Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/28/1991 Council Minutes143 COUNCIL MINUTES CITY OF LINO LAKES COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 28, 1991 DATE October 28, 1991 TIME STARTED 6:30 P.M. TIME ENDED 9:52 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Bisel, Bohjanen, Kuether, Neal, Reinert MEMBERS ABSENT : None Staff members present: City Attorney, Bill Hawkins; Engineer's, Darrell Schneider and Dan Boxrud; Planner, John Miller; Fire Chief, Milo Bennett; Administrator, Randy Schumacher and Clerk - Treasurer Marilyn Anderson. ITEMS TO BE ADDED TO THE AGENDA 1. Charter Commission Appointments 2. Cable Casting of Forum, October 29, 1991 3. Order Public Hearing for Preliminary Plat of Former Lake Crest CONSENT AGENDA Council Member Bohjanen moved to approve the consent agenda as presented. Council Member Neal seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. ITEM DISPOSITION MINUTES: Work Session, September 19, 1991 Approved Work Session, October 2, 1991 Approved Work Session, October 14, 1991 Approved Regular Council Session, October 14, 1991 Approved DISBURSEMENTS: October 28, 1991 Centennial Fire Department Approved Approved CONSIDERATION OF EASEMENTS, WENZEL FARMS IMPROVEMENT: - Daniel L. & Carole M. Miller Approved - Thomas M. & Deborrah L. Mesich Approved - Carl D. & Mary E. Schmuland Approved - Gary J. & Lori K. Dahl Approved 1 1 1 COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 28, 1991 REGULAR AGENDA OPEN MIKE Linda Elliott, 2001 Otter Lake Drive - Ms. Elliott explained that she is a candidate for election in the municipal election and noted that a debate has been scheduled for October 29, 1991 at 7:30 P.M. in the council chambers. Ms. Elliott said that she is aware that some of the candidates are not in favor of broadcasting the debate on the Lino Lakes government channel (channel 16) because not many Lino Lakes citizens have access to cable TV. She asked why then, would the Council meetings be cable casted? Ms. Elliott felt the debate would make proper use of the Lino Lakes government channel and asked that the Council unanimously approve the use of the government channel for the debate. Al Ross, 6356 Ware Road - Mr. Ross asked why the Council did not recommend that he be re- appointed to the Charter Commission since he was recommended by the Charter Commission chairman and as he was the only member of the Charter Commission who responded to a letter from the Chairman asking if he was interested in serving another term. Tony Laska, 7035 Lakeview Drive, asked why he does not have an opportunity to bid on a towing contract for the Police Department. He explained that he has talked to the Police Chief and Mr. Schumacher and had not received a suitable answer. Mr. Laska told the Council that the City of Lino Lakes does not place the police towing out for bid and this does not allow everyone interested in securing the contract an opportunity to bid for the services. Mayor Bisel said that this matter will be referred to the City Administrator and the procedure will be clarified. Mr. Schumacher explained that he talked to the Police Chief and it would be best to have the Police Chief explain the procedure. David Storberg, 6978 Lake Drive explained that he is a current Charter Commission member and questioned the legality of the Charter Commission appointments recently made by Judge Gibbs. Mayor Bisel explained that this matter will be discussed later under Old Business. DISCUSSION OF THE 1988 BUILDING CODE WITH AMENDMENTS AND APPENDIX E Fire Chief Bennett explained that this matter had been discussed at the October 14, 1991 Council meeting and he was here tonight PAGE 2 144 145 COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 28, 1991 to answer any questions from the Council Members. He noted that the burning permit process is not included in the 1988 fire codes. Chief Bennett explained that the most important change in the 1988 Code is the requirement for fire sprinklers in all new commercial buildings. This means that any new commercial building of any size must have municipal water available to them to make the fire sprinklers practical. Council Member Reinert asked if this matter will go through the hearing process. Chief Bennett said that the change will be made through an ordinance amendment. This requires two (2) readings. Council Member Reinert suggested that a task force of people who would be affected by the proposed changes be formed to gather input from all those affected by the changes. Mayor Bisel said he would like a work session on this matter so that all differences can be discussed. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD Minor Subdivision, McLean, LeTourneau, ETAL - Mr. Miller explained that the applicants have joint ownership of a parcel of land known as Outlot B of Otter Lake Estates. At this time they wish to subdivide Outlot B into two (2) parcels, one (1) containing 3.62 acres and the second containing 9.9 acres. The smaller parcel has 280 feet of frontage on Otter Lake Drive and includes land known locally as "the island ". This parcel is almost completely surrounded by the Otter Lake Channel and is not buildable. The applicants would like to reserve this parcel for recreational purposes and as a memorial to their parents. The applicants plan to sell the larger parcel for the development of single family homes. The DRB considered this request and recommended approval subject to the recommendation that the smaller parcel be deeded to the Otter Lake Homeowners Association or some other Otter Lake land owners group. There was discussion regarding access to the smaller parcel by using a foot bridge. It was noted that this bridge would be on private property and the City would have no liability for this structure. There was discussion regarding what would happen to the smaller parcel in the distant future if the Hanson family is no longer interested in the parcel and it becomes tax forfeit. It was explained that the land would become tax forfeit and the City would be given the option to obtain title to the property. If the City decided not to obtain title, the land would remain in PAGE 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 COUNCIL MINUTES state ownership. OCTOBER 28, 1991 Council Member Kuether moved to approve DRB application No. 91 -40 allowing the minor subdivision. Council Member Bohjanen seconded the motion. VOTING ON THE MOTION: Bisel Neal Abstained: none Bohjanen Reinert Kuether Motion carried unanimously. Site and Building Plan Review, Variance, Lynn and Teresa Weinkauf - The applicants operate a local business known as TRW's Tax and Accounting Service and BJ's Bazaar. The business is now located in rented space. The residence at 7395 Lake Drive has been purchased by the applicants and they propose to change this former residential building to commercial use as their new home. A site and building plan review is required because the applicants are proposing to add a 12'x 42' addition to the front of the residence. The front of the proposed addition will be within 46 feet of the right -of -way for Lake Drive (T.H. 49) which has prompted a four (4) foot variance request. The DRB ,has reviewed these requests and recommend approval of the site and building plan with the following provisions: 1. The one -way driveway be signed. 2. The driveway and parking ares be asphalt surfaced with concrete curbs. 3. Outside display of merchandise be limited to normal business hours of 10:00 A.M. to 8:00 P.M. 4. Signage be limited to the single sign indicated in the site plan application. 5. Any outside lighting be hooded to prevent glare to the highway or adjacent properties. 6. Construction meet standards of the City adopted building code. 7. Any dumpster on the property be screened from public view. 8. No driveway or parking area to be within five (5) feet of the property line nor within 15 feet of the highway right- of-way. The DRB has recommended approval of the variance and has made the following six (6) findings of fact: 1. The property cannot be put to a reasonable use under present official contracts, i.e. There is no area for expansion of PAGE 4 146 147 COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 28, 1991 the structure that meets setback requirements. 2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property as the parcel is triangular. 3. The hardship is not due to economic conditions alone. 4. The granting of the variance will permit the landowner to enjoy a setback similar to that of neighboring properties. 5. The actions in granting the variance will not diminish or impair established neighborhood value. 6. The actions are in keeping with the spirit and intent of the zoning ordinance to establish safe setbacks from public roads. There was discussion regarding requiring the applicants to provide bumpers for parking rather than concrete curbing. Mr. Miller noted that the applicants are asking that bumpers be allowed because concrete curbing is cost prohibitive. He noted that the zoning ordinance does allow the Council discretion is this matter. There was discussion regarding limiting the hours of outside display. Mr. Miller indicated that originally the applicant has asked that overnight outside display be allowed. This would require a Conditional Use Permit. Therefore the DRB limited this outside display to the normal business hours for TRW. Council Member Kuether noted that if this business decided to change their regular business hours, they would have to come back to the Council and ask that their site and building plan approval be amended. She asked that the outside display hours not be limited to specific hours. Teresa Weinkauf, 7395 Lake Drive explained that the DRB amended their outside display requirement to 9:00 A.M. to 8:00 P.M. for the fenced area only. She referred to the Planner's review dated October 2, 1991 which stated that five local businesses have been required to provide hard surface driveways and parking areas in their site and building plan review. Mrs. Weinkauf noted that two (2) of the business listed do not yet exist and the other three (2) did not have concrete curbing. She asked that the Council not require that she install concrete curbing and that the Council allow bumper parking. Council Member Neal said he felt that the Council should not set hours for the outside display. This requirement would make it appear that the Council is trying to regulate the business hours for TRW. Council Member Kuether moved to approve the variance, DRB No. 91- 41. Council Member Bohjanen seconded the motion. VOTING ON THE MOTION: PAGE 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 COUNCIL MINUTES Bisel Neal Abstained: none. Bohjanen Reinert Motion carried unanimously. Kuether OCTOBER 28, 1991 Council Member Kuether moved to approve DRB application No. 91 -42 approving the site and building plan and change item No. 3 from concrete curb to concrete bumpers. Council Member Reinert seconded the motion. VOTING ON THE MOTION: Bisel Neal Abstained: none Bohjanen- Reinert Motion carried unanimously. Kuether El Site and Building Plan Review, Molin Concrete Products Company - Mr. Miller explained that the applicant wishes to construct an accessory building near 4th Avenue and Lilac Street. The proposed structure is planned as a wood frame building to measure 24' x 36'. A 14' side wall is also proposed. The applicant states that the building will be used for general storage including material to be used in the mixing of concrete and also vehicles. Council Member Bohjanen moved to approve DRB application No. 91- 43 for a site and building plan application for Molin Concrete Products Company. Council Member Neal seconded the motion. VOTING ON THE MOTION: Bisel Neal Abstained: none Bohjanen LJ Kuether Reinert Motion carried unanimously. Minor Subdivision, Variance, Emmett and Beatrice Salberg - Mr. and Mrs. Salberg own several parcels of land on 20th Avenue near Rehbein's Peltier View. The Salbergs are looking for additional methods of generating income to preserve the property until utilities become available. In this regard the applicants wish to subdivide a 50.2 acre parcel so that a rental residence can be constructed. The parcel is being proposed to be subdivided into a 11.3 acre parcel and a 38.9 acre parcel. PAGE 6 148 149 COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 28, 1991 The land is presently zoned Rural Business Reserve (R -BR) with minimum lot sizes of 10 acres and 330 feet of road frontage. Rural and residential land uses are permitted within the district until such time as the land is rezoned for commercial and industrial uses. It was determined that Rehbein Street in Rehbein's Peltier View can someday be extended through the Salberg property. This was taken into consideration when the Salberg's planned the subdivision of their property. A subdivision plan was prepared to allow the extension of Rehbein Street into the Salberg's property and allow for the eventual resubdivison of the property which would meet the City's lot size requirements for future commercial and industrial development. A variance is required to allow the creation of a lot with less than the required lot frontage. Council Member Reinert noted that the variance was requested by the City to allow for the extension of Rehbein Street in the future and moved to approve the Planner's recommendation of the variance for Mr. and Mrs. Salberg, DRB application No. 91 -44 permitting the creation of a lot with 80 feet less than the required frontage and including the following six (6) findings of fact for granting the variance: 1. In the future with further subdivision of the property, the land could not be put to its best use as allowed by current official controls. 2. The plight of the land is caused by the subdivision of Rehbein's Peltier View and the construction of Rehbein Street. 3. The hardship is not due to economic considerations alone and in particular a need for a four way intersection at 20th Avenue and Rehbein Street has been demonstrated. 4. The granting of the variance will not permit the applicant any special privilege in subdividing his property, i.e. he will not get additional lots. 5. Property values will not be diminished by the variance. 6. The actions are in keeping with the intent of the zoning ordinance to allow for the orderly development of the City. Council Member Bohjanen seconded the motion. VOTING ON THE MOTION: Bisel Bohjanen © Kuether Neal © Reinert Abstained: none PAGE 7 1 1 1 1 COUNCIL MINUTES Motion carried unanimously. OCTOBER 28, 1991 Council Member Neal moved to approve the minor subdivision as recommended by the City Planner. Council Member Bohjanen seconded the motion. VOTING ON THE MOTION: Bisel Neal El Bohjanen Reinert Kuether Abstained: none Motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST, GUNSALLUS /HENNESY The applicants have purchased a 10 acre parcel of land located on the very south boundary of Lino Lakes. There are two (2) dwellings on the property and two (2) accessory buildings. The second dwelling is used a rental property. The applicants are doing business as Ken -dall Kennels and wish to remodel one (1) of the accessory buildings for use as a dog kennel. The building would be divided into four (4) pens with each having an individual run. The remainder of the building would be used for storage of supplies. There would be no new construction involved with the kennel operation. The DRB considered this request and recommended approval. Mr. Miller indicated that a letter has been received regarding this matter from Mr. Dean Schull. The issued raised in Mr. Schull's letter has been resolved. Cattle are also kept on the property and the Community Service Officer (CSO) has visited the applicants and all issues are being resolved. Mayor Bisel opened the public hearing at 7:30 P.M. There was no one in the audience to speak for or against this issue. Council Member Reinert moved to close the public hearing at 7:31 P.M. Council Member Bohjanen seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Council Member Neal moved to grant a Conditional Use Permit to Ken Gunsallus and Julie Hennessy as outlined in DRB application No. 91 -35. Council Member Bohjanen seconded the motion with the stipulation that all runs are fenced so that dogs are not running loose. Council Member Reinert noted that all Conditional Use Permits must have an annual review by the Council. If there is a PAGE 8 150 151 COUNCIL MINUTES problem it can be dealt with at that time. VOTING ON THE MOTION: Bisel Neal Bohjanen Reinert Kuether OCTOBER 28, 1991 Abstained: none Motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING, IMPROVEMENT HEARING, RICE LAKE COURT Mr. Schneider explained that improvements are being constructed on Ulmer Drive as part of the Wenzel Farms project. Several property owners along Rice Lake Court have petitioned requesting improvements for Ulmer's Rice Lake Court. A feasibility report has been prepared and the Council has called a public hearing for this hour. Mr. Schneider used the overhead projector and showed the location of the proposed improvement and outlined the costs to serve seven (7) lots. He noted that three (3) of the four (4) lots can be subdivided creating seven (7) lots. Mr. Schneider also noted that Outlot A may be subdivided into three (3) lots. If this is possible, 10 lots will be served by the improvements. He showed how this would reduce the cost to all the lots. Mr. Schneider also explained that the improvements include sewer, water, curb and gutter and new streets. It was noted that the cost per lot is very high. However, there are large frontages on these lots. Mr. Schneider explained that if the frontages were the normal 80 feet, the costs would be approximately the same as for any other residential lot. There was discussion regarding if Outlot A could possibly be developed. Mr. Schneider explained that there is no reason to assure anyone there could be three (3) more lots added to the improvement from Outlot A. He noted that a petition has been received from several residents on Rice Lake Drive. The two (2) projects could be constructed at the same time and average the costs. Mayor Bisel opened the public hearing at 7:47 P.M. Jack Menkveld, 8741 Central Avenue explained that he owns Outlot A in Ulmer's Rice Lake Addition and Outlot A in the Sunrise Meadows Addition. He has initiated contact with the agencies responsible for wetland alteration and protection regarding trading storm water storage areas. If the response is favorable, he will proceed with engineering work to trade land and water holding sites. Mr. Hawkins noted that the City has easements of PAGE 9 1 1 1 1 1 COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 28, 1991 some of this for storm water management. A proposal would have to be brought to the City to move the easements. Council Member Kuether asked if there may be a problem obtaining permits. Mr. Menkveld explained that he has received permits in the past. However, a considerable amount of engineering work must be done. Dean Thorson, 7040 Rice Lake Court asked if Mr. Menkveld has received permits for fill he had hauled to the Outlot last year. Mr. Menkveld said the fill did not go into the flood plain. Mr. Thorson explained that he was not interested in splitting his lot. He said from a running foot standpoint he would be opposed to the improvement. James Brandl, 7057 Rice Lake Court noted the frontage on Outlot A and asked why he could not split his lot into additional lots. He asked why the engineering was favoring Outlot A? He asked if the City has give Mr. Menkveld permission to build? Mr. Thorson asked who is responsible for the easements? Mr. Hawkins explained that the underlying landowner is responsible for the easements. Mr. Thorson asked if a portion of the lot is sold, who is responsible for the assessments. Mr. Hawkins explained that normally the landowner sells the lot for a price that would include the cost of assessments. Mr. Thorson asked what the interest rate is on assessments. Mr. Hawkins said that it is 2% over the rate at which the City sells bonds. It has been 9% in the recent years. Council Member Bohjanen moved to close the public hearing at 7:59 P.M. Council Member Neal seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Schneider explained that no Council action can be taken on this matter for 60 days. He noted that it is important to wait to see what Mr. Menkveld can do. PLANNER'S REPORT Second Reading, Ordinance No. 11 - 91 Renaming a portion of 74th Street to Apollo Drive - Mr. Miller explained that the first reading of this ordinance was October 14, 1991. If the second reading is approved by Council, the easterly 375 feet of 74th Street will be renamed Apollo Drive. This action would require 74th Street in the Sunset Oaks and Forest Glen residential areas to be blocked off from the industrial area by berming and signage. It was noted that when Inside Sports develops other minor commercial streets will be constructed. Council Member Bohjanen moved to adopt the second reading of Ordinance No. 11 - 91. Council Member Neal seconded the motion. PAGE 10 152 153 COUNCIL MINUTES VOTING ON THE MOTION: Bisel Neal Bohjanen Reinert Kuether OCTOBER 28, 1991 Abstained: none Motion carried unanimously. Ordinance No. 11 - 91 can be found at the end of these minutes. Sec Second Reading of Ordinance No. 12 - 91 Renaming West Street to White Tail Ridge - Mr. Miller explained that the City Council approved the first reading of this ordinance on October 14, 1991. There is no opposition to this name change during the first reading. Council Member Reinert moved to adopt the second reading of Ordinance No. 12 - 91. Council Member Kuether seconded the motion. VOTING ON THE MOTION: Bisel Neal El Bohjanen Reinert Kuether Abstained: none Motion carried unanimously. Ordinance No. 12 - 91 can be found at the end of these minutes. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 13 - 91 Rezoning the Weaver Property From Single Family Residential (R -1) to Single Family Executive (R -1X) - Mr. Miller explained that the Council approved the first reading of this ordinance at the October 14, 1991 Council meeting. Approval of the second reading will rezone the property. This is in keeping with the comprehensive plan and the City Council wishes expressed during review of the concept plan. Council Member Bohjanen moved to adopt the second reading of Ordinance No. 13 - 91. Council Member Reinert seconded the motion. VOTING ON THE MOTION: Bisel Neal Bohjanen Reinert Kuether PAGE 11 1 1 COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 28, 1991 Abstained: none. Motion carried unanimously. Ordinance No. 13 - 91 can be found at the end of these minutes. Consideration and Approval of Final Plat, Wenzel Farms, Second Addition - Mr. Miller noted that there are 22 lots in the Second Addition. The final plat appears to be in compliance with the approved preliminary plat. Mr. Schneider has written his opinion regarding the Second Addition. His letter dated October 23, 1991 regarding a 10 foot utility and drainage easement in Outlot A and an arrangement with the developer to obtain an additional 5 feet of property dedicated to park use along the west edge of Lot 13, Block 3 must be resolved. In addition, identifications of trails near Snow Owl Lane should be marked parks so that persons purchasing lots adjacent to the trails will know what is to be constructed near their property. Council Member Reinert asked why letters of credit and developers agreements are presented to the City after all of the approvals have been given by the City. Mr. Schumacher explained that all plats have been "fast tracked" but may take up to 60 days to finalize. The developer does not want to pay money on a letter of credit that may sit for 60 or more days before final approval. Therefore the letter of credit and the developers agreement are usually presented at the same time. The developer cannot do anything to the property until these items are completed and the plat is filed. Council Member Bohjanen moved to approve the final plat of Wenzel Farms, Second Addition and to include the engineer's comments. Council Member Neal seconded the motion. VOTING ON THE MOTION: Bisel © Bohjanen © Kuether Neal © Reinert Abstained: Kuether Motion carried. ENGINEER'S REPORT Neither Mr. Schneider or Mr. Boxrud had a report. ATTORNEY'S REPORT Kern Lawsuit Regarding Oak Brook Peninsula - Mr. Hawkins reported PAGE 12 154 155 COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 28, 1991 that this lawsuit appears to be nearing a settlement. He will bring the results of the negotiation back to the City Council for their review and approval. The Council took a five (5) minute recess at 8:20 P.M. OLD BUSINESS Charter Commission Appointments - Mr. Hawkins explained that questions regarding the appointment process to this commission have been raised. He noted that there were nine (9) vacancies. One (1) appointment is needed to complete the remaining two (2) years of a term and eight (8) appointments are needed to fill the terms that expired August 31, 1991. Mr. Hawkins read the State Statute regarding the appointment process. He also noted that the City received a copy of a letter written by the Charter Commission Chairman, Jeanne Goldade to Judge Gibbs listing nine (9) names that she had recommended to Judge Gibbs to fill the vacancies. Mr. Hawkins and Mr. Schumacher felt this matter should be brought to the attention of the City Council and this was done on August 26, 1991. The Council instructed Mr. Schumacher to write to the Judge and ask for an extension of time to allow the City to advertise the Charter Commission vacancies and to prepare a list of recommended appointments. The Council met on September 9, 1991 and voted on a list of nine (9) nominations for the vacant positions. The list was transmitted to Judge Gibbs by Mr. Hawkins. Judge Gibbs appointed the list submitted by the City Council because the Charter Commission had not met to officially recommended a list of appointments. According to State Statute 410.05, Subd. 3. Commission appointment; nominees, Judge Gibbs appointed from the only list meeting State Statute requirements. Mr. Hawkins explained that the State Statutes do not provide for private citizens to recommend Charter Commission appointments. Mr. Hawkins also noted that the Charter Commission could not make a recommendation without meeting and complying with the open meeting law. Council Member Reinert was concerned because Mr. Hawkins appeared to be speaking for the City Council in his letter to Judge Gibbs dated September 13, 1991. He also did not agree that the Chairman of the Charter Commission could not submit names to Judge Gibbs for the Charter Commission. He said he felt that citizens should be able to have their names submitted to the Judge by any organization. Council Member Reinert said he felt Mr. Hawkins letter said, "disregard the Charter Commission Chairman's letter and use only the City Council's list of nominees ". Mr. Hawkins explained that the Council had voted unanimously to submit their own list. He had no problem with the Charter Commission Chairman submitting her own list. Council Member Reinert said it appeared to him that the City Attorney was PAGE 13 1 1 1 1 1 1 COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 28, 1991 steering Judge Gibbs toward the list of nominees submitted by the City. Mr. Hawkins said he was since by law the list submitted by the Charter Commission Chairman did not meet State Statutes. Council Member Reinert felt that the City Attorney should not be telling the Judge what he can do. Mr. Hawkins explained that was his understanding of what the City Council wanted done. Council Member Reinert said it was his understanding that the City Council was submitting their list of names in addition to the list submitted by the Charter Commission Chairman's list. Mayor Bisel explained that it is his understanding that if the Charter Commission had met and prepared a list of nominees and submitted them to Judge Gibbs, he may have appointed members from both lists. This is the method used to control the Charter Commission. The Charter Commission was remiss in not meeting and preparing their own list. Council Member Reinert said he felt that if the City Attorney had simply listed the City Council nominees in his September 13, 1991 letter, the Judge would have appointed from both lists. Mayor Bisel said that someone would have noted that type of an error and brought it to Judge Gibbs attention. Mr. Hawkins explained that when the Council selected nine (9) names, he assumed that is what the Council wanted and he did tell Judge Gibbs the process used by the Council to select the nine (9) names. He said he assumed that if the Council wanted someone from the Charter Commission Chairman's list appointed, the Council would have selected those names from the list. Council Member Reinert referred to Mr. Hawkins August 27, 1991 letter to Judge Gibbs and said he felt it was written in such a manner as to indicate that the City Council would submit additional names and that the Judge could appoint from both lists. Council Member Reinert said it was his opinion that the letter steered Judge Gibbs to select from just the City proposed list of candidates. Mr. Hawkins said he felt he was suppose to do this on behalf of the City Council. He said he did not have any feelings on the matter, he just did exactly what the Council asked him to do. Council Member Neal said he thought that the Council was sending both lists to Judge Gibbs. He also noted that Mr. Al Ross was the only person responding to Chairman Goldade's inquiry and Mr. Ross was not appointed. Council Member Kuether said that at the time the Council prepared their recommendation for Judge Gibbs, she thought the Charter Commission Chairman's list was legal. Mr. Hawkins said Judge Gibbs has said that it is his policy to follow the recommendation of the City Council. It was not a matter of whether or not the list was legal or not. He felt that his paragraph did not influence the Judge. Council Member Reinert asked why would the City Council as a public body work in concert with the Charter Commission. It was explained that this would destroy the checks and balances concept PAGE 14 156 157 COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 28, 1991 of a City Charter. Council Member Reinert said that if he had known what he knows now, he would not have voted for the Council list of nominees. Dick Kulaszewicz, 6417 Hokah Drive asked how the motion was made on the appointments. Mayor Bisel read the motion from the minutes. Mr. Kulaszewicz noted that Council Member Kuether seconded the motion since she was one of the nominees. Mr. Hawkins said that the State Statutes do not prohibit her from voting. Mr. Kulaszewicz asked if there is a mandate for equality on the Charter Commission such as a specific number of women or senior citizens. Mr. Hawkins explained that there was nothing in the Charter by -laws or in City policy. Mr. Kulaszewicz asked if the Charter members were subject to petition? Mr. Hawkins said no, the appointee must take an oath within 30 days after the Judge issues his order. David Storberg, 6978 Lake Drive noted that the order from Judge Gibbs listed two (2) different terms of office for each nominee. Mr. Hawkins explained that this was an error and Judge Gibbs will be amending his order. Mr. Storberg asked since Mr. Al Ross did submit an application for a position on the Charter Commission, should he not have been re- appointed? Mayor Bisel said that his nomination should have come from the Charter Commission acting as a body, not from the Charter Commission Chairman. Mr. Storberg asked when the Council did advertise the vacant positions, did the Council advise Chairman Goldade and discuss combining lists? Council Member Kuether said no, it was not understood that the list from the Charter Chairman would not be considered. Council Member Reinert said he felt it was the manner in which Mr. Hawkins wrote the letter to Judge Gibbs that influenced his decision. Council Member Bohjanen said he felt that letter did not make any difference. Council Member Reinert said the entire matter is a botched up mess. Mayor Bisel said he felt the matter was unfortunate, however the rules of the Charter must be followed. Mr. Storberg asked if Mr. Ross was not off of the Charter Commission. It was explained that he was no longer a member. Mr. Storberg said he has noted some resistance on the part of the Council to cable casting on TV. He explained that he regularity tapes the meetings and passes the tapes to his neighbors. Mr. Hawkins told the Council that if the Council feels they want to reconsider both lists, he will ask Judge Gibbs to do so. PAGE 15 1 1 1 1 1 1 COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 28, 1991 Mayor Bisel said he would like a legal opinion as to whether this would be legal. Council Member Reinert moved to see if there is a possibility of reconsidering both lists. Council Member Neal seconded the motion. VOTING ON THE MOTION: Bisel Neal Abstained: none. Bohjanen Reinert Motion carried unanimously. Cable Cast Forum Kuether Mayor Bisel explained that on October 24, 1991, the City Council discussed cable casting a candidate forum on the government access channel No. 16 to allow for an exchange of views. A decision was not made at that time. Mayor Bisel said it was his opinion that the government access channel should be "kept clean" and only government sponsored programming be allowed. Mayor Bisel explained that the public access channel No. 33 is available for a candidates forum. He noted that the City of Centerville used Channel 33 for airing their consolidation issue. He asked that the Lino Lakes government access channel be kept clear and not be controlled by any individual or the media. Council Member Neal noted that Channel 33 reaches many other cities whose citizens would not be interested in this program. He asked when the forum would be scheduled on Channel 33 and noted that it should have been scheduled some time ago. Mayor Bisel said that this forum has been arranged by the local newspapers in the private sector. He said he would not be opposed if the forum had been arranged by the League of Women Voters or such other organization. Council Member Reinert said he could not think of a better information forum for the government channel. Mayor Bisel said he agreed, but said this is not the issue. He said Channel 16 should be used solely for broadcasting-Lino Lakes government happenings. Council Member Reinert felt Channel 33 did not serve the purpose for this forum. He felt the public forum is more focused and should be on Channel 16. Linda Elliott, 2001 Otter Lake Drive said she would like to see the unanimous approval of the Council for use of the government PAGE 16 158 159 COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 28, 1991 access channel for this forum. She noted that without debate and access, there would be no government. She felt the forum should not be discounted because it is to be provided to the public by the local newspapers. Council Member Kuether asked how the format was established. Ms. Elliott said that originally, the newspapers were promoting a "call in" type of format. She noted that there is a great deal of time on the government access channel and it would not be "dirtied" if it were opened to the debate. Ms. Elliott felt that to not allow the forum would be to deny access to the handicapped. She said it is a golden opportunity to use the channel. It would not be opening the door to profit motive operators. Ms. Elliott respectfully asked the Council to unanimously approve use of the government access channel for the public forum. Joyce Scharpen, 801 Main Street asked how many homes does cable TV reach in Lino Lakes. She asked if it would cost the City to pay for this program. Ms. Scharpen also asked if the audience would be able to ask questions. Ms. Scharpen was told that there would be no cost to the City. Council Member Neal noted that there will be another public forum at Mar dee's Restaurant on Thursday. Council Member Bohjanen asked if any other City Council has authorized the use of the government access channel for this forum. Mr. Schumacher explained that the City of Circle Pines had denied use of their public access channel. Barry Klieder, reporter for the Circulating Pines told the Council that he was before the Council tonight to answer questions about the forum. Council Member Reinert expressed concern about the format. Mayor Bisel said that was not relevant, the use of the government access channel was the concern. Council Member Kuether said she felt the format was important. Mr. Klieder said the format would be basically that used by the League of Women Voters. Each candidate would have equal time, each person would have the chance to be first and last. Questions from the floor would come on paper to Mr. Klieder first and he would ask the question. This procedure would eliminate the "loaded" questions or "speech making ". No one would know who asked the question. Council Member Kuether asked why the City of Circle Pines did not allow the forum on the government access channel. Mr. Klieder said it was because the sponsor was not a government agency. He noted that there was no such government agency who would sponsor the forum. That is why the local newspapers sponsored the forum. PAGE 17 1 1 1 1 1 COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 28, 1991 Mayor Bisel said he felt the format was correct, however the issue is should the City open the government access channel to non - government organizations? Mr. Klieder explained that there is no expense to the local government. The public forum will be cable casted on Channel 33, November 4, 1991 at 5:00 P.M. Council Member Bohjanen asked if Channel 33 is viewed by the same number of people as Channel 16. Mr. Klieder said yes plus people for all the other cities in the network. Council Member Reinert said he felt this is a Council policy issue and moved to open the debate live tomorrow for Channel 16, the government channel. Council Member Neal seconded the motion. Council Member Kuether said she felt this was not going to be a problem. Council Member Neal said the forum would be open to any one running for public office. Mr. Schumacher explained that this would become policy. The Council must make the decision to make Channel 16 a government access channel or not to make it a government access channel only. Council Member Reinert said he considered his motion policy. Mr. Schumacher explained that every time he receives a request for use of Channel 16, he will have to come to the Council for clarification. Council Member Reinert noted that State Statutes treat newspapers as separate entities because they are public outreach vehicles. The intent is to bring good information to the citizens. Council Member Kuether said she felt that the Council should make the decision whenever there is a request for use of Channel 16. Tami Adamson, 6001 Sargent Court North asked if there will be newspaper reporting on the debate. Mr. Klieder explained it would be after the election. Ms. Adamson explained that she was contacted about the debate and when she asked about the structure of the format the person said they would get back to her. This person did not contact her again and she has made other plans for that particular evening. Council Member Kuether said that there must be fairness in this issue. Council Member Bohjanen explained that when he was contacted, he told the person that he had a commitment for that evening and for every Tuesday of the year. However, he was quoted as saying he was not interested. Council Member Bohjanen felt that this was unfair. VOTING ON THE MOTION: Bisel Neal Abstained: none Motion carried. Bohjanen Reinert Kuether PAGE 18 160 161 COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 28, 1991 Mr. Schumacher asked if the Council is saying that the government access channel can be used for public information purposes? Mayor Bisel said a precedence has been set. NEW BUSINESS Set Special Council Meeting for Wednesday, November 6, 1991, 6:30 P.M. to Canvas the Municipal Election - Council Member Bohjanen moved to set this meeting. Council Member Neal seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Set Public Hearing for Former Lake Crest Preliminary Plat - Mr. Miller explained that the land known as Lake Crest has been purchased by Keith Ebinsteiner. The revised plat would eliminate dual driveways that exit onto Birch Street. Council Member Bohjanen moved to set this public hearing for Monday, November 25, 1991. Council Member Neal seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Council Member Bohjanen moved to adjourn at 9:52 P.M. Council Member Neal seconded the motion. Aye. These minutes were considered, corrected and approved at the regular Council meeting held on November 25, 1991. Marilyn nderson, Clerk- Treasurer Harold L. Bisel, Mayor PAGE 19 1 1 1 Council Member Bohjanen introduced the following ordinance and moved its adoption: CITY OF LINO LAKES ''COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA Ordinance No. 11 - 91 AN ORDINANCE RENAMING A PORTION OF A PUBLIC STREET KNOWN AS 74TH STREET TO APOLLO DRIVE Pursuant to the authority granted by M.S.A. 412.221, Subd. 18, the City Council of the City of Lino Lakes, Anoka County, Minnesota, does ordain: I. A portion of the following described public street is hereby renamed and said public street shall hereinafter be called Apollo Drive: The easterly 375 feet of the public street dedicated to the City of Lino Lakes or Anoka County, Minnesota according to the map thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for Anoka County, Minnesota, known and described as 74th Street. II. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication according to the Lino Lakes City Code. Passed by the City Council this 28th day of October, 1991. Harold L. Bisel, Mayor Marilyn G. Anderson, Clerk - Treasurer The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by Council Member Neal and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Neal, Kuether, Bisel, Reinert, Bohjanen. The following voted against same: none Whereupon the ordinance was declared duly passed and adopted. 162 163 Council Member Reinert ordinance and moved its adoption: introduced the following CITY OF LINO LAKES COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA Ordinance No. 12 - 91 AN ORDINANCE RENAMING A PUBLIC STREET KNOWN AS WEST STREET TO WHITE TAIL RIDGE Pursuant to the authority granted by M.S.A. 412.221, Subd. 18, the City Council of the City of Lino Lakes, Anoka County, Minnesota, does ordain: I. The following described public street is hereby renamed and said public street shall hereinafter be called White Tail Ridge: The public street dedicated to the City of Lino lakes or Anoka County, Minnesota according to the map thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for Anoka County, Minnesota, known and described as West Street. II. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication according to the Lino Lakes City Code. Passed by the City Council this 28th day of October 1991. Marily Harold L. Bisel", Mayor G. Anderson, Clerk - Treasurer The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by Council Member Kuether and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Neal, Kuether, Bisel, Reinert, Bohjanen. The following voted against same: None Whereupon the ordinance was declared duly passed and adopted. 1 1 1 1 1 1 Council Member Bohjanen introduced the following ordinance and moved its adoption: CITY OF LINO LAKES COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA Ordinance No. 13 - 91 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 02 OF THE CITY OF LINO LAKES BY REZONING CERTAIN REAL ESTATE FROM SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R -1) TO SINGLE FAMILY EXECUTIVE (R -1X) (WEAVER PROPERTY) I. The City Council of the City of Lino lakes, Anoka County, Minnesota does ordain: Ordinance No. 02 of the City of Lino Lakes, Anoka County, Minnesota, passed by the City Council on May 24, 1983 is hereby amended by rezoning from Single Family Residential (R -1) to Single Family Executive (R -1X), pursuant to the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Lino Lakes, the following described real estate: The southeast one quarter (1/4) of the northeast one quarter of Section 28, Township 31, Range 22, Anoka County, Lino Lakes, Minnesota. II. Save as above amended, said Ordinance No. 02 shall stand as initially passed and as previously amended. III. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication according to City Charter. Passed by the City Council of the City of ino Lakes thi day of October , 1991. 4 .6 ;2, V)--\ Marilyn "G. Anderson, Clerk - Treasurer 28th Harold L. Bisel, XD' The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by Council Member Reinert and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor: Neal, Bisel, Reinert, Bohjanen. The following voted against same: None, Council Member Kuether abstained. Whereupon the ordinance was declared duly passed and adopted. 164