Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 2001/11/26PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA -~ ,; -~ ,---~ ,, _ Regular Meeting `, J ,'J,, November 26, 2001 -~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Mounds View City Hall _._ __ ._. 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 7:05 P.M. 1. MEETING IS CALLED TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL: Sonterre, Quick, Marty, Stigney, and Thomas. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA A. Monday, November 26, 2001 City Council Agenda. City Administrator Miller requested that Items 7D, 7E, and 7F be removed from the agenda. Council Member Quick indicated that he would like to remove Item 6F from the Consent Agenda for discussion. MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Thomas. To Approve the November 26, 2001, City Council Agenda as amended. Ayes - 5 Nays - 0 Motion carried. 4. PUBLIC INPUT Diane Wyman of 2209 Bronson Drive explained to Council that her dog had been attacked by a pitbull while she was walking it. She also indicated that another dog in the neighborhood had been attacked as well. She then asked Council to review the City's Ordinance concerning vicious dogs because she feels it needs to be changed because the Ordinance sets out consequences for a dog that has bitten a person and she feels that there should be language to govern when a dog has shown vicious behavior toward other animals or people. Ms. Wyman indicated that the dog is owned by residents who live right next to the elementary school and she is concerned because the yard is not fenced. Council Member Marty asked whether Ms. Wyman had incurred veterinary bills as a result of the attack on her dog. • Mounds View City Council November 26, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 2 Ms. Wyman indicated her veterinary bill was approximately $200.00 and the other resident had approximately $400.00 in veterinary bills. Council Member Marty suggested discussing the Ordinance at the next work session. Mayor Sonterre asked if there were state statutes to be followed concerning vicious dogs. Acting Chief Brennan indicated that the Community Service Officer has begun the process of having the dog certified as a vicious animal. He then indicated that if the owner of the dog does not comply with the items outlined in the letter sent by the Community Service Officer by December 6, 2001, the police would be seizing the dog. Council Member Marty asked Acting Chief Brennan to ask the Community Service Officer to come to the work session to provide input when Council discusses the Ordinance. David Jahnke of 8428 Eastwood Road indicated he had watched the November 13, 2001 Council Meeting on television and said he thought that recessing and leaving those in attendance to wait for more than two hours was very inconsiderate. Mr. Jahnke indicated he had watched the budget work session and was very concerned about the possibility of promoting certain individuals because he feels that "not everybody needs to be a vice president." He then asked Council to be careful with how it proceeds with employment • matters because a lot of mistakes have been made in the past that have cost the City and its taxpayers a lot of money. John Wharton of 7462 Spring Lake Road indicated he was from the Lions and was concerned that Council Member Quick had suggested tabling approval of the Charitable Gambling Application for the Lions because he needs to send a copy of the application to the State Control Board by Friday or the Lions would lose their license. He then indicated that he has been the Charitable Gambling Manager for more than 10 years and does not want to lose the license. Mayor Sonterre thanked Mr. Wharton for his comments and indicated that he would be allowed to speak when Item 6F was discussed. Mary Knoll of 5725 Bunker Hill Drive inquired as to the status of the matter concerning the fitness equipment at the Community Center. Mayor Sonterre indicated that a letter had been issued to the City Administrator with a full explanation and remedy. Ms. Knoll indicated that residents in attendance had been given the impression that the recess at the November 13, 2001 had been called to discuss the fitness equipment because there was pending or threatened litigation. She then asked if that was the case. • r Mounds View City Council November 26, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 3 . City Attorney Riggs indicated the recess was called so that he could give Council legal advice concerning the fitness equipment. 5. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. 6. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approve Just and Correct Claims B. Licenses for Approval C. Resolution 5652 Approving a Step Increase for Jeremiah Anderson D. Resolution 5653 Approving a Step Increase for Debbie Jasper E. Resolution 5654 Approving a Step Increase for Lois Lestina-Yost F. Resolution 5655 Approving a Charitable Gambling Application for the Lions G. Resolution 5656 Closing City Hall for Christmas Eve, December 24, 2001 H. Resolution 5658 Reclassifying the Assistant to the City Administrator position to Assistant City Administrator and Re-pointing the Position Council Member Marty requested that Items 6E and 6H be removed for discussion. Council Member Quick requested that Item 6F be removed for discussion. Mayor Sonterre requested that Item 6A be removed for discussion. MOTION/SECOND: Thomas/Marty. To Approve Consent Agenda Items 6B, C, D, and G as presented. Council Member Stigney requested that the Resolutions for Items 6C, D, and G be read. City Administrator Miller read Resolutions 5652, 5653, and 5656. Ayes - 5 Nays - 0 Motion carried. MOTION/SECOND: Sonterre/Quick. To Approve Consent Agenda Item 6A as presented. Mayor Sonterre indicated that he had attended a meeting with URS, Ramsey County, and Community Development Director Ericson to discuss the "leap frog" design that had been presented at the public meeting and at a Council work session. He then indicated he was concerned to find out that URS had not really looked into the logistics of actually doing the "leap frog" option. He further indicated he was put off somewhat to learn that this option was given to Council without complete review and URS could not confirm, at the meeting, whether the project could be made a reality due to adequate right of way and utility issues. • Mounds View City Council November 26, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 4 Mayor Sonterre indicated that Council had not asked URS to present hypothetical situations to the public and Council and suggested holding the payment to URS until more work was done to make the proposal realistic. Council Member Thomas indicated she was not happy with any of the plans provided by URS. She then commented that she thought the City was clear when it told URS that the City wanted safety issues addressed and wanted to foster a downtown feeling. She then indicated that she did not see anything that Council had specifically asked for actually addressed in the proposals. She further indicated that she would like to make a motion to send the options back to URS and ask them to address the priorities given to them because she is uncomfortable paying them until they do the job they were asked to do. Mayor Sonterre indicated that the City was under time constraints when this process started but said that Ramsey County had determined that a mill and overlay would not hamper redevelopment opportunities because that redevelopment would not take place prior to 2005 which means that the City is no longer being pressured by Ramsey County to provide a plan by the end of the year. He then commented he feels the City should do a more thorough investigation into any proposed redevelopment plans. Council Member Thomas suggested a friendly amendment to Mayor Sonterre's motion to approve Item 6A to request that the options provided by URS be sent back to them and ask them to address the safety issues and other issues they were originally asked to address with their proposals. Mayor Sonterre amended his motion to approve Item 6A without Check Number 107081 to URS and to direct Staff to ask URS to re-examine the priorities of the City for the County Highway 10 redevelopment and come back to Council with a new and better plan. Council Member Stigney asked what was being sent through Mailbox Express for $76.82. Finance Director Hansen indicated that fund 730 was the sewer department for shipping but indicated he was not sure what was shipped. Council Member Marty inquired as to why the City was paying Sunrise United Methodist Church $14.00. City Administrator Miller indicated that amount was an employee contribution. Ayes - 5 Nays - 0 Motion carried. Council Member Stigney made a point of order that he did not think it was correct procedure for Roberts Rules of Order to make a motion for approval of the item before discussing it because discussion is needed to determine the type of motion that should be made. He then indicated that at the last few meetings the procedure has changed. Mounds View City Council November 26, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 5 City Attorney Riggs indicated that any item pulled from the Consent Agenda needs to be handled in the same fashion as other items on the agenda. He then indicated that Roberts Rules of Order is not a clear edict or law and the procedure depends on what Council wants to do. Council Member Stigney indicated that it seems illogical to move approval of the item prior to discussion. Council Member Thomas indicated that the matter was discussed by full Council and everyone agreed that to bring order to the discussion Council would change its procedure to have a motion on the floor. MOTION/SECOND: Thomas/Quick. To Approve Consent Agenda Item 6E as presented. Council Member Marty questioned why this employee was being given a half step increase rather than a full step. Acting Chief Brennan indicated that because this employee was hired in at Step 4 she was told that she would not move to Step 5 until her one-year anniversary but there is a six-month review that usually contains the step move. Council Member Marty asked when the step increase is typically given. Acting Chief Brennan indicated that a step increase is usually given at the six-month process. Council Member Thomas indicated that to her recollection Council had determined that due to the employee staring at Step 4 she would not go to Step 5 after six months but would be required to wait until one year and the half step covers an increase for the six month period. Council Member Marty asked City Administrator Miller to research the matter and bring it back before Council at the next meeting. MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Stigney. To Table Resolution 5654 to the December 10, 2001 Pending Further Information. Ayes - 5 Nays - 0 Motion carried. MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Stigney. To Approve Consent Agenda Item 6F as presented. Council Member Quick questioned whether there were some changes to the licensing for the Lions. Mayor Sonterre indicated that the previous owner of the establishment, prior to passing away, had expressed an interest in changing the licensing. t Mounds View City Council November 26, 2001 ''~ Regular Meeting Page 6 John Wharton of 7462 Spring Lake Road indicated that the previous owner had signed the lease and the new owner has agreed to honor the lease. He then indicated that the lease is part of the premise permit that needs to be submitted to the State Control Board by Friday. He also indicated that the Lions are making improvements to the business. Mayor Sonterre clarified that the Resolution does not extend the contract with the establishment but allows the Lions to operate the charitable gambling according to state regulations. Mayor Sonterre asked City Attorney Riggs whether passing the Resolution would affect the ability of the City to go back and revisit the Ordinances concerning charitable gambling in the City, if needed. City Attorney Riggs indicated that passing the Resolution does not bind the City legislatively and noted the City could change the Ordinance if need be. Ayes - 5 Nays - 0 Motion carried. MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Thomas. To Approve Consent Agenda Item 6H as Presented. Council Member Stigney made a point of order that he feels it is customary to have the person who pulls an item off the Consent Agenda speaking first. City Attorney Riggs indicated that it is not necessary to have the person who pulled the item off the Consent Agenda speaking first. He indicated that the matter is a procedural decision of Council and Council needs to decide how it wants to handle the matter. He indicated that items pulled from the Consent Agenda are to be treated as any other item. He then indicated that it seems that Council has gone to the position of having a motion on the table before discussion. Council Member Marty indicated that Council had discussed this matter during the budget process but it has never been a subject or an agenda item at a work session so it has never really been formally presented to Council. He stated that he does not feel a City the size of Mounds View needs an Assistant City Administrator because the budget cannot afford it. He then noted that starting the individual off at $59,573.00 means that by the time the individual reaches Step 5 the pay increases to over $70,000. Council Member Marty commented that he feels the job descriptions of the City Administrator and the Assistant to the City Administrator need to be reviewed to make sure that the duties those individuals were hired for are being handled according to the job descriptions for those positions. Mayor Sonterre asked whether the incumbent position holder with her current position and pointing would exceed Step 1 pay for this proposed new position. City Administrator Miller indicated she would not. Mayor Sonterre asked whether it would be more appropriate to start her at Step 1. Mounds View City Council November 26, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 7 • City Administrator Miller indicated that she felt that would be fair. Council Member Thomas commented she did not have an opinion as to what title the individual was given but noted that she deserves to be paid for the job she is currently doing regardless of what she was hired to do. Council Member Stigney indicated that creating this new position would be a reorganization for the City because the City has never had an Assistant City Administrator before. He then commented that the person was hired as the Assistant to the City Administrator and assigned specific jobs to do and that person was fully aware of those duties and the pay range for those duties. He further commented that it seems the individual has exceeded the top pay range for her position and Staff is trying to create a new pay range for her. Council Member Stigney indicated that he felt it was wrong to place this item on the Consent Agenda because it has not been brought to a work session for discussion as to why this would be good for the City, why it is cost beneficial to the City, and what the benefits to the taxpayers would be. He then indicated he had other questions and then asked what the current pointing of her existing job was. Council Member Stigney asked if any Council Member knew the current pointing on the current job. There was consensus that Council was not aware of the current pointing for the position. Council Member Stigney indicated that the original pointing, proposed new pointing, current duties, and additional duties should all be discussed at a work session. He then indicated that it is interesting to note that changing her title to Assistant Administrator puts her in a different pay scale so changing the title does make a difference. Council Member Stigney commented that he did not think the City Administrator's pay would be lowered to account for the fact that the Assistant Administrator is picking up some of her duties. He then indicated that as of January 1, 2001 all the pay scales are shifted up 4% which means that under the current proposal she would start at $61,956.71. Council Member Stigney commented that the budget is not complete but Council is being asked to approve this change and then noted that he feels it is inappropriate to present this to Council for approval before the pros and cons to the City and taxpayers are discussed. MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Marty. To Table Resolution 5658 to the Work Session for Further Discussion. Ayes - 2 Nays - 3 (Sonterre/Thomas/Quick) Motion failed. Mounds View City Council Regular Meeting November 26, 2001 Page 8 Council Member Marty indicated he would like to know who authorized the repointing of the position as it never was brought to Council and just came up during the budget process. Council Member Stigney questioned who authorized the new job description, as it was never handed out to Council. He then commented that he feels the way this is being done is backwards. Council Member Marty indicated that, as was discussed previously, the City does have incentive pay or merit pay to reward employees that have been encumbered with extra duties. He then suggested using merit pay to reward this employee rather than reclassifying her position and changing the pay scale which permanently affects the budget. He further noted that several years ago an Assistant Administrator was suggested and that Council had determined a City the size of Mounds View did not need an Assistant Administrator. Council Member Stigney questioned why additional duties could not be added under the current job description rather than recreating her position. City Administrator Miller indicated she was at a loss to understand why Council Members Marty and Stigney have said that reclassifying the position was not discussed because the matter has been discussed at several meetings in terms of how it would affect the budget. She then indicated that the position was re-evaluated based on the responsibilities of the individual and re- pointed accordingly. She further explained that this is not an unusual thing because all positions are routinely evaluated on an annual basis or when the position is filled to make sure that the job descriptions are updated. Council Member Stigney questioned why nothing was brought forward to Council. Council Member Quick made a point of order that no one interrupts Council Member Stigney and he then said everyone should be treated equally and fairly. City Administrator Miller indicated that the City has had positions re-pointed routinely since she has been on staff and it has not been a big deal. She then indicated that she did not do the re- pointing of the position, as there is a firm that does that for the City. She also commented that there are certain employee functions that are a routine part of her duties that usually do not require the examination being recommended by Council Member Stigney. Council Member Stigney commented that there has been no review of the pointing, the position, the duties, or the pay for those duties by Council. Mayor Sonterre indicated he did not know the Charter as well as Council Member Stigney but said he believes that this function is an administrative function that, by Resolution, Council agreed to leave to the City Administrator. He then indicated that he believes the Charter clearly indicates that Council is not to get involved in the administrative process. • Mounds View City Council November 26, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 9 Council Member Thomas indicated that this matter was discussed at two or possibly three work sessions along with two other positions. She then indicated that the positions, though not presented as finalized, were specifically discussed at those meetings that were televised. She then commented that for Council Members to say that the positions have not been discussed is disingenuous and frustrating. Council Member Marty agreed that the matter had come up during budget discussions but said it was not presented at a work session for discussion as to the pros and cons of the matter. He then indicated that the matter should have been presented under Council Business rather than the Consent Agenda because Council has a responsibility to taxpayers to make sure that any increase to the budget is justified. City Administrator Miller indicated that this matter was placed on the Consent Agenda because matters of this type are always placed on the Consent Agenda. Council Member Quick noted that Council had directed Staff to place this type of matter on the Consent Agenda. City Administrator Miller indicated that all positions in the City will increase by 4% as of January 1, 2001. Mayor Sonterre questioned whether making the change effective January 2, 2001 would circumvent the 4% increase for the newly created position. City Administrator Miller indicated that would appear to be the case. Mayor Sonterre suggested a friendly amendment to the motion to make the effective date January 2, 2002. Council Member Thomas clarified that she would receive a 4% increase in her current position. City Administrator Miller clarified that the 4% increase is for all positions and, as such, the newly created position would increase 4%. Mayor Sonterre withdrew his request to make the change effective January 2, 2002 and suggested that the employee begin at Step 1 rather than Step 2. Council Member Quick accepted the friendly amendment to his motion. Council Member Thomas accepted the friendly amendment as the seconder of the motion. Council Member Quick indicated that he agreed with Council Member Thomas' comment that the City needs to pay its employees for what they are doing. He then indicated that this employee has demonstrated a team ability to perform in this position and he thinks it is high time that the City recognize her due diligence in her position. Mounds View City Council November 26, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 10 Council Member Quick indicated that during the summer she and the City Administrator worked many long hours on the budget and other employee issues. He then indicated that the City changed over to a pointing system because the City was not in compliance with federal and state laws. He further indicated that an individual employee has a right, at any time, through the grievance process, to challenge the pointing system and the City then has to evaluate the points for the job and re-point and pay the individual for the job they are actually doing. Ayes - 3 Nays - 2(Stigney/Many) Motion carried. 7. COUNCIL BUSINESS A. Truth in Taxation Hearing Mayor Sonterre opened the public hearing at 8:08 p.m. City Administrator Miller recapped the budget process for Council and indicated that since September there have been several work sessions to discuss the budget and bring it into balance. City Administrator Miller indicated that, as Council is aware, the City is functioning without several department heads and indicated that Staff has pitched into present a balanced budget. She then commented that it is hard to believe that the new finance director has only been with the City since October as he has been invaluable during the budgeting process. She also thanked Mr. Pittman, Mr. Ericson, Mr. Dazmsky and all other Staff members that have worked so hard to provide a balanced budget, including the finance director from Blaine who assisted early on in the process. City Administrator Miller indicated that there were a couple of changes to revenue, the most dramatic of which was the elimination of the homestead and agricultural credits amounting to a decrease in revenue of $389,235. She also indicated that there was a decrease of $68,000 for a federal police grant the City did not receive, a decrease of $9,000 in hotel tax and a decrease of $8,500 in antennae fees. City Administrator Miller indicated that on the expenditure side of the budget there was the addition of a full time police officer, the union contract implementation of a 4% increase in pay, and a change to the health insurance costs which resulted in a 15% increase in health care for the City. She also indicated that Staff has attempted to reallocate costs to more accurately reflect the correct department which results in increases in some departments and decreases in other departments. Finance Director Hansen gave a presentation that explained the State's changes and how those changes affect the budget for 2002. He also gave a complete overview of the proposed 2002 budget and showed comparisons to the budgets from 2000 and 2001. i Finance Director Hansen indicated that the overall increase to the budget was held to 2.87%. Mounds view City Council November 26, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 11 Mayor Sonterre indicated that, for the median household a tax bill of $424.91 provides police, fire, parks, programming, streets and the staff at City Hall. He then indicated that a majority of the households in the City subscribe to cable television at approximately $40.00 per month for a total of $480.00 per year. He further indicated that he feels that the price residents pay for services is a bargain and well worth the price. David Jahnke of 8428 Eastwood Road indicated he had not received a budget handout and then noted he was concerned because he did not see where the golf course payment was included. City Administrator Miller indicated the golf course payment had never been included. Mr. Jahnke indicated that the golf course payment is pretty significant and, if the golf course is not able to pay for itself, the payment has to come from the City. He then asked where that payment would come from. Mayor Sonterre indicated that the City is looking at alternate funding sources for the golf course specifically the billboards, to avoid having to come to the taxpayers. He also indicated that in three years or so the City could refinance to make the financial arrangements a little better. He further indicated that, if the City is not able to locate alternative funding sources, the payment may have to come out of the general fund. Mr. Jahnke indicated that the golf course payment is a substantial payment that, if not reflected in the budget, could surprise the City and cause problems. City Administrator Miller indicated that the bond payment is reflected in the golf course budget. She then indicated that, if the payment is not able to be made out of the golf course budget, it would come out of the general fund. City Administrator Miller indicated that the Finance Director has been asked to review the golf course situation and make recommendations as to the cost effectiveness of some of the current practices such as opening first and staying open last, as well as the overall operations of the golf course. Mr. Jahnke indicated that the City had said the Community Center was going to pay for itself and it has not done so. He then indicated that the Community Center costs the City a lot of money per month and asked if that was figured into the budget. City Administrator Miller indicated that there is a $50,000 transfer from the general fund to the Community Center fund to make that budget work. City Administrator Miller indicated that, right now, all expenditures are being taken out of the Community Center fund. • Mounds View City Council November 26, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 12 Finance Director Hansen indicated that he had attempted to split the expenses fairly among the four activities housed there, the YMCA, banquet facility, Community Education, and the daycare center. He then indicated he had presented that to Council as an alternative budget format but had cautioned that efforts to take expenses and divvy them up were based on limited understanding of the operations over there and he will need some time to review the revenues and expenses in order to be sure he has properly apportioned the expenses to the right activity. Mayor Sonterre questioned whether the $50,000 was being distributed evenly for operating costs or if one tenant is getting more than the others. Finance Director Hansen indicated that in his alternative budget format that allocated costs to four entities, the YMCA operation had the greatest shortfall of revenues versus expenses and the other three were more or less self-supporting. Mayor Sonterre asked whether the $50,000 has been adequate or if the amount has been exceeded. Finance Director Hansen indicated that the YMCA would still have a shortfall of revenues and cautioned that he is not sure that all expenses were distributed fairly and equitably. Council Member Thomas questioned whether, with the $50,000, there would be a shortfall. Finance Director Hansen indicated there would still be something of an operating shortfall in 2002 of about $25,000 but said there is sufficient fund balance to cover that for 2002. He then indicated that, unless they are able to either improve revenues or curtail expenses for 2003, the City may need to budget $75,000 instead of 50,000 for 2003. City Administrator Miller indicated that the new daycare lease increases the revenues brought in from the daycare facility and includes a provision where they pay for their portion of the utilities for their part of the building. Mr. Jahnke questioned whether part of the YMCA funding is coming from Park and Recreation funds. Mayor Sonterre answered yes. Finance Director Hansen indicated the City has a contract with the YMCA to run the City's recreation program and manage the Community Center. He then commented that most cities have to subsidize recreation with property taxes. Gene Anderson of 2948 Wooddale Drive questioned why the City needed to add police officers when the population was staying stable and had not significantly increased. He then noted that the Mermaid has numerous police calls to its location and asked whether that is taken into consideration during the licensing process. Mounds View City Council November 26, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 13 Mr. Anderson indicated he was at the meeting because he was amazed at the 20% increase and said he is concerned at the cost of government continuing to increase and the number of people being served staying pretty much stable and he is hoping this Council can get a handle on that. Mayor Sonterre indicated that participation in the drug task force leads to forfeiture funds and, unless you eradicate the problem completely, those forfeiture funds are fairly consistent. He then agreed that the population has remained relatively consistent but said that the City has an increasing problem with drugs and the effect of drugs on the community. He further indicated that the City has had crack houses and methamphetamine houses in the City and participation in the drug task force gives the City multi-jurisdictional assistance with the drug problem. Council Member Thomas indicated that the license for the Mermaid took into consideration the number of police calls to the location. She indicated that the addition of two police officers was tied to getting a grant and, because the City did not get that grant, those two officers were not added. She then indicated that the officer added should be able to generate revenue back to the City with forfeiture funds. She further indicated that the overall increase in government was held to an increase of 2.87%, which is less than the cost of living. Council Member Marty commented that the police department needed another officer to make sure that every shift has more than one officer so that those officers know that they have back up if something were to happen. Mr. Anderson indicated that he is concerned that the franchise fees seem to continue to expand. He then indicated that even though it is being paid out of a different pocket it is going to the same place. Council Member Thomas indicated that the franchise fee has remained the same for three years. Mayor Sonterre indicated the allocation of the franchise fee dollars has been changed to put more money in the street fund. He then explained that the crime report that lists the addresses of 2200 block of Highway 10 does not mean that all of those events are occurring at the Mermaid because often times, the officers are in that general area watching for behaviors. Acting Chief Brennan indicated that even though the population has remained fairly stable for a long time the police department responded to over 10,000 calls in 1999 as compared to 5,000 in 1989. David Jahnke of 8428 Eastwood Road indicated he was at the meetings to try and fight the franchise fee because once a revenue source is established it never goes away. Council Member Quick indicated that the franchise fee is reviewed every year. Mr. Jahnke indicated that the franchise fee was to be reviewed every year with a sunset clause and said that one mayor had indicated that it would go down but he does not think it will ever go away. Mounds View City Council November 26, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 14 f Council Member Stigney indicated that the franchise fee started at 2.5% and is up to 4%. Mayor Sonterre closed the public hearing at 9:02 p.m. B. Public Hearing and Consideration of an Appeal of the Planning Commission Denial of a Variance Requested by Harstad Companies Regarding the Proposed Longview Estates Major Subdivision, Planning Case VROl-010. Mayor Sonterre opened the public hearing at 9:03 p.m. Council Member Marty thanked Finance Director Hansen for his efforts on the budget and for his presentation. He also thanked City Administrator Miller for her efforts. Finance Director Hansen thanked Council for its compliments and indicated that his part of the process could not have been done without all the preliminary work that was done by other staff members. Community Development Director Ericson indicated that this item was noticed as a public hearing but residents were not notified. He then asked that Council continue the public hearing to the December 14, 2001 meeting to allow time for residents to be noticed. MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Thomas. To Continue the Public Hearing to December 10, 2001. Ayes - 5 Nays - 0 Motion carried. C. Introduction and First Reading of Ordinance 689, an Ordinance Amending Chapter 512 of the Municipal Code Relating to Tobacco Products. Acting Chief Brennan indicated that Council had expressed a desire to make some changes to the wording of Ordinance 689 and then led a discussion on those changes. Acting Chief Brennan indicated that Council had previously discussed changing the fine amounts of $75.00 for the first offense and $200.00 for the second offense and $250.00 for the third offense. Mayor Sonterre clarified that the fine being discussed was the fine paid by the establishment, not the individual selling the tobacco product. City Attorney Riggs indicated that the City is allowed to set more restrictive rules than those set forth in Minnesota Statutes Chapter 461. It was the consent of Council to double the amounts of each of the fines for the establishment. Mounds View City Council November 26, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 15 ~_~ ~~ Acting Chief Brennan asked what Council wanted to set as the penalty for the individual selling the tobacco products. It was the consent of Council to increase the fine by $25.00 for the second and third offenses. It was the consent of Council to revoke the license of any establishment with four violations in a 24-month period for one year. It was the consent of Council to revoke the license of any establishment having two violations within a 12-month period for one month. City Attorney Riggs suggested using the term thirty days for clarity. Council Member Marty clarified the fourth violation is revocation for 365 days. Acting Chief Brennan indicated that there needed to be some language inserted into the Ordinance concerning minors after the discussion at the public hearing. City Attorney Riggs indicated that the state statute requires that the City seek out school district and local establishment input and does not call for a public hearing but most cities conduct a public hearing to obtain input. He then suggested noticing all licensed establishments, youth and family services and the school district. MOTION/SECOND: To Waive the Reading and Introduce Ordinance 689, an Ordinance Amending Chapter 512 of the Municipal Code Relating to Tobacco Products. Ayes - 5 Nays - 0 Motion carried. • 8. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS None. 9. REPORTS Council Member Marty asked for an update on the hiring process for department heads. City Administrator Miller indicated that the interviews for the public works position have concluded and an offer was made to the leading candidate. She then indicated that she expects to have an answer from the candidate by Wednesday, November 28, 2001. Community Development Director Ericson indicated that an offer has been extended to the leading candidate for the Economic Development Coordinator position and the City is waiting to hear back from the candidate. Mounds View City Council November 26, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 16 City Administrator Miller indicated that she was pleased with the caliber of applicants that have been applying for the open positions with the City. She then indicated that the next position to be filled is the golf course manager's position. She further indicated that a panel would be put together to interview the candidates. Council Member Marty questioned whether City Administrator Miller would use information from the PGA. City Administrator Miller indicated she had received a lot of information from the PGA which she would review. She also indicated that she intends to contact other resources with golf courses for their input into the process. Council Member Stigney requested that whatever recommendation the City Administrator comes up with be brought before Council at a work session for discussion. City Administrator Miller indicated that it was not typical to do so but said she would bring the matter to the work session if Council so desired. It was the consent of Council to direct Staff to bring discussion concerning the hiring of the Golf Course Manager to the work session for discussion. Mayor Sonterre commented that he feels this is an administrative function that the City i Administrator has been charged with. Council Member Thomas indicated that the value of the discussion would be in discussing what the City is planning to do out at the golf course rather than just the administrative aspect of filling the position. Council Member Thomas indicated the Focus had been delivered to her townhome for the first time and thanked them for that. She also noted she would be sending a letter thanking them. Council Member Marty requested an update on the hiring of a police chief. City Administrator Miller reminded Council that Staff had been instructed to fill the positions internally rather than using a consulting firm to assist in the process. She then indicated that the positions were prioritized and are being filled one at a time based on that prioritization. Council Member Stigney asked Staff to research the contract for fire inspections and provide information on the costs of the contract for discussion at the work session. Mayor Sonterre indicated that the contract for fire inspections would be discussed at the work session on December 3, 2001. ~J Mounds View City Council November 26, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 17 • Mayor Sonterre indicated he had attended the Homeland Safety Summit and had handed out information to Council. He then indicated that the League of Minnesota Cities had made the elimination of phosphorous in fertilizer its number one legislative topic. 10. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. November 13, 2001 City Council Minutes. • Council Member Stigney requested the following changes: On Page 10 indicate if the roll call vote was for or against the motion. On Page 6 change "could" to "would". After the last sentence add: Council Member Stigney disagreed and asked the City Attorney for his opinion and the City Attorney responded that he did not know the answer. Council Member Marty requested the following changes: On Page 1, indicate that Council Member Marty said he was not aware that was what he and the attorney had discussed. On Page 2, fourth paragraph, last line, add "which is the amount the bank would have charged on a six month loan." Third paragraph from bottom, last line, add "under Rich Sonterre's home address" before "his". Next paragraph, end of first line after "Hammerschmidt" add "cell phone bills". On Page 3, after the motion and second, second paragraph add, "allowed to speak for longer than three minutes and I think she should be allowed to continue." In the middle of the page indicate that Council Member Marty stated he did not see a need for a recess because Council had just commenced the meeting. Council Member Thomas requested the following changes: On Page 4, first line replace "it" with "the issue and come back for public input". On Page 9, fifth paragraph from top under Council Member Thomas indicate that "if the alarm does not work it is caught during inspection." MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Thomas. To Approve the Minutes of the Tuesday, November 13, 2001 Council Meeting as Amended. Ayes - 5 Nays - 0 Motion carried. 11. CLOSED SESSION TO DISCUSS PENDING LITIGATION Council recessed to the closed session at 9:33 p.m. 12. Next Council Work Session: Next Council Meeting: Monday, December 3, 2001 Monday, December 10, 2001 • Mounds View City Council November 26, 2001 Regular Meeting Page 18 13. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Sonterre adjourned the meeting at p.m. Transcribed and recorded by: Joan Lenzmeier Timesaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. • ~__J MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL MEETING • November 26, 2001 Please sign in V~,~~~IL? _~DDRESS C:Admin.resolution.sign-in sheet