HomeMy WebLinkAbout061900 RegularREGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
June 19, 2000
CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Mader called the meeting to order.
Present were Mayor Mader, Councilmembers Gundlach and Petersen, City Manager Boyles, City
Attorney Pace, Finance Director Teschner, Planning Director Rye, City Engineer Osmundson,
Assistant City Manager Walsh, and Recording Secretary Meyer. Councilmembers Schenck and
Ericson were absent.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
BOYLES: Removed Item 6B (Presentation by Scott County Administrator Unmacht and Commissioner
Marschall) to the July 17th regular meeting.
MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECOND BY GUNDLACH TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach and Petersen, the motion carried.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM JUNE 5. 2000 REGULAR MEETING.
MADER: Asked that on page 10 at the top of the page reading "....operating budget rather than surplus"
be corrected to read "...operating budget rather than capital equipment fund."
BOYLE$: Noted several typographical changes to be made on pages 3 and 4.
MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECOND BY GUNDLACH TO APPROVE JUNE 5, 2000 REGULAR
MEETING MINUTES AS AMENDED.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach and Petersen, the motion carried.
CONSENT AGENDA:
(a)
(B)
(c)
(D)
(E)
(F)
(G)
(h)
(I)
Consider Approval of Invoices to be Paid.
Consider Approval of Treasurer's Report.
Consider Approval of Building Permit Report.
Consider Approval of Animal Warden Monthly Reports for April and May.
Consider Approval of Fire Call Report.
Consider Approval of Refuse Hauler Permit Renewals for Buckingham Disposal,
Sanitation, Prior Lake Sanitation and Waste Management-Savage.
Consider Approval of 2000-2001 Liquor License Renewals.
(J)
Dick's
Consider Approval of Resolution O0-XX Approving 2001-2005 Capital Improvement Program.
Consider Approval of Resolution O0-XX Ordering Preparation of Feasibility Report for the 2001
Reconstruction Improvement Project (City Project #11-01).
Consider Approval of Temporary 3.2 Non-Intoxicating Liquor License for the MB Softball Club.
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
City Council Meeting Minutes
June 19, 2000
(K)
(L)
Consider Approval of Resolution 00-45 Approving the Plan & Specifications and Authorize
Solicitation of Bids for the Concession/Restroom Facility at the Community Park / Youth Athletic
Complex on the Former Busse Property.
Consider Approval of Resolution 00-46 Approving the Plans and Specifications and Authorizing
Solicitation of Bids for the Band Shelter at Lakefront Park.
GUNDLACH: Requested Item (H) Consider Approval of the Capital Improvement Program be removed.
BOYLES: Item (I) Consider Approval of Resolution O0-XX Ordering Preparation of Feasibility Report for
the 2001 Reconstruction Improvement Project (City Project #11-01) may require a 4/5th vote, so that
item in being deferred. Briefly reviewed the remaining consent agenda items.
MOTION BY GUNDLACH, SECOND BY PETERSEN TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS
AMENDED.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach and Petersen, the motion carried.
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA:
Consider Approval of Resolution 00-47 Approving the 2001-2005 Capital Improvement Program.
GUNDLACH; Asked the Mayor to reiterate his earlier comments from the EDA meeting with respect to
the Downtown Redevelopment proposed street reconstruction project and the article that appeared in
the Prior Lake American.
MADER: Advised that there was a question at the EDA meeting whether funds were being removed
from the budget that had been allocated for downtown redevelopment. Explained that there has not
been any money in the budget yet designated for downtown redevelopment. What was discussed in a
work session was a capital improvement program for 2001-2005. In that draft plan, approximately
$900,000 was shown for reconstruction of the sewer, water and street for Main Avenue. After
discussing the item, the staff and Councilmembers determined that to put that money in the plan for
2001 was not realistic because the downtown redevelopment plan was not yet complete, and it may be
that other financial issues would take priority such as land acquisition. Therefore, the item has
remained in the CIP but the time frame and dollar amount were left undetermined. Also advised that
the CIP is a planning document rather than a budget and that there has been some misinterpretation.
MOTION BY MADER, SECOND BY PETERSEN TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 00-47 APPROVING
THE 2001-2005 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach and Petersen, the motion carried.
GUNDLACH: Noted that the Council and staff put considerable effort into reviewing the five-year
planning document.
Consider Approval of Resolution O0-XX Ordering Preparation of Feasibility Report for the 2001
Reconstruction Improvement Project.
BOYLES: Advised that further clarification is needed so no action is required at this time.
2
City Council Meeting Minutes
June 19, 2000
PRESENTATIONS:
Presentation by Tom Bordwell Regarding Rebuild of Cable Television System.
BORDWELL (Director of Government Relations, Mediacom): Briefly advised the Council on the physical
upgrades of the system to be completed, the communication efforts of Mediacom to notify the public,
and the new products, both analog and digital, and services, including internet access, the upgrade will
allow Mediacom to offer. Advised that the most challenging aspect of the upgrade is the construction
process.
BOYLES; Asked if customers connected to those systems that are already upgraded are able to see
immediate benefits.
BORDW£LL: Advised that customers will see improved pictures as the construction process proceeds.
Explained that the problems many people are experiencing are a result of the local team not being in
sync with the contractor. Some signal levels were disrupted. Normally, there will be immediate benefit
as far as reliability of the system.
(~UNDLACH: Asked about the completion date for the project and the ability to provide internet service.
BORDWELL: The completion date for the project is targeted for the end of July. Digital service should
follow within a month of completion of the upgrade, and high-speed internet is slated for the end of
2000 to the beginning of 2001.
MADER: Asked if there will be notification to the area residents immediately prior to work being started
in their area. Also asked Mediacom to clarify where the responsibility lies for notifying the public of any
system upgrade in their area.
BORDWELL: Noted that residents will receive a postcard notification as well as flyers at the doorstep.
The intent is to have service up by the end of the day. Advised that the responsibility for implementing
the system, notifying the public / customers, and dealing with any problems as a result of the upgrade
is the sole responsibility of Mediacom. Advised that there are 24-hour customer service representatives
available in the Waseca office.
PUBLIC HEARINGS: None.
OLD BUSINESS
Consider Approval of Report Regarding Senior Housing Regulations.
BOYLES: Reviewed the history of the agenda item and asked for the Council to provide staff further
clarification in order to draft ordinance language for senior housing overlay districts.
GUNDLACH: Noted that part of the intent was that implementation of an overlay would afford the Council
greater flexibility in connection with the proposed site based on location criteria. For example,
downtown would be looked at favorably because of the proximity of government buildings, the library
and retail. Also discussed that with respect to setbacks and density, the hope. was that the Council
could more easily regulate density and setbacks in different areas.
3
City Council Meeting Minutes
June 19, 2000
MADER: Reviewed that the first question was whether to utilize overlay district approach, and the
second question relates to whether the Council designate areas where overlay districts could be
applied, or to deal with it as there are application. Asked for the staff recommendation.
There was Councilmember consensus in support of using overlay districts.
RYE: From a staff perspective, there is not a great deal of difference. There are advantages to each
approach. Initially, if several areas are designated, at least a developer knows he can proceed and go
through the process. On the other hand, waiting for an applicant to request rezoning, the Council may
have more flexibility. The down side is that it will extend the time for this type of project to go through
the project. There is no reason that the procedure couldn't be a combination of the two.
There was Councilmember consensus in support of prioritizing several areas
for overlay districts and also having the capability to react if there are other proposals.
MADER: Stated that the third issue presented by staff asked if the intent was to implement the use of
overlay districts for assisted living care facilities, or to encourage development of such facilities.
Commented that there is some incentive to encourage development, but without giving the store away.
Believed it appropriate to structure the ordinance to encourage development.
RYE: Suggested that there are a number of options available to encourage this type of development
depending on the circumstances.
MADER: Which leads to the fourth issue which is given the Council is comfortable with encourage such
development, what specific encourage should be provided. Suggested making the process as simple
and general as possible for ease of administration because it is likely that each proposal will present
unique circumstances. Asked staff how fast an ordinance can be drafted in order to proceed with the
public hearing process, and if the Council wished to see the draft prior to Planning Commission review.
There was Councilmember consensus to encourage development of senior care facilities
and that staff should proceed with making the methods and process as simple
and general as possible to allow the Council greater flexibility.
RYE: Suggested that the Planning Commission could review the item by its July 24th meeting, and the
Council could potentially see the item again at its August 7th meeting.
MADER: Suggested that the review proceed directly to the Planning Commission.
MOTION BY MADER, SECOND BY PETERSEN TO ACCEPT THE REPORT REGARDING SENIOR
HOUSING REGULATIONS AND DIRECT STAFF TO DEVELOP THE DRAFT ORDINANCE WITH A
TARGET DATE OF AUGUST 7TH.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach and Petersen, the motion carried.
Consider Approval of Resolution 00-48 Accepting the Bids and Awarding Contract for 2000
Street Reconstruction Improvement Project (Case Projects 12-00 and ~ 3-00).
OSMUNDSQN: Reviewed the projects scheduled under the 2000 street reconstruction projects, the
bidding process to this point, and the project funding.
4
City Council Meeting Minutes
June 19, 2000
MADER: Asked if the assessments are tentative at this point pending the final project costs upon
completion.
OSMUNDSON: Confirmed.
TESCHNER: Clarified that the project will not be complete at the time of the assessment. We will be
assessing based upon estimated costs at that time and the project will be substantially complete.
MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECOND BY GUNDLACH TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 00-48
ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING THE CONTRACT FOR 2000 STREET RECONSTRUCTION
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (CITY PROJECTS 12-00 AND 13-00) TO NORTHWEST ASPHALT, INC.
FOR $1,082,790.15.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach and Petersen, the motion carried.
The Council took a brief recess.
Consider Approval of Ordinance 00-09 Amending Section 701 of the City Code Relating to the
Use of Public Rights-of-Way and Repealing Ordinance 00-01 Establishing a Moratorium on the
Installation and Location of Telecommunications Facilities in the Public Right-of-Way.
BOYLES: Briefly provided the background information for this item.
PACE: Noted that she distributed a revised version of the ordinance.
RYE: Advised that after review of the telecommunications act and state statutes, the staff and Council
felt it necessary to set out specific requirements for the use of city owned rights-of-way, including
permit process, fees, restoration requirements and standards, inspections, emergency access, limiting
portions of the right-of-way, permit revocation and indemnification. Also noted that the ordinance would
apply to City-owned rights-of-way only.
MADER: Asked how the City has dealt with use of the rights-of-way in the past.
OSMUNDSON: Advised that staff has utilized a permit process guided by the state statute for roadway
authorities.
PACE: Added that staff attempted to broaden the model ordinance directed at telecommunications
towers to include all utilities. Also noted that like the zoning ordinance this ordinance may have
unpredicted results as it is implemented and additional modifications may be necessary. Also noted
that telecommunications companies view themselves as utilities with the same rights and privileges as
utilities. The federal telecommunications act has agreed, and this is a technology that the federal
government would like to see disseminated for public policy reasons, and give them the somewhat
unfettered right to use public rights-of-way without cost or charge other than those provided by statute.
City Council Meeting Minutes
June 19, 2000
PETERSEN: Stated that the City's consideration of the item started with complaints about towers being
place in front yards. His understanding is that the City has little regulatory ability over its own rights-of-
way, and no control over County or State rights-of-way.
RYE and PACE: Confirmed that Councilmember Petersen was correct.
GUNDLACH: Asked about the regulation of the number of poles on facilities.
PACE: Noted that telecommunications facilities outside of the right-of-way are still regulated through a
conditional use process. Explained that co-location is encouraged under the conditional use permit
process, but the statute does not give the City authority to require co-location. As a practical matter,
the telecommuncations providers do try to use existing facilities in the right-of-way.
MOTION BY GUNDLACH, SECOND BY PETERSEN TO APPROVE ORDINANCE 00-09 AMENDING
SECTION 701 OF THE CITY CODE RELATING TO THE USE OF PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND
REPEALING ORDINANCE 00-01 ESTABLISHING A MORATORIUM ON THE INSTALLATION AND
LOCATION OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY.
Ayes by Mader, Gundlach and Petersen, the motion carried.
Consider Approval of Comprehensive Lake Management Plan and Implementation Schedule.
BOYLE$: Briefly reviewed the topics addressed in the Comprehensive Lake Management Plan, the
proposed processes for implementing the recommended actions of the Plan, and the costs of
implementation. Advised that staff is seeking direction on whether the plan is acceptable and to what
extent the processes should be implemented.
MADER: Noted that the plan costs of $75,000 does not include the addition of a full-time position
recommended to implement the plan.
BOYLES: Clarified the costs shown and the difference between estimated staff costs and project costs.
MADER: Suggested that the Council accept the report and ask staff to come back on a specific action-
by-action basis for further approval of specific items.
MOTION BY MADER, SECOND BY GUNDLACH TO ACCEPT THE COMPREHENSIVE LAKE
MANAGEMENT PLAN AND TAKING UNDER ADVISEMENT THE IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE,
ASKING THAT STAFF COME BACK ON AN ACTION-BY-ACTION BASIS.
PETERSEN: Asked how the costs for developing a no-phosphorous fertilizer ordinance were determined.
LEICHTY: Clarified that the figure was an estimate of the number of hours of staff time to develop an
ordinance for consideration.
MADER: Commented that residential regulation would be difficult, but suggested that if regulations were
imposed upon commercial applicators, it would hopefully get the attention of residents.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach and Petersen, the motion carried.
6
City Council Meeting Minutes
June 19, 2000
Consider Approval of the MVTA Levy for 2001.
BOYLES: Reviewed the item in connection with the staff report and explained the options available to
the Council, noting the minimum levy of $379,950 and the maximum levy of $463,739.
MADER: Advised that there are some significant unknowns in connection with any action the Council
may take. Noted that there are three separate levys or payments, totaling more than $630,000, that the
City could pay for the privilege of mass transit. Further advised that the City's "opt-out" date has
expired and criticized the state statute that has put the City in this position. Also discussed that part of
the problem is that it is impossible to determine what the services are costing us, and how it is
determined what percentage of the total levy applies to the City of Prior Lake. State statute, although
never tested, suggested that the City cannot levy less than the previous year. Further noted that as
convoluted as they are, there are basically three options for the Council to consider: (1) levy no dollars
and leave it to the Met Council; (2) levy somewhere between the minimum and maximum; and (3) levy
the $379,950 not knowing if we will get other $100,000 and $172,000 adjustments under the other
levys.
TESCHNER: Clarified that the State indicated to him that the Metropolitan Council has never yet levied
the difference over and above the levy indicated by any of the cities and the maximum possible.
MADER: Commented that what that means is that the City should have continued to levy the same
amount as its initial levy and then the Met Council would not have levied the difference.
TESCHNER: Explained that when the City was at the $301,000 levy, the MVTA strongly encouraged the
Council to levy the maximum or they may need to apply from the Met Council for discretionary funds,
which would be the difference between the amount levied and the maximum. Apparently, from an
administrative standpoint, the process is arduous, so the City Council adjusted the levy to $379,950.
Then, in order to keep the levy of taxation stable, the City Council levied the same amount for the year
2000.
MAI)ER: Added that other cities such as Lakeville that presumably benefit more from the service, are
not in the taxing district and pay nothing for the service. The implication is that if they are required to be
included, they would absorb some of the costs. That is not the case. If additional cities were added, it
just means the MVTA gets more. Suggested levying the $379,950 even though it is tempting to levy
$0, and risk the Met Council imposing the additional levy. Commented that he found it difficult to come
up with a recommendation that made sense.
TESCHNER: Advised that based upon his conversation with the State's office, that a levy anywhere
between $0 and $379,950 in all likelihood, acts as a deferral to the Met Council even though from a
legal standpoint it has not been challenged. Also noted that if the Council does not take action by June
30th, it acts as an automatic deferral.
PACE: Asked if, in staff's conversations with the Dept. of Revenue, the Department of Revenue is
equating level of service with levy.
TESCHNER: The Department of Revenue has interpreted the statute to say that level of service (£e.
transit levy amount) cannot be diminished.
7
City Council Meeting Minutes
June 19, 2000
PACE: Commented that in comparison, if the City Manager's objective to cut the levy by 7% without
cutting service, that would be an inconceivable task for the MVTA, based upon the Department of
Revenue's interpretation of the statute.
TESCHNER: Confirmed.
MOTION BY MADER, SECOND BY GUNDLACH TO APPROVE THE MVTA LEVY AT $379,950 AND
THAT STAFF BE DIRECTED TO PLACE THIS ITEM FOR COUNCIL ACTION ON THE CALENDAR
FOR THE LAST QUARTER OF 2000 REGARDING THE WITHDRAW FROM THE MVTA.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach and Petersen, the motion carried.
MADER: Apologized for the additional details and time, but wanted his frustration with the process
noted.
The Council took a brief recess.
NEW BUSINESS:
Consider Approval of Ordinance O0-10 Relating to Emergency Water Restrictions.
BOYLES: Advised that the ordinance amendment would allow the City Manager, in consultation with the
Public Works Director, to declare an outdoor watering or outdoor usage ban in the case of a water
emergency.
MOTION BY MADER, SECOND BY PETERSEN TO APPROVE ORDINANCE 00-10 RELATING TO
EMERGENCY WATER RESTRICTIONS.
GUNDLACH: Asked how the notification would take place.
BOYLES: Noted that presumably by local newspaper, radio and television, as well as flyers.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach and Petersen, the motion carried.
Consider Approval of Resolution 00-49 Approving the Installation of "No Parking" Signs in
Various Areas in the City.
BOYLES: Noted that areas where the "no parking" signs would be placed and the reasons for such
restrictions.
MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECOND BY GUNDLACH TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 00-49
APPROVING THE INSTALLATION OF "NO PARKING" SIGNS IN VARIOUS AREAS IN THE CITY.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach and Petersen, the motion carried.
8
City Council Meeting Minutes
June 19, 2000
Consider Approval of Resolution 00-50 Ratifying the Labor Agreement Between the Sergeants
Union and the City of Prior Lake.
BOYLES: Briefly reviewed the contract agreement negotiated with the police sergeants union.
MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECOND BY GUNDLACH TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 00-50 RATIFYING
THE LABOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE SERGEANTS UNION AND THE CITY OF PRIOR LAKE.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach and Petersen, the motion carried.
Consider Approval of Resolution 00-51 Authorizing an Agreement for Joint Assessment
Between the City of Prior Lake and County of Scott.
MADER: Advised that this action is to continue the joint assessment services agreement with Scott
County, and is a continuation of the present agreement.
MOTION BY MADER, SECOND BY GUNDLACH TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 00-51 AUTHORIZING
AN AGREEMENT FOR JOINT ASSESSMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF PRIOR LAKE AND COUNTY
OF SCOTT.
BOYLE_S.: Noted one clarification in the Resolution in the second "whereas" should refer to the contract
with the County rather the City.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach and Petersen, the motion carried.
Consider Approval of Resolution 00-52 Approving the Re-Division of Prior Lake Precinct #2 and
Designating Precinct Polling Locations.
T_TE_s_c__~_E~: Advised that the St. Michael's Church is no longer available as a polling location, and that
as a result staff discovered that Friendship Church offered very nice facilities and are amenable
effective for the 2001 election. Also advised that this process provided the City a good opportunity to
realign the precinct boundary map to reflect a better allocation of voters to the respective polling
locations.
MADER: Asked if it would be better to delay the notification until about 60 days prior to the election.
TESCHNER: Explained that several statutory dates prohibit us from doing that because the County
needs approximately 60 days to get the notification out. The City also has to approve its election
judges according to the calendar of events as determined by the Election Department of the State, who
needs the notification as well. The Elections Coordinator's recommendation was "as soon as possible".
Staff will follow up and shoot for the latest possible date.
MADER: Asked if the location of the polling place outside of the City limits will deter voters from turning
out at the polls due to inconvenience.
~: Friendship Church is very near the boundary of precinct #3, and the facility should lend
itself very favorably to the voting process.
9
City Council Meeting Minutes
June 19, 2000
MADER: Suggested significant publicity as the time comes closer.
MOTION BY MADER, SECOND BY PETERSEN TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 00-52 APPROVING
THE RE-DIVISION OF PRIOR LAKE PRECINCT #2 AND DESIGNATING PRECINCT POLLING
LOCATIONS.
VOTE: Ayes by Mader, Gundlach and Petersen, the motion carried.
OTHER BUSINESS / COUNCILMEMBER REPORT~:
Consider Approval of Consent Agenda Item 4(1) (Consider Approval of Resolution 00-53
Ordering Preparation of Feasibility Report for the 2001 Reconstruction Improvement Project
(City Project #11-O1)).
BOYLE$: Asked the Council to consider Item 41 which had been pulled from the consent agenda in
order to clarify whether a 4/5th vote was required. Advised that staff had verified that statute requires a
majority vote rather than a 4/5ths vote.
MOTION BY MADER, SECOND BY PETERSEN TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 00-53 ORDERING
PREPARATION OF FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR THE 2001 RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT (City Project #11-01).
VOTE Ayes by' Mader, Gundlach and Petersen, the motion carried.
Executive Session to Discuss Pending Labor Negotiations.
The Mayor advised that the Council would be adjourning into
Executive Session to discuss pending litigation and current labor negotiations.
When the regular City Council meeting resumed, the Mayor advised that
the Council had discussed labor negotiations and pending litigation, and
that no formal action was required as a result.
BOYLES: Requested that he be able to present to the City Council a report concerning his City-wide
reorganization plan.
Report on City-Wide Reorganization Plan
BOYLES: Boyles read the plan as set forth by memo, and reviewed for the Council a detailed plan for
reorganization of City departments and staff in order to address the Council's directive that the City
Manager bring a 2001 budget to the City Council that would provide a 7% property tax reduction in City
taxes without decreasing or eliminating any services provided by the City.
MADER: Asked if these types of decisions are within the City Manager's authority and if any action was
required by the Council.
B_D_Y_LES: Noted that Minnesota Statutes authorize the City Manager to take such actions and no formal
action is required by the Council. He provided the report for informational purposes only.
10
City Council Meeting Minutes
June 19, 2000
MADER: Commented that he was very impressed with the initiative taken by the City Manager in the
right direction. Believes that the Council will be very supportive even though it creates significant extra
work for the City Manager.
(~UNDLACH: Noted that he was pleased to see such a comprehensive plan.
BOYLES: Advised that the 2001 figure does not reach the full 7%, but that it is important to recognize
the distinction between tax levy reduction and property tax reduction. This report shows a 5% property
tax levy reduction.
MADER,: Commented that if you consider this budget impacts of this action together with the surpluses
enjoyed by the City, he suspects that the City Manager will be in very good shape to meet the objective
set out by this Council. Believes this is a very positive picture.
(~UNDLACI-I: Noted there are other measures, such as the reduction of expenditures for banking
services, that could impact the final percentage.
MADER: Advised that no further action was required by the Council.
A motion to adjourn was made and seconded. The meetS.
Frank Boyles, City Manager Kelly Meyer, Re, l~ording Secretary
11