Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04 28 14 City Council Meeting Minutes 4646 Dakota Street SE Prior Lake, MN 55372 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 28, 2014 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. Present were Mayor Hedberg, Councilors Keeney, McGuire, Morton and Soukup, City Manager Boyles, City Attorney Rosow, City Engineer / Inspections Director Poppler, Project Engineer Thongvanh, Public Works / Natural Resources Director Gehler, Finance Director Erickson, Community and Economic Development Director Rogness, Code Enforcement Officer Stefanisko, Police Chief O’Rourke, Assistant City Manager Meyer and Executive Assistant Deppe. 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 governmental topics rather than private or political agendas. Topics may be addressed at the public forum that are on the agenda. However, topics that are the subject of a public hearing are best addressed at the public hearing, not at public forum. Therefore, topics may not be addressed at public forum if: (i) the topic has been the subject of a public hearing before the City Council or any City Advisory Committee and the Council has not taken action on the topic; or (ii) if the topic is the subject of a scheduled or continued public hearing or public information hearing on the current agenda or at a future meeting before the City Council or any City Advisory Committee. During public forum, a member of the public may request that the City Council consider removing an item from the Consent Agenda following the procedure set forth in Section 401.5. 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. Hedberg: Welcomed everybody and introduced Boyles to explain public forum process. Patrick Quinn (14160 Rolling Oaks Circle NE): Discussed the email he recently sent to the Mayor and Council regarding Mello-Roos Act in California which enables certain communities to be established by local government agencies as a means of obtaining community funding. These communities raise money through special taxes to finance major improvements and services within the community. Mr. Quinn encouraged councilmembers to explore similar alternative fee structures. Also noted that the development would be obtaining city sewer and water through discounted volume rates. Inquired whether property owners would be eligible for same discounts. Curt Stone (14111 Rolling Oaks Circle NE): Noted that he sent letters to councilmembers and that he recently obtained information regarding a new feasibility study related to the Rolling Oaks project and thanked council for working to decrease related costs. Feels that the new development east of the Rolling Oaks neighborhood is the reason the project is being implemented and feels the developer should contribute more to the costs the Rolling Oaks property owners are incurring. With no others interested in speaking, the City Council provided the following comments: Hedberg: Explained process of public forum and thanked speakers for their input and time. 1 APPROVAL OF AGENDA Boyles: Requested to remove consent agenda item 5M. MOTION BY MCGUIRE, SECOND BY MORTON TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Soukup Aye ☒☒☒☒☒ Nay ☐☐☐☐☐ The motion carried. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES MOTION BY MORTON , SECOND BY KEENEY TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE APRIL 14, 2014 CITY COUNCIL MEETING. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Soukup Aye ☒☒☒☒☒ Nay ☐☐☐☐☐ The motion carried. CONSENT AGENDA City Manager Boyles reviewed the items on the consent agenda. A. Consider Approval of Invoices to be Paid B. Consider Approval of March 2014 Treasurers Report C. Consider Approval of Police Department Report for February D. Consider Approval of Resolution 14-064 Approving a Work Order Contract with Honeywell Related to the Guaranteed Energy Savings Program and Authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to Execute Same E. Consider Approval of Resolution 14-065 Approving the Final Plat for Godsons Way, the Development Contract and Authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to Execute a Development Contract F. Consider Approval of Resolution 14-066 Approving the Appointment of Adam Proehl to the Technology Village Board of Directors G. Consider Approval of a Report Establishing Key Dates and Topics Related to the Preparation of the 2015 Budget and CIP H. Consider Approval of a Resolution 14-067 Accepting Donations and Grants to the City During the First Quarter of 2014 I. Consider Approval of a Motion Calling for a Public Hearing to Amend Subsections 704.500 and 704.600 of the City Code Related to the Sewer and Water Fee Deferral Program J. Consider Approval of a Motion Calling for a Public Hearing to Amend the 2030 Comprehensive Land Use Plan and to Amend the Official Zoning Map Related to Approximately 22 Acres Southwest of the Intersection of County Roads 21 and 87 K. Consider Approval of Resolution 14-068 and Resolution 14-069 Approving an Addendum to Two Sprint/City of Prior Lake Water Tower Antenna Agreements and Authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to Execute Same L. Consider Approval of a Motion Calling for a Public Hearing to Amend Subsections 1101.10 and 1104.307 of the City Code Relating to Mooring Facilities, Controlled Access Lots and Marinas M. Consider Approval of a Resolution Approving the Final Plat for Markley Lake Woods and the Development Contract Items Removed: 5C (Keeney) and 5I (Morton). 2 04 28 14 City Council Meeting Minutes MOTION BY KEENEY , SECOND BY MORTON TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS AMENDED. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Soukup Aye ☒☒☒☒☒ Nay ☐☐☐☐☐ The motion carried. PRESENTATIONS: 6A. Presentation: A Report on the 2013 Code Enforcement Activity Stefanisko: Provided overview of the role of Code Enforcement as provided in staff report including the purpose of code enforcement, the inspection process, education and outreach, website information, common code violations and 2013 activity via a PowerPoint presentation. Topics included current and historical statistics, emerging issues, and challenges/opportunities related to code enforcement. Noted that in the past, violations were counted as one property and one violation and now the reporting method counts multiple violations on one property. Morton: Asked if we have increased the inventory of gravel driveways since 2009. Stefanisko: Stated that he did not believe that driveways have increased but that the parking areas have expanded where people have added stone on the sides of their driveways, which is also a code violation. Morton: Asked what was the intention of the 5-year timeline when the ordinance was implemented in 2009. Stefanisko: Stated that he did not know what the intent was. Poppler: Explained the intent was to get the owners of the gravel driveways to transition to paved surfaces. Doesn’t believe there has been a lot of education on this issue and that’s why we are informing people that this is an emerging issue and that they may need to take action. Believes that citizens may criticize city for not forewarning them regarding the enforcement of this code and that the city may want to consider its plan of action prior to the June 9 expiration date. th Morton: Asked what would be specifically recommend at this point. Poppler: Suggested that one option would be to extend the expiration period by another year. Morton: Expressed concerns related to this issue becoming endless if the city would continually extend the expiration period. Stefanisko: Invited council to direct exploring the different options available. Morton: Asked if the impending expiration date has been reiterated since 2009 to the property owners who are subject to this violation. Stefanisko: Noted that if he has made contact with a property in violation that he has made them aware of both the violation and the approaching expiration date. Keeney: Asked for clarification regarding whether storing recreational equipment on gravel is also a violation of this code. Stefanisko: It would not be a violation if the property owner would park recreational equipment on a section of gravel on the property. Keeney: Would like to see clarification in the ordinance as to how it would be applied. Asked if the ordinance prohibits all gravel parking areas even if they are used for non-vehicle use. Stefanisko: Indicated that all gravel parking areas are prohibited according to the ordinance, including miscellaneous storage surfaces and industrial lots as it is currently written. Keeney: Recommended making a clear distinction in the ordinance regarding which types of gravel surfaces are acceptable and which are prohibited, including seasonal parking lots. Noted that he is in favor of eliminating gravel parking surfaces in residential and retail/commercial areas but that we may want to examine whether or not we want to include industrial lots. 3 04 28 14 City Council Meeting Minutes Hedberg: Commented on positive city beatification statistics that were presented at the 2040 Visioning session and thanked Stefanisko and his team for working diligently to resolve code enforcement violations. Noted that he did not believe it is reasonable for us to start announcing aggressive enforcement regarding gravel driveways after five years. Recommended a review of the language in the ordinance and devise a plan to notify residents of the violation and consider extending the expiration date. Poppler: Agreed that several sections of the code could be clarified and requested direction from council on making revisions. Keeney: Shared that he has heard positive comments on the increased awareness and community pride resulting from city cleanup enforcement and resident self-initiation. Feels this is the right direction for the City to proceed. Recommend continuing at this level of enforcement. Hedberg: Rather than go through all the issues highlighted, suggested that the staff report indicates that “in the absence of direction to the contrary, the staff will work with the City Attorney to clarify the following for future council consideration” and it includes a whole bunch of different city code sections. I think the answer to that is “yes”. This is worth some further work, particularly on the gravel driveways. McGuire: Recommended amending the motion to temporarily cease issuing citations regarding gravel surfaces after the expiration period until further review of the language in the ordinance. Keeney: Recommended deferring enforcement until a plan is in place to mitigate the suddenness of the expiration period. There was concurrence on this point. MOTION BY KEENEY, SECOND BY MCGUIRE TO ACCEPT THE REPORT ON THE 2013 CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITY AS AMENDED. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Soukup Aye ☒☒☒☒☒ Nay ☐☐☐☐☐ The motion carried. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7A. Continuation of Public Hearing for Proposed Amendments to the 2014 Official Fee Schedule Boyles: Reminded that the council continued the public hearing regarding certain amendments to the 2014 Official Fee Schedule from the last meeting to solicit input from the Builder’s Association of the Twin Cities. Recommended continuing the hearing again to May 12 to give staff the opportunity to get together with those th representatives who wish to make a comment. MOTION BY SOUKUP, SECOND BY MCGUIRE TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE 2014 OFFICIAL FEE SCHEDULE TO MAY 12. TH VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Soukup Aye ☒☒☒☒☒ Nay ☐☐☐☐☐ The motion carried. 7B. Hearing for Vacation Roadway Easement within Godsons Way Plat Rogness: Explained that because council took action on consent item 5E to approve the final plat of Godsons Way, an associated action is necessary to vacate the roadway easement that was in existence prior to the new plat. Further explained that the purpose of the public hearing is to receive public comment on vacating a final plat with a full right-of-way for the new cul-de-sac to: 1) make the determination of whether it is in conformance with the plan; and 2) is there a public need to retain this easement. Staff recommends approval of this vacation based on their review and feels that because of the final plat, this easement is no longer necessary. 4 04 28 14 City Council Meeting Minutes MOTION BY MORTON, SECOND BY SOUKUP TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR VACATION ROADWAY EASEMENT WITHIN GODSONS WAY PLAT. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Soukup Aye ☒☒☒☒☒ Nay ☐☐☐☐☐ The motion carried. Opened public hearing at 8:00 p.m. No people chose to speak on this item. MOTION BY SOUKUP, SECOND BY KEENEY TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Soukup Aye ☒☒☒☒☒ Nay ☐☐☐☐☐ The motion carried. Closed public hearing at 8:01 p.m. MOTION BY MCGUIRE, SECOND BY KEENEY TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 14-072 PROVIDING FOR THE VACATION OF A ROADWAY EASEMENT LOCATED WITHIN THE GODSONS WAY PLAT VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Soukup Aye ☒☒☒☒☒ Nay ☐☐☐☐☐ The motion carried. OLD BUSINESS 8A. Consider Approval of a Motion to Renew and Two Resolutions Pertaining to the Rolling Oaks Improvement Project, City Project #14-013: 1) Motion To Renew Discussion in Consideration of The Feasibility Report; 2) Approve Resolution 14-070 Accepting the Feasibility Report and Establish a Public Hearing Date; and 3) Approve Resolution 14-071 Authorizing Staff To Submit A Point Source Implementation Grant Application To The Minnesota Public Facilities Authority (PFA) and to Authorize the Mayor and City Manager to Execute a Grant Agreement on Behalf of the City MOTION BY MCGUIRE, SECOND BY SOUKUP TO RENEW DISCUSSION IN CONSIDERATION OF THE FEASIBILITY REPORT. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Soukup Aye ☒☒☒☒☒ Nay ☐☐☐☐☐ The motion carried. Poppler: Reviewed the agenda item consistent with the staff report. Discussed changes since previous consideration in October, including: 1) renewed development interest on that property; 2) grant options were looked at as a source for possible funding for the project; 3) assessment policy revision which allowed more flexibility in use of trunk funds for projects similar to this one; and 4) the Assessment Review Committee has looked at alternative ways to help with these projects. In March, we saw a development proposal from Pulte Homes for the site to the east. The most ideal way to serve a good portion of the lots on the neighboring parcel is to have sewer and water connect and brought to Rolling Oaks Circle. Pulte is continuing to work with property owners in finalizing the purchase agreement for the property within the next 30 days. The 5 04 28 14 City Council Meeting Minutes Assessment Review Committee has met and worked diligently to move these projects forward while trying to keep the associated costs manageable for the homeowners. Extensive research and comparable analysis has been invested in this project to make certain that the associated costs are necessary, on par with similar projects and potential money saving options are explored. Requested a public hearing be held on May 27 th to move forward with the project, with a neighborhood meeting be held prior to the hearing to present up-to- date information to the residents. Keeney: Clarified that we are accepting the feasibility report as amended with the added information. Soukup: Asked for clarification regarding the decreased amount of the current and deferred assessments as compared to the original proposals of each. Poppler: Noted there were multiple funding sources that weren’t initially utilized and that have been added. The Assessment Review Committee is recommending a deferral option for the larger lots. With that deferral option there is an administrative subdivision that would occur. Soukup: Asked for clarification regarding the grant. Asked if the grant would match 50% for the sanitary sewer and if the $60,000 is the 50% match or the total. Poppler: Confirmed that is the 50%. Not all of the associated costs are eligible for that grant. The purpose of the grant is to get properties hooked up. There are additional units that are being built with this project and subdivision will occur – those are not grant eligible and those portions need to be deducted. The 50% amount only includes the dwelling units. Soukup: Asked if this is for what is currently in place right now; not future development. Morton: Requested clarification regarding the funding scenarios. The alternative roadway section is a reduction of $30,000 – doesn’t that mean that the total project cost should be $30,000 less? Did we reduce it by $30,000 or was it displaced elsewhere in the calculation? Our previous and our current both say $912,000, so shouldn’t the new one be $882,000? Poppler: Clarified the total project cost would be reduced by $30,000. Morton: Asked if the total would then be $882,000. Poppler: Confirmed the amount would be $882,000 Cautioned that these are estimated calculations and the final numbers will be determined once the final bids are received. Morton: Asked for the status of the Assessment Committee’s recommendation to have an additional contribution from the builder. Poppler: Confirmed the builder is currently reviewing this inquiry and a response is expected within the next 30 days. Morton: Requested confirmation that the estimated special assessment of the sewer and water has been reduced from $12,000 to $3,700 per unit and the street and storm sewer has also been reduced from $25,700 to $22,400. Poppler: Confirmed that is correct. Morton: Asked if it could be further reduced if Pulte contributes more. Poppler: Confirmed that is a possibility depending upon how the Council treats the contribution. Morton: Requested additional comment regarding Mr. Quinn’s statement regarding discounted water and sewer rates. Poppler: Stated that Mr. Quinn’s wife (Mary Quinn) asked if there are discounted rates available based on the large scale of Pulte’s projects for construction. Morton: Asked if water/sewer rates are the same regardless of it being new construction or an existing home. Poppler: Yes, it is based on our universal fee schedule for sewer and water rates. Mary Quinn: Clarified her question was regarding economies of scale related to construction costs. Soukup: Expressed concern regarding depleting future trunk funds. Directed staff to perform a study and write a report on properties that are scheduled to be affected by these types of changes and to confirm that the trunk funds will not be diminished for future use. Would like to begin educating and forewarning current property owners of these impending changes to allow for budgeting and planning options. 6 04 28 14 City Council Meeting Minutes Keeney: Also expressed concern regarding using trunk funds responsibly. Agreed that a study should be performed. Hedberg: Discussed historical sewer assessments, how the city has managed the trunk funds and unforeseen trunk fund usage in the future. Morton: As part of the Assessment Committee, Morton noted this was taken into consideration at the time the recommendation was made. Boyles: Asked if the staff would need to conduct the report prior to preliminary plat. Expressed concern that the city may not have the necessary resources to do so and would result in being drawn from the trunk fund. Hedberg: Felt an imposed deadline was unnecessary. Keeney: Agreed that a rush-basis was unnecessary. Morton: Confirmed that the timeline for the report would be based on staff availability. MOTION BY SOUKUP, SECOND BY MCGUIRE DIRECTING STAFF TO PREPARE A TRUNK FUND RATE REPORT AND CONDUCT AN INVENTORY OF AFFECTED PROPERTIES. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Soukup Aye ☒☒☒☒☒ Nay ☐☐☐☐☐ The motion carried. Keeney: Asked for clarification regarding how many units the assessment included. Thongvanh: Confirmed it is based on nine units. Poppler: Noted that if they move onto the design phase, they will review the survey information to determine how many units we have at that time. Keeney: Asked for confirmation regarding whether the deferral is available for undeveloped property, and whether properties with a home require some sort of subdivision or process that the owners would have to go through to make sure that they would be eligible for deferral. Asked when would they have to begin the process and complete it to make sure that that they are eligible for that. Poppler: Advised they would have to go through a process of carving out the dwelling from the rest of the large tract and that would have to occur in conjunction with the review of the assessment. Noted the assessment hearing would occur after the bid is received which would be in approximately September; however, if we receive the grant, it would be sometime next year. Keeney: Wanted to give property owners advanced notice that there is a process to enable their properties to have the assessment be deferred so they have time to plan accordingly. Asked if the developer pays the same unit connection fee. Poppler: Yes. Keeney: Asked if there was a plan to roll the ability to defer the hookup fees into the assessment. Poppler: Yes. Keeney: Noted that the city will carry those costs for 5 years, and with interest rates currently being low, city costs would be minimal. Asked if the projects coincide, could the economies of scale be applied. Poppler: Explained current process of obtaining bids and timelines involved. Believed it may be possible to obtain better bids if building schedules coincide but if the grant is pursued, there is less flexibility. McGuire: Noted that the sanitary sewer assessment that is being proposed is $609 and the water main is $3,000 – believed the developer is not getting that done that inexpensively. Believed cost would increase considerably if we combine projects. Pleased that Pulte Homes is offering something to reduce costs for the home owners. Commended staff for reducing the costs. Hedberg: Explained embedded costs for developer imposed by city. Reiterated that these were not the final numbers on this project. Wanted to provide concrete illustrations to the public about the policy to make the assessment amounts comparable to similar projects. 7 04 28 14 City Council Meeting Minutes Morton: Asked when we will receive an answer on the grant. Poppler: Estimated a response on the grant would come sometime in June and if we are successful at that stage, we will need to provide more information to proceed. Noted we will have a better idea within the next 30- 45 days. MOTION BY MCGUIRE, SECOND BY MORTON TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 14-070 ACCEPTING THE FEASIBILITY REPORT AND CALLING A PUBLIC HEARING ON MAY 27. TH VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Soukup Aye ☒☒☒☒☒ Nay ☐☐☐☐☐ The motion carried. MOTION BY KEENEY, SECOND BY MORTON TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 14-071 AUTHORIZING STAFF TO SUBMIT A POINT SOURCE IMPLEMENTATION GRANT APPLICATION TO THE MINNESOTA PUBLIC FACILITIES AUTHORITY (PFA) AND TO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A GRANT AGREEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Soukup Aye ☒☒☒☒☒ Nay ☐☐☐☐☐ The motion carried. 8B. Consider Approval of a Resolution Approving the Final Design for the Carriage Hills Parkway, Carriage Hill Road, and Crest Avenue Rehabilitation Project Poppler: Reviewed the agenda item consistent with the staff report. Addressed the questions and concerns raised at the neighborhood meeting that took place last week. Offered alternatives and solutions for proposed improvements as noted in staff report. Morton: Requested clarification of the specifics for the recommended alternatives related to speed control. Poppler: Recommended installing the two speed tables as a solution now because we are currently working on the pavement and it would be more difficult to add later. Noted that if the speed table does not resolve the issue, dynamic speed signs can be added later. Keeney: Believed the parking at issue would only be used by specific residents and that it is not close enough to the beach to be heavily utilized by the park. Poppler: Understood from the residents that some people are currently parking on the street that use the DNR access but it is further away from the beach. Keeney: Raised concerns regarding parking with proposed alternative 3. Noted that he favored a dynamic sign over the speed tables because of the potential cost to remove them if the desire arose in the future. Believed the park fees should be a separate action. Soukup: Asked if the dynamic speed sign would be visible and/or effective if parking and traffic were to obstruct the view. Poppler: Assured that it would be strategically placed to allow maximum visibility. Soukup: Believed there would be too much distraction to drivers occurring on this road for a dynamic speed sign to be effective. Hedberg: Discussed residential survey results that were presented at the 2040 Vision conference that noted citizens’ concerns regarding distracted driving. Expressed concern about this being a dangerous area. Asked what Poppler recommended regarding eliminating the parking fees on weekends. Poppler: Noted that he was unable to research that option due to time constraints. Hedberg: Felt that that eliminating parking fees would reduce street parking pressure. Motioned to amend this to eliminate the parking fee. 8 04 28 14 City Council Meeting Minutes Keeney: Questioned the process of making this motion and if it needed to be included in the fee schedule amendment. Morton: Asked if we charge parking fees at the other beaches. Poppler: Confirmed that we do not charge parking fees at the other beaches. Morton: Asked how much revenue the parking fee generates for the city. Poppler: Reported $10,000 in city revenue. McGuire: Asked if the $10,000 is profit or revenue. Hedberg: Clarified that it pays for the cost of having a staff member monitor the parking lot. Poppler: Confirmed that the cost was revenue. Meyer: Expressed concern that if the parking monitor were eliminated, the boats with trailers would monopolize the parking lot. Suggested that this matter be referred to the Parks Advisory Committee. MOTION BY HEDBERG, SECOND BY KEENEY TO AMEND MOTION TO INCLUDE ELIMINATING THE SUMMER PARKING FEE. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Soukup Aye ☒☒☐☐☐ Nay ☐☐☒☒☒ The motion failed. Keeney: Felt more input on speed control was needed and had concerns about the residents’ opinions regarding speed tables. Hedberg: Asked if the residents had any comments about the speed table. Poppler: Noted that the residents had concerns about speeding in general. Suggested the speed table because of resident feedback and the other options can be installed at a later date if necessary. Noted that the speed tables would be placed at crosswalks that would also slow traffic at those locations. MOTION BY KEENEY, SECOND BY MCGUIRE TO CONSIDER RESOLUTION 14-073 APPROVING THE FINAL DESIGN OF CARRIAGE HILLS PARKWAY, CARRIAGE HILL ROAD, AND CREST AVENUE REHABILITATION PROJECT #14-002 FOR THE CITY OF PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Soukup Aye ☒☒☒☒☒ Nay ☐☐☐☐☐ The motion carried. NEW BUSINESS No new business was scheduled. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA: 5C. Consider Approval of Police Department Report for February Keeney: Noted a growing sense of concern over the increased traffic violations/incidents over the past year. Concerned that we should take action to reduce this issue. Hedberg: Noted that the Morris Leatherman Residential Survey included this issue on resident perception. We should take an action to direct the Community Safety Advisory Committee. Keeney: Requested that this matter be referred to the Community Safety Advisory Committee, including input from the survey results. 9 04 28 14 City Council Meeting Minutes MOTION BY KEENEY, SECOND BY MCGUIRE TO AMEND THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE POLICE DEPARTMENT REPORT FOR FEBRUARY AND DIRECT MATTER TO COMMUNITY SAFETY ADVISORY COMMITTEE. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Soukup Aye ☒☒☒☒☒ Nay ☐☐☐☐☐ The motion carried. VOTE ON MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Soukup Aye ☒☒☒☒☒ Nay ☐☐☐☐☐ The motion carried. 5I. Consider Approval of a Motion Calling for a Public Hearing to Amend Subsections 704.500 and 704.600 of the City Code Related to the Sewer and Water Fee Deferral Program MOTION BY MORTON, SECOND BY SOUKUP TO APPROVE A MOTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING TO AMEND SUBSECTIONS 704.500 AND 704.600 OF THE CITY CODE RELATED TO THE SEWER AND WATER FEE DEFERRAL PROGRAM VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Soukup Aye ☒☒☒☒☒ Nay ☐☐☐☐☐ The motion carried. Morton: Asked if we are required to amend our policy in accordance to the Met Council’s changes? Rogness: Believed the city has ability to decide the parameters of the amounts; however, the staff feels that it would be appropriate to allow more eligible businesses to apply. Morton: Wanted to know the financial impact of expanding the criteria by which businesses qualify. Rogness: Noted that the EDA budgets for an expected amount of activity each year but it is difficult to estimate how much to budget because we only have one year of experience. Expected the response to be minimal. VOTE ON THE MAIN MOTION. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Soukup Aye ☒☒☒☒☒ Nay ☐☐☐☐☐ The motion carried. OTHER BUSINESS Hedberg: Noted that trees in the Hickory Shores and Maple Glenn neighborhoods were mistakenly removed by a developer and they are working cooperatively with the city staff to resolve this incident. ADJOURNMENT With no further business brought before the Council, a motion to adjourn was made by MORTON and seconded by KEENEY. The motion carried and the meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m. ___________________________________ Frank Boyles, City Manager 10 04 28 14 City Council Meeting Minutes