Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 2002/03/11PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting March 11, 2002 Mounds View City Hall ~~~`}' 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 ,y~\~ 7:08 P.M. 1. MEETING IS CALLED TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL: Mayor Sonterre, Quick, Marty, Stigney, and Thomas (absent). 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA A. Monday, March 11, 2002 City Council Agenda. Council Member Quick asked that Item 8 be moved up in the agenda. City Administrator Miller requested that Resolution 5724 be added as Item 7J. She also requested that Council consider moving Item 11A up to Item 5. MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Quick. To Approve the March 11, 2002, City Council Agenda as amended. Ayes - 4 Nays - 0 Motion carried. 4. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS A. Recognition of Edgewood Middle School Students Deputy Chief Brennan thanked and commended the students involved with the school bus incident. Mayor Sonterre presented a merit award to Shannon Soffer, Matt Nelson, and Paul Boenke for their heroic efforts during a potentially dangerous school bus incident that occurred on February 26, 2002. He also noted that Tanner Socko was not presented but would also be given a merit award. Council Member Council Member Marty thanked them for the quick thinking and told the students they made Mounds View proud of them. • Mounds View City Council Regular Meeting March 11, 2002 Page 2 5. PUBLIC INPUT David Jahnke of 8428 Eastwood Road asked if Mayor Sonterre had paid the City the money for the fitness equipment as requested by Resolution. Mayor Sonterre said no and added he intended to pay at the end of the month. Mr. Jahnke said he felt the matter should be paid immediately and the tax issue dealt with later. Mr. Jahnke expressed concern for enlarging Staff to get work done especially in light of other cities, for example Minneapolis, cutting back on staff. He commented with the expected state cuts the City is not going to have the money for increased Staff. He then commented that he is concerned that a member of Council is not allowed to obtain information without paying for it without the majority vote of Council because the members of Council represent him and should be able to investigate anything they feel necessary. Mr. Jahnke expressed concern for the amount of comp time that Staff accrues and suggested scheduling better in order to reduce the amount of Staff comp time. Mr. Jahnke commented that he feels the agency doing the headhunting for the City did not tell the whole truth with regard to the hiring of the last City Administrator. He further commented that he did not think the headhunter told the City all that is going on and said he feels the Mayor should look into the matter. Mayor Sonterre said he did not think it was fair to lump all cities together when considering staffing issues because he knows the City of Minneapolis has been working with excess staff and the City of Mounds View has been working lean for years. He then urged Mr. Jahnke to contact City Staff to obtain any fiu ther information he needed. 6. CLOSED SESSION A. To Discuss Labor Negotiations MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Quick. To Recess to Closed Session to Discuss Labor Negotiations. Ayes - 4 Nays - 0 Motion carried. Council recessed at 7:25 p.m. Council reconvened at 9:10 p.m. 7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS • None. Mounds View City Council March 11, 2002 ~ Regular Meeting Page 3 8. CONSENT AGENDA A. Just and Correct Claims B. Licenses for Approval C. Resolution 5721 Approving a Wage Adjustment for Kasey Keckeisen D. Resolution 5609 Adopting Revised Salary Schedule for the Clubhouse Manager E. Correcting Resolution 5711 Approving Payment to Elegant Thymes Management Company for Management of the Mounds View Banquet and Conference Center F. Resolution 5720 Establishing a Calendar for the Preparation and Adoption of the 2003 Budget and Long Term Financial Plan G. Resolution 5722 Extending Use of Temp Agency for Administrative Assistant Services Council Member Marry requested that Items A, C, E, and G be removed for discussion. MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Sonterre. To Approve Consent Agenda Item A as presented. Council Member Marty commented that Check Number 107733 in the amount of $113.39 for a shovel and leaf rake seemed high. He then asked why the Mounds View Matters arrived after the home show and the cover page was an advertisement for the home show. He further questioned • what period the check to the school district covered. Council Member Marty then noted there was a check issued to the Minnesota Chiefs of Police for education and training and asked whether the City had posted the Chief position. City Administrator Miller indicated that Staff intended to fill the golf course manager's position and then begin advertising for the Chief s position. Council Member Marty indicated Check Number 107773 was issued to the Spring Lake Park Fire Department in the amount of $13,000.50 and said he would like to know what dates the payment covers and when the City received the bill. Mayor Sonterre asked another staff member to see if the Finance Director was available. He then commented that Staff works diligently to have Council packets available on Thursday and asked Council Members to ask clarifying questions of Staff prior to the meetings in the future. Council Member Marty indicated he was on vacation and flew back for the meeting. Mayor Sonterre asked City Administrator Miller to take note of Council Member Marty's questions and provide answers to him. Council Member Stigney pointed out there were two checks for the North Metro Mayor's Association dinner meetings. He then asked if the bills were for one individual or two. • Mounds View City Council March 11, 2002 Regular Meeting Page 4 Mayor Sonterre indicated the charges were for one individual and said he believes that the charges are for dinner as well as an equally divided charge for membership. City Administrator Miller indicated she would research the matter and provide further information. Council Member Marty asked Staff to research the answers to his questions on Check 107735, 107736, 107749 and report back to Council. Ayes - 4 Nays - 0 Motion carried. MOTIONlSECOND: Quick/Marty. To Approve Consent Agenda Item C as Presented. Council Member Marty indicated he wanted to thank Mr. Keckeisen publicly for his service to the City. Council Member Stigney read Resolution 5721. Ayes - 4 Nays - 0 Motion carried. MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Marty. To Approve Consent Agenda Item E as Presented. Council Member Marty indicated he was wondering if the payment was calculated on the net and, if not, said he thinks it should be changed to reflect that. He then asked for the status of the RFP for management of the banquet center. He further commented that it appears the payment is calculated based on the 78.88% of gross revenues calculation that has been found not to be in the best interest of the City. City Administrator Miller indicated the City is still operating under the current management contract because the City has not severed its relationship with Innovative Images. She further explained that because the relationship has not been severed with Innovative Images, the City is not in a position to renegotiate the contract. Council Member Stigney pointed out the last paragraph says net revenues but paragraph five says gross revenues. Mary _Tatarack indicated she had worked with the table but not the Resolution and explained how the calculation was arrived at. City Administrator Miller indicated she believed the term gross should be net based on Exhibit A because the number in the Resolution is referred to in the chart as a net number. Council Member Marty indicated he would like to table this matter for further clarification in . order to avoid issues with miscalculations as in the past. • Mounds View City Council Regular Meeting March 11, 2002 Page 5 MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Stigney. To Table Consent Agenda Item E For Further Information. Ayes - 4 Nays - 0 Motion carried. Council Member Marty pointed out a typo in Resolution 5722 in the third whereas. He then asked if the position had been posted and, if so, when it closes and the timeframe for hiring. City Administrator Miller indicated the position was posted, Staff has reviewed applications, and interviewed for the position last Friday. She then indicated Staff would be before Council with a recommendation for hiring at the next meeting. Council Member Stigney asked whether the temp works a 40 hour week. City Administrator Miller indicated the temp is scheduled to work a 40 hour week. Council Member Stigney indicated he had an issue with the temp being paid fora 40 hour week because he questions whether the City gets 40 hours worth of work out of the temp. Mayor Sonterre commented that the person being replaced by the temp was afull-time employee. Assistant City Administrator Reed indicated the individual has been working just under 40 hours per week and said she asked for a four week extension because she was not sure how interviews would turn out on Friday. She then said if Council approves the recommendation for hiring and the individual accepts the position, she would not need the full four-week extension for the temp. MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Marty. To Approve Consent Agenda Item G as Presented. Ayes - 4 Nays - 0 Motion carried. MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Marty. To Approve Consent Agenda Items B, D, and F as Presented. Ayes - 4 Nays - 0 Motion carried. 9. COUNCIL BUSINESS A. Public Hearing, First Reading and Introduction of Ordinance 693, an Ordinance Amending Section 1106.03 of the Mounds View Zoning Code Pertaining to Accessory Structures. • Mayor Sonterre opened the public hearing at 9:35 p.m. Mounds View City Council March 11, 2002 Regular Meeting Page 6 Planner Atkinson indicated the amendment to the Ordinance is being proposed by the Planning Commission because it was discovered that the combined area for accessory structures was not great enough for larger properties in the City. He further explained that the Code currently allows 1400 square feet of accessory structures and the Planning Commission is recommending a change to allow 1800 square feet. Mayor Sonterre closed the public hearing at 9:36 p.m. MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Marty. To Waive the Reading, Introduce the Reading and Approve Ordinance 693, an Ordinance Amending Section 1106.03 of the Mounds View Zoning Code Pertaining to Accessory Structures. Ayes - 4 Nays - 0 Motion carried. B. First Reading and Introduction of Ordinance 692, an Ordinance Amending Section 1006.06 of the Mounds View City Code Pertaining to Development Controls. Planner Atkinson indicated this amendment to the Code was initiated by Staff and explained that Staff is attempting to clarify the intent of the existing Code by clarifying what types of construction needs to be reviewed by the Planning Commission and Council and which types of construction requires a development contract. Council Member Marty noted the Ordinance referred to all new construction and expansions and existing construction for single and two family dwelling units. He then commented that this statement ruled out most of the City. Planner Atkinson indicated the building permit process would cover single family and twin homes. He further explained that Staff feels it is unnecessary to take the smaller construction projects all the way through the process. Mayor Sonterre noted if the proposal met all the criteria for zoning and lot sizes an administrative approval would be given and, if not, the proposal would go before the Planning Commission. Council Member Marty asked for clarification of the last underlined portion indicating this requirement may be waived by City Council if no public improvements are planned or proposed. Planner Atkinson indicated that sentence gives discretion as to whether it is necessary to enter into a development contract and further explained there may be simple projects that would not need a development contract. • Mounds View City Council March 11, 2002 Regular Meeting Page 7 • MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Marty. To Waive the Reading, Introduce the Reading and Approve Ordinance 692, an Ordinance Amending Section 1006.06 of the Mounds View City Code Pertaining to Development Controls. Ayes - 4 Nays - 0 Motion carried. C. First Reading and Introduction of Ordinance 695, an Ordinance Renaming a Disconnected Section of County Road J. Planner Atkinson explained that when County Road J was realigned it left a portion of former County Road J all by itself and residents have approached the City to ask that it be renamed in order to resolve a mail and package delivery issue. He further explained that this matter was discussed at a work session and noted residents had asked for a simple change to Old County Road J because that would allow them to keep their house numbers. Planner Atkinson indicated he had received two calls, one asking that the road be renamed to Long Lake Road and another asking for something a little more attractive than Old County Road J. Council Member Marty asked how many residents are affected by this issue. Planner Atkinson indicated there are 8 addresses on County Road J but noted he had also sent notice to those residents with a property line fronting County Road J. Council Member Marty clarified that five or six of the residents involved are fine with Old County Road J and two residents called asking for something else. Planner Atkinson indicated that one of the callers had an address on Red Oak Drive and is not directly affected. Council Member Stigney indicated the signage in the area refers to the road as 85"' Avenue NE and said he feels the logical name for the road would be Long Lake Road or maintain it as 85"' Avenue NE. He then commented he understands the concern of not wanting to change house numbers but noted if the road is ever brought up to date it would be changed to Long Lake Road. Mayor Sonterre indicated the key component of the discussion from the work session was a request for upgraded signage. He then questioned what the state would do with regard to the roadway. Public Works Director Lee indicated he could make a request to the state but said he highly doubted they would be receptive to the suggestion because there is no direct connection to this section of roadway. He then indicated his Staff is prepared to change out the name plate signs • with whatever name Council approves. Mounds View City Council March 11, 2002 Regular Meeting Page 8 C~ Council Member Marty said he feels the most logical thing would be North Long Lake Road but said he does not live over there and this is what residents have asked for. Council Member Quick said he felt 85"' Avenue made the most sense. Council Member Stigney indicated the state signs would remain the same if the City used 85~` Avenue. He then asked if that would get into an issue with the house numbers. Planner Atkinson indicated he would check with the post office. Council Member Quick commented that changing the name of the road to 85`h Avenue should leave the house numbers the same because it was 85`h Avenue at one time. MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Stigney. To Table The First Reading and Introduction of Ordinance 695, an Ordinance Renaming a Disconnected Section of County Road J. Ayes - 4 Nays - 0 Motion carried. • Council Member Stigney asked Planner Atkinson to poll residents for their preference on either 85`h Avenue or Long Lake Road. D. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance 694, an Ordinance Amending Chapter 607 of the Mounds View City Code Relating to Nuisances. MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Sonterre. To Waive the Reading, Introduce the Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance 694, an Ordinance Amending Chapter 607 of the Mounds View City Code Relating to Nuisances. ROLL CALL: Quick/Marty/Stigney/Thomas (not present)/Sonterre. Ayes - 4 Nays - 0 Motion carried. Council Member Marty thanked Staff for working on this issue. E. Public Works Department Quarterly Report. • Public Works Director Lee addressed Council and indicated he was pleased to present the Public Works Department quarterly report. He then indicated the report was quite lengthy and provided a brief overview of the report for Council. Mounds View City Council March 11, 2002 Regular Meeting Page 9 . Public Works Director Lee indicated that the largest public improvement project for the City during 2002 would be the County Road H2 reconstruction. He then outlined the construction schedule for Council. Public Works Director Lee indicated that apre-construction neighborhood meeting would be held for residents to ask Staff questions and give residents an opportunity to meet the inspector for the project. Public Works Director Lee indicated he is recommending the addition of expansion joints every 40 to 60 feet because this technique has proven to be a cost effective way to control cracking. He then indicated that 27 of the 30 residents who returned a survey had asked that no parking be allowed on H2 and Staff is recommending the project proceed without on street parking. Public Works Director Lee indicated the water tower rehabilitation project was estimated to cost $37,000 and, since only $25,000 was budgeted for it this year Staff is recommending holding off on this project until 2003 with the hopes of budgeting the remaining funds in 2003. Public Works Director Lee indicated Staff would be working with the County on the traffic signal at Pleasant View Drive. Public Works Director Lee indicated that for the last 10 years Well Number 4 has been out of service and the City engineer is looking into the costs of making it operational again. Public Works Director Lee indicated Staff met with URS on the County Highway 10 redevelopment project and would be bringing a draft concept to Council for discussion at an upcoming work session before holding a public input meeting. Public Works Director Lee indicated that the County intends to proceed with the mill and overlay of County Highway 10 and has indicated it will be done sometime in 2002. Public Works Director Lee indicated Staff would be bringing a full report concerning the noise wall issue to Council on April 1, 2002 for discussion. Public Works Director Lee indicated public works has been working with the Police Department and Community Development on new signage at Edgewood Middle School and Pinewood Elementary School including possible changes in parking areas. He also indicated public works has been looking at signage along H2 and Jackson Drive and noted any recommendations for change would be brought to Council for consideration. Public Works Director Lee indicated the Hillview warming house project is complete with the exception of minor items and noted that the Parks and Recreation Commission has scheduled a ribbon cutting ceremony for May 23, 2002. He further noted Staff has been contacted by the boy scouts who have a troop member attempting to obtain his eagle scout badge and said this scout Mounds View City Council March 11, 2002 Regular Meeting Page 10 will act as the general contractor in ordering material and implementing the landscaping project with Staff. Public Works Director Lee indicated the City had received a draft copy of the Local Water Management Plan from the City engineer and public works will review and provide comments. He also indicated public works had received the EAW for the Greenfield Park ponding project and would be reviewing it and providing comments. Public Works Director Lee pointed out that spring load restrictions are in place until mid to late April. Public Works Director Lee indicated one of the main goals for public works is to review and analyze the operation and structure of the department to see if it can be made more efficient to serve the needs of residents and Council. He also indicated that he would like to review and develop polices and procedures for the department. He further indicated his department is looking into the long term planning goals for the City with regard to capital improvements. He indicated public works was asked to take the lead on the long term planning goals for the City with regard to capital improvements and the deadline for that plan is June 3, 2002. Mr. Lee finished his report and invited any Council Members or residents to contact him with questions. • Council Member Marty said Mr. Lee had provided an excellent report and said the public works team has done a good job. Council Member Marty suggested posting the Apri18, 2002 meeting where Council will approve plans for the H2 reconstruction to allow interested residents to attend. Council Member Marty asked what a partial replacement of the interior wet coating was. Public Works Director Lee indicated that interior wetcoating is the surface coated by water. He explained that some of the areas normally covered by water have rusted and the tank will need to be drawn down so that those areas can be sandblasted and replaced. He then noted that water service would be available during the repairs. Council Member Marty questioned whether holding off on making the water tower repairs until 2003 would end up costing the City more money. Public Works Director Lee indicated he had checked into that and found that the recommendation for repairs stated that the repairs should be done within 24 months so waiting unti12003 should have no major impact on the scope of the project. Council Member Marty thanked Mr. Lee for the update on the Pleasant View traffic signal. • Mounds View City Council March 11, 2002 Regular Meeting Page 11 • Council Member Marty asked Mr. Lee to provide an update to Council on the rehabilitation of Well Number 4 before the next quarterly report. Council Member Marty noted the redevelopment of County Highway 10 was scheduled for 2006 and 2008 in the report. He then asked why the redevelopment was still so far off and whether the crosswalk times could be lengthened prior to the actual construction. Council Member Marty asked whether the recent state aid cuts would affect the municipal state aid for streets for the City. Public Works Director Lee explained that the numbers are not affected because they are derived from gas taxes. Council Member Marty indicated that public works had 2002 golf course prep work in the report and asked whether the golf course would be under public works or if this was an interim measure. City Administrator Miller indicated that public works is handling the matter as an interim measure until a manager is hired. Council Member Marty noted the exam to obtain pesticide applicators license is scheduled for Apri18, 2002. He then commented he thought one of the golf course manager requirements was the ability to administer pesticides, making the purchase of the study manuals and testing not necessary. City Administrator Miller indicated that pesticide management was one of the qualifications. Council Member Quick indicated there were other spots in the City where pesticide application is required besides the golf course. Council Member Marty suggested that the boy scouts working on the Hillview warming house landscaping contact the City Forester for approval of the types of materials to be used. Public Works Director Lee indicated he intended to oversee the boy scouts to make sure that the right selections are made. Council Member Marty commented the feasibility study for cameras suggested it is not a possibility and questioned why not. Council Member Marty indicated he approved of establishing a pool of consultants rather than using just one. Council Member Marty said he feels the survey is a good idea. • Mounds View City Council Regular Meeting March 11, 2002 Page 12 • Mayor Sonterre indicated Council had given permission for the survey but did not identify a funding source. Council Member Marty commented that Mr. Lee's report had said that filing is a trivial matter and said he does not think it is trivial at all. Council Member Marty indicated he liked the idea of special recognition of employees who go above and beyond. Council Member Marty asked what types of leaks are being referenced in the leak survey. Public Works Director Lee indicated the survey looked at two separate things, water main leaks and leaks from the main to residential properties. He then indicated that six leaks were found from the main to residential properties. Council Member Marty asked whether the City is reimbursed for cleaning the storm sewer for Blaine. Public Works Director Lee indicated that the City is not financially reimbursed but there is a swap of labor and equipment that benefits both cities. Council Member Marty asked Staff to provide an update as to where the City is on budget for snow removal and chemicals. Council Member Stigney said it was a very thorough and informative report and he was happy to review it. Mayor Sonterre asked whether the expansion joints on H2 would reduce the seal-coating schedule. Public Works Director Lee indicated the expansion joints would save time and money in terms of not having to send a crew out to router the line and fill it in. He then commented that, since the pavement will crack and need to be filled in anyway doing it at the beginning helps out in terms of expanding the life of the pavement. Mayor Sonterre asked whether Staff had a guarantee that the water tower repair estimate would be the same in 2003. Public Works Director Lee indicted there was no guarantee and noted the cost is an engineer's estimate and may not be exact. He then commented he would like to bid the job in early 2003 and would know the true costs at that time. Mayor Sonterre indicated that, at a recent Ramsey County League of Local Governments • meeting he sat down with a representative from Ramsey County and was assured that the County Mounds View City Council March 11, 2002 Regular Meeting Page 13 • has allocated, as part of the reconstruction turn back money, funds for both signage and lights and will be doing an investigation into what needs replacement and modification and that modification will take place before the 2006 timeline. Mayor Sontenre asked whether there is a method for reinforcing spring road restrictions. Public Works Director Lee indicated that the City has an active enforcement program whereby the public works department monitors traffic in the City and if a suspicious vehicle is spotted it is pulled over, weighed and, if necessary, the police department is called to ticket them. F. Consideration of Resolution 5713 Authorizing Seasonal Golf Course Positions for 2002. Assistant City Administrator Reed indicated this matter was removed from the February 25, 2002 meeting agenda at the request of Mr. Serfling from AFSCME. She then indicated the City and the union have not settled on seasonal wages for the golf course employees. She further indicated the issue is the City has not yet settled on wages and needs to open the course shortly so Staff is needed. Assistant City Administrator Reed indicated she was asking Council to authorize Staff to hire two employees at 40 hours per week at a maximum of $10.25 per hour for a six month period. • She then indicated she is aware that changes to the salary may need to be made based on negotiations with AFSCME. MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Stigney. To Waive the Reading and Approve Resolution 5713, a Resolution Authorizing Seasonal Golf Course Positions for 2002. Council Member Marty said he feels it is time to get golf course personnel out at the course because help is needed out there to get it up and running. Mr. Serfling said he is disappointed that Council is being asked to do this because he had asked that Council vote against the setting of salaries for seasonal employees because the union considers it to be an unfair labor practice. He then commented that the City has been in negotiations with the union since mid-October and it was not until March 5, 2002 that the union received a wage proposal and it was less than what is being proposed to Council tonight and significantly less than what was proposed on February 25, 2002. Mr. Serfling indicated he had spoken to Ms. Reed about working out something under a temporary agreement and suggested the City could avoid conflict by rehiring employees at last year's salary. He then commented that unilaterally setting salaries is a violation of the bargaining law that requires good faith negotiations and the union does not think this is a good faith attempt to negotiate. He further asked Council not to approve this resolution. C~ Mounds View City Council March 11, 2002 Regular Meeting Page 14 Council Member Marty pointed out that Ms. Reed had indicated during her presentation that the salary is temporary and subject to change based on wage negotiations with the union. Mr. Serfling indicated the law requires salaries to be bargained and this salary has not been bargained so rehiring at last summer's wage would be appropriate. MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Sonterre. To Call the Question. Ayes - 4 Nays - 0 Motion carried. Ayes - 4 Nays - 0 Motion carried. G. Consideration of Resolution 5706, a Resolution Revoking the Business License for Gas `n Splash, Located at 2525 County Highway 10. Community Development Director Ericson indicated this matter was tabled at the February 25, 2002 meeting to allow the business owner to be in attendance when the matter was discussed. He then explained the facility expanded its car wash and the Metropolitan Council had determined that the expansion warranted a SAC charge of 41 units which amounts to $43,050.00 which the City had to pay to the Metropolitan Council. • Director Ericson indicated there has been correspondence back and forth among the parties involved and the business owner contents that this is an unfair fee but the Metropolitan Council has argued that the fee is set based on the capacity for water usage not actual water usage. Director Ericson indicated he would like to give Mr. Mack, the business owner, the opportunity to address Council and explain his position. He then indicated Staff is aware that revoking the business license will not get the City paid any faster but the amount does need to be paid and this is leverage the City can use to attempt to obtain payment. Mayor Sonterre asked if there is a legal basis by which the City could enter into an agreement with Mr. Mack to receive a portion of revenues generated until the amounts are paid. City Attorney Riggs indicated the City could enter into a repayment agreement but said the business owner has had that opportunity available to him for quite some time and it has not come to fruition. He also noted the City could place the amount on the tax rolls to be directly collected. Mayor Sonterre asked whether one party has not agreed or whether an agreement had not been discussed. Director Ericson indicated that Staff has made attempts to enter into some type of negotiations • with Mr. Mack and noted it was not until this year that Staff had spoken to Mr. Mack concerning Mounds View City Council March 11, 2002 Regular Meeting Page 15 the matter. He then noted that Mr. Mack had sent a letter to the Metropolitan Council asking that the Metropolitan Council reimburse the City. He further noted that a representative from the Metropolitan Council had contacted him to indicate that the Metropolitan Council would not be refunding the amounts the City paid. Mr. Mack indicated he feels this is an unfair fee and said he wrote a letter to the Metropolitan Council asking that they reimburse the City the amounts paid. He then indicated he had received a voicemail from someone who gave a name and telephone of another representative to contact for further information. He further indicated he intended to contact that person the next morning. Mr. Mack said he would like to see the Metropolitan Council give back the $43,000 and said if he can dismantle the machine in a way that renders it unable to use that much water he would like to do so. Mayor Sonterre told Mr. Mack this matter has been outstanding for a long time. He then said he is surprised that Mr. Mack has not been more aggressive to see if he could make modifications regarding the water output. He further commented that he finds it hard to believe that Mr. Mack received a voicemail today indicating that this person could be contacted for further information and, knowing he was coming to Council to discuss the matter, Mr. Mack did not make an effort to contact this individual and has nothing to present to Council other than he hopes to call tomorrow. • Mr. Mack agreed he has had time to deal with the matter but said he does not use the water the Metropolitan Council claims he would use. Mayor Sonterre indicated Mr. Mack has an issue with the Metropolitan Council concerning how the SAC unit charge was determined but that issue is separate from the issue of Mr. Mack owing the City $43,000. Mayor Sonterre asked Mr. Mack if he had a willingness to work out a payment schedule with the City. Mr. Mack said he does not feel he should have to pay anything and said he wants the Metropolitan Council to pay the City. Mayor Sonterre said Mr. Mack needed to take care of what he owes the City. He then asked Mr. Mack if he was interested in involving himself in an arrangement to make payments to the City based on revenues from the business. Director Ericson indicated it seems that the City has gone past the point of attempting to enter into a payment arrangement but said that, since negotiations had only just begun after all this time, he is willing to give Mr. Mack the opportunity to work out a payment arrangement. • Mounds View City Council March 11, 2002 Regular Meeting Page 16 Mayor Sonterre asked Director Ericson to sit down with Finance Director Hansen to determine how much the payment to the City should be and asked that the matter be back before Council at the next meeting if an agreement is not reached. He then noted that the business license would be revoked at the March 25, 2002 meeting if an arrangement is not made. MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Marty. To Table Resolution 5706, a Resolution Revoking the Business License for Gas `n Splash, Located at 2525 County Highway 10 to March 25, 2002 to Allow Staff to Attempt to Negotiate a Payment Arrangement. Ayes - 3 Nays - 1(Council Member Quick) Motion carried. H. Consideration of Resolution 5723 to Authorize Staff to Purchase Video Surveillance Equipment for the Mounds View Community Center. Deputy Chief Brennan indicated there was a meeting in early February 2002 to discuss issues such as theft, vandalism and disorderly conduct at the Community Center. It was determined, at that meeting, it was time to look into ways to alleviate these types of problems. Deputy Chief Brennan indicated that the YMCA is looking at adding additional staff members and noted that, looking at the facility there were six areas that he feels are important and he • recommends installing surveillance cameras in those locations. Deputy Chief Brennan indicated the estimates for the surveillance cameras discussed at the March 4, 2Q02 work session were lower than the actual estimates. He then went over the proposals and recommended approval of the Roseville bid. Council Member Marty asked what kind of funding source would be available for the surveillance cameras. City Administrator Miller indicated the City has a contingency fund and said there is not money available in the Community Center Fund for this type of expenditure. Mayor Sonterre said he would argue that this would meet the criteria for the use of park dedication funds. City Administrator Miller indicated she would need to determine whether that would be an allowable expenditure for park dedication funds. Mayor Sonterre said he believes the park dedication funds can be can be spent to any end for programming and he would argue that the safe operation of public recreational facilities and those programs operating within them falls under that category. He then said, if you look under the City Code the Parks and Recreation Commission is charged with recommendations on all City recreational facilities and that would include the Community Center. He further said that a • ~J • Mounds View City Council March 11, 2002 Regular Meeting Page 17 small step would be to implement screening procedures while looking into funding the surveillance cameras with park dedication fees. Deputy Chief Brennan indicated that those on the Intranet would be able to see the video output from the surveillance cameras but explained putting that data out onto the Internet would be an added expense because a hosting site would need to be arranged. Deputy Chief Brennan indicated Roseville was $60.00 over the lowest bid but he feels it would be a good idea to go with Roseville because they would be supporting the system. Council Member Stigney indicated there were two security vendors at the home and garden show and asked whether either of them had contacted the police department. Deputy Chief Brennan indicated that the two security vendors had contacted him. Council Member Stigney asked whether the City should be looking at all the same equipment when comparing vendors. Deputy Chief Brennan indicated the camera with the best specs is a Sony and Roseville quoted that one. He then said he was not sure how to compare the models because it was beyond his expertise. Council Member Stigney said it looked like there was a camera that had variable focal length. Deputy Chief Brennan indicated one bid quoted different lenses and said he is not sure what type of lens Roseville quoted. Council Member Stigney noted the Roseville quote does not say anything about the lens. Deputy Chief Brennan indicated he was not sure what type of lens Roseville was quoting but said he had seen it in action on the Intranet. Council Member Stigney indicated that Sony might have had this model and it was good last year but there would be a new model for this year and he thinks somebody should look at that. Deputy Chief Brennan indicated Mr. Hess would be working with the folks from Roseville to make sure the equipment is as compatible as possible. Council Member Stigney suggested getting the model numbers and shopping prices to get an idea of the actual cost of the system. Mayor Sonterre asked if it would be easier for Roseville to identify who they were buying through. Mounds View City Council March 11, 2002 Regular Meeting Page 18 Council Member Marty said he would like Mr. Hess to work with Roseville to compare models and make sure the City is getting the most bang for the buck and the best equipment it can. He then commented that the Roseville proposal was a little vague in comparison to the other proposals. Mayor Sonterre said he wanted Roseville to define the equipment. Council Member Stigney said he would like to see what is available on the market now. Mayor Sonterre asked Staff to provide more information on the equipment and asked City Administrator Miller to identify the funding source. MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Marty. To Table Resolution 5723, a Resolution Authorizing Staff to Purchase Video Surveillance Equipment for the Mounds View Community Center to the March 25, 2002 Council Meeting. Ayes - 4 Nays - 0 Motion carried. I. Consideration of Resolution 5724 Approving a Policy for Appointing Commission Members. • City Administrator Miller explained that at the last City Council meeting a member of the public questioned the procedure by which the City makes appointments to commissions. She then indicated that as a result of that question she had put together a draft of a policy that includes a provision for notification, publication, review and formal notice of the appointment. She further indicated that the policy should formalize what is being done now. MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Stigney. To Waive the Reading and Approve Resolution 5724, a Resolution Approving a Policy for Appointing Commission Members. Council Member Marty asked whether the policy would be attached to the Resolution. City Administrator Miller indicated the policy would be connected to the Resolution. Council Member Marty indicated he wanted to change the policy under item five to indicate that Staff will make copies for the Mayor and Council to review. He also requested to change the policy to state that the Mayor and City Council will be provided with copies of all applications in council packets when the applications are received. Mayor Sonterre indicated that he sometimes receives applications when no position is open and asked Council whether they felt they needed to see applications if there is no position available. City Administrator Miller indicated her rationale in having the language of the policy read as it does is to follow what is in the City's Code because the Code states that the Mayor makes a Mounds View City Council March 11, 2002 Regular Meeting Page 19 • recommendation to the City Council for Council approval. She then indicated the Mayor may need to conduct discussions or interviews and would need the information sooner than the rest of Council but said Council would receive the applications with the Mayor's recommendation. Mayor Sonterre asked that the Resolution be made less gender specific with regard to the Mayor. Council Member Marty said he would like to see the applications come to Council when they are received because in the past Council has been provided with only the application for the Mayor's recommendation and he would like to ensure that Council sees all the applications. Mayor Sonterre clarified the policy does indicate that Council will get all applications, its just a matter of when. Ayes - 3 Nays - 1(Marty) Motion carried. J. Resolution 5724, a Resolution Supporting Legislation Authorizing by Private Sale the Tax Forfeited Land Defined as LaPort Meadows of State Highway 10 Right of Way. City Administrator Miller indicated the City was asked to approve this Resolution by Senator Chaudhary's office and noted that Ramsey County Commissioners would be hearing a similar • resolution the following day. Mayor Sonterre indicated the director of Ramsey County Property Taxes and Revenue wrote the resolution defining this and thanked her for her support. He then indicated that Commissioner Bennett would be introducing the resolution to the County Board and recommending a public sale with a fee of $1.00 for the City to obtain the parcels. MOTION/SECOND: Sonterre/Marty. To Waive the Reading and Approve Resolution 5724, a Resolution Supporting Legislation Authorizing by Private Sale the Tax Forfeited Land Defined as LaPort Meadows of State Highway 10 Right of Way. Ayes -4 Nays - 0 Motion carried. 10. REPORTS City Administrator Miller indicated she was advised by Senator Chaudhary's office that there is a town hall meeting at the Community Center on March 12, 2002 at 8:00 p.m. She also noted that Representative Evans would be at the meeting. City Administrator Miller indicated she had a hand out for Council and requested that Council Members read it and give it back to her this evening because it contained nonpublic information that she is allowed to share with Council publicly. Mounds View City Council March 11, 2002 Regular Meeting Page 20 • City Attorney Riggs indicated the data is not public and cannot be disseminated but the information can be discussed at the meeting. City Administrator Miller explained that the document is a ruling from the Minnesota Department of Economic Security reversing its earlier decision to award unemployment benefits to former employee Bruce Kessel. She then explained that the Minnesota Department of Economic Security had previously ruled in favor of the former employee and that decision was appealed by the City. City Administrator Miller asked Council to turn to Page 3 of the document where she read the reasons for the decision to reverse the previous ruling. They are as follows: *enter from document. City Administrator Miller then gave a brief overview indicating that the judge found that the applicant was discharged because of employment misconduct and the unemployment judge found that the employee had the training and experience to perform his duties adequately and either chose to create an inadequate accounting system or did not care and his hostility or lack of concern for the employer constitutes misconduct. She further indicated there were 12 findings elaborated in the report and noted briefly that the judge mentions the issue of credit cards, the overuse of credit cards, and the number of cards issued. Council Member Quick asked to have the findings of fact read. City Administrator Miller read the findings of fact from the document. They are as follows: (1) The applicant worked full-time for the employer from July 8, 199b until June 7, 2001 as finance director for a final hourly wage of $33.80. (2) The employer is a Minnesota City. (3) It was the applicant's job to design and administer accounting systems that would accurately show the income and expenditures of the employer. It was also the applicant's job to provide other city officials with financial information that they needed to administer to their departments. (4) The applicant has been a CPA for several years. Before he was hired for this position, the applicant worked several years in the finance department of another Minnesota city. (5) It is very unusual for a Minnesota city to issue more than one or two credit cards to employees for the purchase of merchandise for the city. When the applicant started working for the employer, the employer had issued one credit card to an employee. During the applicant's employment, he issued credit cards to more and more employees. At the time of the applicant's discharge, more than 20 city employees had credit cards they could use to charge purchases against the employer. Two individuals who were not city employees also had city credit cards. The number of credit cards made it impossible for the city to check each purchase to insure that it was for an authorized city purchase. There were employees who used city credit cards to make personal purchases and did not Mounds View City Council March 11, 2002 Regular Meeting Page 21 • reimburse the employer. The employer took no action regarding those unauthorized charges because the applicant did not know about them or he condoned them. (6) The employer has a strict written policy that city funds will not be used to purchase alcohol beverages. The applicant was aware of this policy. During the applicant's employment he authorized the reimbursement of employees, including himself, for the purchase of alcoholic beverages. (7) The applicant was uncooperative with other city officials when they asked for financial information. The city administrator asked for a quarterly financial statement she could use in council meetings to help the city plan expenditures. The applicant was at first hostile to this request. After several months, the applicant did provide the administrator with a document he characterized as a financial statement. This document was disorganized and provided little useful information to the administrator or the council. Other department heads complained to the administrator that the applicant was hostile to their requests for information. (8) During the applicant's employment, the employer's bank statements were not reconciled in a timely manner. When the employer discharged the applicant his replacement had to reconcile several months worth of bank statements. (9) During December 2000, the applicant approached the city administrator and told her that the city had overpaid a contractor who managed the city's community center. The administrator asked how much the overpayment was and the applicant said he was not sure. Over the rest of the applicant's employment the city tried to get an accurate report on the employer's financial status regarding this contractor. Sometimes the applicant reported that the city had overpaid the contractor and sometimes the applicant reported that the city had underpaid the contractor. At the time. of the applicant's discharge there was still no definitive figure for disclosing the employer's liability relationship with the contractor. This figure was very difficult if not impossible to determine because of the unusual, awkward, and inaccurate accounting systems the applicant had designed to manage the contract. (10) Throughout his employment, the applicant used incomplete and inaccurate methods of record keeping so that it is now impossible to review many of the transactions conducted throughout the applicant's employment. (11) During the applicant's employment he caused the employer to act in ways other than specified in several of the employer's contracts. The applicant did not seek or obtain council approval for the contract changes. (12) The employer discharged the applicant on June 7, 2001 because of the facts set out above. "An applicant who was discharged from employment by an employer shall not be disqualified from any unemployment benefits except when: (1) the applicant was discharged because of employment misconduct;... The applicant had training and experience to perform this job adequately. The applicant either chose to make the employer's financial system inaccurate and prone to abuse or he did not care about the inaccuracy and abuse of the city finances. This hostility or lack of concern for the employer and the responsibility of his job constitute misconduct." Mounds View City Council March 11, 2002 Regular Meeting Page 22 Council Member Quick asked what the City needed to do next. City Administrator Miller indicated the former employee can appeal the decision but she is not certain whether he will do so. She then indicated that this is a huge win for the City because determinations such as this do not often go in favor of employers. Mayor Sonterre asked what monetary result occurs in this situation. City Administrator Miller indicated the City does not have unemployment insurance and pays its own unemployment claims. She then indicated the City would be reapid the dollars that were paid for unemployment for Mr. Kesel. Mayor Sonterre asked for the dollar amount. City Administrator Miller indicated she could look into the dollar amount and provide that information. Council Member Quick asked if the decision could be read from Page 4 of the document. City Administrator Miller read the decision on Page 4 for Council. It is as follows: "On June 7, 2001 the applicant was discharged because of employment misconduct. The applicant is disqualified until the end of the calendar week that the applicant has total earnings in subsequent covered employment of eight times the applicant's weekly benefit amount. Benefits paid to the applicant, if any, shall be charged to the reimbursable account of the employer. The employer has elected to be liable for payments in lieu of taxes. The determination under appeal is reversed." Council Member Marty asked what the last line meant. City Administrator Miller clarified that the City does not have unemployment insurance and pays directly for unemployment claims. She then noted the document goes onto state how the City can recover those payments already made. Council Member Stigney asked if the employee can appeal the decision again. City Administrator Miller indicated the employee has 30 days from February 27, 2002 to appeal the decision. Council Member Marty asked if the document received was two copies of the same thing. • Mounds View City Council March 11, 2002 Regular Meeting Page 23 • City Administrator Miller indicated that the documents provided were very similar but each had specific language in it. She also noted the one reversed the decision and the second amended the language to clean it up. City Administrator Miller indicated there had been discussion last week about data practices requests and she has compiled them into one folder if anyone wants to view them. She indicated she did not make copies assuming that Council wanted to view them rather than request copies. She then invited Council Members to make an appointment to come by her office to review the requests but said she is out of the office Tuesday after 1:00 p.m. and all day Wednesday. City Attorney Riggs indicated that Council Member Stigney had requested whether he had the ability under the data practices context to review data requested by another Council Member and the more efficient process under City policy and state law is that he would also be required to file a data practices request and that would be fulfilled as any other request would be. Council Member Stigney sent down a letter formalizing his data practices request. Council Member Quick asked whether the City has received any funds to reimburse the city for time spent to develop the data practice requests of Council Member Marty. City Administrator Miller indicated that the way that the policy works is that once the data • practices request is compiled a letter is sent out to the requestor and the individual is not responsible for that dollar f gore until the materials are picked up. She then said no. Council Member Quick commented that Council Member Marty is in the same boat as any other citizen who makes a data privacy request and does not follow through with it and now Council Member Stigney is interested in that information. City Administrator Miller indicated that Council Member Stigney's request is a new request and it is a request to view the information and that is different than asking for copies. Council Member Quick commented that the City spent the Staff time to compile the information. City Administrator Miller indicated this is a separate data practices request. City Attorney Riggs indicated the City Administrator was correct and said it is unfortunate but the way the statute is written the City can only charge for Staff time if copies are made. Council Member Quick asked whether someone could come in and make a request and say they do not want the information and then another person can come in and ask to look at it. City Attorney Riggs indicated that the requested data becomes personal to the one making the request and the City has to produce that data again as a separate data request. • Mounds View City Council March 11, 2002 Regular Meeting Page 24 City Administrator Miller indicated she would not be making copies as Council Member Stigney had asked to view the originals. Council Member Quick said he feels it is a scam situation and he feels it is rotten that the City can be abused the way it has been because there have been numerous requests that are compiled and left sitting at City Hall. City Administrator Miller indicated she had asked the Finance Director to provide her with a memo discussing his concerns with the data practices requests and the undue burden placed on his department. She further commented that in the Finance Director's opinion a great deal of time and effort has been spent compiling these data requests and, as a result, some of what he needs to do has fallen through the cracks and the City may need to incur costs to have the auditor's office take care of some of those tasks to ready the City for the audit. She indicated that it could cost between $650.00 and $1,000 for the auditor's office to help catch up on those tasks. Council Member Quick indicated the costs multiply and cost the City money and he questions whether the intentions are in the best interest of the City. Council Member Stigney said he feels if it is public information, the public should have the right to view it at no cost and that is what he requested. Council Member Quick said he agreed with Council Member Stigney and said he will look at the information at some point as well. He then commented that Willy nilly requests are a waste of money. Mayor Sonterre asked whether Council Member Marty would have the right to ask to see what Council Member Stigney requested without paying for it. City Attorney Riggs suggested asking for an opinion from the Department of Administration on that issue because he is not sure that the system in place would allow someone to not pay for one request and make a different request in order to avoid paying. Mayor Sonterre indicated that by statute a person can only make a request for the same data once every six months. City Administrator Miller indicated she did not mean to imply that anyone has been asking for information unduly but, in conjunction with all the other requests in the last year, the requests have been tremendous and a lot of work for Staff. She then commented that Council may get an appreciation for Staff time after reviewing those requests. Council Member Stigney said he did not think his request was Willy nilly. • Mounds View City Council March 11, 2002 Regular Meeting Page 25 • Mayor Sonterre indicated there is some language in current statute that indicates that the keeper of the City's data can use his or her best judgment as to fill the requests in a manner that does not impede the business of the City but that has not been held up by the oversight body. Council Member Quick asked if the City could publish the names of the individuals who have made data privacy requests and the amount of time or costs involved with producing those requests and whether or not the bill to the City was paid. City Attorney Riggs indicated that any request is public and any staff time put into the request is public. He further indicated that the requests are not unlike any other city function if someone is making a request that is data of the City and becomes subject to someone looking at it. Council Member Quick suggested listing in Mounds View Matters who is making requests and how much it costs the City. Assistant City Administrator Reed indicated that the employee who is on Medicare would be able to move to the City's plan for her primary insurance because the federal government likes to get rid of the financial burden. She then indicated the individual could come onto the group plan at any time and would qualify for contribution for part time employees which is $225.00. City Administrator Miller asked Ms. Reed to share the information on supplemental insurance. • Assistant City Administrator Reed indicated the individual does have the option when retiring from the City to qualify to stay on the same plan or go back to her old plan but she would need to go through underwriting to go back to her old plan. Council Member Stigney asked whether the employee, if they were 65, would need to pay for Medicare if they were receiving primary benefits from the City. Assistant City Administrator Reed indicated she believed that to be correct and noted the employee would not need supplemental coverage because it would be available through the City. Council Member Stigney clarified that, if using the City's health plan, the employee would not need to have Medicare until she retired. Assistant City Administrator Reed indicated the City offers a Medicare supplement through the company the City currently uses for those employees over age 65 who are active employees. She then indicated she had spoken with Mr. Serfling and provided the most recent information to him. Community Development Director Ericson indicated the home and garden show was a success with a good turn out and vendors indicated they felt participation was good. He then indicated the show would be held again next year. • Mounds View City Council March 11, 2002 Regular Meeting Page 26 Mayor Sonterre indicated he wanted to give thanks to MaryAnn Hecht the aid who does a fantastic job. Council Member Quick thanked City Administrator Miller and Assistant City Administrator Reed for work well done. 11. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. February 25, 2002 City Council Minutes. • Council Member Marty requested the following changes: On Page 2, third paragraph indicate that Ms. Scotch also said that Mississippi water has been used in the past. On Page 7, fourth paragraph change Mr. Harstad to Mr. Zwirn, fifth paragraph indicate he feels it is a waste of Planning Commission, City Council and Staff time. On Page 9 last paragraph add of two police vehicles instead of three with a third to be budgeted for 2003. On Page 13, third paragraph from bottom add a sentence between the second and third: Council Member Marty stated that the paragraph was addressing supplemental life insurance. On Page 17, second paragraph, second line add "and it was determined that someone had accessed his computer as well as another Council Member's computer. MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Stigney. To Approve the Minutes of the City Council for February 25, 2002 as Amended. Ayes - 4 Nays - 0 Motion carried. 12. CLOSED SESSION TO DISCUSS PENDING/THREATENED LITIGATION A. To Discuss Threatened/Potential Litigation This item was heard earlier in the meeting. 13. Next Council Work Session: Monday, March 25, 2002 City Administrator Miller indicated that a special work session was scheduled for 6:00 p.m. on March 25, 2002. Next Council Meeting: Monday, March 25, 2002 • Mounds View City Council Regular Meeting • • • March 11, 2002 Page 27 14. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Sonterre adjourned the meeting at 11:45 p.m. Transcribed and recorded by: Joan Lenzmeier Timesaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.