HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packets - 2002/02/25 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 2002
7:00 p.m.
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL: Sonterre, Quick, Marty, Stigney, Thomas
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
4. 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.
5. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
6. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Just and Correct Claims
B. Licenses for Approval
C. Resolution No. 5704 Approving Seasonal Public Works Positions
D. Resolution No. 5713 Approving Seasonal Golf Course Positions
E. Resolution No. 5716 Approving the Purchase of Replacement Gates for the
Public Works Facility
F. Resolution No. 5717 Approving the Purchase of a Replacement Mower for
the Golf Course
G. Resolution No. 5718 Approving the Purchase of two Replacement Bobcat
Skidsteer Loaders
H. Resolution No. 5719 Approving the Purchase of Windows Based Computer
Software to Operate the HVAC System at the Community Center
I. Resolution No. 5714 Approving Attendance at Out of State Training for Use
of Night Vision Equipment-Training and Equipment Grant Funded
J. Set a Public Hearing for 7:05 pm, Monday, March 11, 2002, to Consider the
First Reading and Introduction of Ordinance 693, an Ordinance Amending
Section 1106.03 of the Zoning Code Pertaining to Accessory Structures
7. COUNCIL BUSINESS
7:05 A. Public Hearing and Consideration of Resolution 5703 Regarding the Longview
Estates Preliminary Plat, Mounds View Planning Case MA01-001 - Ericson
B. Consideration of Resolution 5706, a Resolution Revoking the Business License
for Gas ‘n Splash, Located at 2525 County Highway 10 – Ericson
C. Introduction and First Reading of Ordinance 694, an Ordinance Amending
Chapter 607 of the Mounds View Municipal Code Relating to Nuisances –
Anderson
City Council Agenda
February 25, 2002
Page 2
7. COUNCIL BUSINESS (Continued)
D. Discussion of Resolution 5715 authorizing the purchase of three police
vehicles.
E. Petition for the City Council to Hear the Grievance Filed by Marge Norquist
8. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS
9. REPORTS
10. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. January 28, 2002 City Council Meeting Minutes
B. February 11, 2002 City Council Meeting Minutes
11. CLOSED SESSION TO DISCUSS PENDING/THREATENED LITIGATION
12. Next Council Work Session: March 4, 2002
Next Council Meeting: March 11, 2002
13. ADJOURNMENT
RESOLUTION NO. 5704
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Approving Public Works 2002 Seasonal Positions
WHEREAS, the City of Mounds View Public Works Department does have
a need to hire seasonal employees, and
WHEREAS, Resolution 5546 states that seasonal positions must be
approved by the Mounds View City Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City
Council does hereby approve the seasonal positions, wages and employment
dates for the Public Works Department as listed in Exhibit A.
Adopted this 25th day of February, 2002.
ATTEST:
Richard Sonterre, Mayor
SEAL Kathleen F. Miller, City Administrator
Motion:
Second:
Sonterre:
Quick:
Stigney:
Marty:
Thomas:
RESOLUTION 5704
Approving Public Works 2002 Seasonal Positions
EXHIBIT A
Public Works and Parks Seasonal Workers will perform labor that includes skilled
and unskilled tasks. Employees will operate equipment such as mowers, line
trimmers, dragging equipment and rollers.
Ten (10) seasonal positions will be filled, with new hires starting at the hourly rate
of $9.50/hr with the possibility of advancing to $10.00/hr after one month of
satisfactory performance. Returning seasonal workers will be compensated at
$10.25/hr. Each position will work 40 hours per week. Overtime will not exceed a
total of 50 hours for the entire season.
These seasonal positions will remain on staff for not more than six months
RESOLUTION NO. 5713
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Approving Golf Course 2002 Seasonal Positions
WHEREAS, the City of Mounds View Golf Course does have a need to
hire seasonal employees, and
WHEREAS, Resolution 5546 says that seasonal positions must be
approved by the Mounds View City Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City
Council does hereby approve the seasonal positions, wages and employment
dates for the Golf Course as listed in Exhibit A.
Adopted this 25th day of February 2002.
ATTEST:
Richard Sonterre, Mayor
SEAL Kathleen F. Miller, City Administrator
Motion:
Second:
Sonterre:
Quick:
Stigney:
Marty:
Thomas:
RESOLUTION 5713
Approving Golf Course Seasonal Positions
EXHIBIT A
Position Wage Start Date End Date Hours/wk
Equip Mgr (1) $11.00 Mar 1 Nov 1 32
Tech (1) $9.75 Apr 1 Dec 1 30-40
Tech (1) $9.00 Apr 1 Dec 1 30-40
Tech (2) $9.00 Apr 1 Dec 1 20-30
Tech (1) $8.00 Jun 1 Sept 15 20-30
Irrigation Tech (1) $13.00 Mar 1 Dec 1 40
Beverage Cart (4) $6.50 Apr 1 Sept 30 16-20
Clubhouse Sup (1) $11.50 Apr 1 Nov 1 30-40
Clubhouse (1) $9.00 May 15 Sept 15 40
Clubhouse (1) $8.00 Apr 1 Nov 1 20-30
Clubhouse (1) $7.00 May 15 Sept 15 20-30
Range Picker (5) $7.00 Apr 1 Nov 15 16-30
Item No. 6E
Type of Business: CA
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: Greg Lee, Director of Public Works
Item Title/Subject: Resolution No. 5716 Approving the Purchase of
Replacement Gates for the Public Works Facility
Meeting Date: February 25, 2002
Background:
For the past several years there has been an operational problem with the gate
at the Public Works Facility. The problem is due to the grade of the parking lot
and the general design of the gate.
When the gate was designed and installed, a trench was created on the east side
of the gate to allow the gate to open and close. This was necessary due to the
grades within the parking lot and the extraordinary long length of the gate. During
the winter months, the trench becomes filled with snow and ice making it difficult
to open. This causes undo wear on the motors and controls. The motor and
controls are currently inoperable and in need of repair / replacement.
The cost to replace the motors and controls would be approximately $1,500.
However, this would not address the design issue of the gate which is the real
cause of the problem. The combination of not having a clear passage for the
length of the gate along with having an oversized gate would continue to apply
resistance on the new control/motor and would prematurely require their
replacement.
A design solution was therefore sought. Altering the elevation of the par king lot
was investigated. However, due to the elevation of the parking lot and street
height and the existence of the fuel station, the parking lot could not be altered to
compensate for the gate length. The solution was to redesign the gate so that it
consists of two smaller separate sections, located on each side of the driveway
entrance. This new design will address the problems that have occurred with the
existing gate. The replaced gates will reduce the overall load and resistance thus
create an ease of operation that will reduce the strain on the clutches and
motors. The end result will be that the gates open and close smoother and faster
and the motor and clutches will have an increased longevity.
The existing gate will be salvaged and reused b y mounting it along an existing
section of fence at the Public Works Facility. This will allow Public Works to open
this section of fence to stockpile snow during winter months. It will be non -
motorized (manually opened and closed) and other than when in u se, it will be
locked at all times.
The replacement of the gate was reviewed and discuss in June of 2001. For
budgeting purposes, a quote was obtained at that time. The cost estimate for
such a project was estimated to be approximately $12,000.00. With this
information and planning for contingencies, an amount of $15,000.00 was
budgeted in 2002 for replacement of the gate with opener.
A total of three bids were received to replace the gate. The low bidder was
Century Fence. The bids are as follows:
Century Fence $ 8,190.00
Crow Fence & Wire Company $ 8,310.00
Dakota Fence of Minnesota $10,400.00
The final adopted 2002 budget for replacement of the gate produced a reduction
in fund 730-4826-7030 from the original proposed amount of $15,000.00 to
$7,000.00. Unfortunately, based on the bids received, $7,000.00 will not be
enough money to replace the gate. Staff proposes that the remaining necessary
funds ($1,190.00) be taken from fund 730 -4823-5160. This fund is for system
maintenance for the Sewer Division. A recent analysis of this account indicates
that the estimated Sewer Division maintenance costs to be performed in 2002
will be under the budgeted amount.
Staff would like to act on this matter as soon as possible. The gate is currently
not operating correctly and unfortunately remains unlocked at all times.
Equipment and impounded vehicles are stored outside at the Public Works
Facility. Unable to protect these items with an operating gate poses a security
issue and raises liability concerns for the City.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the City Council approve a contract with Century Fence in
the amount of $8,190.00 for the replacement of the gate at the Public Works
Facility. This amount includes the gate, openers, and all necessary part s and
equipment for the gate. It also includes salvaging the existing gate by reinstalling
it into the existing fence.
Respectfully Submitted,
Greg Lee, Director of Public Works
RESOLUTION NO. 5716
APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF REPLACEMENT GATES FOR THE
PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
WHEREAS, for the past several years there has been an operational
problem with the gate at the Public Works Facility; and
WHEREAS, the replacement of the gate was budgeted for in 2002; and
WHEREAS, a total of three bids were received to replace the gate; and
WHEREAS, the low bidder was Century Fence in the amount of
$8,190.00; and
WHEREAS, $7,000.00 was budgeted for the replacement of the gate from
fund 730-4826-7030; and
WHEREAS, $1,190.00 is available from the Sewer Division fund 730-
4823-5160;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, THAT the Mounds View City
Council does hereby approve a contract with Century Fence in the amount of
$8,190.00 for the replacement of the gate at the Public Works Facility.
Adopted this 25th day of February 2002.
________________________________
Richard Sonterre, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________________
Kathleen F. Miller, City Administrator
Motion by:
Second:
Sonterre:
Stigney:
Quick:
Marty:
Thomas:
Item No. 6F
Type of Business: CA
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: Greg Lee, Director of Public Works
Item Title/Subject: Resolution No. 5717 Approving the Purchase of a
Replacement Mower for the Golf Course
Meeting Date: February 25, 2002
Background:
In 1995, the City purchased a Toro 455-D Rotary Mower for use at the Bridges
Golf Course. This mower has been in use for six years and has reached the end
of its economical useful life cycle. The metal on the mowing deck has
deteriorated due to sand erosion. The engine is in need of major repairs. This
mower was scheduled to be replaced in 2001.
The Toro model 455-D has proven to be a safe, reliable, and an overall user-
friendly mower. Staff feels that this brand and model has met and exceeded the
expectations of the functions it was intended to perform. Based on past
experiences with other mowers, staff also believes that the Toro 455-D has been
a cost effective choice for the City.
Given this, staff recommends that the City Council approve the purchase of a
2002 Toro Groundsmaster 455-D. This has been budgeted for and would be
purchased under state contract. Thus it would forego the requirement to acquire
additional bids. The state contract quote is as follows:
Toro Groundsmaster 455-D (55 hp diesel engine) 4WD
Rotary Mower, 10.5’ cutting width, 2 post ROPS,
filter kit & service manual $35,263.00
Toro leaf mulcher kit $ 810.00
New traction steering tire & rim $ 446.00
Air intake pre-cleaner attachment $ 200.00
Sub Total $36,719.00
Less trade in value on 1995 Toro 455-D ($ 8,500.00)
Sub Total $28,219.00
Sales Tax $ 1,834.24
TOTAL $30,053.24
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the purchase of a 2002 Toro
Groundsmaster 455-D mower along with the aforementioned accessories under
state contract in the amount of $36,719.00 and approve the trade in of the 1995
Toro 455-D mower at a credited value of $8,500.00. Including tax, this represents
a net City cost of $30,053.24.
Respectfully Submitted,
Greg Lee, Director of Public Works
RESOLUTION NO. 5717
APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF A REPLACEMENT MOWER FOR THE
GOLF COURSE
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
WHEREAS, the City Council had previously approved the purchase of a
1995 Toro 455-D mower; and
WHEREAS, said mower has been in use for six years and has reached its
economical useful life; and
WHEREAS, said mower has a the trade in value of $8,500.00; and
WHEREAS, a 2002 Toro Groundsmaster 455-D mower was budgeted for
and the 1995 model scheduled to be replaced in 2001; and
WHEREAS, said mower would be purchased under state contract and
thus forego the requirement to acquire additional bids; and
WHEREAS, there are desired accessories that will make the mower more
useful and increase its longevity; and
WHEREAS, said accessories include a leaf mulcher kit, new traction
steering tire and rim, and an air intake pre-cleaner attachment;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, THAT the Mounds View City Council
does hereby approve the purchase of a 2002 Toro Groundsmaster 455-D mower
along with the aforementioned accessories under state contract in the amount of
$36,719.00 and approve the trade in of the 1995 Toro 455-D mower at a credited
value of $8,500.00. Including tax, this represents a net city cost of $30,053.24.
Adopted this 25th day of February 2002.
________________________________
Richard Sonterre, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________________
Kathleen F. Miller, City Administrator
Motion by:
Second:
Sonterre:
Stigney:
Quick:
Marty:
Thomas:
Item No. 6G
Type of Business: CA
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: Greg Lee, Director of Public Works
Item Title/Subject: Resolution No. 5718 Approving the Purchase of
Two Replacement Bobcat Skidsteer Loaders
Meeting Date: February 25, 2002
Background:
The City of Mounds View has ownership of two Bobcat skidsteer loaders which
are scheduled for replacement in early 2002. These are extremely versatile
pieces of equipment and are indispensable for any Public Works operation.
It has recently come to my attention that the City has been taking advantage of a
state offered program that allows government agencies to replace their skidsteer
loaders on an annual basis. This has been an ongoing program for the last three
years.
The state program allows governmental agencies the opportunity to purchase
new skidsteer loaders at state contract prices. It also offers high trade-in value on
previously purchased loaders.
The 2002 state contract quote is as follows:
Bobcat loader $ 19,450.50
Less trade in value on last year’s model ($17,950.00)
Sub Total $ 1,500.00
Sales Tax $ 97.50
TOTAL $ 1,597.50
This represents an incredible value and cost saving to the City. Details include:
1. The Public Works Department currently utilizes each loader from three
hundred (300) to four hundred (400) hours annually. This translates into
extremely low total equipment use cost of 4 to 5 dollars per hour.
2. With this extensive use, the tires would need to be replaced annually. This
alone represents a cost of $600 for a good set of tires.
3. In comparison, an eight hour Bobcat loader rental is approximately $180-
$200.
Clearly the City derives a benefit by participating in this state program.
Historically this was viewed as a replacement item that was budgeted for and
handled as a purchase of approximately $1600. Given the low dollar amount
actually expended, it was never brought to the Council for approval. However,
based on the draft Purchasing Policy being considered, staff wanted to view this
as a purchase of nearly $20,000 and therefore seek City Council approval.
As previously mentioned, there are two skidsteer loaders scheduled for
replacement in 2002; one at this time and the other in April. If approved, both of
these would be purchased under state contract and will retain a full one-year
warranty.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the purchase of two Bobcat
skidsteer loaders, each to be purchased separately under state contract in the
amount of $19,450.50 and approve the trade in of the two Bobcat skidsteer
loaders currently owned by the City at a credited value of $17,950.50 each.
Including tax, this represents a net City cost of $1,597.50 per skidsteer loader.
Respectfully Submitted,
Greg Lee, Director of Public Works
RESOLUTION NO. 5718
APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF TWO REPLACEMENT BOBCAT
SKIDSTEER LOADERS
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
WHEREAS, the City had previously participated in a state skidsteer
replacement program; and
WHEREAS, said program allows governmental agencies the opportunity
to purchase new skidsteer loaders at state contract prices; and
WHEREAS, said contract prices are $19,450.50 and trade in values are
$17,950.50; and
WHEREAS, replacement of the two Bobcat skidsteer loaders was
budgeted for in 2002; and
WHEREAS, the City recognizes the value of participating in the state
program;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, THAT the Mounds View City Council
does hereby approve the purchase of two Bobcat skidsteer loaders, each to be
purchased separately under state contract in the amount of $19,450.50 and
approve the trade in of the two Bobcat skidsteer loaders currently owned by the
City at a credited value of $17,950.50 each. Including tax, this represents a net
City cost of $1,597.50 per skidsteer loader.
Adopted this 25th day of February, 2002.
________________________________
Richard Sonterre, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________________
Kathleen F. Miller, City Administrator
Motion by:
Second:
Sonterre:
Stigney:
Quick:
Marty:
Thomas:
Item No. 6H
Type of Business: CA
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: Greg Lee, Director of Public Works
Item Title/Subject: Resolution No. 5719 Approving the Purchase of
Windows Based Computer Software to Operate
the HVAC System at the Community Center
Meeting Date: February 25, 2002
Background:
The Heating, Ventilating and Air Conditioning System (HVAC) at the Community
Center is currently monitored and adjusted by a computer. Staff has recently
installed software that allows access to this computer from computers at the
Public Works Building. This is very convenient and saves staff hours by allowing
them to monitor and adjust the system without actually being on site. When the
HVAC computer system was purchased, the software was Dos based and was
somewhat outdated. Dos has limitations running on the City’s computer network
and is very cumbersome to use.
The company that supplied the software now has a new Windows based
program to replace the Dos version. The new Windows program would allow staff
to view the entire system in a graphical interface. It should also be noted that the
Windows version would run better with the City’s existing network. Due to a new
software release promotion the cost of the upgrade is currently set at $2,025.
However this price is only good thru February; after that the software returns to
its normal cost of $6,000. The cost to upgrade at this time would be a substantial
savings versus upgrading at a later date.
The existing Dos based software is not very user friendly. Several screens need
to be opened from the main menu screen to navigate through the system. The
screens are layered on top of each other and you have to switch between them
to see information on another piece of equipment. The windows version will allow
staff to see everything from one graphical representation of the equipment that is
being monitored. The new software is a point and click environment verses
typing in commands and remembering key strokes. The new software is
designed to run on computers that use Windows as the operating system. The
computer at the Community Center is running on the Windows NT operating
system, so there are no compatibility problems with the upgrade.
This upgrade was not included in the 2002 budget for the Community Center. It
was anticipated that the City would budget for the new Windows software when it
became available. What wasn’t anticipated was the large disparity in the software
price from the promotional new release cost of only $2,025 versus the normal
cost of $6,000.
An account within the Community Center budget would be utilized as the funding
source to purchase the new Windows based computer software to operate the
HVAC system at the Community Center. Because there is no guarantee that
there will be future reductions in price, staff recommends taking advantage of the
significant price reduction at this time.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the purchase of a Windows
based computer software to operate the HVAC system at the Community Center
at a cost of $2,025.
Respectfully Submitted,
Greg Lee, Director of Public Works
RESOLUTION NO. 5719
APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF WINDOWS BASED COMPUTER
SOFTWARE TO OPERATE THE HVAC SYSTEM AT THE COMMUNITY
CENTER
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
WHEREAS, the City Council had previously approved the purchase of a
computer system to monitor and adjust the Heating, Ventilating and Air
Conditioning System (HVAC) at the Community Center; and
WHEREAS, said system is Dos based making it somewhat outdated and
difficult to use; and
WHEREAS, said Dos System has limitations running on the City’s network
and is very cumbersome to use; and
WHEREAS, a new Windows based program has been developed to
replace the Dos version; and
WHEREAS, said new software has a promotion price of $2,025 only good
thru February; after that the software returns to its normal cost of $6,000; and
WHEREAS, there is a desire to upgrade to the new Windows based
software at this time and take advantage of the promotion price; and
WHEREAS, staff has explored the use of the general software upgrade
account in the MIS budget and feels this purchase should not significantly impact
the MIS budget,
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, THAT the Mounds View City Council
does hereby approve the purchase of the new Windows based computer
software to operate the HVAC system at the Community Center at a cost of
$2,025.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, THAT funds in the amount
of $2,025 to purchase the new Windows based computer software to operate the
HVAC system at the Community Center will be derived from an account within
the Community Center budget.
Adopted this 25th day of February 2002.
________________________________
Richard Sonterre, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________________
Kathleen F. Miller, City Administrator
Motion by:
Second:
Sonterre:
Stigney:
Quick:
Marty:
Thomas:
Item No.6I
Type of Business: CB
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: Tim Brennan, Deputy Police Chief/Acting Chief
Item Title/Subject: Resolution # 5714 Authorizing Out of State Training in
the Use of Night Vision Equipment for Investigator Tom
Kinney
Date of Report: February 25, 2002
NATURE OF REPORT: The Mounds View Police Department has secured a Grant
that will award a night vision equipment kit and reimburse all training, travel, lodging and
some meal expenses. Upon completion of the training, the Night Vision Kit will be sent
to the Mounds View Police Department for immediate use. The training is being offered
in Orlando Florida on March 25-26, 2002. Investigator Tom Kinney was asked, and has
agreed to receive this training and oversee future utilization of this night vision
equipment. The Mounds View City Council has directed that all out of state training
requests come before them for prior approval. This is an opportunity for the Mounds
View Police Department to obtain otherwise unaffordable equipment and training at little
or no cost.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the authorization for Investigator Tom
Kinney to attend out of state training in the use and implementation of Night Vision
Equipment being offered on March 25-26, 2002 in Orlando Florida.
Respectfully submitted,
_____________________
Tim Brennan
Deputy Police Chief/Acting Chief
RESOLUTION NO. 5714
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING INVESTIGATOR TOM KINNEY TO ATTEND
TRAINING IN THE USE OF NIGHT VISION EQUIPMENT IN ORLANDO, FL
WHEREAS, the City Council has directed that all out-of-State travel for
Conferences and training be presented to the Council for approval;
WHEREAS, the police department has secured a grant that will award a Night
Vision Kit and provide and reimburse for all training expenses, transportation, lodging
and some meals;
WHEREAS, Training in the use and implementation of this equipment is being
offered in Orlando Florida on March 25-26th, 2002;
WHEREAS, Investigator Tom Kinney was asked to attend this training and
oversee future utilization of Night Vision Equipment within the police department;
WHEREAS, Investigator Kinney has agreed to receive this training and take
responsibility for oversight of this equipment;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, THAT the Mounds View City Council
does hereby authorize Investigator Kinney to attend training being offered in the use of
Night Vision Equipment on March 25-26, 2002 in Orlando Florida.
Adopted this 25th day of February 2002.
________________________________
Richard Sonterre, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________________
Kathleen F. Miller, City Administrator
Motion by:
Second:
Sonterre:
Stigney:
Marty:
Thomas:
From: Ericson, Jim
Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 3:10 PM
To: Babekuhl, Joan
Cc: Miller, Kathleen
Subject: Item 7A
Kathleen & Brian,
Here is Item 7A for the Council agenda, pertaining to the Longview Estates preliminary plat. The hard
copy of the plat has already been distributed to Council.
James Ericson
Community Development Director 763-717-4021 (phone)
City of Mounds View 763-784-3462 (fax)
2401 Highway 10 jime@rcmnet.org <mailto:jime@rcmnet.org> (e-mail)
Mounds View, MN 55112 http://www.ci.mounds-view.mn.us (web)
Item No: 7C
Meeting Date: 2/25/02
Type of Business: CB
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: First reading and introduction of Ordinance 694, amending
Chapter 607, Nuisances, of the City Code
Date of Report: February 13, 2002
Background:
At the February 4, 2002 city council work session, council approved proposed changes
to Chapter 607 of the City Code and directed staff to draft an ordinance, which
incorporated these proposed changes. There are four areas within the Nuisance Code
where the changes would occur. The first area is in the beginning, Section 607.01,
Definitions. Section 607.06, Outside parking and storage, is the next area where
changes would occur. A new Section 607.07, Vehicles Constituting a Public Nuisance,
has been created. Lastly, the section titled Enforcement, has been updated and
codified as Section 607.09
Discussion:
Ordinance 694 was written with consideration to the input received during several city
council meetings over the past year. Additionally, at the February 4, 2002 work session,
the issue of firewood stored outside in the front yard of residential properties was
brought to the attention of staff. At that meeting, staff mistakenly indicated that the
regulations pertaining to outside storage of woodpiles were located in the City’s zoning
code. After further review, it was discovered that the outside storage of wood is in fact
regulated in Section 607.03 Subd. 3 of the Nuisance code. As such, staff has included
changes to Section 607.03 Subd. 3 in Ordinance 694 for consideration by the city
council at this time.
First reading and introduction of Ordinance 694
February 25, 2002
Page 2
Recommendation:
Consideration and approval of the first reading and introduction of Ordinance 694,
amending Chapter 607, Nuisances, of the City Code.
Jeremiah Anderson
Housing/Code Enforcement Inspector
Attachment 1: Ordinance 694
ORDINANCE NO. 694
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 600, CHAPTER 607
OF THE MOUNDS VIEW MINICIPAL CODE, PERTAINING
TO NUISANCES
THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW ORDAINS:
SECTION 1. Chapter 607 of the Mounds View Municipal Code is hereby amended with
additions underlined and deletions struck out to read as follows:
SECTION:
607.07: Noise Control Regulations Vehicles Constituting a Public Nuisance
607.08: Enforcement Noise Control Regulations
607.09: Enforcement
SECTION 2. Chapter 607 Section 607.01 of the Mounds View Municipal Code is hereby
amended with additions underlined and deletions struck out to read as follows:
RULES AND DEFINITIONS: When used in this Chapter, the following words and phrases shall
have the meanings ascribed to them:
Subd. 6. FRONT YARD AREA: All that area between the front property line and a line drawn
along the front face or faces of the principle structure on the property extended to the side
property lines. The front side of the property shall be determined as specified in Title 1100
of this Code.
Subd. 7. OCCUPANT: Any person living in or in control of any dwelling unit upon property
wherein a public nuisance has been identified.
Subd. 8. IMPROVED SURFACE: A driveway or parking area constructed of asphalt, concrete,
brick or a parking area of gravel construction (according to Section 1121.09, subdivision 7
of this Code). (Ord. 620, 7-27-98)
Subd. 9. IMPROVED SURFACE, PERMANENT: Permanent improved surfaces are those
constructed of asphalt, concrete or brick. (Ord. 620, 7-27-98)
Subd. 10. MOTOR VEHICLE OR VEHICLE: Any self-propelled device in, upon, or by
which any person is or may be transported or drawn upon a highway, public street, or
body of water. Includes any device drawn by a self propelled vehicle and vehicles which
are propelled by electric power, including vehicles which obtain power from overhead
trolley wires but are not operated upon rails. However, the following are specifically
excluded:
2
a. Trailers with weight classifications of A and B (0 – 1,500 lbs. and 1,501 – 3,000 lbs.,
respectively) as provided in Minnesota Statutes. (Ord. 620, 7-27-98)
b. Manufactured, mobile, and trailer homes placed on a permanent pad located within a
properly zoned manufactured home district that are used for continuous living quarters.
c. Any vehicle moved solely by human power.
Subd. 11. VITAL COMPONENT PARTS: Those parts of the motor vehicle that are essential to
the mechanical functioning of the vehicle, including but not limited to the motor, drive train,
and wheels. (Ord. 620, 7-27-98)
Subd. 12. ABANDONED VEHICLE: A motor vehicle that has remained outdoors on property
within the City for a period of more than 48 hours on public property or has remained for a
period of more than 48 hours on private property without consent of the person in control of
such property or in an inoperable condition, unless it is kept in an enclosed garage or storage
building. It shall also mean a motor vehicle voluntarily surrendered by its owner to the City
or to a moving contractor hired by the City for its removal. A classic car or pioneer car, as
defined in Minn. Stat. § 168.10 shall not be considered an abandoned motor vehicle within
the meaning of this Section. Vehicles held under police authority or pursuant to a writ or
court order are not abandoned vehicles. Vehicles on the premises of junk yards and
automobile graveyards that are defined, maintained, and licensed in accordance with Minn.
Stat. § 161.242 are not considered abandoned vehicles.
Subd. 13. INOPERABLE CONDITION: The vehicle has no substantial potential use consistent
with its usual function, and shall include a vehicle that: a) has a missing or defective part
that is necessary for the normal operation of the vehicle, or b) is stored on blocks or jacks
or other supports.
Subd. 14. JUNK VEHICLE: A vehicle that is located outdoors on property in the city that meets
any of the following:
a. Any motor vehicle that is in inoperable condition.
b. Any motor vehicle that is partially dismantled.
c. Any motor vehicle that lacks vital component parts.
d. Any motor vehicle that is not currently registered and properly licensed
for operation with and by the State of Minnesota.
Subd. 15. UNSAFE MOTOR VEHICLE: Any vehicle located outdoors on any property or public
street within the city in which any systems including braking, steering, suspension, electrical,
lighting, motor, and drive train are not functioning or a vehicle that cannot legally be operated or is
in violation of any state, federal or local vehicle equipment or safety regulation including, but not
limited to Minn. Statutes. § 169.468 to 169.75.
Subd. 16. MPCA or AGENCY: The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency.
3
Subd. 17. DEPARTMENT: The Minnesota Department of Public Safety.
Subd. 18. REGISTERED OWNER: Any person, firm, association, or corporation, other than a
secured party, having title to a motor vehicle. If a vehicle is under lease for a term of 180 days
or more, the lessee is the registered owner if the application for renewal of the registration is sent
to the lessee.
Subd. 19. GARAGEKEEPER: An operator of a parking place or establishment, an operator of a
motor vehicle storage facility, or an operator of an establishment for the servicing, repair or
maintenance or motor vehicles.
Subd. 20. UNAUTHORIZED VEHICLE: A vehicle that is subject to removal and
impoundment pursuant to Section 607.07 Subd. 3 or Minn. Stat § 169.041 but is not a junk
vehicle or an abandoned vehicle.
Subd. 21. LEGAL RESIDENT: A person who is in control of any dwelling or dwelling unit and
said dwelling or dwelling unit is used for continuous living quarters. A person or occupant who
receives U.S mail at said dwelling or dwelling unit shall also be a legal resident of said dwelling
or dwelling unit
SECTION 3. Chapter 607 Section 607.03 Subd. 3 of the Mounds View Municipal Code is hereby
amended with additions underlined and deletions struck out to read as follows:
Subd. 3. Public Nuisances Affecting Peace And Safety: The following are declared to be
nuisances affecting public peace and safety:
. . .
g. The accumulation of any piles of wood which are not stacked or secured in a stable manner so as
to avoid collapse. The outside storage of cut wood, unless all of the following requirements
are satisfied:
(1) Shall be stored in the side or rear yard.
(2) Shall be stacked or secured in a stable manner so as to avoid collapse.
(3) Shall not exceed five (5) feet in height.
(4) Combined stacks shall not exceed a volume of five (5) feet high by ten (10) feet
wide, by twenty-five (25) feet long.
(5) Shall not be closer than five feet from side or rear property line unless screened
by a solid fence or wall.
SECTION 4. Chapter 607 Section 607.06 Subd. 1 of the Mounds View Municipal Code is hereby
amended with additions underlined and deletions struck out to read as follows:
607.06: OUTSIDE PARKING AND STORAGE:
4
Subd. 1. Definitions: When used in this Section, the following words and phrases shall have the
meanings ascribed to them in this subdivision:
a. FRONT YARD AREA: All that area between the front property line and a line drawn
along the front face or faces of the principle structure on the property extended to the side
property lines. The front side of the property shall be determined as specified in Title 1100
of this Code.
b. OCCUPANT: Any person living in or in control of any dwelling unit upon property
wherein a motor vehicle is parked.
c. IMPROVED SURFACE: An improved surface shall mean a driveway or parking area
constructed of asphalt, concrete, brick or a parking area of gravel construction (according to
Section 1121.09, subdivision 7 of this Code). (Ord. 620, 7-27-98)
d. IMPROVED SURFACE, PERMANENT: Permanent improved surfaces are those
constructed of asphalt, concrete or brick. (Ord. 620, 7-27-98)
e. VEHICLE OR VEHICLES: Any vehicle as defined in Minnesota Statutes as “… every
device in, upon, or by which any person or property is or may be transported or drawn upon
a highway …” but excluding the following: (Ord. 620, 7-27-98)
(1) Trailers with weight classifications of A and B (0 – 1,500 lbs. and 1,501 – 3,000
lbs., respectively) as provided in Minnesota Statutes. (Ord. 620, 7-27-98)
(2) Snowmobiles, and
(3) All-terrain vehicles as defined in Minnesota Statutes.
f. VITAL COMPONENT PARTS: Those parts of the motor vehicle that are essential to
the mechanical functioning of the vehicle, including but not limited to the motor, drive train,
and wheels. (Ord. 620, 7-27-98)
SECTION 5. Chapter 607 Section 607.06 Subd. 2 of the Mounds View Municipal Code is hereby
amended with additions underlined and deletions struck out to read as follows:
Subd. 2. 1. Declaration Of Nuisance:
SECTION 6. Chapter 607 Section 607.06 Subd. 3 of the Mounds View Municipal Code is hereby
amended with additions underlined and deletions struck out to read as follows:
Subd. 3. 2. Unlawful Parking And Storage:
. . .
5
c. No person shall cause, undertake, permit or allow the outside parking and storage of
vehicles on any property within the City in residentially-zoned property unless it complies
with the following requirements:
d. No person owning, driving or in charge of any vehicle with a gross weight classification
higher than “E” (6,001-9,000 lbs) as identified on the license plate and specified in
Minnesota Statutes, may cause or permit that vehicle to be parked outside or stand
continuously for more than two (2) hours on residential property or public street within a
residential zone in the City.
e. No person owning, driving or in charge of any vehicle with more than one rear axel
chassis design may cause or permit that vehicle to be parked outside or stand continuously
for more than two (2) hours on residential property or public street within a residential zone
in the City
Subd. 3. Any person who abandons a vehicle on any public or private property, without the
consent of the person in control of the property is guilty of a misdemeanor.
SECTION 7. Chapter 607 Section 607.06 Subd. 4 of the Mounds View Municipal Code is hereby
amended with additions underlined and deletions struck out to read as follows:
Subd. 4. Exceptions: The prohibitions of this Section shall not apply to the following:
. . .
c. Any recreational vehicle with a registered owner who is a legal resident of the property
where said vehicle is parked or stored shall be specifically excluded from the requirements
set forth in Subdivision 2d. and 2e. of this Section.
SECTION 8. Chapter 607 Section 607.06 Subd. 5 of the Mounds View Municipal Code is hereby
amended with additions underlined and deletions struck out to read as follows:
Subd. 5. Special Provisions – Abandoned Or Inoperable Vehicles:
a. Definitions: For purposes of this Section the following words shall have the meanings
specified below:
(1) ABANDONED VEHICLE: A motor vehicle that has remained for a period of
more than forty eight (48) hours on public property illegally or lacking vital component
parts, or that has remained for a period of more than forty eight (48) hours on private
property with or without consent of the person in control of such property, unless it is kept
in an enclosed garage or storage building. It shall also mean a motor vehicle voluntarily
surrendered by its owner to the City or to a moving contractor hired by the City for its
removal.
6
(2) INOPERABLE CONDITION: The vehicle has no substantial potential use
consistent with its usual function, and shall include a vehicle that: a) has a missing or
defective part that is necessary for the normal operation of the vehicle, or b) is stored on
blocks or jacks or other supports.
(3) JUNK VEHICLE: An inoperable motor vehicle which is partially dismantled,
which is used for sale of parts or as a source of repair or replacement parts for other
vehicles, or which is kept for scrapping, dismantling or salvage of any kind, unless such
vehicle is kept in an enclosed garage. A junk vehicle shall also be considered an abandoned
vehicle for the purpose of this Chapter.
(4) MOTOR VEHICLE OR VEHICLE: Shall have the meaning contained in
Minnesota Statutes.
(5) VITAL COMPONENT PARTS: Those parts of the motor vehicle that are
essential to the mechanical functioning of the vehicle, including but not limited to the motor,
drive train, and wheels.
SECTION 9. Chapter 607 Section 607.06 Subd. 6 of the Mounds View Municipal Code is hereby
amended with additions underlined and deletions struck out to read as follows:
Subd. 6. Vehicles constituting a Public Nuisance:
a. Abandoned And Junk Vehicles: Abandoned and junk vehicles are declared to be a public
nuisance creating a hazard to the health and safety of the public because they invite
plundering, create fire hazards, attract vermin, and present physical dangers to the safety and
well-being of children and other citizens. The accumulation and outside storage of such
vehicles is in the nature of rubbish, litter, and unsightly debris and is a blight on the
landscape and a detriment to the environment. It shall be unlawful for a person to pile, store
or keep wrecked, junked or abandoned motor vehicles on private or public property.
b. Vehicles Stopped Or Standing: Any vehicle, whether occupied or not, that is found
stopped, standing or parked in violation of any ordinance or State statute; or that is reported
stolen; or that is found impeding firefighting, snow removal or plowing or the orderly flow
of traffic, is declared to be a public nuisance.
c. Vehicles Blocking Access: Any vehicle which is impeding public road or utility repair,
construction or maintenance activities after reasonable notice of the improper activities has
been given to the vehicle owner or user at least twelve (12) hours in advance, is declared to
be a public nuisance.
d. Vehicles Without License Plates: Any vehicle shall be deemed to be a junked or
abandoned vehicle if said vehicle does not have attached thereto a valid and current license
plate issued by the proper State agency.
7
SECTION 10. Chapter 607 Section 607.06 Subd. 7 of the Mounds View Municipal Code is hereby
amended with additions underlined and deletions struck out to read as follows:
607.07 Vehicles Constituting a Public Nuisance
Subd. 7. 1. Abatement Of Vehicles: Findings and Purpose:
a. Impounding: Any police officer or other duly authorized person may order any vehicle
constituting a public nuisance to be immediately removed and/or impounded. The
impounded vehicle shall be surrendered to the duly identified owner by the towing
contractor only upon payment of the required impound, towing and storage fees.
b. Sale: Notice and sale of any vehicle impounded under this Chapter shall be conducted in
accordance with Minnesota Statutes, chapter 168B, governing the sale of abandoned motor
vehicles. (Ord. 556, 3-20-95)
a. Abandoned, Junk, and Unsafe vehicles constitute a hazard to the health and welfare of
the citizens of the City of Mounds View in that such vehicles can harbor noxious diseases,
furnish shelter and breeding places for vermin, present physical dangers to the safety and
well-being of children and other citizens, invite plundering, and create fire hazards. Motor
vehicles contain fluids that if released into the environment can and do cause significant
health risks to the citizens of Mounds View. The condition of vehicles that are abandoned,
junk, or unsafe significantly increase the likelihood that these dangerous fluids might be so
released. Abandoned, junk, or unsafe vehicles and other scrap metals also constitute a blight
on the landscape of the City and therefore a detriment to the environment. The abandonment
and retirement of vehicles and other scrap metals constitutes a waste of a valuable source of
useful metal. It is therefore in the public interest that the present accumulation of abandoned
and junk vehicles and other scrap metals be eliminated, that future abandonment of vehicles
and other scrap metals be prevented, that the expansion of existing scrap recycling facilities
be developed and that other acceptable and economically useful methods for the disposal of
abandoned and junk vehicles and other forms of scrap metal be developed.
Subd. 2. Abandoned, Junk, and Unsafe Vehicles:
a. Abandoned, junk, and unsafe vehicles are declared to be a public nuisance creating a
hazard to the health and safety of the public because they invite plundering, create fire
hazards, attract vermin, and present physical dangers to the safety and well-being of children
and other citizens. The accumulation and outside storage of such vehicles is in the nature of
rubbish, litter, and unsightly debris and is a blight on the landscape and a detriment to the
environment. No person in charge or control of any property within the City, whether as
owner, tenant, occupant, lessee, or otherwise shall store or keep abandoned, junk, and unsafe
motor vehicles on private or public property.
c. Vehicles Stopped Or Standing: Any vehicle, whether occupied or not, that is found
stopped, standing or parked in violation of any ordinance or State statute; or that is reported
stolen; or that is found impeding firefighting, snow removal or plowing or the orderly flow
8
of traffic, is declared to be a public nuisance.
d. Vehicles Blocking Access: Any vehicle which is impeding public road or utility
repair, construction or maintenance activities after reasonable notice of the improper
activities has been given to the vehicle owner or user at least twelve (12) hours in
advance, is declared to be a public nuisance.
Subd. 3. Authority to Impound Vehicles:
a. Vehicles Constituting A Public Nuisance: The Clerk-Administrator, or his or her
designee or any peace officer employed or whose services are contracted for by the
City may take into custody and impound any vehicle constituting a public nuisance
under Section 607.07 Subd. 2 of the City Municipal Code.
b. Unauthorized vehicles: The Clerk-Administrator, or his or her designee or any peace
officer employed or whose services are contracted for by the City may take into custody
and impound any unauthorized vehicle under Minn. Stat. § 169.041.
Subd 4. When a vehicle may be impounded without prior notice:
a. A motor vehicle may be impounded with or without citation without giving notice
to its owner only under the following circumstances:
(1) In a public location not governed by Minn. Stat. § 169.041:
a. When the vehicle is impending or is likely to impede the normal flow
of vehicular or pedestrian traffic; or
b. When the vehicle poses an immediate danger to the public safety; or
c. When the vehicle is parked in violation of snow emergency removal
routes; or
d. When a peace officer or other agent authorized by the City of Mounds
View has probable cause to believe that the vehicle constitutes evidence of
a crime, or contains evidence of a crime, if impoundment is reasonably
necessary in such instance to obtain or preserve evidence; or
e. When the person driving, operating or in physical control of the vehicle
is taken into custody and the vehicle is impounded for safe keeping; or
f. When the vehicle is parked in a handicap transfer zone when said
vehicle does not properly display a handicapped parking permit.
g. When the vehicle is obstructing firefighting, or firefighting equipment.
9
h. Nothing in this Section shall be construed to authorize seizure of a
vehicle without a warrant where a warrant would otherwise be required.
Subd. 5. When a vehicle may be impounded after notice:
a. A vehicle not impounded under Section 607.07 Subd. 4. may be impounded after a
notice of violation described in Section 607.09 Subd 3 has been served upon the owner of
the property where the vehicle is located and an additional notice similar to that in
Section 607.09 Subd. 4(b) is securely posted on the vehicle. Said vehicle shall not be
impounded until a period of seventy two (72) hours has elapsed after the initial posting of
the notice on the vehicle, excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays for the
following reasons:
(1) When such vehicle, whether occupied or not, is found stopped, standing or
parked in violation of any City ordinance.
(2) When such vehicle is determined to constitute a public nuisance, as defined in
Section 607.07 Subd. 2.
Subd. 6. Sale; waiting periods:
a. Sale after 15 days: An impounded vehicle is eligible for disposal or sale under Section
607.07 Subd. 10, 15 days after notice to the owner, it the vehicle is deemed to be:
(1) A junk vehicle, except that it may have a valid current registration plate and still
be eligible for disposal or sale under this subdivision; or
(2) An abandoned or unsafe vehicle.
b. Sale after 45 Days: An impounded vehicle is eligible for disposal or sale under section
607.07 Subd. 10, 45 days after notice to the owner, if the vehicle is determined to be an
unauthorized vehicle.
Subd. 7. Notice of Taking and Sale:
a. Contents; notice given within five days: When an impounded vehicle is taken into
custody, the City or impound lot operator taking it into custody shall give notice of the
taking within five days. The notice shall:
(1) Set forth the date and place of the taking; the year, make, model and serial
number of the impounded motor vehicle if the information can be reasonably
obtained; and the place where the vehicle is being held;
(2) Inform the owner and any lienholders of their right to reclaim the vehicle
under Section 607.07 Subd. 8; and
10
(3) State that failure of the owner or leinholders to exercise their right to reclaim
the vehicle and contents within the appropriate time allowed under 607.07 Subd. 6
shall be deemed a waiver by them of all right, title and interest in the vehicle and
contents and a consent to the transfer of title to and disposal or sale of the vehicle
and contents pursuant to Section 607.07 Subd. 10.
b. Notice by mail or publication: The notice shall be sent by mail to the registered owner, if
any, of an impounded vehicle and to all readily identifiable lienholders of record. If it is
impossible to determine with reasonable certainty the identity and address of the registered
owner and all lienholders, the notice shall be published once in a newspaper of general
circulation in the area where the motor vehicle was towed from or abandoned. Published
notices may be grouped together for convenience and economy.
c. Unauthorized vehicles; notice: If an unauthorized vehicle remains unclaimed 30 days
from the date the notice was sent under Subdivison 7a. of this Section, a second notice
shall be sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the registered owner, if any, of
the unauthorized vehicle and to all readily identifiable lienholders of record.
Subd. 8. Right to Reclaim:
a. Payment of charges: The owner or any lienholder of an impounded vehicle shall have
a right to reclaim the vehicle from the City or impound lot operator taking it into custody
upon payment of all towing and storage charges resulting from taking the vehicle into
custody within 15 or 45 days as applicable under Section 607.07 Subd. 6, after the date of
the notice required by Section 607.07 Subd 7. To reclaim a motor vehicle impounded
pursuant to this ordinance, the owner or leinholder must pay any costs and administrative
fees incurred by the City and must agree to relocate the vehicle in accordance with local,
state, and federal regulations. The owner or leinholder reclaiming such vehicle shall sign
a “Release of Property” and shall agree to immediate impoundment without notice if such
vehicle again violates this Section. In addition, the City may require a bond to be posted
if said vehicle has been subject to a prior impoundment.
b. Lienholders: Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to impair any lien of a
garagekeeper under the laws of this state, or the right of a lienholder to foreclose.
Subd. 9. Operators deficiency claim; consent to sale:
a. Deficiency claim: The nonpublic impound lot operator has a deficiency claim against
the registered owner of the vehicle for the reasonable costs of services provided the
towing, storage and inspection of the vehicle minus the proceeds of the sale or auction.
The claim for storage costs may not exceed the costs of:
(1) 25 days storage for a vehicle described in Section 607.07 Subd. 6a.; and
(2) 55 days storage for a vehicle described in Section 607.07 Subd. 6b.
b. Implied consent to sale: A registered owner who fails to claim the impounded vehicle
within the applicable period allowed under Section 607.07 Subd. 8 is deemed to waive
11
any right to reclaim the vehicle and contents to the disposal or sale of the vehicle and its
contents and transfer of title.
Subd. 10. Disposition by impound lot.:
a. Auction or sale:
(1) If a vehicle and contents taken into custody by the City or any impound lot is
not reclaimed under Section 607.07 Subd. 8, it may be disposed of or sold at
auction or sale when eligible pursuant to Section 607.07 Subd. 9 and 607.07
Subd. 10.
(2) The purchaser shall be given a receipt in a form prescribed by the Registrar of
Motor Vehicles which shall be sufficient title to dispose of the vehicle. The
receipt shall also entitle the purchaser to register the vehicle and receive a
certificate of title, free and clear of all liens and claims of ownership. Before a
vehicle is issued a new certificate of title, it must receive a motor vehicle safety
check.
b. Unsold vehicles: Vehicles not sold by the City or impound lot pursuant to Subdivision a.
of this Section shall be disposed of in accordance with Section 607.07 Subd. 11.
c. Sale Proceeds, public entities: From the proceeds of the sale under this Section of
vehicles constituting a public nuisance, the City shall reimburse itself for the cost of
towing, preserving and storing the vehicle and all administrative, notice and publication
costs incurred in handling the vehicle pursuant to this chapter. Any remainder from the
proceeds of a sale shall be held for the owner of the vehicle or entitled leinholder for 90
days and then shall be deposited in the treasury of the City.
d. Sale proceeds, nonpublic impound lots: The operator of a nonpublic impound lot may
retain any proceeds derived from a sale conducted under authority of Subdivision 10a.
The operator may retain all proceeds from sale of personal belongings and contents in the
vehicle that were not claimed by the owner or the owner’s agent before the sale, except
that any suspected contraband or other items that likely would be subject to forfeiture in a
criminal trial must be turned over to the appropriate law enforcement agency.
Subd. 11. Disposal Authority.
a. The City may contract with others or may utilize its own equipment and personnel for
the inventory of impounded motor vehicles and scrap metal and may utilize its own
equipment and personnel for the collection, storage and transportation of these vehicles
and scrap metal. The City may utilize its own equipment and personnel only for the
collection and storage of not more than five abandoned, junk, unsafe or unauthorized
vehicles without advertising or receiving bids in any 120-day period.
Subd. 12. Contracts; Reimbursement by MPCA.
12
a. MPCA review and approval: If the City proposes to enter into a contract with a person
licensed by the MPCA pursuant to this Section or a contract pursuant to Section 607.07
Subd. 11., the MPCA may review the proposed contract before it is entered into by the
City, to determine whether it conforms to the MPCA’s plan for solid waste management
and is in compliance with MPCA rules. A contract that does so conform may be approved
by the MPCA and entered into by the City. Where a contract has been approved, the
MPCA may reimburse the City for costs incurred under the contract that have not been
reimbursed under Section 607.07 Subd. 10. Except as otherwise provided in Section
607.07 Subd. 11, the MPCA shall not approve any contract that has been entered into
without prior notice to and request for bids from all persons duly licensed by the MPCA
to be a party to a disposal contract pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 116.07, as it may be
amended from time to time; does not provide for a full performance bond; or does not
provide for total collection or transportation of abandoned, junk, and unsafe motor
vehicles, except that the MPCA may approve a contract covering solely collection or
transportation of abandoned , junk, and unsafe motor vehicles where the MPCA
determines total collection and transportation to be impractical and where all other
requirements herein have been met and the unit of government, after proper notice and
request for bids, has not received any bid for total collection and transportation of
abandoned, junk, and unsafe motor vehicles.
b. If the City utilizes its own equipment and personnel pursuant to its authority under
Section 607.07 Subd. 11, and the use of the equipment and personnel conforms to the
MPCA’s plan for solid waste management and is in compliance with MPCA rules, the
City may be reimbursed by the MPCA for reasonable costs incurred which are not
reimbursed under Section 607.06 Subd. 10.
c. If the MPCA demands that the City contract for the disposal of impounded vehicles
and other scrap metal pursuant to the MPCA’s plan for solid waste disposal and the City
fails to contract within 180 days of the demand, the MPCA, through the Department of
Administration and on behalf of the City, may contract with any person duly licensed by
the MPCA for the disposal.
SECTION 11. Chapter 607 Section 607.07 of the Mounds View Municipal Code is hereby
amended with additions underlined and deletions struck out to read as follows:
607.07: 607.08: NOISE CONTROL REGULATIONS:
SECTION 12. Chapter 607 Section 607.08 of the Mounds View Municipal Code is hereby
amended with additions underlined and deletions struck out to read as follows:
607.08: 607.09 ENFORCEMENT:
Subd. 1. It shall be the duty of the City Council to enforce the provisions of this Chapter and the
City Council may, by resolution, delegate to other officers or agencies power to enforce particular
provisions of this Section, including the power to inspect private premises, and the officers charged
13
with the enforcement of this Chapter shall take all reasonable precautions to prevent the commission
and maintenance of public nuisances.
a. The Clerk-Administrator or designee is authorized to enter upon any property if
necessary to determine whether the provisions of this Code or any applicable State statute
has been violated, to make any examinations or surveys, or to conduct any tests as may be
reasonably necessary in the performance of their duties. All inspection and testing must be
done in a reasonable manner.
SECTION 13. Chapter 607 Section 607.08 Subd. 1 of the Mounds View Municipal Code is hereby
amended with additions underlined and deletions struck out to read as follows:
Subd. 1. 2. Abatement: Notice to owner or to person or persons responsible: Whenever, in the
judgement of the officer charged with enforcement, it is determined upon investigation by
the officer charged with enforcement that a public nuisance is being maintained or exists
within the City, said officer a notice of violation shall be served upon the owner or the
person or persons responsible therefore in the manner prescribed in Section 607.09 Subd. 3
and Subd. 4.such officer shall call or notify in writing the person committing and
maintaining such a public nuisance and require him to terminate and abate said nuisance and
remove such conditions or remedy such defects. Notice to the owner shall be satisfied by
notice to the person listed as the taxpayer on the County's tax records. If the premises are
not occupied, the address of the owner is unknown and no other responsible party can be
reasonably identified, notice may be served on the property by posting a copy of the notice
on the premises. Said notice shall require the owner or occupant of such premises, or both,
to take reasonable steps within a reasonable amount of time to be designated in said notice,
but the maximum time of the removal of said notice after service of said notice shall not in
any event exceed thirty (30) days. If the owner, occupant or other responsible party does not
comply with the notice within the time specified, the City Council may, after notice to the
owner and occupant or other responsible party and an opportunity to be heard, provide for
abating the nuisance by the City. The notice shall be served in the same manner as notice by
the enforcing officer and shall be given at least ten (10) days before the date stated in the
notice when the Council will consider the matter. If notice is given by posting, at least thirty
(30) days shall elapse between the day of posting and the hearing.
Subd. 3. Form: The notice of violation described in Section 607.09 Subd. 2. shall be in accordance
with all of the following:
a. Be in writing.
b. Include a description of the real estate sufficient for identification.
c. Include a statement of the violation or violations, and why the notice is being issued.
d. Include a corrective order allowing a reasonable time to make the corrections and
improvements required to bring the property or structure into compliance with the
provisions of this Code.
14
Subd. 4. Method of Service: Such notice of violation shall be properly served.
a. Said notice of violation shall be deemed to be properly served if a copy thereof is:
(1) Delivered personally, or;
(2) Sent by first-class U.S mail addressed to the person listed as the taxpayer on the
County's tax records, or;
c.(3) Posted on the premises if the premises are not occupied, or the address of the
owner is unknown and no other responsible party can be reasonably identified.
b. When an enforcement officer shall find a vehicle parked in violation of Section 607.07
said officer shall cause additional notice to be placed upon such vehicle in substantially
the following form:
(1) “NOTICE TO THE OWNER AND ALL PERSONS INTERESTED IN THE
ATTACHED PROPERTY: This property, (setting forth brief description) is
unlawfully upon property know as (setting forth brief description of location) and
in violation of Section 607.07 of the Mounds View Code Municipal Code, and
therefore is declared to constitute a public nuisance and must be removed within
seventy-two hours (72) from the date of this notice. If this vehicle is not removed
from the premises or placed in a lawful garage or storage building on or before
(setting forth date and time) it shall be removed by order of the City of Mounds
View. Dated this: (setting forth date of posting of notice). Signed: (setting forth
name, title, address and telephone number of enforcement officer).”
(2) Such notice shall be not less than eight (8) inches by ten (10) inches and shall
be sufficiently weather proof to withstand exposure to the elements
Subd. 5. Abatement: Except for vehicles constituting a public nuisance, which shall follow the
procedures set fourth in Section 607.07, all violations of this chapter may be corrected by
abatement by the City at the expense of the property owner, occupant, or other responsible
party following the procedures listed herein.
a. If the owner, occupant or other responsible party does not comply with the notice of
violation within the time specified therein, the City Council may, after notice to the owner
and occupant or other responsible party and an opportunity to be heard, provide for abating
the nuisance by the City.
b. The notice shall be served in the same manner as prescribed in Section 607.09 Subd. 4
and shall be given at least ten (10) days before the date stated in the notice when the Council
will consider the matter.
c. If the notice of violation was served by posting, at least thirty (30) days shall elapse
between the day of posting and the hearing.
15
SECTION 14. Chapter 607 Section 607.08 Subd. 2 of the Mounds View Municipal Code is hereby
amended with additions underlined and deletions struck out to read as follows:
Subd. 2. 6. Summary Abatement: The enforcing officer may provide for abating a public
nuisance without following the procedure required in subdivision 1 5 above when:
a. There is an immediate threat to the public health or safety.
b. There is an immediate threat of serious property damage.
c. A public nuisance has been caused by private parties on public property., or
d. If the enforcing officer abates the nuisance pursuant to this Section, the officer must
reasonably attempt to notify the owner, occupant, or other responsible party of the intended
action and the attempt to notify inform the owner, occupant, or other responsible party of the
intended action and the right to appeal the abatement and any cost at the next regularly
scheduled City Council meeting.
SECTION 15. Chapter 607 Section 607.08 Subd. 3 of the Mounds View Municipal Code is hereby
amended with additions underlined and deletions struck out to read as follows:
Subd. 3.7. Cost Recovery: The owner of property on which a nuisance has been abated by the
City, or a person who has caused a public nuisance on property not owned by that person,
shall be personally liable to the City for the cost of abatement, including administrative
costs. As soon as the work has been completed and the cost determined, the Clerk-
Administrator or their designee shall prepare a bill for the cost plus an additional 10% and
mail it to the owner or other responsible party. Thereupon, the amount shall be immediately
due and payable at the office of the Clerk-Administrator.
a. Record of Abatement Costs: The Clerk-Administrator or his/her designee shall keep a
record of the costs of abatements done under this ordinance and shall report monthly all
work done to the appropriate officer for which assessments are to be made, stating and
certifying the description of the land, lots, parcels involved and the amount assessable to
each.
SECTION 16. Chapter 607 Section 607.08 Subd. 4 of the Mounds View Municipal Code is hereby
amended with additions underlined and deletions struck out to read as follows:
Subd 4. 8. Assessment: If the cost, or any portion of it, has not been paid under Subdivision 7
3, within thirty (30) days after the date of the bill, the unpaid cost may be certified against
the property to which the cost is attributable. On or before September 1 of each year, the
Clerk-Administrator or his/her designee shall list the total unpaid charges for each
abatement against each separate lot or parcel to which they are attributable. Before
certification against the property, reasonable notice of the impending certification and an
opportunity to be heard by the City Council must be given to the taxpayer of record.
Failure of the taxpayer to receive the notice shall not invalidate the certification,
16
however. The City Council may then spread the charges or any portion thereof against
the property involved as a special assessment under Minn. Statute Section 429.101, and
other pertinent statutes, for certification to the County Auditor for collection the
following year along with current taxes Thereafter, the unpaid cost may be certified to the
County Auditor for collection along with current taxes in the following year or in such
annual installments, not exceeding ten (10), as the City Council may determine in each
case.
SECTION 17. Chapter 607 Section 607.08 Subd. 5 of the Mounds View Municipal Code is hereby
amended with additions underlined and deletions struck out to read as follows:
Subd. 5.9. Landlord's Liability:
SECTION 18. Chapter 607 Section 607.08 Subd. 6 of the Mounds View Municipal Code is hereby
amended with additions underlined and deletions struck out to read as follows:
Subd. 6.10. Penalty: Any person in violation of any of the provisions in this Chapter shall be
guilty of a misdemeanor. Each day on which such violation continues shall constitute a
separate offense. (Ord. 556, 3-20-95)
First read by the City Council of the City of Mounds View on this ____ day of ____, 2002.
Read and passed by the City Council of the City of Mounds View on this ____ day of ____, 2002.
Rich Sonterre, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kathleen Miller, City Clerk-Administrator
(SEAL)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________________
City Attorney
17
RESOLUTION NO. 5715
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF POLICE VEHICLES
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Police Department maintains a replacement schedule of police vehicles;
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Police Department has three police vehicles that currently have between
84,000 and 90,000 miles on them;
WHEREAS, replacement of three police vehicles was budgeted for in 2002 at an estimated cost of
$22,7000.00 each;
WHEREAS, year 2002 Chevrolet Impala’s can be acquired under the state bid for police vehicles at an
approximate cost of $18,635.00 each;
WHEREAS, the deadline for participating in the state bid purchase is April 5th, 2002;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council for the City of Mounds View authorizes the
purchase of three 2002 Chevrolet Impala police vehicles under the state bid at an approximate cost of
$18,635.00 per vehicle.
Adopted this 25th day of February 2002.
Attest:
Richard Sonterre, Mayor
SEAL
Kathleen Miller, City Administrator
Mo tion :
Second:
Sonterre: Stigney: Thomas:
Marty:
Quick
Item No.7D
Type of Business: CB
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: Tim Brennan, Deputy Police Chief/Acting Chief
Item Title/Subject: Purchase of Police Squad Cars for 2002
Date of Report: February 25, 2002
NATURE OF REPORT: The police department has four vehicles in its fleet that currently have about
80,000 miles on them, or higher. Before vehicles obtain such high mileage or substantial maintenance
problems that make them unsuitable for police use or undesirable for resale, the police department has tried to
plan ahead for replacement. The police department budgeted $22,700.00 each for the replacement of two
squad cars, and $22,000.00 for replacement of one police staff vehicle in 2002. Hinckley Chevrolet has been
awarded the state bid for the Chevrolet Impala Police Package for 2002. The Chevrolet Impala has come down
in price to $18,635.00, from last year’s cost of $19, 275.00. The police package Impala’s come standard with
features not included with the Ford Crown Victoria, and the Fords are priced about $2,000.00 higher. One
feature that comes standard with the Impala is a heavy-duty drivers seat, about a $1,800.00 upgrade on
previous models of the Ford.
City staff has indicated a possible need for an additional staff vehicle needed for limited use in and around the
city. One or more of the squad cars scheduled for replacement may be a very viable option for this type of
application.
To participate with the state bid purchase of 2002 Chevrolet Impala Police Package vehicles, orders must be
placed prior to April 5th, 2002.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the replacement of three police department vehicles
under the state bid for 2002 Chevrolet Impala’s at an estimated cost of $18,635.00 for each vehicle.
Respectfully submitted,
_____________________
Tim Brennan
Deputy Police Chief/Acting Chief
M:\MasterFiles\1999 thru 2010\2002\City Council\Council Packets\02-25-02\Item 7E - Greivance.doc
Item No.7E
Type of Business: CB
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: Kathleen Miller, City Administrator
Item Title/Subject: Marg Norquist’s Grievance Hearing
Date of Report: February 25, 2002
Background
The City is in receipt of an Appeal filed by AFSCME Council 14 and Marg Norquist of thee
City Administrator’s response to her request for supplemental health care coverage.
I have attached a copy of the aforementioned appeal, a copy of the City Administrator’s
response, a copy of the personnel policy that refers to health coverage for your
convenience.
Respectfully Submitted,
___________________________
Kathleen F. Miller
City Administrator
PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Regular Meeting
January 28, 2002
Mounds View City Hall
2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112
7:05 P.M.
1. MEETING IS CALLED TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL: Mayor Sonterre, Quick (not present), Marty, Stigney, and Thomas.
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
A. Monday, January 28, 2002 City Council Agenda.
City Administrator Miller requested that authorization to attend out of state training be added
under Council Business as 7F and a report on the status of the press release be added under
Council Business as 7G.
City Administrator Miller asked that approval of the February 8, 1999 Minutes be removed from
the agenda as the Minutes were previously approved.
Mayor Sonterre requested that appointments to the Planning Commission and the Police Civil
Service Commission be added under Special Orders of Business.
MOTION/SECOND: Thomas/Stigney. To Approve the January 28, 2002, City Council Agenda
as amended.
Ayes - 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
4. PUBLIC INPUT
William Werner of 2765 Sherwood Road commented that the Charter Commission had been
asked to review whether the Charter requires department heads to provide an in person report to
Council once per quarter. He then commented that he felt the provision was added to the Charter
during the 1980’s as a way to provide for accountability during turbulent times for the City. He
then asked when he could expect a response as to the interpretation of the Charter.
City Administrator Miller indicated that the matter was on the agenda for the February work
session.
Mounds View City Council January 28, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 2
Steven Berk of 2614 Louisa Avenue asked if he would be allowed to speak on the exercise
equipment now or when it is heard on the agenda later in the meeting.
Mayor Sonterre asked him to reserve comment until it is heard on the agenda.
David Jahnke of 8428 Eastwood Road asked whether information concerning the press release
would be provided during this meeting.
Mayor Sonterre indicated that the press release had been added to the agenda as item 7G under
Council Business.
Mr. Jahnke indicated he had watched the work session and has reservations about the press
release because he feels the City has important business to conduct rather than arguing and
wasting time on it.
Mayor Sonterre indicated Council would hear comments concerning the press release at that
point in the agenda.
Mr. Jahnke commented that the legislation concerning officers issuing speeding tickets does not
restrict the number of tickets that can be written. He then explained that the legislation was
meant to eliminate quotas and does not mean officers cannot be told to go out and do their job,
and part of that job is to write tickets.
Mr. Jahnke expressed concern that an alarm went off during the work session and Council
Members had made light of the situation. He then suggested that the City needed to determine
why the alarm is sounding before a serious situation presents itself. He further commented, “an
open mind is like an open window, but you put a screen on the open window.”
Mayor Sonterre noted that Council did make light of the alarm system that evening and then
explained that the one function of the alarm goes off regularly for no apparent reason and does
not have a bearing on the other fire features of the alarm system.
Michelle Sandbeck of 2356 Sherwood Road handed informational packets to Council concerning
the noise wall issue. She then reviewed the information with Council and noted the reason she
had brought the issues up is she has questions regarding the noise priority study that was done
and what the zoning classifications were for those sites and for those sites added subsequent to
the initial noise priority study. She further commented that she feels the City needs to ask
MNDOT these questions.
Ms. Sandbeck indicated that in 1975 the Commissioner was authorized to extend 1% from the
Minnesota motor vehicle gas tax and other federal aid into $10 or $12 million annually for noise
abatement. She noted the previous federal aid was shifted to other areas and then indicated she
would like to know what happened to the 1%.
Mayor Sonterre thanked her for the information.
Mounds View City Council January 28, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 3
Council Member Marty noted that the City has not heard anything back from MNDOT
concerning the noise wall.
Public Works Director Lee indicated he had been reviewing the files and noted he would be
contacting MNDOT for an update on the issue.
Mayor Sonterre indicated that he had met with MNDOT representatives at City Hall in August
after Mr. Ulrich had left and, due to the work of Ms. Sandbeck, the MNDOT representative
acknowledged that the City was shorted on the soundwall by a particular amount. He indicated
that MNDOT had agreed to send engineers out to see if they could build additional footage along
Laporte and they were to report back to the City. He then indicated that the City needs to follow
up to see how the engineering study is progressing.
Council Member Thomas indicated she was involved with MNDOT on another issue and should
be able to obtain information for the City on this issue. She then commented that she would
provide information as soon as she is able to obtain it.
5. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
None.
6. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Just and Correct Claims
B. Licenses for Approval
C. Resolution 5683 Approving a Joint Powers Agreement Between the Mounds
View Police Department and DPS for Predatory Offender Registration Database
D. Resolution 5691 Amending Section 3.15 of the Personnel Manual
E. Resolution 5692 Approving the City’s January 2001 Pay Equity Report
F. Resolution 5689 Authorizing the Acquisition of Tax Forfeited Parcel Previously
Requested Withheld from Public Sale
G. Resolution 5690 Accepting the Annual Financial Report for the Year Ending
December 31, 2000
H. Resolution 5697 Authorizing the Mayor to Attend the National League of Cities
Congressional Cities Conference in Washington D.C.
I. Resolution 5698 Scheduling a Second Work Session in February
J. Resolution 5693 Approving a Charitable Gambling Application for New
Brighton/Mounds View Rotary
K. Resolution 5694 Amending the 2002 Fee Schedule
L. Resolution 5695 Hiring a Temporary Employee to Fill the Administrative
Assistant Position
M. Resolution 5696 Approving the Golf Course Manager Position Description
N. Resolution 5687 Authorizing Staff to Seek Repayment of the Overpayment for the
Fitness Equipment
Mounds View City Council January 28, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 4
Council Member Stigney asked that the Consent Agenda be read.
Council Member Stigney requested that Items 6A, H, and M be removed for discussion.
Council Member Marty requested that Items 6D, I, and L be removed for discussion.
Council Member Thomas requested that Item 6N be removed for discussion.
Assistant City Administrator Reed requested that Item 6K be removed for discussion.
MOTION/SECOND: Thomas/Sonterre. To Approve Consent Agenda Item 6A as presented.
Council Member Stigney expressed concern that the Mayor’s hotel bill for the training and
conference in Atlanta was $1,021.93. He then commented that he did not feel that room service
or laundry were items that the City should be paying for. He also indicated he had discussed the
matter with City Administrator Miller and had been told the Mayor would be billed for the
personal items.
Mayor Sonterre indicated that he had given an itemized bill to the Finance Director of his
personal telephone calls and laundering fees. He further indicated that he has been billed
$183.20 and will pay that amount.
Council Member Stigney commented he felt it would have been cheaper to go downstairs to one
of the restaurants in the hotel rather than ordering room service at taxpayer expense.
Mayor Sonterre indicated he had gone to the restaurant in the hotel on the first night and found
that the items on the menu in the restaurant were noticeably more expensive and went back to his
room to order through room service.
Council Member Stigney commented that there were other restaurants in the city the Mayor
could have tried that would have been less expensive. He then commented that he would like to
have a policy discussion concerning the use of room service at City sponsored conferences
because, if there is no policy, people tend to take advantage.
Council Member Stigney commented that the total bill for the Atlanta trip, after subtracting the
Mayor’s portion, was $1,546.23 and he feels that is excessive.
Mayor Sonterre clarified that a portion of that amount was the Atlanta conference but said there
were charges for other conferences as well.
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
MOTION/SECOND: Thomas/Sonterre. To Approve Item 6D as presented.
Mounds View City Council January 28, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 5
Council Member Marty read Resolution 5691 which would amend the City’s Personnel Manual
as it relates to the amount of insurance the City will pay for non-union employees. He then
commented that the City is changing the policy from 80% to a fixed dollar amount of $451.00.
Council Member Marty asked if the employees directly affected by this change had been notified
and, if so, how they felt about the change.
City Administrator Miller indicated that the change would affect all non-union employees which
includes department directors and the City Administrator.
Council Member Marty asked if the affected employees had approved the policy change.
City Administrator Miller indicated that, while she had not polled employees, the matter was
discussed and employees are aware that the City was moving toward a set dollar contribution
rather than a percentage.
Council Member Marty noted that some of the affected employees are not department heads.
Assistant City Administrator Reed indicated there were approximately two affected employees
who are not department heads.
Council Member Marty said he thought there were two at public works and two at the golf
course.
Assistant City Administrator Reed indicated there was one employee in public works and one in
finance.
Council Member Marty asked if those employees were aware of the change.
Council Member Thomas indicated the Human Resources Committee had been working on this
issue for almost a year.
Assistant City Administrator Reed indicated the Club House Manager was aware of the change
and knows it impacts him.
Tim Pittman, Public Works Foreman, noted he fell into the non-union non-department head
category and was not aware of the proposed change until this evening.
City Administrator Miller indicated that it was the responsibility of the department directors to
make sure information is passed on. She then noted that, if Mr. Pittman had a question
concerning the change, he was welcome to stop into her office at any time.
Assistant City Administrator Reed explained that 80% is $451.00 and noted that coverage was
not changing at this point.
Mounds View City Council January 28, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 6
Mr. Pittman commented that, if insurance rates change, the dollar amount will change and that is
why 80% is a good deal for employees. He then commented that he feels there was a lack of
communication because he was unaware of it until tonight’s meeting.
Mayor Sonterre noted that, without a department head in public works, some things may have
fallen through the cracks.
City Administrator Miller explained there would not be an immediate change in coverage and
explained that the City needed to set a fixed dollar amount that it was willing to pay because the
costs of insurance are staggering and continuing to climb. She then noted that almost all other
cities are moving away from a percentage formula for insurance.
Mr. Pittman commented that he was in the acting directors position for a while and had been
attending Staff meetings but was never made aware of the proposed change to insurance. He
then commented that 80% was a nice benefit to employees and the City is taking something
away.
Tim Fredberg from the street department indicated that there are a lot of issues within the City
that are affecting employee morale. He then commented that the City has lost a lot of
experienced people and is poised to lose more valuable experience if it keeps treating its
employees in such a manner. He further commented that Council needed to keep in mind that
the employees run the City.
Council Member Thomas indicated that the City was aware when it started discussing this
change it would not be the popular opinion. She then asked those employees in attendance to
turn around and explain to the residents in attendance at the meeting why, with revenue dropping
and taxes rising, the employees feel it is fair to ask residents to pay 80% of health insurance rates
that continue to climb. She further explained that the City is not doing anything different than
the rest of the business world when it comes to health insurance. She concluded her comments
by saying that insurance rates are rising at such a high rate that the City is not able to budget for
it.
Mr. Pittman stated that the public works group is a group of guys that bend backwards to save the
City money and, in return, they are questioned on everything and are constantly criticized.
Council Member Thomas indicated that she, as well as the rest of the City, appreciates the efforts
of the public works Staff.
David Jahnke of 8428 Eastwood Road indicated he sympathized with the employees but
explained he used to work for Sysco that employs over 800 people and the company started
taking health insurance out of employees’ checks. He then commented that nobody wants to lose
a benefit but it is happening in all positions in all companies. He further commented that
insurance rates are ridiculously high.
Mounds View City Council January 28, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 7
Mayor Sonterre indicated that the dollar amount would be set by Resolution and, if the change to
health insurance in the coming year is exorbitant, Council could change the dollar amount by
Resolution. He then commented that Council will be as fair as it can but noted the 80/20 split
was binding and provided no ability for budgeting.
Gary Kardell from public works commented that he feels this City is different from other cities
because it is a very small group. He then commented that there have been no middle of the night
sewer emergencies and overtime has been kept to a minimum which points to an excellent group
of employees doing a good job for the City. He further commented that public works is always
attempting to keep costs down.
Mr. Cardell indicated that they had gotten out of the union because they wanted to be able to
work more upfront with Council on employment issues but said, if necessary, he would be
willing to get back in the union.
Council Member Thomas stated no one ever questions the work or amount of dollars saved by
the public works staff. She then explained that the City needs to be able to forecast the insurance
expense and cannot do that with a percentage. She further commented that the per capita tax
amount for this City is quite a bit higher than any other city this size.
Council Member Marty commented that there appears to be things going on that are leading to
the loss of experienced Staff within the City. He commented the City has lost all of the
department heads and more employees. He commented that he is concerned with the lack of
communication that has been brought up tonight because there have been limits and restrictions
put on communication. He then commented that, if one department does not know something,
then Council may not know, and citizens may not know which is of concern to him. He further
commented that, in speaking with the public works staff, he has found they are always working
together to get the job done regardless of whose job it is. He ended his comment by stating that
he feels the issues raised should be looked into before anything gets any farther out of hand.
William Werner commented that the topic of communication is interesting because that is
exactly what the provision in the charter that requires department heads to provide a report
quarterly is intended to take care of. He then commented, “I do not know why you insist on not
following the charter.”
Mayor Sonterre asked that all subsequent debate be directly related to the Resolution that is
under consideration.
Ms. Sandbeck asked if the flat rate was comparable to what the union employees receive.
City Administrator Miller indicated the union employees rate is comparable to the proposal for
the non-union employees.
Council Member Stigney indicated one of the City employees had called him to discuss some
issues and concerns and he had asked that the matter be added to the retreat agenda in February.
Mounds View City Council January 28, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 8
Ayes – 3 Nays – 1(Marty) Motion carried.
MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Marty. To Deny Item 6H as Presented.
Council Member Stigney commented that he did not feel it was appropriate that the Mayor had
asked to expend monies for an out of town convention when the City is concerned with
expenditures and cutting health insurance benefits for its employees.
Naja Werner agreed with Council Member Stigney’s comment and said she feels the City should
be “tightening its belt” as everyone else is doing. She then commented that the City may have a
“lame duck” Mayor in light of all the negative publicity. She further commented that there are
wonderful educational opportunities in the twin cities and the Mayor should explore those
options.
Council Member Marty said he was surprised that the Mayor had requested authorization for this
trip in light of the financial outlook for the City with the potential for more state aid cuts. He
commented that the money budgeted for the convention does not need to be spent just because it
is in the budget. He then commented that he does not think any Mayor or Council Member
within the last 10 years has incurred as many bills as the present Mayor. He further commented
that the Mayor spent $3,349.67 last year on two out of state conventions and he feels that is
totally out of line.
Mayor Sonterre explained that the basis for his request is that this has been an expenditure for as
far back as the City has been a member of the organization and noted in previous years the City
has sent two representatives to this convention. He commented that he serves a representative to
the National League of Cities on crime prevention and this meeting is one of two mandatory
meetings and there are four others that he does not attend because of the cost and a lack of
benefit to the City. He then commented that, unless you have been to one of these events and
gone through the training and informational seminars included in the registration fee, you would
not be in a position to discuss the benefits.
Council Member Thomas commented that there is a difference between what we need and what
is nice and even though she feels there is a benefit to attending the conventions the timing is not
right in light of the possibility of the loss of more funding sources.
Council Member Stigney commented he did not feel it was appropriate that one individual would
be using well over 3/5ths of the national training budget. He then commented that, as a taxpayer
and a Council Member, he feels the City needs to concentrate on saving money to plan for the
possibility of more reductions in state aid rather than spending money like it is “being made in
the basement.”
Ms. Werner referred to an article from the StarTribune that ranked Mounds View as number 12
out of 109 cities for highest taxes paid on a home valued at $130,000. She then commented that
the taxpayers of the City should be very concerned about that.
Mounds View City Council January 28, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 9
Ayes – 4 Nays- 0 Motion carried.
I. Resolution 5698 Scheduling a Second Work Session in February.
Council Member Marty inquired as to why he was not informed of the potential of a second work
session in February prior to receiving the information in his packet. He then indicated that he has
to bid his work schedule for the coming month by the 18th of the month.
City Administrator Miller noted the possibility of scheduling a second work session in February
was discussed at the work session on January 22, 2002 because there are already 15 items on the
work session agenda for February. She then commented that Staff feels it would be more
appropriate to have two work sessions rather than one marathon meeting and, because the off
Monday falls on a holiday, the work session was scheduled for Tuesday.
Council Member Stigney commented that it would be nice if all Council Members could be at
the meeting and asked if the date could be changed to accommodate schedules.
It was the consent of Council to consult calendars to determine if Thursday, February 21, 2002
would work for all Council Members.
Council member Marty noted that Council Member Quick had asked at the work session that
Staff contact him to determine his availability for the second work session. He then noted he had
yet to be contacted by Staff to discuss his availability.
City Administrator Miller indicated that Council Member Marty was not contacted because the
matter was placed on Council’s agenda for consideration. She then commented that the meeting
would have been scheduled for the off Monday if it had not been a holiday.
Mayor Sonterre suggested changing the Resolution to indicate that, pending the approval of
Council Member Marty’s and Council Member Quick’s schedules the second work session
would be scheduled for February 21, 2002. He then suggested that, if the 21st does not work for
the Council Members then the meeting would be held as previously scheduled on February 19,
2002.
MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Marty. To Approve Item 6I, Resolution 5698 as Amended.
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
K. Resolution 5694, Amending the 2002 Fee Schedule.
Community Development Director Ericson explained that it was brought to his attention that the
fee schedule did not accurately reflect the park dedication fees and, since that change needed to
be made, the fee to move buildings was adjusted as well.
Mounds View City Council January 28, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 10
MOTION/SECOND: Thomas/Marty. To Approve Item 6K, Resolution 5694, Amending 2002
Fee Schedule.
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
K. Resolution 5695, Hiring a Temporary Employee to Fill the Administrative
Assistant Position
Council Member Marty suggested having Marge Norquist fill the Administrative Assistant
position until the position can be filled because she is already employed by the City and has
recently been cut back to part time.
Assistant City Administrator Reed noted that Ms. Norquist has a different skill set because she
works in the finance department than would be required for the Administrative Assistant
position.
City Administrator Miller clarified that the position held by Ms. Norquist has always been a part
time position and was never cut back.
Council Member Marty indicated that Marge has covered for Joan at the front counter and has
answered phones on numerous occasions and suggested using Marge for the activities she has
handled in the past and hiring a temporary assistant for any specific duties.
Council Member Thomas indicated that this position is the only administrative support position
for the support and preparation for meetings and documentation. She then commented that it
would not be fair to Marge to ask her to take on this position because there would not be enough
time in the day for her to complete her tasks and those of the administrative assistant position.
Council Member Marty indicated he felt it would be helpful to fill the position with someone
who has been with the City and knows how the City works rather than a temporary that would
need to be trained.
Council Member Thomas indicated that Marge’s skill set is an educated one and hiring her to fill
the administrative assistant position would cost the City more than it would to hire a temporary
person.
MOTION/SECOND: Thomas/Stigney. To Approve Item 6L, Resolution 5695 Hiring a
Temporary Employee to Fill the Administrative Assistant Position.
Ayes – 3 Nays – 1 (Marty) Motion carried.
M. Resolution 5696, Approving the Golf Course Manager Position
Council Member Stigney suggested the wording on the second page under operational
responsibilities be changed to state that the manager will perform maintenance duties as
Mounds View City Council January 28, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 11
necessary. He pointed out a typographical error in the sixth bullet item and then suggested that
language be added to require that the manager maintain records on grounds maintenance
including the fertilization schedule and application rates.
Mayor Sonterre suggested having Staff create a document that the manager would use to
document the course maintenance for Council approval.
Council Member Stigney suggested that the language under physical demands be changed to
reflect that the manager would regularly be exposed to mechanical parts and then said he is not
sure if moderately quiet accurately reflects the noise of the equipment this person would be
using.
MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Thomas. To Approve Item 6M, Resolution 5696, as Amended, to
Approve the Golf Course Manager’s Position Description.
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
N. Resolution 5687, Authorizing Staff to Seek Repayment of the Overpayment for
the Fitness Equipment.
MOTION/SECOND: Thomas/Mayor Sonterre. To Approve Item 6N, Resolution 5687,
Authorizing Staff to Seek Repayment of the Overpayment for the Fitness Equipment.
Council Member Stigney asked that Resolution 5687 be read.
City Administrator Miller read Resolution 5687.
Steven Berk of 2614 Louisa Avenue commented that he did not feel the Mayor’s comments of no
involvement in the process were accurate because he was on the Park and Recreation Committee
that approved the purchase and then he used the City’s money to establish a credit line.
Mayor Sonterre said that is an inaccuracy.
Mr. Berk indicated that if the Mayor was not involved previously, he is now because he will be
involved in the vote on the issue. He then asked what happened to the $191.10 in sales tax and
who paid that.
City Administrator Miller indicated that sales tax was not figured into the costs because the City
did not pay sales tax on the purchase.
Mayor Sonterre explained that the former finance director had mistakenly informed him that the
purchase was tax exempt because it was being made through the YMCA.
Mayor Sonterre clarified that the City was never charged for the sales tax.
Mounds View City Council January 28, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 12
Mr. Berk commented that the statement of the Mayor in the letter to the City Administrator
claiming that, had he known the purchase was illegal, he would have withdrawn the offer to Park
and Recreation and the savings would not have occurred. He then commented that, in light of the
amount of money spent in attorney’s fees, there has been no savings to the City. He then asked
why the taxpayers are paying to defend the Mayor’s personal business.
Mayor Sonterre commented that, if the former finance director followed state statute, none of this
would have happened.
City Administrator Miller explained that the City Attorney was involved because the City
received a request to investigate. She further explained that the City Attorney represents the
City, not Mayor Sonterre or TSS.
Mr. Berk stated that, if the Mayor had not been involved in this matter, the City Attorney would
not have to defend the City.
City Attorney Riggs commented that, had the City followed proper procedures in six or seven
different incidents this would not have taken place and Council had asked that it be reviewed.
Council Member Thomas asked if there had been a need for prosecution who would have been
liable.
City Attorney Riggs indicated that City Staff and Council would be responsible.
Council Member Thomas commented that it is frustrating to think she could have been held
liable for what happened because she currently sits on Council. She commented that there are
approximately 17 other issues of a similar nature that the City is working to clear up. She then
commented that it is frustrating to be blamed for something that Council did not know was
wrong.
Mr. Berk suggested that Council Member Thomas could resign if she did not like her job and did
not want to listen to residents.
Council Member Thomas indicated she would listen to Mr. Berk as long as he needed to speak.
Council Member Marty indicated he had requested copies of the just and correct claims for June
of 2000 for the exercise equipment. He commented that he looks at the claims and Council
Member Stigney reviews the claims and, if the fitness equipment was on the just and correct
claims, Council should have been aware of it and ultimately approved it by approving the
Consent Agenda. He then commented he is still waiting for the requested information.
City Administrator Miller indicated she had received a voice mail from Council Member Marty
that she understood to be a data practices request. She then commented that, if it was not a data
practices request, the information could be provided tomorrow.
Mounds View City Council January 28, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 13
Mr. Jahnke commented that none of the speakers have ever said where the fault laid. He then
commented that the YMCA is responsible for accepting something other than what was ordered.
He further commented that enough time and money had been wasted on the issue and said it was
time to move on.
Council Member Thomas commented that all Council Members have the responsibility to review
the just and correct claims and the City needs to fix the problem.
Council Member Marty commented that, if Council approved it on the just and correct claims,
the City ultimately did approve the purchase.
Mayor Sonterre commented that City Attorney Riggs had said that, if Council approved the
purchase and it was statutorily improper, then the City would be liable.
Wendy Marty of 2626 Louisa Avenue commented that, if the Mayor had taken ownership from
the beginning rather than denying any wrongdoing and badmouthing her about a witch-hunt there
would not be any attorney’s fees involved. She then commented she thinks the Mayor should
pay the attorney’s fees.
Ms. Marty questioned whether the Mayor should be asked to pay interest from June 15, 2000 to
December 7, 2000 on the $4,120.00 which would be $219.77 and on the $703.33 from December
7, 2000 to January 14, 2002 which would be approximately $77.00 for a total of $300.00 owed to
the City.
Council Member Thomas clarified that the entire City Council was responsible and stated she did
not think it was appropriate to travel down that path any farther.
Council Member Stigney commented that he felt this matter should have been resolved a long
time ago and could have been if someone would have admitted to getting caught with his hand in
the cookie jar. He then commented he did not think it was necessary to have the City ask for
repayment by Resolution.
City Attorney Riggs indicated he had asked that the City request repayment by Resolution to
provide a way to track the matter.
Council Member Stigney clarified that the equipment ordered is what was received but the City
paid for other than what was ordered. He then commented that there has been a lot of time,
aggravation and money spent on this matter causing a big black mark on the City and he feels it
is time to move on.
Mayor Sonterre stated he disagrees with everything Council Member Stigney said and indicated
he had a dated copy of a fax order that indicates the equipment ordered which was what was
requested. He then commented that he never stocked or sold the equipment and had simply made
the opportunity available to the City by providing a catalog. He further commented that the
Mounds View City Council January 28, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 14
catalog did have 800 numbers available to contact for further information on the equipment and
said, if Staff did not investigate, other than looking in the catalog, that is where the fault lies.
Council Member Stigney commented the invoice that Mayor Sonterre had given the City
reflected entirely different equipment than was received at the Community Center.
Mayor Sonterre said he disagreed.
Council Member Marty indicated the Mayor had also stated that he did not sell the equipment
and knew nothing about the equipment but on the tape of the Park and Recreation meeting from
February of that year Terry Blatenbauer was talking about the equipment and she stated that she
had been into the store and the Mayor did have one of the pieces of the equipment in the store.
He stated the broad statements that the Mayor keeps passing out do not seem to add up. He then
indicated that the equipment was all for in home use and asked for a report on the usage and how
the equipment is holding up.
City Administrator Miller indicated she did not have a report this evening but noted she had
talked with the Public Works Director and will get documentation. She also noted that,
according to that documentation, it appears that the equipment is in good shape and she will put
information in the packet for the work session or the informational packet.
Council Member Marty indicated he had looked at the log book and the equipment is used about
four (4) hours a day and it is designed for thirty (30) minutes to one (1) hour per day. He also
noted he had been told the equipment had broken down and been repaired. He then stated he
does not know why the Mayor keeps double talking and said that, if somebody had stepped up to
the plate and accepted responsibility, this would not have cost the City so much in attorney’s
fees. He further stated he does not understand why this matter had to be drug out to the 12th hour
and finished by Resolution.
Mayor Sonterre said he agreed it was time to move on from this point.
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
MOTION/SECOND: Thomas/Stigney. To Approve Consent Agenda Items 6B, C, E, F, G, and
J as Presented.
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
7. COUNCIL BUSINESS
A. Public Hearing and Consideration of Resolution 5688, a Resolution
Approving a Conditional Use Permit and Development Review for the
Edgewood Middle School Facility Expansion.
Mayor Sonterre opened the public hearing at 8:53 p.m.
Mounds View City Council January 28, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 15
Planner Atkinson explained that Independent School District 621 had requested approval of a
conditional use permit and development review to add approximately 15,000 square feet to the
buildings. He then indicated that the issue of events parking was raised at the Planning
Commission meeting and Staff recommends the City enforce its parking code on the west side of
Edgewood to make sure the no parking zone is not used for parking.
Planner Atkinson indicated Council had discussed limiting parking on the street during the
school day. He then noted that this matter had been tabled by Rice Creek with an authorization
for administrative approval.
John Gannon of ATS&R Architects indicated his firm had been hired to assist with the
remodeling of several schools in the Mounds View School District. He then provided a brief
overview of the proposed changes to the school.
Council Member Thomas asked if the 20 parking stalls lost to create the bus only lane would be
relocated to another area on the site.
Mr. Gannon explained that the area is a bus only lane when the buses are lining up and parking is
allowed at all other times.
Mayor Sonterre asked if it would be possible to provide access to the school for events on the
east side of the building near the media center in the hopes that the southeast parking lot would
be utilized for parking.
Penny Howard, Edgewood Middle School Principal, indicated the School could explore that
option.
Mayor Sonterre pointed out there was not a pedestrian crossing marking where the new curb cut
is. He also suggested adding a painted pavement rise, or speed bump, just prior to the stop sign
at the pathway crossing to prevent vehicles from rolling through the crossing.
Mr. Gannon indicated the crosswalk would be marked and indicated he would pursue the option
of the speed bump with the school district.
Council Member Stigney asked if the Public Works Director’s comments had been incorporated
into the plans.
Mr. Lee indicated his comments were minor and should be able to be included.
Council Member Marty expressed concern for the reduction in parking and asked if the east
parking lot is marked for parking.
Ms. Howard indicated the east parking lot is utilized.
Mounds View City Council January 28, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 16
Council Member Marty asked if it would be possible to expand to make up for the loss of
parking.
Mr. Gannon indicated that the portable classroom on the south end will be removed and may
make room for additional parking.
Mayor Sonterre indicated the site would not allow for expansion of the parking lot. He then
commented that a commitment from the school to utilize the east parking lot would help a lot.
Council Member Marty indicated the City was dealing with Pinewood Elementary on some mold
issues because of problems with the roof. He then asked how many additions had been made to
the roof at Edgewood Middle School.
Mr. Gannon indicated the school was built in 1957 and the pool addition added in 1966. He then
indicated the school district has ongoing issues with reproofing and repairs and the
superintendent of buildings and grounds has pointed out delicate areas of the roof and those areas
fall into areas where it is likely that correction and addition work will be done.
Council Member Marty indicated he would like to be as proactive as possible to make sure that
they stay ahead of the game instead of getting into a mold issue at Edgewood. He then asked if
an air quality report had been done.
Mr. Gannon explained that the school would be receiving a new HVAC system and noted that
was one of the main items on the referendum.
Council Member Marty asked if the duct work was lined or galvanized.
David Calser of Stahl Construction indicated that a lot of the roofing problems at Pinewood were
caused because of construction activity on the roof. He then explained that there would not be
any need for construction activity on the roof in this case because the new mechanicals would be
placed on the new roof sections rather than the existing roof.
Council Member Marty asked if an air quality study had been done.
Mr. Calser indicated he thought an air quality study had been done as well as a roof report. He
then noted that, since the roof report was done almost five years ago Stahl Construction would be
doing a roof report.
Council Member Marty asked if the duct work would be checked when the new HVAC system is
installed.
Mr. Calser indicated the school would be receiving all new duct work and noted the school
would have a state of the art HVAC system when completed.
Mounds View City Council January 28, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 17
Council Member Marty indicated that public works had brought up the water supply issue and a
problem with the water at the school recently.
Mr. Lee indicated the school only has one gate valve to the south of its service access and, by
adding one to the north, it would be possible to isolate the service and make it more reliable in
case of a water main break. He then indicated there is also the possibility of looping the system
which is more costly.
Council Member Marty noted the looping report seemed to be the best alternative but is more
costly. He then asked if Mr. Lee felt that having another gate valve added would suffice at this
time.
Mr. Lee agreed that it would be more cost advantageous to the school district to add a gate valve
rather than adding water mains to the site.
Mayor Sonterre closed the public hearing at 9:18 p.m.
MOTION/SECOND: Thomas/Marty. To Waive the Reading and Approve Resolution 5688, a
Resolution Approving the Conditional Use Permit and Development Review for the Edgewood
Middle School Facility Expansion.
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
B. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance 691, Amending Chapter 502
(Intoxicating Liquor) and Chapter 503 (3.2 Percent Beer) of the Mounds
View Municipal Code as They Relate to Charitable Gambling.
Assistant City Administrator Reed explained this item was before Council at the December 3,
2001 work session and Staff was asked to amend the Ordinance to allow other Mounds View
Organizations to conduct charitable gambling in the City and create a 10% fund. She then
explained that several issues had been raised by the Lions and she had attempted to answer those
questions.
Assistant City Administrator Reed explained that the organizations are required to fill out a form
to send to the state listing profits from each site. She then explained that the City is not able to
restrict organizations to spending the majority of profits in the City.
Assistant City Administrator Reed explained the 3% in the Roseville ordinance is used for
regulating the organizations.
Bob Wharton of 7462 Spring Lake Road explained that the reporting mentioned by Staff is for
gross income minus prizes and expenses to establish net income from that site. He then
explained that after that is where the big bucks come into play. He further commented that
combined profit is not shown for the entire organization on that form it is only income from that
site after expenses.
Mounds View City Council January 28, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 18
Mr. Wharton indicated the Lions were not opposed to the 75% as they already meet that
requirement but would prefer that the 10% and 3% be eliminated. He also commented that he
agreed with Council Member Thomas’ comment when she asked why the City would want to get
into administrating this. He then asked Acting Chief Brennan if there have been any instances
where law enforcement has been necessary to administrate the gambling or investigate the
operations.
Acting Chief Brennan indicated that the Police Department conducts background investigations
as part of the licensing requirements but stated he was not aware of any investigations necessary.
Mayor Sonterre explained the 3% tax can only be collected if it is necessary to cover the costs to
regulate costs. He then asked what the process would be to return the overage if it is not used for
regulating the organizations.
Assistant City Administrator Reed suggested exploring whether or not Council could designate
the overage to be used for a specific purpose within the City, such as the Community Center.
Gretchen Wallbridge of 8072 Long Lake Road addressed Council and indicated she would
become the gambling manager on February 1, 2002 and explained that the 3% needs to be used
for law enforcement.
Assistant City Administrator Reed indicated that changing the ordinance may open the market up
to other organizations and there may be a higher demand for investigating applications.
Council Member Thomas indicated Council is not allowing anyone to come in and she is not
interested in bringing in other organizations.
Ms. Wallbridge commented that the 75% requirement should prevent other organizations from
coming to the City.
Council Member Thomas indicated she does not think the City needs to take Staff time to do the
distributions and she does not think the City should collect the 3%.
Dr. Greg Belting from the Chamber of Commerce indicated that the Chamber supports the
adoption of the amended ordinance. He then indicated that the Chamber puts its money into the
New Brighton and Mounds View area and is not concerned with the 75% requirement.
Council Member Marty noted the ordinance requires monthly reporting and asked if quarterly
reporting would be easier for the organizations.
Mr. Wharton indicated that he has to report to the state monthly and would just make an extra
copy for the City. He then asked Council to keep in mind that the 75% contribution would be
cumulative and may not occur every month.
Mounds View City Council January 28, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 19
Dr. Belting indicated that the gambling organizations are in tune for a monthly reporting and it
would actually be more difficult to change to a quarterly reporting for the City.
Council Member Thomas indicated she would like to approve the ordinance without the 10%
fund or the 3% tax.
MOTION/SECOND: Thomas/Marty. To Amend the Ordinance to Remove the 10% Fund and
the 3% Tax.
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Thomas. To Waive the Reading, Approve the Second Reading and
Adopt Ordinance 691, Amending Chapter 502 (Intoxicating Liquor) and Chapter 503 (3.2
Percent Beer) of the Mounds View Municipal Code as They Relate to Charitable Gambling.
Council Member Stigney indicated he did not feel the Ordinance was in need of change and the
City is opening itself up by changing the Ordinance.
Council Member Thomas indicated the Ordinance does not open anything up it simply requires
where the money is to be used.
Council Member Stigney indicated the City has no real control of distribution in the City.
Council Member Marty agreed that the Chamber of Commerce would be contributing to the
Mounds View/New Brighton area not just the City. He then commented he is concerned that the
Ordinance would be weakened and noted Council would need to be vigilant in granting
approvals or changes in charitable gambling establishments.
Council Member Thomas indicated that this change gives the City more control over where the
money is spent.
Council Member Stigney indicated that the Chamber could distribute its funds in New Brighton
and not be in violation of the Ordinance which means the City really has no control.
Council Member Thomas indicated the City has the authority to issue the license and that has
nothing to do with whether the organizations are following the Ordinance or not.
Council Member Stigney asked City Attorney Riggs if a license could be withheld because the
City does not like how funds are distributed.
City Attorney Riggs indicated the City has ultimate control of licensing. He indicated it was not
arbitrary but Council could always change the Ordinance back to what it was.
Dr. Belting indicated that there is a contract that is renewed every two years that is approved by
Council.
Mounds View City Council January 28, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 20
Council Member Stigney indicated the contract cannot say how much the organization will spend
in the City.
Dr. Belting indicated that the Chamber supports the school district and, in particular, Irondale
High School which is in New Brighton but all Mounds View residents children attend that
school. He then commented that they want to do this for the community and that is why he has
waited at this meeting for three hours this evening.
Council Member Marty commented that the Lions are not jumping up and down about the
possibility of losing income but representatives of the Lions have indicated to him that they have
no problem with the Chamber of Commerce.
ROLL CALL: Quick (not present), Thomas, Stigney, Marty, Sonterre.
Ayes – 3 Nays – 1(Stigney) Motion carried.
C. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance 689 Revising Chapter 512 of the
Tobacco Ordinance.
Acting Chief Brennan reviewed with Council the changes that were made as discussed at the
work session.
MOTION/SECOND: Thomas/Sonterre. To Waive the Reading, Approve the Second Reading
and Adopt Ordinance 689, Revising Chapter 512 of the Tobacco Ordinance.
Council Member Marty suggested a friendly amendment under suspension and revocation to
change the Ordinance back to the previous violations.
Council Member Thomas indicated she was not interested in reverting to the original language.
Mayor Sonterre indicated that Council had gone backwards from where it started and he does not
want to change the existing language.
Council Member Marty thanked those that attended the work session to discuss this matter.
Roll Call: Stigney, Thomas, Quick (not present), Marty, Sonterre.
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
C. Consideration of Resolution 5650, a Resolution Approving a Final Plat for
Gustafson’s Fifth Addition Major Subdivision. Planning Case No. MA01-
003.
Mounds View City Council January 28, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 21
Planner Atkinson indicated that Mr. Zinser, representing Ernie Gustafson, is seeking approval of
the final plat for Gustafson’s Fifth Addition. He then noted the park dedication fees are to be
paid prior to recording with Ramsey County.
Mr. Lee indicated he has some concerns in regards to the utilities and noted he would discuss
those with the developer.
MOTION/SECOND: Thomas/Stigney. To Waive the Reading and Approve Resolution 5650, a
Resolution Approving a Final Plat for Gustafson’s Fifth Addition Major Subdivision.
Mr. Jahnke apologized for his remark about the YMCA and said he had wrong information when
he made it.
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
E. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance 683, an Ordinance Rezoning
Certain Property Located at 2525 County Road I from R-1, Single Family
Residential to R-2, Single and Two Family Residential; Planning Case No.
ZC01-001.
Planner Atkinson indicated that this Ordinance would rezone the property to allow for the major
subdivision.
MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Marty. To Waive the Reading, Approve the Second Reading and
Adopt Ordinance 683, an Ordinance Rezoning Certain Property Located at 2525 County Road I
from R-1, Single Family Residential to R-2, Single and Two Family Residential.
Roll Call: Thomas, Quick (not present), Marty, Stigney, Sonterre.
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
F. Authorization for Out of State Training – Police Department
Acting Chief Brennan explained that the City had applied for and received a juvenile
accountability incentive block grant. He explained the City originally was denied the grant but
had been granted a grant of $7,000 and an additional grant of $6,000. He then explained that
there are training opportunities available on February 7, and 8, 2002 in New York and noted all
expenses including wages would be covered under the grant.
Council Member Marty asked what type of training would be received.
Acting Chief Brennan indicated it was restorative justice training which gives an opportunity for
the offender to sit with the victim of the crime and/or relatives to discuss how the crime impacted
the victim and the victim’s family. He then explained that the training is receiving positive
results world-wide.
Mounds View City Council January 28, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 22
MOTION/SECOND: Thomas/Stigney, To Waive the Reading and Approve Resolution 5701,
Authorizing Out of State Training for the Police Department.
Mayor Sonterre congratulated the Police Department on receiving the grants and asked who
wrote them.
Acting Chief Brennan indicated that Officer Nelson wrote the initial grant that was denied and he
had written the subsequent grant that was approved.
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
It was the consent of Council to continue the meeting to 10:20 p.m.
G. Status of Press Release
City Administrator Miller indicated she had reviewed the press release as requested by Council at
the last work session and, after discussion with some Council Members, has decided to
recommend that the City not issue a press release at this time.
Council Member Marty agreed with the City Administrator’s recommendation.
Council Member Thomas indicated that, since the City is past the point of timeliness, she agrees
that no press release is needed.
8. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS
Mayor Sonterre indicated that there are three positions available on the Planning Commission
and then recommended Liz Song be appointed to fill one of those three positions. He also asked
anyone interested in serving on the Planning and Zoning Commission to contact the City to
obtain an application.
MOTION/SECOND: Sonterre/Thomas. To Appoint Liz Song to the Planning and Zoning
Commission.
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
Mayor Sonterre indicated that Eric Miller who presently serves on the Police Civil Service
Commission is interested in being reappointed. He then commented that even though Mr. Miller
is not a resident of Mounds View, he is actively involved in the community because he works for
the school district.
MOTION/SECOND: Sonterre/Thomas. To Re-Appoint Eric Miller to the Police Civil Service
Commission.
Mounds View City Council January 28, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 23
Council Member Marty expressed concern with appointing Mr. Miller because he is not a
resident of Mounds View and his business office is not in Mounds View.
Mayor Sonterre indicated that previous Council had provided a special condition because Mr.
Miller works as a member of Mounds View Public Schools.
Council Member Thomas indicated she had reviewed the other applications and feels it would be
beneficial to have Mr. Miller on the Police Civil Service Commission because he works for the
school district.
Council Member Stigney indicated he felt it was great that Mr. Miller was interested in
volunteering and thanked him for serving. He then said the function of the Police Civil Service
Commission is a bit different and there are candidates that live in Mounds View and have a lot of
police background qualifications.
City Attorney Riggs indicated there may be a problem with the appointment because the statute
requires the appointees live in the City. He then indicated he would review the matter and report
back to Council.
Council Member Marty raised what he feels is another issue concerning the Police Civil Service
and that is the fact that Council Member Quick’s spouse services on the Commission. He
commented that he sees this as a possible conflict of interest that may also pose an ethical
question. He then asked the City Attorney to look into whether it is appropriate to have spouses
of Council Members serving on Commissions and Committees within the City.
Mayor Sonterre noted that the term of the person being discussed was not presently up and
suggested that the City Attorney review the matter and provide a report. He then indicated that
he had reviewed information from the League of Minnesota Cities and had not seen anything that
would prevent the spouse of a Council Member from serving on Commissions or Committees
within the City.
Council Member Marty commented that due to what came up he was not sure if it was a
personality conflict or what it was.
Mayor Sonterre asked that since the matter was not part of the agenda the matter be set for
discussion at the work session in February.
MOTION/SECOND: Thomas/Marty. To Table This Matter for Further Information.
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
9. REPORTS
Assistant City Administrator Reed reported that Mr. Hess had asked her to ask Council whether
Members wished to continue receiving packets via e-mail.
Mounds View City Council January 28, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 24
Council Member Thomas indicated she would like to receive the packet via e-mail.
Council Member Stigney indicated he did not need the original packet by e-mail but asked that
any changes be sent by e-mail.
Mayor Sonterre indicated he would like to receive the packet via e-mail.
Council Member Marty indicated he would like to continue getting the hard copy and would let
Staff know if he wants to receive the packet via e-mail.
Acting Chief Brennan reviewed his Staff report with Council and pointed out that the Police
Department had saved the budgeted $14,000 plus the $4,000 carried over from the previous year
that was to be used to remodel the front counter area to make it updated and EDA compliant by
determining that no EDA changes were necessary and asking the Public Works Staff to install a
new counter. He also pointed out that the Police Department had budgeted $15,000 for two
separate security proposals for the Police Department and he had determined that the current lock
and key system is working just fine and not expended the funds.
Acting Chief Brennan indicated the Police Department has applied and received grant funds for
the purchase of night vision surveillance equipment. He also indicated that training would be
provided as a part of that grant.
Acting Chief Brennan indicated the Police Department is also pursuing a federal grant that would
allow for a maximum of a 50% reimbursement for body armor for the Police Department and
that grant, combined with state funding, could replace all the body armor at no cost to the City
which would save in excess of $10,000. He then commented that the Police Department had
been informed that due to the small size of the department, it is highly likely the grant will be
approved.
Acting Chief Brennan indicated that, acting on information received from the Mayor, the Police
Department is looking into applying for grants to fund community policing.
Acting Chief Brennan provided information to Council concerning the Police Departments policy
and the state requirements for sex offender notification. He then indicated that since 1996, when
classification went into effect, the City does not have any registered level three offenders, has just
one level two offender and has a total of 15 registered offenders living in the City. He also
commented that prior to 1996 the state was not assigning risk levels so the City is unaware of the
status of the remaining offenders.
Acting Chief Brennan indicated that any resident who was interested could check for level three
offenders by logging onto the BCA’s website.
Mounds View City Council January 28, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 25
Mayor Sonterre clarified that the Police Department had done all it could do by law with regard
to notification concerning the level two offender who recently moved into the Community. He
then indicated that schools, churches and daycares were notified.
Council Member Stigney questioned if, the offender was a child predator, would the
neighborhood be notified.
Acting Chief Brennan indicated the Police Department would notify the neighborhood if the
details of the crime warranted it.
Council Member Stigney asked if, without identifying an individual specifically, the
neighborhood he/she resides in could be identified.
Acting Chief Brennan indicated that the location of sex offenders can only be announced for
level three offenders.
Council Member Stigney asked that the sex offender information be posted on the City’s website.
Council Member Marty thanked the Public Works Staff for saving the City $17,950.00
Council Member Thomas reported that both she and Council Member Marty attended the
community meeting at Pinewood Elementary concerning the roofing issues and is pleased to
report that the school district has agreed to put a new roof on the entire school minus the section
that was replaced last summer. She then thanked residents and parents for getting involved to
resolve the matter.
Mayor Sonterre indicated he had attended the Ramsey County League of Local Government
meeting where the governor’s plan to fix the budget was discussed. He noted that the governor
proposes to recoup 30% of the $1.9 billion dollar budget shortfall from aid to cities. He then
asked residents to contact their senator and representative to let them know it is not fair to take
that much funding away from cities.
City Administrator Miller indicated that, based on the governor’s proposed budget, the City of
Mounds View would lose an additional $68,000 in funding this year and another $140,000 next
year in state aid. She then indicated she would pass on to Council information received at that
meeting.
Council Member Marty asked if City Attorney Riggs had prepared a report on whether he had
violated the City’s Charter by doing an investigation into the fitness equipment.
Council Member Marty pointed out that Council Member Quick was doing his own investigation
into the Chief and asked if Council had authorized an investigation into that.
Mounds View City Council January 28, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 26
Council Member Marty indicated he had made a request for City expenses and credit card bills
for department heads because he feels there may be some infractions and he feels it should be
reviewed by Council rather than paying an auditor to review it.
Council Member Marty indicated it was his understanding that cities need to have a policy on
credit cards and, if there is no written ordinance on regulation of credit cards, the City may be out
of compliance.
City Attorney Riggs handed out a letter addressing the charter violation issue.
City Attorney Riggs asked for clarification on the data practices question.
Council Member Marty explained that he had requested the expense reports and credit card bills
for the department heads and Council Members because when MMKR did an audit they found
some possible infractions and he thought, without going to the expense of having auditors go
through it, the City could just look at it to see if there is a need for auditors.
City Attorney Riggs indicated that Council could investigate the matter as a whole.
Council Member Marty indicated he had requested the information and was billed for it.
City Administrator Miller indicated the request was treated as a data practices request because
the request came as part of a request from Mrs. Marty and from Council Member Marty. The
request of Mrs. Marty was fulfilled and the other request was treated as one data practices request
because Council Member Marty and Mrs. Marty had requested the exact same information.
City Administrator Miller explained that she had contacted the City Attorney’s office and the
League of Minnesota Cities for guidance on data practices requests because the City has been
receiving numerous requests and, upon notification of the costs involved, people have been
asking to review the information after copies are made and Staff time is expended preparing the
request. She then commented that she had been advised that it would be appropriate to charge
for data practices requests. She also noted that she had been told that a Council Member could
not be treated any differently than any other resident in the community asking for a data practices
request.
City Administrator Miller indicated that the request made took 13 hours of the bookkeepers time
and was 400 plus pages of copying. She then indicated if Council Member Marty would like to
know in the future, the estimated costs to fulfill his requests she would be happy to provide an
estimate. She further commented that the request was a sizeable request and did not come from
Council as a whole.
Council Member Marty confirmed that the City Administrator would not let him see the
information until he paid the $452.00.
Mounds View City Council January 28, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 27
City Administrator Miller indicated that is City policy and noted that a previous request filled for
Council Member Marty has not been paid.
Council Member Thomas asked for clarification of the letter provided and asked if her
understanding that Council needs to conduct investigations as a body by direction or vote was
correct.
City Attorney Riggs indicated Council Member Thomas was correct in her understanding of his
letter.
Council Member Marty commented that any citizen in this City could investigate anything in this
City.
City Administrator Miller indicated, assuming the information is public, it would be provided but
the resident would still be charged for staff time and for copies.
Council Member Marty asked whether Mr. Coughlin was billed for the data practices request he
made on June 1, 2001 asking for copies of all e-mail and electronic copies of golf course cell
phone bills. He then commented that, when he was told the copies would cost $200.00 he
reviewed them and was told Mr. Coughlin had made the same request.
City Administrator Miller indicated that Council Member Marty was billed for the copies of
those items that he had reviewed. She then indicated that, since that time, the City has had a
number of requests. Staff compiles the information and makes the copies and then the person
decides just to review the copies rather than pay for them and that is why the policy has been
implemented. She further commented that, upon discussion with Staff, the Staff time involved in
fulfilling the requests has been insurmountable and the decision was made to start charging for
Staff time and copies in order to make sure that requests being made are important enough that
the resident is willing to pay for them.
Council Member Marty indicated he thought Council should be able to view the backup
documentation for the just and correct claims and said he thinks Council should review the credit
card information to determine whether an audit is necessary.
Mayor Sonterre reminded Council this section of the meeting was to be reserved for reports and
asked that the current discussion be reserved as a work session discussion. He then asked
Council Member Marty if he wished to ask that the matter be placed on the work session agenda.
Council Member Marty indicated he would like to request to see the City’s credit card policy.
City Administrator Miller indicated it was brought to her attention that all employees had credit
cards and she has since reduced the number of credit cards to two for use when making hotel and
conference arrangements. She then indicated that Council would be dealing with the credit card
issue as part of the purchasing policy at the February work session.
Mounds View City Council January 28, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 28
Mayor Sonterre asked to have the discussion included at the second work session in February.
Council Member Stigney commented that it seems the information Council Member Marty had
requested was different than the purchasing policy. He then asked if he could come to City Hall
and view the information.
City Administrator Miller indicated that right now she has received a request from Wendy and
Rob Marty unless Council decides to turn this into an investigation and direct her to provide
information to the entire Council.
Council Member Marty indicated he was not sure if an investigation was needed but said he
would like to look into it in light of the one spot check that was done.
Mayor Sonterre commented that the request was made as a data practices request and was treated
as such. He then commented that, if Council Member Marty had come to Council and asked
Council to look into the matter as a Council, then the information would have been provided
without a charge to the whole Council.
Council Member Marty said that it seems to him that a Council Member should be able to look
into something if he feels it is necessary.
City Attorney Riggs indicated that the Minnesota Data Practices Act does not treat a Council
Member any differently than any other resident in the community. He commented that Council
Members gain no authority and are to be treated no differently than any other individual unless it
is official authorized Council business. He further commented that Council lacks the authority to
do anything differently because that would be creating a perk that the average citizen does not
have in this community.
Council Member Marty indicated there is a cost of 25 cents per page but said he had never seen it
written anywhere an hourly wage rate for anyone that is billed for a data practices request. He
then asked how much Mr. Coughlin paid for this.
City Administrator Miller indicated that Mr. Coughlin’s request had not been fulfilled.
Council Member Marty indicated that Mr. Coughlin had asked for copies.
City Attorney Riggs clarified that Mr. Coughlin had made a second request to be allowed to view
the information rather than have copies made. He then indicated the statute allows the City to
recover the costs associated with making copies of the information. He further commented that
this is what is allowed by City policy and City policy is compliant with the state statute.
City Attorney Riggs then commented that Council Member Marty wants to be treated differently
than what state statute allows and he cannot tell him that he can be. He further explained he had
discussed the matter with a number of colleagues, had contacted the League of Minnesota Cities,
Mounds View City Council January 28, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 29
and the Department of Administration as well as checking the statutes and the authority being
requested does not exist.
City Administrator Miller indicated that Mr. Coughlin had asked for the same copies Council
Member Marty but, when told he would be charged for the information, had decided to make the
request to view the information instead.
Mayor Sonterre encouraged Council Member Marty and City Administrator Miller to sit down
and discuss the City’s policy for clarification.
Council Member Stigney clarified that any resident could come in and view information that is
public data but would be charged for any copies requested.
City Attorney Riggs indicated that under the statute a resident has the ability to review
information but, if a request for copies is made and fulfilled, residents will be charged for those
costs.
Council Member Marty indicated that when he came in the first time and was told it would cost
him $200.00 he said he would just review the information.
City Administrator Miller indicated the policy was changed to deal with the numerous requests
and exorbitant amount of staff time being taken up with the requests. She further commented
that the City Attorney had advised that the City should start enforcing the data practices law that
states that the City can recover the costs for providing information. She also indicated that
Mayor Sonterre would be billed for his data practices request.
10. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. January 7, 2002 City Council Minutes.
MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Thomas. To Table Consideration of the Minutes to the Next
Council Meeting.
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
Council recessed to the EDA meeting at 11:00 p.m.
Council reconvened at 11:16 p.m. and moved to the closed session.
Mayor Sonterre noted that Council would adjourn from the closed session.
11. CLOSED SESSION TO DISCUSS THREATENED/POTENTIAL LITIGATION
Council recessed to the closed session at 11:16 p.m.
Mounds View City Council January 28, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 30
12. Next Council Work Session: Monday, February 4, 2002
Next Council Meeting: Monday, February 11, 2002
13. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Sonterre adjourned the meeting at ____ p.m.
Transcribed and recorded by:
Joan Lenzmeier
Timesaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Regular Meeting
February 11, 2002
Mounds View City Hall
2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112
7:05 P.M.
1. MEETING IS CALLED TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL: Mayor Sonterre, Quick, Marty (not present), Stigney, and Thomas.
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
A. Monday, February 11, 2002 City Council Agenda.
Finance Director Hansen requested that Resolution No. 5712, a Resolution Approving the 2002
Community Forest Health Oak Wilt Grant Agreement be added under Council Business.
MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Stigney. To Approve the February 11, 2002, City Council Agenda
as amended.
Ayes - 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
4. PUBLIC INPUT
David Jahnke of 8428 Eastwood Road said he watched the work session and agrees with most of
Council that the report is no big deal and should not take more than 10 or 15 minutes so he is not
sure why the rest are opposing it. He then said his other concern is that the current City Attorney
seems to take questions under advisement and offer to research the matter rather than answer the
questions of Council when asked as the previous City Attorney seemed to do.
Mayor Sonterre commented that Council sometimes asks for an opinion and sometimes asks for
a report and noted that Council would attempt to be more cognizant of how the questions are
asked in the future in an attempt to save money on attorney’s fees.
5. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
None.
Mounds View City Council February 11, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 2
6. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Just and Correct Claims
B. Licenses for Approval
C. Resolution 5708 Approving a Charitable Gambling License for the New Brighton-
Mounds View Chamber of Commerce
D. Resolution 5702 Authorizing Expenditure for Two Cellular Phone Accounts for
Community Development as Identified in the 2002 Budget
E. Set a Public Hearing for 7:05 p.m., Monday, February 25, 2002, to Consider the
Revised Preliminary Plat for the Longview Estates Major Subdivision; Planning
Case MA01-001
F. Resolution 5711 Authorizing Payment to Elegant Thymes Management Co.
G. Resolution 5705 Approving Appointments to the Parks and Recreation
Commission and the Planning and Zoning Commission
H. Resolution 5699 Approving a Severance Payment to Joan Babekuhl
MOTION/SECOND: Thomas/Quick. To Approve Consent Agenda Items A through H as
Presented.
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
7. COUNCIL BUSINESS
A. Finance Department Quarterly Report – Charlie Hansen
Mayor Sonterre explained that Council had decided to re-institute a portion of the City’s Charter
that requires department directors to make reports to the public and Council once per quarter.
Finance Director Hansen addressed the Council and gave his report in two parts, the first part
was a preliminary quarterly financial report for the City for the fourth quarter of 2001 and the
second part was specific to the activities of the finance department.
Finance Director Hansen explained that there were some items yet to be accounted for in the
financials for this report and cautioned Council that the report was preliminary.
Finance Director Hansen explained that some of the projects taken on by the Economic
Development Authority exceeded the projected amounts and will require a transfer to bring that
account into balance.
Finance Director Hansen indicated the hotel/motel tax and franchise taxes had revenues that
exceed the projected budget by 3%.
Finance Director Hansen indicated that the licenses and permits exceeded the revenues budgeted
and noted that, while construction can be sensitive to the economy, he does not anticipate a slow
down in the construction within the City.
Mounds View City Council February 11, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 3
Finance Director Hansen explained that intergovernmental revenues were less than what had
been budgeted for and noted that the City had anticipated receiving a $68,000 police grant and
did not receive it.
Finance Director Hansen indicated that he believes that total revenues will exceed 100% of the
revenue budget.
Finance Director Hansen explained that the general funds total $3,911,000 and the budget was
for $4,428,000 making the City under budget by $517,000. He then commented that the numbers
could change slightly as the rest of the expenses come in but he feels the City will stay under
budget on expenses.
Finance Director Hansen explained that the Economic Development Fund was over budget by
quite a bit and noted Council would need to discuss this area and he would be asking Council to
retroactively revise the budget to reflect the level of the projects approved. He further
commented that there would be a transfer out of the TIF fund to balance out the fund.
Finance Director Hansen noted that Pages 26 through 28 cover the Community Center and said
that the City has struggled with accounting for the businesses operating there and is in the
process of improving the accounting for that area to identify what is or is not working. He then
noted that for 2001 the Community Center had expenditures that exceeded revenues by $43,000.
He further noted that the numbers are preliminary but fairly close.
Finance Director Hansen indicated that interest income and depreciation have not been added to
the water and sewer fund and those are significant numbers. He then noted that the City needs to
prepare a utility rate study and do a comprehensive review of the utilities and decide whether to
restructure costs or institute a rate increase to keep up with inflation.
Finance Director Hansen indicated that the golf course numbers are hard to draw conclusions
from because there are outstanding personnel issues that could be significant and noted that the
depreciation had not been recorded.
Council Member Stigney asked whether the golf course figures included the debt service.
Finance Director Hansen indicated the debt service was included in the numbers for the golf
course.
Council Member Stigney asked where the money received from the federal gas tax refund are
accounted for.
Finance Director Hansen explained that the City puts those funds back into the account that the
City buys gas out of. He then explained that the numbers reported show the cost of gas net of the
federal gas tax refund.
Mounds View City Council February 11, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 4
Council Member Stigney indicated that he would like to see the receipt of those funds accounted
for.
Finance Director Hansen indicated he could check with the employees that file the reports and
get a copy of the most recent report.
Mayor Sonterre inquired as to whether the $43,653 overage for the Community Center could be
accounted for each of the uses within the Community Center.
Finance Director Hansen explained that the goal behind the way the budget was set for 2002 was
to have it restructured to break out the costs for each use but the numbers have not been recast for
2001. He then asked if Mayor Sonterre wished him to recast the 2001 figures.
Mayor Sonterre indicated he would like the 2001 figures from the Community Center broken
down by use for discussion at the March work session.
Mayor Sonterre noted there was a long list of items that are club-house related and asked whether
the amounts were gross revenues or net revenues.
Finance Director Hansen indicated he was not sure and said he would research the matter and
report back to Council at the work session.
Finance Director Hansen reported that the finance department is over budget for 2001 by $47,000
and that is due entirely to legal and audit fees. He also indicated that there is a backlog of work
that needs to be cleared up before the audit in April.
Finance Director Hansen indicated that Council had approved the purchase of fixed asset
accounting software and noted that none of the current Staff had been trained to work the old
system. He then indicated that Staff has been working on a purchasing policy and that will be
discussed at the next work session.
Finance Director Hansen indicated the Council had decided in December to engage a new firm
for audits and one major objective is to review City-wide procedures and come up with a list of
recommendations as to how the City can improve its procedures and documentation. He then
cautioned against changing auditors too frequently because whenever you bring in a new auditor
there is a heavy work load for the auditor and Staff to bring the new auditor up to speed with all
the documentation needed whereas a returning auditor would have that. He also recommended
staying with this auditor for a few years to recoup the upfront costs associated with changing
auditors.
Finance Director Hansen indicated that his department is going through all of its procedures and
documentation in an effort to streamline the process. He then noted that the report on quarterly
reports was due two weeks ago and noted that the efforts to redo procedures and documentation
contributed to the delay. He further noted that there would be a delay in receiving information
Mounds View City Council February 11, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 5
from the finance department for up to a year as they wade through things in an effort to provide
better service in the future.
William Werner of 2765 Sherwood Road asked if the City was putting any money into running
the golf course.
Mayor Sonterre asked Finance Director Hansen if the City is putting City funds, not generated as
forms of revenue from the golf course, into the golf course.
Finance Director Hansen indicated that, in looking at the numbers, he would say the golf course
is not breaking even. He then indicated that the last two years the golf course has reported a net
loss and he expects the same for 2001. He then expressed concern that if the course continues to
show a loss year after year, and the City has to start replacing capital equipment, there will not be
cash for those replacements. He further indicated that the City is not currently putting cash into
the golf course but the fact that it is operating at a loss is of serious concern in terms of needing
to put cash into it in the future for the replacement of capital equipment.
Council Member Stigney indicated it was his understanding that the City made a loan to the golf
course. He then asked if the golf course had begun paying back that loan.
Finance Director Hansen indicated that the golf course is not paying back the loan at this time.
B. Community Development Quarterly Report – Jim Ericson
Community Development Director Ericson explained that his department was able to spend
$100,000 less than the amount budgeted for 2001. He then indicated that the savings could be
attributed to a drop in personnel costs and the ability to pass on to the developers most of the
consultant costs involved with development projects.
Community Development Director Ericson reviewed the building permit applications with
Council and indicated that the value of the permits for 2001 was $16,000,000 and said he did not
expect that level for 2002 but said the permits should be somewhere around $10,000,000.
Community Development Director Ericson gave a brief overview of the 2001 nuisance code
activity handled by Jeremiah Anderson and noted that the City is reimbursed for the Section 8
housing inspections conducted by Mr. Anderson.
Community Development Director Ericson explained that it is not always easy to get residents to
comply with the nuisance code and Staff is working on ways to make the process more efficient.
Community Development Director Ericson indicated that the County Highway 10 revitalization
project is taking up a lot of Staff time and noted that there would be an open house in mid-March
to outline the proposed plans for the revitalization. He then indicated that Ramsey County
intends to proceed with the mill and overlay and the City expects to receive special striping at the
Mounds View City Council February 11, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 6
crosswalks to make motorists aware of those crosswalks. He further indicated that the City is
researching many avenues for funding the project.
Community Development Director Ericson indicated the Mermaid project is proceeding as
planned and noted that the nice winter has helped with construction. He then indicated that the
Economic Development Authority would be hearing a concern regarding the project because Mr.
Hall has been having difficulty obtaining the final parcel to complete the redevelopment.
Community Development Director Ericson updated Council on the County Highway 10 billboard
to be updated and expanded by Clear Channel Outdoor. He then indicated that Rice Creek
Watershed District had approved the permit and the matter would be coming before Council for
approval of a wetland alteration permit. He also noted the permit would generate $50,000 up
front for the City and $7,000 per year adjusted for inflation to continue every year.
Community Development Director Ericson indicated that he continues to work on the parking
issues at the Wynnsong Theatre and noted he had spoken to the district office and the
representative had expressed a willingness to work with the City for a successful resolution of the
matter.
Community Development Director Ericson indicated that the Council would be considering
revoking the license of the Gas and Splash for failure to pay SAC fees. He then explained that
the City has been working on resolving the matter for two years and the business owes the City
$43,000 in overdue SAC fees.
Community Development Director Ericson explained that Council would be hearing a request for
a revised preliminary plat for Longview Estates presented by Mr. Harstad. He then explained
that Council denied a variance for reduced lot widths because the property is located within a
wetland zoning district and Mr. Harstad had then brought a plan before the Planning Commission
outlining 26 lots, none of which met the Code requirements, and the plan was denied. He further
indicated that he had received calls from residents asking why Mr. Harstad had brought a
proposal for 26 lots if he was denied 11 lots and said he is not sure, only Mr. Harstad knows why
he has requested the 26 lots.
Community Development Director Ericson reported that the Edgewood regional pond had been
completed and noted the storm water runoff generated by the Mermaid development will be
treated in that pond before entering the creek.
Community Development Director Ericson indicated he went to William Mitchell College of
Law to listen while the Minnesota Court of Appeals heard the City’s argument with regard to the
Commissioner of Transportation’s denial of billboards at the golf course. He then commented
that he is not a lawyer but he felt it went well. He further indicated that a decision is expected
within 90 days.
Community Development Director Ericson indicated that staff has been working with a number
of developers trying to create redevelopment opportunities and focus activity on certain areas
Mounds View City Council February 11, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 7
within the City where the City would like to see redevelopment occur. He then indicated that
those sites are the former Amoco site on Silver Lake Road and Highway 10, and the area by
Groveland Road and Highway 10. He further noted there have been some for sale signs up in
residents’ yards in that area.
Community Development Director Ericson reported that the building official was out on 2,000
building code issues in addition to all the fire code inspections she does each year. He then noted
that Staff is looking at drafting an ordinance to require that the City be notified when a change of
occupancy occurs in the business park because the City currently has no way of tracking who is
in the business park and whether or not the sprinklers are up to Code. He further commented that
this ordinance would allow the City to be able to provide updated emergency contact information
and inspect the sprinkler system to determine whether it complies with the Code.
Community Development Director Ericson explained that Staff has been working with the I35W
Corridor Coalition which is an organization consisting of 7 cities that straddle 35W. He further
explained the organization gets all the cities working together to plan for the future in a
comprehensive way.
Community Development Director Ericson reported that the City participates in the Housing
Resource Center by paying a fee to enable residents to be able to participate in a cost share
program for making home improvements. He then indicated that the program has assisted 34
families in Mounds View and noted that three rebates had been issued and there are five more
pending.
Mayor Sonterre stated that something that speaks volumes to the good that the Housing Resource
Center does is that two cities that are not part of the I35W corridor have petitioned to be
participants in this organization, and have paid a lot more than what the City is paying as a
member City to belong to it.
Council Member Thomas noted the report states that the City has received approval for dead-
ending St. Stephen Street. She then asked if that is with or without the new cross street.
Community Development Director Ericson indicated that would be without the new cross street.
Council Member Thomas asked if Staff was aware of the status of the sale of the one acre parcel
attached to the Walgreen’s parcel.
Community Development Director Ericson indicated that he did not have any information on the
sale of that parcel other than being aware that it is for sale.
Community Development Director Ericson indicated he had asked Aaron Backman to look into it
and the response he received was the owner is trying to sell it. He then noted it is not a very big
parcel and it is hidden by Walgreen’s making it difficult to market.
Council Member Stigney asked if Staff had an update on the Arden Park soil borings and asked
whether the City is doing an RFP.
Mounds View City Council February 11, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 8
Community Development Director Ericson indicated he had been dealing with a couple of
developers and, on a low-key basis, had been asking people to look into the possibility of
developing it. He then indicated he has not taken the steps to create an RFP but is letting
developers know that the area has strong potential for redevelopment opportunities. He further
commented that he expects to see a proposal before the year is up.
Council Member Stigney indicated he had seen information from Senator Chaudharay
concerning $100,000 for the Highway 10 corridor. He then asked if Mounds View would receive
any direct benefit from that.
Community Development Director Ericson indicated he was not sure what that money was
earmarked for.
Mayor Sonterre indicated that the money goes into a pool and all 7 cities will be making requests
and prioritizing projects. He then noted the City scores high on the scale with its revitalization
project and noted that the bill was an I35W Corridor Coalition bill.
Mayor Sonterre indicated the City was very appreciative of the $100,000 savings in the
Community Development budget but mentioned that a large portion of that savings was due to
lowered personnel costs because the department was without a planner and an economic
development coordinator for a period of time.
Mayor Sonterre indicated that late last summer Aaron Parrish had commented that there was
interest in the property off of County Road 10 and Long Lake Road for development.
Community Development Director Ericson indicated that a sample plan was submitted five or six
months ago for a small building that would house three different food related tenants but noted
the deal fell through and Staff has seen nothing further on that property.
Michelle Sandbeck of 2356 Sherwood Road asked if the street in front of the theatre was a City
street.
Mayor Sonterre indicated that the street in front of the theatre is a City street.
Ms. Sandbeck asked why parking is not allowed on that street. She then indicated her neighbor
had asked her to ask Council what happened to the wetlands issue at the golf course.
Mayor Sonterre indicated that the majority of the street in front of the theater is posted no
parking for fire reasons. He then explained that the land in question was deeded to the City for
water retention or filtration not specific to wetlands and the process was begun in 1988 or 1989
to have it reclassified to public facilities which is a generic use term but that process has not been
completed as of yet. He then said he would look into it.
Mounds View City Council February 11, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 9
C. Fire Department Quarterly Report - Nyle Zikmund
Fire Chief Zikmund reported that the total call volume for emergency response was down
approximately 15% and he attributes that to prevention and to some change in response protocols
as the Police Department is handling illegal burns. He indicated that there was a recent fire in
Mounds View in one of the mobile home parks that was a total loss to the structure. He then
noted that a young couple with a young child was living in the home which had no working
smoke detector. He further indicated that it was an early morning fire and the father had
awakened to go to work and realized there was a fire and the family was able to escape
unharmed.
Fire Chief Zikmund reported that his department was over budget for the first time in over 6
years and for the first time during his administration. He then explained that the budget overage
could be attributed to the catastrophic engine failure in one of the fire truck engines and the fact
that the department had two other engines needing to be retrofitted with a different radiator so
that those engines did not fail. He further explained that the department did not seek to recover
any costs from the manufacturer because the attorney’s fees to do so would have cancelled out
any gain.
Fire Chief Zikmund explained the other reason behind the budget overage was the Larson Auto
Wrecking fire that required $20,000 worth of foam from 3M. He then indicated that legal action
is underway to recover the costs for that fire and the costs to do so are being borne by Blaine.
Fire Chief Zikmund indicated that his staffing is at the strongest level in years and he can put
together a day crew of 14 or 15 people.
Fire Chief Zikmund indicated the fire department had received a grant towards the purchase of
safety equipment that attaches to the self contained breathing apparatus and monitors air
temperature, consumption rate, and provides an audible alarm if the fireman goes immobile for
30 seconds and has a flashing alarm to aid in location of the person. He then indicated that this is
the fourth generation of this safety device and the bugs have been worked out of it making it an
important safety feature for the fire department.
Fire Chief Zikmund indicated that a major project for the department is converting to a state of
the art software program that will provide better address information and combine all of the
information now carried around in books onto the computer to be accessed via laptop computers.
Fire Chief Zikmund indicated that the department had been granted another contract to continue
as the HAZMAT response team.
Fire Chief Zikmund reported he is involved in the Minnesota Fire Chief’s Association and the
Legislative Committee. He then indicated that there are some groups attempting to legalize
fireworks in Minnesota and the departments are against that because of the obvious dangers. He
then indicated that there is a bill attempting to add a box to the tax return to be able to contribute
to the police and fireman’s fund.
Mounds View City Council February 11, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 10
Fire Chief Zikmund indicated that the department uses a curriculum called Risk Watch and noted
it is a new approach to doing fire prevention education. He indicated that Risk Watch is
designed to integrate into the school curriculum and be taught by the teachers. He then indicated
that the curriculum has been proven to be effective but it is expensive. He further indicated the
fire department would be writing a grant to attempt to obtain an $80,000 grant for more
curriculum.
Fire Chief Zikmund indicated he is looking at reducing the costs spent on false alarms by
working with dispatch for better information on call outs. He then indicated that over the last
year there had been 40 out of 1000 calls where he would say the department over responded. He
further indicated that, depending on what the legislature does, his department would be looking
at cutting out association activity and phasing in the software implementation slowly to save
costs.
Mayor Sonterre indicated he had seen a lot of reports indicating that interest in serving rose
greatly after September 11th but he has also been hearing that people are not following through.
He then asked the Chief if he had received increased interest in serving.
Fire Chief Zikmund indicated he had not seen any real increase in the numbers of calls. He then
indicated that, in meeting with the Metro Fire Chiefs, there has been a modest increase. He
further noted that those articles tend to attract people that the fire department does not want, not
because they are bad people, but because they do not understand the commitment that it takes to
be a firefighter. He also noted that most of what the fire department does is quite boring.
D. Resolution 5712, a Resolution Approving the 2002 Community Forest Health
– Oak Wilt Grant Agreement
Finance Director Hansen indicated that this agreement would allow cost sharing for anyone in the
City having to deal with a tree with Oak Wilt. For example, a resident would only pay $150.00
to have the tree removed rather than the full $300.00. He also noted that the same would apply to
the City for any trees it needs to remove from City owned land.
MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Thomas. To Waive the Reading and Approve Resolution 5712, a
Resolution Approving the 2002 Community Forest Health – Oak Wilt Grant Agreement.
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
8. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS
Mayor Sonterre indicated that Council had before it Resolution 5710, appointing Mark Pothen
and Mike Szczepanski to the Park and Recreation Commission.
Mayor Sonterre indicated he had received a current application from Mr. Pothen but not from
Mr. Szczepanski.
Mounds View City Council February 11, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 11
MOTION/SECOND: Sonterre/Quick. To Waive the Reading and Approve Resolution 5710, a
Resolution Appointing Mark Pothen and Mike Szczepanski to the Park and Recreation
Commission.
Council Member Stigney asked if both appointees had submitted current applications.
Mayor Sonterre indicated that Mr. Szczepanski had not submitted a new application but had
expressed the desire to be reappointed.
Council Member Stigney indicated that the Planning Commission was required to provide a new
application before being reappointed. He then indicated he felt the appropriate protocol would be
to require a current application before appointing him.
Council Member Stigney suggested a friendly amendment to remove Szczepanski from the
Resolution and not appoint him to the Park and Recreation Commission until he has submitted a
current application.
Mayor Sonterre and Council Member Quick accepted the friendly amendment.
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
9. REPORTS
Mayor Sonterre reported that he and Mr. Ericson had attended the Court of Appeals hearing on
the billboard issue and he felt that it went well.
Mayor Sonterre complimented Mr. Ericson on his presentation to the I35W Corridor Coalition of
the community development issues in Mounds View and said he did a great job. He then
indicated that, based on conversations after the presentation, all of the persons involved have
expressed significant interest in the redevelopment of County Highway 10. He also noted that a
significant transportation hub located on Highway 10 was discussed.
Mayor Sonterre indicated he had a chance to speak to Mr. Hall concerning the issues at the
Mermaid and thanked Mr. Hall for bringing him up to speed on the matter.
Mayor Sonterre reported he had attended a forum hosted by Rice Creek Watershed District for
consideration of the three finalists for the Executive Director position. He then noted that they
are close to filling the position and all three candidates had good credentials.
Mayor Sonterre commented that the City of Burnsville recently fined the Super America Station
$10,000 and suspended its license for one year for failing compliance checks five times in two
years.
Mounds View City Council February 11, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 12
Community Development Director Ericson announced that the 2002 Home and Garden Show
would be held March 2, 2002 from 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. and invited all residents to attend.
10. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. January 7, 2002 City Council Minutes.
Council Member Stigney requested the following changes: On Page 13 correct the spelling of
Sherry Gunn’s name in two places.
City Administrator Miller requested the following changes: On Page 16, indicate that City
Administrator Miller had said that when City Staff took ownership of the equipment no one
checked to make sure the equipment received was what was purchased. On Page 17, third
paragraph, change YMCA to Public Works Staff. On Page 18, second sentence change the last
word from accepted to received. On page 19, fourth paragraph from the bottom, replace
information hunting with an investigation. Change YMCA to Public Works Staff.
MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Thomas. To Approve the Minutes for January 7, 2002 as
Amended.
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
B. January 28, 2002 City Council Minutes
Council Member Thomas indicated that concern had been raised that the minutes from January
28, 2002 required considerable correction.
MOTION/SECOND: Thomas/Quick. To Table Approval of the January 28, 2002 City Council
Minutes.
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
City Attorney Riggs indicated that Council needed to approve, by majority vote, to go into a
closed session for the labor discussions.
Council recessed to the EDA meeting at 8:40 p.m.
Council reconvened at 8:57p.m.
MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Stigney. To Recess to Closed Session to Discuss Labor
Negotiations.
Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried.
Mayor Sonterre noted that Council would adjourn from the closed session.
Mounds View City Council February 11, 2002
Regular Meeting Page 13
11. CLOSED SESSION
A. To Discuss Labor Negotiations
B. To Discuss Threatened/Potential Litigation
Council recessed to the closed session at 9:00 p.m.
12. Next Council Work Session: Tuesday, February 19, 2002
Next Council Meeting: Monday, February 25, 2002
13. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Sonterre adjourned the meeting at ____ p.m.
Transcribed and recorded by:
Joan Lenzmeier
Timesaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.