Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDraft 11 12 13 City Council Minutes O� P ��� ti � v �' 4646 Dakota Street SE Prior Lake, MN 55372 �rNtvr�SO� REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES November 12, 2013 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. Present were Mayor Hedberg, Councilors Keen- ey, McGuire, Morton and Soukup, City Manager Boyles, City Attorney Rosow, City Engineer / Inspections Director Poppler, Project Engineer Thongvanh, Public Works / Natural Resources Director Gehler, Economic and Development Director Rogness, Finance Director Erickson, Ac- counting Manager Erickson, Assistant City Manager Kansier, Assistant City Manager Meyer and Administrative Assistant Green. PUBLIC FORUM The Public Forum is intended to afford the public an opportunity to address concerns to the City Council. The Public Forum will be no longer than 30 minutes in length and each presenter will have no more than ten (10) minutes to speak. Topics of discussion are restricted to City gov- ernmental topics rather than private or political agendas. Topics may be addressed at the Pub- lic Forum that are on the agenda except those topics that have been or are the subject of a scheduled public hearing or public information hearing before the City Council, the Economic Development Authority (EDA), Planning Commission, or any other City Advisory Committee. The City Council may discuss but will not take formal action on Public Forum presentations. Matters that are the subject of pending litigation are not appropriate for the Forum. APPROVALOFAGENDA MOTION BY MCGUIRE, SECOND BY MORTON TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS PRE- SENTED. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES MOTION BY SOUKUP, SECOND BY MORTON TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE OC- TOBER 28, 2013 CITY COUNCIL MEETING. Keeney: Suggested the motion on page nine regarding the downtown roadway plan reflect that the motion made was amended from the originally proposed motion. MOTION BY KEENEY, SECOND BY MCGUIRE TO AMEND THE MOTION FOR A CORREC- TION ON PAGE NINE REFERRING TO THE DOWNTOWN ROADWAY PLAN. VOTE (on the amendment): Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. VOTE (on the motion): Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. CONSENT AGENDA City Manager Boyles reviewed the items on the consent agenda. A. Consider Approval of Claims Listing B. Consider Approval of a Resolution Approving Amendments to the City Council Bylaws with Phone 952.447.9800 / Fa7: 952.447.4245 / www.cityofpriorlake.com Respect to the Consent Agenda C. Consider Approval of the 2013 3rd Quarter Investment Report D. Consider Approval of the 2013 3rd Quarter Financial Report E. Consider Approval of Resolution 13-158 Entering into the City's Standardized Contract for Custodial Services and Authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to Execute the Docu- ment on Behalf of the City F. Consider Approval of Resolution 13-159 Revising the City of Prior Lake Public Works Operations Manual G. Consider Approval of Resolution 13-160, 13-161, 13-162 and 13-163 Appointing Persons to Advisory Committees H. Consider Approval of Resolution 13-164 Approving the Transfer of Local Board of Ap- peals and Equalization Powers to Scott County I. Consider Approval of a Massage Therapy License for Laura Pekarna J. Consider Approval of a Massage Therapy License for Lisa Leonard K. Consider Approval of Resolution 13-165 Authorizing the Acquisition of Tax Forfeited Property L. Consider Approval of Resolution 13-166 Assigning a Development Agreement and Tax Increment Revenue Note from Creekside 54, LLC to Creekside 7K, LLC M. Consider Approval of Resolution 13-167 Approving a Cooperative Agreement with the Prior Lake Spring Lake Watershed District for the County State Aid Highway 12 Wetland Enhancement Project Soukup: Requested that item 56 be removed from the Consent Agenda for discussion. Morton: Requested that items 5G, 5H and 5L be removed from the Consent Agenda for dis- cussion. MOTION BY KEENEY, SECOND BY MORTON TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AB- SENT ITEMS REMOVED. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. 5B Consider Approval of a Resolution Approving Amendments to the City Council By- laws with Respect to the Consent Agenda Soukup: Stated that at the previous Council meeting a member of the public requested items be removed from the consent agenda. Cited a section of the agenda regarding a member of the public removing an item. Noted that the Council's Bylaws state that the Mayor or Councilmem- bers can remove items from the consent agenda. Suggested that since members of the public can address the Council during the public forum, the Bylaws should be followed at this time and the agenda sheet should be modified to remove the statement that a member of the public can have an item removed from the consent agenda. Hedberg: Queried whether the question of whether members of the public should be allowed to modify the agenda should go to the Compensation and Bylaws Committee with a request to make a recommendation. Soukup: Concurred. MOTION BY SOUKUP, SECOND BY MCGUIRE TO REFER THE ITEM TO THE COMPENSA- TION AND BYLAWS COMMITTEE FOR THEIR REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION AND RE- VISE THE AGENDA STATEMENT CONFORM TO THE BYLAWS. Boyles: Queried whether the recommendation from the Compensation and Bylaws Committee should be brought to the Council at its annual meeting. Soukup: Affirmed. Morton: Agreed the agenda should be made consistent now and the Committee should bring forth a recommendation. DRAFT 11 12 13 City Council Meeting Minutes 2 Keeney: Clarified that the existing Compensation and Bylaws Committee will review this. MOTION BY KEENEY, SECOND BY MCGUIRE TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE THAT THE COMPENSATION AND BYLAWS COMMITTEE CONSIDER A MECHANISM FOR MANAGING TIME ON THE AGENDA. Soukup: Sought clarification asking how staff reports could be timed. Keeney: Replied he does not have the mechanism, but is seeking a solution. Hedberg: Noted that he has seen estimated times on other agendas and it allows the agenda preparer and presenters to prepare their reports accordingly. VOTE (on the amendment): Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. VOTE (on the main motion): Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. 5G Consider Approval of Resolutions Appointing Persons to Advisory Committees MOTION BY MORTON, SECOND BY KEENEY TO APPROVE RESOLUTIONS 13-160, 13- 161, 13-162 AND 13-163 APPOINTING PERSONS TO ADVISORY COMMITTEES. Morton: Thanked people who applied for advisory committee vacancies for offering their time, expertise and desire to serve. Read the list of recommended appointees. Hedberg: Also thanked those who applied and are appointed. Keeney: Commented that there are other openings. Boyles: Concurred, stating that the Lakes Advisory Committee has fallen below the minimum level of five members and the City will seek interested persons to serve on that committee. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. 5H Consider Approval of Resolution 13-164 Approving the Transfer of Local Board of Appeals and Equalization Powers to Scott County. MOTION BY KEENEY, SECOND BY SOUKUP TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 13-164 AP- PROVING THE TRANSFER OF LOCAL BOARD OF APPEALS AND EQUALIZATION POW- ERS TO SCOTT COUNTY. Morton: Questioned why the Council would want to give up local insight and control over the Board of Appeals. Asked what costs are involved other than the Council per diems. Erickson: Highlighted key points of the appeal process. Stated that the local board addresses valuation for property owners, but property owners can always contact Scott County with any questions. Holding the LBAE means they have to go to a public setting to express their con- cerns where the open book process is less formal. Holding the LBAE creates an extra step ra- ther than going directly to the County board. Stated the City pays a fee to the County for the assessment agreement; and would also have to pay the cost of County staff members to come to the LBAE. Keeney: Commented that he originally thought it should be done at the local level, but now re- alizes there is little involvement by the Council and it is mostly handled by the County. Believes the LBAE adds little value to the process. The less formal setting is attractive and there is still a defined time and place to make an appeal and if property owners want the formal setting of the County meeting, they can go to that. DRAFT 11 12 13 City Council Meeting Minutes 3 Morton: Commented that there were a couple of situations at the last LBAE where the Council made a change so the property owner did not have to continue their appeal. Hedberg: When the Council made the recommendation, it may or may not have been ap- proved by the County. Morton: Believes the County relies heavily on the LBAE recommendation. Keeney: Believes the LBAE decision is considered final unless there is a further appeal. Hedberg: Recalled a situation where the LBAE recommended a lower valuation and the Coun- ty appealed the assessment. Morton: Recalled a situation of a lake property where the LBAE lowered the valuation and there was no further engagement. Hedberg: Noted the assessors stated they would not treat the lake property assessment as a precedent for other similar properties. Commented that he has participated in this for six years and concurs that the value is not great, it is an extra step, it is intimidating for property owners to have to approach in the formal setting, and members of the Council have to be specifically trained. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire and Soukup. Nay by Morton. The motion carried. 5L Consider Approval of Resolution 13-166 Assigning a Development Agreement and Tax Increment Revenue Note from Creekside 54, LLC to Creekside 7K, LLC MOTION BY MORTON, SECOND BY SOULKUP TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 13-166 AS- SIGNING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND TAX INCREMENT REVENUE NOTE FROM CREEKSIDE 54, LLC TO CREEKSIDE 7K, LLC Morton: Asked about the risks noting there is no history about the business entity that has been set up. Rogness: Replied there is fairly little risk. The business must submit reports demonstrating compliance for affordable units. The City reviews and substantiates the reports. The tax incre- ment is for assuring that 20% of units are set aside to be affordable units. It is a pay as you go increment so the note is paid off from the annual increment to the extent that the money is there. The City would not be obligated to pay more if the value of the property went down. Not- ed that the developers have provided history of other entities they manage. Hedberg: This is a fairly routine transaction. When there is a TIF involved there is a public in- terest. Keeney: This is a TIF agreement that is approximately two-thirds through its course. It is a long-standing agreement that has been successful. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. PRESENTATIONS No presentations were scheduled. PUBLIC HEARINGS No public hearings were scheduled. OLD BUSINESS Consider Approval of a Resolution Accepting the Feasibility Report and Scheduling a Public Hearing to Consider the Maple Lane / Mushtown Road / Panama Avenue Improve- ment Project Project Engineer Thongvanh reviewed the objectives of the project to reconstruct and up- grade streets, eliminate private wells and septic systems and provide sewer and water exten- DRAFT 11 12 13 City Council Meeting Minutes 4 sions to future annexation areas. Described the project area and the proposed improvements. Reviewed the estimated project costs and assessments. Noted the estimated assessments are higher than recent projects due to costs not being offset by grants and the less efficient layout of the infrastructure. Reviewed the preliminary project schedule. MOTION BY MCGUIRE, SECOND BY SOUKUP TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 13-168 AC- CEPTING THE FEASIBILITY REPORT AND CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE MUSHTOWN ROAD, MAPLE LANE, AND PANAMA AVENUE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (CITY PROJECT#14-011). Morton: Asked about the feedback received from the residents. Thongvanh: Replied that an informational flyer was mailed to affected residents. A couple of people have called about costs and about layout of the infrastructure. Morton: Clarified that 28 of the 35 well and septic systems are failing. Thongvanh: Replied that Scott County provided that information and they consider systems older than 1977 to be failing. Keeney: Commented that this road alignment seems inefficient to provide services and ques- tioned whether consideration was given to serve Maple Lane homes from Panama and Mush- town. Thongvanh: Displayed a map explaining logistics of elevation and lengths of easements. Keeney: Commented that the street construction is needed anyway so concurred that the pro- posed plan needs to be followed. Noted that when people buy properties in this condition, they should know they will have to come up with the cost of making the improvements. Stated that Mushtown is a well-used road and needs to be improved. Unfortunate that the cost is so high. Soukup: Stated that facilities in the parks off Mushtown are highly used. Expressed concern about the timing and how the phases of construction will be managed and what kind of alterna- tive ways to the field will be provided. Asked about sidewalks and bike paths. Hedberg: Asked if consideration was given to extending utilities from the Maple Lane cul-de- sac to the homes along Panama. Thongvanh: Replied that was considered but grading was a constraint. Hedberg: Believes a large portion of cost has to do with a distance along Panama that serves 6-7 homes and expensive right of way acquisitions. Asked if it would make sense for City to in- stall tanked septic systems and just provide water service. Keeney: Commented that for the cost of the right of way, homes could be purchased and con- demned. It is an expensive place to build infrastructure. Another proposal would be to defer until there is further development along Panama. Hedberg: Commented that large parcels between Panama and Mushtown have been annexed into the City and they have relatively newer homes so there less likelihood they will be interest- ed in redeveloping their property. Believes the project needs to be done due to condition of roads and we need to look at alternatives for handling the 6-7 homes along Panama as they are causing extraordinary costs to the project. Keeney: Failing septics will make homes unmarketable. Thongvanh: Noted that the area is considered 11 units as one property will be assessed for four units. Explained that easement costs will benefit that part of the project. Boyles: Suggested adoption of a resolution to move forward with the public hearing and refer this project to the Special Assessment Committee to see if they can come up with alternatives. Noted that appraisals must be conducted to assure that the special benefit will be proved. Agreed the amount of assessments is significant, but the City must provide infrastructure for the protection of the public health. Hedberg: Noted that this proposal has 1,000 feet of unused infrastructure to the Panama area and the Maple and Mushtown residents have to share that burden. DRAFT 11 12 13 City Council Meeting Minutes 5 Keeney: Suggested the Special Assessment Committee consider these as separate projects to appropriately assess the different situations. Thongvanh: Commented that septic and wells on Maple are along the Panama side of the property and it may be to their benefit to run the infrastructure along the back side of the proper- ties to help keep the cost down. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. Poppler: The Special Assessment Committee meeting will be scheduled shortly. Consider Approval of a Resolution Accepting the Feasibility Report and Scheduling a Public Hearing to Consider the Maplewood Street Improvement Project Project Engineer Thongvanh reviewed the project objectives. Displayed the project area. Reviewed the existing conditions and the proposed improvements. Discussed the estimated project costs and assessments. The Assessment Review Committee met and recommends the front footage assessment method be used. Reviewed the preliminary project schedule. MOTION BY SOUKUP, SECOND BY KEENEY TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 13-169 AC- CEPTING THE FEASIBILITY REPORT AND CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE MAPLEWOOD STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (CITY PROJECT #14-012). Hedberg: Asked about the remaining life of the existing sewer line that was installed in 1973. Thongvanh: Replied that the line is clay pipe and tends not to corrode. It can get root intru- sions into joints, but televising did not show any. The pipe can be lined in the future and achieve additional life. Hedberg: Asked about the condition of the water line. Thongvanh: Replied it is in reasonable condition yet, but the soils are corrosive and cause pit- ting of the pipes. Would rather be on the side of caution. Hedberg: Suggested the project be deferred if the utilities are in good shape. Anticipates that area will be redeveloped into commercial uses and ripped up at that time. Asked what the As- sessment Review Committee thought about the need for this project. Suggested doing an over- lay of asphalt to buy time. Morton: Replied that the Committee discussed that. Noted that the project includes a widening of the roadway and installation of curb and gutter, but agreed an argument could be made to delay the project. Hedberg: Commented the project could make the residential sites more pad ready for com- mercial development. Keeney: In addition to the paving index, consideration should be given to how heavily the road is used. It is primarily used by residents and he would want to have their input on whether they want to pay for new utilities. Seems a good candidate for resurfacing. Questioned how some of the stubs and oversizing would be paid. Thongvanh: Replied that trunk funds would probably be used for that. Keeney: Expressed concern that construction might break the clay pipe. Hedberg: Commented that the feasibility report can be accepted and the public hearing sched- ule and the Assessment Review Committee could consider various alternatives. Keeney: Asked if staff should be directed to consider an overlay alternative to learn what that cost would be. Poppler: Recalled the pavement degradation standards where a point is reached where the value of an overlay is not recognized. Hedberg: Stated that highest and best use zones this a commercial property and when devel- opment happens, some developer will reconstruct and may even want to realign roadways. Be- DRAFT 11 12 13 City Council Meeting Minutes 6 lieves the future uses need to be considered even though it contradicts what we know from pavement degradation studies. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. MOTION BY KEENEY, SECOND BY MCGUIRE TO DIRECT STAFF TO BRING AN ESTI- MATE OF AN OVERLAY ALTERNATIVE FOR THIS PROJECT AND PROVIDE INFOR- MATION TO THE ASSESSMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. NEW BUSINESS Consider a Report Regarding the City's Street Lighting Policy City Engineer / Inspections Director Poppler reviewed the street lighting policy noting that the policy addresses lighting placement and requests for lights. Stated that the City has approx- imately 400 fiberglass lights with annual energy costs of $100,000. Reviewed the styles of lights and where they are used. Displayed other options that are not used in the City. Morton: Asked what style of lights were placed in past petitions. Poppler: The colonial / traditional light. Morton: Identified the area where a light is being petitioned. Asked what LED lighting for out- side lighting would look like. Poppler: Replied that it is just a different style of bulb. Keeney: Recalled that the petitioners did not want to pay $900 for the traditional light and wanted to have a light mounted on a wooden pole that was in place. Expressed concern about maintenance of different kinds of lamps and having the City take responsibility for the light. Can envision other situations where we might want an approved lamp model for existing structures and poles. Hoped for a suggestion on a different style to be added to the standard usage list. Asked if it would be a problem to have a light that could be installed on an existing pole and still be compatible and meet the power company's requirements. Poppler: Noted that the City pays the energy cost and the power company replaces the bulbs. McGuire: Asked the energy cost for a typical light. Poppler: Replied he does not have individual light costs and reiterated that the annual cost for all lighting is $100,000. Added that staff is inventorying lights and there are other lights in addi- tion to the 400 fiberglass lights. McGuire: Asked if there are light styles that could hang on a wooden pole. Poppler: Replied the City has three different power companies providing service and one com- pany may offer something and another one may not. Hedberg: Proposed that: 1) the City remain with the traditional light that has become our standard — there is a benefit to maintenance and appearance; 2) the City participate in 50% of cost of petitioned lights up to $500; 3) LED should be added to the policy and the City should start lobbying agencies to approve them. If they do, then it should be a planned program to re- place them with LED; and 4) staff should propose a policy for reconstruction projects for con- sistency in neighborhood lighting. Keeney: Commented that power companies are incentivized to bring in additional customers. Concerned that the traditional style has gone out of the affordability range. If someone wants a light, they can't afford it. Not sure the City should subsidize adding a light as he is not a fan of nighttime lighting in general. MOTION BY HEDBERG, SECOND BY MCGUIRE TO DIRECT STAFF TO MODIFY LIGHTING POLICY TO CONTINUE USING TRADITIONAL STYLE LIGHTS, OFFER 50% CITY PARTICI- PATION FOR PETITIONED LIGHTS UP TO $500, ADD THE POSSIBILITY OF LED LIGHTS, REVIEW THE POLICY TO PROPOSE CHANGES ALLOWING CONSISTENCY IN LIGHT IN- DRAFT 11 12 13 City Council Meeting Minutes 7 STALLATION FOR RECONSTRUCTION PROJECTS, AND EXPLORE OPPORTUNITIES FOR INSTALLING TRADITIONAL STYLE LIGHTS ON EXISTING POLES. Morton: Understands the need for continuity in lighting for aesthetic reasons, but does not want to support the subsidy portion of motion. Believes other options should be found to moderate costs. Soukup: Concurred. Keeney: Stated he would support the alternative light option on its own. Boyles: Noted the City currently has a subsidy situation in the policy that states the mainte- nance and energy costs are paid for by the general taxpayer in perpetuity. Stated the intent is that there should be an exchange allowing for consistency in lighting throughout the community for inventory and maintenance as well as aesthetics. Keeney: Replied that in terms of an incentive to put in nicer lights he understands, but from the perspective of an incentive to put in more lights, he does not favor it. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, McGuire and Soukup. Nays by Morton and Keeney. The motion car- ries. Consider Approval of (1) an Interim Ordinance to Prohibit Marina Development, Zoning and Subdivision Building Applications or Permits; (2) a Resolution Authorizing a Study and Task Force; and (3) a Resolution Approving an Ordinance Summary and Publication Community and Economic Development Director Rogness stated the City recently received a request for a marina in a C2 zone. Reviewed the levels of conditions that applied to it. Dis- covered that the DNR had a definition of marinas that differed from the City which allowed the DNR to not be the authority in this process. Suggested the City consider an interim ordinance prohibiting marina development relating to zoning, building permits, applications, etc.; and es- tablish a task force to determine planning with respect to marina development and expansion within the City. MOTION BY KEENEY, SECOND BY MCGUIRE TO APPROVE ORDINANCE 113-12 AN IN- TERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA, TEMPORARILY PROHIB- ING DEVELOPMENT, ZONING, SUBDIVISION AND BUILDING APPLICATIONS OR PERMITS FOR MARINAS WITHIN THE CITY OF PRIOR LAKE; ADOPTING ENFORCEMENT PROVI- SIONS; AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE PART 1 WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAINS PENALTY PROVISIONS. Morton: Asked if there are pending applications or if the City can just move ahead with staff making recommendations. Questioned the need for an interim ordinance. Rogness: Affirmed that we could proceed with a study and task force without an ordinance. There are no pending applications. Hedberg: Stated that existing marinas could make application to expand. An interim ordi- nance would give the City time to step back and plan. Keeney: Added that the City is limited in the types of things mitigating conditions can be ap- plied to and if an application was submitted, there may not be reason to deny it. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. MOTION BY MCGUIRE, SECOND BY SOUKUP TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 13-170 AU- THORIZING A STUDY TO DETERMINE WHAT AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY CODE MAY BE REQUIRED TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE AND TO PRO- VIDE FOR SOUND PLANNING WITH RESPECT TO MARINA DEVELOPMENT AND EXPAN- SION WITHIN THE CITY OF PRIOR LAKE. DRAFT 11 12 13 City Council Meeting Minutes $ Hedberg: Reviewed the advisory committees and other organizations that would be involved in the study. Keeney: Suggested additional topics for the study: impact on residential neighbors by land or by water; use of surFace area of the lake proportionate to the amount of shoreland involved; uni- fied uses for marinas and associations; parking (seasonal parking on unpaved surfaces and whether that is in conflict with water quality goals). Hedberg: Suggested that Keeney's topics be included on the resolution. MOTION BY KEENEY, SECOND BY SOUKUP TO AMEND THE MOTION TO ADD THE AD- DITIONAL TOPICS FOR THE STUDY TO THE RESOLUTION. VOTE: (on the amendment): Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. VOTE (on the motion): Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. MOTION BY MCGUIRE, SECOND BY SOUKUP TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 13-171 AP- PROVING THE SUMARY OF ORDINANCE 113-12 AND ORDERING THE PUBLICATION OF SAID SUMMARY. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. Consider Approval of a Report Regarding Utility Billing Practices Accounting Manager Erickson reviewed the current practices for disconnecting overdue utility billing, and of billing the renter rather than the landlord. McGuire: Stated he would like to move towards certifying water bills rather than shutting off water; and continue the practice of sending bills to renters with late notices to landlords. C. Erickson: Noted that current practice is to send late notices to owners. MOTION BY MCGUIRE, SECOND BY HEDBERG TO DIRECT STAFF TO CERTIFY OVER- DUE UTILITY BILLING TO ASSESSMENTS AND CONTINUE TO BILL RENTERS DIRECTLY. Morton: Asked at what point water would be turned off. McGuire: Replied it would never be turned off, rather the bills would be added to homeowner's taxes. City would automatically collect through taxes with built in late fees and administrative fees. Morton: Asked what the current timeline is for collecting delinquent accounts when services are shut off. J. Erickson: Replied that there is a shut-off process in place and multiple notices are sent. When it finally reaches the shut-off point, it prompts the resident to pay to reconnect the service. Typically, certification occurs when a renter is moving and there are few accounts that are being certified. Morton: Would like to continue current practice. Rosow: Stated he has discussed this issue with staff and in cases where water is shut off, there are significant liabilities that fall to the City including entering and digging into private property. In winter have to warm the soil to do that. All of which means the City has been tres- passing without a court order. Stated the League of Minnesota Cities recommends not engag- ing in a shut-off process and legislation was passed to allow certification. If the City chooses to continue with a shut-off process, it must assure it is not on private property or get a Court order DRAFT 11 12 13 City Council Meeting Minutes g to allow passage onto private property. Believes the Court would likely tell us there is a process for certification. Morton: Asked if communication to the resident that the City will be coming to shut off water is proper notice as other services such as phone or electricity are done that way. Rosow: Responded that other services can be terminated without entering private property. Notifying the resident that the City is shutting off the water does not provide legal access. Water stops are not always in the right of way. Added that it is time intensive for staff to determine whether a water stop is in the right of way. Morton: Asked the potential liability. Rosow: That the City has dug up private property. Soukup: If a renter is not paying the water bill and it is certified, the City will get paid because the owner will have to pay it. J. Erickson: Affirmed, noting it could take one to two years to be paid for a delinquent bill. McGuire: Believes that timeline would be less and noted that penalties and interest are at- tached so the City will not be losing money. Soukup: Sounds like it is standard practice with most cities. Keeney: Concurred that when a delinquent bill is certified against the tax roll, the City is certain to get the money eventually and he is not concerned about the City carrying that amount. Be- lieves the City should not be in the middle of a landlord vs. renter scenario and the account should be billed to the landlord. McGuire: Replied that the City would not be in the middle of it. A notice would be sent to the landlord when an account is overdue and the landlord can subtract the amount owed from the deposit. Most landlords understand that sewer and water costs go with the property. It is typi- cal for renters to pay the utilities. Hedberg: Stated that the League of Minnesota Cities recommends this to its members and the State legislature allows for certification in order to handle this. Presumes that is motivated by the trespass issue. Keeney: Asked if the City has liability if the water is turned off and the building becomes unin- habitable. Rosow: Replied that if a situation becomes unsanitary which can have impacts on neighbors, it pushes other issues dealing with neighborhood and livability. Code says a house must be con- nected to water. Keeney: Asked how people can live in a home if the water is shut off. Rosow: Agreed that is another reason to go towards the certification process and avoid the problems that come with shutting off the water. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire and Soukup. Nay by Morton. The motion carried. Consider Approval of a Report Regarding a Contract for an ERP Software System Finance Director Erickson and Assistant City Manager Kansier reviewed the report re- sponding to Council questions raised at an earlier work session including: costs for an ERP software system, annual maintenance costs and issues concerning finalizing contract language. Reviewed contracts that would come up and a proposal to delay certain renewals during the ERP implementation period. Reviewed peripheral costs to implementation such as additional IT services, hardware and training laptops. Keeney: Referred to language about financial statements and asked if the proposed vendor considers this sale as a software service. Erickson: Replied the vendor believes it would be more appropriate for a software service company to provide a SAS 70. They will not be hosting the data. Keeney: Noted that software becomes outdated quickly, so assurances that they will be in a position to provide for years to come will be necessary. DRAFT 11 12 13 City Council Meeting Minutes 1� Erickson: Replied that the City can own the source code for the software for a fee. Keeney: Noted that it is pretty standard with small businesses that if they become insolvent, the source code is escrowed. Hedberg: Even larger businesses arrange to have the code go into escrow. Erickson: That was addressed at today's discussion and it would be available for less than $1,000 per year. Keeney: Believes the escrow will be an item they will have to add to the contract. Asked if the additional project manager and IT resources would be someone we have to hire. Erickson: Replied that the City received multiple proposals for project management, but the cost came in higher than anticipated so options are being considered which will be brought back to the Council. Keeney: Asked about the period of time project management is desired. Erickson: Through some period of time following go-live. A number of firms have submitted proposals and would dedicate an individual but the whole firm would be available as a resource. Keeney: Commented that his experience has been that if you have a firm and a pool of peo- ple, you won't get a dedicated person. Erickson: Proposal asks the person or persons to be identified. Keeney: Data conversion costs seemed higher than his recollection. Erickson: Replied that, as part of the kick off, there will be discussion of how much information we want to convert. Will be billed only for conversions we go forward with. In response to the area of IT resources, we need to determine what the need is. Assume we will use the current provider. Hedberg: This has been in process for three years and this is the next step in the process. MOTION BY SOUKUP, SECOND BY MCGUIRE TO DIRECT STAFF TO CONTINUE NEGO- TIATIONS WITH BSA AND BRING ITEM BACK TO COUNCIL ON NOVEMBER 25. VOTE: Ayes by Hedberg, Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup. The motion carried. ADJOURNMENT With no further business brought before the Council, a motion to adjourn was made by Morton and seconded by Soukup. The motion carried and the meeting adjourned at 9:49 p.m. Frank Boyles, City Manager Charlotte Green, Administrative Assistant DRAFT 11 12 13 City Council Meeting Minutes 11