HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/26/2011 Council PacketEXPANDED AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
Monday, September 26, 2011
6:30 p.m.
(Scheduled to be broadcast on Channel 16)
City Council: Mayor Reinert, Council Members O'Donnell, Gallup, Roeser & Rafferty
City Administrator: Jeff Karlson
COUNCIL WORK SESSION, 5 :30 P.M.
Community Room (not televised)
1. Fence at 1205 Buckthorn Lane
Council concurred that the fence will be allowed under current
regulations with conditions determined by the City Engineer
Pg 1 -2
2. Review Regular Agenda
CITY COUNCIL. MEETING, 6:30 P.M.
➢ Call to Order — 6:30 p.m.
➢ Roll Call - Council Members O'Donnell, Roeser, & Rafferty, Gallup, and Mayor
Reinert were present
➢ Pledge of Allegiance
➢ Open Mike / Public Comment
Zach Hoppe, 7136 2 "d Av, asked for information on why the Lino Lakes skate park
was closed; the council will discuss the matter at the October 3 work session
➢ Setting the Agenda: Addition or deletion of agenda items
The agenda was not amended
CONSENT AGENDA
A) Consideration of Expenditures:
i) September 26, 2011 (Check No. 91601 through
91700) in the amount of $201,040.12;
ii) Centennial Fire District (Check No. 4983 through
5001) in the amount of $33,672.74
B) Consider approval of September 6, 2011 Work Session Minutes Pg 15a
Council Member Rafferty absent
Pg 3 -15
C) Consider approval of September 12, 2011 Council Meeting Pg 16 -23
Minutes
Council Agenda
-2-
EXPANDED AGENDA
D) Consider approval of Application for Exempt Permit from Lawful Pg 24
Gambling License for St. Joseph Catholic Church (two events)
E) Consider approval of Application to Conduct Excluded Bingo Pg 25
for Blue Heron PTO
September 26, 2011
F) Consider Resolution No. 11 -96, Extending Deadlines for Pg 26 -28
Moon Marsh Planned Unit Development
Action Taken: Motion by Roeser, seconded by Gallup, to
approve the Consent Agenda, Items 1A, 1C, 1D, 1E AND 1F, was
adopted
Action Taken: Motion by O'Donnell, seconded by Roeser, to
approve Consent Agenda Item 1B, was adopted;
Council Member Rafferty abstained
FINANCE DEPARTMENT REPORT, Al Rolek
No report
ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT REPORT, Dan Tesch
A) Consider Recommendation to Reclassify One Staff Position and Pg 29
to Eliminate Two Staff Positions, Jeff Karlson
Action Taken: Motion by Rafferty, seconded by Roeser, to
approve the recommendation to reclassify and elimination
positions as presented, was adopted
PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT REPORT, John Swenson
A) Consider 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 19 -11, Amending
Chapter 503 of the Lino Lakes Code of Ordinances regarding
Animal Control, John Swenson
Action Taken: Motion by Gallup, seconded by Rafferty, to
approve the first reading of Ordinance No. 19 -11 as presented,
was adopted
B) Consider 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 20 -11, Amending
Chapter 213, Subdivision 7, of the Lino Lakes Code of
Ordinances, regarding Unclaimed Property, John Swenson
Action Taken: Motion by O'Donnell, seconded by Roeser, to
approve the first reading of Ordinance No. 20 -11 as presented,
was adopted
PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT REPORT, Rick DeGardner
No report
Pg 30 -40
Pg 41 -45
Council Agenda
-3- September 26, 2011
EXPANDED AGENDA
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT, Michael Groc hala'
A) Consider Resolution No. 11 -97, Calling for Hearing on Proposed Pg 46 -48
Assessment, 35E /CSAH 14 Interchange Project, Michael Grochala
Action Taken: Motion by Roeser, seconded by Gallup, to approve
Resolution No. 11 -97 as presented, was adopted
B) Consider Resolution 11 -98, Approving Letter of Understanding
with City of Centerville, 21st Avenue Park and Ride /Road
Improvements, Michael Grochala
Action Taken: Motion by Rafferty, seconded by Roeser, to approve
Resolution No. 11 -98 as presented, was adopted
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
None
NEW BUSINESS
None
Adjournment
Motion by Rafferty, seconded by Roeser, to adjourn at 6:55 p.m.,
was adopted
Upon adjournment of the regular meeting, the Council will reconvene to a special closed
session to discuss labor negotiations
Community Calendar - A Look Ahead
September 27, 2011 through October 10, 2011
4. Wednesday, Sept 28
Monday, October 3
Monday, October 3
Thursday, October 6
4- Monday, October 10
6:30 pm, Council Chambers
5:30 pm, Community Room
6:30 pm, Council Chambers
8:00 am, Community Room
6:30 pm, Council Chambers
Environmental Board
Council Work Session
Park Board
EDAC
City Council Meeting
•
a
CITY 0F
INS KE
REVISED
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
Monday, September 26, 2011
* * *** * * * * **
6:30 p.m.
(Scheduled to be broadcast on Channel 16)
City Council: Mayor Reinert, Council Members O'Donnell, Gallup, Roeser & Rafferty
City Administrator: Jeff Karlson
COUNCIL WORK SESSION, 5 :30 P.M.
Community Room (not televised)
1. Fence at 1205 Buckthorn Lane
2. Review Regular Agenda
CITY COUNCIL MEETING, 6:30 P.M.
➢ Call to Order and Roll Call
➢ Pledge of Allegiance
➢ Open Mike / Public Comment
> Setting the Agenda: Addition or deletion of agenda items
Pg 1 -2
CONSENT AGENDA'
A) Consideration of Expenditures:
i) September 26, 2011 (Check No. 91601 through
91700) in the amount of $201,040.12;
ii) Centennial Fire District (Check No. 4983 through
5001) in the amount of $33,672.74
Pg 3 -15
B) Consider approval of September 6, 2011 Work Session Minutes to follow
Council Member Rafferty absent
C) Consider approval of September 12, 2011 Council Meeting Pg 16 -23
Minutes
D) Consider approval of Application for Exempt Permit from Lawful Pg 24
Gambling License for St. Joseph Catholic Church (two events)
E) Consider approval of Application to Conduct Excluded Bingo Pg 25
for Blue Heron PTO
F) Consider Resolution No. 11 -96, Extending Deadlines for Pg 26 -28
Moon Marsh Planned Unit Development, Jeff Smyser
Council Agenda
-2-
REVISED
2. FINANCE DEPARTMENT REPORT, Al Rolek
No report
September 26, 2011
ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT REPORT, Dan Tesch
A) Consider Recommendation to Reclassify One Staff Position and Pg 29
to Eliminate Two Staff Positions, Jeff Karlson
PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT REPORT, John Swenson
A) Consider 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 19 -11, Amending Pg 30 -40
Chapter 503 of the Lino Lakes Code of Ordinances regarding
Animal Control, John Swenson
B) Consider 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 20 -11, Amending Pg 41 -45
Chapter 213, Subdivision 7, of the Lino Lakes Code of
Ordinances, regarding Unclaimed Property, John Swenson
PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT "REPORT, Rick DeGardner
No report
MMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT Michael
A) Consider Resolution No. 11 -97, Calling for Hearing on Proposed Pg 46 -48
Assessment, 35E /CSAH 14 Interchange Project, Michael Grochala
B) Consider Resolution 11 -98, Approving Letter of Understanding
with City of Centerville, 21st Avenue Park and Ride /Road
Improvements, Michael Grochala
UNFINISHED BUSINES
None
3USS1
None
nm ,
Upon adjournment of the regular meeting, the Council will reconvene to a special closed
session to discuss labor negotiations
Community Calendar - A Look Ahead
August 23, 2011 through September 12, 2011
4. Wednesday, Sept 28
Monday, October 3
4- Monday, October 3
Thursday, October 6
Monday, October 10
6:30 pm, Council Chambers
5:30 pm, Community Room
6:30 pm, Council Chambers
8:00 am, Community Room
6:30 pm, Council Chambers
Environmental Board
Council Work Session
Park Board
EDAC
City Council Meeting
•
•
•
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
Monday, September 26, 2011
6:30 p.m.
(Scheduled to be broadcast on Channel 16)
City Council: Mayor Reinert, Council Members O'Donnell, Gallup, Roeser & Rafferty
City Administrator: Jeff Karlson
COUNCIL WORK SESSION, 5:30 P.M.
Community Room (not televised)
1. Fence at 1205 Buckthorn Lane
2. Review Regular Agenda
CITY COUNCIL MEETING, 6:30 P.M.
➢ Call to Order and Roll Call
➢ Pledge of Allegiance
➢ Open Mike / Public Comment
➢ Setting the Agenda: Addition or deletion of agenda items
Pg 1 -2
1. CONSENT AGENDA
A) Consideration of Expenditures:
i) September 26, 2011 (Check No. 91601 through
91700) in the amount of $201,040.12;
ii) Centennial Fire District (Check No. 4983 through
5001) in the amount of $33,672.74
Pg 3 -15
B) Consider approval of September 6, 2011 Work Session Minutes to follow
Council Member Rafferty absent
C) Consider approval of September 12, 2011 Council Meeting Pg 16 -23
Minutes
Consider approval of Application for Exempt Permit from Lawful Pg 24
Gambling License for St. Joseph Catholic Church (two events)
E) Consider approval of Application to Conduct Excluded Bingo Pg 25
for Blue Heron PTO
F) Consider Resolution No. 11 -96, Extending Deadlines for Pg 26 -28
Moon Marsh Planned Unit Development, Jeff Smyser
Council Agenda
-2- September 26, 2011
2. FINANCE DEPARTMENT REPORT, Al Rolek
No report
3. ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT REPORT, Dan Tesch
A) Consider Recommendation to Reclassify One Staff Position and Pg 29
to Eliminate Two Staff Positions, Jeff Karlson
4. PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT REPORT, John Swenson
A) Consider 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 19 -11, Amending Pg 30 -40
Chapter 503 of the Lino Lakes Code of Ordinances regarding
Animal Control, John Swenson
B) Consider 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 20 -11, Amending Pg 41 -45
Chapter 213, Subdivision 7, of the Lino Lakes Code of
Ordinances, regarding Unclaimed Property, John Swenson
5. PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT REPORT, Rick DeGardner
No report
6. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT, Michael Grochala
A) Consider Resolution No. 11 -97, Calling for Hearing on Proposed Pg 46 -48
Assessment, 35E /CSAH 14 Interchange Project, Michael Grochala
7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
None
8. NEW BUSINESS
None
Adjournment
Upon adjournment of the regular meeting, the Council will reconvene to a special closed
session to discuss labor negotiations
Community Calendar - A Look Ahead
August 23, 2011 through September 12, 2011
1 Wednesday, Sept 28 6:30 pm, Council Chambers Environmental Board
1 Monday, October 3 5:30 pm, Community Room Council Work Session
1 Monday, October 3 6:30 pm, Council Chambers Park Board
1 Thursday, October 6 8:00 am, Community Room EDAC
1 Monday, October 10 6:30 pm, Council Chambers City Council Meeting
•
•
z
City of Lino Lakes
Organizational
Assessment
1September 2011
I
Prepared by: Jeff Karlson, City Administrator
9/22/2011
I. BACKGROUND
In May 2009 the City Council held a strategic planning and goal- setting session, which was
facilitated by Jim and Lisa Lynn. In a report prepared by Lynn & Associates, a key strategic
goal was to "study, measure, and improve core work processes to deliver effective and efficient
services and programs." The following objectives were included as strategic goals:
1. Complete an organizational assessment to identify opportunities to improve
organizational effectiveness.
2. Implement process improvement efforts to ensure continuous effectiveness and
efficiency.
In October 2010, the City Council directed City Administrator Jeff Karlson to conduct an
organizational assessment of City departments for the purpose of identifying inefficient
processes, duplication of services, and ineffective communication. Furthermore, to provide
general direction to the Council on where to implement changes in order to improve overall
organizational effectiveness, accountability, and decision - making.
Following are some of the basic guidelines that were followed, as outlined in a memo to the
Council.
• Communicate to employees openly and honestly the potential need for change.
• Review job descriptions to determine if job duties are accurate and up -to -date.
• Get as much employee feedback as practical.
• Examine the city internal processes and systems.
• Keep the focus on delivering services to residents cost effectively and efficiently.
• Include closure in the reorganization plan.
• Clearly communicate why we're making any changes and what goals we hope to
accomplish.
Two basic questions that were considered throughout the analysis were: how do we know that
resources are being properly allocated and how can we better utilize our limited resources?
II. COMMUNICATION
In December 2010, the City Administrator held three staff meetings at the city hall, police
department, and the public works facility to inform employees that he would be conducting an
organizational assessment as directed by the City Council. Staff was informed that the first step
of the review process would be to identify inefficiencies, redundancy, and other organizational
1
inconsistencies. The second step would be to formulate strategies for change and then bring a
plan of action to the City Council for consideration and approval.
After interviews with staff were completed, the Administrator met with each department director
to assess the results. The Management Team also discussed change strategies during several
directors' meetings in which the how, what, and why questions were put forth.
III. EMPLOYEE INTERVIEWS
The City Administrator drafted a list of questions and asked the department directors to review
them.
January through March 2011, 20 Lino Lakes employees in city hall were interviewed. Prior to
each interview, the employee was asked to review his or her job description and the following
list of questions:
1. Review your job description. Have any of your responsibilities changed?
2. What do you do on a typical day at work?
3. When you think about going to work, what do you look forward to doing?
4. What excites and challenges you in your job?
5. What, if anything, do you dread when you think about going to work?
6. How is your work regulated or monitored?
7. What do you think your supervisor expects from you?
8. What are your expectations of your supervisor?
9. How would you describe your supervisor's leadership style?
10. How do you find out what is going on in the organization?
11. In your opinion, what does your department do well?
12. What would make your department more effective?
13. If you had a magic wand, what specifically would you change in your department?
Using this format, eight employees in Community Development were interviewed, four
employees in Public Services /Parks & Recreation, three in Finance, two in Administration, and
three support staff employees in the Police Department'. Six employees in the Public Works
Department were also interviewed, but the interviews were less formal and the questions more
open- ended. The average interview took between 90 minutes and two hours to complete.
1 An assessment of the entire Police Department was not performed in order to give the recently -hired Police Chief
time to evaluate his department.
2
IV. RESULTS
Generally, employees enjoy working for the City. They like the job they do and the people they
work with. Staff works well together by helping each other out. There are very few personality
issues. Most of the employees mentioned that they like the variety of tasks they get to do in their
jobs. Employees emphasized the need to be customer - orientated. People are usually very good
at getting back to residents or co- workers on a timely basis with the answers they need. Almost
everyone does an excellent job of this. Only two employees were mentioned as needing to be
held accountable or needing some coaching in this area.
Generally, employees get to use their skills in a creative way to accomplish the best results.
They understand their roles. Employees know what their responsibilities are and perform them
competently and consistently. Issues that do arise from time to time get resolved before they
become a major problem.
Not surprisingly, employee morale is low. With so much uncertainty about the City's financial
future, many employees are anxious and fearful about losing their job. However, they
understand the City Council will have to make more of the same painful decisions to reduce the
budget as they did the past two years. Because of this, it appears employees are disinclined to
take on new initiatives. This could stem from the following: (1) lack of support from the Council
or department directors, (2) discouragement, (3) disengagement, or (4) insufficient
communication/direction. There are many reasons for disengagement, but one of the biggest
reasons is that people simply don't feel trusted.
When employees were asked what would make their department more effective, several issues
were brought up, including those listed below.
• Better utilization of staff
• Better communication from the top and between staff
• Better communication between departments
• Less bureaucracy
• Utilize computer technology more effectively (e.g. electronic filing system)
• More training opportunities
• Better customer services (e.g. phones, front counters)
• More recognition of employees
• Department director needs to delegate more, or do a better job of managing employees
• More accountability (Everyone held to the same standard)
Based on these responses, a survey was created and employees were asked to rank what they
believed were the most important issues. Overall, staff feels the most important issues are: (1)
3
improved communication from the top and between staff; (2) better utilization of technology; (3)
enhanced communication between departments; and (4) better utilization of staff.
V. RIECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommended the City Council implement organizational changes in three phases. The
first phase occurred in June and July when certain positions were reclassified. The second phase
includes staff reductions, which will take place toward the end of September. The third phase,
which involves further staff restructuring, should be executed next year.
Phase 1: Job Classification Changes
After reviewing position descriptions and discussing job duties and responsibilities with each
employee and his or her supervisor, it was determined that certain support staff positions needed
to be reevaluated or reclassified. Ann Antonsen of Springsted, Inc. conducted a job analysis for
the following positions: Secretary B positions (which included two full -time and one part-time
position), Parks & Recreation Office Manager, and Police Records Technician. Staff also
revised several other job descriptions, which did not require a change in reclassification or pay.
Based on the review performed by Springsted, Inc., staff is proposing that the following
positions be reclassified:
Secretary B to Office Technician I. One of the essential job functions now included in
the position description includes the issuance of building permits. The main objectives
are to consolidate support staff behind the front counter in Community Development and
to cross -train the office technicians so they can perform all the essential functions needed
to support the Parks & Recreation, Community Development, and Administration
departments. There are currently two full -time positions and one part-time position
classified as a Secretary B. As you'll see below, the recommendation is to reclassify one
of the full -time positions and to eliminate the other one, which would leave only a part-
time position in this job classification. There would be no change in compensation.
[The City Council approved the reclassification on July 11, 2011.1
• Parks & Recreation Office Manager to Office Technician II. When this position was
moved from the Parks & Recreation building on Lake Drive into the new city hall, the
recommendation at that time was to reclassify this position to Secretary B. A former city
administrator decided not to downgrade the position, even though it no longer needed to
remain a supervisory position. The position is classified as Office Technician II because
4
this person will coordinate the schedules of the Office Technician I positions, the
Community Development Assistant, and the Permit Technician to ensure the front
counters and phones are covered at all times in city hall. Otherwise, the duties are similar
to that of an Office Technician I. With the reclassification, the recommendation being
proposed is to "redline" the position, which means that the incumbent's pay will remain
frozen until it surpasses the top hourly rate in the pay range.
[The City Council will consider this proposal at the September 26, 2011 Council
meeting.]
• Secretary B in Public Safety to Records Technician. Currently, only Jackie Bowdich is
classified as a Records /Evidence Technician, even though Lori Hawkinson is performing
the same job duties. Therefore, the recommendation is to reclassify Ms. Hawkinson's
position to Records Technician. This will result in an annual wage increase from $45,752
to $47,369, which is the same wage as Ms. Bowdich.
[The City Council approved this recommendation on June 27, 2011.]
• Records/Evidence Technician to Records Technician. Several years ago, the former
Public Safety Director requested that "Evidence" be included in the job title because this
position assisted with the storage, preservation, and disposal of evidence. There should
be no distinction between the two office staff positions in the Police Department since
their duties are substantially the same.
[The City Council approved this recommendation on June 27, 2011.]
Since all of these positions are in the AFSCME bargaining unit, the union was advised about the
proposed position reclassifications prior to the City Council acting on the recommendations.
Phase 2: Staff Reductions
The following positions may be considered for elimination:
• Senior Planner. This position involves comprehensive city planning, which includes
coordinating and communicating the planning process and enforcing the City's zoning
ordinance. Another option was to eliminate the Associate Planner position. However,
the Associate Planner handles many of the day -to -day activities in Community
Development, such as land use and zoning issues, code enforcement, sign permits,
conditional use permits, and maintenance of planning files, records, and maps. When
considering which position to eliminate, it became more apparent that the Associate
Planner position is more essential for providing customer service on a daily basis. The
5
primary responsibilities of the Senior Planner can be assumed by the Community
Development Director and the Associate Planner.
• Director of Administration. This position serves on the City's management team and
assists the City Administrator in several areas. Some of the essential job functions
include the following: managing personnel files; updating personnel policies;
administering job recruitment and selection process; updating position descriptions;
administering workers' compensation claims; administering the City's drug testing
program; coordinating appointments to advisory board positions, and assisting with labor
negotiations. Recently, there has been a modicum of activity in the area of human
resources. Because the City is facing tough budget times and being forced to make
difficult employment decisions, it is harder to justify an assistant -level position when
there are not enough regular duties to perform on a day -to -day basis. With the
elimination of the position, the City Administrator would assume nearly all of the human
resources functions performed by the Director of Administration. The other duties
assigned to this position would be delegated to other employees.
The elimination of these two positions will be considered at the September 26, 2011 Council
meeting.
If deeper cuts were needed in the 2012 budget, it would necessitate having to eliminate a support
staff position, which would adversely impact the City's ability to implement a document
management software program when the City purchases a document management system from
Laserfiche in 2012.
In anticipation of staff reductions this year, the City Council adopted a resolution on July 25,
2011, which authorized a voluntary Early Retirement Incentive Program for a limited time period
in order to avoid position eliminations. An early retirement program was previously offered in
2009. The Council established the same eligibility requirements and incentives for this program.
These incentives are in addition to the regular benefits granted to a retiring employee in
accordance with City policy or union contract. No employees took this option.
On September 12, 2011, the City Council accepted a recommendation to adopt a resolution
authorizing a severance package of 12 weeks' pay to provide financial assistance to employees
whose positions are being abolished.
6
Phase 3: Future Staff Restructuring
• Deputy Clerk. The primary job functions of this position are elections, purchasing, and
administrative support. However, the deputy clerk spends little time providing clerical
support. The plan is to eliminate the deputy clerk position and create an
HR/Administrative Assistant position, whose primary responsibilities would include
human resources functions and administrative support to the City Administrator and City
Clerk. The supervision of elections would be transferred to the City Clerk. Purchasing
would move to the Finance Department. Jean Viger is scheduled to retire December
2012, so the transition would occur in 2012.
• Accountant III. Along with assisting the Finance Director with the annual audit and
budget, this position performs many other functions that typically would be handled by a
Human Resources person. This includes coordinating and administering the employee
benefit program, wellness program, and new employee orientation. Upon the retirement
of Jean Viger, I would like to move purchasing responsibilities to this position.
Future Staff Additions
• Administrative Assistant. This position would administer the employee benefits
program, including health, dental, and life insurance, workers' compensation, wellness
program, and FMLA. This position would also provide administrative support to the City
Administrator and City Clerk.
• Senior Engineering Technician. Staff believes the City could realize a significant
savings by hiring a Sr. Engineering Technician.
7
•
•
•
WS — Item 1
WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT
Work Session Item
Date: September 26, 2011
To: City Council
From: Jason Wedel, City Engineer
Re: Fence Encroachment at 1205 Buckthorn Avenue - Continued
Background
This item was originally discussed at the City Council work session that was held on
September 6, 2011. At that meeting, staff presented the background on this matter which
relates primarily to the denial of an encroachment agreement for the installation of a
fence within the drainage and utility easement on the east and north sides of the above -
referenced property due to the presence of an existing storm sewer pipe within the
easement. In addition to staff's presentation, the property owner also spoke and
presented his basis for why the encroachment agreement should be allowed. At the end
of the discussion, the City Council directed staff to review what other cities allow within
their drainage and utility easements and provide an update at the next City Council work
session.
Included in the subsequent City Council weekly report dated September 9, 2011 were
several sections of the City Ordinance pertaining to the construction of residential fences.
These sections of the City Ordinance were provided for the City Council's information.
The first ordinance section states that fences placed upon utility easements require City
approval and are subject to removal at the owner's expense if required for the
maintenance or improvement of the utility. The second ordinance section states that
fence installation requires a permit and that they may be constructed within public and
private drainage easements provided that:
1. No fence shall be located within a drainage or utility easement without written
permission of the Zoning Administrator and the filing of an encroachment
agreement.
2. Removal of a fence or portion thereof for the purpose of utilizing the easement
shall be at the property owner's expense.
The ordinance does not contain any language restricting fences from being located within
drainage and utility easements that contain underground utilities.
P1
P2
As discussed at the previous City Council work session, drainage and utility easements
are established during the plat approval process. The easements are mutually agreed to
with the land developers and are established to facilitate the City's protection and
maintenance of various infrastructure improvements prior to home construction. Home
buyers have the option of choosing whether or not to purchase lots that are impacted by
these easements. Based on this information, it has been the City's practice not to allow
fences in drainage and utility easements that contain underground utilities. The City
Easement Encroachment Agreement form specifically states that encroachment shall not
be allowed on any easement that is being used for underground utility purposes.
City staff has since contacted a number of different cities on this topic and the results are
as follows:
Lakeville — No fences allowed in D & U easements that contain public utilities
Forest Lake — No fences allowed in D & U easements that contain public utilities
North Branch — No fences allowed in D & U easements that contain public utilities
Mahtomedi — Yes, fences allowed subject to review
Rosemount - Yes, fences allowed subject to review
Minnetrista - Yes, fences allowed subject to review
Excelsior - Yes, fences allowed subject to review
St. Paul Park - Yes, fences allowed subject to review
Blaine - Yes, fences allowed subject to review
Hugo - Yes, fences allowed subject to review
Shoreview — Yes, fences allowed subject to review
Of the cities that were contacted by City staff, three of the eleven cities have a similar
policy to Lino Lakes and do not allow fences within drainage and utility easements that
contain underground utilities. The other eight cities do allow fences to be constructed in
the easement on a case by case basis. If the City Council were to decide to change the
City's policy on allowing fences in drainage and utility easements that contain
underground utilities, the following conditions would be recommended:
1. An Easement Encroachment Agreement be executed and recorded at Anoka
County to ensure that future property owners are aware of the potential removal
of the fence at their expense. This is consistent with the City's current policy.
2. Approval of the encroachment will be based on the review by the City Engineer.
If it is determined that the installation of the fence has the potential to alter or
damage the existing underground utilities located within the easement, then the
fence will need to be relocated a sufficient distance away to ensure safe
installation.
3. Encroachments will not be allowed in drainage and utility easements that are
being utilized for storm water ponding.
Requested Council Direction
Staff is requesting direction from the City Council on this matter in regards to deviating
from existing City requirements to facilitate an Easement Encroachment Agreement for a
fence to be located within a drainage and utility easement that contains an existing storm
sewer pipe.
•
EXPENDITURES
SEPTEMBER 26, 2011
•
•
P3
Date: 09/21/2011 Time: 08:13:42 City of Lino Lakes
Ranges:
Vendor #: (A)
Invoice #: (A)
Entry Journal #: (R) 9631 - 9632
Trans #: (A)
Line #: (A)
Due Date: (A)
Bank #: (A)
FM Entry - Invoice Journal
Operator: KKF Page: 1
Options: Detail / Summary: S Invoice Status: A # of copies: 1
Sort: A Check Over Expend: N
Discount
Vendor # Name # of items Net Gross Discount Lost
000093 ACE SOLID WASTE, INC. 1 553.51 553.51 .00 .00
000998 AGGREGATE INDUSTRIES - MIDWEST REGION 1 70.30 70.30 .00 .00
000100 AID ELECTRIC CORPORATION 3 1,163.09 1,163.09 .00 .00
000210 AMERICAN FASTENER & SUPPLY, INC. 1 15.44 15.44 .00 .00
000370 ANOKA COUNTY CENTRAL COMMICATIONS 1 442.34 442.34 .00 .00
000420 ANOKA COUNTY PROPERTY RECORDS & TAXATION 1 184.00 184.00 .00 .00
000946 C. P. OFFICE PRODUCTS 1 192.60 192.60 .00 .00
000122 CDW GOVERNMENT, INC. 1 14.49 14.49 .00 .00
900516 CENTENNIAL COMMUNITY EDUCATION 1 8.81 8.81 .00 .00
001110 CENTENNIAL UTILITIES 2 1,716.23 1,716.23 .00 .00
002700 CENTERPOINT /MINNEGASCO, INC. 1 153.16 153.16 .00 .00
001070 CENTURY FENCE COMPANY, INC. 1 8,290.00 8,290.00 .00 .
008407 CHANHASSEN DINNER THEATERS 1 100.00 100.00 .00 .00
004670 COMCAST 2 69.90 69.90 .00 .00
004470 COMO LUBE & SUPPLIES, INC. 1 1,710.68 1,710.68 .00 .00
001187 CONNEXUS ENERGY 1 4,500.84 4,500.84 .00 .00
008023 CROSSBREED HOLSTERS LLC 1 59.81 59.81 .00 .00
008003 DASH MEDICAL GLOVES, INC. 1 61.90 61.90 .00 .00
007465 DAVIS EQUIPMENT CORPORATION 1 117.48 117.48 .00 .00
000256 DEEP ROCK WATER COMPANY 1 57.82 57.82 .00 .00
000947 DIAMOND VOGEL PAINTS, INC. 1 964.59 964.59 .00 .00
001267 FAST BREAK CORNER MARKET, INC. 1 19.16 19.16 .00 .00
•
Date: 09/21/2011 Time: 08:13:42
City of Lino Lakes Operator: KKF Page: P5
FM Entry - Invoice Journal
Discount
or # Name # of items Net Gross Discount Lost
i�
001520 FLANAGAN SALES, INC. 1 3,767.34 3,767.34 .00 .00
000431 FORD CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. 1 2,630.24 2,630.24 .00 .00
001072 GAMETIME /A PLAYCORE CO. 1 1,484.53 1,484.53 .00 .00
000078 GILBERTSON, STEVE 1 38.74 38.74 .00 .00
008240 GOPHER STATE ONE -CALL 1 443.90 443.90 .00 .00
005031 GOPHER 1 1,210.11 1,210.11 .00 .00
000152 GRAFFIC TRAFFIC, LLC 1 104.00 104.00 .00 .00
007644 GREYSTONE COMMERCIAL SERVICES LP 1 103.20 103.20 .00 .00
001480 HAWKINS, INC. 1 30.00 30.00 .00 .00
008401 JANINE HEGGESTAD 1 52.00 52.00 .00 .00
001840 TIM HILLESHEIM 1 33.77 33.77 .00 .00
001847 HIRSHFIELD'S PAINT MANUFACTURING,IN 1 494.83 494.83 .00 .00
003271 HSBC BANK USA 2 62.06 62.06 .00 .00
007224 HUGO MILL 1 581.06 581.06 .00 .00
001971 INFRATECH 3 3,710.00 3,710.00 .00 .00
nn0303 INSTRUMENTAL RESEARCH, INC. 1 142.50 142.50 .00 .00
076 INTERSTATE POWER SYSTEMS, INC. 1 1,247.37 1,247.37 .00 .00
002000 INTL UNION OF OPER ENGR 1 480.00 480.00 .00 .00
008400 DIANE IRVING 1 52.00 52.00 .00 .00
008394 JANI -KING OF MINNESOTA, INC. 2 3,624.13 3,624.13 .00 .00
008271 DONALD LEE JENSEN 1 498.75 498.75 .00 .00
008221 JEFFREY KARLSON 1 124.43 124.43 .00 .00
008406 JANELLE KORPI 1 40.00 40.00 .00 .00
008123 LUBRICATION TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 1 3,566.58 3,566.58 .00 .00
000274 LYNN PEAVEY COMPANY, INC. 1 144.00 144.00 .00 .00
002486 MATT PARROTT, A Storey Kenworthy Co. 1 799.10 799.10 .00 .00
007694 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 1 60,082.17 60,082.17 .00 .00
•
Date: 09/21/2011 Time 08:13:43 City of Lino Lakes
FM Entry - Invoice Journal
Operator: KKF Page: 3
Discount
L•
Vendor # Name # of items Net Gross Discount
007530 MINNESOTA HIGHWAY SAFETY & RESEARCH CTR 1 878.00 878.00 .00 .00
003455 MINNESOTA DEVELOPMENTAL BASKETBALL, INC. 1 4,702.50 4,702.50 .00 .00
002931 MN CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENT CENTER 2 1,122.09 1,122.09 .00 .00
007995 MN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY 1 25.00 25.00 .00 .00
008396 BRENDA MONTGOMERY 1 48.00 48.00 .00 .00
008122 MOORE, SHANNA 1 170.00 170.00 .00 .00
000649 MPSTMA 1 100.00 100.00 .00 .00
008405 BEV MURRAY 1 26.00 26.00 .00 .00
008198 NATIONAL PAYMENT CENTER 1 193.37 193.37 .00 .00
003091 NCPERS MINNESOTA 1 304.00 304.00 .00 .00
007268 PETE NOLL 1 103.63 103.63 .00 .00
003300 NORTHWAY IRRIGATION /LANDSCAPING 1 38.00 38.00 .00 .00
000900 O'REILLY AUTOMOTIVE, INC. 16 20.51 20.51 .00 .00
003443 OTTER LAKE ANIMAL CARE CENTER, INC. 1 171.40 171.40 .00 .00
008402 MARIE PETERSON 1 52.00 52.00 .00 .00
003491 PETTY CASH 1 64.14 64.14 .00 00
003524 PITNEY BOWES, INC. 1 269.96 269.96 .00
001105 PLANT & FLANGED EQUIPMENT COMPANY, INC. 1 3,345.83 3,345.83 .00 .00
000217 POLAR CHEVROLET & MAZDA 2 36.10 36.10 .00 .00
003600 PRESS PUBLICATIONS, INC. 2 55.66 55.66 .00 .00
900491 ROSEVILLE, CITY OF 2 6,720.88 6,720.88 .00 .00
000405 LESTER RYDEEN 1 190.67 190.67 .00 .00
003910 SAM'S CLUB, INC. 1 81.70 81.70 .00 .00
000065 SCHARBER & SONS, INC. 1 677.91 677.91 .00 .00
008403 HELEN SPENCER 1 26.00 26.00 .00 .00
004100 SPRINGSTED, INC. 1 3,700.00 3,700.00 .00 .00
004125 CITY OF SAINT PAUL 1 541.30 541.30 .00 .00
•
Date: 09/21/2011 Time: 08:13:43 City of Lino Lakes
FM Entry - Invoice Journal
Operator: KKF Page: P74
Discount
or # Name # of items Net Gross Discount Lost
008142 STAPLES ADVANTAGE 1 90.79, 90.79 .00 .00
007735 STREET SMART RENTAL 1 1,566.79 1,566.79 .00 .00
004240 STREICHER'S, INC. 1 40.57 40.57 .00 .00
008195 SWEENEY, MURPHY & SWEENEY, P.A. 1 10,637.53 10,637.53 .00 .00
000375 SYCOM, INC. 2 3,963.63 3,963.63 .00 .00
004340 T.A. SCHIFSKY AND SONS, INC. 3 3,732.16 3,732.16 .00 .00
000489 TDS METROCOM MN 1 993.86 993.86 .00 .00
004350 TKDA 7 28,230.94 28,230.94 .00 .00
008410 TORQBUDDY LLC 1 3,847.50 3,847.50 .00 .00
004469 TOUSLEY FORD, INC. 1 365.04 365.04 .00 .00
001534 TRI- COUNTY LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSOCIATION 1 50.00 50.00 .00 .00
004560 U S BANK VISA 1 3,064.59 3,064.59 .00 .00
008408 UTILITY TRUCK SERVICES 1 1,076.02 1,076.02 .00 .00
003465 VIKING ELECTRIC SUPPLY, INC. 3 266.26 266.26 .00 .00
000174 W. W. GOETSCH ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 3,943.69 3,943.69 .00 .00
"'1409 CAROL WAHL 1 26.00 26.00 .00 .00
11111/760 WALDOCH SPORTS, INC. 4 96.82 96.82 .00 .00
008404 FRANCES WATSON 1 26.00 26.00 .00 .00
004127 WAYNE WEGENER JR. 1 7.58 7.58 .00 .00
004840 WINNICK SUPPLY, INC. 1 35.34 35.34 .00 .00
003250 XCEL ENERGY 8 9,301.40 9,301.40 .00 .00
Grand Totals: 145 201,040.12 201,040.12 .00 .00*
•
P8
Date: 09/21/2011 Time: 07:59:17
Ranges:
Operator: KKF
Page: 1
City of Lino Lakes
FM Entry - Invoice Payment - Department Report
Fund:
Dept Id:
Program:
Vendor #:
Invoice #:
Schedule Journal #:
Bank #:
(A)
(A)
(A)
(A)
(A)
(R) 9637
(A)
Options: Print Ranges /Options: Y
Page on Department: N
Department Vendor Name
- 9638
# of copies: 1
Description
ADMINISTRATION
ADMINISTRATION
ADMINISTRATION
ADMINISTRATION
FINANCE
ANOKA COUNTY PROPERT
ANOKA COUNTY PROPERT
INTL UNION OF OPER E
MN CHILD SUPPORT PAY
NCPERS MINNESOTA
NATIONAL PAYMENT CEN
Total for
PRESS PUBLICATIONS,
U S BANK VISA
U S BANK VISA
KARLSON, JEFFREY
6476 STELLA LN- RECORDING
7963 HIGHLAND DR- RECORDI
SEPT. 2011 UNION DUES
CHILD SUPPORT
590600 -PERA LIFE
GARNISHMENT
Department
CHARTER COMM MEMBERSHIP
COOPERATION MEETING
MPELRA CONFERENCE
MILEAGE /NMMA MEETING REI
Total for Department 402
ROSEVILLE, CITY OF SEPT. 2011 IT SERVICES
Total for Department 407
LEGAL CONSULTANTS SWEENEY, MURPHY & SW SEPT. 2011 PROSECUTION S
Total for Department 414
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT U S BANK VISA BANNER
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT U S BANK VISA STATIONERY- OFFICE
Total for Department 415
PLANNING & ZONING ANOKA COUNTY PROPERT LINO AIR PARK ACQ- RECORD
PLANNING & ZONING PRESS PUBLICATIONS, PUBLIC HEARING PUBLICATI
Total for Department 416
ENGINEERING
ENGINEERING
POLICE
POLICE
POLICE
POLICE
POLICE
POLICE
POLICE
POLICE
TKDA
TKDA
AUG. 2011 STATE AID /STRE
AUG. 2011 SURFACE WATER
Total for Department 417
CDW GOVERNMENT, INC.
GRAFFIC TRAFFIC, LLC
LYNN PEAVEY COMPANY,
ANOKA COUNTY CENTRAL
TDS METROCOM MN
CONNEXUS ENERGY
FAST BREAK CORNER MA
TRI- COUNTY LAW ENFOR
MEMORY UPGRADE FOR LLPDW
LINO LAKES PD
TESTING KITS
AUG. 2011 WIRELESS INTER
MONTHLY PHONE SERVICES
MONTHLY ELECT. CHARGES
CAR WASHES
2011 ANNUAL AGENCY DUES-
Amount
46.00
46.00
480.00
1,122.09
304.00
193.37
2,191.46*
27.83
44.37
170.63
124.43
367.26*
5,769.58
5,769.58*
10,637.53
10,637.53*
58.91
11.71
70.62*
92.00
27.83
119.83*
760.82
760.82
1,521.64*
14.49
104.00
144.00
442.34
673.83
21.37
19.16
50.00
•
•
Date: 09/21/2011 Time: 07:59:17
•
Department
Operator: KKF
Page: 2
City of Lino Lakes
FM Entry - Invoice Payment - Department Report
Vendor Name
Description
POLICE
POLICE
POLICE
POLICE
POLICE
POLICE
POLICE
POLICE
POLICE
POLICE
POLICE
POLICE
POLICE
OTTER LAKE ANIMAL CA
SAM'S CLUB, INC.
WEGENER, WAYNE, JR.
STREICH£R'S, INC.
U S BANK VISA
U S BANK VISA
U S BANK VISA
U S BANK VISA
U S BANK VISA
U S BANK VISA
NOLL, PETER
DASH MEDICAL GLOVES,
CROSSBREED HOLSTERS
IMPOUND /CITY BOARDING FE
PD OPEN HOUSE
HSEM TRAINING LUNCH REIM
GUN REPAIR PARTS
2 POCKETJET PRINTERS -SQU
COLOR CONTEST WINNER FRO
LAPTOP BATTERY -SQUAD 363
PD BIKE LIGHTS & TIRE
PROJECTOR LIGHT BULB
REPLACEMENT DVD DRIVE -IN
GPS TRAINING REIMBURSEME
NITRILE GLOVES
D THILL UNIFORM ALLOWANC
Total for Department 420
BUILDING INSPECTIONS MN DEPT OF LABOR & I P. MOONEN - CERTIFIED BU
Total for Department 422
STREETS
STREETS
STREETS
STREETS
STREETS
STREETS
STREETS
STREETS
STREETS
EETS
LETS
ETS
STREETS
STREETS
FLEET
FLEET
FLEET
FLEET
FLEET
FLEET
FLEET
FLEET
FLEET
FLEET
FLEET
FLEET
FLEET
FLEET
FLEET
FLEET
•
TDS METROCOM MN
DIAMOND VOGEL PAINTS
AGGREGATE INDUSTRIES
CENTURY FENCE COMPAN
CONNEXUS ENERGY
XCEL ENERGY
VIKING ELEL1RIC SUPP
PETTY CASH
ST. PAUL CITY OF
T.A. SCHIFSKY AND SO
T.A. SCHIFSKY AND SO
T.A. SCHIFSKY AND SO
TKDA
STREET SMART RENTAL
Total for
MONTHLY PHONE SERVICES
WHITE HIGH BUILD DURABLE
CONCRETE SAND
FURNISH & INSTALL CANTIL
MONTHLY ELECT. CHARGES
MONTHLY ELECT. CHARGES
CONDUIT & WIRE
REPLENISH PETTY CASH
AUG. 2011 ASPHALT MIX PI
AC FINE /MODIFIED ASPHALT
AC MODIFIED ASPHALT
AC MODIFIED /FINE ASPHALT
AUG. 2011 OTTER LAKE SVC
TYPE II BARRICADES /MODEL
Department 430
SCHARBER & SONS, INC
AMERICAN FASTENER &
POLAR CHEVROLET & MA
POLAR CHEVROLET & MA
RYDEEN, LESTER
O'REILLY AUTOMOTIVE,
O'REILLY AUTOMOTIVE,
O'REILLY AUTOMOTIVE,
O'REILLY AUTOMOTIVE,
O'REILLY AUTOMOTIVE,
O'REILLY AUTOMOTIVE,
O'REILLY AUTOMOTIVE,
O'REILLY AUTOMOTIVE,
O'REILLY AUTOMOTIVE,
O'REILLY AUTOMOTIVE,
O'REILLY AUTOMOTIVE,
PARTS FOR UNIT # 135
MISC STOCK PARTS
LINK
LINK - # 362
CLOTHING ALLOWANCE REIMB
AIR FILTER - # 202
COUPLER
FUEL FILTERS
FUSE HOLDER /ADD A CIRCUI
HOSE CLAMPS
MARKER LIGHT
MINI LAMP
MISC FUEL /OIL FILTERS
MISC OIL FILTERS
MISC. OIL /FUEL FILTERS
OIL /FUEL FILTER
Amount
171.40
81.70
7.58
40.57
356.80
70.35
38.98
82.95
132.45
43.83
103.63
61.90
59.81
2,721.14*
25.00
25.00*
38.66
964.59
70.30
8,290.00
1,257.20
262.36
220.61
13.23
541.30
1,740.90
1,548.26
443.00
2,023.83
1,566.79
18,981.03*
677.91
15.44
18.05
18.05
190.67
16.43
22.38
32.92
13.87
20.20
16.10
5.39
58.35
32.87
60.92
14.50
P9
P10
Date: 09/21/2011 Time: 07:59:17
Department
Operator: KKF
Page: 3
City of Lino Lakes
FM Entry - Invoice Payment - Department Report
Vendor Name
Description Amount
FLEET
FLEET
FLEET
FLEET
FLEET
FLEET
FLEET
FLEET
FLEET
FLEET
FLEET
FLEET
FLEET
FLEET
FLEET
FLEET
FLEET
FLEET
FLEET
GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS
GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS
GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS
GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS
GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS
GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS
GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS
GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS
GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS
GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS
GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS
GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS
GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS
GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS
GOVERNMENT
GOVERNMENT
GOVERNMENT
GOVERNMENT
PARKS
PARKS
PARKS
PARKS
PARKS
PARKS
PARKS
PARKS
PARKS
O'REILLY
O'REILLY
O'REILLY
O'REILLY
O'REILLY
HSBC
AUTOMOTIVE,
AUTOMOTIVE,
AUTOMOTIVE,
AUTOMOTIVE,
AUTOMOTIVE,
BANK USA
HSBC BANK USA
TOUSLEY FORD, INC.
COMO LURE & SUPPLIES
U S BANK VISA
U S BANK VISA
WALDOCH
WALDOCH
WALDOCH
WALDOCH
WINNICK
DAVIS
OIL /FUEL FILTERS
PA DOM LINE - # 230
RETURN SWAY LINK KIT
RETURN TQ CALIPERS & BRK
UNIVERSAL PATCH
BREAK AWAY CABLE & PIN /S
BREAK AWAY SWITCH 7 -WIRE
REPLACE AC CONDENSOR - #
55 GALLON DRUM 15/40, 5/
BATTERIES - BATTERIES PLUS
RADAR TRAILER JACK
SPORTS, INC. ELEMENT,AIR CLNR
SPORTS, INC. GASKET,FLOAT CHAMBER /NEE
SPORTS, INC. GUIDE /PLATE,ELEMENT FITT
SPORTS, INC. 0- RING /MOTO 4
SUPPLY, INC. 2" BALL VALVE STANDARD T
EQUIPMENT CORP SHEILD PRO521724
LUBRICATION TECHNOLO 1000.3 GALLONS UNL
UTILITY TRUCK SERVIC DOT & ANNUAL INSPECTION/
Total for Department 431
ACE SOLID WASTE, INC
AID ELECTRIC CORPORA
AID ELECTRIC CORPORA
DEEP ROCK WATER COMP
TDS METROCOM MN
C. P. OFFICE PRODUCT
CENTENNIAL UTILITIES
CONNEXUS ENERGY
HILLESHEIM, TIM
CENTERPOINT /MINNEGAS
CENTERPOINT /MINNEGAS
XCEL ENERGY
PITNEY BOWES, INC.
COMCAST
BUILDINGS STAPLES ADVANTAGE
BUILDINGS JANI -KING OF MINNESO
BUILDINGS JANI -KING OF MINNESO
BUILDINGS ROSEVILLE, CITY OF
RUBBISH /RECYCLE REMOVAL
LL COMMUNITY GREEN /REPLA
PD GARAGE LOT- RELAMP EXT
BOTTLED WATER DELIVERY
MONTHLY PHONE SERVICES
MISC OFFICE PRODUCTS
CITY CENTER -AUG. 2011 GA
MONTHLY ELECT. CHARGES
EXPANSION JOINTS - REIMB
1187 MAIN ST- MONTHLY GAS
1189 MAIN ST- MONTHLY GAS
MONTHLY ELECT. CHARGES
POSTAGE MACHINE RENTAL C
INTERNET CHARGES
MISC OFFICE SUPPLIES
SEPT. 2011 CLEANING SERV
SEPT. 2011 CLEANING SERV
SEPT. 2011 PHONE CHARGES
Total for Department 432
GILBERTSON, STEVE
ACE SOLID WASTE,
MPSTMA
GAMETIME/A PLAYCORE FLIP
CENTENNIAL UTILITIES 6811
CENTENNIAL UTILITIES 6918
CENTENNIAL UTILITIES 7204
CLOTHING ALLOWANCE REIMB
INC RUBBISH /RECYCLE REMOVAL
2011 FALL WORKSHOP REGIS
SLIDE (ROTOPLASTIC:
LAKE DR -AUG. 2011 G
SUNRISE -AUG. 2011 G
LAKE DR -AUG. 2011 G
MONTHLY ELECT. CHARGES
WOOD FIBER SAFETY SURFAC
CONNEXUS
FLANAGAN
ENERGY
SALES, INC.
13.73
6.66
-16.26
- 285.08
7.53
40.66
21.40
365.04
1,710.68
142.45
45.95
13.20
24.51
54.96
4.15
35.34
117.48
3,566.58
1,076.02
8,159.05*
425.80
419.25
536.84
57.82
165.36
192.60
948.58
1,034.46
33.77
41.50
52.27
5,981.16
269.96
69.90
90.79
486.28
3,137.85
951.30
14,895.49*
38.74
127.71
100.00
1,484.53
17.08
26.82
17.08
68.53
3,767.34
•
Date: 09/21/2011 Time: 07:59:17 Operator: KKF
•
Department
Page: 4
City of Lino Lakes
FM Entry - Invoice Payment - Department Report
Vendor Name Description
PARKS
PARKS
PARKS
PARKS
PARKS
PARKS
PARKS
RECREATION
ENVIRONMENTAL
FORESTRY
ADULT SPORTS
ADULT SPORTS
IAL EVENTS /TRIPS
CIAL EVENTS /TRIPS
SPECIAL EVENTS /TRIPS
SPECIAL EVENTS /TRIPS
SPECIAL EVENTS /TRIPS
SPECIAL EVENTS /TRIPS
SPECIAL EVENTS /TRIPS
SPECIAL EVENTS /TRIPS
SPECIAL EVENTS /TRIPS
SPECIAL EVENTS /TRIPS
SPECIAL EVENTS /TRIPS
SPECIAL EVENTS /TRIPS
SPECIAL EVENTS /TRIPS
SPECIAL EVENTS /TRIPS
SPECIAL EVENTS /TRIPS
HIRSHFIELD'S PAINT M ATHLETIC FIELD STRIPING
CENTERPOINT /MINNEGAS 1179 MAIN ST- MONTHLY GAS
CENTERPOINT /MINNEGAS 6520 PHEASANT RUN S -MONT
NORTHWAY IRRIGATION/ VALVE SOLENOID IRRITROL
PETTY CASH REPLENISH PETTY CASH
HUGO MILL PULLEY /OIL /POLE SAW /SPAR
GREYSTONE COMMERCIAL EZ REACHER W /PLAIN SLEEV
Total for Department 450
PETTY CASH REPLENISH PETTY CASH
Total for Department 451
U S BANK VISA ARBORETUM /CLEAN WATER SU
Total for Department 461
U S BANK VISA SIGN - EMERALD ASH BORER
Total for Department 463
Total for Fund 101
MONTGOMERY, BRENDA
KORPI, JANELLE
Total for
MOORE, SHANNA
JENSEN, DONALD LEE
Total for
PETTY CASH
U S BANK VISA
U S BANK VISA
U S BANK VISA
U S BANK VISA
GOPHER
IRVING, DIANE
HEGGESTAD, JANINE
PETERSON, MARIE
SPENCER, HELEN
WATSON, FRANCES
MURRAY, BEV
CHANHASSEN DINNER
WAHL, CAROL
CENTENNIAL COMMUNITY
Total for Department
PROGRAM REFUND
PROGRAM REFUND
Department
PROGRAM REFUND
CONTRACTED SPORTS OFFICI
Department 202
REPLENISH PETTY CASH
ART & SCIENCE CAMP SUPPL
ART CAMP SUPPLIES
SCIENCE CAMP SUPPLIES
SENIOR TRIP - SCIENCE MU
VINYL CONES /DODGEBALLS /P
SENIOR TRIP REFUND
SENIOR TRIP
SENIOR TRIP
SENIOR TRIP
SENIOR TRIP
SENIOR TRIP
TB DEPOSIT FOR
SENIOR TRIP
2011 MIDDLE
REFUND
REFUND
REFUND
REFUND
REFUND
SENIOR TRIP
REFUND
SCHOOL BEACH
205
YOUTH INSTRUCTIONAL MINNESOTA DEVELOPMEN BASKETBALL CLINIC
YOUTH INSTRUCTIONAL GOPHER VINYL CONES /DODGEBALLS /P
Total for Department 207
YOUTH SPORTS PETTY CASH
•
Amount
494.83
17.14
12.86
38.00
17.33
581.06
103.20
6,912.25*
21.15
21.15*
60.00
60.00*
41.49
41.49*
72,494.52*
48.00
40.00
88.00*
170.00
498.75
668.75*
3.56
195.19
24.58
61.22
425.00
472.23
52.00
52.00
52.00
26.00
26.00
26.00
100.00
26.00
8.81
1,550.59*
4,702.50
238.47
4,940.97*
REPLENISH PETTY CASH 8.87
P11
P12
Date: 09/21/2011 Time: 07:59:17 Operator: KKF
Page: 5
City of Lino Lakes
FM Entry - Invoice Payment - Department Report
Department Vendor Name Description Amount
YOUTH SPORTS U S BANK VISA FOOTBALL DRY ERASE BOARD 96.33
YOUTH SPORTS U S BANK VISA FOOTBALLS 53.57
YOUTH SPORTS U S BANK VISA KICKING TEES 53.03
YOUTH SPORTS GOPHER VINYL CONES /DODGEBALLS /P 499.41
Total for Department 208 711.21*
Total for Fund 201 7,959.52*
DEBT SERVICE SPRINGSTED, INC. 2010 CONTINUING DISCLOSU 336.36
Total for Department 470 336.36*
Total for Fund 322 336.36*
DEBT SERVICE SPRINGSTED, INC. 2010 CONTINUING DISCLOSU 336.36
Total for Department 470 336.36*
Total for Fund 323 336.36*
DEBT SERVICE SPRINGSTED, INC. 2010 CONTINUING DISCLOSU 336.36
Total for Department 470 336.36*
Total for Fund 324 336.36*
DEBT SERVICE SPRINGSTED, INC. 2010 CONTINUING DISCLOSU 336.37
Total for Department 470 336.37*
Total for Fund 327 336.37*
DEBT SERVICE SPRINGSTED, INC. 2010 CONTINUING DISCLOSU 336.37
Total for Department 470 336.37*
Total for Fund 328 336.37*
DEBT SERVICE SPRINGSTED, INC. 2010 CONTINUING DISCLOSU 336.36
Total for Department 470 336.36*
Total for Fund 329 336.36*
DEBT SERVICE SPRINGSTED, INC. 2010 CONTINUING DISCLOSU 336.36
Total for Department 470 336.36*
Total for Fund 330 336.36*
DEBT SERVICE SPRINGSTED, INC. 2010 CONTINUING DISCLOSU 336.37
Total for Department 470 336.37*
Total for Fund 331 336.37*
DEBT SERVICE SPRINGSTED, INC. 2010 CONTINUING DISCLOSU 336.37
Total for Department 470 336.37*
•
Date: 09/21/2011 Time: 07:59:17 Operator: KKF
•
Page: 6
City of Lino Lakes
FM Entry - Invoice Payment - Department Report
Department Vendor Name Description Amount
Total for Fund 332 336.37*
DEBT SERVICE SPRINGSTED, INC. 2010 CONTINUING DISCLOSU 336.36
Total for Department 470 336.36*
Total for Fund 334 336.36*
GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS U S BANK VISA REPLACEMENT PRINTER -BLDG 819.51
Total for Department 432 819.51*
Total for Fund 403 819.51*
OTHER TKDA AUG. 2011 OTTER LAKE RD 4,936.78
Total for Department 499 4,936.78*
Total for Fund 406 4,936.78*
OTHER TKDA AUG 2011 SEALCOAT PROJEC 1,468.97
OTHER TKDA AUG. 2011 OVERLAY PROJEC 508.36
Total for Department 499 1,977.33*
Total for Fund 421 1,977.33*
OTHER TKDA AUG. 2011 BIRCH ST /WARE 9,242.82
OTHER TKDA AUG. 2011 MAIN ST /LAKE D 7,589.87
Total for Department 499 16,832.69*
Total for Fund 475 16,832.69*
•T SERVICE SPRINGSTED, INC. 2010 CONTINUING DISCLOSU 336.36
Total for Department 470 336.36*
WATER INSTRUMENTAL RESEARC TOTAL COLIFORM BACTERIA 142.50
WATER SYCOM, INC. SOLENOID FOR ELECT DOOR 426.00
WATER TDS METROCOM MN MONTHLY PHONE SERVICES 116.01
WATER CENTENNIAL UTILITIES 3RD QTR 2011 SEWER & WAT 459.90
WATER CONNEXUS ENERGY MONTHLY ELECT. CHARGES 1,795.76
WATER HAWKINS, INC. 150 LB CHLORINE CYLINDER 30.00
WATER MATT PARROTT /STOREY #10 WINDOW ENVELOPES 399.55
WATER CENTERPOINT /MINNEGAS 1180 BIRCH ST- MONTHLY GA 12.86
WATER CENTERPOINT /MINNEGAS 6774 BLACK DUCK DR -MONTH 16.53
WATER XCEL ENERGY MONTHLY ELECT. CHARGES 3,057.88
WATER TKDA AUG. 2011 UTILITY CONNEC 469.34
WATER U S BANK VISA REPLENISH ROLLER CARE SO 17.65
WATER GOPHER STATE ONE -CAL AUG. 2011 LOCATES 221.95
WATER TORQBUDDY LLC HYDRANT BUDDY HYDRANT WR 3,847.50
Total for Department 494 11,013.43*
Total for Fund 601 11,349.79*
•
P13
P14
Date: 09/21/2011
Department
Time 07:59:17
Operator: KKF
Page: 7
City of Lino Lakes
FM Entry - Invoice Payment - Department Report
Vendor Name
Description
Amount
SEWER
SEWER
SEWER
SEWER
SEWER
SEWER
SEWER
SEWER
SEWER
SEWER
SEWER
SEWER
SEWER
SEWER
SEWER
SEWER
SEWER
SEWER
SEWER
AID ELECTRIC CORPORA
W. W. GOETSCH ASSOCI
SYCOM, INC.
FORD CONSTRUCTION CO
INTERSTATE POWER SYS
PLANT & FLANGED EQUI
CENTENNIAL UTILITIES
CENTENNIAL UTILITIES
CONNEXUS ENERGY
INFRATECH
INFRATECH
INFRATECH
MATT PARROTT /STOREY
VIKING ELECTRIC SUPP
VIKING ELEC:'1'RIC SUPP
TKDA ._
U S BANK VISA
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL OCT. 2011 WASTEWATER SER
GOPHER STATE ONE -CAL AUG. 2011 LOCATES
Total for Department 495
CHANGE ROTATION ON EMERG
USED SUBMERSIBLE PUMP /MO
LABOR /MATERIALS FOR SERV
CEDAR ST. LIFT STATION L
PERFORM START -UP ON USED
8" FLXPE 18' CL EPDXY /8"
3RD QTR 2011 SEWER & WAT
SUNRISE -AUG. 2011 GAS US
MONTHLY ELECT. CHARGES
CLEAN /VAC LIFT STATIONS
JET /VAC CLEANING CULVERT
TELEVISING SEWER MAIN AT
#10 WINDOW ENVELOPES
PVC COUPLING /ADAPTER /IOC
PVC ELBOW & CONDUIT
AUG. 2011 UTILITY CONNEC
REPLENISH ROLLER CARE SO
Total for Fund 602
MHSRC / Range T PETERSON, C BOEHME CLA
Total for Department
Total for Fund 801
Grand Total
207.00
3,943.69
3,537.63
2,630.24
1,247.37
3,345.83
229.69
17.08
323.52
2,200.00
880.00
630.00
399.55
19.85
25.80
469.33
17.64
60,082.17
221.95
80,428.34*
80,428.34*
878.00
878.00*
878.00*
201,040.12*
•
•
CENTENNIAL FIRE DISTRICT Check Register - FIRE GL
... Reort Crtera:
Page: 1
Check Issue Dates: 9/7/2011 - 9/16/2011 Sep 16, 2011 03:54PM
Report type: Summary
GL Check Check Vendor
Period Issue Date Number Number
•
•
Payee
09/11 09/16/2011 4983 11565
09/11 09/16/2011 4984 20353
09/11 09/16/2011 4985 30480
09/11 09/16/2011 4986 31008
09/11 09/16/2011 4987 40040
09/11 09/16/2011 4988 50140
09/11 09/16/2011 4989 60300
09/11 09/16/2011 4990 70578
09/11 09/16/2011 4991 120331
09/11 09/16/2011 4992 120450
09/11 09/16/2011 4993 120490
09/11 09/16/2011 4 994 130840
09/11 09/16/2011 4 995 140525
09/11 09/16/2011 4996 160050
0 9/ 11 09/16/2011 4997 180600
09/11 09/16/2011 4998 200150
09/11 09/16/2011 4999 220200
09/11 09/16/2011 5000 230550
09/11 09/16/2011 5001 240100
Grand Totals:
ASPEN MILLS
BLAINE BROTHERS, INC
CENTENNIAL UTILITIES
COMCAST
DEEP ROCK WATER COMPANY
EMERGENCY SUPPORT SERVI
FIRE SAFETY USA, INC
GRAINGER
LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INS TR
CITY OF LINO LAKES
LOFFLER COMPANIES, INC
MFSCB
NO METRO FIRE TRAINING CE
PAETEC
CITY OF ROSEVILLE
THOMAS MOTORS, INC
VERIZON WIRELESS
WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GRO
XCEL ENERGY
Description
UNIFORM
L21 MTC
STATION 1 UTILITIES
INTERNET CENTERVILLE STATI
BOTTLED WATER
SMALL TOOLS PULLEY /CLAMP
HELMETS
BLDG SUPPLIES
MEDICAL COST
JULY REIMBURSEMENTS
COPIER MTC CONTRACT
CERTIFICATION TESTS
TRAINING CENTER RENTAL
PHONES STATION 2
JT POWERS MIS
'09 ESCAPE REPAIR
CELL PHONES
SCBA MTC
ELECTRIC STATION 2
Check
Amount
168.04
1,836.57
115.03
94.00
15.83
1,531.17
1,775.00
28.00
113.12
23,170.42
153.40
600.00
800.00
147.94
655.58
934.73
237.96
816.00
479.95
33,672.74
P15
M = Manual Check, V = Void Check
•
•
•
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
DATE
TIME STARTED
TIME ENDED
MEMBERS PRESENT
MEMBERS ABSENT
DRAFT
CITY OF LINO LAKES
MINUTES
September 6, 2011
: September 6, 2011
. 5:30 p.m.
. 9:00 p.m.
: Council Member Gallup, O'Donnell,
Roeser and Mayor Reinert
: Council Member Rafferty
Staff members present: City Administrator Jeff Karlson, City Engineer JasonWedel,
Director of Finance Al Rolek, City Attorney Joseph Langel, Community Development
Director Michael Grochala, Public Services Director Rick DeGardner, Public Safety
Director John Swenson, City Clerk Julie Bartell
1. Fence at 1205 Buckthorn Lane — City Engineer Wedel explained that the owners of
the property at this address, Michael and Tracey Jansen, are interested in putting up a
fence around their property. They applied for a fence permit and a standard
encroachment agreement with that. When the application was reviewed by staff it was
determined that the property has certain easements that were included when the lot was
platted. The city has certain criteria related to the granting of encroachments and the
Jansen's request for a fence permit was administratively denied based on those criteria,
specifically the presence of underground utilities. Since the Jansen's are still interested in
pursuing a fence, staff did investigate the possibility of flexibility on placement however
that was not fruitful. They are currently requesting permission to construct a fence that
could be taken down at city request - a fence of a temporary nature. Staff is
recommending that a fence be installed only if it can meet city criteria.
Mr. Jensen told the council that he is considering not using cement posts but rather fence
post spikes instead; he has used them successfully in the past. They would be of a
temporary nature. He confirmed that there is not a homeowner covenant issue with the
fence.
When the mayor asked staff about the possibility of allowing a temporary structure, the
City engineer explained that it would be a deviation of what the city has required for
decades (encroachment criteria). Mr. Wedel also pointed out that there could be a
different owner down the line that wouldn't be in tune with a "special" agreement.
Community Development Director Grochala added that one concern in using the spikes is
that the underground pipes could actually be at different depths. When the mayor asked if
there are other cities allowing such temporary spikes, staff replied that they are not aware
of any.
The council discussed the issue of the corner of the property and the bike paths that meet
there; there is a visibility question also.
•
•
•
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION September 6, 2011
DRAFT
46
47 The mayor asked the council if they would like to consider an ordinance change overall to
48 allow this situation? He suggested that staff should look more specifically at what other
49 cities are doing in this area and review the possibility of allowing the use of fence spikes.
50
51 Mr. Jensen added that the fence is also a safety issue for his family as well as a matter of
52 privacy. He also has an issue that he cannot place a playset for his young children in the
53 yard if the fence isn't allowed as requested.
54
55 2. Paul Montain — Zoning Issue at 8122 80th Street — Community Development
56 Director Grochala recalled that the zoning issue at 8122 80th St was brought forward
57 through a complaint on the use of the property for a trucking business. Staff has
58 investigated the fertilizer company operations that are occurring on the property. The
59 property owners are contending that the use is agricultural and therefore allowed. Staff
60 has considered it to be a trucking business use and therefore not a permitted use. The
61 property owners appeared at a recent Open Mike and requested an opportunity to discuss
62 the situation at a council work session.
63
64 Paul Montain and Lloyd Drilling, owners of the property at 8122 80th Street, told the
65 council that they firmly believe the use at the site is agricultural and that it should be
66 allowed. The operations do involve trucks that are moving things around and the
67 operations are agriculture related. Mr. Montain pointed out that neither the city nor the
68 state of agriculture (and the operations involved) are the same as when the pertinent city
69 law was drafted (in the 1980's). He is exclusively involved in agriculture and he expects
70 the rules to recognize that; otherwise they need to be properly changed. Furthermore he
71 was told by the city's former attorney, Mr. Hawkins, that the use is permitted.
72
73 Community Development Director Grochala clarified that the title of the land use district
74 may be confusing. It is not, in fact, intended to allow agricultural use. Perhaps a
75 clarification is what's needed. The mayor noted that it appears that the city may have to
76 revisit its ordinances in this area and figure out what makes sense for this situation and
77 others like it.
78
79 The mayor noted that the city has received a complaint relative to noise, number of
80 trucks, dust, etc. Staff confirmed that the concern is about the vehicles operating a
81 business out of the property and providing services to others. The mayor suggested that
82 staff should be looking at all like situations for reference and studying the overall issue
83 while being sensitive to business and agricultural needs.
84
85 City Attorney Langel suggested that the council should also focus on these ten acres and
86 the operations that are occurring there whereby a business is actually providing services
87 to others. Community Development Director Grochala suggested that it seems as if the
88 council wants to draw the line as far as use and would be interested in providing for a way
89 to operate a business such as this with some controls; perhaps a topic appropriately
90 discussed by the Planning and Zoning Board. Mr. Grochala added that, in the meantime,
•
•
•
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION September 6, 2011
DRAFT
91 there should be some discussion with the property owner about the nuisance concerns at
92 the property — those things that can be addressed outside of the use. Mr. Montain
93 indicated that he would get together with staff to work on those immediate concerns.
94
95 3. Charter Amendments — Administrator Karlson noted that the city received two
96 charter amendment proposals from the Lino Lakes Charter Commission. In order to
97 provide information to the council on these proposals, the city attorney has reviewed the
98 Chapter 1 amendment and the city's financial advisor, Ms. Terri Heaton of Springsted,
99 has reviewed the Chapter 7 amendment that relates to a tax cap. Their respective written
100 reports are included in the council packet.
101
102 City Attorney Langel reviewed his written report, noting that the council is being asked to
103 allow certain changes to the city charter (by a unanimous vote). Overall, he explained
104 that city charters are typically very straightforward documents. The proposed amendment
105 to Chapter 1 addresses how the Charter Commission may operate and not the city as
106 charters more appropriately do. He questions if that is appropriate. Further he explained
107 that charter commissions have only the powers granted to them by state statute; the
108 amendment appears to be an attempt to add authority and he questions if that authority
109 even exists. He noted that the proposed amendments do not appear to further effectuate
110 the exercise of governmental functions by the city which should be the primary purpose
111 of charter amendments.
112
113 Administrator Karlson reviewed Ms. Heaton's report on the Chapter 7 amendment,
114 noting that the report indicates that overall the concern is that certain restrictions may
115 impact the city's ability to meet financial obligations.. There is concern about the lack of
116 flexibility and the inability to allow corrections to meet economic demands. And one of
117 the biggest concerns is how the levy limit would be calculated since the language is
118 difficult to interpret. Ms. Heaton's memo also addresses questions about possible impact
119 on the city's credit rating.
120
121 A council member suggested that it is the council's job to decide what is needed for the
122 city and the proposal could be limiting as far as what happens when the economy turns
123 around; it could even leave a situation where the city may tax more than it needs.
124
125 The mayor noted that the city's chosen form of government is to elect officials who dig
126 into details and make decisions. He has been told by a charter commissioner that the
127 amendments were drafted by their attorney. The council should be receiving information
128 about the need for these amendments from the commission as well as from the city
129 attorney and financial analyst. The council should be open to the commission's
130 explanation. Without being able to understand the amendments, however, how can the
131 council act upon them?
132
133 City Attorney Langel noted that the council does not have authority to change the
134 language of the amendments; any change would have to be resubmitted.
135
•
•
•
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION September 6, 2011
DRAFT
136 The council requested that the Charter Commission Chair and Vice chair be invited to
137 attend the public hearing on the amendments.
138
139 4. Discuss Current Conservation Water Rate Structure — The mayor noted that he
140 requested a discussion about the City's water rate structure. He recalled that the council
141 previously received a study on water rates, was asked to change the rate structure and did
142 so. However the impetus of the change was to impact use and he doesn't believe that has
143 happened. He still has a concern; Lino Lakes is a family oriented community and the new
144 rate structure seems to punish families. He suggests that a plan that encourages water
145 conservation is a better way to address the situation.
146
147 City Engineer Wedel explained that in 2008 the Minnesota Department of Natural
148 Resources required a tiered rate structure in order for the City to keep its authority to
149 continue with new wells. The idea at that time wasn't to penalize families but to get at
150 the "big irrigators ". There is benefit to the city in conservation because infrastructure
151 costs can be avoided (much infrastructure is built to serve peak times). Is the new tiered
152 rate structure working? He suggested that it is difficult to say since this has been a year
153 of lots of rain and the economy is down. He provided a chart indicating rate variations in
154 other cities — he doesn't think the City is out of line with other communities. Tim
155 Hillesheim, Utilities Supervisor for the City, explained that he doesn't think that families
156 are punished by the rates because 95% of the city's residential water users consume
157 30,000 or less (remaining in the lower rate). He added that the city has not been able to
158 see the result of the rate change because the past two summers have been wet. Mr.
159 Wedel remarked that the city could certainly review the rate structure in 2012 if that's the
160 council's desire. Public Service Director DeGardner distributed additional information
161 indicating that over 99% of Lino Lakes' families fall within the first two tiers (lowest) of
162 the rate structure in the winter and that 82% of Lino Lakes families fall within the first
163 two tiers in the summer. The city is doing what it can to keep from having to add more
164 very expensive infrastructure that will in fact raise rates.
165
166 The mayor thanked staff for the discussion. He'd like to take a look at the rate structure
167 again in 2012 to ensure fairness.
168
169 5. Comprehensive Plan Update — Community Development Director Grochala
170 recalled that in May of 2011 the council gave preliminary approval to the 2030
171 Comprehensive Plan and it was approved by the Metropolitan Council with authorization
172 to put the Plan into effect. At this point it is back to the council for final Plan approval.
173 He has attempted, in his staff report, to identify the major changes to the Plan over the
174 past few years, including decreasing the amount of units forecast in the next twenty years,
175 reduction of the affordable housing goal, and modifications to the utility staging plan by
176 dividing the staging areas into five year phases. In addition the council modified the Plan
177 to reintroduce an annual average new housing growth benchmark, limit city financial
178 assistance to meet regional housing goals, modify residential development densities and
179 reduce net residential density proposed. When the Plan is approved as final by the
180 council, staff will begin the process of updating the city's official controls such as the
•
•
•
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION September 6, 2011
DRAFT
181 zoning and subdivision ordinances as well as begin implementation of the Special Area
182 Management Plan to streamline administration of wetland conservation in conjunction
183 with the Rice Creek Watershed District.
184
185 The council requested that staff place the resolution approving the Plan on the next
186 council agenda.
187
188 6. Weekly Progress Report - Administrator Karlson reviewed the written report.
189 Regarding the ECFE lease, he noted that he has now spoken with the school district
190 superintendent and has set up a meeting to discuss the lease and the potential for
191 revisions. The council recommends a dual process — market the property while
192 negotiations continue with the school district.
193
194 A council member noted a letter received from the owner of Lakes Liquor regarding
195 banners. That matter should be remanded back to the Planning & Zoning Board (banners
196 on buildings) and followed as part of the Weekly Progress Report.
197
198 A council member also noted the surly brewing legislation recently approval by the state
199 that allows certain brewery operations. The council member has passed some
200 information on to staff and suggests following the possibility of competing for an
201 operation in the city. That matter as well should be added to the Weekly Progress Report.
202
203 7. Review Sept. 12 Council Agenda- Regarding the agenda, the Mayor requested
204 that the resolution honoring U.S. Constitution Week be removed from the Consent
205 Agenda and added as a special presentation.
206
207 Regarding the preliminary budget adoption, Finance Director Rolek reviewed an updated
208 budget gap worksheet (based on directions from the last budget work session) and
209 indicated that the result of those changes is a reduction to the levy of $432,741. That is
210 reflected in the resolutions in the council packet.
211
212 Regarding the Administration report, Administrator Karlson noted the resolution that
213 institutes a severance package for employees impacted by the pending position
214 eliminations (that will be coming to the council on September 26). The council
215 recommended that the severance package be increased to 12 weeks in consideration of the
216 difficult job market.
217
218 The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
219
220 These minutes were considered, corrected and approved at the regular Council meeting held on September
221 26, 2011.
222
223
224 Julianne Bartell, City Clerk Jeff Reinert, Mayor
225
5
•
•
•
COUNCIL MINUTES September 12, 2011 P 16
DRAFT
1 CITY OF LINO LAKES
2 MINUTES
3
4
5 DATE : September 12, 2011
6 TIME STARTED : 6:30 p.m.
7 TIME ENDED : 9:05 p.m.
8 MEMBERS PRESENT : Council Member Gallup, O'Donnell, Rafferty,
9 Roeser, and Mayor Reinert
10 MEMBERS ABSENT : none
11
12 Staff members present: City Administrator Jeff Karlson; City Attorney Joseph Langel; Community
13 Development Director Michael Grochala; Director of Public Safety John Swenson; Director of
14 Finance Al Rolek; and City Clerk Julie Bartell
15
16 PUBLIC COMMENT
17
18 No one was present to address the council regarding a matter not on the agenda.
19
20 SETTING THE AGENDA
21
22 The agenda was approved as presented.
23
24 SPECIAL PRESENTATION
25
26 Proclamation recognizing the week of September 17 -23, 2011 as Constitution Week — Mayor
27 Reinert read the proclamation and it was then presented to Gail Lossing, representative of the
28 Daughters of the American Revolution.
29
30 CONSENT AGENDA
31
32 Council Member O'Donnell moved to approve the Consent Agenda, Items 1B through 1F, as
33 presented. Council Member Rafferty seconded the motion. Motion carried on a unanimous voice
34 vote.
35
36 Council Member Rafferty moved to approve Consent Item 1G as presented. Council Member Roeser
37 seconded the motion. Motion carried on a voice vote; Council Member O'Donnell abstained from
38 voting.
39
40 ITEM ACTION
41
42 Consideration of Expenditures:
43
44 September 12, 2011 (Check No. 91451 -
45 91600, $414,199.62) Approved
P17
COUNCIL MINUTES September 12, 2011
DRAFT
46
47 Centennial Fire District (Check No. 4946-
48 4972, $33,321.14) Approved
49
50 August 22, 2011 Council Work Session
51 Minutes Approved
52
53 August 22, 2011 City Council Meeting
54 Minutes Approved
55
56 August 22, 2011 Special Budget Work Session
57 Minutes Approved
58
59 August 15, 2011 Special Budget Work Session
60 Minutes Approved
61
62 FINANCE DEPARTMENT REPORT, AL ROLEK
63
64 2A) Resolution No. 11 -89, Adopting Preliminary 2011/2012 Property Tax Levy — Finance
65 Director Rolek reported that it is time for the City to consider a maximum levy amount for the coming
66 year, as is required by state statute. Mr. Rolek noted that the amount of the maximum preliminary
67 levy is $8,227,259, a decrease of 5 percent over the past year. This levy amount may be decreased by
68 the council for the final budget adoption but it may not be increased. A public hearing on the levy is
69 scheduled for December.
70
71 The Mayor congratulated the council for their work on this budget. They worked essentially all year
72 and the result is a decreased budget achieved through review of the organization, a change in
73 engineering services and some outsourcing of services. He believes the council has accomplished
74 what the citizens want.
75
76 Council Member Roeser moved to approve Resolution No. 11 -89 as presented. Council Member
77 Gallup seconded the motion. Motion carried on a unanimous voice vote.
78
79 ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT REPORT, DAN TESCH
80
81 3A) Amendments to Lino Lakes City Charter: Public hearing and consideration of 1st Reading
82 of two ordinances — Administrator Karlson noted that the Lino Lakes Charter Commission has
83 submitted two ordinances for consideration by the City Council. State statute includes a process and
84 timeframe under which the amendments must be considered. The schedule was reviewed and it was
85 noted that an affirmative vote of all council members is required for an amendment to pass.
86
87 Mayor Reinert opened the public hearing. He noted that the council has not had the opportunity to
88 hear from the Charter Commission on the amendments and would much appreciate getting some
89 clarification from the commission now.
90
2
S91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
• 113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
COUNCIL MINUTES September 12, 2011 P 1 8
DRAFT
Mike Trehus, Lino Lakes Charter Commission member, addressed the council. He confirmed that he
would offer an explanation of the amendments and then reserve the opportunity to rebut what he
understands he will be hearing from the city as far as a critique of the amendments.
Mr. Trehus first explained that a charter commission is a group of volunteer city residents that work
with a small budget. The charge of the group is to frame and amend the city charter, based on their
view of city operations. The commission doesn't have power to directly amend the charter and can
only propose amendments to the city council or the voters. The Lino Lakes Charter Commission is
proposing amendments to the council now mainly because this year's Minnesota Legislature did not
include in their budget actions any tax cap for cities. That being the case, the commission decided it
would be a good time to suggest that a tax cap be added to the city charter. He noted that taxes are
high in Lino Lakes and he showed a chart comparing the City's taxes to other cities. The other
amendment proposed clarifies and speaks to the duties of the Commission.
Mayor Reinert read the proposed amendment to Section 1.04. Mr. Trehus explained that while some
of the added language may be duplicative to what's currently in state law, the commission feels it
should be in place within the Charter in case there are law changes in the future. It is meant to be
reaffirming. He will be demonstrating the need as he moves further into his presentation.
Mayor Reinert read the proposed amendment to Section 1.05. Mr. Trehus explained that the courts
have decided that any public money spent on a referendum issue belongs to both sides of the issue.
That has not been the case in Lino Lakes. This would be a no cost option that doesn't change any
power for the Commission. He noted the history of the city council trying to get the word out on an
amendment on the ballot and that the city advocated but didn't allow the Commission to get the word
out on the other side of the matter.
Mayor Reinert read the proposed amendment to Chapter 7.13. Mr. Trehus presented a chart
indicating tax levy increases in Lino Lakes over the past ten years and comparing the levy amounts to
population growth and he explained that the primary purpose of the tax cap is to prevent this type of
tax growth. He noted that the current city council has worked to reduce the city's levy and that is
appropriate, but it's important not to return to the past ways of rampant growth of taxes. He noted
several cities that have tax caps in place. A council member noted that the information being
presented ends at 2009 however that is when democracy took its course and the council make up
changed, trends reversed and taxes were reduced; the presentation ignores that more recent relevant
information that may indicate that a tax cap isn't needed. Mr. Trehus acknowledged that the
amendment goal is trying to limit taxes from rampant growth; the statement regarding the election
would be an opinion; he added that the current council in perpetuity wouldn't be a problem but there
could be change in the future. Mr. Trehus noted that the tax cap proposed is good one that is tried and
true and working in other cities. A council member asked for a comparison of population for the tax
levy comparisons and when a chart was shown he noted that many are not in the range of Lino Lakes;
another council member added that the comparative figures are not from the current decade. Mr.
Trehus noted that he has compared current information, focusing on cities that are growing like Lino
Lakes, and he continues to have a goal of reducing the cost of government and he added thateven if
the council doesn't intend to allow taxes to run rampant again, they have nothing to lose by enacting
this tax cap. A council member noted that the finance director has opined that there could be an
3
P19
COUNCIL MINUTES September 12, 2011
DRAFT
136 implication on bond ratings, raising capital, etc. The mayor suggested that there are two questions:
137 does the city want a tax cap and, if so, how that is done. Mr. Trehus further reviewed the proposed
138 tax cap amendment, noting that it allows for consideration for growth, not incenting or punishing that
139 type of thing. The proposed amendment also addresses special levies and tax increment financing.
140
141 Mr. Trehus was asked to drill down deeper on the Chapter 1 amendments. Section 1.04 reiterates
142 state statute and firms it up by putting it into the Charter and stipulates further that one of the duties of
143 the Commission is to inform residents of the meaning or impact of a proposed charter amendment.
144 Section 1.05 requires that ballot wording be reviewed by the Commission. It adds a funding
145 requirement for information given on amendments so that both sides will be treated fairly and equally;
146 in the past, there has been a problem and the new language would avoid similar problems in the
147 future. He noted specific elements of a past referendum and information given and how the process
148 failed to provide enough appropriate and clear information. The Charter Commission thought that
149 should not be allowed to happen again.
150
151 Caroline Dahl, 1101 Holly Court, Lino Lakes Charter Commission Chair, first noted that the
152 Commission was not invited to attend the council's recent work session discussion on the
153 amendments and they wouldn't normally attend unless asked. She shared a note from a commissioner
154 clarifying that last year's budget cut was very small (.4 of 1 percent). Also the last two years the city
155 has been under a tax cap but that it will expire as it was not renewed by the State Legislature. The
156 reason that the tax cap and other amendments are being proposed isn't necessarily for this council but
157 for the future. State law has been known to change and it makes sense to have the language in the
158 Charter.
•
159
160 Rosemary Storberg, 6978 Lake Drive, Charter Commissioner, noted that three of the current council
161 members were sitting in 2008 and she would ask them why the newsletter on the amendment wasn't
162 handled differently? The mayor noted that he recalls that it was suggested that the Commission
163 submit a page for the newsletter but that there was disagreement on content so the Commission never
164 officially submitted anything. Ms. Storberg added that the Commission should have the same
165 opportunity to provide information to the public. Also she said she's heard the warning about harm
166 to the city's bond rating before (when the charter was originally approved) but it never panned out.
167 The bottom line is that the City Charter is a document that is needed and wanted by the residents of
168 this city.
169
170 Tim Henderson, 6987 West Shadow Lake Drive, noted that he admires everyone involved in this
171 discussion and for their service. What he would like to see for the charter amendments is a citizen
172 vote; that would be the optimum. He urges caution in not handcuffing future city leaders as
173 consideration is given to the amendments.
174
175 There being no further speakers, the public hearing was closed at 7:59 p.m.
176
177 City Attorney Langel reviewed his written memorandum regarding the proposed amendments. The
178 basic issues with the Chapter 1 amendments are that they are mainly duplicative to state law. The
179 Commission has made the argument that the state law could change however even if that occurs, it •
180 raises the question that a charter cannot contravene state law so putting the language into the charter
4
•
•
•
COUNCIL MINUTES September 12, 2011 P 2 0
DRAFT
181 wouldn't necessarily guarantee that it will remain valid. So it begs the question of why should you
182 add the language? The Commission's authority is narrow and is laid out in statute. Another issue
183 raised is about creating authority for the Commission to get into the public information area, a job that
184 is given to the city council by state statute. He questions if a charter commission can create authority
185 for itself. Charters are generally speaking constitutions designed to decide how a city operates and
186 not how the Commission operates. Mr. Langel noted that he also has a concern about the amendment
187 dealing with granting use of public funds. The language implies that the council cannot do what it is
188 responsible for doing unless it provides equal funding to the Commission. While the Commission
189 representative has indicated that that language is intended to get the two bodies to work together, Mr.
190 Langel fears it would have the opposite effect in keeping the work from getting done. The language
191 also seems to imply that there are always two sides to an amendment; the fact is that neither side
192 cannot advocate. If there is an issue about the past and a goal to prevent it to happen again, the
193 answer wouldn't seem to be a charter amendment but a rather to find a process whereby the groups
194 will work together. The mayor confirmed that the Commission has had the opportunity to review
195 Mr. Langel's written comments.
196
197 Terri Heaton, Springsted, financial advisor to the City, indicated that she would be reviewing her
198 written comments regarding the proposed Chapter 7 charter amendment. As financial advisor to the
199 city, it is her job to consider the city's ongoing ability to finance its operations and meet debt
200 obligations as well as meet ongoing capital needs. She has looked at the proposed levy limit language
201 (to continue a levy limit for this city) using 2010 rates. Currently, the city has reacted to the reduction
202 in its tax base by reducing its levy. The current state limit would actually allow the city to levy higher
203 than it is proposing. By locking into a low year, the city may put itself in a different position than
204 other cities in how it can respond when the economy comes back. Another portion of the proposed
205 amendment deals with special levies and she noted that many are not funded from tax base and
206 melding them into a tax cap as the proposed amendment seems to do is unclear. Another item
207 includes restriction of special levies to a vote process and she sees that could limit the city's
208 flexibility, an item that is a key area that credit agencies look at. She noted that she sees credit
209 agencies comparing cities more for rating purposes these days, looking at flexibilities for instance,
210 and they are changing ratings much more than in the past. The city should also consider the
211 systematic replacement of infrastructure and maintaining the ability to do replacement at the most
212 effective time. Ms. Heaton also expressed that the amendment is confusing in that it uses the term
213 "net tax capacity" but Minnesota cities do not use mil rates so that term doesn't make sense with
214 current law. There was discussion about tax increment financing and that it is a tool that is being
215 used by many cities and very effectively for development. A city's tax base grows when the tax
216 increment capture period ends. Regarding the proposed amendment, it would allow the city to use tax
217 increment but without the same advantages as other cities in that the increment is pulled away from
218 the development. She pointed out that the council should consider the possibility of a negative impact
219 on the bond rating, that sending more matters to voters is costly in terms of special elections and that
220 the city's long term sustainability could be challenged by tying hands to a rate at an economically low
221 time. When the mayor asked if there is a "good" way to do a tax cap, Ms. Heaton responded that
222 citizens should be confident that they are getting the best value for their tax dollar and there are ways
223 for the council to know that.
224
P21
COUNCIL MINUTES September 12, 2011
DRAFT
225 The council reviewed the proposed amendments to Section 1.04 and 1.05. City attorney Langel noted
226 that the only new language (different from existing state law) relates to informing residents. A
227 council member noted that adding language to the charter would mean that the city may end up
228 needing to amend the charter if state law changes. The city attorney suggested that it is never a good
229 idea to regurgitate state law in a document such as the City Charter. City Attorney Langel pointed
230 out that, while charter amendments always get reviewed by the charter commission, ballot language
231 doesn't so that would be a new concept.
232
233 The mayor recalled that within the past year the city council and the charter commission held a joint
234 meeting and there was great hope for progress through that process. At that meeting, a suggestion
235 was brought forward to set up a joint side group made up of council members and charter
236 commissioners and, if that had happened and was functioning, that could have meant a better
237 understanding of these amendments coming forward. Unfortunately at that joint meeting there was an
238 explosion of emotion and the good idea didn't happen. He still believes that it could happen and that
239 it would result in some good accomplishments.
240
241 i. Ordinance No. 17 -11, Amending the City Charter by adding a new Section 1.04 and 1.05
242
243 The mayor called for a motion on Item 3Ai, First Reading of Ordinance No. 17 -11. The item failed
244 for lack of a motion.
245
246 ii. Ordinance No. 18 -11, Amending the City Charter by adding a new Section 7.13 regarding
247 tax cap
248
249 The mayor read the proposed amendment and noted that he is not opposed to the idea of a tax cap but
250 he sees there are issues with the language proposed. It concerns him that the proposal would actually
251 allow the council to add a $1 million to the tax levy this year. The down economy has been difficult
252 for the tax situation but the council has acted to keep taxes down. In the area of special taxing
253 districts, he sees that there are situations where it occurs through an outside request; having a vote on
254 everything reminds him of California and that isn't Lino Lakes. The city has a representative republic
255 form of government whereby people are voted into office to make decisions on behalf of the public.
256 He wishes the council would have had the opportunity to work with the commission on the matter.
257
258 A council member noted that there has been good information offered in a lot of areas. He's been on
259 the council for ten years and understands that the budget process is complicated and he pointed out
260 that it impacts him as a property taxpayer also. The citizens have a good form of representation and it
261 is called the election. He knows that people will come to the voting booth and decide if they are
262 getting the value they want from their tax dollar.
263
264 Other council members concurred that the voting process works and that an automatic taxing system
265 isn't needed. They expressed the desire to continue working with the Charter Commission in a joint
266 fashion.
267
268 The mayor called for a motion on Item 3Aii, First Reading of Ordinance No. 18 -11. The item failed
269 for lack of a motion.
•
•
6
•
•
•
COUNCIL MINUTES September 12, 2011 P 2 2
DRAFT
270
271 3B) Resolution No. 11 -88, Employee Severance Package for 2011— Administrator Karlson noted
272 that the council will soon be considering the elimination of two city positions based on the results of
273 the organizational study. The council is being asked to consider granting 12 weeks of severance pay
274 to those employees affected by position elimination.
275
276 Council Member Roeser moved to approve Resolution No. 11 -88 as presented. Council Member
277 Gallup seconded the motion. Motion carried on a unanimous voice vote.
278
279 PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT REPORT, JOHN SWENSON
280
281 There was no report from the Public Safety Department.
282
283 PUBLIC SERVICES DEPARTMENT REPORT, RICK DEGARDNER
284
285 There was no report from the Public Services Department.
286
287 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REPORT, MICHAEL GROCHALA
288
289 6A) 1 -35E /CSAH 14 Interchange Project:
290 i. Resolution No. 11 -92, Amendment to General Obligation Improvement Note of 2009 and
291 Amendment to Joint Powers Agreement with Anoka County;
292 ii. Resolution No. 11 -93, Declaring Costs to be Assessed and Ordering Preparation of Proposed
293 Assessments
294
295 Community Development Director Grochala reported that this is an interchange project that is being
296 managed by Anoka County and it has come in considerably under the original cost estimate.
297 Therefore staff is requesting that the city's portion of the General Obligation Note issued for the
298 project by Anoka County be reduced from $4,260,000 to $3,695,000 and that the joint powers
299 agreement with Anoka County that relates to the project be amended as well.
300
301 Council Member O'Donnell moved to approve Resolution No. 11 -92 as presented. Council Member
302 Roeser seconded the motion. Motion carried on a unanimous voice vote.
303
304 Community Development Director Grochala explained that the project costs for the city's share of the
305 interchange project will be assessed to benefited property owners. Since the project costs have been
306 reduced greatly, the proposed assessment is also less. Staff proposes to proceed with the process for
307 assessments.
308
309 Council Member Gallup moved to approve Resolution No. 11 -93 as presented. Council Member
310 Rafferty seconded the motion. Motion carried on a unanimous voice vote.
311
312 6B) Resolution No. 11 -94, Approving the 2030 Comprehensive Plan Update — Community
313 Development Director Grochala reviewed the multi -year process, including citizen input elements,
314 that has gone into the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. He explained changes that occurred
7
P23
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
COUNCIL MINUTES September 12, 2011
DRAFT
during that process to the areas of growth management and housing. He also noted the decrease in
household forecast, a reduction in the affordable housing goal, modifications to the utility staging
plan, and density modifications. As mentioned previously, the inclusion of the wetland impact
element to the Plan is streamlining and unique.
The mayor noted that his consideration of the Plan has specifically focused on three things - pace,
density and quality. He believes the work of the council has made for an improved plan. He is happy
with the results of the work and noted the change that calls for a five -year review rather than ten.
Community Development Director Grochala thanked the community members who worked on the
Plan and helped with the process. The work couldn't have been accomplished without them.
Council Member Roeser moved to approve Resolution No. 11 -94 as presented. Council Member
Rafferty seconded the motion. Motion carried on a unanimous voice vote.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
There was no Unfinished Business.
NEW BUSINESS
There was no New Business.
COMMUNITY CALENDAR
Community Calendar- A Look Ahead
September 13, 2011 through September 26, 2011
Wednesday, September 14 6:30 pm, Council Chambers
Monday, September 26 5:30 pm, Community Room
4E. Monday, September 26 6:30 pm, Council Chambers
Planning & Zoning Bd
Council Work Session
City Council Meeting
ADJOURN
There being no further business, Council Member Rafferty moved to adjourn at 9:05 p.m. Council
Member Roeser seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
These minutes were considered and approved at the regular Council Meeting, September 26, 2011.
Julianne Bartell, City Clerk
8
Jeff Reinert, Mayor
•
•
•
STAFF ORIGINATOR:
MEETING DATE:
TOPIC:
VOTE REQUIRED:
AGENDA ITEM 1D
Julie Bartell, City Clerk
September 26, 2011
Consider Approving Application for Exempt
Permit from Lawful Gambling License for St.
Joseph Catholic Church (two events)
Simple Majority (3/5 Vote)
BACKGROUND:
St. Joseph Catholic Church has applied for an exempt permit to conduct its annual
"Turkey Bingo" event which helps fund Thanksgiving food baskets. The event is
scheduled for November 20, 2011. The church has also applied for an exempt permit to
conduct a raffle to be held on November 22, 2011. The proceeds from this fundraising
event will be used to award college scholarships to members of St. Joseph Catholic
Church.
Non - profit organizations are allowed, under the State Gambling Statutes, to apply for an
exemption from a gambling license if they conduct five (5) or fewer gambling occasions
per calendar year. St. Joseph Catholic Church conducts five (5) or Tess per calendar
and, therefore, remains exempt from requiring a gambling license.
Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 349, Section 349.166, Subd. 2 does, however, require that
the non - profit organizations applying for the exemption permit notify the city that they
are applying for the exemption and receive local approval.
The application and background materials are on file in City Clerk's office.
OPTIONS:
1. Adopt a motion approving the application for exemption with no waiting period
2. Deny the application for exemption.
RECOMMENDATION:
Option No. 1
P24
•
AGENDA ITEM 1 E
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Julie Bartell, City Clerk
DATE: September 26, 2011
TOPIC: Approve Application for Blue Heron Elementary PTO to
Conduct Excluded Bingo
VOTE REQUIRED: Simple Majority (3/5 Vote)
BACKGROUND:
Under Minnesota Statute 349.166, excluded bingo may be conducted by an
organization that conducts four or fewer bingo occasions in a calendar year, or in
connection with a county fair, the state fair, or a civic celebration if it is not conducted
for more than 12 consecutive days. Blue Heron Elementary PTO holds only this one
gambling event each year.
The Blue Heron Elementary PTO is requesting approval to hold its Annual "Back to
. School Family Bingo Night ". This event will be held at Blue Heron Elementary School,
405 Elm Street, on Thursday, November 17, 2011. There is no license fee involved and
there will be no charge to play bingo.
The application, a certificate of non - profit status and the results of the background
check on the applicant are on file in the city clerk's office.
OPTIONS:
1. Approve the request to conduct the bingo event.
2. Deny the request.
•
P25
•
•
AGENDA ITEM 1 F
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Jeff Smyser
C.C. MEETING DATE: September 26, 2011
TOPIC: Consideration of Resolution No. 11 -96
Extension of Time for Moon Marsh
VOTE REQUIRED: Simple Majority
BACKGROUND
In 2007 the City Council approved the Moon Marsh project with Resolution No. 07 -142. This
approved a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) and a PUD
Development Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat.
A PUD Development Stage Plan must be followed by the Final Plan application within twelve
months under the zoning ordinance. Likewise, a final plat must be submitted within one year of
the preliminary plat approval under the subdivision regulations. For a conditional use permit
(CUP), construction must begin within one year of approval. The project did not meet these
deadlines due to the widespread slowdown in development in the region, and the City has
granted several extensions. The current submittal deadline for the PUD Final Plan/Final Plat is
October 1, 2011, and the recommendation is to extend it to April 1, 2012.
The Moon Marsh site includes a high value natural resource area. Permanent open space is to be
created within the site that will be placed in a permanent conservation easement. The
preservation of open space on this site will be a step in the implementation of the City's larger
greenway vision, a foundation of the Comprehensive Plan.
OPTIONS
1. Approve Resolution No. 11 -96 granting an extension for submitting the PUD Final
Plan/Final Plat and for construction to begin under the Conditional Use Permit.
2. Deny Resolution No. 11 -96.
3. Return to staff with direction.
RECOMMENDATION
Option 1
P26
P27
Council Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF LINO LAKES
RESOLUTION NO. 11 -96
APPROVING AN EXTENSION OF TIME FOR THE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FINAL
PLAN AND FINAL PLAT FOR MOON MARSH
WHEREAS, on September 10, 2007 the City Council granted approvals for the Moon Marsh
project with Resolution 07 -142 approving a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Unit
Development and PUD Development Plan/Preliminary Plat; and
WHERAS, Section 2, Subd. 10.F.8.g. of the City's Zoning Ordinance, requires that a PUD -final
plan be submitted within one year of approval of the PUD - development stage plan but allows an
extension for six month intervals, and the extension can be approved after the deadline date
passes; and
WHERAS, Section 1001.055 of City Code (Subdivision Regulations) requires a final plat be
submitted within one year of approval of the preliminary plat unless an extension is requested
and for good cause is granted by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, Section 2, Subd. 2.B.11. of the City's Zoning Ordinance states that if construction
has not begun within one year of approval of a conditional use permit the permit is void; and
WHEREAS, the City granted extensions with Resolution Nos. 08 -106, 09 -78, 10 -35, 10 -87, and
11 -31; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that there is good cause to grant an extension because the
economic conditions of the real estate market have affected development nationally, regionally,
and locally;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Lino Lakes
hereby approves the following extensions:
1. A PUD Final PlanfFinal Plat application for the CUP/PUD approved with Resolution No. 07-
142 must be submitted by April 1, 2012.
2. Construction shall begin within six months of final plat approval.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that all of the conditions of approval included in Resolution No.
07 -142 continue to apply.
Jeff Reinert, Mayor
•
•
•
ATTEST:
Julie Bartell, City Clerk
Adopted by the Lino Lakes City Council this day of , 2011.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council Member
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following
voted in favor thereof:
The following voted against same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Resolution No. 11 -96, page 2
P28
•
•
AGENDA ITEM 3A
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Jeff Karlson, City Administrator
MEETING DATE: September 26, 2011
TOPIC: Organizational Assessment
VOTE REQUIRED: 3/5
BACKGROUND
As part of the organizational assessment that was conducted this year, the City
Council is being asked to approve the reclassification of one position and the
elimination of two staff positions. In July the Council approved three other job
reclassifications.
At the September 12 Council meeting, you authorized 12 weeks' severance pay for
employees affected by the staff reductions to help them in their transition to future
employment.
The morning of Monday, September 26, the affected employees will be informed that
the Council will be considering the above recommendations. Further details will be
provided to you at Monday's work session. The organizational assessment report will
also be handed out at the work session.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve staff recommendations as presented.
P29
P30
•
•
AGENDA ITEM 4A
STAFF ORIGINATOR: John E. Swenson, Chief of Police
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: September 26, 2011
TOPIC: Consider 1St Reading of Ordinance No.
19 -11, Amending Chapter 503,
regarding Animal Control
ACTION REQUIRED: Simple Majority
BACKGROUND:
Approximately one year ago, the City initiated an enforcement action under the Animal
Control Ordinance. That process provided an opportunity to review how the Ordinance
works in a specific situation. After working through that process and then evaluating the
Ordinance in light of State law and the ordinances of other municipalities, City staff and
the City Attorney have drafted a number of modifications. These changes are intended
to streamline the enforcement process while at the same time continue to promote
fairness and due process for all parties involved.
ANALYSIS
The proposed ordinance will no longer use the term "potentially dangerous animal;"
either the dog at issue is dangerous, as defined in the ordinance, or it is not. This
change will remove any questions with respect to access to an appeal process when a
dog is declared potentially dangerous.
The proposed ordinance also calls for the appointment of a Hearing Officer for all
appeals under Chapter 503. The Hearing Officer is appointed by City Council and
charged with all duties related to the appeals process. Utilizing a Hearing Officer will
relieve the Council of having to undertake evidentiary hearings and prevent scheduling
conflicts with the Council's meeting dates and agendas. If an appeal is filed there is
language requiring that all costs associated with the appeal process be covered by the
party filing the appeal.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff is recommending approval of the first reading of Ordinance No. 19 -11, Amending
Chapter 503 of the City of Lino Lakes Code of Ordinances
• ATTACHMENTS
1. Chapter 503
P31
151 Reading:
Publication:
2 "d Reading:
Effective:
Council Member
ordinance:
moved for adoption of the following
CITY OF LINO LAKES
ORDINANCE NO. 19 -11
AMENDING TITLE 500, CHAPTER 503 OF THE LINO LAKES CODE OF
ORDINANCES RELATING TO ANIMAL CONTROL REGULATIONS.
The City Council of Lino Lakes ordains:
Section 1. That the index for Chapter 503 be amended to read as follows:
503.01
503.02
503.03
503.04
503.05
503.06
503.07
503.08
503.09
503.10
503.11
503.12
503.13
503.14
503.15
503.16
503.17
503.18
503.19
503.20
503.21
503.22
503.23
503.24
Definitions
Enforcement
Right of entry
Impounding animals
Impounding strays
Impounding facility
Redeeming impounded animals
Disposition of impounded animals
License and vaccination requirements
Kennel licenses: private and commercial
Health and maintenance standards
Prohibitions
Confinement in motor vehicle
Rabies; animal bites
Attack by an animal
Dangerous animals requirement)
Appeal process
Farm Animals Notification of new address
Wild Animals Dangerous animal requirements
Penalty Forfeiture of ownership rights
Exemptions Farm animals
Wild animals
Penalty
Exemptions
•
•
•
P32
•
•
Section 2. That Section 503.01 of the above - entitled ordinance be amended to
read as follows:
503.01 DEFINITIONS.
A DANGEROUS ANIMAL is an animal that has:
1. Without provocation, caused bodily injury or disfigurement to any person
on public or private property;
2. Without provocation, engaged in any attack on any person under
circumstances which would indicate danger to personal safety;
3. Exhibited unusually aggressive behavior, such as an attack on another
animal; or
4. Bitten one or more persons on two or more occasions.
HEARING OFFICER. The person designated by the City Council to hear appeals
brought pursuant to this Chapter 503.
PROPER ENCLOSURE. Proper enclosure means securely confined indoors or in a
securely locked pen or structure suitable to prevent the animal from escaping and to
provide protection for the animal from the elements. A proper enclosure does not include
a porch, patio or any part of a house, garage or other structure that would allow the
animal to exit of its own volition, or any house or structure in which windows are open or
in which door or window screens are the only barriers which prevent the animal from
exiting. The enclosure shall not allow the egress of the animal in any manner without
human assistance. A pen or kennel shall meet the following minimum specifications:
1. Have a minimum overall floor size of 32 square feet;
2. Sidewalis shall have a minimum height of five feet and be constructed of
11 -gauge or heavier wire. Openings in the wire shall not exceed two inches, support posts
shall be one and one - quarter inch or larger steel pipe buried in the ground 18 inches or
more. When a concrete floor is not provided, the sidewalis shall be buried a minimum of
18 inches in the ground;
3. A cover over the entire pen or kennel shall be provided. The cover shall be
constructed of the same gauge wire or heavier as the sidewalis and shall have no
openings in the wire greater than two inches., and
4. An entrance /exit gate shall be provided and be constructed of the same
material as the sidewalis and shall also have no openings in the wire greater than two
inches. The gate shall be equipped with a device capable of being locked and shall be
locked at all times when the animal is in the pen or kennel.
UNPROVOKED. Unprovoked shall mean the condition in which the animal is not
II/ purposely excited, stimulated, agitated or disturbed. It shall be a rebuttable presumption
P33
that any attack on a child 14 years of age or younger shall be considered to be
unprovoked unless the child is engaged in an act that could reasonably be anticipated to
cause an animal to attack or bite.
Section 3. That Section 503.12, Subdivision 8, of the above - entitled ordinance be
amended to read as follows:
503.12 PROHIBITIONS.
(8) An owner of an animal must not fail to restrain the animal from inflicting or
attempting to inflict bodily injury on a person at any place or on a domestic animal off
the owner's property, except in the circumstances defined in §503.15 (3) (b), potentially
dangerous animal_
Section 4. That Section 503.15, of the above - entitled ordinance be amended to
read as follows
503.15
BY AN ANIMAL.
ATTACK
(1) Attack by an animal. It shall be unlawful for any person's animal to inflict or attempt
to inflict bodily injury to any person or other animal whether or not the owner is present.
This section shall not apply to an attack by a dog under the control of an on -duty law
enforcement officer or to an attack upon an uninvited intruder who has entered the
owner's home with criminal intent.
(2) Destruction of a dangerous animal. The animal control officer shall have the
authority to order the destruction of dangerous animals in accordance with the term
established by this chapter.
(3) Definitions.
(a) A DANGEROUS ANIMAL is an animal which has:
1. Caused bodily injury or disfigurement to any person on public or private property;
to personal safety;
/1. Bitten one or more persons on two or more occasions; or
the same, the animal aggressively bites, attacks or endangers the safety of humans or
domestic animals.
•
•
•
•
•
•
2. When unprovoked, chased or approached a person upon the streets, sidewalks, or any
of humans or domestic animals.
(c) PROPER ENCLOSURE. Proper enclosure means securely confined indoors or in a
securely locked pen or structure suitable to prevent the animal from escaping and to
provide protection for thc animal from the elements. A proper enclosure does not include
a porch, patio or any part of a house, garage or other structure that would allow the
animal to exit of its own volition, or any house or structure in which windows are open or
in which door or window screens are the only barriers which prevent the animal from
exiting. Thc enclosure shall not allow the egress of the animal in any manner without
human assistance. A pen or kennel shall meet the following minimum specifications:
concrete floor is not provided, the sidewals shall be b
3. A cover over the entire pen or kennel shall be provided. The cover shall be constructed
greater than two inches; and
sidewalls and shall also have no openings in thc wire greater than two inches. Thc gate
shall be equipped with a device capable of being locked and shall be locked at all times
when the animal is in the pen or kennel.
(d) UNPROVOKED. Unprovoked shall mean the condition in which the animal is not
purposely excited, stimulated, agitated or disturbed.
(1) Designation as potentially dangerous animal. The animal control officer shall
designate any animal as a potentially dangerous animal upon receiving evidence that a
potentially dangerous animal has, when unprovoked, then bitten, attacked or threatened
the safety of a person or a domestic animal as stated in division (3)(b) above. When an
of the potentially dangerous animal to be notified in writing that the animal is potentially
dangerous.
P34
P35
Section 5. That Section 503.16, of the above - entitled ordinance be amended to
read as follows:
503.16 DANGEROUS ANIMALS.
(5) (1) Evidence justifying dDesignation as dangerous animal. The animal control officer
shall have the authority to designate any animal as a dangerous animal upon receiving
evidence of the following: that the animal meets any of the criteria set forth in the
definition of dangerous animal in Section 503.01.
(a) The animal has, when unprovoked, bitten, attacked or threatened the safety of a
person or domestic animal as st - - - • -- -; =
(b) The animal has been declared potentially dangc
(3)(a) above.
(6) Authority to order destruction. The animal control officer, upon finding that an
following findings of fact:
(a) The animal is dangerous as demonstrated by a vicious attack, an unprovoked attack,
an attack without warning or multiple attacks; or
(7) (2) Procedure. The animal control officer, after having determined that an animal is
dangerous, may shall proceed in the following manner:_
(a) Order the animal seized and kept at an animal control facility at owner's expense.
The owner shall immediately make the animal available for seizure, and failure to do so
shall be a misdemeanor.
(b) The animal control officer shall then determine whether to
1. Order the animal destroyed, or
2. Impose the conditions set forth in Section 503.20. If conditions are imposed in
lieu of destruction, the animal shall remain confined at an animal control facility until the
owner demonstrates to the animal control officer that all conditions have been fulfilled
except that set forth in Section 503.20 (1) (d).
•
•
•
•
(ac) The animal control officer shall cause one owner of the animal to be notified in
writing or in person that the animal is has been determined to be dangerous and that the
animal is to be destroyed or that the owner must comply with the conditions set forth in
Section 503.20. - - - - - - •• - - - - -- - = - • - • "-• The •
owner shall be notified as to dates, times, places and parties bitten that form the basis for
the determination and shall be given 14 days to appeal this order the determination by
requesting a hearing before the City Council hearing officer for a review of this the
determination.
i. If no appeal is filed, the orders issued will stand or the animal control officer
may order the animal destroyed.
ii. If an owner requests a hearing for determination as to the dangerous nature of
the animal, the hearing shall be held before the City Councilhearing officer, which who
shall set a date for hearing not more than three weeks after demand for the hearing.
Pending the hearing, the animal shall remain at an animal control facility. A fee, as
established by the City Council, shall be posted by the owner to cover the administrative
costs of scheduling the hearing.
iii. The records of the animal control or the City Clerk's office shall be
admissible for consideration by the animal control hearing officer without further
foundation.
iiiiv. After considering all evidence
the City Council hearing officer shall make an order it deems properr'ejecting,
upholding or amending the determination. The order must be issued within 10 days of
the hearing and shall be delivered to the owner in person or by registered mail. If the
declaration that the animal is dangerous is upheld by the hearing officer, the actual
expense of the hearing, including attorney's fees, up to a maximum of $1,000 will be the
responsibility of the animal's owner. The City Council may order that the animal control
custody. If the animal is ordered into custody for destruction, the owner shall
immediately make the animal available to the animal control officer.
(3) Harboring a dangerous animal. No person shall harbor an animal after it has been
found to be dangerous and ordered into custody for destruction.
($4) Stopping an attack If any police officer or animal control officer is witness to an
attack by an animal upon a person or another animal, the officer may take whatever
means the officer deems appropriate to bring the attack to an end and prevent further
injury to the victim.
P36
P37
Section 6. That Section 503.17, of the above - entitled ordinance be amended to
read as follows:
503.17 APPEAL PROCESS.
An order by a hearing officer may be appealed by writ of certiorari to the Court of
Appeals.
Section 7. That Section 503.18, of the above - entitled ordinance be amended to
read as follows:
503.18 NOTIFICATION OF NEW ADDRESS
(9) Notification of new address. The owner of an animal which has been identified as
dangerous or potentially dangerous must notify the animal control officer in writing if the
animal is to be relocated from its current address or given or sold to another person. The
notification must be given in writing at least 14 days prior to the relocation or transfer of
ownership. The notification must include the current owner's name and address, the
relocation address and the name of the new owner, if any.
Section 8. That Section 503.19, of the above - entitled ordinance be amended to
read as follows:
503.19 DANGEROUS ANIMAL REQUIREMENTS
(1) Requirements. If the City Council hearing officer does not order the destruction of an
animal that has been declared dangerous, the City Council hearing officer may, as an
alternative, order any or all of the following:
(a) The owner provide and maintain a proper enclosure for the dangerous animal as
cpecifieddefined in § 503.15503.01(3)(c);
(b) Post the front and the rear of the premises with clearly visible warning signs,
including a warning symbol to inform children, that there is a dangerous animal on the
property, as specified in M.S. § 347.51, as it may be amended from time to time;
(c) Provide and show proof annually of public liability insurance in the minimum amount
of $300,000. The owner shall have 15 business days from the date of the request to show
proof of insurance, except that if the animal is impounded, proof of insurance must be
demonstrated prior to the animal's release.
(d) If the animal is a dog and is outside the proper enclosure, the dog must be muzzled
and restrained by a substantial chain or leash (not to exceed six feet in length) and under
the physical restraint of a person 16 years of age or older. The muzzle must be of the
design as to prevent the dog from biting any person or animal, but will not cause injury to
the dog or interfere with its vision or respiration;
•
•
•
(e) If the animal is a dog, it must have an easily identifiable, standardized tag identifying
the dog as dangerous affixed to its collar at all times as specified in M.S. § 347.51, as it
may be amended from time to time; and
(f) All animals deemed dangerous by the animal control officer shall be registered with
•
satisfactory proof thereof to the animal control officer; and
(gf) If the animal is a dog, the dog must be licensed and up to date on rabies vaccination.
If the animal is a cat or ferret, it must be up to date with rabies vaccination.
by serving a summons and petition upon the city and filing it with the district court.
reclaimed by the owner of the animal upon payme
and presenting proof to animal control that each of the requirements under division (1)
above is fulfilled. An animal not reclaimed under this section within 14 days may be
costs incurred in confining, impounding and disposing of the animal.
(42)
.. . .
Failure to Comply with Conditions.
(a) If an owner of an animal that has been declared dangerous fails to comply with any
conditions, the animal must be seized. Notice shall be provided to the owner of the basis
for the seizure and the right to request a hearing before the hearing officer to determine
whether conditions were violated. A request for hearing must be made within 14 days of
the seizure, and a fee, as established by the City Council, shall be posted by the owner to
cover administrative costs.
(b) If the owner fails to request a hearing within 14 days, the animal control officer may
order the animal destroyed in a proper and humane manner and the owner shall pay the
costs of confining and destroying the animal.
(c) If a hearing is requested, the hearing shall be held before a hearing officer not more
than three weeks after demand for a hearing was received. The records of animal control
and the City shall be admissible for consideration by the hearing officer without further
foundation. After considering all evidence, the hearing officer shall issue a decision
within 10 days of the hearing and the order shall be delivered to the owner in person or
by registered mail.
i. If the owner is found to have violated the conditions, the hearing offier may
order the animal destroyed in a property and humane manner and the owner shall pay the
P38
P39
costs of confining and destroying the animal. In addition, the owner shall pay the costs of
the hearing, if any, including attorney's fees, up to a maximum of $1,000.
ii. If the owner is found not to have violated the conditions, the owner may
reclaim the animal after paving the costs of confining the animal. An animal not
reclaimed within 14 days of the owner's receipt of the decision may be destroyed and the
owner shall pay all costs of confinement.
the same animal, the animal must be seized by animal control. The owner may request a
destroyed in a proper and humane manner and the owner shall pay the costs of confining
notified that the animal may be reclaimed, the animal may be disposed of as provided
under § 503.15(6) and the owner is liable to the animal control for the costs incurred in
Section 9. That Section 503.20, of the above - entitled ordinance be amended to
read as follows:
503.1-720 FORFEITURE OF OWNERSHIP RIGHTS
(1) (a) The ownership rights of a person owning the following types of animals may be
forfeited to the city pursuant to the procedure in this section:
1. A public nuisance animal;
2. A wild animal; and
3. A maltreated animal.
(b) In addition, the ownership rights of other animals owned by the same owner may be
forfeited if he or she has demonstrated an inability or unwillingness to properly care for
or control the animal in order to prevent it from becoming a public nuisance animal or a
maltreated animal.
(2) Authorized city personnel must notify the owner or apparent owner of the animal
sought to be forfeited that the city intends to forfeit his or her ownership rights. The
notice must be served on the owner personally or by registered mail. The notice must be
in writing and state the reasons why forfeiture is sought, including a summary of
applicable incidents.
•
•
•
•
(3) The owner shall be given 14 days from the date of the notice to appeal the forfeiture
decision by requesting a hearing before City Council hearing officer for a review of this
determination.
(a) If no appeal is filed, the forfeiture decision will stand.
(b) If an owner requests a hearing for determination as to the forfeiture of his or her
ownership rights, the hearing shall be held before the City Council hearing officer, which
shall set a date for hearing not more than three weeks after demand for the hearing. The
records of the animal control or City Clerk's office shall be admissible for consideration
by the animal control officer without further foundation. After considering all evidence,
the City Council hearing officer shall make an order as-it he or she deems proper.
(4) If the animal is deemed forfeited, the owner must immediately give the animal to
authorized city personnel, and a failure or refusal to do so is a misdemeanor. Authorized
city personnel may use reasonable force and go onto private property to take the animal
into custody.
(5) Authorized city personnel will determine on a case by case basis whether forfeited
animals may be destroyed or given to new owners who will adequately care for and
control the animal.
Section 10. That Section 503.21, 503.22, 503.23 and 503.24 be renumbered as
follows:
503.21 FARM ANIMALS
503.4322 WILD ANIMALS
503.2-023 PENALTY
503.2424 EXEMPTIONS
Jeff Reinert, Mayor
Attest: Julianne Bartell, City Clerk
Adopted by the Lino Lakes City Council this day of , 2011.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by Council
Member and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor
thereof:
The following voted against same:
Whereupon said ordinance was declared duly passed and adopted.
P40
•
•
•
AGENDA ITEM 4B
STAFF ORIGINATOR: John E. Swenson, Chief of Police
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: September 26, 2011
TOPIC: Consider 1st Reading of Ordinance No.
20 -11, Amending Chapter 213.07
regarding Unclaimed Property
ACTION REQUIRED: Simple Majority
BACKGROUND:
The City sells property /equipment which is no longer needed for City use, is not
claimed, or is forfeited through legal proceedings. The current ordinance (213.07
Disposal) only affords the City the ability to sell property through public auction. This
current practice does not allow the City to leverage technology to maximize revenues
for the City. Furthermore, the requirement of a public auction creates a stockpile of
property at the City's public works facility which has generated complaints from
neighbors.
ANALYSIS
If these changes are adopted the City will benefit in the following areas:
1. Increased revenue from the sale of the property. Currently we sell city property
at an auction with multiple government entities; therefore there is a surplus of like
equipment being sold on the same day in a fixed time frame. This creates a saturated
market which drives the price paid for items down, which decreases the revenue to the
City. Other cities have experienced an increase in revenues by making these types of
proposed changes.
2. The current auction schedule is two per year. This creates storage /crowding
issues at the Public Works facility. If the proposed changes are adopted property can
be sold as soon as it becomes available. This would relieve some of the storage
problems currently experienced at the Public Works facility.
3. The proposed change would also give the City options in the manner in which
the public is notified of the sale of public property. Currently, all notification must be
published in the newspaper. This requirement creates an expense to the City and limits
the scope of the notification. If the proposed changes are adopted, the City would have
other notification options available, such as use of the City's website as its avenue to
notify the public.
P41
P42
The proposed changes have been reviewed and approved by City Attorney Joe Langel
for legal compliance
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff is recommending adoption of Ordinance No. 20 -11, Amending Chapter 213,
Subdivision 7, of the City of Lino Lakes Code of Ordinances
ATTACHMENTS
1. Chapter 213.07
•
•
•
•
•
l St Reading:
Publication:
2nd Reading:
Effective:
Council Member moved for adoption of the following
ordinance:
CITY OF LINO LAKES
ORDINANCE NO. 20-11
AMENDING CHAPTER 213 OF THE LINO LAKES CODE OF ORDINANCES
RELATING TO UNCLAIMED PROPERTY.
The City Council of Lino Lakes ordains:
Section 1. That Section 213, Subdivision 7, of the above - entitled ordinance be
amended to read as follows:
213.01 UNCLAIMED PROPERTY DEFINED.
UNCLAIMED PROPERTY means any money or personal property, except
animals and motor vehicles, lawfully coming into the possession of the city and
remaining unclaimed by the owner.
213.02 PROCEDURE.
(1) General. The Chief of Police shall make a reasonable and diligent effort to find
the owner of any unclaimed property and restore the same to him or her.
(2) Motor vehicles. Abandoned motor vehicles shall be disposed of as provided by
M.S. Ch. 168B, as it may be amended from time to time.
213.03 FOUND PROPERTY.
A receipt shall be issued to any person who finds lost or abandoned property or money
and delivers it to the custody of the city. The person may indicate in writing that he or she
wished to assert a claim to the property or money as a finder. If the finder so indicates,
and the property or money remains unclaimed by the owner for 60 days, the property or
money shall be delivered to the finders.
213.04 PERISHABLE OR DANGEROUS PROPERTY.
Any unclaimed property which is perishable, or which would lose the greater part of
its value by being retained for 60 days, or which is determined by the Chief of Police to
be dangerous shall be disposed of at the discretion of the Chief of Police in the manner
deemed appropriate by him or her.
P43
P44
213.05 MONEY.
Any money which is not claimed by the owner within 60 days or by a finder pursuant
to § 213.03, or which was seized from illegal gambling, shall be deposited in the city's
general fund.
213.06 PROPERTY SEIZED AS EVIDENCE.
Any property seized as evidence shall, when no longer needed as evidence, be
returned to the owner, unless otherwise subject to lawful detention. The property which is
otherwise subject to lawful detention shall be destroyed or otherwise disposed of as
directed by the court.
213.07 DISPOSAL.
(1) City use. Any unclaimed property for which no other manner of disposal is
provided by §§ 213.01 through 213.06 and which is not claimed by the owner within 60
days may be appropriated to city use upon approval of the appropriation by the Council.
(2) Sale. Any property described in division (1) which is not appropriated to city
use shall be sold to the highest bidder at public auction in a manner that provides access
for the public, following at least one published proper notice not less than two one week
prior to the auction sale. The notice shall contain the following information:
(a) The date, time and fie- location or electronic medium of the sale;
(b) The general description of the property to be sold;
(c) Whether or not the property will be sold piecemeal or otherwise;
(d) (RI The terms of payment; and
(e) (d)
manner in which the sale shall be conducted.
(3) Proceeds. The proceeds of any sale shall be placed in the general fund of the
city, or in any other fund of the city as the City Council may, from time to time, designate
by resolution. The former owner of any property so sold may claim the sale price of the
sale of the former property within six months from the date of the sale from the fund;
provided, however, that the former owner shall only be entitled to the sale price upon
proof of the former ownership and less reasonable expenses incurred in the storage, care,
keeping and sale of the property.
(4) Unsold property. Any unclaimed property remaining unsold after public
auction the attempted sale shall be disposed of as directed by the Council.
•
•
Jeff Reinert, Mayor
Attest: Julianne Bartell, City Clerk
Adopted by the Lino Lakes City Council this day of , 2011.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by Council
Member and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor
thereof:
The following voted against same:
Whereupon said ordinance was declared duly passed and adopted.
P45
•
•
•
AGENDA ITEM 6A
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Michael Grochala
CITY COUNCIL
MEETING DATE: September 26, 2011
TOPIC:
ACTION REQUIRED:
BACKGROUND
Consideration of Resolution No. 11 -97 Calling
Hearing on Proposed Assessment -
135E /CSAH 14 Interchange
3/5 Vote
On September 10, 2011 the City Council approved Resolution No. 11 -93 declaring the
cost to be assessed and ordering the preparation of the assessment role for the
135E /CSAH 14 Interchange improvement project. The total cost of the project is
$19,817,833. The City's share of the project is $4,307,861 of which $4,207,861 was
proposed to be assessed.
Accordingly the assessment role has been prepared and the costs of the project
allocated to every assessable lot within the area affected. However, due to the multiple
classifications of property and subsequent assessment rate determinations, the amount
assessed is $4,206,010. This number is $1,851 dollars less than the amount included
in Resolution No. 11 -97. This amount ($1,851) will be funded from the City's municipal
state aid street fund.
The next step in the process is to call for the hearing on the proposed assessment. The
proposed hearing will be held at the October 24, 2011 City Council meeting. Notice of
the meeting will be published in the City's official newspaper (Quad Press). Mailed
notice will be provided to each parcel owner not less than two weeks prior to the
hearing.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff is recommending approval of Resolution No. 11 -97.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution No. 11 -97
P46
P47
Council Member introduced the following resolution and moved its
adoption:
COUNTY OF ANOKA
CITY OF LINO LAKES
RESOLUTION NO. 11 -97
RESOLUTION FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT
WHEREAS, by a resolution passed by the Council on September 12, 2011, the City Clerk
was directed to prepare a proposed assessment of the City's share of the cost for the
improvement of the I -35E /CSAH 14 Interchange between 21st Avenue and Otter Lake
Road by bridge replacement and widening, roadway replacement and widening,
reconstruction of existing freeway ramps and construction of new ramps, installation of
traffic control signals, improvement to local road connections and construction of
pedestrian /bicycle facilities, and
WHEREAS, the Clerk has notified the Council that such proposed assessment has been
completed and filed in her office for public inspection,
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF LINO LAKES,
MINNESOTA:
1. A hearing shall be held at 6:30 p.m. on October 24, 2011 in the City Hall located at
600 Town Center Parkway, Lino Lakes, Minnesota to pass upon such proposed
assessment. All persons owning property affected by such improvement will be given an
opportunity to be heard with reference to such assessment.
2. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice of the hearing on the proposed
assessment to be published once in the official newspaper at least two weeks prior to the
hearing, and he /she shall state in the notice the total cost of the improvement and the
City's share of said total cost. She shall also cause mailed notice to be given to the owner
of each parcel described in the assessment roll not less than two weeks prior to the
hearing.
3. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the
assessment to the county auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property,
with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City, except that no interest shall be
charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of the
assessment. An owner may at any time thereafter, pay to the City the entire amount of
the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in
which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 or
interest will be charged through December 31 of the succeeding year.
Approved by the City Council of the City of Lino Lakes this 26th day of September, 2011.
2
•
Jeff Reinert, Mayor
ATTEST:
Julianne Bartell, City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council
Member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor
thereof:
The following voted against same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
•
•
P48
•
•
STAFF ORIGINATOR:
CITY COUNCIL
MEETING DATE:
TOPIC:
ACTION REQUIRED:
BACKGROUND
AGENDA ITEM 6B
Michael Grochala
September 26, 2011
Consideration of Resolution No. 11 -98
Authorizing Execution of Letter of
Understanding with City of Centerville, 21st
Avenue Extension.
3/5 Vote
Metro Transit has been working with city staff, the City of Centerville and property
owners to construct a 300 space park and ride facility adjacent to the 35E /CSAH 14
Interchange. The preferred property is located in the NW quadrant of the interchange
area. Construction of the park and ride would require extension of 21st Avenue north of
CSAH 14. A final determination of the park and ride locations is dependent on road and
utility costs. To move forward with facility planning the property owners have requested
that the city determine the scope and cost of the required street and utility
improvements necessary to service the site.
For planning purposes the City Engineer, WSB, has submitted a proposal to prepare a
preliminary layout and cost estimate. The estimated cost of the preliminary engineering
is $6,000. The cost of the study is proposed to be borne by two of the abutting property
owners. Once funds are deposited in an escrow account staff would move forward with
preparation of the study.
Since the proposed roadway will straddle the municipal limits with the City of
Centerville, any construction will require approval of a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA).
The purpose of the JPA is to allocate responsibilities for design, construction and future
maintenance of the roadway. The attached letter of understanding is intended to
provide a general understanding of the project between the two cities, authorize staff to
proceed with engineering upon deposit of funds in escrow, and authorizing staff to
prepare a Joint Powers Agreement, if the project moves forward.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff is recommending approval of Resolution No. 11 -98.
ATTACHMENTS
• 1. Resolution No. 11 -98
Council Member introduced the following resolution and moved its
adoption:
COUNTY OF ANOKA
CITY OF LINO LAKES
RESOLUTION NO. 11 -98
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING WITH
THE CITY OF CENTERVILLE FOR 35E /CSAH 14 INTERCHANGE PARK AND RIDE
WHEREAS, Metro Transit is considering the construction of a Park and Ride, to service
area commuters, in the Northwest Quadrant of 35E and County State Aid Highway 14
(CSAH 14) and
WHEREAS, public street and utility improvements, straddling the border with Centerville,
are required to service said facility; and
WHEREAS, property owners abutting the proposed improvement have requested
preliminary engineering be completed to provide a conceptual design and cost estimates;
and
WHEREAS, the preliminary engineering is proposed to be paid by abutting property
owners
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF LINO LAKES,
MINNESOTA:
That the Mayor is authorized to execute the Letter of Understanding with the City of
Centerville regarding the possible extension of 21st Avenue, a copy of which is attached
hereto as Exhibit A.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that staff is authorized to execute a deposit agreement
with the property owners to cover the cost of said engineering study.
Approved by the City Council of the City of Lino Lakes this 26th day of September, 2011.
ATTEST:
Julianne Bartell, City Clerk
Jeff Reinert, Mayor
2
•
•
•
•
•
•
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council
Member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor
thereof:
The following voted against same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
EXHIBIT A
LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING
FOR THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS TO 21ST AVENUE NORTH OF COUNTY
SATE AID HIGHWAY 14 IN THE CITIES OF CENTERVILLE AND LINO LAKES,
MINNESOTA
BACKGROUND: Metro Transit has proposed to construct a 300 -car park -n -ride facility in Lino
Lakes, along the east side of 21St Avenue, approximately 1000 feet north of Main Street. Metro
Transit has allocated funding to the facility and proposing to make a purchase offer on the
property, subject to the city of Lino Lakes issuing necessary permits, and subject to the City of
Lino Lakes and /or the City of Centerville constructing the necessary improvements to 21St
Avenue to provide access to the site. Metro Transit is obligated to use the funding allocated to
the project by the end of 2012. If this location turns out to be unfeasible, they will need to direct
their efforts to another location.
The affected landowners are willing to pay for the preliminary engineering to identify the scope
of improvements and the estimated costs to construct 21St Avenue. This engineering study will
determine what improvements are needed and which properties would be affected. It is
anticipated that the cost of improvements would be specially assessed to the benefitted
landowners. If the project appears feasible after the preliminary engineering, a joint powers
agreement will be needed to allocate responsibilities for designing and constructing the
improvements as well as the future maintenance of the street.
ACTION: The cities of Lino Lakes and Centerville recognize the urgency of Metro Transit to
make a final determination on the park -n -ride location. The City Council of Lino Lakes and the
City Council of Centerville, in giving approval to this Letter of Understanding, are authorizing
and directing staff to initiate the preliminary engineering for the project upon the landowners
placing funds for the preliminary engineering, in escrow. Lino Lakes shall take the lead and will
engage the necessary engineering services to complete the study. Further, if subsequent to the
preliminary study, the project appears feasible, staff is authorized to prepare a joint powers
agreement for consideration by the city council.
Approved by the City of Lino Lakes
Date Jeff Reinert, Mayor
Approved by the City of Centerville
Date Tom Wilharber, Mayor
4
•
•
•