Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4-Minutes O� PRIOr ti U 4646 Dakota Street SE Prior Lake,MN 55372 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES March 23, 2015 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. Present were Mayor Hedberg, Councilors McGuire, Keeney, Morton and Thompson. Also present were Manager Boyles, Attorney Johnson, Attorney Schwarzhoff, Finance Director Erickson, Project Engineer Thongvahn, Code Enforcement Officer Stefanisko, Public Works Director Gehler, Water Resources Engineer Young, Police Lieutenant Hofstad, Fire Chief Hartman, and Executive Assistant Dull. PUBLIC FORUM Boyles: Reviewed the process for the public forum. Hedberg: Opened the Public Forum at 7:04 p.m. Bill Rudnicki (2330 Sioux Trail NIM: Asked the City of Prior Lake embrace the SMSC noting that the topic has not been talked about at the Council level but that it might be time. Commented that the Chamber of Commerce and new business community, Scott County, and the State have embraced the SMSC noting there is a benefit to the relationship between the SMSC and the City. Stated local businesses do work for the tribe and the business community has benefitted by having the SMSC here.Added that from a business standpoint, there were benefits that the Council may not see. Provided an example that the Rotary has embraced the SMSC community and that the SMSC has been the primary sponsor for the last six years of the Lakefront Music Fest which brings in thousands of people and is family friendly. Asked whether anyone else would take on that sponsorship as it is a significant cost. Added that nearly 700 citizens of Prior Lake are employed by the SMSC and during the down- turn of the economy, the SMSC was one of the few organizations that did not lay people off. Stated the SMSC offers great employment benefits and stated examples are Molly Carter, the SMSC employment manager, and Eric Zimmerman, who is also a Prior Lake Fire Department volunteer and both are Prior Lake residents. Both appreciate working for the Tribe and it works out to a benefit to Prior Lake. Commented that one of the goals of SCALE is to have 50% employment in the County and that between the four entertainment venues there would be a job fair with approximately 1100 jobs. Noted the SMSC's partnership with Belle Plaine, Scott County and MnDOT for the reconstruction of Hwy 169 intersection and the SMSC worked in partnership with the State to ensure all state squads had AED's in 2007. Stated there were sometimes concerns of the residents without acknowledging the benefits noting a water agreement with the City last year saved the City $3-5 million so the City wouldn't have to build new wells and incur maintenance costs. Asked that the City of Prior Lake embrace the SMSC and acknowledge the benefits and relationship between the two entities. Hedberg: Closed the Public Forum at 7:16 p.m. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION BY MCGUIRE, SECOND BY MORTON, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS WRITTEN. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Thompson Aye Nay ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Abstain ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Absent ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ The motion carried. 1 APPROVAL OF MARCH 9,2015 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MOTION BY THOMPSON, SECOND BY KEENEY, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES (]FTHE MARCH 9, 2015 CITY COUNCIL MEETING. VOTE Hedberg Keeney_ McGuire Morton Thompson Aye 0 129 N Nay O O O O O Abstain Z O O O O Absent O O O O O The motion carried. CONSENT AGENDA Boyles: Reviewed the items UOthe consent agenda. A. Consider Approval Cf Claims Listing B. Consider Approval nfthe February 2O15Treasurers Report C. Consider Approval VfBuilding Permit Summary Report D. Consider Approval ofAnimal Control Services Report E. Consider Approval ofFire Department Report F. Consider Approval of Resolution 15-043 Approving 8 Joint Powers Agreement between the City of Prior Lake and k4PCA0DFund the Monitoring and Testing ofIron Enhanced Sand Filters G. Consider Approval of Resolution 15-044 Authorizing the Maintenance Superintendent to Execute the Annual Contract between the City ofPrior Lake and the Cooperative Purchasing Venture for Road Salt H. Consider Approval of Resolution 15-045 Approving an Off-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License for Stone Lake 11 LLC dba MGM Wine&Spirits 1. Consider Approval 0faCigarette Licenm8fn[StoDeLake|{ LLCdboN1GK8VVine&GpiritD J. Consider Approval of Resolution 15-046 Adopting Findings of Fact' /#ffinDing the Suspension of the 2015 Tobacco License for Peter F|ink,dbaPrior Lake Shell,and Imposing oFine K. Consider Approval of Resolution 15-047 Awarding the City's Standardized Contract for Construction Services to Northdale Construction Company, Inc.for the 2015 County Road 21 Watermain Replacement Project L. Consider Approval of Resolution 15-048 Ratifying the 2015-2017 Collective Bargaining Agreement between the City nfPrior Lake and Teamsters Public and Law Enforcement Employees' UOiVO, Local No. 320. Representing Police Sergeants M. Consider Approval 0fResolution 15-049Approving aTemporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License for the Church of St. Michael N. Consider Approval of Reso\Ud0Du 15'050 and 15'051 for the Maple Lane, yNuahtown Road. Panama Avenue Improvement Project: 1) Accepting Proposals and Authorizing VV8B &ASsOCi8tes to Provide Construction Staking; and 2)Accepting Proposals and Authorizing Element Materials Technology to Provide Construction Testing [}. Consider Approval of Resolution 15-052 Approving Revisions to the City of Prior Lake Data Practices Procedures and Appointing 8Responsible Authority P. Consider Approval ot 1) Ordinance 115'U0Granting aFranchise toScott Rice Telephone Company db@ |nbaon8 Telecom To Construct, Operate, and Maintain a Cable CV0ADUOi:8UOns @votenO in the City ofPrior Lake, Minnesota Setting Forth Conditions Accompanying the Grant of the Franchise; Providing for Regulation and use of the System and the Public Rights-of-Way in Conjunction with the City's Right-of-Way Ordinance, Section 701; and Prescribing Penalties for the Violation of the Provisions Herein;2)Ordinance 115-09 Granting a Franchise to Mediacom Minnesota LLC to Construct,Operate,and Maintain a Cable Communications System in the City of Prior Lake,Minnesota Setting Forth Conditions Accompanying the Grant Vfthe Franchise; Providing for Regulation and use of the System and the Public Rights'of-VVaxiOConjunction VvidlUle City's Right-of-WavOrdinance, Section 7O1; and Prescribing Penalties for the ViO|@1k]O of the Provisions Herein; 3\ {lrdiO@OQR 115'10 Amending Part 3 of the Ph0[ Lake City Code by Replacing GeCh0n 308 Relating to Cable TV Franchises, Amending Part 10 of the Prior Lake Qb/ Code by adding Subsection 1005.1200 Relating to Cable Installation and Adopting by Reference City Code Part I Which Among Other Things Contains Penalty Provisions;4)Resolution 15'053Approving a Summary VfOrdinance Amending Part 30fthe I 03Z3zsChy[ound|Kxee^inVxxinutes Prior Lake City Code and Authorizing Publication of said Summary; 5) Resolution 15-054 Approving a Summary of Ordinance Granting a Franchise to Scott Rice Telephone Company dba Integra Telecom; and 6) Resolution 15-055 Approving a Summary of Ordinance Granting a Franchise to Mediacom Minnesota LLC MOTION BY MCGUIRE, SECOND BY THOMPSON TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS WRITTEN. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Thompson Aye ® ❑x Nay ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Abstain ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Absent ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ The motion carried. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7A. Public Hearing to Consider the Addition of Section 315 to the Prior Lake City Code Relating to Short Term Rental Boyles: Reviewed the staff report dated March 23,2015 in connection with the agenda item. Staff recommended the Council conduct the hearing and provide staff with direction. MOTION BY MORTON, SECOND BY MCGUIRE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:28 P.M. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Thompson Aye ® ❑x ® ® O Nay ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Abstain ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Absent ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ The motion carried. Brad Lindeman (2815 Spring Lake Rd.): Commented he has been a resident of Prior Lake for 26 years and thanked the Council for the opportunity to speak as well as thanked the staff for their work done on this topic. Stated he appreciated the workshop put on and that the draft ordinance will help but believed more could be done. Commented that short-term rentals don't fit in an R-1 single family zoned neighborhood and it was inappropriate because it is a business use. Noted there has been research done and suggestions made that these uses cannot be prohibited but asked for more work to be done. Commented that short term rentals have been compared to bed and breakfasts suggested using the parts of the Code that are already set up for those. Agreed that there is a responsibility to RiverSouth and businesses but also to the families in the neighborhoods. Suggested modifications to allow only 1 short term rental per 30 days to lessen the ins and outs every few days. Also suggested further restrictions on overnight guests, a publicly available list of all people staying in a short term rental for public safety purposes, and requiring an on-site agent during rental of the unit. Morton: Inquired about how many houses in Prior Lake are short term rentals, whether they are in one area or all over, and whether the homes are homestead. Also noted the primary season would be late spring to early fall and that the 90 days could be out of the season which means no penalties and new clock begins the following season and suggested revising to a 30 day violation timeline. Schwarzhoff: Commented she was unsure of the total number of short term rentals as they were not required to register but aware of at least 9. Stated the properties ranged from small to very large and that some were managed by a professional company but she was unsure whether these properties were homestead. 03 23 15 City Council Meeting Minutes 3 McGuire:Asked whether the City can prohibit short term rentals completly and suggested putting outside activity hour restrictions of 9:00 p.m. on weeknights and midnight on weekends. Also suggested allowing one rental per week and agreed with Councilor Morton's proposal of 30 days for violations. Keeney: Inquired about reinstating permits following suspension or revocation. Requested more clarity for the penalty and how long it lasts. Suggested instead of revocation, it is a fine for reinstatement similar to what was requested for tobacco licenses. Commented requirements for the agent to be available should be loosened to require only while the property is rented but still 24/7. Commented that this is a reasonable use of person's property and cautioned the Council to not go too far based on the irresponsible actions of one user. Stated didn't want to end short term rentals but more curtail the late party rentals. Also suggested keeping a registry of guests available to law enforcement for any disturbances. Thompson: Clarified with Attorney Schwarzhoff potential for short term rental zones and suggested the Council consider allowing only in some districts and not others to protect the homeowners in single family residential areas. Commented she was ok with long term rentals but not weekly short term rentals. Hedberg: Commented he did not support prohibiting in R-1 districts as he supported the right of people to rent their homes but also wanted to protect the neighbors. Suggested more proactive enforcement of the ordinance and conducting regular surveys and reviews. Stated that if proactive, Council would need to provide the staff resources to complete enforcement. Johnson: Clarified that if violation accumulation changes to 30 days as proposed, it would loosen restrictions allowing new violations to start over every 30 days so that if a violation occurs on the 1St day of the month and the 31 st day of the month, there would be no accumulation. Schwarzhoff: Commented that the Council council consider two things: 1) extend the violation period; as proposed it is any 3 strikes,whether a week or season,and out.Council could extend to 1 year to count everything from date to date; and 2) if there is a revocation, a property owner would not be eligible for a new license for a determined number of years which makes the penalties stricter. Thompson: Stated that if moving forward with the ordinance, she would like to see it as strict as possible, would like restrictions providing for no outdoor activity after 9 p.m. and commented that these felt like a business to her and asked whether there was some kind of taxing code that they should be looking at. Hedberg: Stated the mechanism to do tax would be lodging tax. Commented the consensus of the Council is to support one rental per week. Asked Attorney Schwarzhoff to clarify what constitutes a guest. Schwarzhoff: Advised the overnight guest limit excludes anyone under 3 years of age and therefore, anyone over 3 is counted. Explained the numbers proposed were determined by the general consensus of the workshop. Hedberg: Clarified that because the proposed would count everyone over 3, there was not an issue of having numerous couples and their kids in one rental. Stated posting other applicable ordinances may provide added solutions. Thompson: Suggested including in the ordinance a limit to the number of people total. Keeney: Suggested making the property owner responsible for any fines or citations if guest cannot be located. 03 23 15 City Council Meeting Minutes 4 Schwarzhoff: Explained that there were two ways to enforce the first being police issuing a citation to whomever is breaking the law and noted citations for violation of any codes could be issued but that follow-up would be with the owner. Stated that Council did not have authority to impose a fine which is why the proposed ordinance has suspension/revocation which is the second way to enforce the ordinance. Confirmed the property owner would be liable under the ordinance. MOTION BY MCGUIRE,SECOND BY MORTON TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:08 PM AND DIRECT STAFF TO WORK WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY TO REVISE THE ORDINANCE BASED UPON COUNCIL'S DISCUSSION AND CONSENSUS. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Thompson Aye ® ® ® ® p Nay ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Abstain ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Absent ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ The motion carried. OLD BUSINESS 8A. Consider Approval of a Resolution Approving the Cooperative Agreement between the City of Prior Lake and the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community for the Construction and Maintenance of the Extension of Stemmer Ridge Road to CSAH 82/154th Street Boyles: Reviewed the staff report dated March 23,2015 in connection with the agenda item.Staff recommended approval of a resolution approving the agreement with the SMSC for the construction and maintenance of Stemmer Ridge Road. Hedberg: Noted issues are reaffirming the decision that this project needs to happen to extend utilities to the annexation area, that this particular agreement is with the owner of the property who happens to be the SMSC and the City would need to work with them to meet the needs of both communities, and the broader issue os SMSC acquisitions and fee trust applications. Keeney: Stated the goal of the agreement was to work cooperatively with SMSC on this road project and that the best way to narrow the cope of what is being discussed is to stop trying to negotiate the entire relationship with the SMSC. Commented that when going into negotiations, he was understanding that the project was important to the City's infrastructure and that was the consensus of all and both parties agreed on the location of the roadway. But, the piece that the parties are stuck on is whether we are doing this as a partnership or as an exchange of some form. Stated that as an exchange, there are problems because the City is being asked to exchange its position that it would like to object to certain land applications adding that we would have objected to this application if it weren't for the roadway. Was concerned that the exchange is too much of the City's future to not register objections especially when it comes to the next piece that the City needs and didn't want the City chasing the SMSC. Suggested stepping back from the exchange and work only on the cooperative agreement to get the road built noting that what has been drafted accomplishes that by removing the endorsed part and leaving that portion neutral. Commented he'd like to protect the City's objections to future problematic trust applications and that with a few minor tweaks, the agreement was ok as is but he wasn't sure if it was enough for the Tribe as they seem to want the endorsement. McGuire: Supported those comments asking for clarification of the alternative to move forward with. Keeney: Stated he'd like to remove the endorsement language in the agreement but he was open to specific language in the letter that seemed highly prejudicial to the application. Suggested removing everything after 2 in 03 23 15 City Council Meeting Minutes 5 the proposed letter so the City can still keep a foot in the door with the BIA for future events and so it sets the tone and consistency in applications. Morton: Commented that the City should not exchange its right to object in the future and should be based on the merits of the project rather than the value of what is being exchanged. Hedberg: Stated that the cooperation along the way is that they are offering to construct the City's infrastructure at their cost and provide permanent access as well as taking responsibility for the continued maintenance and repair noting that these are specific quantifiable benefits to the City. However,they will not construct until the land is in trust. Suggested that if the Council feels the desire to strengthen language in the agreement and letter, that they make this a specific case and not set precendent.Added that they could take the position to not stand in the way of this project, which then also not stand in the way of fee to trust as the project could cost the City more in the future. Commented that the Tribe already owns the land so it will never be on the City's tax rolls and thus, that should be a non-issue. Stated the letter as written reads as an objection to the trust application by the SMSC and they may not want to enter into the agreement. Thompson: Asked for confirmation that the City would lose $3 million in developer fees if the land goes to trust. Boyles: Advised the City would not lose$3 million as developer fees would be charged when connecting to the City's system which the SMSC will not be doing but stated he did not have the calculations to determine the actual number. Thompson: Asked whether or not the City would lose$1.3 million of developer fees. Hedberg: Explained fees for developments noting portions are building permit, park dedication, sewer and water trunk fees and others fees may apply,that the$3 million figure that has been discussed would include all of these, but that the SMSC would not be connecting to City utilities and not be using City services for their development. Keeney: Commented that if they approached this as if the SMSC owned the land before the City's plans, it would be different and that this seemed more like arms being twisted since there isn't any better way for the City to run its water and sewer. Stated it seemed inappropriate for us to give up and in the absence of arm twisting, the Council would have objections to the trust application. Commented that this was an intentional situation entered into by SMSC and that the Council has done a lot to move in their direction and he was concerned if they gave much more and pretend not to object, it could cost more in the future. Stated the intent should be that we are really not happy being put in this position but if this doesn't happen, then the ability to develop the annexation area may be impaired. Stated he was not ok with being leveraged into this position. McGuire:Commented that this has been discussed many times and the fact is the SMSC purchased the Menden farm and there is nothing the City Council can do about it and the property will never be developed by the SMSC unless it is in trust. Added that the City needs Stemmer road and the utilities and regardless, the SMSC will ultimately prevail in putting the land into trust. Stated the City could spend a lot of money fighting but nothing will come of it and that he disagreed with spending $6-9 million to get the street and utilities in using other directions. Stated he didn't necessarily like it but suggested Councilors be practical and agree that they be clear that this agreement only deals with this parcel of land and does not apply to future parcels in the City but to make a decision and move on. Keeney: Explained that the objections are not aimed at preventing the land trust and the significant issue is the relationship with the SMSC. Added that we want to be in partnership but need to pay attention to the things that 03 23 15 City Council Meeting Minutes 6 are important to us. Commented the whole premise that this letter would not completely turn over the project but more about putting it out for the future. Stated he was willing to move forward with a few tweaks that get the project done and preserves our position. It would accomplish the goal without giving up our position to be an equal partner and not feel it is inevitible for them to do whatever. Hedberg: Stated that they have been told this letter would not be acceptable to them and while the Council can approve with modifications, but that he thought the Council knows the SMSC's answer. MOTION BY MCGUIRE, SECOND BY HEDBERG TO TAKE NO ACTION ON THE SMSC AGREEMENT AND DIRECT STAFF TO COOPERATE WITH THE SMSC FOR THE PURPOSE OF ASSURING THAT THE ROADWAY AND UTILITIES ARE INSTALLED IN THE LOCATION HERETOFORE CONTEMPLATED AT THE BEST POSSIBLE COST TO THE CITY. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Thompson Aye X ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Nay ❑ ® ❑ Abstain ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Absent ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ The motion failed. Keeney: Suggested edits to the agreement in hopes of strengthening the City's position with the BIA to help with obtaining road right of way and would ratify the road and utilities being constructed. Commented that maybe the parties can negotiate a different letter. Thompson: Asked if Councilor Keeney could review and approve the language changes once they are made and before the agreement and letter are distributed. McGuire: Responded that it would be inappropriate for an individual councilmember to review final documents but that he was open to at least considering SMSC suggestions for modification. MOTION BY KEENEY, SECOND BY MORTON, WITH FRIENDLY AMENDMENT BY HEDBERG ACCEPTED BY COUNCILORS TO IDENTIFY ALIGNMENT CONCEPT F, TO RATIFY THE AGREEMENT AS WRITTEN WITH THE FOLLOWING MODIFICATIONS: 1) PAGE 1 OF 15, ITEM G, CHANGE"SUPPORT AND ENDORSE" TO "RESPOND TO" AND ADD AFTER THE WORD "APPLICATION" THE LANGUAGE "IN THE FORM ATTACHED'; 2) PAGE 2 OF 15, ITEM 2, ADD CONCEPT "F"; 3) PAGE 2 OF 15, ITEM 4, CHANGE "ENDORSING" TO "RESPONSIVE TO"AND CHANGE "ENDORSING LETTER" TO "LETTER"; 4) PAGE 3 OF 15, TOP OF PAGE, CHANGE REMOVE THE WORD "ENDORSEMENT" FROM "ENDORSEMENT LETTER"; 5) LEAVE THE PROPOSED LETTER ATTACHED AS IS; 6) PAGE 4 OF 15, ITEM 15, INCORPORATE LANGUAGE FROM A PREVIOUS DRAFT OF THE LETTER TO THE EFFECT OF "SMSC WILL NEGOTIATE IN GOOD FAITH AND WILL NOT PURSUE LAND WITHIN ANNEXATION AREA". VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Thompson Aye ❑ ® 0 ❑ ❑ Nay ® ❑ ❑ Abstain ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Absent ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ The motion failed. McGuire: Stated the Council has exhausted its options and suggested moving on with no cooperative agreement at this point. 03 23 15 City Council Meeting Minutes 7 8B. Consider Approval of a Resolution Accepting Proposals, Entering into the City's Standardized Professional Services Agreement for Engineering Services for the Stemmer Ridge Road Extension Project(TRN14- 000004)and Authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to Execute said Agreement Boyles: Reviewed the staff report dated March 23,2015 in connection with the agenda item. Staff recommended approval of a resolution awarding the City's Standardized Professional Servies Agreement with WSB & Associates for the Stemmer Ridge Road Extension Project. Keeney: Asked Attorney Johnson for explanation regarding acquiring right of way from land held by SMSC not in trust. Johnson: Explained there were two layers of risk and with regard to acquisition, once plans and specifications are completed, they would need approximately six months to conduct an eminent domain quick take process but noted that the property could go into trust during that time. Added that City resources and time would also have been put into the project. The potential risk that the tribe would say the City can't acquire land under MN law, there is a chance that the City could win that argument. Hedberg: Commented that Attorney Rosow indicated that the City could not use the quick take process and confirmed with Attorney Johnson that the quick take process would be five to six months following completion of plans and specifications. Also confirmed with Project Engineer Thongvahn that design would take three to four months to complete plans and specifications. Noted that this timeline would be roughly the end of the year. Keeney: Inquired about the special assessment risk. Johnson: Advised it would be in several forms but the process could start once the project is completed noting that the same standards of whether or not there was a special benefit to the properties on either side exist and the Tribe's argument could be that they would be using their own system. Stated the other question is whether there would be benefit and that the special assessment process would have to beat the application to trust so the BIA could take it into trust with assessments.Added that the City could likely defend the assessments as long as the land did not go into trust but if in trust, it would be highly unlikely to collect. Advised there was a difference between assessing before trust versus once it is federal land and it would not be a sure thing either way Hedberg: Noted that if assessed and land is in trust, the feds would determine whether or not to accept assessments. Asked whether the Tribe would challenge on the basis of special benefit or immunity. Keeney:Stated previously there was significant doubt for collection.Commented that they may look at how much was spent or how things are applied and that the City may not be able to collect special assessments when the property is in trust but they may be able to collect now. Stated he had mixed feelings about delaying the project and they would have had plans in hand at this point had it not been delayed but agreed not to spend the money if it is not going through. MOTION BY HEDBERG, SECOND BY MCGUIRE TO DENY AND NOT PURSUE THE 429 PROCESS DUE TO RISKS OF EMINENT DOMAIN, SPECIFICALLY ACQUISITION AND COLLECTION OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Thompson Aye ® ❑ ® ® ❑ Nay ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Abstain ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Absent ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 03 23 15 City Council Meeting Minutes 8 The motion carried. NEW BUSINESS 9A. Consider Approval of Resolutions Authorizing the Negotiated Sales of General Obligation Bonds Series 2015A and 2015B Erickson: Reviewed the staff report dated March 23, 2015 in connection with the agenda item. Staff recommended adoption of two resolutions authorizing the issuance of General Obligation Bonds, Series 2015A and Series, 2015B. Tammy Omdal (Northland Securities, underwriter for sale of bonds): Explained the resolutions in further detail noting that Series 2015A would approve bond purchase agreement in the max of$10 million and that the true interest costs to be at or below 3.0%while 2015B is for$5.2 million and the true interest cost would be at or below 2.65%. Morton: Asked whether it would make more sense to have the balance of refunding portion for 2015B at test level of 8%so they are married at the same point. Omdal: Explained the 3% recommendation is to keep a minimum of 3% for both taxable and tax exempt and based upon current conditions, the 8% assumption would be reasonable and that is why there is the minimum threshold. MOTION BY THOMPSON, SECOND BY MCGUIRE TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 15-056 AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE OF 2015A BONDS AND RESOLUTION NO. 15-057 AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE OF 2015B BONDS. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Thompson Aye Nay ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Abstain ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Absent ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ The motion carried. 9B. Consider Approval of two Resolutions calling for a Public Hearing on: 1)the Proposed Modification of the Development Program for Municipal Development District No. 1:the Proposed Establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-5;the Proposed Adoption of the Tax Increment Financing Plan Therefore; and 2)a Proposal for Housing Finance Program and the Issuance of Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds Pursuant to Minnesota Law and Authorizing the Publication of Notice of Hearing Rogness: Reviewed the staff report dated March 9,2015 in connection with the agenda item.Staff recommended approval of two resolutions calling for public hearings. Keeney: Asked whether adopting the resolutions would set the amount of the TIF and confirmed with staff that the direction for TIF amounts would be the direction the Council provided in work session. Rogness: Confirmed that the amount of the TIF would not be included in the resolution noting that staff received some direction at the work session so that information would be brought back to Council. Hedberg: Asked that the amount be part of the staff report before the public hearing. 03 23 15 City Council Meeting Minutes 9 MOTION BY MCGUIRE, SECOND BY MORTON TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 15-058 CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED MODIFICATION OF THE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 1; THE PROPOSED ESTABLISHMENT OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1-5; THE PROPOSED ADOPTION OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN THEREFORE. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Thompson Aye Nay ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Abstain ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Absent ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ The motion carried. Morton: Asked Ms. Omdal to explain conduit bonds for the public. Omdal: Explained that the City is being asked to serve as the conduit or the issuer but will not have an obligation on the bond and it would not affect the City's debt level or credit rating. It was only to use the tax exempt status. MOTION BY THOMPSON, SECOND BY MCGUIRE TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 15-059 CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROPOSAL FOR A HOUSING FINANCE PROGRAM AND THE ISSUANCE OF MULTIFAMILY HOUSING REVENUE BONDS PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA LAW, AND AUTHORIZING THE PUBLICATION OF A NOTICE OF THE HEARING. VOTE Hedberg Keeney McGuire Morton Thompson Aye Nay ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Abstain ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Absent ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ The motion carried. OTHER BUSINESS 1 COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS Morton: Commented she would not be at the Council meeting on April 13 and wanted to say good-bye to Jerilyn Erickson, thank her for everything, and wish her luck in the next endeavor. ADJOURNMENT With no further business brought before the Council, a motion to adjourn was made by THOMPSON, seconded by MORTON. The motion carried and the meeting adjourned at 9:26 p.m. VAL Frank la6dp4, dipy Manager 03 23 15 City Council Meeting Minutes 10