Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 2001/07/09PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting July 9, 2001 ~' ~ ~~ ~ Mounds View City Hall ~.` ~ ~ '~ ,;~,; ~; 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 .__._ 7:01 P.M. 1. MEETING IS CALLED TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL: Sonterre, Quick, Marty, and Stigney. Absent: Thomas. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA A. Monday, June 11, 2001 City Council Agenda. MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Stigney. To Approve the July 9, 2001, City Council Agenda as presented. Ayes - 4 Nays - 0 Motion carried. 4. PUBLIC INPUT Jerry Linke, 2319 Knoll Drive stated there are tapes of meetings that are missing. He said he finds it hard to believe. He commented that there are supposed to be tapes at the library. A resolution was approved that stated copies were to be sent to the library, and he didn't see any there. Mr. Linke also questioned whether the computers should be confiscated of the Clerk Administrator, and her assistant. Mr. Linke read a comment from the bulletin that Council Member Thomas made, which he thought was inappropriate. "We would have better discussion with staff if we don't have residents there." Mr. Linke questioned two items on the presented agenda under "closed session" which were the Banquet Center Agreement and the Unemployment Insurance Appeal. He asked if the Council could explain to the public why those items are on the agenda. City Attorney Riggs stated that both items satisfy Statute 13 • Mounds View City Council July 9, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 2 Council Member Quick stated that when McCarty was Mayor, the policy of sending tapes to the library was changed due to cost savings. It was easier to keep the tapes at the City Offices. Council Member Marty questioned where the tapes would be if they are not at City Hall. He asked if there is an accounting of them. He asked what tapes are missing, the dates and times of the tapes, and why they would be missing. City Administrator Miller responded she had asked Patrick to complete an inventory of tapes. They were kept in cabinets in the community room. The cabinets oftentimes were not locked. The key that was in Patrick's desk was taken. Council Member Marty said he talked to Patrick on this issue. To Patrick's knowledge, the cabinets were locked. City Administrator Miller stated she would often go down to those cabinets and she found they weren't always locked. Jane Stolelamb , 2305 Shorewood Road, stated she is providing the Council with a copy of a petition that was mailed the previous week to the Environmental Quality Board. The petition was prepared in accordance with Minnesota Rules Chapter 4410. A copy was sent to the Rice Creek Watershed. The petition is in regard to the Greenfield Park project and is requesting that an environmental worksheet assessment be completed. There are 43 signatures on the petition; only 25 were needed. The petition wasn't presented at every household due to the July 4 holiday. . She explained that in early April or May, the Council voted to have an environmental impact study completed. She said that Council Member Marty initiated the discussion. Then he decided that the assessment would be too expensive. The motion to direct that an EIS not be done carned with one no vote, which was by Council Member Stigney. There was no mention at the meeting of what the cost would be or how much of the cost the City would bear. The petition states the concerns, which include the amount of traffic, vehicle emissions, natural wetland preservation and loss of wildlife and wildlife habitat. She added that an environmental impact study has been conducted to learn if there is any concern. The residents disagree with the watershed report. Mayor Sonterre responded that both Council Members Thomas and he had contacted the DNR within the last two weeks. He was told the overall process hasn't been completed. He asked the DNR what the additional cost would be for the EIS Study. Council Member Marty explained he did make the motion, but then understood there was significant cost involved. He offered to reverse his position if that is what the residents asked of him. Mayor Sonterre stated that the DNR indicated they would need a week or so to complete the study and they will contact the Mayor when it is complete. Dana Mandosa, 2633 Clearview Avenue observed that Council Member Marty's computer is back in the Council Member's position. City Attorney Riggs stated that the computer was confiscated for the purpose of specific issues and is still being analyzed. Mounds View City Council July 9, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 3 • Mr. Mandosa requested a copy of the contract for the City Administrator. City Attorney Riggs explained the procedure to request a copy. Mr. Mandosa inquired how much the City Administrator makes per year and whether she makes bonuses. City Administrator Miller stated she does not get bonuses. Mr. Mandosa asked where City Administrator Miller lives. City Attorney Riggs responded that Mr. Mandosa can make the request to learn where the City Administrator lives, though it will most likely be denied. Mr. Mandosa inquired whether the City Attorney is under contract. City Attorney Riggs stated he is not under contract at this time. Mr. Mandosa asked who hires the City Attorney. City Attorney Riggs responded the Council hires the City Attorney. Mr. Mandosa stated he would like to know what the City has paid in legal fees this year to date, and what the fees are for. Mayor Sonterre asked the City Attorney if that information is available under the Data Practice Act, and City Attorney Riggs confirmed it is. Mr. Mandosa asked if the Bridges Golf Course has profited each year based on golfers and fees. City Administrator Miller replied that Mr. Mandosa could formally request that information. . Mr. Mandosa commented that by letting Mr. Hammerschmidt and Mr. Kesel go, he felt the city was opened up for the possibility of law suits. He questioned why a third party investigation wasn't decided on. Council Member Quick stated the Council does the hiring and firing for the City. Mayor Sonterre explained it is a job of the City Administrator to govern the people working under her and to keep track of personnel. Her recommendation was simply a recommendation. It was an action of the Council to accept the recommendation. Council Member Marty did mention the option of a third party investigation. It was the other four members of the Council that rejected that request. The decision was made on the information available at the time. Council Member Stigney added that this was an internal matter, investigated by the City and reviewed and acted upon by the Council. Dan Lamb, 2305 Shorewood Road, felt the question on the environmental impact study was not adequately answered. He asked if Council Member Marty had some type of cost structure in mind. He said the residents left the Rice Creek Watershed meeting under the impression that the study would be completed. After the meeting, Council Member Marty stated it would be too expensive and voted against it. Mr. Lamb thought that left a sour message for the residents in that area. Council Member Marty stated the cost was too high for the EIS Study. • Mounds View City Council July 9, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 4 • Council Member Quick wished to correct Mr. Lamb's statement and said that the Council could ask for a study if they wished, but no promises were made. Mr. Lamb thanked Council Member Quick for that clarification. Mr. Lamb commented that the land use has grown by 74 acres for industrial use. He thought that was a strenuous growth on the City. Mayor Sonterre stated that issue is on the agenda for this meeting. Doris Holman, 3034 Ardimore Ave. questioned the availability of information off the web site. She said the agenda is not on the web site for this meeting, and that has happened repeatedly. Also, when the web page was relocated, minutes from the year 2000 disappeared. She stated that if the City is going to promote the use of the web site for city information, then it should be kept up. Mayor Sonterre explained that the City has joined forces with Roseville several months ago. Our city is using their server. Mounds View doesn't have a dedicated web maintenance individual at the time. Mr. Ericson has spent some time maintaining the web page, but his duties have overtaken the time he could volunteer on the web page. The City is looking for someone to take that job over. Mayor Sonterre offered to check with Patrick about the cable portion of the meetings being put on the web site, and suggested Ms. Holman request the agenda be emailed to • her for each meeting. Ms. Holman stated she was here four months ago on the one-year anniversary of her stepson's death on Highway 10 in front of the City Hall. She was told Highway 10 would be changed. She understood the issue of lowering the speed limit in this area would be on an upcoming agenda and she hasn't seen it yet. Mayor Sonterre replied that there is a public open house on that study and other items coming up. Ramsey County completed a study and determined the speed limit of 55 was appropriate. Council Member Marty mentioned that he saw in the City schedule that on Wed., July 11 the Highway 10 Team will meet, and next Monday from 6:00 to 10:00 p.m. an open house in the Council Chambers will be held on this issue. There is also a work session planned for Monday, July 16, and suggested Ms. Holman attend the Highway 10 corridor study as well. Steven Berg, 2316 Louisa Ave. asked what exactly is a retreat and what the difference is between that and a study session. Council Member Marty explained a retreat is for the entire Council to meet and discuss how the Council has been performing and how to improve their performance Mr. Berg asked if the City Attorney attended the retreat and if the City paid for his presence. Mayor Sonterre stated an attorney was there. Mounds View City Council July 9, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 5 • Mr. Berg commented that he agreed that the meetings should always be held at the City Hall and also agreed that Council Member Thomas' comments as mentioned earlier were inappropriate. David Jahnke of 8428 Eastwood Road commented that TIF funding is the subject of an article in that day's USA Today. He offered to copy the article and distribute it to the Council Members. Mr. Jahnke stated he is present at each meeting and is noticing a larger crowd. He also attended the meeting in Roseville and observed an attorney from the League of Minnesota Cities was present and informed people how to get information on the City. Mr. Jahnke remarked that his pet peeve is on the golf course. He was told residents wouldn't have to pay to play golf. When he went to play golf, he was told to pay. He also mentioned that there seems to be a group of residents that are interested in how Mr. Hammerschmidt was let go. Mr. Jahnke also stated he felt the past administrators never held each department accountable for their departments. When new people came on board, the departments were held accountable, but he said that strange things happened. Sheri Gunn, 8120 Red Oak Court wished to thank people on behalf of the Festival committee. She named the Public Works department, Mounds View Police, Police Reserves from other cities, Fire Departments from Blaine and Spring Lake Park, parade emcees, Patrick and crew for televising the event, Wendy and Rob Marty for making the golf tournament a success, Post 761 for handling emergencies, Pete Severson and the Chevy Car Club, the Lions, school groups and outside craft vendors. She noted that the committees for next year's Festival will start forming next month, and if anyone wishes to join a committee, they should call her. Council Member Marty echoed her message of thank yous. Steve Bakke, 8261 Sunnyside Road, raised his concerns on one issue. He said the department heads are relied upon to carry out the mission and are accountable to the Council. He stated that that when department heads lose their jobs, some trust is lost among the residents. He felt that those that lost their jobs brought up reasonable assertions. Mr. Bakke added that when the possibility of having a third party investigation was voted down, he thought residents were disappointed and would have been willing to spend the money for it. He said that if Council Member Marty had his computer confiscated, all other computers should have been confiscated to show unity. He felt that Council Member Marty was singled out because his computer was confiscated. Mayor Sonterre replied that no Council member used cost as a justification for voting down a third party investigation. Council Member Stigney explained the issue of not using a third party adequately before noting that it was an internal issue. Council Member Quick asked if the Council has complied with the Code, Charter and State Law • in this issue, and with data practices and the termination of employees. Both City Attorney Riggs and City Administrator Miller confirmed they did comply with all the above. Mounds View City Council July 9, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 6 • Council Member Quick raised the question whether a ending investigation would put the P Council in a different position. City Attorney Riggs confirmed it would, adding that public or nonpublic data would need to be reviewed before releasing to the public. Council Member Marty requested an up-to-date attorney's bill prior to the next Council meeting. He said it seems the City Attorney is copied on a lot of data and Council Member Marty would like an accounting of the monies according to the city budget. Mayor Sonterre questioned City Attorney Riggs and asked if City Attorney Riggs were copied on something he didn't feel was a legalistic nature, if he would complete that request. City Attorney Riggs stated he was not aware of receiving copies on items of that sort. He explained there is a retainer and many duties fall under that retainer. City Administrator Miller commented the Staff can satisfy the request for the copy of the budget. She added that the City is selective of what information is passed on to the attorney. 5. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. 6. CONSENT AGENDA • A. Approve Just and Correct Claims B. Licenses for Approval C. Resolution 5581 Authorizing Severance Payout to Bruce Kessel D. Resolution 5582 Authorizing Severance Payout to John Hammerschmidt E. Resolution 5577 Allowing Lake Region Hockey Association to Conduct Charitable Gambling at Robert's Off 10 Council Member Marty requested that Item E be removed for discussion. Council Member Stigney requested that Items A and D be removed for discussion. MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Quick. To Approve Consent Agenda Items B and C as Presented. Ayes - 4 Nays - 0 Motion carried. E. Resolution 5577 Allowing Lake Region Hockey Association to Conduct Charitable Gambling at Robert's Off 10 Assistant to City Administrator Reed explained that in the past, the Lake Region Hockey Association has conducted charitable gambling at Donatelle's, which is no longer open. If this resolution is approved, the gambling will be conducted at Robert's Off 10 next year. The Association used Donatelle's for several years. There are no other licenses at that location. The owner of that location has signed off on this agreement. Mounds View City Council July 9, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 7 Jerry Linke, 2319 Knoll Drive, stated the Lions currently have a legal license and contract with Roberts Off 10. Contrary to what Assistant to City Administrator Reed said, the Lions had a conversation with Robert Waste. Gretchen Wallbridge, past president of the Lions, was present for comments as well. Mr. Linke continued that according to Mr. Waste, he was surprised to hear of this item on the agenda. As far as he knew, his group was only investigating options for when the contract was up. Mr. Linke named the charitable works the Lions has done for the community. Council Member Quick stated the issue is whether Mr. Waste has signed off on this agreement. Assistant to City Administrator Reed stated she had a copy of the agreement at her desk. MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Marty. To Recess at 7:59 p.m. Ayes - 4 Nays - 0 Motion carried. The recess ended at 8:09 p.m. Assistant to City Administrator Reed provided a signed agreement. Though, this agreement may be in conflict with the Lions Club. She did not have a contract depicting the relationship between the Lions and Roberts Off 10. MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Quick. To Table Resolution 5577 Allowing Lake Region Hockey i Association to Conduct Charitable Gambling at Robert's Off 10 for two weeks. Ayes - 4 Nays - 0 Motion carried. A. Approve Just and Correct Claims Council Member Stigney observed there are four items at the end of the list for Just and Correct Claims, which he requested be pulled from the June 11 meeting. To date he has not received information on them. City Administrator Miller explained she provided each department with a listing of the items in question. She does not have an answer from them yet. Mayor Sonterre asked Council Member Stigney to confirm the check numbers in question. Council Member Stigney listed them as 105794, 105828, 105837, 105844. MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Marty. To Approve Just and Correct Claims less items 105794, 105828, 105837, 105844. Ayes - 4 Nays - 0 Motion carried. D. Resolution 5582 Authorizing Severance Payout to John Hammerschmidt Council Member Stigney questioned this item because Mr. Hammerschmidt has approximately 5 weeks of vacation pay. He added that per the contract, he is to take his vacation during the Mounds View City Council July 9, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 8 winter season. He questioned if the City should pay the vacation time Mr. Hammerschmidt didn't use. City Administrator Miller clarified that the golf course had a contract which allowed Mr. Hammerschmidt to carry over vacation. She was under the impression that Mr. Hammerschmidt didn't always take vacation in the winter. She did not have a copy of his contract but she wasn't aware that the contract stated he had to take vacation in the winter; it was just intended. Council Member Stigney asked if it was City Administrator Miller's opinion that these wages were due to Mr. Hammerschmidt. City Administrator Miller stated she hasn't worked in this position long enough to know what the practice was in the past. She also clarified that the amount due to Mr. Hammerschmidt was only accumulated vacation and sick pay; it did not include flex hours. City Attorney Reed informed the Council that this practice does comply with the Statutes. Mayor Sonterre raised the issue that there is a statutory window in which to address issues, and asked what that window was. City Administrator Miller offered to notify the finance department the next day of when to sent the check out, assuming the Council approved this payout. Mr. Kessel's check was to be mailed to him. Mr. Hammerschmidt's check will be mailed to Ramsey County. MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Quick. To Approve Resolution 5582 Authorizing Severance Payout to John Hammerschmidt Ayes - 4 Nays - 0 Motion carried. 7. COUNCIL BUSINESS A. Public Hearing to Review, Discuss and Present the Revised Mounds View Comprehensive Plan. Mayor Sonterre opened the public hearing at 8:18 p.m. Director of Community Development Ericson stated the City has been working on this plan for three or four years. The City held community meetings at Edgewood School and mass mailed every household in the city. There was a lot of input, and the work was completed in 1999. The Council approved the plan for distribution to neighboring cities and the Met Council. After a few months, the Met Council decided that more details needed to be resolved. On November 8, 2000 the Met Council approved the plan. The City Council has nine months from that date in which to approve the document. Director Ericson further explained that there hasn't been many changes to the Comprehensive Plan. Many of the principals, goals and policies are still in place. He displayed a future land use map as well as an existing land use map. Residential will still be the City's primary land use. Mounds View City Council July 9, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 9 There are approximately eleven areas in the city that have been identified to change what the future land use will be. It is not the city's intention to redevelop. If redevelopment does occur, the areas depicted on the future land use map are most likely the areas that would redevelop. If the property owner does not want to have his land redeveloped, then it will not be. He explained all the areas that are identified for future development would only be developed if the property owners so choose. The City would prefer to see something of a comprehensive basis for development rather than each smaller piece be developed individually. This would assist the tax base as well. Director Ericson stated he was not recommending an action be taken by the Council at this meeting. He was only presenting information. The Comprehensive Plan is intended to be a fluid document and change over time to reflect the needs of the community. Steve Bakke, 8261 Sunnyside Road, commented he has heard that residents would like an elevated crosswalk over Highway 10. He was under the understanding that there was a meeting on the this Wednesday night. His question was whether the Planning Commission has considered this. Director Ericson responded that one of the elements of the Comprehensive Plan is to address transportation in the City. He added that the City is working toward creating and providing innovative transportation choices. Mr. Bakke asked if a trailway is planned. Director Ericson answered that the City is moving forward to implement that. The Planning Commission and the Park and Recreation Department • discussed how to provide safe pedestrian and bike traffic. The Planning Commission and Park and Recreation Department did discuss building a bridge over Highway 10. However, the Comprehensive Plan did not go as far as recommendation on that issue. He added that the project team is meeting this Wednesday and the consultant will meet with the community the following Monday. All options need to be considered including an underpass, overpass or trails. Greg Johnson, 2865 Highway 10 and Mounds View Planning Commissioner commented that any building along Highway 10 has had a requirement to put in a sidewalk. This makes the highway safer. Dan Lamb, 2305 Shorewood Road, questioned who prepared the future land use map. He noted that the water and wetlands were one color and on the Twin Cities Metro Land Use map, there isn't a correlation between water and land. Director Ericson clarified that most of this information was from the Ramsey County files and the City's files. He believes the numbers are accurate for the amount of wetland in the city. Mayor Sonterre closed the public hearing at 8:40 p.m. Council Member Marty stated he did not observe trails on the map. Director Ericson explained that there are about 20 different maps. There is a trailway map that shows where existing trails are and where future trails will be. Council Member Marty explained he was hoping there would be more trails and was concerned that some may be eliminated instead. Director Ericson agreed that there should be more trails. Mounds View City Council July 9, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 10 i MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Quick. To Approve the Comprehensive Land Use Map for Finalization at the July 23 Meeting. Ayes - 4 Nays - 0 Motion carried. B. Public Hearing to consider the First Reading and Introduction of Ordinance 683, an Ordinance Rezoning Property Located at 2525 County Road I from R-1, Single Family Residential, to R-2, Single and Two Family Residential. Mayor Sonterre opened the public hearing at 8:52 p.m. Director of Community Development Ericson explained this request is from Ernie Gustafson who owns 3 lots. There are 2 undeveloped lots north of his lot. Mr. Gustafson has put forward a subdivision plan making his 3 lots into 4. Three of the 4 lots would be rezoned to R-2, and this drawing is on Exhibit C, included in the packet. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on this issue on June 4 and many residents appeared before the Commission, and most opposed the proposal. Included in this packet are a couple of letters and one email. The Planning Commission felt this would not be an appropriate change and wouldn't fit in with the existing neighborhood. • The Planning Commission approved a resolution that provided an alternative to rezoning. This is shown on exhibit F in the packet. This resolution recommended that Lots 3 and 4 of Exhibit F could be rezoned and be consistent with the housing that already exists. Mr. Gustafson is not m favor of this. If he were to subdivide to 5 lots, he would accept one lot facing County Road I at R-2. There is room for 5 lots, but the lot line would end up too close to Mr. Gustafson's house. There would be no access allowed from County Road I. Any R-2 lot would have to take frontage from County Road I. Staff has prepared a rezoning ordinance for the Council's consideration. There several options of the Council's actions which are: to approve the first reading; approve the first reading with different rezoning; table the issue; or deny. Director Ericson invited Mr. Gustafson to contribute to the public hearing as well as residents. Commissioner Quick noticed that Exhibit C does not show 5 lots. Director Ericson explained that option was proposed after the fact. Before the 5 lots can be drawn, the Planning Commission would have to approve a variance for the setback on the side of the lot facing Long Lake Road. Ernie Gustafson, 2525 County Road I, stated that when he appeared before the Planning Commission last month, he had proposed a subdivision of 3 lots. There would be a large duplex lot next to the duplexes that are already there to the east. While Mr. Gustafson did not agree with the option shown on Exhibit C, he did agree with the option shown on Exhibit F. He added that when the tornado hit his home in 1965, he rebuilt the house so it could function as a duplex. He said he hoped the area would be zoned to allow the duplex. He further explained that there is • 105 feet from the Long Lake Property line to his home. There needs to be a 10 foot side yard and he suggested taking 10 feet from his house. That leaves 95 feet by 135 feet on the corner of Mounds View City Council July 9, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 11 • County Road I and Long Lake Road. This demands a variance of 5 feet, and he is agreeable to presenting that to the Planning Commission if need be. Mr. Gustafson stated that he advertised his lots for sale by acreage. A buyer was interested in the corner lot. Mr. Gustafson couldn't make the sale because he didn't know if it would be considered a lot. Commissioner Quick asked Director Ericson what would need to be done if the Council approved this plan with 5 lots. Director Ericson suggested having a first reading of the ordinance and delay the second reading for the variance. If the Planning Commission doesn't approve the variance, then the issue is back to square one. Commissioner Quick asked City Attorney Riggs for his suggestion. City Attorney Riggs explained that at least 14 days would have to elapse between the first reading and the variance. Mayor Sonterre clarified that in the 5-lot scenario, the composition would be three duplexes on County Road I and then 2 lots remaining on Long Lake Road as R-l. Director Ericson responded that Staff would propose that 2 lots at the most would be R-2. Mayor Sonterre further clarified that there would be 3 single family homes on Long Lake Road if they approve the variance. Mayor Sonterre closed the public hearing at 9:05 p.m. MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Quick. To Waive the First Reading and Introduction of Ordinance 683 an Ordinance Rezoning property Located at 2525 County Road I from R-I, Single Family Residential, to R-2, Single and Two Family Residential with Exhibit F amended as proposed. Ayes - 4 Nays - 0 Motion carried. Director of Community Development Ericson pointed out that this is the first reading. The applicant now must appear before the Planning Commission. The second reading of the ordinance will not happen until after the rezoning is approved. C. Public Hearing to Consider the Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance 684, an Ordinance Rezoning Property Located at 2625 Highway 10 from R-3, Medium Density Residential, to B-2, Limited Business. 1. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance Mayor Sonterre opened the public hearing at 9:09 p.m. Director of Community Development Ericson stated this is a request from the Mounds View Animal Hospital to expand their site. The Council did approve a reading of the first ordinance at . their last regular meeting. Staff recommends approving Ordinance 684. Mounds View City Council July 9, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 12 Janet Licox, 7815 Eastwood Road recapped that this is for limited business use. She commented that a specific business is in mind for the lot now and questioned what types of businesses would be allowed at this location. Director Ericson explained that a higher intensity retail use type of business would not be appropriate in this location. Ideas of businesses that would be allowed are dentist office or Laundromat. Ms. Licox questioned what type of access would be needed for this. She observed that there isn't any access for this property currently. Director Ericson replied the applicants requested there be aright in/right out on County Road 10. That would be the primary access. Customers north of County Road 10 would use the Eastwood Road access. They do have approved access on County Road 10 from Ramsey County. Ms. Licox inquired what types of runoff solutions there are. Director Ericson responded that those issues would be addressed at the development review. The engineers have been asked to put into consideration storm water management practices to avoid problems. Mayor Sonterre closed the public hearing at 9:16 p.m. MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Marty. To Approve Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance 684. . Council Member Stigney asked the applicant if they would do what they can to preserve the trees that are there. Dr. Barcus replied they will. He said he is not sure how it will play out because of the size and shape of the building. They want to maintain an aesthetic standpoint and he thought a number of the perimeter trees will be saved. Mayor Sonterre asked City Administrator Miller to take the roll call vote. Marty: aye. Quick: aye. Stigney: aye. Sonterre: aye. Thomas: Absent. MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Quick. To recess at 9:22 p.m. Recess ended at 9:27 p.m. D. Continuation of Public Hearing to Consider the Intoxicating Liquor and Sunday Sales License Application for Topa Corporation dba Donatelle's. Assistant to the City Administrator Reed requested a continuation of this item to the August 13 regular meeting of the City Council. This is the second request for a continuation. The applicant is working out issues with the Ramsey County Health Department. MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Stigney. To Continue the Public Hearing to Consider the • Intoxicating Liquor and Sunday Sales License Application for Topa Corporation dba Donatelle's. Mounds View City Council Juiy 9, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 13 Ayes - 4 Nays - 0 Motion carried. E. Appeal of Planning Commission Denial of Variance Request for a Reduced Side-Yard Setback, Arlen Baumhofner, 5532 St. Stephen Street. Planning Associate Atkinson stated this request from Arlen Baumhofner is to construct a storage building. The Planning Commission reviewed this issue in a public hearing. The Planning Commission did not find a reason to grant the variance; they felt there was no hardship. Planner Atkinson mentioned there is a procedural flaw in this item due to no notification of residents of the public hearing. City Attorney Riggs stated that Section 112502 in the City Code states the Board of Adjustment of Appeals states a public hearing must be held and notices must be sent to those that are within 350 feet of this request. He suggested this item be continued. MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Marty. To Continue the Appeal of Planning Commission Denial of Variance Request for a Reduced Side-Yard Setback. Director Ericson mentioned that Mr. Baumhofner's neighbor was present and wished to speak. The Council agreed to hear public testimony. . Mr. Baumhofner stated he was in favor of the public hearing. He commented that his neighbor was in favor of the building. He explained the storage building would look more like a carriage house with a front porch and pillars. Barb Skurvig, 5538 St. Stephen Street said she saw no problem with the building of the storage building. She felt the building would enhance the area. Director of Community Development Ericson stated this item would be scheduled for the regular Council Meeting on August 13, due to the lead-in time needed for publication. F. Creative Kids Child Care Agreement City Administrator Miller stated the Council reviewed a number of proposals at the last meeting. Included in that meeting was a copy of the lease agreement, a public works report, and a copy of the revenue report by the City's finance director. The revised contract is similar to the original but simplifies the lease agreement. The original document had a formula for enrollment and we wanted to simplify that. The second component of the agreement is the utility maintenance. The Public Works director compiled a report which is included in the meeting packet. The Staff recommended a minimum of a 5-year lease agreement. Provided in the report are the actual revenues collected for the year 2000. The applicant did not feel comfortable with a 3% CPI. Mayor Sonterre questioned the 3% number and whether that was fact based or not. City Administrator Miller responded it is not fact; it is speculative. She used that number because the Public Works Director included that number in his report. Mayor Sonterre suggested the CPI be Mounds View City Council July 9, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 14 eliminated this time around, and include real numbers when the lease is due again. His suggestion was to not increase the amount the first year, but an accurate CPI can be determined for future years. Council Member Marty agreed with Mayor Sonterre's suggestion to omit the CPI for now and set the base rate. City Administrator Miller suggested a base rent be established, and on July 1 of each year, determine what the CPI is. The lease offers two ways of paying. One option is a percentage of the previous year's analyzed rent, and another is an amount equivalized to the CPI and pay the greater of the two. Tracy Sonterre, applicant, received a copy of the lease at 11:30 a.m. today. She would like to contact her lawyer before agreeing with the lease. She had a question in regard to the base rent, due to the fact that she cannot raise her rates on child care to maintain the lease. In addition, she will have to maintain a 4-5 percent raise for staff wages for incentive for them to stay on with her center. She said she was reassured many times that this was to be as much of an even break as possible. She felt that if the lease is being increased, it could be a hardship in the long run. City Administrator Miller stated it was not intended that the rate would gradually increase. Mayor Sonterre explained that while increases are to be expected, the City would try to keep them surmountable. Ms. Sonterre noted that the business of child care can be costly. Council Member Stigney questioned whether a CPI factor is involved and what the policy is for leases for the YMCA, and such organizations. Ms. Sonterre stated that her organization is not a private corporation nor an organization supplemented by the state. She requested leniency to get the business started and maintain employees. Her goal is to be in the community a long time. Ms. Sonterre's business is at capacity in Anoka and is a good business. She felt she could build the same type of business in Mounds View. Mayor Sonterre stated it was worth noting that the Council's time has been remarkably tied up as of late. Originally, the Council was working towards an August 1 start date for a new provider, but realizes it will be difficult to have the center open by August 1. He suggested the word "greater" be changed to "lesser" in the contract under 2.1 (a). Council Member Stigney stated he was under the impression that this was a negotiated lease and now he learned that the applicant needs to consider the lease with the lawyer. He requested our staff and attorney look at our contract. City Attorney Riggs responded that the Council does have that discretion. Mayor Sonterre remarked that this is not a working document. The goal is to present an officially approved lease. This lease is much the same as the predecessor's, except for a few points. Mounds View City Council July 9, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 15 Council Member Marty stated he thought the community needed this service and believes that Creative Kids Child Care Center has bargained in good faith. He concurred with Mayor Sonterre on his suggestion of changing the wording relating to rent. He also questioned why it took four days for Ms. Sonterre to get a copy of the lease when it was emailed to the Council Members on July 5. City Administrator Miller explained that she had been in conversation with Ms. Sonterre. Ms. Sonterre was on vacation prior to the 4th of July. Ms. Sonterre stated she did receive a message from City Administrator Miller when she returned to her office on Thursday, July 5. City Administrator Miller stated she was out of the office Thursday and Friday, July 5 and 6. Ms. Sonterre acknowledged that the Council had been working on other issues recently and didn't see that as a problem. She did want to bring up two other items on the lease. Item 2.4 in regard to Accounting she didn't feel pertained to her business. Because of the change in the maintenance fee for her business, she understood the earnings she made did not affect the City. She also requested clarification on item 4.1 in regard to tenant's maintenance and repairs. Council Member Stigney asked if Ms. Sonterre had a problem divulging her income. Ms. Sonterre explained she was only interested in not making it public. Ms. Sonterre questioned whether the books would be reviewed just for that property or for any other sites of the corporation. City Attorney Riggs replied the books would be reviewed for the whole corporation. MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Stigney. To Continue Discussion on this Item For a Limit of 15 Minutes. Ayes - 4 Nays - 0 Motion carried. City Attorney Riggs clarified that item 2.4 is on the lease because this is a state bond financed property. Typically, the auditor needs to look at the books when a lease is with a public entity. He encouraged Ms. Sonterre to leave that item in place. Council Member Stigney asked if the books would be reviewed annually or quarterly. Mayor Sonterre suggested that since that information must be prepared for taxes, it may be the least costly to review the books annually. City Attorney Riggs suggested to make the language in the agreement read "annually or upon request." Mayor Sonterre raised issues with Section 4.1. He said that Ms. Sonterre needed clarification on exactly what is considered interior and exterior maintenance. He brought up two scenarios of broken windows or plumbing problems and asked who would be responsible for what types of repair. He then suggested the language be left as is and define it at a later date. City Attorney Riggs agreed the language could be modified. Mounds View City Council July 9, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 16 Council Member Stigney questioned the wording in Section 2.3 in relation to a drastic adjustment in any utilities due to inflation, act of God, etc. City Administrator Miller suggested the wording be changed to "There should be an adjustment in any utilities," etc. City Attorney Riggs explained that this provision was intended to cover the drastic spikes in utility costs. He added that the word "inflation" is taking into account the CPI. Council Member Stigney felt the increase in utilities should be the tenant's responsibility. Council Member Marty pointed out that if the cost would increase drastically, it would likely be brought before the Council. Mayor Sonterre reviewed the changes discussed: Section 2.1.(a) should read "by the lesser of and " 3% CPI"; 2.3 should read "There should be an adjustment in utilities"; 2.4 should read "annually or upon request the accounting information." MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Quick. To Approve the Creative Kids Child Care Agreement as amended. Ayes - 4 Nays - 0 Motion carried. G. Payments to Seasonal Employee for Golf Lessons Assistant to City Administrator Reed distributed papers with the first two pages intending to be answers to questions the Council Members had at the last meeting. Assistant to City Administrator Reed explained that in answer to Council Member Stigney's question of who were the card carrying PGA golf teachers, all four are. She included a small flow chart in the handout, explaining how the pros are paid. The following information sheet that was handed out outlined the fees received for golf lessons. Mayor Sonterre raised the question of how the apprentice pro is paid. Assistant to City Administrator Reed explained the apprentice is an employee of the City but wasn't sure how the apprentice was paid. She offered to find out. Council Member Stigney questioned item 5 on the handouts. He asked who the $40 administrative fee is paid to. Assistant to City Administrator Reed replied that is paid to the pros. Council Member Stigney asked if that is in addition to the wages they would already be making. Assistant to the City Administrator Reed deferred this item to the Head Pro, who was out of the office. Council Member Stigney questioned what the definition of "member" is in regard to card carrying PGA members. Assistant to the City Administrator Reed explained all 4 teachers are members. The PGA web site would likely have more information on member status. Mounds View City Council July 9, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 17 . Assistant to the City Administrator Reed explained that there are 2 staff employees that work in the clubhouse. One seasonal employee has other responsibilities. The master professional only gives lessons. Resolution 5548 created a second position to give lessons only and was approved by the Council and is an open position. Assistant to the City Administrator Reed stated that on June 25, the Council requested job descriptions be developed. Since the issue is on lesson pay, the individual who gives lessons and works in the clubhouse would only receive his base pay while this issue is under discussion. Council Member Marty questioned how long the pay could be withheld due to working on the job descriptions. Assistant to the City Administrator Reed stated the job descriptions were given to the two regular employees the day after the last Council meeting. She explained she would need 48 hours to draw up the descriptions for the other employees and send them to Labor and Relations. Mayor Sonterre said he understood there is a need to change a certain position to a contracted position. He questioned whether that should be considered by Labor and Relations. Assistant to the City Administrator Reed confirmed that Labor and Relations recommended this position be an individual contract. Council Member Stigney inquired whether the City is in violation of Chapter 302 of the City • Code. City Attorney Riggs clarified that an independent contractor agreement is a fairly simple agreement, but did agree that it should be discussed with Labor and Relations. Council Member Stigney stated he read in the contract that this particular employee would be paid until the end of the year. Assistant to the City Administrator Reed explained they would be paid at the end of the junior session, which is the end of August. The Pros will be paid this Thursday for lessons up to June 15. Mayor Sonterre suggested this item be put off until the work session the following week to discuss changing a certain position to a contract position as per the recommendation of Assistant to City Administrator Reed and City Attorney Riggs. Assistant to the City Administrator Reed asked if she has direction from the Council to create a job description for the person that gives lessons and has operational duties. She clarified it would all be in one job description. Mayor Sonterre asked if this was a recommendation brought forward by Labor and Relations. Assistant to the City Administrator confirmed it is. Council Member Marty affirmed the Council was giving direction. Council Member Stigney stated he was not ready to act on it. H. Approval of amendment to Development Agreement 87-81, regarding a parking lot expansion at Building G of the Mounds View Business Park. t Mounds View City Council July 9, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 18 Planning Associate Jim Atkinson reviewed the Staff Report. The Council approved a prior request to add 35 spaces with 3 conditions. The Case had been tabled due to one document, and as of today that document was issued. City Attorney Riggs explained the contract for private development appears to suggest modifications can be made. However, there is no verification whether everything was done properly when the parcel was transferred to new owners. Director of Community Development Ericson suggested approving a resolution to amend the resolution that approved the expansion and amend that resolution stating Council no longer desires to have the developer agreement amended. This will be discussed at the next work session. I. Closed Session • City Attorney Riggs stated the Labor and Relations Negotiations requires by Minnesota Statute to have a motion to approve discussion of that item in a closed session. MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Stigney. To Discuss Item I Labor Negotiations in Closed Session. Ayes - 4 Nays - 0 Motion carried. MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Marty. To Layover Agenda Items 8, 9 and 10 to the Next Regularly Scheduled Council Meeting. Ayes - 4 11. Next Council Work Session: Next Council Meeting 12. ADJOURNMENT Nays - 0 Motion carried. July 16, 2001 July 23, 2001 Mayor Sonterre adjourned the meeting to a closed session at 10:57 p.m. Transcribed and recorded by: Christine Moksnes Timesaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. LJ MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL MEETING Jul 9 2001 Y Please sign in N:~1IH: ~1DDRESS C:Admin.resolution.sign-in sheet