Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-08-2011 CCMMINUTES APPROVED: April 19, 2011 City of Lake Elmo City Council Meeting Minutes March 8, 2011 Mayor Johnston reconvened the City Council Meeting from March 1, 2011 at 7:03 p.m. PRESENT: Mayor Johnston and Council Members Emmons, Park, Pearson, and Smith (arrived at 7:15 p.m.). Also Present: Administrator Messelt, Attorney Snyder, Planning Director Klatt, Finance Director Bouthilet and City Clerk Lumby. Presentation by Dan. Krivit Foth Infrastructure & Environment LLC This item was scheduled at the request of the Mayor and City Council as a follow up to its January 11, 2011. Workshop discussion. Dan Krivit, Senior Project Manager of Foth Infrastructure & Environment provided a brief PowerPointo presentation and answered questions regarding Municipal Approaches to Organized Trash Collection. Update on ECFC/Potential Action on amendments to Joint Powers Aareement City Administrator Messelt presented a brief history of the proposal, highlighting February 1.5th and 17th City Council meetings, as well as a February 16th Open House and March I st City Council update on the status of preparation of a Joint Powers Agreement for either City purchase and lease of the subject property to the School District or City assignment to the School District of its purchase option for the subject property and a waiver of applicable City SAC and WAC charges. The Council discussed the proposed revisions to the JPA language. Ray Queener, Assistant Superintendent of Business and Administrative Services, represented the School District in answering City Council questions. The City Attorney and City Engineer also responded to questions from the City Council. MOTION: Council Member Park moved to adopt Resolution No. 2011-07B Approving the revised Joint Povvers Agreement for the City to purchase the property and lease to the School Districtfor .9.9 years at a cost of'$1. Mayor Johnston seconded the motion. MOTION: Council Member Emmons amended the motion to adopt enabling Resolution No. 2011-07A and the related Joint Powers Agreement, including the revised language presented tonight, requiring the school district own the property at their proposed location. Council Member Smith :seconded the motion. The motion, as amended, then passed 3-2 (Mayor Johnston and Council Allember Park voting against). Consider Resolution No. 2011. -006 re: Washington County Participation in CTIB The City Council was requested to consider Resolution No. 2011-006, supporting Washington County's continued participationn in the Counties Transportation Improvement Board (CTIB), as requested by the Gateway Corridor Commission. The City Council supported. continued CTIB participation of collecting a quarter -percent sales tax for transit projects in Washington County. MOTION. Council Member Pearson moved to approve Resolution No. 2011-006 expressing support for Washington County's continued participation in the Counties Transportation Improvement Board (CTIB). Council Member Park seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-0. The Council adjourned the meeting at 10:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted by Sharon Lumby, City Clerk Resolution No. 2011-006 support for Washington County's continued participation in the Counties Transportation Improvement Board (CTIB) Resolution No. 2011-07A requiring the school district own the property at their proposed location and the related Joint Powers Agreement March S, 2011 City Council Minutes 3hrs. 21 minutes Mayor Johnston.: We have received input from other attorneys that say we should be doing this without challenges. Who wrote the second opinion, Bruce. Administrator Messelt: It was'rim. Keane, Malkerson, Gunn, Martin, LLP Council Member Smith: Where is the opinion? Why isn't the Council privy to that? Mayor Johnston: Let me answer the question so I only have to repeat it once. We have not seen a written opinion. from our attorney. When the opinion came I was surprised it was addressed to me. I immediately forwarded the second opinion to our attorney. I think it's reasonable that if we were to look at the opinion, we look at both or neither so I forwarded it to our attorney. I don't think it would be time well spent for us to start debating legal issues when simply — one said it works and the other one said there are concerns. Council Member Smith: But I don't think you should introduce that in a conversation that there are attorneys saying this is o'k if you are not willing to present that. If you don't want to get into a debate tonight, you then should not use in. an argument, respectfully. Mayor Johnston: I disagree completely. We are not skilled judges of legal issues. I think we should look to our attorney and am perfectly willing to listen to his input, but cannot look at one opinion without looking into the other. Attorney Snyder: Mr. Mayor as a followup to your comments Reasonable people, reasonable attorneys, who may not be people or reasonable, can differ on that issue. I recognize that there is a difference in opinions. Council has identified other issues of interest and probably worth focusing on all the issues are addressed both those identified by myself or yourself March 8, 201.1 City Council Minutes -- 3 Hrs. 33 minutes. Mayor Johnston: Can Option B be defendable? Attorney Snyder: It can be defended. Recommend that a painless and elegant alternative to buying the property, eliminate SAC and WAC Fees, provided there is public use sufficient to allow to why we eliminate SAC and WAC. There is a statute that allows the school district and City to own property. The City and school district can lease properly, but the lease cannot exceed 30 years. A number of issues that a prospect of a lease creates can be easily eliminated. The statute states the City has the authority to purchase property for another taxing entity, as proposed. Then if you operate :Parks & Ree and the School District operates Park & Rec, then the City can purchase land subject to a number of conditions: Limitations lease terra not more than 30 years Limitations include providing for City use of facilities There is also a specific statute that I did look at, to purchase for the purpose of another taxing entity. Ties it up to 99 years and have the ability to review calendaring in exchange, therefore, I think it is doubtful. Thus I made the recommendation. Mayor Johnston: Does the other opinion specifically state the City has the authority to enter into the agreement? Attorney Snyder: It does. I refer back to State statute. No support. If you have an opinion, then you have an opinion. So you can look at that opinion and rely on the opinion if something goes wrong. Be responsible. That's the reality. That is why I made the recommendation I did. This excerptfrom the March 81h minutes is not complete.