Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packets - 2001/09/24MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL MEETING September 24, 2001 Please sign in NAME ADDRESS 1(Zf1 CtAdminsesolution.sign-in sheet M:\MasterFiles\1999 thru 2010\2001\City Council\Council Packets\09-24-2001 Council\Agenda -- Sept 24, 2001.doc CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNCIL AGENDA MONDAY, September 24, 2001 7 p.m. Revised 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL: Sonterre, Quick, Marty, Stigney, Thomas 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 4. PUBLIC INPUT: A. 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. Approve Just and Correct Claims B. Licenses for Approval C. Resolution 5618 Approving a Joint Powers Agreement with Ramsey County for Election System Replacement D. Resolution 5623 Authorizing the Replacement of Carpeting Throughout the Police Department. E. Resolution 5606 Approving Severance for Bill Clark F. Construction of a Traffic Signal at Pleasant View Drive and County Hwy 10 (Please bring packets that were distributed at the September 17, 2001 Retreat) 7. COUNCIL BUSINESS A. Resolution 5622 Authorizing Abatement of Hazardous Building at 8217 Long Lake Road-Jeremiah Anderson B. Consideration of Resolution 5625 Appointing a Finance Director/Treasurer C. Discussion Regarding Public Works Staffing 8. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS A. Presentation of Plaque for Larry Decheine 9. REPORTS A. Schedule Special Work Session with Public Works Personnel 10. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. September 10, 2001 M:\MasterFiles\1999 thru 2010\2001\City Council\Council Packets\09-24-2001 Council\Agenda -- Sept 24, 2001.doc City Council Meeting September 24, 2001 Page –2- 11. Closed Session to discuss pending litigation. 12. Next Council Work Session: October 1, 2001 Next Council Meeting: October 8, 2001 13. ADJOURNMENT Item No. 6B Type of Business: CA WK: Work Session; PH: Public Hearing; CA: Consent Agenda; CB: Council Business City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Mayor and City Council From: Barb Benesch Item Title/Subject: CONTRACTOR LICENSES FOR APPROVAL Meeting Date: September 24, 2001 Please consider the following contractor licenses for approval. The licenses listed will expire on December 31, 2001. All applicants have submitted appropriate fees and proof of insurance. Licenses are noted with a “New” or “Renewal” after the company name. Those licenses defined as “new” include all applicants that have never been licensed with the City or they may have been licensed with the City in the past, but were not licensed in 2000. Those defined as “renewal” were licensed in the year 2000. GENERAL – COMMERCIAL Ebert, Inc. – New SEWER/WATER St. Paul Utilities, Inc. - New TREE TRIMMING/REMOVAL River Junction Tree Service – New Bill Marty Tree Trimming & Firewood – New DOOR INSTALLATION City Wide Garage Door – New Staff Recommendation: Approve license applications as requested. Item No. 6D 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: Tim Brennan, Deputy Police Chief/Acting Chief Item Title/Subject: Resolution 5623 Authorizing the Replacement of Carpet throughout the Police Department Date of Report: September 24, 2001 REPLACEMENT OF POLICE DEPARTMENT CARPETING: Carpeting throughout the Police Department is nine years old and in very poor condition in several areas. The last attempt to have the carpet cleaned was unsatisfactory and cost in excess of $1,600.00 for the entire police department. Carpet replacement for the two areas most in need, the squad room and break room area, was budgeted for 2001 in the amount of $4,400.00. Five carpet stores were consulted and three bids were ultimately obtained. Recommendations from all carpet reps were to upgrade to a commercial grade nylon carpet. This upgrade would be much more durable and respond to cleaning much better than the current olefin synthetic carpet. In order to minimize the amount of work disruption and ensure the best overall appearance and match, we looked into bids to replace all department carpeting at once. Sufficient funds are available within the police department’s equipment account to cover the additional cost to replace the carpeting throughout the police department. Bids for “Cumberland- Starburst” commercial grade nylon carpeting were obtained from the following three vendors: Carpet King- $6,984.25; Carpet Consultants- $10,024.60; and Bennett-Cooper Floors- $6,421.32. None of the bids include furniture moving, which would be performed by either public works or police personnel, as available. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Council approve the replacement of carpeting throughout the police department. Materials and installation to be provided by Bennett-Cooper Floors of New Brighton at an estimated cost of $6,421.32. Respectfully Submitted, ___________________________ Tim Brennan Deputy Police Chief/Acting Chief RESOLUTION 5623 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA A RESOLUTION APPROVING REPLACEMENT OF CARPET FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT WHEREAS, carpeting throughout the police department is worn and unsightly, and in need of replacement; WHEREAS, attempts to clean severely soiled areas has proven costly and unsatisfactory; WHEREAS, replacement of carpet in the two areas most in need, the police squad room and break area, was budgeted for 2001 at an amount of $4,400.00; WHEREAS, replacement of adjoining areas was to be budgeted for and completed in subsequent years; WHEREAS, to reduce work disruption as much as possible and ensure matching grade and appearance of all carpeted areas, three bids for carpet replacement were obtained for the entire area of the police department which is currently carpeted; WHEREAS, the lowest of the three bids was from Cooper Bennet Floors in New Brighton at an estimated replacement cost of $6,421.32; WHEREAS, sufficient funds are available within the police department’s equipment account to cover the additional cost to replace the carpeting throughout the police department; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council for the City of Mounds View approves the replacement of all carpeting in the police department by Cooper Bennet Floors of New Brighton at an estimated cost of $6,421.32. Adopted this 24th day of September 2001. Attest: Richard Sonterre, Mayor SEAL Kathleen Miller, City Administrator Motion: Seconded: Sonterre: Stigney: Quick: Marty: Thomas: 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: Givonna Reed, Assistant to the City Administrator Item Title/Subject: Resolution 5606 Approving Severance for Bill Clark Date of Report: September 17, 2001 The Council will recall that this item was pulled from the September 10, 2001 City Council agenda. Originally, Resolution 5606 indicated that Bill Clark’s severance was $12,528.50. The correct amount is $8,944.94. Clark’s employment agreement (Holidays, Vacations, Sick Leave) reads as follows: “Upon employment you will be given a 30 day bank of sick leave. Thereafter, you will accumulate one day per month against the 30 day bank and will continue to accumulate sick leave in accordance with City policy.” When Clark began employment with the City in 1999 he was given 30 days of banked sick leave as provided for in the employment agreement, however, he also began accumulating additional sick leave immediately which is not provided for in the employment agreement. As interpreted by the City Attorney, for the first 30 months of employment, Clark could draw from the 30 days of banked sick leave, but would not accumulate any additional sick leave in excess of 30 days total. This reduces Clark’s amount of accrued and unused sick leave available for severance to 105.45 hours. Recommendation Approve Resolution 5606 authorizing a severance payment to Bill Clark in the amount of $8,944.94. RESOLUTION NO. 5606 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA Resolution 5606 Approving Severance for Bill Clark WHEREAS, Bill Clark has resigned from his position as Police Chief with the City of Mounds View effective August 20, 2001; and WHEREAS, Bill Clark is entitled to the following benefits per the City of Mounds View Personnel Manual, Section 4.35D Separation Compensation: • 100% of accrued and unused vacation time-estimated at 166.35 hours x 32.91=$5,474.58 • 50% of accrued and unused sick leave at $32.91/hr x 105.45=$3470.36 • Total: $8,944.94 WHEREAS, Bill Clark is paid from the General Fund (Police Department). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council approves the abovementioned provisions for Bill Clark and directs staff to pay severance to Bill Clark from the General Fund (Police Department). Adopted this 24th day of September, 2001. Richard Sonterre, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen Miller, City Administrator SEAL Motion by: Second by: Sonterre Quick Stigney Marty Thomas Item No. 6F Staff Report No. Date of Meeting: September 24, 2001 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: Jim Hess, Engineering Technician Item Title/Subject: Pleasant View Drive Traffic Signal/Median Design Date of Report: September 20, 2001 As a follow up to the informational packet Council received at the retreat, staff has since been in contact with Anoka County Highway Department. So as not to jeopardize the Federal Funding on this project, Anoka County has decided to prepare a set of revised plan sheets that will include a median design that allows full access to County Highway 10. It is staffs understanding that this revision will closely reflect what Council previously approved with the passing of Resolution 5355. Plan sheets showing the median design that restricts access to County Highway 10 will also be available for review. Due to the short time frame, the revised plans will not be included with this staff report, but will be available at the council meeting. Lyndon Robjent, Assistant Anoka County Engineer, will be attending the council meeting to present both options for the median design. Respectfully Submitted, Jim Hess Item No. 6F Staff Report No. Meeting Date: September 24, 2001 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: Tracy Juell, Administrative Assistant Item Title/Subject: Pleasant View Drive Traffic Signal Date of Report: September 12, 2001 The following is a chain of events that have occurred or are planned to occur, regarding the construction of a traffic signal at Pleasant View Drive and County Highway 10. (The attachments are labeled accordingly.) Lyndon Robjent, Assistant County Engineer for the Anoka County Highway Department will be in attendance for the council meeting. Mr. Robjent has previously explained to Staff that in order to receive the federal funds for this project, the plans must be signed and approved by September 30, 2001 or the federal funds will be forfeited. A February 16, 1999, Council was presented documentation regarding installation of a traffic signal at Pleasant View Drive and County Highway 10. B March 1, 1999, Resolution 5319 was signed supporting the financing and construction of the traffic signal. C August 2, 1999, Survey results from residents in the area that would be affected by the traffic signal. D August 9, 1999, Plans were presented regarding the design and Resolution 5355 was signed approving and supporting the construction of a traffic signal. E February 15, 2000, Informational meeting at Spring Lake Park City Hall. All residents on Pleasant View Drive were notified of this meeting. (See copy of the plan that was presented at the meeting and note the median design.) F March 6, 2000, Staff report indicates that little if no change has been made. G May 1, 2000, Anoka County was not able to give support documents regarding the residential comments from the informational meeting; item pulled off of the agenda. H June 5, 2000 (Work Session), Support documents regarding residential comments from the informational meeting. I August 22, 2000, City of Spring Lake Park had Public Hearing and the preferred option (Alt. 3) was presented. J September 12, 2001, Joint Powers Agreement faxed to City Attorney to review. K September 24, 2001, Approval of plans for Anoka County Highway to proceed with project. (Current proposed design plan attached and note median design.) Residents that attended the informational meetings at the City of Spring Lake Road, indicated their concerns and dislike for additional traffic in the area. With this new information, the Anoka County Highway Department redesigned the traffic signal plans to extend the median to prevent access to County Highway 10 by southbound traffic from Pleasant View Drive. This proposed design will provide a safe and efficient intersection; but it will definitely impact the driving habits of the residents in that area. It is Staff’s understanding that the council and all of the residents on Pleasant View Drive, Pleasant View Court and 84th Avenue NE have NOT seen the current redesigned plan since the public hearing on August 22, 2000; which is also attached to this staff report as Exhibit K. At the time of this writing, the Joint Powers Agreement was faxed to Kennedy & Graven for review. The Joint Powers Agreement can be signed at a later date and it should be noted that revisions to the agreement can be made later to address the median design issues should the surveys indicate a change is needed. Staff in conjunction with S E H, will be mailing surveys to the affected residents asking for their comments regarding the median design issue. It is Staff’s recommendation to approve the plans for installation of a traffic signal at Pleasant View Drive and County Highway 10 and to then address the median design issue, dictated by the survey results from the residents on Pleasant View Drive, Pleasant View Court and 84th Avenue NE, at a later date. Note: All attachments were given to council on September 17, 2001. Respectfully Submitted, Jim Hess, Engineer Tech Item No.7B 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: Givonna Reed, Assistant to the City Administrator Item Title/Subject: Consideration of Resolution 5625 Appointing a Finance Director/Treasurer Date of Report: September 19, 2001 Upon direction from the City Council to proceed with hiring for the Finance Director position, staff advertised the Finance Director position in a number of publications including the following: Star Tribune, Pioneer Press, League of Minnesota Cities Bulletin, Government Jobs.com and the City of Mounds View web site. We received 18 applications and interviewed four candidates. Mr. Charles Hansen stood out as the most ideal candidate. Mr. Hansen has 25 years of experience in municipal finance and 23 years of experience in senior municipal finance positions. For the last eight years Mr. Hansen has served as Finance Director for the City of Brooklyn Center and has managed a $40,000,000 budget and a $30,000,000 investment portfolio. His responsibilities included handling the budget and investments, risk and debt management and TIF. In addition, he supervised staff who were responsible for financial reporting, payroll, accounts payable and receivable and utility billing. As Assistant Finance Director in Brooklyn Center for seven years and as Assistant Finance Director in Robbinsdale for eight years Mr. Hansen was responsible for the preparation of annual financial reports, support of external auditors, preparation of monthly general fund statements and profit and loss statements. He was also responsible for supervising finance department staff. Based on how closely Mr. Hansen’s skills and experience match the City’s needs, staff recommends that the City Council approve hiring Mr. Hansen for the position of finance director. Staff further recommends that the Council appoint Mr. Hansen with a starting salary of $63,270.18 (step 3) annually with an increase to $66,785.66 (step 4) in 6 months pending a satisfactory performance evaluation and $70,300.20 (step 5) one year from the start date pending a satisfactory performance evaluation. The recommendation to start Mr. Hansen at step 3 is based on his extensive experience in senior municipal finance positions. Staff further recommends that the Council allow Mr. Hansen to accrue vacation at a rate of three weeks annually. Recommendation • Adopt Resolution 5625 Appointing Charles Hansen as the City’s Finance Director/Treasurer • Authorize a starting salary of $63,270.18 (step 3) annually with an increase to $66,785.66 (step 4) in 6 months pending a satisfactory performance evaluation and $70,300.20 (step 5) one year from the start date pending a satisfactory performance evaluation. • Authorize vacation accruals of three weeks annually for Mr. Hansen This offer of employment would be contingent upon a satisfactory reference check and satisfactory criminal and financial background checks. Respectfully Submitted, Givonna Reed RESOLUTION NO. 5625 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA A RESOLUTION APPOINTING CHARLES HANSEN AS THE FINANCE DIRECTOR/TREASURER WHEREAS , the City of Mounds View Finance Director/Treasurer position has been vacant since June 7, 2001; and WHEREAS, the City has received and reviewed 18 applications for the position and interviewed four candidates; and WHEREAS, Charles Hansen’s skills and experience most closely match the city’s needs. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council appoints Charles Hansen as the City of Mounds View Finance Director/Treasurer, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council authorizes a starting salary of $63,270.18 (step 3) annually with an increase to $66,785.66 (step 4) in 6 months pending a satisfactory performance evaluation and an increase to $70,300.20 (step 5) one year from the start date pending a satisfactory performance evaluation, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that vacation accruals will begin at three weeks annually for Mr. Hansen BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this offer of employment is contingent upon satisfactory reference, criminal and financial background checks. Mr. Hansen will begin employment with the City on (or as soon as possible after) October 1, 2001, and BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that all other personnel policies will apply normally. Adopted this 24th day of September, 2001. Richard Sonterre, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen Miller, City Administrator SEAL Motion by: Second by: Sonterre Aye No Quick Aye No Stigney Aye No Marty Aye No Thomas Aye No PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting September 10, 2001 Mounds View City Hall 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 7:00 P.M. 1. MEETING IS CALLED TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL: Sonterre, Quick (not present), Marty, Stigney, and Thomas. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA A. Monday, September 10, 2001 City Council Agenda. Assistant to the City Administrator Reed requested that Item 6H be removed from the Agenda. Community Development Director Ericson requested that Item 8A be moved up in the Agenda. MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Stigney. To Approve the September 10, 2001, City Council Agenda as amended. Ayes - 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 4. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS A. Proclamation declaring September 13, 2001, as PJW Automotive Day in Recognition of Being Selected “Business of the Year” by the New Brighton/Mounds View Chamber of Commerce. Community Development Director Ericson explained that PJW Automotive had been named as Business of the Year by the New Brighton/Mounds View Chamber of Commerce. He further explained that both cities will issue proclamations declaring September 13, 2001 as PJW Automotive Day. MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Thomas. To Proclaim September 13, 2001, as PJW Automotive Day. Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. Mounds View City Council September 10, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 2 Council Member Marty indicated he had read the information provided from the Chamber of Commerce and said that Mr. Whelan should be commended. Mr. Whelan thanked the Council for the proclamation and for the honor. Mayor Sonterre stepped down from the dais and shook hands with Mr. Whelan and congratulated him on being named Business of the Year. 5. PUBLIC INPUT Tom Winicki of 2748 Sherwood Road inquired as to when Silver Lake Road would be repaired. Mayor Sonterre indicated that Silver Lake Road is a county road and said that the appropriate body to address concerning the road would be the Ramsey County Board. He then said he believes repairing the road is a budgetary concern for the county. David Jahnke of 8428 Eastwood Road indicated he had watched the meeting concerning the budget plan and said he is concerned. He then indicated that he questions why the City would need to add so many administrative positions and asked the City to justify the 85% increase in the administrative budget. Mr. Jahnke indicated that the attorney’s fees concerned him and indicated that he felt it would be more cost effective for the City to hire a full time attorney rather than having an attorney on contract. Mr. Jahnke noted that according to information received the golf course has lost money every year since 1995 and noted that there were no projections for 2000 or 2001 at this point. He then stated he would like to hear some answers as to why that is occurring. Mr. Jahnke told the Council that he had stopped by the Attorney General’s booth at the Minnesota State Fair and discussed the City using taxpayer funds to host parties for an employee. He then indicated he was told by the Attorney General that state statute makes it illegal for the City to do so and said he would like to have all monies spent on employee parties returned. Mayor Sonterre thanked Mr. Jahnke for his comments and concerns. He then reminded Mr. Jahnke that the Council had indicated as a group that it did not have a desire to have the City funding employee parties. Mayor Sonterre clarified that a large portion of the percentage increase in the administrative department’s budget is directly related to the shifting of some salaries from other budgets to the administrative department budget. He further clarified that other department’s budgets were decreased because of the moving of those salaries. Mr. Jahnke asked Council if it were true that the golf course had borrowed $100,000 in order to keep running this year. Mounds View City Council September 10, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 3 City Administrator Miller indicated she did not have the numbers in front of her and invited Mr. Jahnke to stop by her office the following day to have his questions answered. Council Member Stigney questioned whether it was okay for the City Council to approve an expenditure that is in violation of a state statute. He then indicated he was referring to the $460.00 expenditure for the Ulrich going away party. City Attorney Riggs clarified that whether or not the expenditure is allowed by state statute depends on exactly what the party is for and noted there are ways to set it up so that it would be allowed. He then indicated that he is not sure how the events were set up in the future and said he had not been asked to research the matter. Council Member Stigney requested the City Attorney research the expenditures and report back to Council. William Werner of 2765 Sherwood Road questioned how the City could get around the laws concerning the expenditures by using a loophole. Mayor Sonterre indicated that the statute does allow for events to be paid for that are informative, educational and may be of a social nature. Mr. Werner questioned which way the Mayor would prefer to lean, toward using resident’s money and sneaking around the law, or toward following Mr. Jahnke’s suggestion to stop spending taxpayer dollars. Mayor Sonterre noted that each elected official on the Council lives in the City and pays taxes. He then noted that Council had taken action to ensure that the activity would be eliminated in the future. 6. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. 7. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approve Just and Correct Claims B. Licenses for Approval C. Resolution 5603, Authorizing the Implementation of a Fee for Processing Permit to Carry Firearm Applications D. Resolution 5613, Approving a Step Adjustment for Givonna Reed E. Resolution 5614, Approving a Step Adjustment for Tim Brennan F. Resolution 5615, Approving a Step Adjustment for Jim Ericson G. Resolution 5616, Approving Severance for Aaron Parish Mounds View City Council September 10, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 4 Council Member Marty Requested that Item 7E be removed from the Consent Agenda for discussion. Council Member Stigney requested that Items 7D and 7F be removed from the Consent Agenda for discussion. Council Member Stigney requested that Resolution 5613 be read. City Administrator Miller read Resolution 5613 for Council. Council Member Marty requested that Resolution 5614 be read prior to discussion. City Administrator Miller read Resolution 5614 for Council. Council Member Marty indicated he was concerned that by increasing Deputy Chief Brennan’s pay by 15% for taking on the duties of Acting Chief he would be making more than the Chief. Council Member Marty then noted he had raised the issue at the August 27, 2001 meeting and, at that meeting, he had suggested that there needed to be a cap on his salary based on the salary of the new person coming in. Council Member Marty referred to the minutes from the August 27, 2001 meeting where there was a motion and second to refer the Resolution to the next work session for further clarification on the 15% increase. Council Member Thomas indicated that the step increase and the 15% increase for handling the duties of the Acting Chief were two separate issues. She further indicated that this step increase is consistent with the personnel policy and consistent with prior Resolutions. Council Member Marty indicated that Council Member Thomas was correct that there were two separate issues but said there was not another place on the agenda to bring the issue up. He then stated he did not have a problem with the step increase. Council Member Stigney requested that Resolution 5615 be read. Mayor Sonterre clarified that there were no changes or amendments made to the items removed from the Consent Agenda for discussion. MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Thomas. To Approve the Consent Agenda as presented Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. Mounds View City Council September 10, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 5 8. COUNCIL BUSINESS A. Public Hearing to Discuss County Road H2 Construction Project Mayor Sonterre opened the public hearing at 7:31 p.m. Barry Peters presented a report for Council on the County Road H2 project. He indicated that the road was turned back to the City in 1996 enabling the City to receive turn back funds to be used to fund the repair of the roadway. Mr. Peters outlined the costs for the different levels of reconstruction of the roadway. Mr. Peters provided three drawings of the improvement area and explained that the proposed roadway will be 26 feet wide as is required to receive state aid funds. Mr. Peters noted there was no consensus on whether to allow parking as part of the improvement. He then noted that the costs for the parking areas were included in the estimate for reconstructing the roadway. Mr. Peters noted he had included an 8-foot bituminous trail, left turn lanes at Silver Lake Road and Long Lake Road, and a left turn, through lane, and right turn lane at County Highway 10. Mr. Peters indicated the proposed costs of the improvement would be approximately $1,914,026 which includes the street, trail, water main, and storm sewer improvements. He then noted he had included 10% for contingencies and 35% for engineering, administrative, fiscal and legal costs. Mr. Peters indicated the City would use the $220,000 received from the county, and said there would be assessments, and the remainder of the costs would be funded through MSA funding. Mr. Peters indicated that the maximum per foot assessment for residents would be $14.60 and noted that residents would be charged a flat rate of $400 for the storm sewer. Mr. Peters provided an outline that indicated the reconstruction would begin in May 2002. Mayor Sonterre asked whether the street would be reconstructed in phases or all at once. Mr. Peters indicated that the contractor would reconstruct the street in phases and would put down a gravel base, install the curb and one layer of bituminous before moving onto the next phase. David Jahnke of 8428 Eastwood Road acknowledged that Mr. Peters had said he had allowed for extra costs but stated in almost every project the City undertakes there are costs that are added after the fact. He then questioned if Mr. Peters was sure that all costs were included in the estimate. Mounds View City Council September 10, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 6 Mr. Peters confirmed that all associated costs were included in the estimated figure but clarified it is an estimate. Ronald Morgan of 2656 County Road H2 questioned whether the road project was a “done deal”. He also questioned how the survey was sent out. He then indicated that he wondered why the City of Mounds View would want to pay to provide a truck route through the community. He further stated that he does not feel the road is beneficial to the residents of the City and said he would like to have more input from residents who live on County Road H2. Mayor Sonterre told Mr. Morgan it was not a done deal and explained Council will use resident input as part of the decision process. Public Works Foreman Pittman indicated he was aware that notices were sent out to all the residents but said he was not sure exactly how the residents were notified. Council Member Marty indicated he had received four or five telephone calls concerning the survey which indicates that the surveys were received by some residents. Mr. Morgan indicated there were residents in the area that did not get the survey. Council Member Thomas questioned how residents could suggest that they were not aware of the plan to reconstruct County Road H2 because the City has made three attempts to obtain feedback from the neighborhoods involved. Jeff Dunnell of 5279 Sunnyside Road indicated he was a new resident and had not received the mailings. He then requested he be sent a survey so that he could submit his preferences for the road construction. Mr. Dunnell then indicated he was concerned that the movie theatre and the apartment complex generate a significant amount of traffic that impacts County Road H2. Council Member Stigney suggested that the City provide a copy of the survey to anyone who indicates they have not yet filled one out. He then indicated that he had expressed concern at the work session because the majority of those who returned the survey voted for something other than to reconstruct. He further stated the City should consider how to reconcile what those people would want for the roadway. Mr. Peters indicated he was directed to provide a report based on a total reconstruction to state aid highway standards. Council Member Stigney questioned whether Council would authorize sending out more surveys. Council Member Marty indicated that he had no problem with allowing those residents that had not returned a survey to do so. He then noted in driving on County Road H2 it is apparent it is in need of repair. Mounds View City Council September 10, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 7 Council Member Marty noted that County Road H2 is an arterial roadway and as it started out as a county road it is designed to handle larger volumes and heavier traffic. He then noted that the City has discussed the truck issue on County Road H2 previously and found out that the only recourse the City would have to control truck traffic would be to lower the speed limit to 30 m.p.h. to discourage the trucks from using that stretch of road. Council Member Thomas noted the City kept all of the surveys on file and knows who has filled one out. She then asked that any resident that has not previously filled one out do so as soon as possible. Council Member Thomas noted that the City should use the majority determination of the survey as to how to construct the roadway. She then noted that the general consensus was that people were not happy with the patching of the road and asked that either the City fix the road or leave it alone. She further noted that, as she recalled, the discussions have indicated that the road cannot be left alone as it is a safety hazard. Council Member Marty indicated that the previous street fund was down to a zero balance so the City started building it back up about two years ago by earmarking a portion of the franchise fee to the street fund. He further explained that because the City has a street fund the assessment is limited to $14.60 per foot of frontage instead of approximately $25.00 per foot of frontage. Council Member Stigney stated he felt that it was important to reconcile the survey by going back to those that voted for no reconstruction and telling them that there will be some type of reconstruction and ask them what they would prefer. Mr. Peters pointed out that the survey that was sent out contained the statement that “failure to complete and return this survey indicates that you will accept the majority decision.” Council Member Stigney stated that the majority of people voted for something other than reconstruction. He then stated that they are the true majority and suggested they be asked what they would like as there will be some type of reconstruction. Council Member Stigney stated he felt it was obvious that some communication was falling by the wayside and said he felt the need to re-emphasize what the residents were voting on and why. Council Member Thomas suggested there was more than one way to spin the numbers contained in the survey. She then indicated that the City needs to determine what those residents want to happen with the road. She then reiterated that the cost would be $18.00 per foot of frontage if the City were not using the street fund to contribute the $4.00 per foot of frontage for each house. Mr. Peters noted that City policy says the City will pay for curb and gutter, the trailway, and the parking areas. He further clarified that the resident is only being asked to pay for a 26-foot wide bituminous roadway. Mounds View City Council September 10, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 8 Council Member Thomas clarified that with the assessment for the 26-foot wide roadway the residents are being assessed for 75% of the cost rather than 100%. Bill Rice of 2932 County Road H2 presented a petition to Council asking that no parking be allowed along County Road H2 from Knollwood to Pleasant View Drive. Mayor Sonterre thanked Mr. Rice for his comments and indicated the City will attempt to accommodate his request. Mr. Rice further indicated that parking bays would take away too much of their front yards because the houses are closer to the street in his area. He then asked Council how much he could expect his proposed assessment to increase from the $2,203.45. Mayor Sonterre indicated the City hopes to lower the assessment. Council Member Thomas indicated the City is trying to reduce the amounts. Mr. Peters noted that the assessment would not go down, as the $14.60 is a set fee as well as the $400 storm sewer fee. He then clarified that the only number subject to change is the watermain price of $2.69 per front footage which could go up or down. Mr. Rice thanked Council for the opportunity to address Council. Robert Mills of 2817 County Road H2 questioned whether, if the City did not reconstruct County Road H2, there was a way to prohibit truck traffic on County Road H2 to prevent further deterioration of the roadway. Mayor Sonterre indicated the City does not have the authority to prohibit truck traffic on County Road H2 as it is a Minnesota State Aid Highway. Council Member Marty noted the discussion of truck traffic on County Road H2 has been before Council on other occasions and noted the only control the City would have is to lower the speed limit to 30 m.p.h. Council Member Thomas expressed concern that the reconstruction allow room for the bus stop at the corner of Long Lake Road and County Road H2 to remain. Mr. Peters indicated he would work with the MTC and include the bus stop along with the protected left turn lane. Martin Harstad of 2195 Silver Lake Road requested that he and his family, as large property owners in the area, be allowed input as to the type of pipe that may go into the roadway. He then noted that his family has a proposed plat before the City to develop the property and they would like to run the utilities to the property based on the proposed plat in order to avoid having to tear up the street after it is reconstructed. Mounds View City Council September 10, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 9 Mr. Harstad asked if the road would be constructed to 9 ton or 7 ton requirements. He then questioned how the assessment caps were determined for the various parts of the project. Mr. Peters expressed his willingness to work with the Harstad family to eliminate the need to tear up the street shortly after being reconstructed. He then suggested it may be possible to run the water main in the boulevard. He further indicated that the road will be built to 9-ton standards and said the road is designed as a collector road. Mr. Peters re-addressed the assessment numbers for the street, new water mains and storm sewer. Mr. Harstad asked how it would be applied to him. Mr. Peters explained that the proposed assessment assumed as many 75-foot wide properties as would fit into the property owned by the Harstads. He then indicated that each 75 foot property would be assessed the $400 storm sewer fee. Mayor Sonterre suggested Mr. Harstad meet with Mr. Peters to discuss the matter. Mr. Harstad and Mr. Peters agreed to discuss the matter. Ronald Morgan of 2656 County Road H2 said he felt the street reconstruction should wait until after the Harstad development is put in. He then suggested that reconstructing County Road H2 would decrease the value of the property along County Road H2 because of the increase in truck traffic. He further suggested that it is inappropriate for the City to consider reconstructing now and said the City should postpone the reconstruction pending any development. He then asked Council if he would be required to disclose the pending assessments if he were to sell now before the assessment amount is finalized. Council Member Thomas noted there is always the potential of pending development within the City. She then noted there are pending plans to put the utilities in the boulevard to avoid needing to dig up the street. She further advised that there is no assessment pending until the project has been approved. Ronald Morgan of 2656 County Road H2 noted he feels it is prudent to address the development before moving forward on the reconstruction. He then requested that Council put into writing the reason why the City would want to spend monies to make a truck highway on County Road H2. Council Member Thomas indicated that reconstructing County Road H2 would not create a truck highway because there is already truck traffic on it and the City cannot prohibit trucks on the road. She further noted that whether or not the road is reconstructed the truck traffic will remain. Mayor Sonterre noted that speeds tend to increase on a newly resurfaced roadway and said the City will be aware of that and ask for extra patrol in the area to combat that issue. Mounds View City Council September 10, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 10 Mr. Rice questioned whether a 9-ton road would stand up to the large trucks that come by loaded with 40,000 pound loads. Mr. Peters indicated the street is designed to handle large truck and bus traffic. Mr. Rice asked if Council would be voting on the matter this evening. Mayor Sonterre indicated that Council would like resident feedback before proceeding. Council Member Marty suggested setting a deadline for receiving responses back in order to maintain the established timeline for construction of the roadway. City Administrator Miller questioned whether the City should assume that everyone that did not return a survey did not receive one. Mayor Sonterre indicated that the City should send out a notice to those that have not responded and make sure that the disclaimer is included indicating that failure to respond would indicate you concur with the majority decision. Mr. Rice questioned whether his petition would still be considered. Mayor Sonterre indicated it would. Mr. Peters suggested that, to be prudent, the City should resend the survey to everyone rather than trying to determine who did or did not respond. Mayor Sonterre indicated he would prefer to send the surveys out to those that did not respond. Jeff Dunnell of 5279 Sunnyside Road questioned why the City feels it needs parking along County Road H2. Mayor Sonterre indicated parking is a concern in the commercial areas and so parking was added to the plan wherever the topography would allow. He further noted that some of the parking areas could be eliminated in the residential area. Mr. Dunnell indicated that he felt the commercial properties and the apartment complexes should have to pay more than the residents because they contribute more wear and tear to the roadway. Mayor Sonterre asked Mr. Peters to explain how the commercial property assessments are calculated. Mr. Peters explained the formula for determining the commercial assessments. Richard Thorne of 2925 County Road H2 indicated he has never seen a traffic backup and questioned why the City needs to add left turn lanes. Mounds View City Council September 10, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 11 Mr. Peters indicated the transportation department had looked at the traffic patterns in the area and felt it would be prudent to add turn lanes at the main intersections. Judy Witbeck of 3009 County Road H2 indicated she was in favor of at least some on street parking in connection with the reconstruction of the roadway. Peter McIntyre of 2917 County Road H2 asked if it were feasible for the City to return the street to a City street and remove the Minnesota State Aid Highway designation. He then noted if the City were able to do so that would be a way to regulate the truck traffic. Steve Campbell indicated it is possible to remove the Minnesota State Aid Highway designation from County Road H2 but said it was a very difficult process. He then noted that the City would not receive MSA monies toward the reconstruction if the designation were removed. Mayor Sonterre questioned how much money the City would lose if it were to remove the MSA designation. Mr. Peters indicated there was $1.4 million dollars in MSA funds set aside for the reconstruction of County Road H2. He also noted that changing the designation of the roadway would impact other communities in the area. Council Member Thomas clarified that County Road H2 was never a City street. She noted it was a county highway prior to being designated as a State Aid Highway which means it was always designed to handle a high volume of traffic. Public Works Foreman Pittman noted that when the City took over the street it was posted at 9 tons and has now been lowered to 7 tons due to the condition of the roadway Council Member Marty asked if that weight limit was clearly posted. Public Works Foreman Pittman indicated that it was. Council Member Stigney questioned if the roadway could be reconstructed to 7-ton standards since that is its current designation. Mr. Peters indicated that the roadway’s weight designation was lowered due to the condition of the roadway. He then indicated that MSA standards require that the roadway be built to 9-ton standards. Mayor Sonterre closed the public hearing at 8:37 p.m. Council Member Marty asked if it was possible to complete the process of soliciting additional resident input within one month. Mounds View City Council September 10, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 12 Jeff Dunnell noted that Council had indicated that the reconstruction of County Road H2 was a matter of public safety. He then questioned whether residents could still vote no on the project. Mayor Sonterre indicated that the surveys are not the final word on the matter but are a part of the process for receiving resident input for discussion at the Council level. He then indicated that there are pavement condition indicators that are used to determine the condition of the roadway. He further indicated that, if the designated pavement condition indicator is reached, Council has no choice but to do something to fix the roadway as a matter of public safety. Jeff Dunnell asked if a no vote was a wasted vote. Mayor Sonterre indicated he was not sure of the pavement condition indicator on County Road H2 at this time and then said that no vote is a wasted vote. Council Member Thomas indicated that a no vote simply means no improvement at this time because if the pavement condition indicator reaches a certain number the City will fix the street whether the residents wish to have it done or not. Public Works Foreman Pittman indicated that over 50% of the Spring asphalt patching can be attributed to the patching of County Road H2. Mayor Sonterre indicated he believes County Road H2 is below the pavement condition indicator and suggested that residents may wish to vote for the lowest cost option rather than for no improvement. Council Member Stigney indicated that if the pavement condition indicator is such that it requires the City to do something to the roadway, the survey should indicate that no is not a valid option. He further stated that he feels those residents who already turned in their surveys with a no vote should be able to revote now that it is known that there will be some type of reconstruction of County Road H2. Council Member Thomas indicated that County Road H2 had not degraded to the point it is at now at the time that those residents voted no for the reconstruction. She then said that the City may need to resend the survey to all residents. Mayor Sonterre questioned whether the City needed to have another public information meeting to describe what residents would get for their dollar for each of the options. Mr. McIntyre stated he feels that residents should receive information that would outline where they get the best bang for the buck. He then noted that it is cheaper in the long run to go with the total rebuild. Jeff Dunnell asked if just the roadway could be redone and skip the other additions. Mounds View City Council September 10, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 13 Council Member Marty indicated that the City is paying for the sidewalks, trailway, and curb and gutter. Mayor Sonterre indicated that residents will only be paying for the asphalt. Mayor Sonterre suggested scheduling another public information meeting as soon as possible. City Administrator Miller indicated the City could send out notification of the public information hearing with the survey. Mayor Sonterre questioned how quickly it could get into the mail. City Administrator Miller indicated the time was dependent on the engineering staff’s schedules. Mr. Peters indicated they would gather information at the public information meeting and bring it to Council prior to having it heard at a formal Council meeting. Mayor Sonterre suggested a mandatory response date that is three or four days after the public information hearing. Council Member Marty asked if there would be time to schedule a public information meeting prior to two weeks from this meeting. Mr. Peters indicated Council would want to give a ten-day notice of the meeting in order to allow for residents to rearrange their schedule and attend the meeting. B. Discussion of School District’s Use of the Banquet Center for the 2001 School Board Election Assistant to the Administrator Reed reported that the School District had requested permission to use the banquet center to hold its school board election. She then asked for Council direction as to whether the banquet center, equipment and staff should be used free of charge or at a discounted rate. Assistant to the Administrator Reed indicated that the public works department had requested permission to use the banquet center for a dinner it is holding for retired employee Larry Decheine. She also noted that the golf course club house manager had requested permission to use one of the City’s designated days for the golf course banquet. Council Member Marty indicated it would make sense to use the facility for the requested events rather than have it sit empty. Assistant to the Administrator Reed indicated that the City has 10 days it can use for free events at the banquet center. Mounds View City Council September 10, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 14 Council Member Marty questioned why the City would need to pay to use the facility if it is not booked. Council Member Thomas indicated that the contract specifies that the City is allowed 10 free days and that is all the City gets. Council Member Stigney said he felt that, if the City had enough days left to cover its planned events, he saw no reason why the school district could not use the banquet center. Council Member Stigney suggested approving option 4 which allows for free use of the facility and a charge for staff time. Council Member Thomas questioned whether they would need to use the machines. Assistant to the Administrator Reed indicated that they do not use the machines but do use the voting booths. It was the consent of Council to allow the school district to use the banquet center free of charge but require that the school district pay for any charges incurred while doing so. It was the consent of council to allow the public works department to use the banquet center free of charge for Larry Decheine’s retirement party. It was the consent of Council to allow the golf course manager to use the banquet center free of charge for its annual golf course banquet. C. Consider Resolution 5619 Certifying Proposed General Fund Budget and Tax Levy for Fiscal Year 2002 City Administrator Miller noted that the truth-in-taxation requirements were waived for this year but noted that the City must certify levies by September 15, 2001. City Administrator Miller noted that the tax law requires that the City certify the levy once and noted that the levy could be decreased but not increased. She then indicated that Council had asked that Staff work to balance the general fund budget and indicated it would be on the November work session agenda. Council Member Stigney pointed out an error in the dollar amount of the levy and asked that it be corrected. MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Marty. To Waive the Reading and Approve Resolution 5619, a Resolution Certifying the Proposed General Fund Budget and Tax Levy for Fiscal Year 2002. Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. Mounds View City Council September 10, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 15 D. Resolution 5620 Establishing Public Hearing Dates for the Proposed General Fund Budget and Tax Levy for Fiscal Year 2002. City Administrator Miller indicated the state legislature had waived the requirement for the truth- in-taxation hearing but said the City intends to hold a public hearing and this Resolution would set the date for that hearing as November 26, 2001 at 7:05 p.m. MOTION/SECOND: Thomas/Stigney. To Waive the Reading and Approve Resolution 5620, a Resolution Establishing Public Hearing Dates for the Proposed General Fund Budget and Tax Levy for Fiscal Year 2002. Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. E. Closed Session to Discuss Pending Litigation – Attorney Client Privileged Council Member Thomas suggested moving the closed session to the end of the meeting to accommodate staff members not needed for this discussion. It was the consent of Council to move the closed session to the end of the meeting. 9. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS None. 10. REPORTS Council Member Marty reported he had attended the Minnesota State Fair and had watched Tony Mortenson on his BMX bike. He then congratulated Tony on his skills. Council Member Marty indicated he had received comments concerning the turf at the golf course. He then indicated he had gone to the golf course and, in his opinion, holes 3, 4, 5, 8 and 9 are starting to look pretty rough. He further stated that it is the opinion of the pros at the golf course that if the City does not start spending money on turf management it will end up costing the City more in the long run. Council Member Marty also pointed out that the individual who is responsible for maintaining the turf is paid hourly and has been working a lot of overtime hours. He then suggested the City needs to address the issue of possibly hiring him full time as a salaried employee for next season. Council Member Marty then asked whether the golf course pros contracts were settled. City Administrator Miller indicated the individuals that are now covered by the union were in a status quo and noted the City will negotiate with them. Council Member Marty questioned whether Chuck Chism’s last day is October 12, 2001. Mounds View City Council September 10, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 16 Council Member Marty expressed concern for closing the golf course in October as in the past the course has been open later in the year than any other in the area. Council Member Marty also expressed concern for making sure that the golf course is properly prepared for Winter in order to ensure a successful Spring opening for the course. He then noted there may not be enough staff to ensure proper Winter preparation of the course. City Administrator Miller indicated that Mr. Manthis has been invited to the department head meetings and noted that would be the appropriate venue for him to address any issues he had concerning the golf course. She then indicated that she was not sure of the final date of employment for Mr. Chism but noted that there are a maximum number of days seasonal employees can work and still be considered seasonal. Assistant to the Administrator Reed indicated that Mr. Dazenski had spoken to City Administrator Miller and indicated that he is working on preparing the golf course for Winter. Council Member Marty noted there had not been a golf course committee meeting in well over six months and asked that one be scheduled. City Administrator Miller indicated she would look into scheduling a golf course committee meeting later in the month. Mayor Sonterre noted that Todd, an hourly employee out at the golf course, had reportedly been doing a great job with course maintenance. He then noted that Mr. Ulrich had suggested that Todd be asked to take some training classes over the winter months and be offered a salaried position next summer as the maintenance supervisor. City Administrator Miller indicated turf management would be placed on the work session. She then noted that she was not a turf management expert but said this year has been a tough year for courses due to the long dry spell. Council Member Thomas expressed concern that the City follow its policies when considering hiring for any position that may be available. Council Member Stigney indicated he had spoken to Mr. Manthis and asked him if he was having any problems out at the golf course and he had indicated he was not. Council Member Stigney then suggested that Mr. Manthis should bring any issues to the attention of the City when they arise. Council Member Marty questioned whether there was a maintenance position open at the golf course. Mayor Sonterre indicated it would be nice to be able to let the seasonal employee know that the City intends to bring him back next season in an increased capacity. Mounds View City Council September 10, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 17 Mayor Sonterre noted that there is one opening on the Parks and Recreation Commission and three openings on the Planning Commission. He then urged any interested persons to stop by City Hall for an application or visit the City’s website. Mayor Sonterre asked City Administrator Miller if all Council Members had provided her with comments concerning the proposed budget. City Administrator Miller indicated she had not received all Council Members’ comments. Mayor Sonterre asked Council to forward any concerns regarding the budget to City Administrator Miller as soon as possible. Assistant to the Administrator Reed indicated that a Resolution authorizing the purchase of new elections equipment would be on the consent agenda at the next meeting. She then asked if Council wished to have a representative of the company present to answer questions. It was the consent of Council that it was not necessary to have a representative of the company present at the meeting. 11. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. August 27, 2001 City Council Minutes. Council Member Stigney indicated that he would like to table approval of the minutes to allow time to review the tape of the meeting. MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Marty. To Table Approval of the Monday, August 27, 2001, City Council Minutes. Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. B. June 4 – 6, 2001 City Council Minutes. Council Member Marty noted he had made a transcription of the June 4, 2001 Council Meeting that was submitted to the City. He then noted that his transcription of those minutes was not part of the minutes Council was being asked to approve. MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Stigney. To Authorize that the Videotape Recorded and Submitted by Council Member Marty be Played at the Council Meeting in Order to Compare the Actual Meeting to the Minutes Received for Approval. Mayor Sonterre asked Council Member Marty to clarify his motion. Mounds View City Council September 10, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 18 Council Member Marty indicated he would like to air the four and a half minute video tape he had recorded at the June 4, 2001 City Council Meeting in order to allow Council to compare the tape to the minutes presented for approval. Mayor Sonterre asked City Attorney Riggs for a legal opinion on the matter. City Attorney Riggs clarified that the minutes of the Council Meetings are not a transcript of the meeting word for word but a description of what happens. Council Member Thomas questioned what Council Member Marty meant by airing the tape. Council Member Marty indicated he wanted to have the video tape played in Council Chambers. Council Member Thomas stated she did not see the need to do so. She further noted that if any Council Member needed to refresh their memory of the meeting they could request the tape and view it. Council Member Stigney questioned whether the videotape had ever been aired to the public. Council Member Marty stated not to his knowledge. Council Member Stigney indicated he did not see a reason not to air the videotape. Council Member Thomas indicated that the videotape contained only the June 4, 2001 meeting, not the meeting that occurred on June 6, 2001. Council Member Stigney indicated that the June 4, 2001 meeting was not televised Council Member Thomas indicated that the meeting was continued to the next time and said that no business was conducted. Council Member Stigney asked what differences were of concern to Council Member Marty. Council Member Marty read his transcription of the meeting for Council. Council Member Thomas questioned what part of the transcription read by Council Member Marty was not included in the minutes that were provided. Council Member Marty indicated that the minutes presented did not state that he had indicated he was not available on the date suggested for the continuing of the meeting. Council Member Thomas indicated that is not necessary to include in the minutes discussion of available meeting dates. Mounds View City Council September 10, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 19 Council Member Marty noted Council did have a retreat scheduled for June 8, 2001 that was on the calendar. He then noted that shortly after the meeting where City Administrator Miller had indicated there was not a meeting schedule an email was sent telling Council to remove from the calendar the retreat scheduled for June 8, 2001. City Administrator Miller indicated that the calendar that is put together is not a legal calendar and stated she would hasten to say there are many mistakes in scheduling made on that calendar on a regular basis. She then indicated she would not utilize that calendar for verifying Council dates of any kind. She further indicated that Council had agreed on one date and then, in her absence, had rescheduled it for another date which she remembers to be on a Monday evening. She then noted that there have already been four different versions of the September calendar a sure sign of the fact that the calendar may not be relied upon as the final word on meeting dates. Council Member Marty indicated that after that meeting he had talked to Council Member Stigney who agreed he had thought there was a retreat scheduled for June 8, 2001. He then indicated that Council Member Stigney had checked his calendar at home and he had written in a retreat for June 8, 2001. Council Member Marty further noted that he had written in a retreat for June 8, 2001 on his calendar at home as well. Council Member Marty pointed out that Council Member Quick had called the question and then Council voted on calling the question but did not vote on the original motion. City Attorney Riggs noted that the point of order needed to be made at that time or it is a non- issue. He further indicated that it was clear what the Council was voting on and said there is case law to uphold his explanation of the matter. Council Member Thomas asked if, other than the detail, there was anything that was not true in the minutes. She then asked if there was anything in the minutes that needed to be corrected. She further asked that if there was anything that needed to be corrected it be done so the minutes could be approved and Council could move on. Ayes – 2(Marty/Stigney) Nays – 2(Sonterre/Thomas) Motion failed. Council Member Marty noted that on Page 4 of the June 6, 2001 minutes City Administrator read the summary recommendation and he then stated he would like to have it entered into the minutes in its entirety or attached to the document before it is approved. Council Member Marty noted that on Page 7 of the June 6, 2001 minutes City Administrator Miller read Resolution 2001-5700 and stated he would like the Resolution added to the minutes in its entirety or attached to the document before it is approved. Council Member Marty noted that on Page 8 of the June 6, 2001 minutes City Administrator Miller’s summary recommendation was read and he stated he would like it added into the document or attached to the document before it is approved. Mounds View City Council September 10, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 20 Council Member Marty noted that on Page 9 of the June 6, 2001 minutes City Administrator Miller read Resolution 2001-5701 and stated he would like the resolution added to the document or attached before it is approved. Council Member Thomas questioned when Council had ever attached Resolutions to the minutes prior to approval. Council Member Marty indicated Council had never read a Resolution. Council Member Thomas clarified that Council asks that Resolutions be read all the time. She then explained that the documents in question are referred to by name in the minutes and will be located with the minutes in the City’s records. City Attorney Riggs indicated that Section 10504 Subd. 7(d) of the City’s code states that the document need not be recorded in full if it appears in other permanent records and can be adequately identified in the minutes and exists in a public data form within the City. Council Member Thomas asked if Council Member Marty would like the City to rename the documents for ease of reference. Council Member Marty questioned whether there was a number or title for the document so a citizen would be able to request a copy of it. Council Member Thomas noted that the minutes contained the name of the document as it was stated. Assistant to the Administrator Reed indicated she would confirm that the title of the document and the title listed in the minutes were the same. Mayor Sonterre asked if the explanations were acceptable to Council Member Marty. Council Member Marty indicated he was not sure that the explanation was acceptable to him. Council Member Thomas reiterated that everything would be put together in the book where the minutes are kept. Council Member Marty clarified that the minutes kept by the City would contain a copy of the documents referred to in the minutes. City Administrator Miller indicated that when a citizen asked for the minutes he/she would get just the minutes. She then indicated that, if the resident should ask, a copy of the other documents would be provided. City Administrator Miller suggested including the effective date of the documents in an effort to help identify them. Mounds View City Council September 10, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 21 Council Member Stigney questioned whether the supporting documentation was part of the public book that is available in Council Chambers on meeting nights. City Administrator Miller indicated that any information provided to the Council will ultimately be provided if a request is made. Council Member Marty asked where the minute book is kept. City Administrator Miller indicated it is kept in a room at City Hall except on meeting nights when it is brought to Council Chambers. Council Member Marty agreed to have the documents amended to reflect the date of the document and the title on Pages 4 and 8 of the minutes. MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Thomas. To Approve the June 4 – 6, 2001, City Council Minutes as Amended. Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. It was the consent of Council to adjourn from the closed session. MOTION/SECOND: Thomas/Stigney. To Continue the City Council Meeting Until After the EDA Meeting. Ayes – 4 Nays – 0 Motion carried. Council reconvened the meeting at 9:50 p.m. and moved directly into a closed session. 12. Next Council Work Session: Monday, October 1, 2001 Next Council Meeting: Monday, September 24, 2001 13. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Sonterre adjourned the meeting at ______ p.m. Transcribed and recorded by: Joan Lenzmeier Timesaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.