HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packets - 2003/03/24CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA
Monday, March 24, 2003
7:00 p.m.
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. ROLL CALL: Linke, Quick, Marty, Stigney, Gunn
4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
5. PUBLIC INPUT:
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.
6. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS
A. Resolution 5971 Approving a Step increase for Kasey Keckeisen
B. Resolution 5976 Approving a Step Increase for Desaree Crane
7. A. JUST AND CORRECT CLAIMS
B. AUTHORIZATION FOR EXPENDITURES
8. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Licenses for Approval
B. Resolution 5973 Approval of Purchase for Video Decks
9. COUNCIL BUSINESS
7:05 PM A. Public Hearing to Consider an Appeal of the Planning Commission’s Denial of a
Variance Request Made by the Property Owners of 2075 Hillview Road, Planning
Case VR03-001
7:10 PM B. Public Hearing, Introduction and First Reading of Ordinance Consideration of
Resolution 721-03, a Resolution Recommending Approval of a Zoning Code Text
Amendment to Chapter 1111 Relating to the R-O Zoning District -- Planning Case
TX03-001 Permitted
7:15 PM C. Public Hearing and Consideration of a Recommendation to Post the East Side of
Greenfield Avenue as “No Parking” 350 Feet from the Corner of County Road I
and Greenfield Avenue
10. REPORTS
11. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. City Council Minutes, March 10, 2003.
City Council Agenda
March 24, 2003
Page 2
12. Next Council Work Session: Monday, April 7, 2003
Next Council Meeting: Monday, April 14, 2003
13. ADJOURNMENT
RESOLUTION NO. 5971
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION APPROVING A STEP ADJUSTMENT FOR KASEY
KECKEISEN, PATROL OFFICER
WHEREAS, KASEY Keckeisen is a regular full-time employee who began
working for the City of Mounds View as a full time employee on March 17, 2001,
and
WHEREAS, KASEY Keckeisen’s Supervisor has reviewed his
performance as it relates to the responsibilities of Patrol Officer outlined in the job
description, and
WHEREAS, Kasey Keckeisen’s Supervisor determined that Kasey
Keckeisen has satisfactorily performed in the capacity of Patrol Officer; and
WHEREAS, a wage adjustment from Step Three (80% of top patrol rate)
to Step Four (90% of top patrol rate) is consistent with the LELS Labor
Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City
Council does hereby approve a wage adjustment for Patrol Officer Kasey
Keckeisen from Step Three ($3436.34/month) to Step Four ($3865.89/month)
effective March 17, 2003.
Adopted this 24th day of March 2003.
________________________________
Jerry Linke, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________________
James Ericson, Interim City Administrator
(SEAL)
RESOLUTION NO. 5976
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION APPROVING A STEP INCREASE FOR DESAREE CRANE
WHEREAS, Desaree Crane is a regular full-time employee who began
working for the City of Mounds View on March 26, 2002; and,
WHEREAS, Ms. Crane’s work performance has been rated satisfactory or
higher by her supervisor; and,
WHEREAS, Ms. Crane’s supervisor recommends that the City Council
approve a wage adjustment from step three to step four.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City
Council does hereby approve a step increase for Desaree Crane from step three
($17.63/hr) to step four ($18.61/hr) effective March 26, 2003.
Presented this 24th Day of March, 2003.
____________________________________
Jerry Linke, Mayor
ATTEST
____________________________________
James Ericson, Interim City Administrator
(SEAL)
Item 6B
Item No.08A
Type of Business: CA
WK: Work Session; PH: Public Hearing;
CA: Consent Agenda; CB: Council Business
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Barb Benesch
Item Title/Subject: CONTRACTOR LICENSES FOR APPROVAL
Meeting Date: March 24, 2003
Please consider the following contractor licenses for approval. All contractor licenses will
expire on December 31, 2003. All applicants have submitted appropriate fees and proof of
insurance. Those companies that are “new” include applicants that have never been licensed
with the City or they may have been licensed with the City in the past, but were not licensed in
2002. Those companies renewing their license were licensed, at a minimum, in the year 2002.
The type of license they are applying for follows the company name.
Apollo Heating & Vent. Corp. – HVAC – Renewal
Belair Excavating – Excavating – New
Chuba Home Improvement – General (Commercial) – New
Enviroworld USA – HVAC - New
Fore Mechanical – HVAC – New
RJM Construction – General (Commercial) – New
Staff Recommendation: Approve license applications as requested.
Item No. 08B
Type of Business: Council Business
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Kenneth Gammell, Cable Coordinator
Item Title/Subject: Resolution 5973, Approving the Purchase of Video
Decks
Date of Report: March 19, 2003
This report provides details for the proposed purchase of video decks for the Cable
department.
The Cable budget (Fund 210 – 4350 – 5130) for 2003 includes $3000 that was
allocated to replace two nonfunctioning video decks used for cable playback.
History
During the Work Session of 3/3/03, a proposal for replacing two nonfunctioning S-VHS
video decks with professional digital video decks was presented before the Council.
With concerns about the existing budget, the decision was made to table approval of
the purchase until after the Special Work Session on 3/17/03. This current proposal is
being submitted with an option for the Council to determine the amount authorized to
purchase the equipment.
Digital Video versus S-VHS Video
The video format of the two decks that need replacement are currently S-VHS. S-VHS
is older analog technology and now is considered outdated for professional applications.
Digital video has vast improved quality and performance that is now considered the
standard for community access television. In the past 5 years, Mounds View has been
continually updating it’s equipment to digital, including digital cameras for meetings,
and the purchase of 5 digital video decks.
“Pro-sumer” verses Professional
The current S-VHS decks that need replacement are cheaper “Pro”-sumer models that
have slightly better features compared to a regular consumer deck used by most people
in their homes. They are less expensive than the price of a professional model,
however, the life expectancy is 5 years or less. A professional model is built to
withstand many years of use and is ideal for use as a playback deck for meetings. The
cable department currently has two Panasonic AG-7150 Professional decks that are
over 10 years old and are still performing satisfactorily. A purchase of a professional
deck is more reliable and will not need to be replaced as often. The price of a
Professional S-VHS deck now is only about $150 less than a Professional Digital deck,
so it makes sense to purchase a digital deck with the better quality.
Item 08C
City Council Meeting
Page 2
Cable Budget
For the 2003 Cable Budget, the Repairs & Equipment fund was doubled from $1500 to
$3000 to replace the faulty pro-sumer S-VHS video decks with professional decks. In
consideration of not exceeding the $3000 allocated, it is proposed that the purchase of
one Professional digital deck and one S-VHS Pro-sumer deck be approved at this time.
Quotes and totals are provided below.
Quotes
Sony DSR-11 DVCAM Digital Video Deck:
B&H (New York, NY) $1,995.00 (Shipping - $26.50) = $2021.50
Samy’s DV (New York, NY) $2,049.00 (plus tax)
ALPHA (Edina, MN) $2,117.00 (plus tax)
B&H, which is a reliable seller in New York, has the cheapest quote of $1,995, with a
calculated shipping cost of $26.50, totaling $2021.50.
JVC SRT-V10U S-VHS Pro-sumer Video Deck:
ProFeel (Monsey, NY) $267.95 (Shipping - $14.95) = $282.90
B&H (New York, NY) $269.95
J&R (New York, NY) $279.88
ProFeel has the cheapest quote of $269.95 and has a good rating according to internet
sources.
The proposed purchase of one digital deck and one S-VHS deck would total as follows:
B&H (Sony DSR-11 Digital Deck) $2021.50
ProFeel (JVC SRT-V10U S-VHS Deck) $ 282.90
Total $2304.40
Summary
The City’s cable budget has allocated $3000 specifically for the purchase of two
replacement video decks. This money is not part of the general fund, and has no other
financial impact for the city. The current video decks have been unusable for over 4
months and has forced a reduction in playback for the cable department. The further
delay in replacing these decks will cause extra wear on the other video decks in trying to
compensate for being short-handed. An immediate purchase of 2 new decks will help
alleviate this problem.
Item 08C
City Council Meeting
Page 3
Recommendation: Staff recommends the purchase of one Sony DSR-11 Digital Video
Deck from B&H for $2021.50 and one JVC SR-V10U from ProFeel for $282.90. The new
equipment will come out of the 2003 Repairs, Equipment Budget, 210-4350-5130.
Respectfully Submitted,
_____________________
Kenneth Gammell
RESOLUTION 5973
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Resolution Approving the Purchase
of two video decks for the Cable Department
WHEREAS, the City’s current cable playback system has two
nonfunctioning video decks;
WHEREAS, staff recommends that two replacement video decks be
purchased due to the need of keeping the cable playback system up to standards.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Mounds View City
Council does hereby approve the amount of $_____________ for the purchase of the
video decks.
Adopted this 24th day of March, 2003.
Jerry Linke, Mayor
ATTEST:
James Ericson, Interim City Administrator
(SEAL)
Item No: 9A
Meeting Date: March 24, 2003
Type of Business: Council Business
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: James Ericson, Acting City Administrator
Item Title/Subject: Consideration of an Appeal of the Planning Commission
Denial of a Variance Requested by the Property
Owners of 2075 Hillview Road Pertaining to a Proposed
Reduction in Required Parking Stalls
Introduction:
The property owners of 2075 Hillview Road requested a permit to expand their four-plex by
constructing two additional units in the basement of the four-unit building. The property is
zoned R-3, Medium Density Residential. In terms of density, both a four-plex and a six-unit
building would be appropriate for this district. However, there is not enough parking on-site
to satisfy the zoning requirements for a six-unit building which prompted the property owner
to request a variance.
On February 5, 2003, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the
request. Based on the testimony provided at the meeting and the review of the zoning
requirements, it was apparent that no hardship existed that would warrant or justify approval
of the variance. The Planning Commission directed staff to draft a resolution denying the
request as it failed to satisfy the hardship requirements. That resolution, Resolution 719-03,
is attached for your reference.
The property owners were sent a letter on February 20, 2003, indicating that their request for
a variance had been denied, however the Code allows for an appeal to the City Council if
such an appeal were received in writing by March 2, 2003. Such an appeal was received by
that date and as such a new public hearing was scheduled with the Council for March 24,
2003.
Discussion:
Chapter 1121 of the Zoning Code requires that multi-family housing developments provide a
minimum of 1 and ½ outdoor parking stalls per unit and 1 garage stall per unit for a total of 2
½ parking stalls per unit. Currently there are twelve stalls on the site, of which only two are
garage stalls. While the total number of stalls satisfies the total number presently required,
there should be two more garage stalls for the property to be completely conforming to the
City Code. As it is now, the property is considered a legal, non-conforming use. To expand
the number of dwelling units in the building, there would need to be a total of 15 stalls, six of
which would need to be garage spaces. The appeal is to maintain the present parking
capacity at 12 spaces with only the two garages stalls.
While the property may have more parking capacity than many of the other surrounding four-
plex units by virtue of the garage stalls, if the property were to expand to six units, the
number of additional vehicles could potentially exceed the lot capacity on a daily basis. The
question the Planning Commission and residents asked was, where would the overflow
Variance Appeal
March 24, 2003
Page 2
parking be satisfied? One could suggest that as a condition of the variance, the property
owner could, through a lease provision, limit the number of resident vehicles to no more than
two per unit, which would be consistent with the parking capacity of the site, but then there
would be no parking for visitors.
Upon closer inspection of the site, it does appear that there is sufficient room for additional
parking and/or garages on the east side of the property could be constructed on the site,
however a survey would need to be completed to verify setbacks and spacing requirements.
The neighboring residents are opposed to any additional impervious surface or garages,
siting agreements that were made in the 1960s when the block of four-plexes were
developed.
Variance Considerations:
For a variance to be approved, there needs to be demonstrated hardship or practical
difficulties associated with the property that makes a literal interpretation of the Code overly
burdensome or restrictive to a property owner. State statutes require that the governing
body (the Planning Commission) review a set of specified criteria for each application and
make its decision in accordance with these criteria as set forth in Section 1125.02,
Subdivision 2, of the City Code. The Code clearly states that a hardship exists when all of
the criteria are met. The individual criteria are as follows with responses supported by the
Planning Commission:
a. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to the property which do not apply
generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinity and result from lot size or
shape, topography or other circumstances over which the owners of the property
since the effective date hereof have had no control.
The property is zoned R-3 and is improved with a four unit residential dwelling. The
property is similar to the other four-unit dwellings in this area of the City. The lot is not
irregularly shaped however there is a slope toward the rear of the property and a
drainage easement that restricts development in this area. Other than the slope,
there does not appear to be any exceptional circumstances associated with the
property.
b. The literal interpretation of the provisions of this Title would deprive the applicant of
rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district.
The subject property appears similar to the majority of R-3 zoned properties in this
area. The literal interpretation of the provisions found in the Zoning Code would not
deprive the applicant of rights enjoyed by other properties in the same zone, in that no
other property has increased density by expanding to a six unit residential dwelling.
c. That the special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the
applicant.
The four-plexes in this area may have been constructed prior to the enactment of the
zoning code provision which requires garage stalls for each unit. To that end, the
Variance Appeal
March 24, 2003
Page 3
property is considered a legal, non-conforming use. Increasing the density, however,
is an action of the property owner.
d. That granting the variance requested would not confer on the applicant any special
privilege that is denied by this Title to owners of other lands, structures or buildings in
the same district.
Granting the variance would confer upon the property owner a special privilege
that would be denied other property owners. To expand one’s property, one must
have adequate parking to meet the increased demand.
e. That the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the
hardship. Economic conditions alone shall not be considered a hardship.
The variance requested is twofold—a reduction in the number of garage stalls and a
reduction in the total number of parking stalls provided. Because it appears as though
additional parking could be added to the site, the variance requested is not the
minimum to alleviate the hardship.
f. The variance would not be materially detrimental to the purpose of this Title or to
other property in the same zone.
Granting a variance to allow the expansion of the structure from a four unit building to
a six unit building without a corresponding increase in the parking capacity of the site
would be detrimental to the intent of the zoning code and would potentially adversely
impact the surrounding properties.
g. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent
property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the
danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair
property values within the neighborhood.
The proposed variance would not result in any of the above-cited adverse effects with
the exception of a possible increase in congestion on Hillview Road.
Public Comment:
This meeting has been published as a public hearing and notices have been mailed out to
property owners within 350 feet of 2075 Hillview Road. From the previous public hearing, I
had received two phone calls regarding this request, one from the adjoining property owner to
the east, and the other from the owner of Colonial Village. The neighbor was simply
interested in learning more about the request and did not immediately indicate a position
regarding the variance request. The owner of Colonial Village was opposed to the expansion
if there was inadequate parking to support the expansion.
Variance Appeal
March 24, 2003
Page 4
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the property owners’ appeal be denied for the same reasons
articulated by the Planning Commission. There does not appear to be a hardship associated
with the request and there could be impacts to the neighborhood resulting from overflow
parking.
_____________________________________
James Ericson
Interim City Clerk/Administrator
Attachments:
1. Site Plan
2. Zoning Map
3. Planning Commission Resolution 719-03
4. Photographic Documentation
5. Council Resolution 5974
Zoning Map
Variance Appeal
March 24, 2003
Page 6
Site Plan
2075 Hillview Road
Photographic Documentation
((Looking north, east side of building. Trees are on subject property.))
(Looking north, parking lot, garages and west side of property.)
Variance Appeal
March 24, 2003
Page 10
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 719-03
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION DENYING A VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM PARKING
REQUIREMENT FOR A PROPOSED MULTIPLE DWELLING EXPANSION FOR THE
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2075 HILLVIEW ROAD;
PLANNING CASE NO. VR03-001
WHEREAS, the applicant, Thuy Thi Bui, has applied for a variance from the
minimum parking requirement for a multiple-family dwelling; and,
WHEREAS, the applicant is proposing to expand the existing four-unit dwelling
to a six-unit dwelling; and
WHEREAS, the property is zoned R-3, Medium Density Residential, which
allows a six-unit dwelling; and
WHEREAS, the City Code requires 1.5 parking spaces per unit plus 1 garage
space per unit; and,
WHEREAS, the property currently has 12 parking spaces, of which only 2 are
garage spaces; and,
WHEREAS, according to Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2 of the Mounds View
Municipal Code, the Planning Commission is to review a standard set of criteria, of
which all must be satisfied, in order to grant a variance to the Zoning Code.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning
Commission makes the following finding of facts related to this request:
1. There are no exceptional or extraordinary conditions relating to this request or
to the property.
2. The literal interpretation of the Zoning Code, Chapter 1121, Parking
Requirements, does not deny the applicant rights commonly enjoyed by other
R-3 properties.
3. The applicant, by virtue of the desire to expand the building, has caused the
conditions which necessitate the variance request.
4. Granting the variance would confer upon the applicant a special privilege not
enjoyed by others in this zoning district.
5. Granting the variance would be detrimental to the neighborhood in that
parking problems already present would be exacerbated.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View
Planning Commission, based upon the above identified finding of facts, does hereby
Variance Appeal
March 24, 2003
Page 12
deny the variance requested for a reduction in the parking requirements associated with
the expansion of the four plex located at 2075 Hillview Road.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission
that the applicant shall be notified of the right to appeal this denial to the City Council.
The appeal shall be submitted in writing within 10 business days of the adoption of this
Resolution.
Adopted this 19th day of February 2003.
_____________________________________
Gary Stevenson, Chairperson
ATTEST:
_____________________________________
Jim Ericson, Community Development Director
(SEAL)
\\Ntserver\MasterFiles\2003\City Council\Council Packets\03-24-03\09A Public Hearing
to Consider an Appeal of the Planning Commission's Denial of a Variance Reuqest
2075 Hillview Road.doc
RESOLUTION NO. 5974
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL OF A
VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENT FOR A PROPOSED
MULTIPLE DWELLING EXPANSION AT 2075 HILLVIEW ROAD;
PLANNING CASE NO. VR03-001
WHEREAS, the applicants Thuy Thi Bui and Jamey Viger applied for a variance
from the minimum parking requirement for a multiple-family dwelling; and,
WHEREAS, the applicant is proposing to expand the existing four-unit dwelling
to a six-unit dwelling; and
WHEREAS, the property is zoned R-3, Medium Density Residential, which
allows a six-unit dwelling; and
WHEREAS, the City Code requires 1.5 parking spaces per unit plus 1 garage
space per unit; and,
WHEREAS, the property currently has 12 parking spaces, of which only 2 are
garage spaces; and,
WHEREAS, according to Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2 of the Mounds View
Municipal Code, the Planning Commission is to review a standard set of criteria, of
which all must be satisfied, in order to grant a variance to the Zoning Code.
WHEREAS, on February 5, 2003, the Planning Commission held a public
hearing, accepted testimony and reviewed the facts associated with the request; and,
WHEREAS, on February 19, 2003, the Planning Commission adopted
Resolution 719-03, a resolution DENYING the requested variance; and,
WHEREAS, on March 2, 2003, the applicants formally appealed the Planning
Commission’s denial to the Mounds View City Council requesting approval of the
variance; and,
WHEREAS, the Mounds View City Council held a public hearing regarding the
appeal on March 24, 2003, taking testimony from the staff, the applicants and general
public.
Variance Appeal
March 24, 2003
Page 14
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, based upon the testimony submitted
by staff, the Planning Commission, the applicants and the general public, the Mounds
View City Council makes the following finding of facts related to this request:
1. There are no exceptional or extraordinary conditions relating to this request or
to the property.
2. The literal interpretation of the Zoning Code, Chapter 1121, Parking
Requirements, does not deny the applicant rights commonly enjoyed by other
R-3 properties.
3. The applicants, by virtue of their desire to expand the building, have caused
the conditions which necessitate the variance request.
4. Granting the variance would confer upon the applicant a special privilege not
enjoyed by others in this zoning district.
5. Granting the variance would be detrimental to the neighborhood in that
parking problems already present would be exacerbated.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View City
Council, based upon the above identified finding of facts, does hereby uphold the
Planning Commission’s denial of the variance requested for a reduction in the parking
requirements associated with the expansion of the four plex located at 2075 Hillview
Road.
Adopted this 24th day of March 2003.
_____________________________________
Jerry Linke, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________________
James Ericson, Interim City Administrator
(SEAL)
Item No: Item 09B
Meeting Date: March 24, 2003
Type of Business: Council Business
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: James Ericson, Interim City Administrator
Item Title/Subject: Public Hearing, Introduction and First Reading of
Ordinance Consideration of Resolution 721-03, a
Resolution Recommending Approval of a Zoning Code
Text Amendment to Chapter 1111 Relating to the R-O
Zoning District -- Planning Case TX03-001
Introduction:
The property owner residing at and operating a business at 2865 County Highway 10 has
requested an amendment to Chapter 1111 of the Zoning Code relating to the permitted uses
allowed within the R-O Zoning district. The Code indicates that accessory uses within an R-
O district are regulated as they are in the R-4 zoning district, which is the same for an R-3
district, and so on. In the single-family district, an accessory building may not exceed 952
square feet without a conditional use permit and that the total square footage of all
accessory use space shall not exceed 1,800 square feet.
Discussion:
The property owner asserts that the zoning requirements relating to the size of his garage,
which is his place of business, are too restrictive and not in keeping with the intent of the
Residential Office district. According to the Zoning Code, the purpose of the district is as
follows:
The purpose of the R-0, Residential Office District is to provide for high-density
residential use and for the transition in land use from residential to low intensity
business allowing for the intermixing of such uses.
The intent is to allow for a more dense development, with or without a commercial
component. In other words, this district is a true “mixed use” district. Given that commercial
and residential uses are allowed on the site at the same time, there are in effect two principal
uses. As such, the garage area in this case should not be considered accessory but rather
principal, and should not be subject to the accessory garage requirements as articulated in
the single-family residential district.
The Planning Commission reviewed the request on February 19, 2003 and determined there
was justification to make a change. On March 5, 2003, the Commission adopted a
resolution recommending a change to the Zoning Code to allow for the addition of the
following language to Section 1111.02, Permitted Uses:
Automotive Accessory Installation Operations
Recommendation:
Hold the public hearing and consider all testimony related to the request. If the Council
supports the proposed ordinance, a motion should be made to introduce the first reading of
Ordinance 710, amending Chapter 1111 of the Mounds View Zoning Code pertaining to
permitted uses within the R-O, Residential Office zoning district.
_____________________________________
James Ericson
Interim City Clerk/Administrator
Attachments:
1. Planning Commission Resolution 721-03
2. Ordinance 710
Zoning Map
Applicant’s
Property
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 721-03
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A TEXT AMENDMENT TO
CHAPTER 1111 OF THE MOUNDS VIEW ZONING CODE PERTAINING TO THE R-O
ZONING DISTRICT; MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE NO. TX03-001
WHEREAS, Greg Johnson, property owner of 2865 Highway 10, has requested
an amendment to Chapter 1111 of the Zoning Code relating to the permitted uses
within the R-O Zoning District; and,
WHEREAS, Mr. Johnson maintains his residence and operates a commercial
use on his property which is currently zoned R-O, Residential/Office District; and,
WHEREAS, The purpose of the R-0, Residential/Office District is to provide for
high-density residential use and for the transition in land use from residential to low
intensity business allowing for the intermixing of such uses; and,
WHEREAS, Mr. Johnson has operated his commercial business at this location
for twenty years and is now seeking approval to expand the footprint of his commercial
building in excess of what is allowed by residential district standards; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission believes that the R-O Zoning District was
created to provide for a mix of uses on the same lot and that the commercial use
existing on the subject property is consistent with the intent and purpose of the district;
and,
WHEREAS, as permitted by Chapter 1111, there are two distinct principal uses
on the property and that the commercial building should not be considered a residential
garage and held to the same requirements and restrictions as provided for in a single-
family zoning district.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, THE Planning Commission
recommends amending Chapter 1111 of the Zoning Code to further clarify the
permitted uses within the R-O district by adding the following text under Section
1111.02, Permitted Uses:
• Automotive Accessory Installation Operations
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning
Commission recommends that separate and distinct commercial facilities within R-O
districts be subject to the Development Review requirements as set forth in Section
1006.06 of the Mounds View Building Code.
Resolution 721-03
Page 2
NOW THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View
Planning Commission directs staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to
approval of the minutes.
Adopted this 5th day of March, 2003.
_____________________________________
Gary Stevenson, Chairperson
ATTEST:
_____________________________________
James Ericson,
Community Development Director
(SEAL)
N:\DATA\GROUPS\COMDEV\Planning Commission\PC Resolutions\721-03, R-O Text Amendment.doc
ORDINANCE NO. 710
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 1111.02 OF THE MOUNDS VIEW ZONING
CODE PERTAINING TO PERMITTED USES WITHIN THE R-O, RESIDENTIAL-OFFICE
ZONING DISTRICT
THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW ORDAINS:
SECTION 1: Section 1111.02 of the Mounds View Zoning Code is hereby
amended with the proposed additions underlined to read as follows:
1111.02: PERMITTED USES: The following are permitted uses in an R-0 District:
All permitted uses allowed in an R-4 District.
Club or lodge without the serving of food or beverage. (1988 Code §40.15)
Automotive Accessory Installation Operations (Ord. 710, 4-7-04)
SECTION 2. This Ordinance becomes effective thirty (30) days after its
publication in the official City newspaper.
First read by the City Council of the City of Mounds View on this 24th day of
March, 2003.
Read and adopted by the City Council of the City of Mounds View this 14th day
of April, 2002.
Jerry Linke, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________________
James Ericson, Interim Clerk Administrator
(SEAL)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________
City Attorney
Item No: 9C
Meeting Date: March 24, 2003
Type of Business: Council Business
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: James Ericson, Interim City Administrator
Item Title/Subject: Public Hearing and Consideration of a
Recommendation to Post the East Side of Greenfield
Avenue as “No Parking” 350 Feet from the Corner of
County Road I and Greenfield Avenue
Introduction:
On September 13, 2000, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 633-00 which
approved a variance to Tony Mezzenga, a developer proposing to construct an office
building at 2402 County Road I. The variance allowed a reduced parking ratio of one space
per 200 square feet. (The standard ratio is three spaces plus one space per 175 square feet
of leaseable space.) The developer had indicated that the resulting parking requirement of
15 stalls was more than adequate.
Upon completion of the construction, Mr. Mezzenga sold the building to Mr. Steve Farrell and
it became readily apparent soon afterward that vehicles destined for the Farrell building were
overflowing across the street onto Greenfield Avenue. Mr. Farrell confirmed to City staff that
the 15-stall parking lot was not adequate for his business, employees and clients. Because
of the regular overflow parking on Greenfield and complaints from residents, the Planning
Commission adopted a resolution in support of the “No Parking” request on the east side of
Greenfield Avenue south of County Road I. (The west side of Greenfield is already posted
“No Parking.”) Their resolution, Resolution 718-03, is attached for the Council’s review.
The ultimate authority regarding No Parking requests lies with the City Council. The Council
takes into consideration recommendations from the Planning Commission along with
recommendation of Staff, the Police Department and affected property owners.
Discussion:
Resolution 633-00 approved a reduced parking ratio of one space per 200 square feet of
leaseable space. At just less than 3,000 square feet, the number of stalls required as a
result of the resolution was 15, of which one had to be handicapped accessible. If the typical
standards were applied to this building, the number of parking stalls required would have
been 20, five more than what was approved by the variance. Because there is not enough
room for a twenty-stall parking lot given the size of the lot and the building, the leaseable
space in the building would have had to have been reduced by almost a third.
Staff checked with the Police Department who indicated that there were no typical standards
for reviewing “No Parking” requests. Under the direction of then Acting Chief Brennan,
members of the MVPD observed the intersection and the parking along Greenfield and have
concluded there were no critical safety issues associated with the vehicles parked on
Greenfield Avenue. At the December 18, 2002, Planning Commission meeting, Officer Terry
Broos reported that the east side of the street a certain distance back from the corner could
be posted No Parking to maintain adequate visibility. If, however, parking were to be
restricted along a certain distance of the east side of Greenfield Avenue, the vehicles
currently parking in front of the business would in all likelihood shift further to the south on
Greenfield Avenue.
The property owner, Steve Farrell, has appeared before the Planning Commission in
opposition to the proposed parking restriction, indicating that when he bought the property he
did so with the intent of utilizing Greenfield Avenue for overflow parking if needed. There are
currently no restrictions that would prohibit Mr. Farrell, his employees or clients from parking
on the east side of Greenfield. The Planning Commission asked Mr. Farrell to examine and
resolve the situation on his own so as to avoid a potential parking restriction. Mr. Farrell
contacted the property owner of the adjacent land to the west (the former Tom Thumb site)
to ascertain whether he would consider leasing some of his spaces to Mr. Farrell. The
property owner was not willing to consider such an arrangement. Mr. Farrell was asked
about car-pooling and ride share alternatives, to which he responded that his employees
work staggered shifts and often are required to attend closings off-site, making ride-share
and car-pooling impractical.
Mr. Farrell indicated that he would be willing to add as many as four additional stalls to the
parking lot, however doing so would require a variance in the permitted setback along
Greenfield Avenue and would result in the parking lot extending beyond the property onto the
City’s right of way. While possible, the Commission determined that such a parking lot
expansion would do more aesthetic harm to the neighborhood than good. Even so, no
application was made to expand the parking lot so no action was taken in that regard.
At the February 5th Planning Commission meeting, the Commission indicated a preference
to restrict parking 350 feet from the corner of County Road and Greenfield Avenue. While
there are no obstructions on the east side of Greenfield at this point, the driveway for 7656
Greenfield is at the south end of the lot and vehicles parked on the street could be an
obstruction for residents backing out of the driveway onto Greenfield.
After significant discussion at multiple meetings involving residents and the property owner of
2402 County Road I, the Planning Commission voted to approve resolution 718-03, a
resolution recommending approval of a no parking restriction on the east side of Greenfield
Avenue, 350 feet back from the corner of County Road I and Greenfield Avenue.
Recommendation:
Hold the public hearing and discuss the merits of posting the indicated section of
Greenfield Avenue as “No Parking” as articulated in Planning Commission Resolution
718-03.
_____________________________________
James Ericson
Interim City Clerk/Administrator
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 718-03
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING INSTALLATION OF A “NO PARKING FROM
HERE TO CORNER” SIGN ON THE EAST SIDE OF GREENFIELD AVENUE FOR
PUBLIC SAFETY PURPOSES
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed the parking situation
on Greenfield Avenue between County Road I and Bronson Drive in response to complaints from
residents in this area; and,
WHEREAS, the business located at 2402 County Road I consistently and regularly
overflows its parking lot resulting in employees and customers parking on Greenfield Avenue;
and,
WHEREAS, the west side of Greenfield Avenue has already been posted as No Parking
to control and restrict on-street parking on this block.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of
Mounds View, finding there to be sufficient cause and in the interest of public safety,
recommends that a “No Parking from Here to Corner, Mon – Sat, 8 am – 6 pm” sign be
installed on the east side of Greenfield Avenue, 350 feet south County Road I, shown as
Location “C” on the attached Exhibit 1.
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Planning Commission directs staff to forward
this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes.
Adopted this 5th day of February, 2003.
____________________________________
Jean Miller, Acting Chairperson
ATTEST
____________________________________
James Ericson, Community Development Director
(SEAL)
No Parking Report
February 5, 2003
Page 3
Recommendation:
The Planning Commission may choose to act on the attached resolution, Resolution 718-03,
recommending posting the east side of Greenfield Avenue “No Parking from Here to Corner.”
The Resolution does not indicate the actual distance back from County Road I and would need to
be added as part of its adoption.
James Ericson
Community Development Director
Attachments:
1. Resolution 718-03
EXHIBIT 1.
C
Proposed
Location of “No
Parking from
PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL 1
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW 2
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA 3
4
Regular Meeting 5
March 10, 2003 6
Mounds View City Hall 7
2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 8
7:00 P.M. 9
10
11
1. MEETING IS CALLED TO ORDER 12
13
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 14
15
3. ROLL CALL: Linke, Quick, Marty, Stigney, and Gunn 16
17
4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 18
19
Interim City Administrator Ericson requested that Item 9Cbe removed from the agenda. 20
21
A. Monday, March 10, 2003 City Council Agenda. 22
23
MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Marty. To Approve the Monday, March 10, 2003 Agenda as 24
Amended. 25
26
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 27
28
5. PUBLIC INPUT 29
30
Dennis Haames of 5511 Quincy Street addressed Council and asked whether anyone had looked 31
into the administration violations for noise violations as he had asked last month. 32
33
Interim City Administrator Ericson agreed to look into the noise violations. 34
35
Mr. Haames asked if the state patrol could help enforce the noise ordinance. 36
37
Council Member Quick asked Mr. Haames to explain the issue. 38
39
Mr. Haames indicated the noise from jake brakes on trucks and loud exhaust on cars and trucks 40
has been disrupting his sleep as the road is right outside his bedroom windows. 41
42
Council Member Quick asked what street has the issue. 43
44
Mounds View City Council March 10, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 2
Mr. Haames indicated he lives at the corner of Quincy and County Road I and the loud mufflers 1
and jake braking at the stoplight are very loud and disrupting his sleep. He then said that he was 2
told that jake brakes were for downhill decent so it is not necessary to use them in Mounds View. 3
4
Council Member Quick asked if Staff had forward the request to the Police Chief. 5
6
Interim City Administrator Ericson indicated the police department was notified and said he 7
would follow up with them to see what, if any, action has been done. 8
9
Robert Edmund of 7835 Groveland Road addressed Council and asked if there was anything that 10
could be done to reduce the number of police visits to a certain business within the 2200 block of 11
County Road 10 for underage drinking as he feels the number of trips is a drain on the police 12
budget. 13
14
Mayor Linke explained that underage drinking is not occurring and the reason the police are 15
called to the business is to deal with underage individuals attempting to obtain alcohol from the 16
business. He then said he would rather the police handle the situation as it is more of a deterrent 17
than just having the business escort them out. He further commented that the business is doing 18
what it is supposed to be doing to keep underage individuals from consuming alcohol. 19
20
Mr. Edmund said he feels that places a burden on the police. 21
22
Mayor Linke indicated he felt calling the police is a bigger deterrent than the establishment just 23
turning them away. 24
25
David Jahnke of 8428 Eastwood Road indicated he had voiced concerns at the last Council 26
meeting about expenses and had gotten some promises but things seem to be going the other 27
way. He then said he read an article on how some other cities are cutting costs and then sees on 28
this agenda hiring a planning associate and leasing copy machines. 29
30
Mr. Jahnke expressed concern over the number of vehicles that Staff take home with the excuse 31
that they need a vehicle to get back to City Hall in the event of an emergency. He then said that 32
he thinks it is absolutely ridiculous as employees, as part of their job, should have a way to get to 33
City Hall in the event of an emergency and the City should not have to provide a vehicle for that. 34
35
Mr. Jahnke indicated he feels the City can reign in spending without being jerks about it and he 36
would like to see Council really look into any expenditures that are not absolutely necessary. 37
38
Mayor Linke indicated Council is meeting on March 17, 2003 to discuss the budget and review 39
possible items for cutting. He then indicated the hiring of an associate planner was removed 40
from the agenda. He further commented that Staff and Council are keenly aware of the budget 41
situation and he has personally been looking at the budget trying to make a determination of how 42
and where to cut 15%. 43
44
Mounds View City Council March 10, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 3
Mr. Jahnke asked if anyone knew how many loans are against the golf course and what the total 1
amount of the loans is. 2
3
Finance Director Hansen indicated the golf course and its loans would be discussed later in the 4
agenda. 5
6
Mr. Jahnke indicated he would like to know the total figure borrowed to keep the course running. 7
8
Council Member Marty indicated that he had spoken to Mr. Ericson concerning the planning 9
associate and Mr. Ericson is working on different avenues in an effort to save the City money. 10
11
6. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS 12
13
A. Resolution 5960, Appointing Parks and Recreation Commission Members 14
15
Mayor Linke indicated the names of four interested persons were presented to the Park and 16
Recreation Committee for review and the Committee has put forth three names for Council 17
consideration, Sharon Linke, Dana Mendoza and Robert Edmunds. He then said that he would 18
recommend that Sharon Linke and Dana Mendoza be appointed to the Committee. 19
20
MOTION/SECOND: Linke/Gunn. To Approve Resolution 5960, a Resolution Appointing 21
Parks and Recreation Commission Members. 22
23
Michele Sandback addressed Council and indicated she is concerned with Ms. Linke being 24
appointed to the Committee as there have been ongoing conversations with this Council to get rid 25
of the YMCA and putting in a City-run Parks Director. She further commented that Ms. Linke is 26
the Mayor’s wife and she feels there may be a conflict of interest at the time when, and if, the 27
City does go through with a City-run Parks Department. 28
29
Mayor Linke indicated this Commission has no money to spend and merely makes 30
recommendations to Council and his wife has over 20 years of experience in Parks and 31
Recreation and she is the better candidate. 32
33
Ms. Sandback said she feels that the Mayor should abstain from voting since the candidate is his 34
wife and secondly, she would like to see a resolution passed by this Council to stop conflicts of 35
interest when it comes to Commissions. She then suggested passing a resolution that prohibits 36
Commission Members from gaining employment with the City until one year after resignation or 37
removal from a City Commission. 38
39
Ms. Sandback indicated she feels there may be a conflict of interest later on if the City does 40
decide to go with a City-run parks department when it comes to hiring someone to run that 41
department. She then said that Ms. Linke is the president of Innovative Images and there is an 42
unresolved financial issue between Innovative Images and the City. 43
44
Mounds View City Council March 10, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 4
Ms. Sandback indicated she does not want the City to go through more of what has been going 1
on for the past two years. 2
3
Council Member Stigney indicated he has a problem with an acting Mayor making the motion to 4
appoint his wife to a position rather than abstaining. He then said that, in the past, Mayor Linke 5
has voted for salary raises for his wife under the auspice that it was a raise for everyone in that 6
class but this is a very specific thing appointing his wife and something does not ring right with 7
that. 8
9
Council Member Stigney indicated that there are some issues regarding claims against the City 10
with Innovative Images and until that issue is resolved he has serious reservations about 11
appointing her to the Commission as she was terminated from the position. He then asked why 12
the Commission brought forth three names for two positions. He further said he would like to 13
have the motion divided to handle the appointments separately. 14
15
Mayor Linke indicated that, as Mayor, it is his responsibility to bring two names to Council for 16
appointment and as far as outstanding legal issues there is nothing outstanding. He then asked 17
City Attorney Riggs if there was anything outstanding between Innovative Images and the City. 18
19
City Attorney Riggs indicated there was nothing outstanding based on Council action on the last 20
matter. 21
22
Council Member Stigney asked whether a settlement had been made. 23
24
Mayor Linke indicated that no claim for settlement has been made at this time. 25
26
Council Member Stigney asked if the amount offered by the City was accepted by Innovative 27
Images. 28
29
Mayor Linke said no. 30
31
Council Member Stigney said he has a problem when the applicant is the Mayor’s wife and the 32
Mayor makes the motion. 33
34
Mayor Linke indicated he made the motion based on the applicants’ backgrounds and experience 35
and he feels these two applicants would be the best for the City. 36
37
Council Member Stigney asked if Mayor Linke would be willing to abstain from voting. 38
39
Mayor Linke said yes, if that is what it takes. He then said that conflict means if a member of 40
Council were to receive a monetary benefit and there is no benefit as this is a volunteer position. 41
42
Council Member Quick asked who the principal officers of Innovative Images are. 43
44
Mayor Linke asked what that has to do with appointing his wife. 45
Mounds View City Council March 10, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 5
1
City Attorney Riggs indicated he was aware of only two Sharon Linke and Jerry Linke. 2
3
Council Member Quick commented that the company was terminated for violations of a contract 4
with the City of Mounds View. 5
6
City Attorney Riggs indicated that the contract was terminated based on Council directive. 7
8
Council Member Quick commented that there is nothing to act on but Innovative Images has not 9
agreed on the City’s offer to settle. 10
11
City Attorney Riggs indicated there were offers that transpired back and forth but the matter has 12
died. 13
14
Council Member Quick asked if there had been a letter saying that claims would stop or no 15
further action would be taken. 16
17
City Attorney Riggs indicated he has received nothing. Offers went back and forth and that is 18
where it stopped. 19
20
Council Member Quick indicated he supported Council Member Stigney’s request to split the 21
motion. 22
23
MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Quick. To Divide the Motion. 24
25
Mayor Linke indicated that motion was out of order. 26
27
Council Member Quick challenged the decision of the chair. 28
29
City Attorney Riggs indicated it was in order to request that the motion be split. 30
31
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 32
33
MOTION/SECOND: Linke/Gunn. To Waive the Reading and Approve Resolution 5960A, a 34
Resolution Appointing Parks and Recreation Commission Members. 35
36
Council Member Marty indicated he has nothing against Ms. Linke but feels it may look bad 37
publicly and it may be a good decision for Council to consider another candidate. 38
39
Ayes – 1 Nays – 4 Motion failed. 40
41
MOTION/SECOND: Linke/Gunn. To Waive the Reading and Approve Resolution 5960B, a 42
Resolution Appointing Parks and Recreation Commission Members. 43
44
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 45
Mounds View City Council March 10, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 6
1
2
MOTION/SECOND: Linke/Stigney. To Waive the Reading and Approve Resolution 5960C, a 3
Resolution Appointing Robert Edmunds to the Parks and Recreation Commission. 4
5
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 6
7
Council appointed Dana Mendoza to the term ending December 31, 2005 and Mr. Edmund to the 8
term ending December 31, 2004. 9
10
7. JUST AND CORRECT CLAIMS 11
12
Mayor Linke asked for clarification of the charge from Kennedy and Graven for the Police 13
Commission. 14
15
Interim City Administrator Ericson indicated the Police Civil Service Commission had not met 16
yet this year but he had posed questions to the City Attorney and that is what brought about the 17
$24.00 charge. 18
19
Finance Director Hansen informed Council of a correction to the spread sheet that tracks 20
payments from outside parties. He then explained that a formula had been inadvertently copied 21
to a cell where it did not belong and had shown a collection for Longview Estates where there 22
was none. He then apologized for the error. 23
24
Council Member Marty asked for clarification of Check Number 110435 to the Minnesota 25
Department of Health for a water supply connection fee. 26
27
Finance Director Hansen indicated the State of Minnesota does testing of all water systems in the 28
state and all water systems have to pay the state a fee based on the number of connections and 29
that payment is made each quarter. 30
31
Council Member Marty asked for clarification on Check Number 110430 to Midwest Public Golf 32
Managers Association. He then said that it seems there have been numerous memberships for 33
the golf course and he is wondering how many the City needs and if there are any more the City 34
will be asked to pay for. 35
36
Finance Director Hansen indicated there were several different memberships at the golf course 37
and he does check them against the budget or for City Administrator approval before the 38
payments are made. 39
40
Golf Course Manager Burg indicated that this membership is an association of local City and all 41
public managers and is one of the last to be paid for. She then said there may be one more that 42
needs to be paid. 43
44
Council Member Marty asked how many memberships the golf course has. 45
Mounds View City Council March 10, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 7
1
Ms. Burg indicated that there are six different associations and explained each of them. 2
3
Ms. Burg indicated there would be a couple more licenses to be purchased by the City for staff at 4
the golf course. One is an electrical license and the other is a pesticide applicator’s license. 5
6
Council Member Marty asked whether New Brighton had this many memberships. 7
8
Ms. Burg indicated that the only one New Brighton does not have is the United States Golf 9
Association but said they do not have PGA and are not required to have the United States Golf 10
Association membership. 11
12
Council Member Stigney indicated he had asked at the last meeting whether there are more 13
memberships this year than last year. 14
15
Ms. Burg indicated that she deferred to the budget as the amount for memberships went down. 16
She then said that she would look into what memberships the course had last year. 17
18
Council Member Marty asked for clarification on Check Number 110417 for the 19
Hammerschmidt matter for $973.80. 20
21
City Attorney Riggs indicated there were two independent actions still pending, one where the 22
arbitration matter was handled by Julie Fleming Wolfe and has a decision pending. The other is 23
an unemployment insurance claim matter that was appealed and may be before Council 24
sometime in April or May for discussion dependent upon what the claimant and Commissioner 25
do. 26
27
Council Member Stigney asked if both the termination and unemployment were being appealed 28
by Mr. Hammerschmidt. 29
30
City Attorney Riggs indicated that both matters were appealed. 31
32
Council Member Marty indicated he had asked for further information from Ms. Flemming 33
Wolfe and asked whether that was provided. 34
35
Interim City Administrator Ericson indicated he had not received any further information. 36
37
Council Member Marty asked for clarification of Check Number 110454 for $1,626. 38
39
Finance Director Hansen indicated that was an expense for the banquet facility for materials to 40
update and renovate some decorating of the facility. 41
42
Council Member Marty suggested that before anybody does anything else they should seek 43
Council approval. He then asked what the monetary value would be before coming to Council 44
for approval. 45
Mounds View City Council March 10, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 8
1
Finance Director Hansen indicated that for items in the budget the amount is $5,000 and for 2
items not in the budget the amount is $2,500. 3
4
Council Member Marty commented that this is not a large expense but every little item needs to 5
be looked at when the City is faced with losing over $300,000. 6
7
Council Member Stigney asked what MAHCO was. 8
9
Finance Director Hansen indicated that MAHCO is the Minnesota Association of Housing Code 10
Officials. 11
12
Council Member Stigney asked what MSSA was. 13
14
Finance Director Hansen indicated that MSSA is the Minnesota Street Superintendents 15
Association. 16
17
Council Member Stigney indicated that it seems to him that Staff does not realize there is a 18
budget crunch with the proposed cutbacks to LGA and he would like to give Council direction 19
through the City Administrator to have Staff look at ways of cutting back. 20
21
Council Member Marty suggested a moratorium on spending and said it bothers him to be 22
discussing spending money as if things are normal and the City is not expected to lose money. 23
24
Council Member Quick said he felt that Council should have held an immediate meeting to 25
discuss the budget and spending issues if Members are so worried about it rather than waiting 26
until March 17, 2003 to give Staff a clear idea of Council wishes with regard to spending. 27
28
Council Member Stigney indicated the reason he had brought it up is he would like the City 29
Administrator to let Staff know that Council does not want to see any of these expenses until the 30
City knows how the budget crisis will be resolved. 31
32
Finance Director Hansen explained that there is a substantial lead time from the time that the 33
department makes the decision to buy something to when that claim shows up on the claim list at 34
least a month or two. He then said that a motion from Council would give Staff clear directive as 35
comments from one or two members does not. 36
37
Mayor Linke indicated it would be more prudent to say not to spend anything that is not 38
absolutely necessary for the function of the City as directing Staff by motion not to spend money 39
could stop the operations of the City. 40
41
Mayor Linke directed Staff to review the spending, watch what they are spending and buying, 42
and make sure all spending is approved by the City Administrator and Finance Director so that 43
Council knows that money is being spent wisely. 44
45
Mounds View City Council March 10, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 9
Council Member Stigney indicated that no money should be spent on nonessential items. 1
2
Interim City Administrator Ericson indicated that he would communicate to Staff that no 3
nonessential expenditures are to be made. 4
5
Mayor Linke asked Staff to hold off on any items that are in the works that can be stopped. 6
7
Council Member Stigney indicated that he was aware that claims show up on the list months later 8
but wanted to try to slow the spending and decrease the list in light of the budget crisis. 9
10
Council Member Stigney indicated he did not feel it was appropriate for the City to spend money 11
on five tickets to the Twin Cities North Chamber Gala and asked how this was approved without 12
Council action. 13
14
Interim City Administrator Ericson indicated that this type of expenditure is not something that 15
would come before Council. He also indicated that while past practice does not guarantee it 16
should be done today this is something that the City has paid for in past years. 17
18
Council Member Stigney indicated he questions whether it is an appropriate expenditure of 19
taxpayer funds. 20
21
Council Member Quick asked whether the money was in the budget. 22
23
Interim City Administrator Ericson indicated that Staff budgets for the Chamber events. 24
25
Council Member Quick explained that the issue with Brooklyn Center is that money was spent 26
with no vote of Council and without it being included in the budget. He then said that he feels 27
the Chamber puts much more back into the City than the City contributes and he feels it is 28
necessary for communication between the City and local businesses. 29
30
Council Member Stigney commented that just because the amount is in the budget does not mean 31
it has to be spent. He then said he is concerned about the appropriateness of the City spending 32
money on 5 gala reservations. He then asked that the City Administrator check with the state 33
auditor to determine whether this is an appropriate expenditure. 34
35
Council Member Quick clarified that the issue with Brooklyn Center was that they were spending 36
funds that were not budgeted and not approved by Council. He then said that, if Council were 37
this worried about the budget, it would have been more appropriate to have a meeting two weeks 38
ago rather than waiting until March 17, 2003 to give Staff direction on spending. He further 39
commented that if Staff is given appropriate and clear direction they would follow it. 40
41
Mayor Linke indicated that the gala was a budget item and an appropriate expenditure. 42
43
Council Member Stigney said he disagreed with the Mayor and Council Member Quick. 44
45
Mounds View City Council March 10, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 10
Council Member Marty indicated he would not have an issue with checking with the State 1
Auditor for clarification so it does not appear that anything is being swept under the carpet. 2
3
Council Member Gunn asked for clarification on Check Number110378 to the City of Spring 4
Lake Park for equipment usage. 5
6
Finance Director Hansen explained that Lakeside Park is the park that is on border with Spring 7
Lake Park and the two cities jointly operate it with each City taking on certain responsibilities for 8
maintenance. The City of Spring Lake Park assumes the physical maintenance and makes use of 9
city equipment to maintain the park, keeps track of hours and bills the City for usage of that 10
equipment at commercial rental rates. 11
12
Council Member Gunn asked if the County Road H2 project was nearly completed. 13
14
Public Works Director Lee indicated that the final wear course, boulevard restoration and 15
pathway on the north side still needed to be completed. 16
17
Mayor Linke asked Mr. Ericson to contact the State Auditor for clarification on the gala 18
expenditure. 19
20
MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Gunn. To Approve Just and Correct Claims as Presented. 21
22
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 23
24
8. CONSENT AGENDA 25
26
A. Resolution 5961 Approving a Supplemental Letter Agreement with SEH for work 27
associated with the Water Tower Rehabilitation Project 28
29
B. Set a Public Hearing for 7:05 PM, Monday, March 24, 2003, to Consider an Appeal of 30
the Planning Commission’s Denial of a Variance Request Made by the Property Owners 31
of 2075 Hillview Road, Planning Case VR03-001 32
33
C. Set a Public Hearing for 7:10 PM, Monday, March 24, 2003, to Consider the Introduction 34
and First Reading of Ordinance 710, an Ordinance Amending Chapter 1111 of the 35
Mounds View Zoning Code Pertaining to Permitted Uses in the R-O Zoning District, 36
Planning Case TX03-001 37
38
D. Set a Public Hearing for 7:15 PM, Monday, March 24, 2003, to Consider a “No Parking” 39
Request on the East Side of Greenfield Avenue 350 Feet South from County Road I 40
41
Council Member Marty requested that Item A be removed for discussion. 42
43
MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Gunn. To Approve Consent Agenda Items B, C, and D as 44
Presented. 45
Mounds View City Council March 10, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 11
1
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 2
3
Council Member Marty expressed concern that the engineering estimate was much lower than 4
the actual costs for the project. He then said that he would like Staff to ensure that engineering 5
estimates are carefully reviewed in the past so that the amounts are closer to the actual amount. 6
7
Mayor Linke asked why there was a need for another agreement. 8
9
Public Works Director Lee indicated that this project was started before he came to the City and 10
he has found that there was no letter agreement for anything other than the original drawings. 11
12
Mayor Linke asked if Staff recommended that the engineers be responsible for the inspection of 13
the water tower. He then said that he is used to seeing all of these services wrapped into the 14
original proposal and not in two pieces. He further commented that he is not pleased with SEH 15
at this time as they are not following through with their responsibilities and it is costing the City 16
money. 17
18
Public Works Director Lee indicated he understood the concern and said he is working with SEH 19
to bring things to where they should be. 20
21
Mayor Linke suggested that the City may need to discuss some free work to pay for the screw ups 22
in the past as the City is losing money because of SEH’s failure to do what they are paid to do. 23
24
Council Member Marty agreed and said that he is not happy with some of the things that are 25
coming back from SEH for more money. 26
27
Council Member Stigney asked if it would be beneficial to postpone approval to allow Staff to 28
discuss the matter with SEH. 29
30
Public Works Director Lee indicated there was time to postpone as the work would not begin 31
until September. 32
33
MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Marty. To Postpone Action on Resolution 5961 Until a Response 34
is Received from SEH. 35
36
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 37
38
9. COUNCIL BUSINESS 39
40
A. Resolution 5967 Approving Transfers Between Funds for the Year 2002. 41
42
Finance Director Hansen addressed Council and explained the necessary fund transfers. 43
44
Mounds View City Council March 10, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 12
Mayor Linke clarified that the City budgeted for $300,000 worth of transfers that will not need to 1
be made. 2
3
Finance Director Hansen indicated that was correct. 4
5
Mayor Linke asked for clarification on the transfers involving the vehicle equipment funds. 6
7
Finance Director Hansen explained that one fund acts as a savings account and the money is 8
transferred to that savings account and then back the other way to pay for vehicle purchases. 9
10
Council Member Quick asked for clarification on the purchase of one squad car. 11
12
Finance Director Hansen indicated the City had budgeted for three vehicles, two marked and one 13
unmarked squad and only one marked squad was purchased. 14
15
Council Member Quick asked why only one marked squad was purchased. 16
17
Finance Director Hansen indicated the decision was made well over a year ago but as he recalls 18
the acting Chief at the time determined that, in the interest of saving the City money, the Police 19
Department could make it a little longer with the one marked squad that was scheduled to be 20
replaced. 21
22
MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Marty. To Waive the Reading and Approve Resolution 5967, a 23
Resolution Approving Transfers Between Funds for the Year 2002. 24
25
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 26
27
B. Resolution 5968 Approving Interfund Loans for the Year 2002 and Setting 28
an Interest Rate on Loans for the Year 2003 29
30
Finance Director Hansen explained the interfund loans that needed to be made noting that these 31
are loans with the assumption that the moneys will be paid back to the lending fund with interest. 32
33
Finance Director Hansen indicated the Resolution lists the amounts of the loans Staff is asking 34
Council to approve for December 31, 2002. He then listed the amounts. 35
36
Finance Director Hansen indicated that the total amount of loans to the golf course is 37
$1,017,887.00 as a result of an operating loss in 2002 due to difficult weather and the strike. 38
39
Council Member Quick asked if some of that loan happened because money was transferred 40
without Council approval to operate the golf course. 41
42
Finance Director Hansen explained that there are bond covenants requiring the City to maintain a 43
cash balance of $309,000. He then said that there was a year or two where the City lost site of 44
Mounds View City Council March 10, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 13
that requirement and allowed the cash value to drop below the amount called for and, when Staff 1
became aware of that, a loan was required to bring the account back into compliance. 2
3
Council Member Stigney clarified that the total loans are $1,017,887.00. 4
5
Finance Director Hansen indicated that language was added to the Resolution that additional 6
loans may be made as needed to cover operating deficits in 2003 to meet the state law 7
requirement that Council approve, in advance, any loans made to the TIF district. 8
9
Finance Director Hansen indicated that Staff recommends all loans pay interest at a rate of 4% 10
for 2003 in light of the general trend downward in interest rates Staff felt it appropriate to lower 11
the rate charged between the City’s own funds. 12
13
Council Member Gunn asked if there was something the City could do to get SEH to timely 14
apply for MSA reimbursement. 15
16
Council Member Marty read a paragraph from the staff report indicating that the MSA fund 17
suffers from the City Engineers failure to timely complete requests for reimbursement from the 18
state. He then said he finds it totally unacceptable that the City’s engineering firm has caused the 19
City to lose money and, with the state’s budget crisis, there is the potential that those funds could 20
be unallocated and lost to the City entirely. 21
22
Council Member Stigney asked if there was a way to contact SEH to get them moving forward 23
on seeking reimbursement. 24
25
Interim City Administrator Ericson indicated that Mr. Lee is working on the matter with SEH. 26
27
Finance Director Hansen indicated that he and Mr. Lee have discussed the matter numerous 28
times over the last year and cautioned that it is only a remote chance that the money could be 29
unallocated but it is a possibility which is why he is concerned that the reimbursements happen 30
as soon as possible. 31
32
Council Member Quick indicated the City has not had issues with SEH in the past and asked 33
Staff to contact them concerning the MSA issue and ask for an explanation and proposed plan to 34
take care of the problem. 35
36
Council Member Marty asked whether the loans from the community fund to the TIF districts 37
can be repaid without becoming entangled in TIF regulations. 38
39
Finance Director Hansen indicated it should be possible to be paid back without entangling the 40
community fund in TIF regulations but noted that the community fund is already entangled and 41
that is why that fund was selected as the originator of the loan. 42
43
Mounds View City Council March 10, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 14
David Jahnke of 8428 Eastwood Road expressed concern that the manager of the golf course had 1
the right to deplete this fund without approval and somehow put the golf course in debt over a 2
million dollars. 3
4
Mayor Linke indicated the ultimate responsibility was the administrations because someone was 5
not watching the store. He then said that, in his mind, the ultimate responsibility lies with the 6
administrator as that person approves all expenditures and Council sees those and signs off on 7
them. 8
9
Council Member Quick explained that when these issues were first discovered by the former 10
Administrator it took her awhile to ferret them out and Council dealt with them including 11
terminating the contract with Innovative Images and two employees. 12
13
Mr. Jahnke thanked Council for handling the situation once it became known. He then 14
commented that the City needs to be very careful when hiring a new administrator. 15
16
MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Stigney. To Waive the Reading and Approve Resolution 5968, a 17
Resolution Approving Interfund Loans for the Year 2002 and Setting an Interest Rate on Loans 18
for the Year 2003. 19
20
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 21
22
C. Request Authorization to Hire a Planning Associate in the Community 23
Development Department 24
25
This item was removed from the agenda. 26
27
D. Resolution 5969 Authorizing the Write-off of Delinquent Accounts 28
Receivable. 29
30
Council Member Gunn asked if there was a way to verify checks received at the golf course to 31
eliminate the insufficient funds problem. 32
33
Finance Director Hansen indicated that one of the checks was in the amount of $725.00 and that 34
concerns him but the others are small enough that it would not be cost effective to attempt to 35
collect them. He then said that the City should not have any large checks as the course is moving 36
away from large ticket items being sold. 37
38
Mayor Linke asked whether the person who wrote the check could be prosecuted for 39
misdemeanor or felony theft since the amount is $750.00. 40
41
City Attorney Riggs indicated the City could attempt to prosecute the large check. 42
43
Mayor Linke indicated he would like to conduct an investigation into the issuance of that check 44
to determine if the City could prosecute it. 45
Mounds View City Council March 10, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 15
1
Finance Director Hansen indicated he was not with the City in July of 2001 but as he understand 2
a police report was filed but the original person who wrote the check could not be found. 3
4
Council Member Stigney asked what the City’s procedure is for verifying checks out at the golf 5
course. 6
7
Golf Course Manager Burg indicated that the course is implementing checking drivers license 8
and noted that, if Council approves the point of sale cash register program it would allow for 9
swiping of driver’s licenses in an effort to verify. 10
11
Mayor Linke indicated that he has been at other courses that require a thumbprint for a check 12
over a certain dollar amount. 13
14
Golf Course Manager Burg indicated it would be simple to implement a thumb printing policy 15
for check writing at the golf course and said that would be discussed along with other verification 16
information. 17
18
Council Member Stigney asked whether the insufficient funds checks were put through the 19
maximum number of times. 20
21
Finance Director Hansen indicated that all of the checks were but through at least twice. 22
23
Council Member Stigney asked why the City could not be reimbursed for the false fire alarms 24
and police alarms. 25
26
Finance Director Hansen indicated that state law allows the City to certify false fire alarms to the 27
property taxes as leverage for collecting but that is not true of false police alarms. He then 28
explained that, in the case of Calvin Academy, the business owner is not the property owner so 29
the City would be certifying the amount created by the business to the property owner. 30
31
Mayor Linke suggested getting in touch with the owner of the property to let them know what is 32
going on and tell them that the next step may be certifying to the property taxes. He then 33
recommended contacting Dan Anderson of Kraus Anderson Realty 34
35
Council Member Stigney suggested that all of these items could be taking to conciliation court at 36
one time and that may be something to consider. He then asked about the contested legal fees 37
and whether there was any chance of collecting them. 38
39
Finance Director Hansen explained that in the past the City did not require an agreement from the 40
developer to pay the legal fees associated with a development and these legal fees occurred under 41
that old policy so the City does not have leverage to collect the fees. He further commented that 42
the City does now require that any legal fees incurred as a result of the development request be 43
paid by the developer. He then reviewed the outstanding legal fees and explained the situations. 44
45
Mounds View City Council March 10, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 16
City Attorney Riggs further clarified that the City has taken steps to correct the situation so that 1
this does not happen in the future. He then said that the City may have options with the Red Oak 2
Estates matter when it develops in the future to require that the outstanding legal fees be paid. 3
4
Council Member Marty recommended the City take no further action with Red Oak Estates until 5
the City is reimbursed. He then said he would like to have Staff contact Calvin Academy and tell 6
him to pay the outstanding amounts or the City will not respond to calls. 7
8
Interim City Administrator Ericson cautioned that it would be a bad idea not to respond to calls 9
for liability reasons. 10
11
Council Member Marty asked for an explanation as to how Dan Coughlin received and deposited 12
a duplicate paycheck and ended up on the list for a debt of the City to be written off. 13
14
Finance Director Hansen explained that Mr. Coughlin had a habit of not depositing his checks 15
right away but would accumulate them and then deposit them. In this case he lost a paycheck 16
and the City reissued it and issued a stop payment order but that stop payment order is only good 17
for 30 days and, some time later, Mr. Coughlin must have found the check and deposited it not 18
realizing it was the one he had lost and had a duplicate issued for. 19
20
Finance Director Hansen explained that Mr. Coughlin was contacted for payment and, for 21
whatever reason, there was confusion as to the amount owed so Mr. Coughlin paid the wrong 22
amount and there is a small amount still outstanding. Mr. Coughlin has been contacted 23
numerous times and he has not paid the balance. Staff has spent more time and postage trying to 24
collect this amount than the amount at stake. 25
26
Council Member Quick asked if the names could be posted in Mounds View matters. 27
28
City Attorney Riggs indicated the Resolution would be public information and could be 29
published. 30
31
Council Member Stigney suggested the City Administrator personally contact Mr. Coughlin to 32
ask him for payment of the outstanding amount before his name is published. He also asked that 33
the City add information to the website listing deadbeats within the City. 34
35
MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Quick: To Create a Website that Lists the Names of Those with 36
Debts Outstanding to the City, Contact Mr. Coughlin to ask if he Wishes to Pay before his Name 37
Appears in Print, and to Have the Names listed in Mounds View Matters and both Newspapers. 38
39
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 40
41
Council Member Gunn asked whether it was possible to prosecute for the outstanding rent. 42
43
Interim City Administrator Ericson indicated it was possible to prosecute for the outstanding rent 44
amounts but explained that the City is not sure where this person has relocated to and it is 45
Mounds View City Council March 10, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 17
difficult to pursue without knowing where they are. He then said he has been in contact with 1
Northwest Youth and Family Services in an attempt to contact the former tenant. 2
3
MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Marty. To Postpone approval of Resolution 5969 to Allow Staff 4
Time to Attempt Further Collection Efforts. 5
6
Council Member Quick asked whether Staff felt it would be possible to collect any of the 7
outstanding amounts or if this would be a waste of time and money. 8
9
Finance Director Hansen indicated he had no issue with postponing and carrying out the directive 10
to make further efforts on Calvin Academy and create a website to list the outstanding debts that 11
will be published in the newspaper. He then said that Staff has expended the amount of effort 12
that is prudent based on the outstanding amount. 13
14
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 15
16
MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Quick. To Direct Staff to Take No Further Action on Red Oak 17
Estates Until the Outstanding Amounts are Paid in Full. 18
19
Council Member Quick asked for an explanation of Red Oak Estates. 20
21
Interim City Administrator Ericson explained that Red Oak Estates is located at the southwest 22
corner of County Road H2 and Long Lake Road that was proposed for 72 townhome units and 6 23
were constructed. He further explained that the developer and the City have been involved in 24
ongoing litigation but the litigation has stalled. 25
26
Council Member Stigney asked for a legal opinion as to whether the motion would harm the City 27
with the legal case. 28
29
City Attorney Riggs indicated the motion could impact the litigation and recommended not 30
adopting it. He further explained that nothing would happen with Red Oak Estates until the 31
litigation is resolved and then only after City approval. 32
33
Interim City Administrator Ericson indicated that Longview Estates is the same developer and 34
there is an outstanding legal balance on that development as well. He then asked whether 35
Council wished to restrict activity on that property as there is no litigation and there could be a 36
proposal before Council at any time. 37
38
City Attorney Riggs indicated the City has the ability during the subdivision process to require 39
payment for the City’s expenses incurred and, if another application is submitted, that matter 40
would be negotiated with the developer. 41
42
Council Member Stigney indicated that, based on the comments of the City Attorney, it may be 43
more prudent to do nothing with it rather than open the door for a litigation problem. 44
45
Mounds View City Council March 10, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 18
Ayes – 2 (Marty/Linke) Nays – 3 Motion failed. 1
2
E. Resolution 5970 Approving Leases for Three Copy Machines from Savin 3
4
Finance Director Hansen explained that with the ever changing copier technology the City can 5
get new copy machines at a lower cost than the ones that are currently being leased. He then 6
indicated Staff has looked into the copier needs of the City and recommends purchasing the 7
machine in the garage for $745.00 as it is not used very heavily and would only cost the City 8
minimal maintenance. He further recommended that the City lease three machines to replace the 9
three in City Hall noting that the new copiers can be hooked up to the computer system to be 10
used as printers to take some of the load of the LaserJet printers. 11
12
Finance Director Hansen indicated that changing the City’s copiers based on Staff’s 13
recommendation would save the City approximately $9,000 per year as well as save wear and 14
tear on the City’s printers. 15
16
Mayor Linke asked whether the finance copier could be eliminated and have that department 17
utilize the administration copier. 18
19
Finance Director Hansen explained that there are many times when the administrative 20
departments machine is busy and he feels it would be a waste of staff time to have them standing 21
in line at the copier. He also clarified that the increased projection in use for the copiers assumes 22
moving some printing away from the LaserJet printers to save wear and tear. 23
24
MOTION/SECOND: Gunn/Marty. To Waive the Reading and Approve Resolution 5970, a 25
Resolution Approving Leases for Three Copy Machines from Savin. 26
27
Council Member Stigney indicated he would like the dollar amount added to the Resolution. 28
29
Finance Director Hansen inserted the lease amount of $50,942.60 into the Resolution. 30
31
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 32
33
MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Marty. To Reconsider Resolution 5970. 34
35
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 36
37
The Motioner and Seconder accepted Council Member Stigney’s friendly amendment to add the 38
dollar amount to the Resolution. 39
40
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 41
42
Mounds View City Council March 10, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 19
F. Resolution 5963 Approving the Legal Services RFP and Authorizing its 1
Distribution 2
3
Interim City Administrator Ericson indicated he had made the requested changes to the RFP with 4
the exception of the request of Council Member Marty as there was not clear direction on the 5
requested change. 6
7
Interim City Administrator Ericson indicated the City Attorney had recommended a change under 8
Section 5(b)(9) as the City cannot request or expect to receive the contents of the most recent 9
audit or financial report. 10
11
City Attorney Riggs indicated that would result in an ethical violation for an attorney to do that. 12
13
Interim City Administrator Ericson suggested adding a retainer fee under Section K1 for the 14
prosecuting attorney. 15
16
Council Member Gunn indicated her notes reflect that Council Member Marty wanted all of the 17
Farmington information added. 18
19
Council Member Marty indicated he wanted to add the costs per mile, and identify minimum 20
increments of time billed for each service. He then asked that Farmington’s 5 and 6 be added as 21
Mounds View’s 4 and 5 under K. 22
23
Council Member Stigney asked for the City Attorney’s opinion on the document. 24
25
City Attorney Riggs indicated he had discussed the document with Mr. Ericson and had brought 26
up the only issues he had with it. He then said that it was comprehensive and the language was 27
fairly standard. 28
29
MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Gunn. To Waive the Reading and Approve Resolution 5963, a 30
Resolution Approving the Legal Services RFP and Authorizing Distribution. 31
32
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 33
34
Council recessed at 9:25 p.m. 35
Council reconvened at 9:30 p.m. 36
37
G. Resolution 5962 Approving the Purchase of a Point of Sale System for the 38
Bridges Golf Course. 39
40
Golf Course Manager Burg briefly explained how the point of sale system would improve record 41
keeping at the golf course noting that the system would automatically transmit information to 42
City Hall to eliminate the need for staff to drive over with a piece of paper. 43
44
Council Member Stigney asked whether the transfer of data would be secure. 45
Mounds View City Council March 10, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 20
1
Golf Course Manager Burg indicated she did not think it would be any more or less secure than 2
email. 3
4
Interim City Administrator Ericson indicated the City has a very secure system and benefits from 5
the City of Roseville having numerous checks and security systems that prohibit hacking and the 6
City has been fortunate not to have any issues with that. He then commented that approval of 7
this system would eliminate the need for a separate internet connection at the golf course which 8
costs the City 50.00 per month. 9
10
Mayor Linke asked if a daily report could be done until there is a system in place. 11
12
Golf Course Manager Burg further explained the system and its report generating options. 13
14
Council Member Stigney asked whether Staff looked into the price of high speed cable or 15
wireless remote. 16
17
Golf Course Manager Burg indicated she had asked for that information but had not yet received 18
it. 19
20
Interim City Administrator Ericson indicated the cost would be slightly less than $2,000 as 21
equipment has gone down in price from the time the City first looked at it. He then said that the 22
City is not sure that Comcast would be able to connect the golf course. 23
24
Council Member Stigney asked whether the system would give a breakdown of costs charged for 25
the round or just the number of rounds. 26
27
Golf Course Manager Burg indicated the system would provide any information asked for. She 28
then explained she had checked with other courses that are using the system the way the City 29
intends to and this is the system they were using. 30
31
Council Member Quick asked if the system would provide the total amount sold if the entire 32
course were rented out. 33
34
Golf Course Manager Burg indicated it would show the transactions for that time period but 35
would provide the information if it is entered into the system the number of people times the cost 36
of the rounds. 37
38
Council Member Quick asked if there is a policy for renting the entire course. 39
40
Golf Course Manager Burg indicated she had located an old contract for group rental but there is 41
no policy. 42
43
Council Member Stigney asked if the system would save Staff time or only provide better 44
information. 45
Mounds View City Council March 10, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 21
1
Golf Course Manager Burg indicated it would save her the time to drive the reporting 2
information to City Hall. She then explained that it would also save time entering the 3
information as well as eliminate possible entry errors. She also commented that it would provide 4
information to track the course better to allow for more efficient staffing which has the potential 5
to save the City money. 6
7
Council Member Quick commented that, with this system, the receipts would not disappear. He 8
then asked for an update on the investigation. 9
10
Interim City Administrator Ericson indicated he is still waiting for information from MMKR on 11
what is missing. 12
13
Finance Director Hansen indicated he feels the real value is that it will provide better information 14
on managing the relationship between the course and its patrons as well as control inventory 15
which will result in a better run golf course. He then said the finance department would realize 16
benefits as Staff would have faster information as well as a little time-saving on inputting data. 17
18
MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Gunn. To Waive the Reading and Approve Resolution 5962, a 19
Resolution Approving the Purchase of a Point of Sale System for the Bridges Golf Course. 20
21
Council Member Marty asked whether the City really needed this system. 22
23
Mayor Linke commented that this system would provide a true indication of what is going on at 24
the golf course and help the Golf Course Manager do a better job of managing the course. 25
26
Council Member Stigney asked for clarification of whether this would make the course run more 27
efficiently or merely be a different form of reporting. 28
29
Golf Course Manager Burg said she believes the system would make things run more efficiently 30
and even move people through the clubhouse faster. 31
32
33
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 34
35
Council Member Quick asked whether there was a set rate to rent the entire course. 36
37
Golf Course Manager Burg indicated she was not sure of a time when the entire course has been 38
rented out. 39
40
Council Member Quick asked about Festival in the Park. 41
42
Golf Course Manager Burg indicated that Festival in the Park paid by the tee time. 43
44
Council Member Quick asked whether the New Brighton course was ever completely rented out. 45
Mounds View City Council March 10, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 22
1
Golf Course Manager Burg indicated that New Brighton always rented by the tee time. 2
3
Council Member Quick asked how Staff would handle a request to rent the course for anything 4
other than by the tee time. 5
6
Golf Course Manager Burg indicated she had no experience with that type of request on a 9 hole 7
course but said if it did happen she would need to come to Council for consideration and 8
approval as that would be changing the fee structure. 9
10
Council Member Quick asked whether the New Brighton course provided for discounted rounds. 11
12
Golf Course Manager Burg indicated there were very few times when an organization had asked 13
for a reduced fee to assist them with fundraising efforts. 14
15
MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Gunn. To Direct Staff to Prepare a Group Reservation Policy for 16
the Golf Course for Council Consideration. 17
18
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 19
20
H. Resolution 5965 Approving the Contract for a Website with 21
TwinCitiesgolf.com 22
23
Golf Course Manager Burg explained the request for the use of TwinCitiesgolf.com noting that 24
with tight advertising dollars this would be a method of getting the course out there and attracting 25
golfers. 26
27
Mayor Linke asked if golfers would still need to call for a tee time or if online reservations were 28
available. 29
30
Golf Course Manager Burg indicated she had spoken to someone from the telephone company 31
and is working on the City’s reservation line. She then said that this system does not allow for 32
online reservations and the system that does costs 3,500 per year and she does not feel it would 33
be cost effective to pay that fee as she does not feel the online reservations would justify the 34
expenditure. 35
36
Council Member Gunn asked if the golf course is advertised anywhere else. 37
38
Golf Course Manager Burg indicated the course is in Golf Minnesota magazine for the whole 39
season and the only other place is in the phone book. 40
41
MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Gunn. To Waive the Reading and Approve Resolution 5965, a 42
Resolution Approving the Contract for a Website with TwinCitiesgolf.com. 43
44
Mounds View City Council March 10, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 23
City Attorney Riggs indicated he had emailed Mr. Ericson concerning language in the 1
indemnification clause. 2
3
Golf Course Manager Burg indicated she spoke with a representative of the company and had 4
gotten agreement to make the adjustments. 5
6
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 7
8
10. REPORTS 9
10
Council Member Quick indicated it was his understanding that Article 21 of the sick leave policy 11
allowing for borrowing of sick leave has been implemented as was discussed at the closed 12
session and he wonders if Council needs to act on this matter. 13
14
City Attorney Riggs indicated that whether or not to establish a policy is the right of Council. 15
16
Council Member Quick asked whether the City has to implement it. 17
18
City Attorney Riggs indicated it is language that exists in an agreement but, based on his reading 19
of it, something that is subject to Council discretion. 20
21
Council Member Quick indicated he felt the matter should be discussed so that Council can 22
provide clear direction to Staff. He then said that there is no policy on how to deal with this and 23
he is quite concerned about the fact that the action may have put the City in jeopardy some way. 24
25
Council Member Quick commented that there is no approval and no conditions but it has been 26
implemented so he would say that Council needs to act on this issue tonight one way or the other. 27
28
Mayor Linke began to comment but was interrupted by Council Member Quick who stated that 29
there is a contract and a provision in the contract that has been implemented without Council 30
direction. He then said he understands there was a misunderstanding of the conversation so 31
Council needs to take action on it. He further commented that it has nothing to do with 32
borrowing sick leave and that is not the discussion. 33
34
Council Member Quick asked whether Council wished to implement this section of the contract 35
and, if so, what are the controls. 36
37
Mayor Linke said he understood Council Member Quick’s comments but using the language in 38
the LELS should the City set up a policy borrowing against future sick time or go back to 39
Resolution 5943 which would allow coworkers to donate already banked sick leave. 40
41
Council Member Quick indicated the policy is contained in the contract and the borrowing of the 42
30 days is in the contract. He then said the City cannot go around the contract but can set up a 43
policy that has to deal with the 30 days of borrowing. 44
45
Mounds View City Council March 10, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 24
Mayor Linke commented that both LELS and AFSCME will follow the City’s personnel policy if 1
the item is not in the contract. He then said he would not want to have an employee borrow 2
against future sick leave but would rather have other employees give time that is already on the 3
books. He further commented that, given the choice, he would rather use Resolution 5943. 4
5
Council Member Stigney indicated that Resolution 5943 was put off to the work session and 6
asked if this discussion could be moved to the work session as well. 7
8
Council agreed to finish the conversation at the work session. 9
10
Council Member Marty indicated he had attended the Chamber of Commerce Gala and it was an 11
excellent opportunity to socialize with local businesses as well as officials from neighboring 12
cities. 13
14
Council Member Stigney indicated he had attended the meeting concerning the skate park and it 15
was very informational. 16
17
Council Member Gunn had no report. 18
19
Council Member Quick asked City Attorney Riggs how, in the best interest of the City, the City 20
should deal with the current situation on the contract. 21
22
City Attorney Riggs indicated he had discussed the matter with Mr. Ericson and noted there is a 23
policy decision to be made by Council but there is a situation where the City has not adopted a 24
policy but it appears something has been paid based on it and Council should deal with and 25
recognize that it has happened. 26
27
MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Gunn. To Suspend the Borrowing of Sick Leave Until Council Has 28
Discussed and Established a Policy and to Authorize What Has Already Occurred. 29
30
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 31
32
Interim City Administrator Ericson indicated he met with the YMCA Advisory Committee on 33
March 3, 2003 and there will be another meeting on April 14, 2003. 34
35
Interim City Administrator Ericson indicated he would be meeting with Commissioner Bennett 36
to discuss local and regional issues. 37
38
Mayor Linke indicated there were two county commissioners. 39
40
Interim City Administrator Ericson indicated it was not possible to get the two together. 41
42
Mayor Linke asked that Staff mention the community center. 43
44
Mounds View City Council March 10, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 25
Interim City Administrator Ericson indicated that there would be a town hall meeting on March 1
15, 2003 from 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. 2
3
Interim City Administrator Ericson gave a brief demonstration on keyless entry systems and 4
provided pricing information indicating it would cost the City approximately $1,800 to retrofit 5
the doors and another $2,000 in other costs to implement the system. He also indicated he would 6
check with the Police Department to see whether they would be interested in the system. 7
8
Interim City Administrator Ericson indicated the Planning Commission is working on the 9
pawnshop ordinance. 10
11
Interim City Administrator Ericson indicated there is a house at 7741 Long Lake Road that is 12
being constructed in the setback and the City has posted a stop work order and contacted the 13
developer and property owner. He then said there was an error on the City’s part when the 14
building permit was approved and Staff will be working with the developer and property owner 15
to either apply for a variance or cut 10 feet off the garage. 16
17
Interim City Administrator Ericson indicated that the City had received an offer of settlement 18
from MetroCom Wireless outside of the bankruptcy proceedings and the City’s Attorney has 19
recommended accepting the amount. 20
21
MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Marty. To Accept the $3,500 Settlement Offer from MetroCom 22
Wireless. 23
24
Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 25
26
Interim City Administrator Ericson indicated the compensation study needs further refinement as 27
three positions did not show up in the study and Staff would like to see some other items 28
addressed. 29
30
Mayor Linke indicated this item should be discussed during the budget work session. 31
32
Council Member Stigney indicated he did not like the policy and would like to know what other 33
cities use the Stanton 6 for maximum salary. He then said he would like to know why Staff has 34
gone back to using the Stanton mean of all group six cities when it was reported to Council that 35
there was a subset of 10 cities that Staff was basing salary on. He also asked for the per capita 36
cost and what the other cities tax capacity is as he does not like being compared to cities up to 37
25,000 when what they have for income has nothing to do with the City of Mounds View. 38
39
Interim City Administrator Ericson clarified that Council would like Staff to contact all other 40
Stanton 6 cities to determine who has this policy. 41
42
Council Member Stigney indicated he wanted to know who uses the Stanton mean for their 43
hiring. 44
45
Mounds View City Council March 10, 2003
Regular Meeting Page 26
Interim City Administrator Ericson indicated he would be happy to look into it but said he is not 1
sure why the City did not go with the subset but that can be discussed along with the other 2
personnel policy issues. He then commented that he would not have time to research the tax 3
capacity issue and suggested using an outside entity for that research. 4
5
Council Member Stigney asked where the report from Labor Relations was that cost the City 6
$3,900. 7
8
Interim City Administrator Ericson indicated the supporting documentation was not provided as 9
it is right out of Stanton 2002 which Council has. 10
11
11. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 12
13
A. Minutes for February 24, 2003 to be approved on March 24, 2003 14
15
12. Next Council Work Session: Monday, April 7, 2003 16
Next Council Meeting: Monday, March 17, 2003 (Special Work Session) 17
18
13. ADJOURNMENT 19
20
Mayor Linke adjourned the meeting at 10:33 p.m. 21
22
23
Transcribed and recorded by: 24
25
26
Joan Lenzmeier 27
Timesaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. 28