The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About04-11-92 Special CCMf Since we do not have time to discuss every point presented, it may ✓eem that decisions are preconceived. However, background information is provided for the City Council on each agenda item in advance from City Staff and appointed Commissions; and decisions are based on this information and past experiences. In addition, some items may also have been discussed at previous Council meetings. If you are aware of information that hasn't been discussed, please fill out a "Request to Appear Before the City Council" slip; or, if you came late, raise your hand to be recognized. Comments that are pertinent are appreciated. Items requiring excessive time may be continued to another meeting. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA SATURDAY, APRIL 11, 1992 9:00 a.m. Meeting Convenes at the Hammes Mining Property A. Hammes Property Walk-Thru 10:00 a.m. Meeting Reconvenes at City Hall B. David Johnson/Jess Mottaz letter to the Metropolitan Council C . Adj ourn LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP SATURDAY, APRIL 11, 1992 1. Hammes Walk -Through The City Council and Building Official met at the Hammes Property at 9:00 a.m. to walk-thru the property and determine the compliance with the council directive that they (Hammes) clean-up their property. Councilman Hunt: I saw progress, but not the kind of progress the council was looking for. At the current pace, they will not finish by the end of the year. Councilman Johnson: They have made some progress, but there are hundreds of tires that need to be disposed of. They stated they have cleaned steady the last two weeks with a crew of four. I'm particularly dismayed with nothing done with the movilas and semi -trucks loaded with stuff. It indicates to me that shortly before the Council is to go out for a walk-thru they do a little clean-up. At the present rate, it's going to be a long process. I personally feel its time to take action and put our city attorney to work and get it done. Mayor Johnson: I am happy to see some of the stuff is cleaned up around the house. I agree the City has to do something now. Jim, I think we should pick out area by area, probably start with the movilas and get that cleaned up by a certain time. I would like to suggest we have someone determine which items have historic or mining value, and the rest has to go. Councilman Mottaz: I'm disappointed with the progress. I see this as a staff problem and not a city council problem, because the staff hasn't exhausted all the means available to them. I think Jim could survey the property and isolate certain areas, site the code violation, and set a deadline. If they have not complied by the deadline set, then the Attorney sends them an order. This should be done in some kind of an organized fashion so the Hammes know what to concentrate on. If we work with them and clean up certain areas one at a time, I think we would see some progress. Councilman Williams. The motion that was passed by the Council was there was suppose to be significant progress made by this date. I don't feel significant progress has been made. The Attorney has laid out our options, and I think we should proceed with those options. We tried this step approach last year and it didn't get us anywhere. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 11, 1992 2 Councilman Hunt: I would like to have our attorney come back and tell us if Councilman Mottaz's idea is viable or if we should proceed with the full scale. I am in favor of turning it over to the staff. The Council has done a good job of trying to be responsive. We want to see this cleaned up by the end of the year or action has to be started. Mayor Johnson: I like the idea of a citation by our Building Inspector for a certain category of items, give a date that it will be accomplished. If not accomplished, then turn it over as a citation violation to the prosecuting attorney. We can say here, without any reservation, we will back Jim up on this. M/S/P Hunt/Mottaz - to direct Attorney Filla to prepare an opinion using whatever sources he feels necessary to develop that opinion as to whether or not the City can break this clean-up project down into citeable stages, and issue citations if those stages are not met or if the City should continue with the entire -clean-up as a whole. This opinion should be presented at the next regular council meeting. (Motion carried 5-0). 2. Mayor Johnson's and Councilman Mottaz's Letter to the Met Council Councilman Hunt: We have a petition before the Met Council for an extension of the MUSA. Unfortunately your letter tends to cast a doubt on the Met Council's review on that extension. It says that "oh by the way, what you used to review the extension against was not right. There's a whole bunch of other stuff you had to look at." Anything that comes out that causes the Met Council to geL<�pisse ,off at us or to think that maybe we didn't consider everything is only going to hurt this issue. This is my concern. I wanted to hear the other council members opinions. I think at this 11th hour we want to get this thing through. From talking to Mary, her opinion is the Council really should have had a unified front to take to the Met Council. This was her reading and apparently Mike Black's reading. We do not have that unified front and we're going to look petty silly on Monday, I'm afraid. Mayor Johnson: As far as the comp plan whether the stated policy of the Met Council is correct you must by specification add, change or delete items, I think that was stated correctly in the letter. I don't think that goes for the MUSA Extension issue. I don't think that should play any part in it and don't think it would play any part in it. Let me say, that I wasn't happy to have to see that letter written. The way this thing came about is we had a call from our City Administrator to Mr. Thompson and in essence a request to send a letter to our City to her clarifying her LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 11, 1992 3 own understanding in that she arrived at with Mr. Thompson as to what the comp plan is. My feeling is that Mary knew full well that this was an issue that had to be resolved in this City. I felt as that letter from Mr. Thompson said, unless there are any other conclusions or information from the City, that is the way they were going to proceed. I could not see us not commenting. Councilman Hunt: I think we definitely differ in interpretation. As I interpret it, Mary did not call Mr. Thompson and say "this is my impression of what happened, will you please send a letter to that effect." She called and said "this is what we have, what is your opinion?" This is the letter I received as to response to that. This is what happened, what did you review, what is your opinion. This is what Mr. Thompson responded to. Not that he and Mary sat down and cooked up this deal, that Mary wanted him to write this letter this way. I take offense that your comments made it sound that way. If I were Mary, I would take offense to it also. Mayor Johnson: And that was one of the intentions. Councilman Mottaz: I am sort of disappointed. If Mary is making this the same issue. This letter that we sent does not involve the MUSA extension. As a matter of fact this letter was sent and Thompson received it after the Met staff had made their decision and published their position on the MUSA extension. That happened before this letter was even sent in the mail. I was at the meeting at the Met Council when this was discussed with the staff and Mike Black presented the city's position. There could be no question in any one's mind that the City was not unified in this thing. Mike presented an excellent case. He brought out some very very strong arguments and had nothing to do with the comp plan at all. It was strictly the MUSA question. Hunt: The fact is that after presenting that very strong case w have potential for erosion because there is a doubt as to which comp plan that application had to be reviewed against. No matter what you say that application has to be reviewed against our comp plan because it is an amendment to our comp plan and how it fits in. All of that work is to naught if it is a different comp plan which means we are back to square one. Mary did not call me up and tell me "this comp plan being linked to this MUSA extension and to this letter." What I did was ask her some specific questions because I knew she was there. What I asked was What do you think? Do you think there is a possibility? She said "I don't know." But I certainly would be pissed off if I got something like this that told me I don't know my own business. I could tell she was not pleased by the LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 11, 1992 4 fact the letter implied she did not know her own job either. I strongly disagree with that tone in that letter. Mayor Johnson: I did not want to send that letter. I did not want this to go outside of the City. As I stated in that letter that is my position, and I think that would be your position as well on the Council. This is a policy issue. We must resolve. It is our plan and not the Met Council's plan. We just dealt with this at a council meeting where we discussed perhaps going to an Administrative law judge or whatever to resolve the issues. Then to have this come back in as kind of an unofficial official confirmation. As much as anything Dick Thompson, in my opinion, is going to address a policy issue should get clearance from his appointed council. If he addresses it, should address the results of that to our Council and not this unofficial thing --just a letter to Mary. When we get something like that, I would like distribution of that mailed now. I want mail that is policy oriented, whether addressed to her, that is council actionable, I want it in my mail box when it comes in. M/S/P Williams/Dick Johnson - to direct the City Administrator to compose a letter and read it at the hearing on April 13th covering at least the following three points: 1. The official City of Lake Elmo position is that the 1990-2010 comp plan document is the official comp plan for the City of Lake Elmo. 2 The letter written by Mayor Johnson and Councilman Mottaz was written by them as individuals and in no way reflects city policy. 3. That the City is embarrassed by the confusion caused by this letter and request that the Metropolitan Council proceed with the MUSA Extension application using the 1990- 2010 comp plan as the base. Mayor Johnson: Well, I'm sorry but it can't be stated because as you know there is a difference of opinion as to what is the comprehensive plan. Now we do agree that the comp plan map, the 1990-2010 map that accompanies that amendment, is a specific amendment to the comp plan map that existed prior to that time. I have no problem with it and I don't think Jess does either. But to read that would be a falsehood because that is not the opinion of this Council. This Council must vote by a 4/5ths vote to approve a comp plan amendment. I think we made it quite clear in that letter as to what two of these council members believe that vote to be and I think the evidence is quite clear as to what was accomplished. Reading that before the group on the 13th would do more to split to insure a recognition by the LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 11, 1992 5 ' met council in particularly this is not staff any more that we are dealing with. We are dealing with the people that are going to make the recommendations. This is a subcommittee to the Met Council. I don't think we have to continue this argument outside of these chambers. We are the ones that have the responsibility to come to a resolution and I was hoping that was what we were going to do today. I thought that was the purpose of your request -- of what constitutes our comp plan. I don't think making these comments although that would be satisfying to you personally would do anything to further our position with the Met Council. Dick Johnson: I mentioned at the last meeting when you brought this up that the most important part of a comp plan is the Future Land Use Map, but I think with this letter you have taken this issue out of the city and already put it into an arena outside of the city. If Councilman Williams had not made this motion, I was prepared to support a similar letter that would go out and state what the majority of this council's opinion is and what we felt the vote was made to approve the 1990-2010 comp plan. When I go back and look at that, even though you took out the word "supercedes", it is very clear to me that document represents the comp plan of the City. I think this kind of thing just adds confusion to the Met Council in our efforts. I couldn't believe when I read this letter that you would be wiling to impair our efforts, and I believe this is impairing our efforts to get the MUSA Extension. I have to support what Councilman Williams stated. Mayor Johnson: What will impair our efforts is our comments like this that are read in a public forum and I then have to refute them at the same public forum. I will not accept this. If you say it is the city's position that this is the comp plan, I will state at that very same meeting, uninquevocably the City's position is not that. There are two members that do not agree. There is no purpose to reading this thing aloud. Councilman Hunt: The comp plan that was prepared and submitted to the Met Council was submitted to them as a replacement. That is the way they reviewed it. That is the way the resolution read to adopt it. All through the entire process it was made clear to the Met council that this is the direction. This was done before you two were on the Council. In order to have changed that you would have had to pass a motion, the majority of the council, voting in favor to say-- we need to change our submission and we need to modify our submission and say no, take this document too and review them together. The review would have been completely different. It is clear from their review that LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 11, 1992 6 they reviewed only the one document and approved only the one document. When you voted you knew that. Mayor Johnson: I know what you are saying. On the other hand. M/S/P Mottaz/Hunt - to call the question. (Motion carried 5-0). (MOTION CARRIED 3-2: Mayor Johnson, Mottaz) List of Claims for Approval For the period 14/02/92 to 14/42192 April 6, 1992 Lake Elmo Council Meeting TO WHOM PAID FOR WHAT PURPOSE DATE CLAIM NUMBER TOTAL CLAIM ACCOUNT NUMBER ACCOUNT AMOUNT LEAGUE OF AN CITIES APRIL PREMIUM 04/12/92 411 2,432.25 100-41580-130 1,275.72 111-42401-131 334.81 106-43100-130 821.72 MINN. BENEFIT ASSN. APRIL PREMIUM 14/42/92 412 661.71 111-41511-131 57.37 111-43111-130 514.33 ALLIED GROUP INSURANCE TRUST APRIL PREMIUM 14112192 403 86.86 100-41SIO-131 34.16 111-42441-131 14.14 101-43110-131 38.66 MUNICI-PALS MEMBERSHIP DUES 14142192 404 5.11 100-41398-433 5.01 STILLWATER GAZETTE ANNUAL SUBSCRIPTION 14112192 415 85.11 100-41300-433 85.#$ POSTMASTER BULKNAILING NEWSLETTER 14112/92 406 264.12 111-41501-354 264.12 MINUTEMAN PRESS 3126 NEWSLETTER. 14/12192 417 596.75 114-41514-354 596.15 AMERICAN AMEN SUPPLY OFFICE BLOC. MAINT. 14/12192 408 35.46 101-41511-406 35.46 WASHIM6TON COUNTY TREAS. RECORD RES. 1 91-21 691-23 14/12192 419 31./1 111-41511-201 36.10 PITNEY $OWES POSTAGE METER 14112192 411 111.11 101-41501-201 111.11 D.C. KEY CO. COPY MACHINE MAINT. 04/12192 411 211.14 100-41501-210 211.14 WASHINGTON COUNTY TREAS, TRUTH 6 TAXATION MAILING 14/12/92 412 255.14 101-41510-211 255.14 GENERAL OFFICE PRODUCTS OFFICE SUPPLIES 14112/92 413 149.43 100-41SIO-211 149.43 F.X.L., INC. FRANK LANGER -.APRIL ASSESSING 14/02192 414 1,273.33 111-41551-301 1,273.33 TKOA" FEBRUARY ENGINEERING 14/12/92 415 7,141.10 111-41931-311 1,258.41 803-41930-300 391.55 402-41931-301 4,216.73 411-41936-311 1,200.31 JAMES R. HILL, INC. FEBRUARY PLANNER 041/2/92 416 1,662.11 180-41911-300 1,311.11 813-41910-316 355.11 ANDALL 6 LINDA WAGNER 3J5192 RECYCLING WINNER 14/12192 417 25.11 101-43269-318 25.11 NARY OLSON 216192 RECYCLING WINNER 14142192 418 25.14 101-43200-318 26.11 MICHAEL SMITH MARCH ANIMAL CONTROL OFFICER 04//2192 419 591.0/ 111-42700-110 $94.01 INT'L CONF,OF BLOG.OFFICIALS MEMBERSHIP DUES 14/02192 421 75.1# Ili-42400-2f7 75.10 GOVERNMENT TRAINING SERVICE BUILDING CODE SEMINAR 041/2/92 421 21.10 110-42400-217 21.04 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO MARCH ASP 04142/92 422 2,558.21 106-41510-381 164.39 100-42200-380 288.82 110-43111-381 111.64 111-43166-381 805.68 101-45211-381 Z31.18 611-49411-380 342.13 612-49450-381 26.57 U. S. WEST MARCH TELEPHONE 04102/92 423 431.3/ 161-41501-320 242.14 101-42200-321 81.69 111-43111-320 . $1.82 111-45201-321 55.65 CELLULAR ONE FIRE DEPT. CELLULAR PHONE 14112/92 424 11.52 100-42216-320 ll.52 JAMES SACHS FIRE MARSHALL$ ASSN DUES 6 RUN REP 04102192 425 146.25 110-42201-210 110.25 101-42210-433 35.11 MEYER SEWER SERVICE STATION 1 1 SEWER PUMPING 141#2192 426 85.11 110-42211-401 85.11 MINN.CONWAY FIRE 6 SAFETY FIRE DEPT - NOZZLE REDUCER 14192192 421 18,18 111-4221t-217 18.18 6-WHIZ LETTERING UNIFORMS FOR NEW MEMBERS O4102/92 428 122.06 161-42200-218 122.06 OAK PARK HEIGHTS IND FIRE DEPT ENVELOPES 6 PRTG 14/02/92 429 114.66 101-42261-200 114.66 LAKEVIEW HOSPITAL FIRE DEPT 1ST RESPONDER PROGRAM 14102192 430 45.00 100-42209-207 45.00 4EO-COMPASS, INC. HEP.VACCINE SHOTS 6 CHECKUPS 14/12192 431 674.10 111-42280-306 674.00 RE INSTRUCTORS ASSN.OF AN 6 MEMBERSHIPS 6 I BOOK 04102192 432 54.00 181-42201-433 30.16 101-42201-297 21.11 NORTH STAR INTERNATIONAL TRUCK FIRE DEPT YEARLY OIL CHANGES 14/12/92 433 37.52 111-42201-220 31.52 (Over) April 6th List of Claims for Approval (continued) For the period 14/02/92 to 04/02/92 04103192 CLAIM TOTAL ACCOUNT ACCOUNT TO WHOM PAID FOR WHAT PURPOSE DATE NUMBER CLAIM NUMBER AMOUNT TNT INC FIRE DEPT-TRUCK AIR LEAK 14112132 434 146.90 111-42201-221 146.84 LOWER ST. CROIX VALLEY AMBULANCE FIRE DEPT INJURY 14/12132 435 311.01 111-42211-151 311.11 INTERSTATE DETROIT DIESEL, INC. NAIMT.OEPT.LDAOER REPAIR 14/12/92 436 541.72 111-43110-221 641.72 VERN'$ OTC AUTO PARTS MAINT G FIRE 141/2J92 437 $05.98 111-43111-221 253.71 111-42211-220 52.28 GARELICK STEEL CO. 88 OMC PICKUP REPAIRS 041/2192 438 62.31 110-43111-221 52.36 TRUCK UTILITIES NAINT DEPT PARTS 6 REPAIR 14112/92 439 31.86 111-43111-221 31.81 PIONEER RIM 6 WHEEL CO MAINT.OEPT.-RECEIVER TUBE 14/12/92 440 13.18 110-431A0-221 13.18 AMERICAN TOOL SUPPLY NAINT.DEPT.-TRANSFER PUNCHES 14112192 441 53.45 111-43111-223 53.45 F.N.BATHKE CO. NAINT.DEPT.-WELOINO SUPPLIES 14(12'92 442 31.14 101-43161-223 31.14 N B INOUSTRIAL SUPPLY CO. NAINT 6 PARKS SUPPLIES 04/12/92 443 30.69 111-43111-223 11.23 111-45211-219 21.46 MIDWEST BOLT 6 SUPPLY NAINT.OEPT.SHOP SUPPLIES 14/12/92 444 $3.75 191-43101-223' 33.75 GLENWOOD INGLEWOOD MAINT DEPT WATER 14/12/92 446 12.60 111-43141-223 12.61 NORTH ST.PAUL MEDICAL CENTER MAINT.OEPT.-DAN STEEL IN EYE 14/12/92 446 $5.10 111-43111-156 85.40 KREA£R SPRING 6 ALIGNMENT COMPOST GATE POSTS 6 NAINT SUP 14/12/92 447 64.01 111-43210-311 40.61 111-43119-221 24.60 HENAROS PARKS 6 FIRE DEPTS MISC SUPPLIES 14(12/92 448 186.42 101-42201-401 78.72 106-45210-220 1#7.71 ELMO'S LUMBER K PLYWOOD FIRE 6 PARKS OEPTS MISC SUPPLIES 14142/92 449 22.65 111-42208-441 11.31 111-45208-221 1234 DOLAN'S SPORTING GOODS KLEIS PARK CLIMBING LADDER 14112/92 451 16.11 111-45201-219 16:11 ELMER'$ REPAIR PARKS DEPT - CHAINS 6 SHARPENING 14/12192 451 41.32 101-45201-221 41.32 FR066Y'S CARPET SHOP CARPET FOR PARK BLDG. 641/2192 452 362.52 414-45211-531 362.52 GAME TIME LIONS PLAYGROUND-REIMB JAYCEES 14/12/92 453 3,196.24 404-45210-580 3,196.24 ON -SITE SANITATION INC SUNFISH SATELITE 04(02/92 464 60.11 101-45261-385 60.09 KILLER EXCAVATING GRAVEL FOR WATER MAIN BREAK N112192 455 617.81 601-49400-228 607.81 TOTAL FOR MONTH 26,123.19 26,123.19 TO DATE 26,123.19 26,123.09