HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packets - 2007/02/05
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION AGENDA
MOUNDS VIEW CITY HALL
Monday, February 5, 2007
7:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL: Marty, Stigney, Flaherty, Hull, Mueller
PUBLIC COMMENT
Citizens may speak to issues not on tonight’s agenda. Before speaking, please give your full
name and address for the minutes. Also, please limit your comments to three minutes and sign
in on the sign-in sheet located on the podium.
Agenda Items Discussed by Consensus
________ 1. Joint Meeting with Planning Commission (7pm – 7:45pm)
A. Discuss Process to Update Comprehensive Plan
B. Discuss Increasing Membership of the Planning Commission
C. Review Administrative Subdivision Request for Red Oak Estates
_________ 2. Communications (7:45pm – 8:30pm)
A. Communications Coordinator Position (Representatives of the Cable Committee will
be here for this item)
B. Review Newsletter Postage Costs
C. NSCC Web-streaming Proposal
_________ 3. Public Works (8:30 – 9:15pm)
A. 2007 – 2008 Street & Utility Project
________ 4. Administration (9:15pm to 10:00pm)
A. 3rd Annual Town Hall Meeting Discussion
B. Community Events/Celebrations Committee
C. Policy for Citizen Agenda Items
D. Community Center Task Force Continuation
E. Mounds View Gambling Report
Next Work Session: Monday, March 5, 2007 @ 7pm
Next City Council Meeting: Monday, February 12, 2007 @7pm
Item No: 1A
Meeting Date: Feb 5, 2007
Type of Business: Worksession
Administrator Review : ____
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council and Members of
the Planning Commission
From: James Ericson, Community Development Director
Item Title/Subject: Discuss Process to Update the Comprehensive Plan
Introduction:
The City of Mounds View will need to update its Comprehensive Plan by the end of 2008.
Given the magnitude of this task, staff feels it would be best to start planning the process as
early as possible and establish a framework to guide us through the update. The Sun Focus
recently ran a story which addresses this task and the steps some cities will be taking to
accomplish the update; the article is attached for your reference.
Discussion:
There are many options to consider and discuss regarding the update of the Comprehensive
Plan, such as who will be involved, should the City hire a consultant to assist with the
preparation, should a steering committee be formed, should a community survey be
conducted, etc. The newspaper article addresses many of these options. The last
Comprehensive Plan update was initiated in 1998 and was concluded in 2001 with adoption
by the City Council. The task was challenging due to the fact that the previous “official”
Comprehensive Plan was from 1979—twenty year earlier. The update due in 2008 should
be a relatively straightforward process given that the City is for the most part fully developed
and given that the last update was adopted just five and a half years ago.
Staff anticipates that it will be necessary to enlist the assistance of consultants to assist with
demographic data analysis and GIS mapping, and funds have been budgeted ($2,500) to
account for some of this in 2007. As discussed with the Planning Commission on January
24, staff will be coordinating the review process with the Planning Commission, the Parks
Recreation and Forestry Commission, and the Economic Development Commission and will
schedule at least one open house to gather input from residents and property owners.
While there does not appear to be a need to hire an outside consultant to survey residents or
otherwise assist with the preparation of the update, the Comprehensive Plan should
represent the culmination of the community’s vision for the city, thus broad public
participation will be key to the success and acceptance of the document. Staff will utilize all
reasonable means of communication to alert property owners to the ongoing review process
in an effort to engage and encourage public comment and feedback.
Comp Plan Report
Feb 5, 2007
Page 2
Recommendation:
The purpose of this joint meeting between the City Council and Planning Commission is to
review goals and expectations and to ensure that both entities agree on the general process
by which the City’s Comprehensive Plan will be reviewed and updated. At the meeting, Staff
will distribute a timeline which among other things will chart out when sections of the Comp
Plan will be reviewed by which entity and the anticipated hearing dates for public review and
consideration of the final draft.
Respectfully submitted,
________________________
James Ericson
Community Development Director
Item No: 1B
Meeting Date: Feb 5, 2007
Type of Business: Worksession
Administrator Review : ____
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council and Members of
the Planning Commission
From: James Ericson, Community Development Director
Item Title/Subject: Discuss Increasing Membership of the Planning
Commission, Reappointment Process
Introduction:
The Mounds View Planning and Zoning Commission is an advisory body comprising of
seven residents appointed by the City Council. Recently much interest has been expressed
in serving on the Planning Commission, as evidenced by the seven applications for the four
open seats. In addition to discussing membership levels, the Council also indicated a desire
to review the policy concerning the procedures for appointment and reappointment. Both
issues can be discussed at this joint meeting.
Discussion:
Concerning the number of members appointed to the Planning Commission, the City Code
indicates that there shall be seven persons appointed to serve in three year staggered terms.
A seven member board functions well and provides for a diversity of opinion and thoughts
without becoming too unwieldy or unmanageable by expanding the ranks. In 1999, however,
new mayor Dan Coughlin desired to increase membership on the boards and commissions
to expand opportunities for residents to volunteer and participate in City advisory bodies.
The Planning Commission membership was increased to nine members, however this
proved to be too difficult a membership to maintain and one year later the membership was
down to eight, and by the end of 2000, membership had dropped to six members. After two
years of continued vacancies, the City Code was amended once again back to seven
members. My experience with the nine member board was that there did not seem to be the
same level of attendance commitment among some members as there was with a seven
member board. The number of applications received for the Planning Commission in 2007
was an anomaly; more often it is the case that an open seat remains vacant for extended
time periods.
Concerning the procedure for appointing members to advisory boards and commissions, the
policy and practice has evolved over time. Originally (or at least when I started in 1996)
sitting commission members who desired to be reappointed were simply reappointed without
reapplying or posting notice for the potentially open seat. The basis for this practice likely
stemmed from the fact that it was difficult to find people willing to volunteer their time in the
first place; if they wanted to continue, they should be provided that opportunity.
PC Membership Report
Feb 5, 2007
Page 2
In 1999, with the election of Mayor Coughlin, the reappointment procedures were revised to
discontinue automatic reappointments for sitting commission members. Mayor Coughlin felt
that automatic renewals provided little chance for new ideas, thoughts or opinions being
brought to the commission and served only to perpetuate what was figuratively referred to as
an old boys club. From that point on, all sitting City commission members have been asked
to reapply for their positions if they desired to continue serving. The Council has asked
whether preference should be granted for sitting members if the number of applications
exceed the number of available seats (as was the case in 2007.) The Council has also
asked whether we should automatically advertise for potential openings even if
commissioners desire to remain on the commission. The way I see it, both cannot occur. If
preference is given to existing commission members, it would seem disingenuous to
advertise for the openings that are not really available (the recent example being the
Economic Development Commission.)
Recommendation:
Regarding the membership level of the Planning Commission, my recommendation is that
the membership remain at seven and that any applicants present or future who are not
selected to serve on the Planning Commission be notified of other advisory body service
opportunities that may be available at the time.
Regarding automatic reappointments or preferential treatment for sitting members, my
personal opinion is that the Council stay with the process in place presently which requires
sitting members to reapply for their seat and posting notice for the potential openings. Given
the frequency of resignations on our commissions, there will always be opportunities for
residents to become involved without having to compromise the continuity and level of
experience by replacing long-serving commission members.
Respectfully submitted,
________________________
James Ericson
Community Development Director
Planning Board Composition
In August 2002, the Planning Commissioners Journal sent out a short survey
to planners and planning commissioners on our e-mail list. The aim was to
supplement Greg Dale's and Elaine Cogan's articles in our Fall 2002 issue
(Who Shall Serve? Public Interest vs. Special Interest and Does Your Planning
Board Reflect Your Community) with some feedback on the composition of
planning commissions.
We received an astonishing (to us) number of replies, hearing back from 242 of the 620
individuals we e-mailed. Bear in mind, however, that the results were not based on a
statistically composed random sample. Nevertheless, we feel we learned much -- and
came away with some surprises -- from the feedback many of you generously provided.
Achieving Diversity
What struck us most was the very wide diversity in backgrounds of planning board
members -- and the relatively small number of communities having criteria for
appointment of planning commissioners (beyond residency). As one town clerk from
New York put it: "We do have diversity. However, I don't think we actually planned it."
Nevertheless, a number of communities have made efforts to achieve diversity. For
example, John Kross, Community Development Director for Queen Creek, Arizona,
reported that in his community about one-third of the population is of Hispanic origin:
"Our Mayor and Council have made a point to consider the ethnic balance of the
community, as well as gender balance of all boards and commissions. However, this is
not a prescriptive policy."
A number of replies to our survey noted the value of having individuals with
backgrounds in certain fields. According to Pete Dickinson, Planning Director for the City
of Pullman, Washington, while his city has no formal criteria for appointment, "we
usually like to have at least one real estate developer or broker on the planning
commission ... we also like to have representation from all quadrants of the city."
Russ Soyring, Planning Director for the City of Traverse City, Michigan, feels that
"having an architect on the Commission helps fellow Commissioners understand
building plans better," while Marty Ryan, City Planner for Cedar Falls, Iowa, reports that
his city seeks to have a geographically balanced commission, without a "clustering" of
members from one or two parts of the city.
Timothy Huey, Planning Director for Scott County, Iowa, noted that "given the
importance of agriculture in Scott County, there's an effort to have individuals with
farming backgrounds serve on the commission." Currently Scott County's seven
member commission includes three farmers. Huey did add, however, that "a good
planning commissioner is someone who has a good sense of the community character
and understands that commissioners represent the whole community and not just their
neighborhood or profession."
Better gender balance was listed as a goal in several replies. Cindy Gray, a senior
planner and zoning administrator in Fargo, North Dakota, told us of efforts to increase
gender diversity on the Fargo Planning Commission. Three women now serve on the 11
member board (up from just one recently). Interestingly, Gray also reported that "we
have tried to get an age balance on the Planning Commission ... and have made efforts
to have someone on the Planning Commission who lives in rental housing or in the
downtown area"" though, Gray observes, "that's been difficult."
Criteria for Board Composition
We did hear back from several communities which do have written criteria on planning
commission composition. For example, Bryan Wood, Zoning Administrator for the City
of Greenville, South Carolina told us that by city ordinance planning commissioners are
to be appointed "in consideration of their professional expertise, knowledge of the
community, and concern for the welfare of the total community and its citizens" and
that "membership shall represent a broad cross section of the interests and concerns of
persons residing and doing business within the city." Reflecting this charge, the
Commission currently includes an architect, two lawyers, a residential builder, a realtor,
a planning professor, and one retiree.
Allara Mills-Gutcher, a senior planner with the Bay County Board of Commissioners in
Panama City, Florida, reported that her county's land development regulations call for
the planning commission to include three members "who have demonstrated an
involvement or expertise in the development of land, such as an architect or landscape
architect, an engineer, a person in real estate or development or a general contractor;
three people who have demonstrated an involvement or expertise in the protection and
conservation of the environment ...; and three who do not have ties to either of the
above."
Planners from Michigan noted that under their state's Municipal Planning Act, [see
§125.33] a planning commission must "represent insofar as is possible different
professions or occupations." Another state with specific requirements is Minnesota,
which requires that on county planning commissions: "No voting member of the
commission shall have received, during the two years prior to appointment, any
substantial portion of income from business operations involving the development of
land within the county for urban and urban related purposes." MN County Planning
Enabling Act §394.30
Who's on Board
Not surprisingly, attorneys are well represented on planning boards (7%). We can't tell
you whether that's good or bad , but attorneys can take heart from what we heard
from Carolyn Braun, Planning Director for the City of Anoka, Minnesota: "We have four
attorneys on our seven member commission. At first I thought it would be an
impossible situation. However, the attorneys have various legal backgrounds and bring
a reasoned approach to decision-making. As such, the commission as a whole makes
well-thought out recommendations."
It also came as little surprise that a relatively high proportion of commissioners work in
development, real estate, building, and related fields (13%). While some replies pointed
out the benefits of this, others expressed concern about potential conflicts of interest.
One planner from Georgia noted the need for balance: "Applicants for commission
openings tend to be concentrated in the development and real estate fields. We make a
concerted effort to balance representation and limit self-serving interests."
We were surprised to find a fairly high proportion of commissioners (6%) who are
teachers (in either K-12 schools or colleges and universities). On the other hand,
certain professions appear to be very poorly represented. Most striking, perhaps, is the
paucity of medical professionals serving on planning boards (just 1%).
Several of those responding stressed the importance of other traits over the value of
any particular occupational background. As Larry Fronk, Community Development
Director for Miami Township, Ohio, put it: "What I have found is the
background/education of the Board member is less important than their commitment to
the community, their willingness to learn and understand the planning and zoning
process, and their willingness to do their 'homework' on upcoming planning issues or
zoning cases." Similarly, Paul Ketelsen, Zoning Administrator for Clinton County, Iowa,
succinctly noted: "People with intelligence and good judgment are better than trying to
find specific backgrounds in the community."
How Commissioners are Selected
Planning commission recruitment and appointment processes were another focus of the
questionnaire. 97% of the communities replying indicated that commissioners are
appointed. The principal exception being Massachusetts, where 4 of the 9 communities
we heard from have elected boards.
The appointment process varies greatly, though the most common method by far is
appointment by the governing body. Most planning commissions are comprised entirely
of "at large" appointees. The most common exception to the above are commissions
having a designated slot for a member of the governing body. The most unusual
designated slot we heard about, however, was in Hoquiam, Washington, where one
commission member must be a high school student!
While few communities have guidelines for the appointment of new members, many
require completion of a written questionnaire and/or interviews by the mayor and
governing body. In St. Louis County, Minnesota, explained planning commission
secretary Mark Johnson, "Commission candidates are given a questionnaire about views
on development, environment, and their ability to face long, controversial meetings."
Vince Hustead, a planner for Little Rock, Arkansas, sent us a copy of a detailed
questionnaire potential commissioners need to complete.
Berlin, New Hampshire, uses an intriguing approach to planning commissioner
appointment. As city planner Pamela Laflamme reports, "We usually take new members
on as non-voting associate members to allow for an educational immersion into the
Board. Then, when they feel ready and there is an opening, the Planning Board votes to
recommend an associate member to the Mayor for appointment." According to
Laflamme, there are currently three associate members who attend the Board's
monthly meetings.
Several replies noted the difficulty of finding people to serve on small town (or county)
planning commissions. As a planner from Montana noted: "Because we often don't get
several people expressing interest in a vacancy, when someone does express interest,
we tend to jump on it and appoint that person without much consideration of their
'qualification' or ability to make the time commitment."
Comments on the political nature of the appointment process were also common. A
sampling: "the process is very political" (from a California planning commissioner);
"appointments sometimes are the result of political favors" (from a Michigan planner);
"the appointment process can become very political" (from a Maryland planner);
"appointments are used as payback for election support or to appease factions calling
for more representation" (from a former Virginia planning commission chairman);
"politics still plays a big role" (from a North Carolina planner).
But sometimes the appointment process is just one big mystery. As one planning
director put it: "it's a black box at the council level."
Item No: 1C
Meeting Date: Feb 5, 2007
Type of Business: Worksession
Administrator Review : ____
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council and Members of
the Planning Commission
From: James Ericson, Community Development Director
Item Title/Subject: Review Administrative Subdivision Request Concerning
Red Oak Estates Townhome Project
Introduction:
Last December, Marty Harstad contacted me regarding the possibility of separating the
existing six townhome owners from the rest of the association. The request, according to Mr.
Harstad, was made by the existing six townhome owners who anticipate pressure from the
new association to bring their building exteriors into compliance with the design standards
and appearances of the new buildings. The existing owners foresee this possibility as a
financial burden they are not presently able to bear and may feel as though the new
association board could effectively vote them out of the development via excessive
renovation assessments. To guard against this from happening, the six townhome owners
wish to be removed from the Red Oak Estates Association, or conversely, that the remaining
66 lots be placed into a new association apart from their own. The attorney representing Mr.
Harstad has articulated this request in writing, dated January 23, 2007. Staff asked Kennedy
& Graven to review this request and to prepare an opinion taking into consideration the City’s
Subdivision Code and potential ramifications from the 2004 ruling on the development. City
Attorney Scott Riggs has responded that there is no basis for an administrative subdivision
approval, and that if the new association were to be carved from the old, the development
would likely need to be replatted or a variance be requested to bypass the platting
requirement.
Discussion:
Setting aside for the moment any procedural issues associated with such a change, staff
feels the request is not without merit and there would not appear to be any obvious reasons
to prohibit such a split from occurring, except that approving the split could potentially delay a
timely renovation of the existing building’s exterior. If the 66 remaining lots were split from
the original six, it would seem likely that the new association bylaws would be prepared
under current townhome association laws and requirements rather than a model from the
1970s.
From a procedural standpoint, it appears that a division of the association would necessitate
creation of a new lot line which would in turn necessitate a replatting of the property. All of
the property owners would need to sign the application for the subdivision if such action were
being considered. Based on Mr. Riggs response, there are no provisions in the Subdivision
Code (Title 1200) which would allow for an administrative subdivision approval.
Red Oak Estates Report
Feb 5, 2007
Page 2
Recommendation:
No action is being requested at this time and this report is purely for the council’s and
Commission’s information so that you are aware of the desires of the existing six townhome
owners. City Attorney Riggs will communicate his findings to Attorney Brinkman who
represents Mr. Harstad. If an application for a subdivision is submitted, it will be processed
consistent with the requirements of Title 1200, the Mounds View Subdivision Code.
Respectfully submitted,
________________________
James Ericson
Community Development Director
Item No: 02A
Meeting Date: 02/05/07
Type of Business: Work Session
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Kurt Ulrich, City Administrator
Item Title/Subject: Communications Coordinator Position
Background
With the resignation of the City’s Communications Coordinator late in 2006, the City Council
asked staff and the City Cable Committee to review other options. Currently, the City is running
the cable operation with one part-time position. The other part-time Cable Technician position is
vacant and hiring has been put on hold until a decision is made regarding the Communications
Coordinator position.
The position was created in the 2006 budget in an effort to address the City’s goal of improving
citizen communication. This position was established to assist in city communications to include
cable television support, web page updates, and general communications to the public.
The Cable Committee has reviewed this position and recommends a 40 hour per week (fulltime)
position be created called the Cable Coordinator. The various duties are as outlined in the
attached document. In addition to Cable broadcasting and program development, the position
also includes web page updates and operating the electronic message board on County Highway
10. The position as proposed would not be responsible for the City newsletter nor general press
releases. These duties would need to be assigned to other existing staff. Responsibility for web
page updates is now in the process of being transferred to each individual department as the City
has gone to the gov.office web hosting service.
Representatives of the Cable Committee will be present to discuss their recommendation.
The position was previously funded as a full-time position with split funding allocations based
upon an approximate time spent on various duties. Funding was split among the Cable TV Fund
(75%), the General Fund (16%), the Water and Sewer Funds (3.5% each), the Street Light and
Storm Water Funds (1% each). These funding allocations would need to be reassigned based
upon the job duties. As proposed by the Cable Committee, more funds would be allocated
directly to the Cable TV Fund. Thant Fund has a 2007 budgeted ending fund balance of $193,
693.
Attached are the following documents for discussion:
• Responses from Cor Wilson, executive Director of NSCC, and Barbara Haake regarding
the history of the Cable Committee and staffing among the 10 cities of the NSCC.
• Cable Committee time allocation for 40 hour per week Cable Coordinator position.
• 2007 Cable TV Budget
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council discuss the position and consider the position as outlined
by the Cable Committee.
Item No. 02B
Type of Business: WK
Date: Feb. 5, 2007
City Administrator Review _______ City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Desaree Crane, Assistant to the City Administrator
Item Title/Subject: Review Newsletter Postage Costs
At the December 4, 2006, Work Session, delivery options were discussed for the Mounds View Matters
Newsletter. Staff was directed at this Work Session to start the process of delivering the newsletter via
U.S. Postal Service (USPS). At the start of this process, Staff discovered that the cost of delivering the
newsletter by USPS was higher than reported at the December 4, 2006 Work Session. In addition to
the higher than expected delivery costs, additional copies of the newsletter may need to be printed in
order to accommodate the many apartment complexes and mobile home parks in Mounds View.
The new preliminary costs for delivery/mailing of the newsletter via Standard/Bulk Rate by the USPS
would cost approximately $1,089.80 per issue ($6,538.80/year). Standard Bulk Rate means that the
USPS has within 2 weeks to deliver the newsletter upon receipt. If the City Council wished to deliver
the newsletter via First Class Mail (delivery within a week upon receipt), then it the cost would be
approximately $4,086.75 per issue ($24,520.50/year). This does not include what the printing company
will charge for delivery to the post office and sorting the newsletter in accordance with USPS standards.
Due to the present staffing at the City, Staff feels that sorting and delivery of the newsletter by City
employees would be a big undertaking and would require hiring of additional employees or volunteers.
A future issue with delivery of the newsletter is the proposed rate increase by the USPS. The USPS is
currently proposing a rate increase for 2008. Attached is the proposed increase for your reference.
Attached is the December 4, 2006 Work Session Staff Report on Newsletter Delivery Options. Staff
would like more time in researching delivery and printing options. In addition, Staff is researching into
reducing the number of issues to a more seasonal or quarterly timeframe. Staff sent an email to
Jonathan Thomas, Mounds View Charter Commission Chair to see if there are any issues with the City
Charter and see if this option would be viable under the current City Charter. As soon as Staff receives
a response by the Charter Commission, Staff will inform the City Council.
The March/April Mounds View Newsletter will be delivered by our current vendor, Independent Delivery
Service.
Respectfully submitted,
Desaree Crane
Item No: 2C
Meeting Date: 02/05/07
Type of Business: WS
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Kurt Ulrich, City Administrator
Item Title/Subject: NSCC Web-streaming Proposal
Currently, the North Suburban Cable Commission (NSCC) has been provided the City
with the service of live web-streaming of meetings and archived video files of meetings
for view by the public. This service has been provided to the City at an introductory rate
of $165 per month for much of 2006. The City has been generally satisfied with the
web-streaming service and it has greatly improved over the last two years.
This introductory service has allowed the City to test the product, and has allowed NSCC
to add additional features of storage and bandwidth capacity to the system. NSCC has
given preliminary notice to cities that the cost of the service will be increasing to $250 per
month, starting March 1, 2007, subject to approval by their board. According to NSCC,
this represents a significant subsidy of the actual costs, but they are mindful of passing a
full cost allocation to cities in the middle of a budget year. If this increase goes ahead,
the additional cost to the City for 2007 will be $765, allocated to the Cable Fund.
Item No. 3A
Meeting Date: February 5, 2007
Type of Business: WK
WK: Work Session; PH: Public Hearing;
CA: Consent Agenda; CB: Council Business
City Administrator Review _______
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Greg Lee, Director of Public Works
Item Title/Subject: 2007-2008 Street and Utility Improvement Project
Design Issues
Background:
On November 21, 2006 a Public Informational Meeting was conducted to present
the draft report on the 2007-2008 Street and Utility Improvement Project. There
are several issues that were discussed at the November 21st Public Informational
Meeting and noted on the Feedback Forms that were submitted.
Curb Style - surmountable versus barrier style curbs
Hillview Road – Narrowing of Hillview Road form 42’ to 28’ and adding a sidewalk
Elimination of the access of Hillview Road and Fairchild Avenue
Hillview Park Parking Improvements
Grouping of Mail boxes
Deferral Option
Rain Gardens / Infiltration Basins
Phasing of this project
On December 4, 2006 the City conduced a work session in which these items
were discussed with the City Council. The City Council gave direction on several
of these items.
On December 11, 2006 the City Council held a public hearing and approved a
resolution approving the Feasibility Report for the 2007-2008 Street and Utility
Improvement Project.
On January 2, 2007 the City conducted a work session in which several design
issues were discussed with the City Council. The City Council gave direction on
several of these items.
On January 25, 2007 Staff provided the City Council with a memorandum entitled
2007-2008 Street and Utility Project Update – curb Issue, schedule, petition,
water quality –Raingardens.
The aforementioned reports, meeting minutes, and/or meeting tapes can be
made available to the City Council on request.
Discussion:
Should this project proceed, the next action the City Council will take is to order
the project and authorize the preparation of plans and specifications. To ensure
this project stays on schedule and to ensure that the plans and specifications
reflect the expectations of the City Council, it is recommended that all design
issues be resolved by February 12, 2007.
The following is a list of design issues that have been identified. Also included is
staff’s interpretation of the general consensus of how the Council would like to
address these design issues - based on previous discussions. Please note that
this does not mean that official action was taken on these items or that there was
complete agreement on them.
Curb Material – concrete versus bituminous curbs
Interpreted general consensus: Concrete.
Curb Style - surmountable versus barrier style curbs
Interpreted general consensus: Barrier.
Hillview Road – Narrowing of Hillview Road
Interpreted general consensus: Reconstruct Hillview Road to its current width.
Elimination of the access of Hillview Road and Fairchild Avenue
Interpreted general consensus: Eliminate access as indicated in the County
Road 10 Corridor Redevelopment and Revitalization Plan.
Hillview Park Parking Improvements
Interpreted general consensus: Include in project utilizing MSA funding
Grouping of Mail boxes
Interpreted general consensus: Group mailboxes as currently required by code
Rain Gardens / Infiltration Basins Incentive
Interpreted general consensus: Provide incentive to residents that elect to have a
Rain Garden or Infiltration Basin in the boulevard adjacent to their property. The
amount of the reduction of their assessment would be based on the storm water
quality portion of their assessment – based on the draft report the maximum
amount would be approximately $358 per residential property. Staff to develop
an incentive policy and / or plan.
Phasing of this project
Interpreted general consensus: Have the contractor submit their recommended
phasing plan. This would give the contractor the gretatest flexibility, which could
translate into better bid prices.
Proposed Project Schedule
Should this project proceed, the following is the tentative schedule:
February 12, 2007 Council Orders Project / Authorizes Preparation of
Plans and Specifications
April 23, 2007 Council Approved Plans and Specifications / Set Bid
Date
May 24, 2007 Bids Received
June 25, 2007 Assessment Hearing / Award Construction Contract
July 12, 2007 Neighborhood Preconstruction Meeting
July 16, 2007 Construction Begins
Recommendation:
Staff is looking for direction on this matter. Specifically, Staff is looking for
Council direction on what additional information the City Council wishes to obtain
on these issues so as to be able to provide definitive direction on February 12,
2007.
Respectfully Submitted,
Greg Lee, Director of Public Works
Item No. 04A
Type of Business: WK
Date: Feb. 5, 2007
City Administrator Review _______ City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Desaree Crane, Assistant to the City Administrator
Item Title/Subject: Discuss Draft of the 3rd Annual Town Hall Meeting
The Mounds View 3rd Annual Town Hall Meeting is scheduled for Saturday, April 14, 2007. Attached is
the Town Hall Meeting Press Release along with the proposed Agenda. Staff has not decided on a
theme for this year’s meeting, and would like some ideas from the City Council.
In addition to the press release, Staff will be advertising in the local newspaper, the Mounds View
Matters Newsletter, the electronic board, the Mounds View website and the Cable TV Bulletin.
Staff is also considering sending out reminder postcards to residents of Mounds View at least two
weeks before the Town Hall Meeting. Staff feels that this would be a real effective way to get the word
out; however, it is not cheap. Staff did ask for quotes from printing companies and received two
quotes. We would be using the same mailing list for the Recycling Flier. Cost for the post cards
include, sorting, printing, drop off at the post office, and postage (postage at the standard bulk rate is
.20 per post card). Total cost: $1,826.40. This will potentially go out to 5,449 households in Mounds
View. If the City Council wishes to do this, Staff can start getting the post cards drafted, and have
them to the printing company as soon as possible.
Please review the Agenda and make any changes you feel necessary. Staff will present a final draft of
this Agenda at the next City Council Meeting scheduled for Monday, February 12, 2007. The Town Hall
Meeting will be televised by CTV.
Respectfully submitted,
Desaree Crane
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW PRESS RELEASE
There will be a Town Hall Meeting held on Saturday, April 14, 2007 at 9am to 12noon in the Mounds View
Community Center. The Mounds View Community Center is located at 5394 Edgewood Drive in Mounds View.
All Mounds View residents are invited to this great event. There will be Mounds View Historical Displays, City
Vehicle Displays, and great City Department Exhibits. The City will also have seminars to discuss the Vision and
Goals of our City for 2007. There are even activities for the kids at the Mounds View Community Center Gym.
This is your chance to ask questions of Mounds View City Staff to include the Mayor and Mounds View
Councilmembers. Below is a schedule of events. We hope to see you there!
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
TOWN HALL MEETING AGENDA
SATURDAY, APRIL 14, 2007
9am – 12pm
9-930am Registration (Cookies and Coffee Served)
930am-1130am City Exhibits
• Mounds View Police Department
• SBM Fire Department
• Public Works (to include Park and Recreation)
• Community Development
• Finance
• YMCA
• Children Activities at the Mounds View Community Center Gym
10am-1200pm City Presentations
10am – 1030am Mayor City Address
1030am – 11am Vision, Mission and Goals for 2007
Speaker: Kurt Ulrich, City Administrator
11am – 1130am Award Presentations
1130am-12pm Final Thoughts and Questions
12pm Town Hall Meeting Adjourns
Item No: 04B
Meeting Date: 02/05/07
Type of Business: Work Session
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Kurt Ulrich, City Administrator
Item Title/Subject: Community Events/Celebrations Committee
Background
At a previous Council work session, the City Council asked for an opportunity to discuss
creation of a Community Events/Celebrations Committee. Two items of consideration
were whether the City should increase its involvement in the festival, both with planning
and funding of the event, and the fact that the City will celebrate its golden 50th
anniversary of incorporation in 2008.
At one time, the City was directly involved with the Festival in the Park annual community
celebration and created an ordinance establishing a Mounds View Festivities Commission
(see attached). The purpose of the Commission as outlined in the current code is fairly
general: “. . . to promote an annual community-wide event” and therefore could be
adapted to fit the current direction of the Council in regard to the Festival.
This Commission is no longer active, but remains on the books as a City Commission.
Currently, the Festival is planned and operated by a non-profit corporation and the City
provides $4,000 of staff contribution for set-up and operation of the Festival. The Festival
is primarily supported by private donations and volunteer labor organized by the non-
profit organization.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council discuss the reactivation of the Mounds View
Festivities Commission under the current ordinance Chapter 406.
Item No: 4C
Meeting Date: 02/05/07
Type of Business: WS
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Kurt Ulrich, City Administrator
Item Title/Subject: Policy for Citizen Agenda Items
DRAFT COUNCIL POLICY 2007-01
CITIZEN AGENDA ITEMS
Purpose:
The purpose of this policy is to allow the public to formally present items of public interest
before the Council as regular agenda items, thereby allowing additional time in excess of
the 3 minutes per speaker provided under Public Input section of the agenda.
Policy:
1) Any City resident, business, property owner, or organized group thereof, may request
an opportunity to present an item before the Council as an agenda item.
2) Requests shall be made to the City Clerk Administrator, to the Mayor, or any City
Council Member. All requests shall be forwarded to the City Clerk/Administrator for
consideration as an agenda item.
3) All requests shall be made in writing, clearly stating the subject matter, time duration,
and the date of the presentation.
4) Presentations shall be limited to _____ minutes in length.
5) The City Clerk Administrator will make every attempt to accommodate the request as
specified, however, the City Clerk/Administrator and Mayor/City Council reserve the
right to reschedule, limit, or restrict any presentation as they deem necessary for the
safe, efficient and effective conduct of public business.
6) The deadline for the submittal of requests shall be the end of the business day, the
Wednesday prior to the meeting if the meeting falls on a Monday. If the meeting falls
on another day of the week, the request shall be submitted at least four business days
in advance of the meeting.
7) Any request received after the above deadline will be scheduled for the next regular
meeting, or may be presented to the Council by the petitioner at the Public Input
section of the agenda for consideration by the Council to add as an agenda item.
Appeal:
Any decision by the City Clerk/Administrator in regard to this policy may be appealed
directly to the City Council under the Public Input section of any regular meeting.
Adopted:
(Date) 2007
Item No: 04D
Meeting Date: 02/05/07
Type of Business: Work Session
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Kurt Ulrich, City Administrator
Item Title/Subject: Community Center Task Force Continuation
Background
At a previous Council work session, the City Council asked for an opportunity to discuss
whether the Mounds View Community Center Task Force should be continued. The Task
Force completed its “task” when it made a report to the Council on March 6, 2006. A
copy of this report is attached. The Task force subsequently worked with an architect
hired by the City to refine plans and costs for the upgrading of the facility consistent with
the report recommendations.
Discussion
In regard to current tasks, the Task Force anticipated ending its work and assigned duties
of marketing management and capital planning to the staff, YMCA, or YMCA Advisory
Committee. To reactivate the Task Force for those reasons would be redundant.
However, if the Council wished to explore alternate construction plans, or implementation
of the plan in greater detail, a Task Force could be of assistance. It appears that 3 of the
6 past seats would need to be reappointed with new individuals due to changes that have
occurred since this group was last active.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council discuss the reactivation of the Mounds View
Community Center Task Force and discuss alternative missions for such a group.
Item No: 04E
Meeting Date: February 5, 2007
Type of Business: Work Session
Administrator Review: _________
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Desaree Crane, Assistant to the City Administrator
Item Title/Subject: 2006 Mounds View Gambling Report
Staff was directed by Council to research and annually report to the City Council each permanent Charitable Gambling
Permit to ensure contribution compliance with the Mounds View Trade Area. According to the City Code Section 502.13.
subd. 2 (c):
c. By December 31st of each calendar year, a licensed organization conducting lawful gambling
within the City shall expend seventy five percent (75%) of its expenditures for lawful purposes
conducted or located within the City’s trade area. The City’s trade area” is defined as, and limited
to, Mounds View, Spring Lake Park, Blaine, Shoreview, Arden Hills, New Brighton and
Fridley.
According to Section 502.13, subd. 2 (d), of the City Code, each organization licensed to conduct charitable gambling in
the City shall report monthly to the City its gross receipts, expenses, and profits from those activities in and the distribution
of those profits, itemized as to payee, purpose, amount and date of payment. Organizations licensed to conduct
charitable gambling at more than one (1) site must provide the above-mentioned information for each site within the City.
These requirements may be satisfied by submission of copies of the monthly reports required by the Gambling Control
Board. Below is a breakdown of what each permit holder contributed to the City’s trade area in 2006 for your reference.
Merrick, Inc.
Merrick, Inc., is a nonprofit organization 501(c)(3) charitable corporation, licensed by DHS as a Day Training & Habilitation
(DT&H) and Supported Employment Services (SES) provider. The focus of their program is to provide employment
services to adults with a developmental disability. Merrick’ Inc.’s charitable gambling license was originally approved on
January 26, 2004, and they renewed their Gambling License on February 27, 2006. They currently hold a permit with
Robert’s Sports Bar and Entertainment. Below is a breakdown of their contributions for 2006:
Jan: No Contributions to the Trade Area
Feb: No Contributions to the Trade Area
Mar: No Contributions to the Trade Area
Apr: 4/11/06 Mounds View Trade Area $1,027.41 (check made payable to Merrick, Inc.)
4/18/06 Mounds View Trade Area $80.63 (check made payable to Merrick, Inc.)
May: 5/16/06 Mounds View Trade Area $1,027.41 (check made payable to Merrick, Inc.)
5/16/06 Mounds View Trade Area $595.12 (check made payable to Merrick, Inc.)
5/16/06 Mounds View3 Trade Area $426.74 (check made payable to Merrick, Inc.)
Jun: No Contributions to the Trade Area
Jul: 7/31/06 Mounds View Trade Area $178.80 (check made payable to Merrick, Inc.)
Aug : 8/31/06 Mounds View Trade Area $944.68 (check made payable to Merrick, Inc.)
8/31/06 Mounds View Trade Area $367.00 (check made payable to Merrick, Inc.)
Sep: 9/29/06 Mounds View Trade Area $185.00 (check made payable to Merrick, Inc.)
Oct: 10/31/06 Mounds View Trade Area $1,027.41 (check made payable to Merrick, Inc.)
10/31/06 Mounds View Trade Area $67.20 (check made payable to Merrick, Inc.
Nov: 11/30/06 Mounds View Trade Area $625.04 (check made payable to Merrick, Inc.)
Merrick, Inc., continued
Dec: 12/29/06 Mounds View Trade Area $1,027.41 (check made payable to Merrick, Inc.)
12/29/06 Mounds View Trade Area $316.00 (check made payable to Merrick, Inc.)
12/29/06 Mounds View Trade Area $185.00 (check made payable to Merrick, Inc.)
Staff understands that the City Council has been concerned with Merrick’s Charitable Gambling activities in regards to
their contributions to the trade area. It seems that Merrick, Inc., only states on their tax returns “Mounds View Trade Area”
and other permit holders state the trade area organization/business they contributed to. Attached is a letter from Merrick,
Inc., dated August 18, 2004, (this letter was originally given to the City Council September of 2004), explaining how they
are contributing to the trade area. In addition, it explains why they write checks to themselves.
Twin Cities North Chamber of Commerce
The Twin Cities North Chamber of Commerce is a non-profit organization, which held a charitable gambling at Jake’s
Sport Café in Mounds View. However, since then Jake’s Sports Café was sold and ownership was transferred in 2006.
The new business is now called Moe’s, and the Twin Cities North Chamber has not renewed their Charitable Gambling
Permit. They recently were approved for a one-day permit to conduct Charitable Gambling at the Mermaid
Entertainment and Event Center for a raffle (approved on January 22, 2007). Below is a breakdown of their contributions
for 2006. Due to the sale of Jake’s Sports Café, they only have gambling activity in the month of May.
May: 5/19/06 City of Fridley $90.27
Lake Region Hockey Association
The Lake Region Hockey Association is a charitable organization to help in funding youth hockey to include Irondale
Youth Hockey and Mounds View Youth Hockey programs. The City Council adopted their Charitable Gambling License
on June 12, 2006, and conducts their charitable gambling at Moe’s located at 2400 County Highway 10. Below is a
breakdown of their contributions in 2006. They started their charitable gambling activity in July of 2006.
Jul: 7/18/06 Schwan’s Super Rink (Blaine) $1,875.00
Aug: 8/15/06 Irondale H.S. Boys Soccer $500.00
Sep: 9/6/06 Irondale H.S. Girl’s Hockey $300.00
9/10/06 Mounds View H.S. Boys Hockey $1,000.00
9/18/06 Mounds View H.S. Girl’s Hockey $1,000.00
9/30/06 Irondale H.S. Girl’s Soccer $500.00
Oct: No Contributions to the Trade Area
Nov: 11/21/06 City of New Brighton Santa Cop $1,000.00
11/21/06 NSC Super Rink (Mounds View hockey ice time) $2,500.00
Dec: 12/19/06 Ramsey County (Irondale Youth Ice Time) $2,500.00
The Mounds View Lions
The Mounds View Lions is a non-profit organization that currently holds a charitable gambling permit at the Mermaid. The
Mounds View Lions does many things for the Mounds View Community to include Foodshelfs, scholarships, and city
festival activities to name a few. Below is a breakdown of their contributions for 2004:
Jan: No contributions to the Trade Area
Feb: No contributions to the Trade Area
Mar: 3/03/06 Cub Scout Pack 367 $500.00
3/20/06 Fedor’s Market – Foodshelf Donation $644.76
Apr: 4/10/06 Irondale HS Girls Track $100.00
4/10/06 Blaine/Spring Lake Park/Mound View Fire Dept $100.00
4/10/06 Irondale Baseball League $160.00
4/14/06 Fedor’s Market – Foodshelf Donation $644.76
May: 5/16/04 City of Spring Lake Park – Youth Safety Camp - $300.00
5/16/06 Fedor’s Market – Foodshelf Donation $805.95
Jun: No contributions to the Trade Area.
Jul: 7/10/06 Fedor’s Market – Foodshelf Donation $638.28
Aug: 8/3/06 Fedor’s Market – Foodshelf Donation $797.85
Sep: No contributions to the Trade Area.
Oct: No contributions to the Trade Area
Nov: No contributions to the Trade Area.
Dec: 12/13/06 Pinewood Elementary $1,000.00
12/13/06 Edgewood Middle School $500.00
12/13/06 Cub Scout Pack #367 $225.00
12/13/06 Sunnyside Elementary School $1,000.00
12/31/06 MN Lion’s Eye Bank $300.00
12/31/06 Lion’s MD 5 Hearing Foundation $300.00
All gambling reports are available for your review at City Hall if you wish to examine any of them.
Respectfully submitted,
Desaree Crane