HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC MINUTES 05301979 Meeting Sheet
IIIIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIVIII IIIIIIII
105862
Box: 36
Folder: CC MINUTES AND AGENDAS 1979
Document: CC MINUTES 05301979
K �
CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING
MINUTES
May 30 , 1979
The special meeting of the Council to consider a license for the
Muscular Dystrophy Carnival at Apache Plaza, June 2 , was called
to order at 7 : 30 p.m. by Mayor Haik. `
c
Present for roll call: Letourneau, Haik and Ranallo
i
i
Absent: Sundland and Sauer
Also present: Jim Fornell, City Manager
i
Joan Peterson, 964 West Montana, St. Paul, who is in charge of the
carnival, and Ruth Welch , manager of Apache Plaza, told of the plans j
for the fund raiser and assured that if the fee for the license and
clean-up bond were waived, the City would be provided, prior to the
event, written proof of insurance coverage for liability and assump-
tion of responsibility for cleaning up after the carnival. Council-
man Letourneau questioned why special consideration of the fee should
be given to this request and was told it has been the City' s custom
to treat all non-profit events in like fashion.
Motion by Councilman Ranallo and seconded by Mayor Haik to waive the
license fee and clean-up deposit requirement for the Muscular
Dystrophy Carnival at Apache Plaza, June 2 , 1979, under the condition
• a Certificate of Insurance is provided by the sponsors and assurance
made that Apache will assume responsibility for cleaning up after
the event.
Motion carried unanimously.
Motion by Councilman Ranallo and seconded by Councilman Letourneau
to adjourn the meeting at 7: 35 p.m. for the Public Hearing on the
Municipal Liquor Operation scheduled that evening.
Motion carried unanimously.
The hearing was convened by Mayor Haik at 8 p.m. with the same members
of the Council and staff present.
Mr. Fornell went over the items contained in the liquor operation
background information sheet which had been distributed with the
agenda for the hearing to more than 40 persons in attendance. Council
members had also been provided the memorandum with his recommendations
against a second bottle shop in the Kenzie Terrace area as well as
the December 31, 1978 balance sheet for the City' s liquor operation.
The Manager asked the residents present to consider the existing
liquor operation and to provide some future direction to the Council
regarding this key revenue source. He saw a very strong profit pic-
ture as essential to maintain the existing level of municipal services
A
-2-
especially in view of the residents ' decision by referendum not to
raise the City' s levy base which would allow its officials the
leverage of raising revenues to match the rate of inflation. He
explained the twelve alternatives to the existing Apache liquor
operation listed in the information sheet were just suggestions,
many of which might not be viable either from a profit-making or
good-planning point of view. He reiterated the anticipated diffi-
culties for this operation with the probability of a sharp rise in
rental fees with the renegotiation of the lease in 1986 and the --
immediate need for remodeling of the bar at an estimated cost of
up to $75, 000 . Apache owners have refused to negotiate the rent
prior to the current lease expiration . He concluded by telling
those present, "The liquor revenues are representing a smaller and
smaller percentage of the total general fund revenues each year. "
Ten of the persons present who had asked to be heard on the question
identified themselves as living on Penrod Lane , Macalaster Drive or
39th Avenue N.E. , adjacent to either the Hedlund or Twin City Federal
property in the northeast quadrant of the City across from Apache
where alternate sites for building a liquor store had been suggested.
About a half dozen residents of Heights Manor, 3850 Stinson Boulevard,
indicated they were present to oppose a bottle shop or bar being
located at 39th and Stinson. Approximately only one resident south
of 37th Avneue N.E. was present.
Joseph C. Waltersack, 4000 Penrod Lane, did not see the figures as
provided in the fact sheet as indicating a problem with the Apache
• operation since those figures seemed "almost equal to those for the
Stonehouse" . He wondered if the Apache owners might consider re-
modeling the bar as an incentive for the City to remain in the shop-
ping center. He later questioned the "legal ramifications of building
a liquor operation on the east side of Silver Lake Road" , and threat-
ened to "personally seek legal counsel if this happened" .
Good management practices accounted for the maintenance of income in
spite of decreasing sales for the Apache operation, Mr. Fornell told
him, but the City cannot anticipate being able "to wring more and
more out of the operation" (with less sales) .
Ruth Nelson, 3916 Macalaster Drive, felt it "would be a very poor
idea to build a liquor operation on the Hedlund property near a
residential area where it will probably bring in other undesirable
kinds of commercial business to the area" . She believed the City
should do all in its power to keep Apache going. Later she mentioned
the volume of business the pie shop on Stinson is doing.
George Thompson, 3015 39th Avenue N.E. , opposed placing a liquor
operation on the east side of Silver Lake Road near residential area.
He felt it would be too costly to build, and saw the development of
such a usage, where the "Hedlund PUD asks for low volume service of-
fice usage or south of Twin City Federal, as setting a precedent for
commercial development incompatible to the homes on Penrod. He
favored leaving the liquor operation on Apache property , suggesting >_
,s
-3-
the Wards Auto building, which is soon to be vacated, might be a
good choice. Another Penrod resident suggested Wards Garden
Center or the Country Store building, where commercial useage is
already established and there is adequate parking and good visi-
bility.
Wayne Carlson, 3917 Macalaster Drive, echoed their objections to
placing the liquor operation east of Silver Lake Road and conclu-
ded by questioning whether "St. Anthony should be in the liquor
business at all. " He would be willing to pay more taxes "to see
the City get out of this business altogether. "
Bill Zawislak, 2500 34th Avenue N.E. , identified himself as being
in a rather unique position as a resident to speak to the issue
since he is the manager of the municipal liquor stores (bottle
shops only) in Anoka. He said he had never before realized
St. Anthony is so dependent on its liquor operation for operating
revenue, nor that the taxpayers might end up paying $200 more in
taxes if the City were not in the liquor business . His choices
for constructing a building would either be at 37th and Silver
Lake Road "where there might not be room", or the southeast corner
of Silver Lane and Silver Lake Road, which he considered a "prime
location for a liquor store, but not a bar" . He reasoned the
decor of the building could be planned to match that of the ad-
joining residential area, and insisted the operation would not
generate any more traffic than the Tom Thumb store farther north
on Silver Lake Road, nor require later hours of operation than
• Twin City Federal. He told those present that St. Anthony is one
of the very few liquor operations in the metropolitan area which
can make it in a shopping center because of parking and surmised
the rental for the existing operation will run from $7 to $15 by
1986.
Richard Hanson, 4009 Penrod Lane, said he works in the office of
the city assessor for Minneapolis , and questioned whether St.
Anthony might not receive a "windfall" from the legislated con-
sideration of the market value rather than limited value in asses-
sing taxes in the future. Mr. Fornell told him that levy limita-
tions are based upon a per capita amount, hence there would be
no windfall. Mr. Hanson disagreed that only an off-sale operation
should be built, saying the City wiil "have to build a bar to make
a profit", and questioned why the City didn' t condemn the commer-
cial property it wants for its fair market value. It was thought
that condemnation is somewhat limited to utilities and doubted
the courts would allow a municipality to condemn property for a
liquor store. Mr. Zawislak said Anoka is condemning for just such
a purpose.
Tom McMullen, 3909 Penrod Lane, wondered how involved the City' s
residents had been made in the presentation of the City' s need for
a raise in levy limitation prior to the referendum, and questioned
whether they knew "they might end up with liquor in a residential
• area if revenues were not raised. " He offered to "carry the banner
a
T
-4-
for the City" in any effort to reverse that vote, but the Mayor
told him the deadline for such action had passed and the only re-
course open would be to lobby for a change in the law. She added
that, since -400 residents had indicated through the referendum
they didn' t want that direction pursued, Council members had opted
not to lobby for further changes in the levy limits.
Mr. McMullen said he would oppose any liquor operation which would
hurt the quali-ty of life in any area of the City and was concerned
that the residential quality of the City be maintained, insisting
that principle rather than dollar profit should be considered no
matter which site is chosen. He advocated consideration of commer-
cial areas first and was "willing to pay more taxes rather than have
the liquor operation developed in a residential neighborhood. "
Duane Stanley, 3012 39th Avenue N.E. , said he lives directly behind
the Twin City Federal building and has noted the increase in traffic
down Penrod since drivers go through the bank ' s parking lot in order
to bypass the traffic lights on Silver Lake Road. He saw the Council
as open to the charge from the residents of contradiction between
their stated expectations for the area through the Hedlund PUD and
the message they will be conveying if they change their minds and
allow a high-volume business with higher traffic generation in the
same location now. He also questioned whether the City should be
in the liquor business at all and wanted to know just what level of
income the City was hoping to generate by updating the liquor opera-
tion.
• Mayor Haik responded that the City's principle concern is to stay
ahead of inflation in order to maintain the existing level of
services . Mr. Fornell anticipated yearly expenditure increases
for the City of up to $100 ,000 for which the City will only be
allowed a six percent levy raise on a 1979 base of $500, 000, which
could result in yearly deficit amounting u p t o . $70,000 . He saw
the only other "business" alternative to deficit spending would be
to raise the rates for water and sewer services, the only other
businesses the City has, but this he viewed as taking from the
residents in the same manner as raising their taxes . The Mayor
agreed that alternatives to maximizing the income potential of the
liquor operation would be raising the rates for water and sewer
services and cutting out such services as tree trimming, branch
removal and edging of the curbs.
She saw it as almost impossible to cut the Maintenance staff who
i
are very flexible about filling in their regular jobs with doing
much of the required construction work and repairing their own
vehicles and equipment. She also felt the use of Certificate of
Indebtedness for equipment purchases was a very costly way of
operating.
-5-
She said the City Council has been a victim of national press
against national and state bureaucracy and waste, and undeservedly
so since the City runs a very lean operation being restricted to
one of the slimmest levy levels in the state, resulting from the
establishment of the base year for setting the levies in a year
when the City was utilizing all of its available reserves to pay
for services.
She agreed with those who said establishing the liquor operation
across from Apache would be a contradiction of the purpose of the
Hedlund PUD.
Councilman Ranallo said it is hard for him to believe that just a
short time ago the residents voted down the levy raise which is
the reason the City is looking at the upgrading of the liquor
operation and now residents are saying they would rather raise
taxes than maintain the liquor store. He suggested anyone who is
interested in reversing the effects of the referendum should
attend the levy limits strategy meeting at the Radission South
Hotel on June 12.
He also said he was disappointed to see the northern sections of
the City represented at the hearing and said he had received 15
calls regarding the hearing, but not one of those who called was
present that evening. Mayor Haik also commented on the absence
of residents who had signed the petition calling for the referen-
dum, saying most of them seemed to be from the area around 29th
Avenue N.E. and 33rd Avenue N.E. and Coolidge Street N.E . who
presumably opposed a levy base raise because they are on limited
incomes because of their age, but who seem not to be interested
in other means of raising operating revenues.
Mr. Fornell answered questions about the City' s efforts to publicize
the hearing by telling there had been two front-page stories on the
issues involved carried in the City' s two newspapers , the Sun and
-�kthe Bulletin; a notice had been placed in the school district's
newsletter which was sent out to all residents ; and numerous attempts
made to circulate the information informally. The Mayor added it
is not economically feasible to send out a City newsletter and con-
cluded any questions could have been answered through a phone call
to the Manager who is available a major portion of each day for
resident communication or to Council members who have made their
home phones accessible to such calls. Councilman Letourneau felt
the lack of response regarding alternate sites for the liquor opera-
tion to those in the northern sector of the City left the Council
in a quandry as to what steps they should take next. He told Mr.
McMullen he wondered how many other residents would be willing or
able to pay more taxes .
Two residents of the Heights Manor spoke against building at the
corner of 39th and Stinson. John Starceivic felt the bar and liquor
stores should remain in Apache to avoid the costs of building and
•
4
maintaining a new building, and to "get away from the aches and
• pains of such a building being considered undesirable anywhere
else where it might be adjacent to residential . " M. Gehrke said
she and other senior citizens who live at the Heights have enough
trouble trying to cross Stinson now and feared a liquor store in
that location would tend to draw even more traffic. She was told
of possible plans to install a semaphor as well as a sidewalk along
39th Avenue N.E.
Mr. Jones felt the City owed Ray Nelson a commendation for managing
the liquor operation so well, but definitely felt the bar should
be moved from that location after 1986. He favored a liquor store
being built at the Silver Lane location, but also saw the advantages
of building a store at the corner of 37th and Silver Lake Road where
there will be an easy access. He viewed a well-run liquor store
as an improvement over Fas Gas and Purity for the residents across
37th, but if the decision is made not to locate in the northern I
section of the City, he suggested the Stonehouse operation should f
be expanded and the fire station moved up to the Parkview building i
with the Police Department.
The Anoka liquor manager responded to his suggestion that only a
liquor store be built by saying the City needs both on- and off-sale
in the area and cautioned New Brighton might get ahead of the City
by establishing their own operation either on Silver Lake Road and
County Road "E" , or at their border with St. Anthony on Silver Lane.
• The Manager agreed with his assumption that parking affects the off-
sale of liquor in a shopping center, saying the Apache liquor store
revenues generally improve when the rest of the shopping center ' s
business declines. Mrs. Nelson disagreed, saying a majority of the
parking is for the bowling alley which always does a flourishing
business.
Before the hearing was closed, an unidentified resident on Penrod
said he had purchased his home with the understanding that the PUD
for the rest of the Hedlund property called for only low-volume,
office-type usage along Silver Lake Road and was surprised to learn
of the contradictory proposals being advanced now. He was informed
that the PUD is office-usage oriented, that that site was only an
alternative and the City was aware of significant legal obstacles.
I
Mr. McMullen thanked the Council for the opportunity they had given
the residents to provide input into the preliminary stages of the
planning.
Mayor Haik -announced there would be no direction to the staff nor
scheduling of a second meeting that evening because two Council
-members are not present. „',1`
-7-
Motion by Councilman Ranallo and seconded by Councilman Letourneau
to adjourn the hearing at 9 : 35 p.m.
Motion carried unanimously.
Mayor
ATTEST: ,
City Clerk
•
a
CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
BOARD OF REVIEW
May 30, 1979
The Board of Review was called to order at 7 : 05 p.m. by Mayor Haik.
Present for roll call: Haik, Ranallo and Letourneau.
Absent: Sundland and Sauer.
Also present: Jim Fornell , City Manager
Donald Monk, Hennepin County Assessor
R. O. Becken, Hennepin County Assessor's Office
Mr. Monk reported that, as required by law, his office 'had physically
reappraised 25 percent of the properties in St. Anthony (the north-
east quadrant), and statistically adjusted the real property assess-
ment valuation for the remaining 75 percent. He estimated raises in
valuation amounting to 50 percent for residential lots and 17 percent
for residential buildings with commercial property appraised indivi-
:?ually. The aggregate raise in valuation for the City he estimated
to be between 20 and 25 percent.
Having met the legal requirements of their role as City Assessor,
the County then arranged informal discussions with affected property
owners at which 39 were in attendance. Of these, only 11 requested
• reappraisals .
Mr. Monk detailed the procedures to be followed by the City regarding
the Board of Review and told the Council it is their responsibility
to make the judgment whether the County or property owner is correct
regarding a contested valuation. The only property owner to appear
to question the valuation placed on his property was Len Toth, 2900
Roosevelt "Street N.E. He said a conference with County officials
indicated there is no record of a physical appraisal being made of
his home and he was told his valuation was arrived at through com-
parative sales figures . Homes in other City districts than his
own, whose valuations were $60 ,000 , $66 ,000 , and $98, 000, were used
to set his valuation he said he had learned. He felt the sales price
of a home identical to his own which had been sold within the last
ten years should have been used instead. Mr. Toth also questioned
the fairness of the question posed to him by the County officials ,
"Would you sell your home for the amount of your valuation?" , since
he has no intention of selling. Mr. Monk saw the question as a fair,
though perhaps not the most tactful, method of attempting to reach
a decision regarding the current market values .
Although Mr. Toth conceded, "A private appraiser would probably
appraise the property higher" , he requested a physical reappraisal
of his property.
Motion by Councilman Ranallo and seconded by Councilman Letourneau
to continue the Board of Review to the next Council meeting, June
12, when the Council will receive the results of the Toth reappraisal .
Motion carried unanimously.