moved off site. The City's next course of action would be to cite
them for the ongoing violation and seek a court order to remedy the situation.
While attempts will be made to suggest this as an economic development issue it-is really a very
simple zoning matter. Jenmar Equities is leasing space in a building to a business that operates in a
manner not permitted for that property. Jenmar Equity, the property owner, has asked for the council
to consider allowing the use to continue. Neither city staff nor the city council has the authority to
grant that approval. To allow such a use in this location, on either an interim or permanent basis, the
City would need to amend the zoning ordinance.
When considering such a change the intent and purpose of the existing ordinance should be
reviewed. Additionally the use should be evaluated as to whether it meets that purpose or is
otherwise accommodated within the district or elsewhere in the city.
Section 8. Subdivision 1 of the LI, Light Industrial District states the following:
"These areas have the prerequisites for industrial development, but because of proximity to
residential areas or the need to protect certain areas or uses from adverse influences, high
development standards will be necessary..."
2
The LI District does allow exterior storage by conditional use permit. As stated in the zoning
ordinance certain uses, while generally not suitable in a district, may under some circumstances be
suitable. When these circumstances exist a conditional use permit may be granted. The provisions in
the zoning ordinance specify the circumstances where exterior storage is permissible within the LI
District.
Generally, exterior storage is allowed as a conditional use on interior parcels within the LI District.
Exterior storage is prohibited on parcels abutting rural, residential, commercial districts or the two
interstates purposely to avoid both aesthetic and nuisance impacts to abutting, less intense uses.
Historically, the city has been very sensitive to encroachment of industrial uses on neighboring
residential properties. A few examples include exterior storage at Molin Concrete and the Pomp's
Tire Facility.
There are locations within both the LI and GI, General Industrial districts that could accommodate
Lakes Business Components. Alternatively, the City could amend the ordinance to allow exterior
storage abutting residential, rural, commercial districts or the interstates. While this would
accommodate Jenmar's existing lease to Lakes it would also allow similar uses on other properties.
For example Pomp's Tire, which currently stores used tires off -site, could accommodate them at their
existing facility. Exterior storage also tends to increase the intensity of the use by introducing
loading and unloading, rearranging of product and materials and additional vehicle traffic and noise
to the site.
City staff is currently working on amendments to the commercial and industrial zoning districts. Staff
will likely be discussing these items with the Planning and Zoning Board in July. If requested by the
council an amendment related to outside storage could be incorporated for consideration.
Additionally, Jenmar could be directed to the Planning and Zoning Board to discuss this issue.
Council Direction
L Staff is requesting direction regarding council's intent to consider amending the conditional
use permit requirements for exterior storage in the LI, Industrial District.
2. Staff is requesting direction regarding the pending code enforcement action on Jenmar
Equity, LLC.
Attachments
1. General location map
3
•
. Larkin
Hofrnan
ATTORNEYS
•
July 28, 2011
The Honorable Jeff Reinert
Mayor of the City of Lino Lakes
6765 E. Shadow Lake Drive
Lino Lakes, MN 55014 -1348
Council Member Jeff O'Donnell
City of Lino Lakes
6958 Black Duck Drive
Circle Pines, MN 55014 -1315
Council Member Rob Rafferty
City of Lino Lakes
1573 Mergamser Court
Hugo, MN 55038 -9629
• Re: 7301 Apollo Court, Lino Lakes, Minnesota
•
Our File #30,968 -00
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
ty,lq
Larkin Hoffman Daly & Lindgren Ltd.
1500 Wells Fargo Plaza
7900 Xerxes Avenue South
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55431-1194
GENERAL: 952 - 835 -3800
FAX 952 -896 -3333
www.larkinhoff� i Lan. com
WEB:
Council Member Kathi Gallup
City of Lino Lakes
508 Woodduck Trail
Circle Pines, MN 55014 -2459
Council Member Dave Roeser
City of Lino Lakes
6179 Patridge Court
Lino Lakes, MN 55110 -1061
We represent Jenmar Equity, LLC, the owner of the above property, which in turn leases it to
two business operations housed within the building, namely Superl, Inc. and Lakes Building
Components, Inc ( "Lakes "). Lakes serves the building components market and is in a startup
mode. This business expects to grow from approximately 15 employees today to 40 employees
in a few years. To accomplish this growth plan they require some flexibility with regard to
outside storage of product assembled on the property. The inability to store wood trusses, their
main product, significantly threatens their expansion plans for this operation within the
community.
We have enclosed photos of the site to demonstrate how well screened it is today through high
berming, an existing fence and mature vegetation. Please note that many of the other uses in the
same industrial park are allowed outside storage based on their locations. Our client would like
the same opportunity to expand its business using its rear and side yard.
Accordingly, we requested the opportunity to meet with you in a work session to explore
resolution of this matter. For instance, one possible alternative would be the issuance of an
interim use permit for outside storage for a stated term to allow the building owner to build an
Mayor and Council Members of
the City of Lino Lakes
July 28, 2011
Page 2
addition for storage of wood trusses and related products, or to find other storage opportunities
within the area.
We will present this request to you next Monday and are committed to working through a
mutually agreeable resolution. Thank you.
/7.
illi, •C. Griffith, for
Larkin Hoffman Daly & Lindgren Ltd.
Direct Dial: 952- 896 -3290
Direct Fax: 952- 842 -1729
Email: wgriffith @larkinhoffman.com
cc: Mike Grochala, City of Lino Lanes
Mark Dietz, Jenmar Equity, LLC
Joseph J. Langel, City Attorney
•
•
•
""s
r• ' ' .4,'' `,!. :i. - _ ' .
,
44.■
''',....
•
•
•
•
•
WS — Item 3
WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT
Work Session Item
Date: August 1, 2011
To: City Council
From: Paul Bengtson, Associate Planner
Re: 2122 80th Street — Code Enforcement
Background
Based on the complaints the City Council received, the city attorney sent a letter to the
owner of 2122 80t Street and indicated that violations of the ordinance were occurring
on the site. The property owner contacted staff and requested a meeting to discuss the
property and the code issues. On Monday July 25th staff met with the property owner
Lloyd Drilling and the business owner on the site Paul Montain.
The business that is being operated on the site is Mountain Environmental, a fertilizer
company that hauls post - production wastes from industrial users to farm locations and
then spreads the materials on farm fields for fertilization. The occupant of the home on
site is not involved in this business directly. The use was not established as a home
occupation, but as what they considered to be an `agriculture' use. Agriculture is allowed
as a permitted use within the Rural Business Reserve zoning district.
Upon conclusion of the meeting between staff and the property/business owners, staff
identified three areas of concern still looming with this use and this site:
1. Use — Is this use `agriculture' or is it a `trucking company'? Staff is consulting
with the city attorney to determine if the use occurring on the site must be
considered `agriculture', or if it falls under another use. If the use on the site is
not `agriculture', the city or the property owner may initiate a process to amend
the ordinance to allow this type of use on the site.
2. Junk — the business and property owners both agreed that there were a number of
junk vehicles that should be removed to clean up the site. They indicated that
they would begin to do so in the short term.
3. Oversized Vehicles — Section 3 of the zoning ordinance includes restrictions on
the number of oversized vehicles allowed on properties. It separates properties
by area, with separate requirements for properties under 2.5 acres and properties
between 2.5 acres and 10 acres. However, the ordinance does not specifically
state how many vehicles a parcel that is 10 acres or greater is allowed to have.
Additionally, within the rural zoning districts an accessory use is listed that states
the following:
Operation, parking, or storage of such vehicles, equipment and machinery
which are incidental and customary to permitted or conditional uses
allowed in this district.
Some clarification might be necessary to determine if the accessory use listed in
the Rural zoning districts allows property owners to exceed the oversized vehicle
limits in Section 3, and if properties of 10 acres or more have any limitation on
the number of vehicles on the site. This clarification is necessary regardless of
what use is on the subject site.
Requested Council Direction
Staff is open to direction from the City Council, but in the meantime will continue to
consult with the city attorney and forward any further information that comes to light.
•
•
•
•
•
WS — Item 4
WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT
Work Session Item #4
Date: August 1, 2011
To: City Council
From: Julie Bartell
Re: Charter Amendments Relating to Elections
Background
The city council received the attached report at the work session of May 2, 2011 outlining
two areas of the city charter that contain schedules related to elections and that are
impacted by recently enacted federal and state law changes. The amendments were
referred to the Lino Lakes Charter Commission with a request that they consider a
recommendation back that would allow the council to consider adoption of the
amendments by ordinance (by unanimous vote).
The Charter Commission considered the matter at their regular meeting on July 14. They
acted to forward the following response:
The Commission is interested in the idea of proceeding with the
amendments by ordinance (not to the ballot) in order to comply with state
statute, however, they request that the city pay reasonable fees for their
attorney to review the proposals. They would need funding above and
beyond their regular budget of $1,500 and would be able to provide an
estimate of the cost of a review.
Requested Council Direction
Staff requests council direction on the Charter Commission's request.
Attachments
Work Session Report of May 2, 2011
WS — Item 10
WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT
Work Session Item #10
Date: May 2, 2011
To: City Council
From: Julie Bartell, City Clerk
Jean Viger, Deputy City Clerk
Re: Charter Amendments relating to Elections
Background
The United States Congress adopted legislation in 2009 requiring a period of 45 days for
absentee ballot voting to allow the time necessary for military and overseas voting. As a
result the Minnesota State Legislature adopted and the governor signed into law
legislation that adjusts state election law to accommodate the extended absentee balloting
period and other election administrative changes. These law changes have an impact on
the city's election calendar including when the city can receive filings for office and, in
the case of special improvement consideration, how long the city has to submit questions
to Anoka County for inclusion on the ballot. Since the City of Lino Lakes election
regulations are included in the city charter, staff is presenting the following suggestions
for amendments to the charter to concur with state and federal level changes.
1. Filing for Office. With the change in the absentee voting period, the filing period
reflected in Charter Section 4.02 is no longer appropriate. The filing period must occur at
least soon enough to allow the city to meet the deadline for getting names on the ballot.
The following changes to the City Charter would bring the city into conformance with
state law.
Section 4.02. Filing for Office. ighty four (81) days and not
later than seventy (70) days bBefore any municipal election, any resident of the City
qualified under state law for elective office may, by filing an affidavit and by paying a
filing fee to the City Clerk in an amount as set by ordinance, or by means otherwise
permitted by state law, have his /her name placed on the municipal election ballot. The
filing period shall be as established by Minnesota State law. (Amended 1/25/88)
(Amended 05/27/2003)
•
•
•
•
•
•
2. Special Improvements. The Lino Lakes City Charter contains provisions relative to
public improvements and special assessments (Chapter 8). Language within that section
of the charter is also impacted by the above - referenced election law changes. Under
current charter language, there would not be sufficient time to meet the deadline for
submission of ballot language and meet the charter requirements of: a) a public hearing;
b) the passing of 60 days before further action; and c) submission to the voters within 120
days of the public hearing. In order to allow sufficient time to satisfy both the Charter
requirements and the ballot notice requirements, it is suggested that the 120 day period be
increased to 160 days.
Also the city attorney has pointed out that the language in this section is not clear in
dictating when a special election must be held (if a general election isn't already
scheduled within the 120 or 160 day period) and that state law wouldn't allow the city to
hold a special election in the 19 weeks before a state primary election nor within 40 days
after a state general election. The language proposed would also clarify those points.
The following are the proposed changes to Section 8.04 of the Charter:
Subdivision 2. Regardless of the provisions of Subdivision 1 of this section, when less
than one hundred (100 %) percent of the estimated cost of the proposed improvement is to
be paid for by special assessments, connection charges, or any outside funding sources
other than the City general fund, the Council shall within one hundred twenty sixty - (1-20)
160 days after the conclusion of the public hearing, submit the proposed local
improvement and its assessment formula to the voters of the City. If no general election
is scheduled during such one hundred 4venly sixty () (160) day period, the Council
shall schedule a special election within said period unless otherwise prohibited by law, in
which event the special election shall be held as soon as reasonably practicable. by
City's voters. If a majority of those voting on said improvement and associated
assessment formula are opposed, the Council shall not proceed with the local
improvement as proposed.
Charter Amendment Procedure. The charter amendment process is governed by state
statute, which provides more than one method by which a home rule charter can be
amended:
Petition — a petition meeting the requirements of state law can be submitted by
citizens and the question would be brought to the voters;
Amendment proposed by the council — the council may propose an
amendment by ordinance and, after review by the charter commission, may
present it to the voters;
Upon receiving a recommendation from the charter commission, the council
may enact a charter amendment by ordinance with an affirmative vote of all
council members (with a post approval waiting period of 90 days).
Requested Council Direction
It is requested that the council confirm that these amendments should be forwarded to the
Lino Lakes Charter Commission for their review. The next regular Charter Commission
meeting is scheduled for July 14, 2011.
•
•
•
•
•
•
410.12, 2010 Minnesota Statutes Page 1 of 2
2010 Minnesota Statutes
410.12 AMENDMENTS.
Subdivision 1. Proposals. The charter commission may propose amendments to such charter and shall do so upon
the petition of voters equal in number to five percent of the total votes cast at the last previous state general election
in the city. Proposed charter amendments must be submitted at least 17 weeks before the general election. Only
registered voters are eligible to sign the petition. All petitions circulated with respect to a charter amendment shall be
uniform in character and shall have attached thereto the text of the proposed amendment in full; except that in the
case of a proposed amendment containing more than 1,000 words, a true and correct copy of the same may be filed
with the city clerk, and the petition shall then contain a summary of not less than 50 nor more than 300 words setting
forth in substance the nature of the proposed amendment. Such summary shall contain a statement of the objects and
purposes of the amendment proposed and an outline of any proposed new scheme or frame work of government and
shall be sufficient to inform the signers of the petition as to what change in government is sought to be accomplished
by the amendment. The summary, together with a copy of the proposed amendment, shall first be submitted to the
charter commission for its approval as to form and substance. The commission shall within ten days after such
submission to it, return the same to the proposers of the amendment with such modifications in statement as it may
deem necessary in order that the summary may fairly comply with the requirements above set forth.
Subd. la. Alternative methods of charter amendment. A home rule charter may be amended only by following
one of the alternative methods of amendment provided in subdivisions 1 to 7.
Subd. 2. Petitions. The signatures to such petition need not all be appended to one paper, but to each separate
petition there shall be attached an affidavit of the circulator thereof as provided by this section. A petition must
contain each petitioner's signature in ink or indelible pencil and must indicate after the signature the place of
residence by street and number, or other description sufficient to identify the place. There shall appear on each
petition the names and addresses of five electors of the city, and on each paper the names and addresses of the same
five electors, who, as a committee of the petitioners, shall be regarded as responsible for the circulation and filing of
the petition. The affidavit attached to each petition shall be as follows:
State of )
County of )
being duly sworn, deposes and says that the affiant, and the affiant only, personally
circulated the foregoing paper, that all the signatures appended thereto were made in the affiant's presence, and that
the affiant believes them to be the genuine signatures of the persons whose names they purport to be.
ss.
Signed
(Signature of Circulator)
Subscribed and sworn to before me
this day of
Notary Public (or other officer)
authorized to administer oaths
The foregoing affidavit shall be strictly construed and any affiant convicted of swearing falsely as regards any
particular thereof shall be punishable in accordance with existing law.
Subd. 3. May be assembled as one petition. All petition papers for a proposed amendment shall be assembled
and filed with the charter commission as one instrument. Within ten days after such petition is transmitted to the city
council, the city clerk shall determine whether each paper of the petition is properly attested and whether the petition
is signed by a sufficient number of voters. The city clerk shall declare any petition paper entirely invalid which is not
attested by the circulator thereof as required in this section. Upon completing an examination of the petition, the city
clerk shall certify the result of the examination to the council. If the city clerk shall certify that the petition is
insufficient the city clerk shall set forth in a certificate the particulars in which it is defective and shall at once notify
the committee of the petitioners of the findings. A petition may be amended at any time within ten days after the
making of a certificate of insufficiency by the city clerk, by filing a supplementary petition upon additional papers
signed and filed as provided in case of an original petition. The city clerk shall within five days after such amendment
httns: / /www.revisor.mn.gov /statutes / ?id= 410.12
5/4/2011
410.12, 2010 Minnesota Statutes Page 2 of 2
is filed, make examination of the amended petition, and if the certificate shall show the petition still to be insufficient,
the city clerk shall file it in the city clerk's office and notify the committee of the petitioners of the findings and no
further action shall be had on such insufficient petition. The finding of the insufficiency of a petition shall not
prejudice the filing of a new petition for the same purpose.
Subd. 4. Election. Amendments shall be submitted to the qualified voters at a general or special election and
published as in the case of the original charter. The form of the ballot shall be fixed by the governing body. The
statement of the question on the ballot shall be sufficient to identify the amendment clearly and to distinguish the
question from every other question on the ballot at the same time. If 51 percent of the votes cast on any amendment
are in favor of its adoption, copies of the amendment and certificates shall be filed, as in the case of the original
charter and the amendment shall take effect in 30 days from the date of the election or at such other time as is fixed in
the amendment.
Subd. 5. Amendments proposed by council. The council of any city having a home rule charter may propose
charter amendments to the voters by ordinance. Any ordinance proposing such an amendment shall be submitted to
the charter commission. Within 60 days thereafter, the charter commission shall review the proposed amendment but
before the expiration of such period the commission may extend the time for review for an additional 90 days by
filing with the city clerk its resolution determining that an additional time for review is needed. After reviewing the
proposed amendment, the charter commission shall approve or reject the proposed amendment or suggest a substitute
amendment. The commission shall promptly notify the council of the action taken. On notification of the charter
commission's action, the council may submit to the people, in the same manner as provided in subdivision 4, the
amendment originally proposed by it or the substitute amendment proposed by the charter commission. The
amendrnent shall become effective only when approved by the voters as provided in subdivision 4. If so approved it
shall be filed in the same manner as other amendments. Nothing in this subdivision precludes the charter commission
from proposing charter amendments in the manner provided by subdivision 1.
Subd. 6. Amendments, cities of the fourth class. The council of a city of the fourth class having a home rule
charter may propose charter amendments by ordinance without submission to the charter commission. Such ordinance,
if enacted, shall be adopted by at least a four -fifths vote of all its members after a public hearing upon two weeks'
published notice containing the text of the proposed amendment and shall be approved by the mayor and published as
in the case of other ordinances. The council shall submit the proposed amendment to the people in the manner
provided in subdivision 4, but not sooner than three months after the passage of the ordinance. The amendment
becomes effective only when approved by the voters as provided in subdivision 4. If so approved, it shall be filed in
the same manner as other amendments.
Subd. 7. Amendment by ordinance. Upon recommendation of the charter commission the city council may enact
a charter amendment by ordinance. Within one month of receiving a recommendation to amend the charter by
ordinance, the city must publish notice of a public hearing on the proposal and the notice must contain the text of the
proposed amendment. The city council must hold the public hearing on the proposed charter amendment at least two
weeks but not more than one month after the notice is published. Within one month of the public hearing, the city
council must vote on the proposed charter amendment ordinance. The ordinance is enacted if it receives an affirmative
vote of all members of the city council and is approved by the mayor and published as in the case of other ordinances.
An ordinance amending a city charter shall not become effective until 90 days after passage and publication or at such
later date as is fixed in the ordinance. Within 60 days after passage and publication of such an ordinance, a petition
requesting a referendum on the ordinance may be filed with the city clerk. The petition must be signed by registered
voters equal in number to at least five percent of the registered voters in the city or 2,000, whichever is less. If the
requisite petition is filed within the prescribed period, the ordinance shall not become effective until it is approved by
the voters as in the case of charter amendments submitted by the charter commission, the council, or by petition of the
voters, except that the council may submit the ordinance at any general or special election held at least 60 days after
submission of the petition, or it may reconsider its action in adopting the ordinance. As far as practicable the
requirements of subdivisions 1 to 3 apply to petitions submitted under this section, to an ordinance amending a
charter, and to the filing of such ordinance when approved by the voters.
History: (1286) RL s 756; 1907 c 199 s 1; 1911 c 343 s 1; 1939 c 292 s 1; 1943 c 227 s 1; 1949 c 122 s 1; 1959
c 305 s 3,4; 1961 c 608 s 5,6; 1969 c 1027 s 3; 1973 c 503 s 1 -4; 1986 c 444; 1998 c 254 art 1 s 107; 1999 c 132 s 42;
2005 c 93 s 1; 2008 c 331 s 7; 2010 c 184 s 43
httns: / /www.revisor.mn.gov /statutes / ?id= 410.12 5/4/2011
•
•
WS — Item 5
MANAGEMENT TEAM'S
Weekly Progress Report
August 1, 2011
•
Last Action Taken
Staff
Status
Item
Organizational Assessment
7/11/11 Council approved reclassification
of Secretary B to Office Technician I
Jeff
Further recommendations are
pending
2030 Comprehensive Plan
Amendments
5 /23 /11Council approved revised plan for
submittal to Met Council
Mike
Following review by the Met
Council, the City Council will
consider final approval
Five -Year Financial Plan
4/4/11 Staff presented a first draft of the
plan
Al
A second draft of the plan will
be prepared in conjunction
with the 2012 budget
Early Childhood/Family
Education Center (ECFE)
Lease
5/2/11 Council directed staff to begin
marketing the space at city hall currently
occupied by the ECFE
Rick
Staff has researched tax
matters and has had
discussions with nonprofits &
businesses re. the space
•