HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 2004/09/27PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL
• CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Regular Meeting
September 27, 2004
Mounds View City Hall
2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112
7:00 P.M.
1. MEETING IS CALLED TO ORDER
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. ROLL CALL: Linke, Quick, Marry, Stigney, and Gunn
4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Monday, September 27, 2004 City Council Agenda.
MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Stigney. To Approve the Monday, September 27, 2004 Agenda as
. revised.
Ayes - 5 Nays - 0 Motion carried..
5. PUBLIC INPUT
William Warner, 2765 Shorewood Road, asked about the survey for the golf course.
Mayor Linke stated that the survey was approved at the EDA meeting prior to the City Council
meeting for an amount not to exceed $8,300.
Mr. Warner asked if it was a 4-1 vote, and Mayor Linke stated that Council Member Quick had
voted against it and gave his reasons for doing so at that time.
Mr. Warner asked for Council Member Quick's stand on selling on the golf course.
Mayor Linke stated he could not speak for Council Member Quick, but speaking for himself, he
did not have all the information in front of him to make that decision. He stated there is one
proposal to sell it, and there are four other proposals that they were waiting for information on.
Council Member Quick stated that if Mr. Warner had been at the EDA meeting, he would have
heard his views.
Mounds View City Council September 27, 2004
Regular Meeting Page 2
• David Jahnke, 8420 Eastwood Road, thanked the four Council members for basically changing
their minds regarding the golf course. He stated that the average income per household in
Mounds View is not very high, and that the levy limits are off again, so they are going to get
nailed again. He stated he had a note from five people that said it was nice to golf at the Bridges,
and not one of them lived in Mounds View, so they were paying for other people to enjoy playing
golf. He stated there is another golf course right around the corner. He stated he couldn't figure
out why the Mayor had told Barb Haake that they only lost $200,000 on the golf course when the
Finance Director had stated that it was a million.
Mayor Linke stated the $200,000 had come from the lawsuit, because it had cost $300,000, and
they had won $100,000.
Mr. Jahnke stated that this year would be worse because of the weather, so they would be taking
another beating on the golf course.
City Clerk/City Administrator Ulrich stated that they would be discussing the golf course
alternatives in a broader fashion at the Work Session to be held on October 4cn
Mike Marone, 5545 Brighton Lane, stated he sees a real mismanagement of the taxpayer's money
after watching the City Council meetings on cable the last several months. He stated that it's the
taxpayer's money, and the Council needs to really look at what they are spending the money on.
i Mayor Linke stated he was speaking in generalities.
Mr. Marone stated that the manager at the Bridges golf course had been given a raise, and that he
himself had not had a raise in three years because the company he works for hasn't made any
money.
Mayor Linke stated that the City had to live up to its contracts.
Council Member Quick stated, regarding the raise, that the City is governed by a different set of
rules and laws than private industry, and they need to meet those obligations.
Council Member Quick stated that the golf course is a piece of property that they don't know
whether they can sell. He stated that they also have a contract for some signs, and that the
interested party doesn't want anything to do with the signs. He stated when the golf course was
built, there was 90 percent acceptance in the City. He stated that nobody had polled what the
citizens want at this time. He stated if they did a professional poll that came back with less than
50 percent, he would be the first one to vote to sell it. He stated the golf course carries all the
debt from the lawsuit. He stated that he felt that the City Council had erred, and that the City
should have picked that up.
Mr. Marone asked why there was a lawsuit.
Mounds View City Council September 27, 2004
Regular Meeting Page 3
• Council Member Quick stated that it hadn't been built correctly, and that they had went after the
contractors to get things done correctly.
Mr. Marone asked if they hadn't received the legal fees on top of the money they were asking for.
Mayor Linke stated that there were extenuating circumstances that negated a lot of their claims.
Mr. Marone asked why they didn't put it on the ballot and ask the people what they want to do
with it.
Council Member Quick said that was his idea exactly.
Mayor Linke stated he had been pushing for a phone survey.
Council Member Quick stated that his idea had been shot down by the Council.
Council Member Quick stated that there is about 70 acres of the property that they had received
from the Department of Transportation, and that there was a caveat that stated it had to be used
for public purpose. He stated they have asked the Governor's office to make an administrative
ruling, and they've also sent that question to the Attorney General's Office. He stated that this
was done legislatively, and that he didn't know whether the Governor could take off something
that the legislature had put on. He stated that the golf course issue will be looked at on October
• 4tn
Mayor Linke stated that right now they've spent about $90,000 on this so far.
Mr. Marone stated they should turn the parcel into a park and build houses around it, and at least
that way they would make the money back and pay for the bond.
Mayor Linke stated that they are all trying to work towards the same end; to do the best thing
they can for the City. He stated that this cannot be done until all the information has been
received.
Council Member Quick stated he had run into a situation with a bridge where a lot of money had
been spent, and then the newly elected officials had killed the item, and a lot of money had went
down the tubes. He stated that he had learned to ask a lot of questions a long time ago. He stated
he is probably the most pro tax base person here. He stated they could have put in some high-end
condos down in the southwest corner of the city, and they could have gotten ten times the taxes
from it. He stated that they would have had to have condemned some properties to do it. He
stated that they don't have any high-end condos available in the area.
Council Member Many stated that they would have had to have condemned 15 to 18 different
properties, and he hadn't agreed with that.
C7
Mounds View City Council September 27, 2004
Regular Meeting Page 4
• Council Member Quick said it was probably only about five. He stated that the property owners
would not lose in that situation because they get more than market value for their home, plus the
City has to pay for them to move.
Council Member Stigney stated that there was no individual contract with the golf course
manager and she is not a union employee. He stated the personnel policy of the City had been
followed which guaranteed employees a certain wage bracket every year based on what other
cities in the metro area are doing. He stated he didn't think it was a good policy, and that
hopefully they'll be able to change that in the future.
Council Member Stigney stated it was important to look at other options for possible
redevelopment of the golf course, and that they are on track with that, and he fully supports any
type of development that would take the golf course off the taxpayers' backs and put it on the
revenue source for the City.
Council Member Stigney stated the only time he would support eminent domain would be for a
public purpose such as a highway or hospital, but not to take somebody's private property and
put in another private development.
6. CITY BUDGET QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS
• None.
7. SPECLAL ORDER OF BUSINESS
A. Resolution (6360) of Appreciation to Liz Song for her Contributions on the Mounds
View Planning Commission.
Mayor Linke read the Resolution of Appreciate for Liz Song aloud.
MOTION/SECOND. Linke/Many. To adopt the Resolution 6360 , in Appreciation to Liz Song
for her Contributions on the Mounds View Planning Commission.
Ayes-5 Nays-0 Motion carried.
B. Resolution 6374 Appointing Gary Meehlhause to the Planning Commission.
MOTION/SECOND. Gunn/Marty. To adopt Resolution 6374 Appointing Gary Meehlhause to
the Planning Commission.
Council Members Stigney and Marty stated they were glad that he had applied.
Ayes-5 Nays-0 Motion carried.
Mounds View City Council September 27, 2004
Regular Meeting Page 5
• 8. JUST AND CORRECT CLAIMS.
Council Member Gunn asked how many elevator repairs had been done this year, and if this was
an elevator repair or just a maintenance item in regard to the claim on page 3, No. 114401.
Finance Director Hansen stated that he would have to go back and check what this invoice was
for and how many other repairs had been done this year.
Public Works Director Lee stated that this was a minor repair to the elevator that was part of the
bi-annual inspection of the elevator. He stated that there would be a minor upgrade requested as
part of the agenda for October 4~'.
Council Member Gunn asked whether the City owned apost-hole digger in regard to an item on
page 5.
Public Works Director Lee stated that they do not own one, and that this was a rental of a 10-inch
auger bit to do the mailbox posts for the 2003 Street Improvement Project.
Council Member Gunn remarked that the mailboxes look very nice.
MOTION/SECOND. Marty/Quick. To waive the reading and to approve the Just and Correct
Claims as presented.
Ayes-5 Nays-0 Motion carved
9. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Licenses for Approval
B. Resolution 6354 Setting an Interest Rate and Administrative Fee for Special
Assessments Certified During 2004.
C. Resolution 6355 Adjusting the Assessment Role for the 2003 Street
Improvement Project - 7830 Gloria Circle Driveway Apron Deletion.
D. Resolution 6356 Authorizing the Execution of the 2004 Oak Wilt Grant
Agreement with the State of Minnesota.
E. Cancel a Public Hearing for October 11, 2004 at 7:05 pm to Receive Public
Input and Pass upon a Special Assessment Levy for Delinquent Public Utility
Accounts and reschedule the Public Hearing for October 25, 2004 at 7:05 pm.
F. Cancel a Public Hearing for October 11, 2004 at 7:10 pm to Receive Public
Input and Pass upon a Special Assessment Levy for Diseased Tree Removals
and reschedule the Public Hearing for October 25, 2004 at 7:10 pm.
G. Resolution 6358 Awarding the Restoration Contract for Silver View
Sedimentation Pond Project.
• MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Quick. To Approve the Consent Agenda as presented.
Mounds View City Council September 27, 2004
Regular Meeting Page 6
Ayes-5 Nays-0 Motion carried
10. COUNCIL BUSINESS
A. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance 743, Amending Chapter 5 of the
City Charter (Roll Call Vote).
Council Member Quick asked the City Attorney that if recall is contrary to the Constitution in
Minnesota, how could they have it in their Charter.
City Attorney Riggs stated that it is not entirely contrary, and that there generally has to be a
finding of some type of malfeasance. He stated unless there is a finding of some type of
malfeasance, the courts would not entertain it and allow it to move forward.
Council Member Quick stated that it would have to be something serious then, and City Attorney
Riggs stated it would have to be serious.
Council Member Quick stated that if a Council member is not doing what one member or a
group doesn't like, then they couldn't have them up for recall, and City Attorney Riggs agreed.
Council Member Quick stated that there is a fine line that the Constitution allows, and he wanted
it in the minutes.
• Ci Attorne Ri s stated that it was a limited rovision that is authorized by statute for that
ty Y gg p
type of a situation.
Duane McCarty, 8060 Long Lake Road, stated that amendments are added at the end of the
Constitution, so this process is not necessarily entirely correct. He stated this was probably not a
big deal since they are a small city, and these sorts of things can be handled.
Mayor Linke informed the public that Duane was on the original Charter Commission and helped
to write the existing Charter.
Mr. McGarry stated that these amendments don't really improve a whole lot, and that in fact they
give more problems. He stated that in Chapter 410, Charter Law of the State of Minnesota, there
is a savings clause at Section 33, that where a Charter is silent on a matter of general law, then
the Council may apply general law, unless it's specifically forbidden.
Mr. McCarty stated that in Chapter 410 it states that the Clerk Administrator has the
responsibility to determine whether or not a petition is sufficient, which means was it properly
signed by the voters of the city as required by law and the Charter. He stated that it has nothing
to do with the verbiage or the content of the proposed amendment or addition and so forth. He
stated that state law isn't clear on what he would term immediacy, and the City Charter requires
• that. He stated that when the Clerk Administrator receives a petition, he has 10 days to report to
the City Council that the petition is either sufficient or insufficient. He stated that the Council
Mounds View City Council September 27, 2004
Regular Meeting Page 7
• knows within 10 days that there is a petition out there, and obviously the public gets the
information directly and quickly. He stated that this proposal changes all of that. He stated that
Section 504, Disposition of an Insufficient or Irregular Petition, it states that the Clerk
Administrator determines the sufficiency. If he determines that it cannot be declared, it shall be
determined to be insufficient or irregular, and that the committee now has 30 calendar days to
correct that. If they bring it back to the Clerk Administrator, he now has five additional days. He
stated that there is now 45 days involved here before it's ever presented to the Council, and that's
not soon enough. He stated that as the Charter states, with good reason and cause, immediately
upon receipt and determination of sufficiency, within 10 days the Council is notified, and that is
not the case here. He stated it is wiped out under this proposal.
Mayor Linke stated that in Section 503 it says within 10 working days of receipt of petition the
Clerk Administrator shall determine its sufficiency.
Mr. McCarty stated that's determination of petition under the new language. He stated that under
the new language determination of petition sufficiency, that ten-day period comes into play.
However, if you go down to 504, Disposition of Insufficient or Irregular Petition, now they get
into the 30 and the additional five days in the corrective process. He stated that nowhere in the
new proposal does it say that within ten days of receipt of the petition, regardless of sufficiency,
the Clerk Administrator is duty bound to present it to the Council that this is afoot. He stated
that that is wiped out under the new proposal.
• Mayor Linke stated that in the last sentence in 503, it says that upon receipt of the report, the
Council shall immediately declare the sufficiency of it.
Mr. McCarty stated that that was correct, but when do they receive the report, and he directed
them to 504.
Mr. McCarty stated that proposed Charter amendments must be submitted 12 weeks or 84 days
before the general election, and that this information had been presented to them on August 23`d,
which was 81 days before the next election, so it didn't make the 84-day cut.
Mr. McCarty stated that in 410, Section 12, Subdivision 7, it says that as far as practicable, the
requirements of Subdivisions 1 through 3 apply to petitions submitted under this section to an
ordinance amending the Charter and the filing, so he really questions whether they've made the
cut in any case.
Mayor Linke stated it was his understanding it does not need to go to the voters if it's approved
by 100 percent of the Council.
Mr. McCarty stated that it doesn't, and this is where the judgment call comes in. He stated he
thought the Charter is too important not to involve them.
• Mr. McCarty stated that Chapter 5 is a total rewrite, and that it has not complied with the
recommendations under state law. He stated that you take the old language, and you strike out
Mounds View City Council September 27, 2004
Regular Meeting Page 8
• what you want to remove, and you underline what you want to put in so everybody has a clear
picture. He stated that unless you are intimately familiar with the current Charter, there is no way
that you can pick up this proposed amendment and understand completely what it does.
City Attorney Riggs stated that the language that Mr. McCarty cites in the end of Subdivision 7
applies when there is a petition brought forth pursuant to that subdivision, and it doesn't apply
when it comes from a direct recommendation from the Charter Commission, so this is one of the
seven listed ways that a Charter can be amended that the legislature has permitted, and it is
something that the Council and the Charter Commission has utilized before.
Mayor Linke asked if the City Attorney had looked at this and could see nothing wrong, and City
Attorney Riggs stated that that was correct.
MOTION/SECOND. Stigney/Gunn. To waive the reading and approve Ordinance 743 as
written.
Council Member Marty stated that some issues had been raised tonight, and he didn't see
anything wrong with having this information disseminated directly to the residents through a
ballot poll and letting the residents decide.
Mayor Linke stated that that could not be done in time for this election.
. Council Member Marty asked what the hurry was.
Barbara Thomas, 5444 Landmark Circle, member of the Mounds View Charter Commission,
stated that she thought these questions had been answered before. She stated that if the Council
felt that there were significant issues they wanted to address in this language, then the Council
was free to do so, or to send it back to the Commission with those recommendations. She stated
that she didn't think it was possible to go to ballot now, and she didn't think it was necessary.
She stated that they hadn't changed the process of what happens with sufficiency or who has to
declare the sufficiency. She stated that what they provided was a time line, which was
completely missing, and had actually caused problems for the election staff to not be able to
manage that sufficiency should a petition be given to them. She stated that that is also missing
from state law. She stated that this was not a significant amendment. She stated that nothing has
been presented here tonight that the Charter Commission wasn't in unanimous agreement on and
that couldn't be handled by a unanimous decision by the Council.
Council Member Gunn stated that the way she read this is that within ten working days after the
Clerk Administrator gets the petition, it is then determined if it is insufficient or not, and that that
report, one or the other, is brought to the City Council, and they declare it. If it is deemed to be
insufficient, then it goes back, and that process starts in 504.
Mayor Linke stated that that was the way he read it, too.
•
Mounds View City Council September 27, 2004
Regular Meeting Page 9
Mr. McCarty stated that if the Clerk Administrator determines it's insufficient, he must within
ten working days notify the Council of that fact. He stated that under the new proposal if a
petition comes in that is insufficient, you go to Section 504, and the Clerk Administrator shall
deliver a copy of the petition with a written statement of its defects to the sponsoring committee
He stated, parenthetically, that under Chapter 410 of the state law, charter law, it is recommende
that a sponsoring committee number five, and the Charter reaff rms that the sponsoring
committee should be five. He stated that this proposal says five or more.
Mr. McCarty stated that the committee shall have 30 days in which to file additional signature
papers or make corrections, and the Clerk Administrator doesn't go to the Council yet. He only
goes when he declares it as sufficient.
d
Mayor Linke stated that if it's insufficient, then it doesn't go to the Council.
Ms. Thomas stated that there was nothing for them to do at that point.
Mayor Linke stated that the Council should make that official determination, because that's what
they've always done in the past.
Mr. McCarty stated that what is in state law and in the Charter is that the Council is immediately
notified within ten days whether it is sufficient or insufficient, and vis-a-vis there is immediate
notice to the citizens. He stated that this change short-circuits due notice, and he believes that
• this is an honest error. He stated he also believes that the five or more should be taken out, and
why would you need more than five sponsors. He asked if they could imagine calling in a
sponsoring committee of 20 and trying to straighten out some detail.
Mayor Linke stated that Mr. McCarty brought up some good points.
Council Member Stigney stated that this had been prepared for the Council, not for referendum,
so it took a unanimous vote of the Council to approve the changes. He stated that there may be a
gap in there regarding the ten-day notification that they should look at. He stated he saw nothing
wrong with the language of five or more.
Mayor Linke asked if Council Member Stigney was proposing a postponement of action on this
matter, and Council Member Stigney said he hadn't proposed anything yet.
Ms. Thomas stated that the Council could make small amendments to this and continue on. She
stated that what this language allows is a process if a mistake has happened or things are not
quite correct, and it doesn't throw the petition out. It allows the sponsoring group to correct the
petition and bring it back before it is declared.
Mr. McCarty stated that if he is understanding Ms. Thomas correctly, she is suggesting that this
revision guarantees an additiona130 days that would otherwise be lost.
•
Mounds View City Council September 27, 2004
Regular Meeting Page 10
• Ms. Thomas stated that that she didn't know that they had a provision currently in the Charter for
what happens if it's not.
Mr. McCarty stated that that has been a problem all along. He stated that the current Charter
does exactly what the current proposal does in terms of time frame, and that insufficient petitions
go back to the committee, and they have 30 days to file additional signatures, make corrections,
and bring it back to the Administrator. He stated that is all in conformance with 410, Minnesota
Charter Laws, on the basis of recommendations from the League of Minnesota Cities.
Mr. McCarty stated his concern that once you start amending, changing, and revising the City
Charter, you start a slippery slope that is hard to come back from, and some day there will be
something that is very, very important that is going to get slipped through.
Ms. Thomas stated that unfortunately the Charter doesn't have a time limit, and neither does state
statute, and it has caused some significant issues, and this was discussed at length with the
League and the representatives. She stated they had looked for model charters all over the
country to see if anyone had anything, and it doesn't exist.
Council Member Stigney asked the City Attorney what the best course would be as far as
proceeding on this item.
City Attorney Riggs stated that if there is a belief there is an inconsistency, that is something that
can be discussed with the Charter Commission. He stated that the Council could make basically
typographical corrections, but if there was anything beyond that, it should go back to the Charter
Commission and be noticed to the public.
Mayor Linke asked that if they postponed the vote on this and sent it back to the Charter
Commission, and then they bring it back, and then they do the second reading, would that be
sufficient, even though they held the public hearing on the first part.
City Attorney Riggs stated that they had to start over, and that there is a very defined and built-in
public hearing process in the statute. He stated the conservative route would be to err on the side
of public notice, and that is what he suggested that they do.
Mr. McCarty stated that in terms of the Mayor's Powers and Duties, the only change that they are
suggesting is that the word "duties" be stricken, and the word "authority" be inserted. He stated
that taking the word "duties" away, it means that the mayor doesn't have authority to run City
Hall. He asked if they extract his authority in the City Charter, can he then step away from his
perceived authority in state law?
Mayor Linke stated that he still read that in the second paragraph.
Council Member Quick stated that it's given to the mayor by the Council.
• Mayor Linke stated that that is by state law.
Mounds View City Council September 27, 2004
Regular Meeting Page 11
• Mr. McCarty questioned whether the Charter Commission had taken a good look at the
Emergency Management Plan for the City. He stated that an emergency could only be declared
by the mayor of a municipality. He stated he didn't want the mayor's hands tied because the City
Charter has removed his ability to exercise authority.
Mr. McCarty stated that if the Charter Commission is so convinced that this Charter needs to be
revised, then they should get in their petition and let the residents know what is going on.
Mayor Linke stated they would need to vote the motion down in order to send it back to the
Charter Commission.
Ms. Thomas stated they need to provide guidelines to the Commission on what they would be
interested in seeing.
Mayor Linke stated the reason he is voting is his direction, and they can ask the Council
afterwards.
Ayes-0 Nays-5 Motion failed.
Mayor Linke stated his understanding of the reason they were sending this back to the Charter
Commission is because it is not coming to the Council with a comment regarding whether it's
• sufficient or insufficient and notification as to it's happening. He stated he felt the Council
should be declaring it sufficient or insufficient because they are the elected body that should be
making that decision.
Council Member Gunn stated that the last sentence in 503 is the one that needs to be reworded.
Mayor Linke stated that also the first sentence of 504 needs to be reworded.
MOTION/SECOND. Stigney/Marry. To return Ordinance 743 to the Charter Commission to
look at Sections 503 and 504 as it pertains to the discussions that have taken place.
Ayes-5 Nays-0 Motion carried.
B. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance 742, Amending Section 2.06 of
the City Charter regarding Mayor's Powers and Duties (Roll Call Vote).
Mayor Linke asked the Ciry Attorney whether this ordinance would affect the duties given to him
by state statute for purpose of martial is still in there.
Council Member Quick stated that if it's in the ordinance, that gives the authority of the Council
to do that.
•
Mounds View City Council September 27, 2004
Regular Meeting Page 12
• Council Member Marty stated if there is a state of emergency, then the mayor would need to
convene a quorum.
Council Member Quick stated there is also an emergency plan that was adopted by the Council,
and their power was transferred to the Mayor, the Administrator, and the Police Chief.
City Attorney Riggs stated that Chapter 12 is going to preempt the Charter anyway, so it doesn't
matter.
MOTION/SECOND. Stigney/Linke. To waive the reading and adopt Ordinance 742, Amending
Section 2.06 of the City Charter regarding Mayor's Powers and Duties, to say that the mayor has
no administrative authority.
Council Member Stigney stated that this very specifically points out to the entire staff that the
mayor has no additional authority over any individual Council member, and that the Council acts
as a whole on all of these issues.
ROLL CALL: Linke/Quick/Marty/Stigney/Gunn.
Ayes-5 Nays-0 Motion carried.
C. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance 748, Amending Section 4.05 of
• the City Charter regarding Vacancy of Municipal Elected Office (Roll Call
Vote).
Mayor Linke stated that personally he would like to see an appointment rather than a new
election, but that is not what is in the Charter.
Barbara Thomas stated that they weren't making drastic changes. She stated that should the
Council at any time wish the Charter to look at making a more significant change to the Charter,
they would be more than willing to do so. She stated that this change was merely to clarify time
lines.
Mayor Linke stated he would like them to look at a process to eliminate the Charter, but that was
his opinion.
Council Member Stigney stated that these changes resulted from questions that City Staff had
directed to the Charter Commission, and that this was the response back from the Charter
Commission.
MOTION/SECOND. Stigney/Marty. To waive the reading and adopt Ordinance 748, Amending
Section 4.05 of the City Charter regarding Vacancy of Municipal Elected Office
ROLL CALL: Linke/Quick/Marty/Stigney/Gunn.
Mounds View City Council September 27, 2004
Regular Meeting Page 13
• Ayes-5 Nays-0 Motion carried.
D Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance 749, Amending Section 9.01, of
the City Charter regarding Acquisition of Property (Roll Call Vote).
Mayor Linke stated that the only change here was adding the words "as amended".
MOTION/SECOND: Stigney/Gunn. To waive the reading and adopt Ordinance 749, Amending
Section 9.01 of the City Charter regarding Acquisition of Property.
Council Member Marry asked City Attorney Riggs why, if state statute takes precedence over
City Charter, this even needs to be in here.
City Attorney Riggs stated that this is one of the provisions the City will be able to use to acquire
property. He stated the legislature has left some room for the City to interpret or do other things
with it, then you usually put it in your Charter or your City Code. He stated that Chapter 117
basically sets out the broad concept of eminent domain, and the City is saying, yes, we will
exercise that.
Council Member Stigney stated that this would take the ambiguity out of Chapter 117.
City Attorney Riggs stated that they are looking at 19801aw, and Chapter 117 has been changed
• a number of times since then.
ROLL CALL: Linke/Quick/Marty/Stigney/Gunn.
Ayes -5 Nays - 0
Motion carried
E. Resolution 6362 Step Increase for Officer Benjamin Zender and a Longevity
Increase for Steve Menard of the Mounds View Police Department.
MOTION/SECOND. Marty/Gunn. To adopt Resolution 6362, Step Increase for Officer
Benjamin Zender and a Longevity Increase for Steve Menard of the Mounds View Police
Department.
Ayes-5
Nays-0
Motion carried.
F. Resolution 6359 Accepting the Spring Creek Wetland Delineation and
Hydrology Report and Authorizing Field Verification and Digital
Conversion of the City's Official Wetland Zoning Maps.
Director Ericson stated that the Council had authorized Staff to proceed with the creation and
distribution of an RFP to do the wetland delineation in the Spring Creek Basin. He stated Staff
• felt the delineation as depicted on the wetland zoning maps from the late 1970's were in error.
He stated the delineation that was conducted by SEH did show that the boundary had shifted
Mounds View City Council September 27, 2004
Regular Meeting Page 14
• enough so that it made a difference to the residents out there. He stated Staff is asking that the
Council accept this report, accept the delineation, and direct Staff to undertake a revision to the
official wetland zoning map to incorporate this new delineation, and that they are also seeking
direction to have SEH conduct acity-wide wetland field verification and digital conversion of
their existing maps and have a completely new set of maps so that they can incorporate that into
their GIS system.
Council Member Marty asked if this would cover the whole city, and if this was the option 2 for
a cost estimate of $2,500, and Director Ericson stated that that was correct.
MOTION/SECOND: Marty/Quick. To waive the reading and adopt Resolution 6359 as
presented.
Ayes - 5 Nays - 0 Motion carried.
G. Resolution 6363 Assigning Officer Darrell Meyer to the position of
Investigator with the Mounds View Police Department.
City Clerk/City Administrator Ulrich stated that Chief Sommer could not be present due to a
death in his family, but that he was recommending this item. He stated that the City Attorney
had pointed out that the state statute requires that a temporary assignment not exceed 30 days,
and that more permanent assignments have to go back to the Police Civil Service Commission.
• Ma or Linke stated he had assumed this had gone to the Police Civil Service Commission.
y
City Clerk/City Administrator Ulrich stated that he was not aware that it had, and that the police
chief didn't mention that in his report.
Council Member Marty stated that this is the only officer who has applied for this position, and
that they are an investigator short, so he would move approval to at least start this 30-day process
to get this going.
MOTION/SECOND. Marty/Quick. To adopt Resolution 6363 as presented.
Council Member Marty asked if this would automatically refer it to the Police Civil Service
Commission, and City Clerk/City Administrator Ulrich stated it would approve it for 30 days.
The approval is modified to reflect a 30 day assignment, with this item being referred to the
Police Civil Service Commission.
Mayor Linke stated it would go to the Police Civil Service Commission within 30 days.
Ayes-5 Nays-0 Motion carried.
•
Mounds View City Council September 27, 2004
Regular Meeting Page 15
. H. Resolution 6357 Authorizing the Publication of a Request for Proposal (RFP)
for Work Associated with the County Road 10 Redevelopment and
Revitalization Plan.
Public Works Director Lee stated that pursuant to Council direction, Staff has prepared a request
for proposal to have a consultant assist the City in implementing the County Road 10
Redevelopment and Revitalization Plan. He stated the RFP has been prepared, and at this time
Staff is requesting authorizing for its publication.
Mayor Linke and Council Member Marty stated that it was a good job.
MOTION/SECOND. Gunn/Marty. To waive the reading and adopt Resolution 6357 as
presented.
Ayes-5
Nays-0
Motion carried.
I. Resolution 6361, Approving the Mounds View Citizenship Award Policy.
Mayor Linke stated that he had a problem with the selection criteria which states they will look
for an individual who has given unselfishly of his or her time to fight for a just cause, because
there are a lot of people that do things for the City that aren't fighting for a particular cause, and
they are helping the City.
Council Member Marty stated he has a problem with the fact that persons with honorable
mentions from previous years are not eligible for consideration again for two years. He stated he
did not want them to be ineligible the next year.
Mayor Linke stated he had many questions about this process right now, and he's not sure what
the next step would be, but he can't vote for it at this time.
Council Member Marty suggested referring it to a Work Session, and Council Member Gunn
agreed.
MOTION/SECOND. Linke/Marty. To postpone Resolution 6361 to a Work Session.
Ayes-5 -
Nays -0
Motion carried.
J Resolution 6365, Ordering the Preparation of an Alternative Urban
Areawide Review (AUAR) for the Proposed Bridges Business Development
Project.
Mayor Linke stated that basically what they were doing was reiterating what the EDA had done
two weeks ago.
. Economic Development Director Backman stated that it requires the City Council to take action.
Mounds View City Council September 27, 2004
Regular Meeting Page 16
• MOTION/SECOND. Marty/Stigney. To waive the reading and adopt Resolution 6365 as
presented.
Council Member Quick and Mayor Linke stated that they had stated their concerns.
Council Member Marty stated that this study would be valid for 20 years.
Mayor Linke stated that there is nothing that keeps them from doing this in five years if it comes
up at that point, too, and he has a hard time spending $55,000 on this.
Council Member Quick asked where the funds were coming from.
Mayor Linke stated that it was from TIF funds.
Council Member Stigney stated that he thought it was money well spent to pursue other avenues
of possible development at the golf course, and that it might benefit the taxpayers, and he fully
supports this.
Mayor Linke stated that they didn't know if they could sell it, and Council Member Stigney
stated that that is why they are pursuing this item was to get some answers.
. Mayor Linke stated that this doesn't tell them that, and Council Member Stigney stated that it's
another step in the process.
Council Member Marty stated that the City Attorney had informed them that this potentially may
require legislative action, so there is the potential that it could go through.
Mayor Linke stated that they were being asked to spend $55,000 on something that they could
not put their hand around, and that there was nothing saying that they had to do this now. He
stated he wanted to wait until they had some answers.
Ayes-3 Nays-2 (Linke and Quick) Motion carried.
11. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. City Council Minutes September 13, 2004
Council Member Gunn stated that at page 15, line 2, it should read "Music of the Night".
Council Member Stigney stated that at page 13, lines 26 and 28, it should read HSA rather than
RHA.
• Council Member Marty stated that at page 6, line 33, the word "in" should be inserted between
"been" and "effect".
Mounds View City Council September 27, 2004
Regular Meeting Page 17
• MOTION/SECOND. Marry/Stigney. To approve the City Council Minutes of September 13
as amended.
Ayes - 5 Nays - 0 Motion carried.
12. REPORTS
A. Reports of Mayor and Council.
1. School District Meeting Report and Request for Committee Appointments
(S. Gunn.)
Council Member Gunn stated that citizens could go to the school web site to check for the forum
in their area so that they can attend and give their input regarding the school closings.
Council Member Gunn stated that the diversity programs in the two high schools was discussed
at the meeting, and Irondale had started a diversity group, but nobody showed up for the first club
meeting, so they were going to revamp it and try to get the kids involved. She stated that a
desegregation plan had been started up for the school district, and they are asking for one Council
person and the City Administrator from each of the cities to be a part of the committee. She
stated she would like to be that Council person, but that she would like to give up her seat on the
• Ramsey County League.
Mayor Linke stated that that would be up to the next Council coming the first of the year when
they make the new appointments.
Council Member Quick asked if it was discussed about being paired up with Columbia Heights.
Council Member Gunn stated it was brought up a little bit, and that Columbia Heights has been
deemed a racially isolated school district, which means that the neighboring school districts are
obligated to partner with that school district to help with some of the problems that may arise.
She stated that this could arise in a number of ways, such as a summer camping trip with a
student from each district going on a camping trip, or it could be staff from each district working
together on some kind of a plan that could be implemented in each district. She stated that a plan
has been submitted and is in place, so it's a requirement.
Council Member Quick asked if the City of Minneapolis is included in that.
Council Member Gunn stated that they are not, but the City of St. Anthony is.
Council Member Quick asked if Fridley was included, and Council Member Gunn answered she
didn't think so.
•
Mounds View City Council September 27, 2004
Regular Meeting Page 18
• Council Member Quick asked her to ask that question for them, and Council Member Gunn
stated that she would.
Council Member Quick requested to have a discussion at the next Work Session regarding a
questionnaire to be handed out at the presidential election, and Council Member Marty and
Mayor Linke agreed.
Council Member Stigney stated that there would be a Candidates Forum on Tuesday, October 5th
from 7:30 to 9:30 at the Council Chambers for residents to ask Council candidate's questions.
Council Member Quick asked to discuss the City purchasing the house at 8217 Long Lake Road
at the next Work Session.
B. Reports of Staff.
1. Community Development Quarterly Report
Director Ericson stated that they have spent 8 1/2 percent less for their budget for 2004, and that
they anticipate coming in under budget again this year, and that is a reflection of trying to do
more with less. He stated 88 percent of their budget are personnel costs, so there is not much in
that area that they can cut back on.
• Director Ericson stated that permit volume remains high, but they are for smaller type jobs, but
that doesn't mean that the fourth quarter may not be a real good quarter. He stated there are
some projects on line that may bring it back to where the budget shows they could be, but that is
something they'll have to look at for 2005 as their property gets developed.
Director Ericson stated that the Planning Commission had been busy, and there have been 19
applications for conditional use permits in major subdivisions. He stated they have also handled
a number of special planning cases that have kept Staff and the Planning Commission busy.
Director Ericson stated they had had a temporary inspector that helped out over the summer
months, and that he had done 245 inspections. He stated the plan for 2005 is to have an
inspection intern who will hopefully stay for three months.
Director Ericson stated that in June of 2004 MnDOT did authorize six billboard permits out at
the golf course, and based on what happens at the golf course, it's still on hold. He stated that
would be a substantial source of revenue that the City could generate over the course of a 20 year
lease.
Director Ericson stated there is another Planning Commission vacancy, but it is his
recommendation to hold off filling that seat until 2005, and they have not received any
applications as of yet for that position. He invited members of the community to apply to serve
• on the Planning Commission.
Mounds View City Council September 27, 2004
Regular Meeting Page 19
• Director Ericson stated that they continue to work on housing code violations, and he passed out
a map to the Council showing the areas that they have targeted through the years.
Director Ericson stated that the CFS building has been framed in, and that the office building at
the corner of Long Lake and 10 is close to being completed.
2. Review Clear Channel Request to Extend Lease Agreement.
Mayor Linke stated he felt they should say no at this time to extending the lease agreement.
MOTION/SECOND. Marty/Gunn. To deny Clear Channel Request to Extend Lease Agreement.
Council Member Gunn asked if they would even be staying for 40 years.
Council Member Marty stated he didn't want the billboards in the first place, but they had been
trying to find funding to pay for the golf course. He also didn't want to saddle future Councils
with decisions made now by this Council. He stated the lease was initially 15 years, and it had a
sunset clause.
Ayes-5 Nays-0 Motion carried.
City Clerk/City Administrator Ulrich stated that at the next Work Session a draft letter to the
• billboard company will be discussed.
City Clerk/City Administrator Ulrich stated that on Thursday, September 30~', at 7:30 p.m. there
would be a state legislative candidates forum at the City Council Chambers, and everyone is
invited to attend, and that it would be televised.
B. Reports of City Attorney.
None.
13. Next Council Work Session:
Next Council Meeting:
Monday, October 4, 2004, 7:00 p.m.
Monday, October 11, 2004, 7:00 p.m.
14. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Linke adjourned the meeting at 9:15 p.m.
Transcribed and recorded by:
Sheree Theobald
Timesaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.