Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packets - 2003/02/03 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION AGENDA Monday, February 3, 2003 7pm CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL: Linke, Stigney, Quick, Marty, Gunn PUBLIC COMMENT Citizens may speak to issues not on tonight’s agenda. Before speaking, please give your full name and address for the minutes. Also, please limit your comments to three minutes. Agenda Items Discussed by Consensus _______ 1. Code Enforcement Presentation – Jeremiah Anderson _______ 2. Discuss YMCA Committees and Course of Action _______ 3. Review Golf Course Needs and Consider Operational Adjustments _______ 4. Pathway Plan Discussion _______ 5. Discussion of borrowed sick leave per LELS Collective Bargaining Agreement _______ 6. Review the City’s Personnel Manual Regarding Probationary Periods, Flex Time and Use of the Stanton Mean for Compensation Plan _______ 7. Review Additional Responses from Executive Search Firms Regarding the City Administrator Position _______ 8. Discuss Meaning and Intent of Resolution 5555 _______ 9. Review Research Performed Regarding Legal Representation RFPs _______ 10. Discuss Human Resources Committee _______ 11. Banquet Center Electronics Upgrade (verbal report) _______ 12. Community Education – Status of Lease at Community Center (verbal report) Next Council Worksession: Monday, March 3, 2003 Next City Council Meeting: Monday, February 10, 2003 Item No: 01 Meeting Date: 2/3/03 Type of Business: WK WK: Work Session; PH: Public Hearing; CA: Consent Agenda; CB: Council Business City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor & City Council From: Jeremiah Anderson, Housing/Code Enforcement Inspector Item Title/Subject: Code Enforcement Presentation Date of Report: January 29, 2003 Background: The City of Mounds View Community Development Department operates several programs that share the core goal to protect the health and safety of the citizen’s of Mounds View through the enforcement of duly-adopted codes and ordinances. These programs set out to accomplish that core goal through a variety of different methods and procedures. Staff understands that the City Council is interested in what is currently being utilized to enforce these various provisions of the City Code. Code Enforcement is quite often a comprehensive effort and can at times employ the use of several methods to achieve a desired result. Code enforcement can be defined as the process by which public agencies gain compliance with laws, regulations, and permits over which they have authority. Others may view code enforcement as an annoying intrusion into the free use of private property. Traditionally, it has been a process where local governments use various techniques to gain compliance with duly-adopted regulations such as land use and zoning ordinances, health and housing codes, and uniform building and fire codes. In recent years, state and federal regulations have come into play and local governments are now obliged to include enforcement of these rules and regulations in the array of responsibilities they assume for protecting the public health and welfare. In many respects, code enforcement is a specialized form of law enforcement, subject to all the legal standards and constitutional limitations that law enforcement entails. This report and presentation will explain the methods, steps, and various procedures, currently being utilized to gain compliance with the Nuisance Code, Housing Maintenance Code, and applicable sections of the Zoning Code. Discussion: Traditionally, the enforcement process will begin after a citizen files a complaint with the Community Development Department, another City department, or an outside public agency such as child protection contacts the Community Development Department. Additionally, the residential code compliance program involves proactively investigating Code Enforcement Presentation February 3, 2003 Page 2 code violations. Staff has found that dealing with the issue prior to a complaint can revitalize the appearance of the entire neighborhood, while stopping the spread or urban blight which can cause the entire neighborhood to become deteriorated. While investigating a code violation, Staff researches files to determine if prior involvement has occurred at the subject property, Staff then visits the property, and often times speaks directly with the responsible party, speaks with neighbors, and takes photographs. In this respect, it is important to note that Staff performing these initial investigation steps serves both the complainant and the violator, and Staff is responsive to their respective needs. Staff regularly expresses a willingness to communicate with the complainant, when the identity is known. Staff respectfully communicates to the violator what must be done to resolve the situation. This process regularly involves working with a violator to determine how his or her situation can conform to the satisfaction of both the violator and the City. This does not mean compromising standards or lengthening timelines for compliance without cause, staff feels that it is important to not start the compliance transaction on a hostile note. However, only the violator can solve the problem efficiently. After Staff has collected the facts, Staff must evaluate whether or not violations exist and, if so, what steps are to be taken to bring about compliance. Once inspection of the property reveals code violations, Staff notifies the responsible person to seek compliance. Generally, the responsible party is the property owner, but may also include the tenant, lessee, or occupant depending on the violation. Compliance can be obtained by using one or a combination of administrative and judicial remedies. Since most violations exist through simple, unintentional ignorance of a regulation, the majority of cases are resolved soon after this initial notice. About 90 percent of code violation cases voluntarily comply with the cited regulation. However, Staff may use nearly all of its resources to bring the remaining 10 percent of cases into compliance. As much as similar code violations are the same, they are also different due to the various social and economic situations present. As such, Staff must constantly evaluate the various compliance remedies on a case-by-case basis. Evaluating remedies is the heart of code enforcement. Enforcement remedies are the basic legal tools and mechanisms that can be used by Staff to gain compliance. Three broad classifications of remedies exist, Administrative, Criminal Prosecution, and Civil Injunction. Staff’s primary objective here is to select the most appropriate remedy to gain timely and effective compliance. To avoid unnecessary delay, Staff needs to select the most effective remedy as soon as possible. Administrative remedies are used by Staff to gain compliance with codes and regulations on a regular basis. Administrative remedies are classified as informal or formal. Informal administrative remedies include a notice of violation, stop work orders, and the issuance of an administrative offense citation. Code Enforcement Presentation February 3, 2003 Page 3 A notice of violation lists specific code sections and establishes timeframes for bringing the property into compliance and is in the nature of a warning. In most cases, staff gains compliance by issuing a notice of violation. A notice of violation has a cover sheet explaining the program goals and purpose. At properties with no prior code violation history, this has a congenial tone and includes specific information regarding the violation, “Hey friend, did you know that the garbage in your yard is in violation of City ordinance? Lets talk about ways to solve this problem that work for both of us.” A notice of violation is appropriate in most cases, however, where Staff confronts violations that pose imminent health and safety hazards, a notice of violation may be inadequate to compel compliance. Another informal administrative remedy is the stop work order. This is an appropriate remedy when Staff determines that current construction activity must cease immediately because it is inconsistent with specific requirements of the Building Code, the underlying building permit, or does not meet zoning approval. When staff has issued a notice of violation and the necessary corrective action(s) has not been taken within the established timeline another informal administrative remedy is used, the issuance of an administrative offense citation. This tool is an effective way for the City to compel compliance while avoiding criminal prosecution for a relatively minor violation. Once an administrative offense is issued, the violator has a choice to pay the associated penalty and take the necessary corrective actions, or request an administrative hearing with the City, which is facilitated by the Clerk-Administrator and attended by Staff. If the violator chooses to take no action after a period of 30 days, Staff will again evaluate the available remedies and determine if proceeding to formal administrative remedies, criminal prosecution, or civil injunction is appropriate. Where informal enforcement actions are either ineffective or inappropriate, Staff may use formal administrative actions as an alternative to judicial action or before a case is filed in court. Formal administrative actions are classified into three general categories, revocation or suspension of licenses, permits or certificates of occupancy, administrative abatement, and summary abatement. Abatement is a formal enforcement tool used by Staff to remove conditions that cause a public nuisance. In both administrative and summary abatement, the City (or a contractor for the City) performs the corrective action and then assesses costs against the property. Administrative abatement and summary abatement differ in that administrative abatement requires a notice prior to the abatement action, summary abatement can be done with no prior notice, provided however, that an emergency situation or condition existed. Section 607.07 Subdivision 3 of the City of Mounds View Nuisance Code grants the authority to impound vehicles constituting a public nuisance. Section 607.07 Subdivision 5 of the City Code provides that vehicles constituting a public nuisance may be impounded after 72 hours when a notice of violation has been Code Enforcement Presentation February 3, 2003 Page 4 served upon the property owner and additional notice is posted on the vehicle. This formal administrative remedy is much more effective than the criminal prosecution remedy, where four to six week’s often elapse before the court hears the case. Additionally, some judges are reluctant to impose significant penalty for municipal code violations because misdemeanor convictions might impose the stigma of a criminal record on ordinary citizens. Civil action is an enforcement method that can be used to address violations of land use and zoning ordinances. On behalf of the enforcement agency, a City attorney requests an injunction requiring the responsible person to correct outstanding violations and maintain the property in compliance with ordinances and laws. The City attorney need only prove the existence of the code violations by using Staff’s written declarations. Live testimony is not required to obtain an injunction. Unlike criminal prosecution, the City attorney can request the court to issue either temporary restraining orders or preliminary injunctions which can compel compliance while the civil action is pending. This differs from criminal action, where a conviction must occur before a court can order compliance. Staff has not regularly used civil remedies as a code enforcement remedy; however, the option is available if needed. This report is an overview of what enforcement remedies exist and which remedies Staff is currently utilizing to enforce various provisions of the City Code. After the presentation staff will be happy to answer additional questions that Council may have. Jeremiah Anderson Housing/Code Enforcement Inspector Attachment: Residential Code Compliance Program Description 1. Program Outline: Code Compliance Sweeps of two neighborhoods within each Community Orientated Policing zone. Specific neighborhoods are determined using the following selection criteria: • The geographic designation of the Four established Community Orientated Policing zones. • Geographic distribution and concentration of dwellings. • Designation of dwellings as category 4 or 5 in the records of the County Assessor. • Dwellings identified by the inspections department as having an excessive number of exterior code violations or a history of documented noncompliance or slow compliance with previous corrective orders. 2. Program Objectives: • To prevent the reoccurrence and eliminate any existing act, substance, matter, emission or situation, which creates a dangerous or unhealthy condition. • To prevent the reoccurrence and eliminate any existing act, substance, matter, emission or situation that threatens the public peace, health, safety and the sanitary condition of the City. • To improve the appearance of residential neighborhoods by establishing minimum standards for the maintenance of the exterior of existing dwellings. • To improve the appearance of residential neighborhoods by establishing minimum standards for the maintenance of the outdoor property surrounding existing dwellings. • To preserve the quality of the existing housing stock and neighborhoods for present and future residents. • To preserve the tax base that the housing stock provides to the City of Mounds View. 3. Program Guidelines: • All property owners in the areas identified using selection criteria in Section 1. will be sent an initial notification explaining the purpose and goals of the residential code compliance program and will be notified of the date their neighborhood will be inspected. Residential Code Compliance Program Page 2 • The initial notification letter will be sent to the respective property owners approximately 30 days in advance of the inspection time. Additionally, the initial notification will inform property owners of the availability of the Residential Code Compliance Handbook, which may provide answers to common situations. • In the event that the inspection identifies items that do not comply with adopted codes and City ordinances, property owners will be notified in compliance with the requirements set forth in the applicable codes and City ordinances, and will be provided a reasonable time frame to bring the items into compliance. Item No. 2 Meeting Date: February 3, 2002 Type of Business: WS City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: James Ericson, Interim City Administrator Item Title/Subject: Discuss YMCA Operation of the Community Center and Provision of Park and Recreation Programming Services. INTRODUCTION At previous meetings of the City Council, there have been discussions regarding the YMCA’s operation of the City’s Community Center and the City’s level of satisfaction with the arrangement. As a result, staff had been directed to place this item on the February worksession for further discussion with Ms. Pat Riemersma representing the YMCA. DISCUSSION: I met personally with Ms. Riemersma, District Vice President for the Northwest YMCA, on January 17, 2003. She indicated that communication between the City and the YMCA had been minimal and agreed that the formation of an advisory committee consisting of the center manager, the Northwest YMCA Executive Director, the City Administrator, the Finance Director and two Councilmembers or their appointees, as indicated in the agreement between the City and the YMCA, would be a step towards improving the communication between the Y and the City.. Ms. Riemersma will be attending the worksession and will be available to discuss any concerns the Council may have regarding its operation of the City’s recreation programs and oversight of the community center. RECOMMENDATION: Discuss any concerns with the YMCA representative and direct staff to initiate the formation of the advisory committee as indicated in the YMCA agreement. If the Council supports the formation of the advisory committee, it should also designate two Councilmembers (or other appointees) to serve on the committee. Respectfully Submitted, James Ericson Interim City Administrator Item No. 03A Type of Business: WK WK: Work Session; PH: Public Hearing; CA: Consent Agenda; CB: Council Business City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: Mary Burg, Golf Course Manager CC: James Ericson, Interim City Administrator Item Title/Subject: Consider Golf Course Needs and Consider Operational Adjustments Date of Meeting: February 3, 2003 Introduction: As requested by the City Council, staff has prepared a review of manager schedules and compensation at metro area golf courses. Although no two facilities were found to be the same, these six courses operate a similar facility. Courses operating more than a nine-hole facility are not included in this review. Specifically stand-alone nine-hole municipal golf courses have been chosen for the comparative analysis. Discussion: All golf staff included in this analysis are considered permanent employees. Some as indicated, may have an alternative position during the winter months. Only two maintenance staff at the Highland Golf Course, City of St. Paul, are subject to lay off and receive unemployment compensation. Furthermore Highland Golf Course operates the nine separate from the eighteen, presently under construction. The survey found that each course has its own unique circumstance. The positions that are listed in this survey are only those, which are considered full time and qualify for benefits. The practice of the full time staff working extremely long hours is proven beneficial to golf operation as opposed to the use of unskilled lower paid workers. Due to the disproportionate amount of hours required during the golfing season, it is generally standard practice for the employer to offer flexible time to be used during the off-season as indicated. There were no facilities that were found to compensate the golf managers with overtime pay at time and a half. The survey found that each municipality created its own individual system for the status of the seasonal employee. The cities that have shared the golf employees have winter facilities that have additional staffing requirements. Specifically, St. Paul and Roseville utilizes staff at its ski area and ice rinks facilities. New Brighton has one staff report to Park & Recreation. During which time that person assists with rink maintenance, and also oversees the repair of the golf course equipment. New Brighton does not use a timesheet to record hours worked. Rather exempt employees record only time for the exception of sick time or vacation time use. The Golf Manager position has a function throughout the entire year. During the off- season a variety of important responsibilities are carried out. Planning, marketing strategies, repair and maintenance of equipment and facility, as well as professional training opportunities are some of the aspects of the managers’ role when the course is not open for play. It is noteworthy that the Mounds View position is a Department Director level, which is unlike any other in this survey and places it in a unique category. However, in checking with other Golf Directors flexible time is used to balance the remainder of additional time worked. Recommendation: The recommendation is that the position continues with the same terms and conditions as other full time employees. The responsibilities of the golf business would be met and not disrupted. Respectfully Submitted, _____________________________________ Mary Burg, Golf Course Manager GOLF COURSE MANAGER SURVEY 2/3/2003 Course/City Title Course Size (par) Golf Range Manager Maximum Monthly Salary Months Paid Full Time Staff/Shared Seasonally (all receive FT benefits) Flex Time Bridges /MV Manager 32 X $5665 12 3 X Brightwood Hills/New Brighton Operations Manager 30 X $5253 10/12 1/1 New Hope Superintendent 27 $4764 12 1 X Cedarholm/ Roseville Superintendent 27 $4635 12 1/3 X Birnamwood/ Burnsville Superintendent 27 $4770 12 2/1 X Highland/ St.Paul Facility Manager 35 $4583 12/12/10 2/3/2 X Item No. 6 Meeting Date: February 3, 2002 Type of Business: WS City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: James Ericson, Interim City Administrator Item Title/Subject: Discuss and Review the City’s Personnel Manual Pertaining to probationary Periods, Flex Time, Expense Reimbursements and Use of the Stanton Mean for Compensation Study Purposes INTRODUCTION The Council has requested that this item be placed on the worksession agenda for discussion. DISCUSSION: 1. Probationary Periods. In December of 2002, the City Council authorized the adoption of Resolution 5915, which, among other things, revised the policy regarding probationary periods. The policy currently states, “New, probationary employees may be terminated by the City with cause at any time, subject to the right of veterans.” The change that was made was to remove language indicating that probationary employees are “at will employees” and can be terminated “without cause.” It is my understanding that the change was made to be consistent with employment case law. 2. Flex Time. Section 3.05 of the Personnel Manual states the following about flex time and its use: Flex Time Policy is an attempt to establish a consistent method of tracking regularly scheduled work hours and additional non-regularly scheduled work hours which applied to exempt status employees. Flex time may be earned and accrued, one hour for each extra hour worked over a 40 hour work week. Flex time should be used within a reasonable period from when it was earned; preferably during the same week. Flex time can be used in increments of a maximum of 16 hours in a two-week pay period. Use of Flex time must be approved by the employee’s Supervisor prior to its use. Recording of Flex time should be accurately maintained be each employee. Accrued flex time balances will be reduced to forty hours on December 31 of each calendar year. (This reduction does not apply to Golf Course exempt status personnel). Upon an employee’s termination from the City, there will be no pay-out of Flex Time accruals, either partial or total. 3. Use of the Stanton Mean. The City uses the Stanton Group as its benchmark for establishing compensation and for compensation analyses and pay equity analyses. Section 3.01 of the Personnel Manual indicates that maximum salaries are equal to the “to 100% of the mean of the DCA Stanton Group 5 cities contained in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Salary Survey published annually by the DCA Stanton Group.” This is outdated in the sense that we are no longer in the Stanton Group 5, but rather, Stanton Group 6. (Group 5 cities are those with populations in excess of 25,000.) I contacted the League of Minnesota Cities and Labor Relations Associates regarding the availability of other compensation benchmarks. Both LMC and Labor Relations indicate that most cities use the Stanton Group, referring to it as “the standard” in compensation analyses. While the City is free to establish its own group of comparable cities for compensation analyses, the League cautions against this especially if the City has union contracts or collective bargaining agreements in place. It was communicated to me that unions and collective bargaining units prefer the consistency that the Stanton Group provides throughout the metro area. One Councilmember indicated that it made no sense to compare ourselves to cities having populations twice our own. A valid point to be sure. In response to that concern, a more select list of cities were used for the 1997 and subsequent analyses—Arden Hills, Lino Lakes, Mendota Heights, North St. Paul, Prior Lake, Robbinsdale, Rosemount, Savage and Vadnais Heights. 4. Expense Reimbursements. Section 1.50 of the Personnel Manual addresses reimbursements incurred by employees while traveling on behalf of the City. It reads: REIMBURSEMENT: Employees must complete an expense statement form and attach receipts for any allowable meals, lodging, transportation and/or parking expenses incurred. After obtaining Supervisor approval, submit the completed form to the Finance Department. All expenses must be supported by receipts. The City’s Purchasing Policy further addresses employee reimbursements, but neither the purchasing policy nor the personnel manual place time limitations on when expenses need to be submitted for reimbursement. Some employees hold off on submitting expense reimbursements until enough are accumulated to make reimbursement worthwhile as well as to minimize paperwork. An example of this would be an employee submitting two or three months worth of mileage reimbursements, with perhaps four separate entries totaling $30.00. Other employees may forget to submit an expense reimbursement immediately after incurring the expense. In either case, delay does not cause the finance department a problem. If the Council would like, we could add language in both areas to suggest that expense reimbursement requests be submitted promptly or when practicable. RECOMMENDATION: Discuss the above issues and direct staff to make whatever revisions or corrections the Council feels appropriate. Respectfully Submitted, James Ericson Interim City Administrator Item No. 7 Meeting Date: February 3, 2002 Type of Business: WS City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: James Ericson, Interim City Administrator Item Title/Subject: Review Additional Responses from Executive Search Firms Regarding the City Administrator Position INTRODUCTION: The Council has requested that this item be placed on the worksession agenda for discussion. DISCUSSION: Please refer to the summary I presented at your last meeting on January 27 as well as the information offered by Councilmember Marty. To facilitate discussion, it may be beneficial to bring to the council meeting the eight proposals in your possession. I will have my copies available for review if necessary. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Council consider the options and discuss how you would like to proceed to fill the City Administrator position. Respectfully Submitted, James Ericson Interim City Administrator Item No. 8 Meeting Date: February 3, 2002 Type of Business: WS City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: James Ericson, Interim City Administrator Item Title/Subject: Review Resolution 5555 INTRODUCTION: Mayor Linke has asked that the City Council review Resolution 5555 at this worksession meeting. This resolution was adopted in part to reaffirm the role of the City Administrator as well as to reaffirm and further define the communication process between employees and the City Council. Much of the basis for this resolution is found in the City’s Charter. DISCUSSION: Resolution 5555 does not in any way prohibit or restrict City Council members from contacting or speaking directly with employees. The resolution does, however, indicate that employee communication to the Council be channeled through the City Administrator. If the City Council finds this policy to be too restrictive, a new resolution could be adopted which would supersede Resolution 5555 to the extent pertaining to employee communication with the City Council. But for what it’s worth, I believe—in general--the policy of channeling communication through the city administrator is worth preserving. Bypassing direct supervisors, department directors and the administrator with information to the Council could result in a management staff unaware of important matters, delaying potentially necessary and timely action or response. Should employees be prohibited from speaking to the Council? No. Should an employee be reprimanded for speaking to the Council? Again, No. Should an employee however use common sense and follow the “chain of command” in most cases? Yes. Doing so promotes an organized, informed and responsive workplace. RECOMMENDATION: If the Council feels that Resolution 5555 is inappropriate or no longer serves its intended purpose, the Council may rescind the resolution. If the Council would like to modify or clarify the intent of Resolution 5555, a new resolution could be drafted to amend specific sections or parts of the original resolution. Or, Resolution 5555 can stand on its own unchanged with or without a new resolution drafted to articulate the Councils position on communication. Respectfully Submitted, James Ericson RESOLUTION NO. 5555 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION CONCERNING ADMINISTRATION OF CITY AFFAIRS AND REAFFIRMING RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE CITY CLERK-ADMINISTRATOR WHEREAS, the City of Mounds View conducted a retreat with the City Council and City staff concerning various City of Mounds View issues; and WHEREAS, the relationship between the City Council and the City Clerk- Administrator in the City was discussed; and WHEREAS, the City Council has concluded that it is in the best interest of the City to have clearly defined supervisory responsibilities; and WHEREAS, the City Council does hereby reaffirm that all Department Directors shall be supervised directly and exclusively by the City Clerk- Administrator; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to reaffirm the scope of duties and responsibilities of the City Clerk-Administrator pursuant to the Mounds View City Charter; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to clarify and set forth its understanding of the administration of City affairs and the scope of duties and responsibilities of the City Clerk-Administrator for the City of Mounds View. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT, the City Council of the City of Mounds View, after thorough review and consideration of the City’s Charter and past practices concerning the administration of City affairs, reaffirms that the City Clerk-Administrator for the City of Mounds View, with such duties as set forth in Chapter 6 of the Mounds View City Charter, shall be the administrative officer of the City appointed by the Council to supervise the administration of the City pursuant to the City Charter and Council action. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT, the City Council of the City of Mounds View does hereby reaffirm its direction to the City Clerk-Administrator to supervise its Department Directors and direct its Department Directors to report directly to the City Clerk-Administrator in performing the day-to-day business of the City, as directed by the majority of the City Council. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT, the City Council of the City of Mounds View establishes the policy that all communication between City staff and Department Directors shall be forwarded to the City Council through the City Clerk-Administrator who is acting as the chief administrative officer of the City. Such a policy reflects the procedures for the administration of City affairs as set forth in Chapter 6 of the Mounds View City Charter, as well as the intended administrative procedures desired by the City Council. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED THAT, the City Council of the City of Mounds View states that this adopted policy is a reaffirmation of the responsibilities and duties set forth in the Mounds View City Charter and the desires of the City Council, and that any policies of the City or City Code provisions in conflict with such intent of the Council, shall be reviewed and modified to reflect the resolve of the City Council. Adopted this 9th day of April, 2001. Attest: ________________________________ Richard Sonterre, Mayor (SEAL) _____________________________ Kathleen Miller, City Clerk-Administrator Motion By: Gary Quick Second By: Roger Stigney Sontere: Aye Quick: Aye Stigney: Aye Marty: Aye Thomas: Aye Item No. 9 Meeting Date: February 3, 2002 Type of Business: WS City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: James Ericson, Interim City Administrator Item Title/Subject: Review Research Regarding Legal Representation Requests for Proposals. INTRODUCTION: The Council has requested that this item be placed on the worksession agenda for discussion. DISCUSSION: The City has received copies of Legal Representation RFPs from the following communities: Roseville, Chanhassen, St. Louis Park, Cold Spring, Farmington, Brooklyn Center and Red Wing. RECOMMENDATION: If the Council agrees that it would be in the City’s best interest to prepare an RFP for legal representation, I can draft something for your review based on the attached examples. Given everything else going on, however, I would be unable to present a draft back to the Council until your next worksession meeting on March 3, 2003. Respectfully Submitted, ___________________________ James Ericson Interim City Administrator Item No. 10 Meeting Date: February 3, 2002 Type of Business: WS City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Honorable Mayor and City Council From: James Ericson, Interim City Administrator Item Title/Subject: Discuss the Continued Need for a Human Resources Committee INTRODUCTION: The Council has requested that this item be placed on the worksession agenda for discussion. DISCUSSION: The Human Resources Committee was established by the City Council with the adoption of Resolution 5498, December 11, 2000. The Committee is comprised of the City Administrator, the Assistant City Administrator, two members of the City Council and the Department Head from the affected department. The intent of the Committee was to address and resolve issues pertaining to human resources issues before they reached the Council for consideration, in an effort to achieve some level of consensus by the time an issue reached the Council agenda. One drawback of the committee was that it created another level of bureaucracy and often extended the time it took to get Council approval on certain matters. The Committee has not met in some period of time. RECOMMENDATION: Staff has no recommendation either way regarding this issue. If the Council were to agree to eliminate the committee, it could do so simply by adopting a resolution indicating as much, referencing the original resolution adopted in 2000. Respectfully Submitted, James Ericson Interim City Administrator