HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda & Minutes
City Council Work Session - 5:00 - 7:00 p.m.
Truth in Taxation Public Hearing for Proposed 1999 City Budgets
7:00 p.m.
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA
Date: DECEMBER 7, 1998
1. CALL TO ORDER................................................................................ 7:30p.m.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
4. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF PREVIOUS MEETING MINUTES:
A. November 16, 1998
B. November 18, 1998 (Special Meeting)
5. CONSENT AGENDA: Those items on the Council Agenda which are considered routine and
non-controversial are included as part of the Consent Agenda. Unless the Mayor, a Councilmember,
or member of the public specifically requests that an item on the Consent Agenda be removed and
considered separately. Items on the Consent Agenda are considered under one motion, second and a
roll call vote. Any item removed from the "Consent Agenda" shall be placed on the City Council
Agenda as a separate category.
A. Consider Approval of Invoices to Be Paid
B. Consider Approval of Sale of Excess City Vehicle
C. Consider Approval of Resolution 98-XX Authorizing the Purchase of One 1999 One
Ton Four Wheel Drive Pick-up Truck and One 1999 One Ton Utility Truck
D. Consider Approval of Change Order No. 1 to the Contract for Reconstruction of
Wellhouse #3
E. Consider Approval of the following Resolutions:
1. Resolution 98-XX Declaring Costs to be Assessed and Ordering Preparation
of Proposed Assessment Roll for Project 97-17, Pike Lake Trail Improvement
2. Resolution 98-XX Establishing the Date ofthe Assessment Hearing for
Project 97-17, Pike Lake Trail Improvements
F. Consider Approval of Massage Therapy License for Marion Lannon
6. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA:
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph, (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
City Council Meeting Agenda
December 7, 1998
Page 2 of2
7. PRESENTATIONS:
A. Presentation of Proclamation to Scott County Officials for Completion of Major
Road Improvements in Prior Lake.
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Truth in Taxation Hearing for Proposed 1999 City Budgets (7:00 p.m.)
9. OLD BUSINESS:
A. Consider Approval of Ordinance 98-XX Amending Title 9, Chapter 5 of the Prior
Lake City Code concerning discharges into the Sanitary Sewer System.
10.
NEW BUSINESS:
A. Consider Approval of Ordinance 98-XX Approving an Amendment to the Zoning
Ordinance to Extend the Hours of Operation for Gymnastic Schools in the BP
(Business Park) District.
B. Consider Approval of Resolution 98-XX Amending Resolution 98-43 Approving the
Administrative Plat Request of Hillcrest Homes.
C. Consider Approval of Revisions to the Parks Division Winter Maintenance Policy.
^
i
11. OTHER BUSIN:ESS/COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS:
12. ADJOURNMENT:
120798,DOC
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
Date: November 16 , 1998
1. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Mader called the meeting to order and welcomed everyone to
the meeting. Present were: Mayor Mader, Councilmembers Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck,
and Wuellner, City Manager Boyles, Assistant City Manager Woodson, City Attorney Pace,
Planning Director Rye, Planning Coordinator Kansier, City Engineer IIkka.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Mader led the Pledge of Allegiance and welcomed
everyone to the meeting.
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
Schenck: Added an item under the Consent Agenda to Consider Approval of a Temporary
3.2 Liquor License for S1. Michael's Church as included in the recent Update.
MOTION BY KEDROWSKI, SECOND BY SCHENCK TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS
AMENDED TO INCLUDE THE ADDITION OF 5 I TO THE CONSENT AGENDA.
Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck and Wuellner, the motion
carried.
4. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF PREVIOUS MEETING MINUTES:
A. November 2, 1998
Mader: Made a correction to page 13 of the minutes by adding the following to the fifth
comment, "Requested that staff prepare a recommendation for City Council consideration
on this subiect."
MOTION BY SCHENCK, SECOND BY PETERSEN TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF
THE NOVEMBER 2, 1998, AS AMENDED.
Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Petersen, Schenck, nay by Kedrowski the motion carried.
Wuellner abstained.
5. CONSENT AGENDA: Those items on the Council Agenda which are considered routine
and non-controversial are included as part of the Consent Agenda. Unless the Mayor, a
Councilmember, or member of the public specifically requests that an item on the Consent
Agenda be removed and considered separately, items on the Consent Agenda are
considered under one motion, second and a roll call vote. Any item removed from the
"Consent Agenda" shall be placed on the City Council Agenda as a separate category.
A. Consider Approval of Invoices to be Paid.
B. Consider Approval of Treasurer's Report
C. Consider Approval of Building Permit Report.
D. Consider Approval of Animal Warden Monthly Report
E. Consider Approval of Fire Call Report
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.E" Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
Council Meeting Minutes
November 16. 1998
F. Consider Approval of Resolution 98-XX Authorizing Special Assessment Deferral
for Project 98-15, Pleasant Street Reconstruction.
G. Consider Approval of Resolution 98-XX Denying the Final PUD Plan and Final Plat
for Creekside Estates (also known as Eagle Creek Assisted Living Facility) (case
#98-088).
H. Consider Approval of Resolution 98-XX Requesting the Metropolitan Council Grant
a Four Month Extension of the December 31, 1998, Due Date for Review of the City
of Prior Lake Comprehensive Plan for Consistency with Amended Metropolitan
Council Policy Plans.
I. Consider Approval of Temporary 3.2 Liquor License for St. Michael's Church.
City Manager Boyles reviewed the Consent Agenda items.
Mayor Mader removed items 5.G and 5.H from the Consent Agenda.
MOTION BY SCHENCK, SECOND BY WUELLNER TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA
ITEMS A-F AND I.
Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck and Wuellner, the motion
carried.
6. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA:
5. G Consider Approval of Resolution 98-XX Denying the Final PUD Plan and Final Plat
for Creekside Estates (also known as Eagle Creek Assisted Living Facility) (case #98-
088).
Mader. Sought clarification on item 5.G regarding the history section where there is
reference to changes.
Kansier: All petition materials were submitted but some required changes. There were
changes required to utility plans, and on the plat itself showing different utility easements.
Those technical changes needed to be made and some changes also needed to be done
to comply with conditions of approval of the preliminary plat.
Mader. Was the applicant aware of what was expected?
Kansier: Staff met with the applicant shortly after they submitted all the components on
July 27.
Mader: Does the revised resolution reflect these facts?
Kansier: Yes.
MOTION BY SCHENCK, SECOND BY WUELLNER TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 98-XX TO
DENY THE FINAL PUD PLAN AND FINAL PLAT FOR CREEKSIDE ESTATES.
Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck and Wuellner, the motion
carried.
111698.DOC
2
Council Meeting Minutes
November 16. 1998
5.H Consider Approval of Resolution 9a-xx Requesting the Metropolitan Council Grant
a Four Month Extension of the December 31, 199a, Due Date for Review of the City of
Prior Lake Comprehensive Plan for Consistency with Amended Metropolitan Council Policy
Plans.
Mader: Commented on the heavy workload in the Planning Department as it relates to the
requested extension in submitting a document. This is a Metropolitan Council item which
the City must complete and is costly for us to prepare. Appropriate to defer it.
MOTION BY MADER, SECOND BY WUELLNER TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 98-XX
REQUESTING THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL GRANT A FOUR MONTH EXTENSION
OF THE DECEMBER 31,1998 DUE DATE FOR REVIEW OF THE CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR CONSISTENCY WITH AMENDED METROPOLITAN
COUNCIL POLICY PLANS.
Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck and Wuellner, the motion
carried.
7. PRESENTATIONS:
None.
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Continuation of Public Hearing to Consider Approval of a Comprehensive Zoning
Ordinance and Zoning Map for the City of Prior Lake.
The Public Hearing continued at 7:40 p.m.
City Manager Boyles introduced the item and commented on the history of meetings
leading to the Public Hearing this evening. After closing the Public Hearing, Council should
direct staff to prepare the ordinance adopting the zoning ordinance and/or schedule a work
session for the purpose of further discussing these final changes.
Rye: Walked through the staff report detailing items of concern raised at the previous
Public Hearings:
1. Define point of measurement for setbacks.
. Measurement
. Yard Encroachment
2. Fence Height.
3. Zoning at CH Carpenter Lumber.
4. Request to include Hotels/Motels as a permitted use in the C-5 (Business
Park) District.
. Permitted Uses
5. Effect of retaining walls on Bluff Setback.
6. Non-conforming Lots and Lot Combinations.
7. Bohlen Property Located South of Titus Addition.
Wuellner: Asked how a Non-conforming structure is defined?
111698.o0C
3
Council Meeting Minutes
November 16, 1998
Rye: Read the definition and gave some examples for clarification.
Pace: Clarified a point in her memo regarding conformance with the ordinance. The
structure may be constructed if it's within 365 days of approval and if it otherwise meets the
provisions of this ordinance. If it is nonconforming, it has to be re-built just as the
ordinance requires.
Rye: Reminded the City Council that it is a policy decision for City Council to hold to
current standard or give them the benefit of saying it does meet setbacks and build to
foundation as is.
Wuellner: If property had variances and burnt down 10 years later, can they automatically
re-build and get the same variances as before or do they go through an approval process
again?
Pace: Yes, variances run with the property. However, it must be rebuilt in 365 days and
would have to meet current setvack requirements or otherwise get a variance.
Kedrowski: Commented on Bohlen property. Asked question regarding living quarters.
Was someone living in a pole barn?
Kansier: Indicated that staff has been taking action to eliminate this as a dwelling unit.
Kedrowski: Is the agreement between Bohlen and Whips actually valid, or is it the
assumption that Mr. Bohlen owns the property again and there never was an agreement?
Pace: Her opinion is that due to time, circumstances and documents in the file, that it is a
valid agreement.
Kedrowski: There are two separate documents and they can get two building permits?
One for 10 acres and one for 18 acres?
Kansier: The agreements were essentially the same as they both described the same 10
acre parcel and what would be allowed in the building permits. There were two separate
ones because they were in the process of doing the conveyance.
Kedrowski: So if the property is rezoned to agricultural, then the property is not adversely
affected?
Rye: It has no change in terms of lot size in permitted uses on that portion.
Kedrowski: What is staff looking for from the Council?
Rye: Staff is suggesting that the portion that is R-1 today be designated as RS on the
zoning map, and leave the portion that is C-1 agricultural because the C-1 District goes
away when a new ordinance is adopted.
111698.DOC
4
Council Meeting Minutes
November 16. 1998
Discussion occurred on specific items concerning the Bohlen property. Responses were
clarified by staff and the City Attorney.
MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECOND BY KEDROWSKI TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING
AND DIRECT STAFF TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE WITH FINDINGS OF FACTS
ADOPTING A DRAFT ZONING ORDINANCE.
Schenck: The public tonight has not had the opportunity to finalize anything they may have
to say. The motion is a little premature until the Council polls the audience to find out if, in
fact, there is any more input that is desired tonight. Then the motion would be appropriate.
The Council needs to hear from the audience.
Mader: Will support the motion. The public has had ample time to have input over the past
fifteen meetings.
Kedrowski: Questions if the rest of the Council has any concerns.
Petersen: Modified motion to close the public hearing and the second half of this motion is
to move for finding of fact.
Mader: Offered an amendment to modify the original motion to deal with closing the Public
Hearing only.
MOTION BY MADER, SECOND BY KEDROWSKI TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski and Petersen, nays by Schenck and Wuellner, the
motion carried.
The Public Hearing closed at 8:10 p.m.
Council Comments:
Kedrowski: No comments at this time.
Wuellner: Questioned the opacity requirement with front yard fences. Gave some
examples of fences that would be 25% or 15% opacity. 15% opacity sounds like a wrought
iron fence where every vertical piece is 7" apart and 1" in diameter that seems like a pretty
skimpy fence. At 25% opacity, if it were a picket fence it would be a 3" picket, 21" on
center and would also be a pretty skimpy fence. Why such a concern about opacity and
such a low percent for front yard? If there were a picket fence that were even 50% or 35%
opacity, I wouldn't have a problem with that.
Rve: The concerns have to do with public safety. People backing out of driveways,
emergency vehicles trying to look for house numbers, that sort of thing. The more
obstruction you put up, the more difficult it is. Front yard fences typically are intended to be
more ornamental or decorative, but again it's a matter of Council policy.
Wuellner: Concerned that 15% to 25% is unrealistic.
111698.DOC
5
Council Meeting Minutes
November 16. 1998
Mader: Talked of hedge height requirement. Are hedges included?
Rye: No. However, in a clear view triangle at an intersection or alley they are.
Wuellner: If we make it too restrictive, we're going to be right back here in 6 months
changing it because it isn't reasonable.
Rye: The current ordinance has been 42" and 25% opacity. Somebody bought a fence
that happened to be higher than 42". It's Council's policy decision. It also gets to be an
enforcement issue.
Mader. Would like to hear from City public safety officials on the actual impact before
finalizing the ordinance.
Schenck: Allowing two-foot eaves in the side yard is a fairly good compromise. Is side
yard setback averaging allowed?
Rye: Yes, the total separation to allow for the flexibility.
Mader. Was that on all lots or just riparian lots or those in lakeshore district?
Rye: It was all residential lots.
Schenck: Is very comfortable with the 48" fence height and 25% opacity. Agrees with
Councilmember Wuellner that 15% is not enough and thinks City Council should review.
Not sure that the Council discussed or has a thorough understanding of the Bluff setbacks.
What is a cloud on title? How does a property owner know when they have a cloud on
title?
Rye: A cloud on title is anything that potentially interferes with the sale or transfer of the
property.
Mader: Is that term showing up in our zoning ordinance?
Rye: No.
Schenck: One of the stipulations in the Bluff setback is a hold harmless for the City which
effectively creates a cloud on title. Is that correct?
Pace: No, because it has nothing to do with the transfer ability.
Schenck: Concerned that people will wake-up in the morning and their property, which
may have been legal today, will be legal but non-conforming tomorrow. Two of the areas of
concern are Shady Beach Trail and Watersedge Trail. If the winds that hit us in May would
have partially destroyed those homes, would those homes be able to be rebuilt on the
existing foot prints if this ordinance would be in effect at that time?
Rye: If the lots met the requirement for substandard lot of record.
111698.DOC
6
Council Meeting Minutes
November 16. 1998
Schenck: Looking at the proximity of some of those homes and some of the variances that
may have been received, then essentially those parcels would not be rebuildable without
variances.
Rye: Not possible to respond to that without knowing specifically what the circumstances
are of each lot. There are a variety of lot sizes. There is no blanket statement that says
"yes, if they were all destroyed they could rebuild depending on lot size." If they are non-
conforming in terms of flood plain elevation, for example, that's a whole different situation.
Schenck: Concerned about this. Want people to understand before something happens to
their home.
Mader. This isn't something new. It has been in the ordinance since its inception.
Rve: The concept of allowing building on substandard lots of record is in the current code
and that doesn't change in the new one. In many respects it's more lenient than other
ordinances that say if it's destroyed, you comply with the ordinance and if you can't comply
with it your only recourse is to get variances.
Schenck: If the variances are not approved - you have to make brand new plans.
Rve: You have the basis to grant a variance because, if by denying it the property owner
can't make reasonable use of the property, there is cause to grant a variance.
Mader: It's also true that the same condition, for example, exists with every home in the
flood plain. It's not only local ordinance, but a State of Minnesota ordinance as to what can
or cannot be done. This is not something new.
Schenck: There are certain requirements that create a cloud on title. Is this a fact today or
not?
Pace: Clarified the Indemnification issue with regard to the Bluff Ordinance and when the
City could be potentially liable. The City is, to a certain extent, covered by discretionary
immunity.
Kedrowski: Has two concerns:
- Setback issue regarding moving from 50' to 75' from the 904. Would like to see it
maintained at 50' because it is a drop dead number and with averaging property owners
can continue to move forward toward the lake irrespective of that 50'. The Council did
grant someone less than 50' setback from the lake.
- Bluff Ordinance issue and the many added .
Petersen: The City has had 75' setback for years. Talking to people, that's the way it's
worked in the past.
Wuellner: Can live with either 50' or 75'. Agrees there is over-restrictiveness on Bluff
Ordinance and that the Indemnification is unnecessary. It does create a cloud on title.
Concerned with Sunset clause regarding parking lot conformance. Concerned that a
church, business or school has to plan for a major capital improvement project and money
111696,DOC
7
Council Meeting Minutes
November 16, 1998
in a three year period in order to have their parking lots comply. Also concerned with
opacity and fence issues.
Mader: Would like to hear from the safety officials on the fencing issue.
- Bluff Ordinance: should look at Indemnification and make sure the City is not
overly burdening the property owners.
- City has had to deal with three landslides into the lake not one. We don't need
another law suit.
- Still believes that it is a good ordinance that shows our purpose.
- Suggests that the requirement for l' contour lines is overly restrictive
- Concern regarding consolidation of substandard lots and whether new ordinance
will we will accomplish anything with the additional of this provision.
- Would like to have one more work session to come to consensus on ordinance.
Doesn't want Council get hung up on single issues.
MOTION BY MADER, SECOND BY KEDROWSKI THAT THE CITY MANAGER
SCHEDULE ONE MORE WORK SESSION WITH THE INTENT THAT IT WILL FINALIZE
THE ZONING ORDINANCE WHICH COULD BE SUPPORTED BY THE ENTIRE
COUNCIL.
Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck and Wuellner, the motion
carried.
Boyles: I want to make sure that when we have the work session that each of your
concerns is addressed. Here is what I have: (1) fence opacity, (2) setback from the 904 -
50' vs. 75', (3) Bluff Ordinance including Indemnification issues as well as definitions and
contour lines, and side yards, (4) Sunset issues with parking provisions, and (5)
substandard lot combination requirements.
Pace: What about side yards?
Wuellner: The DNR is more concerned about side yard setbacks than about setbacks from
the lake or bluffs.
Pace: There is one issue her memo did not cover. With respect to land and shoreland
district, lot combination is not a discretionary matter under the DNR shoreland regulations.
DNR requires the combination of those lots in common ownership that are substandard.
Mader: Does this mean that the DNR will not approve the ordinance without this provision?
Pace: It is not discretionary within the shoreland district. The State DNR rules require lot
combination.
Rve: As it relates to that issue, they would insist that the change be made.
Mader: The DNR could just send the City a notification that they are not approving or
accepting the ordinance?
Rve: That is correct.
111698.DOC
8
Council Meeting Minutes
November 16. 1998
9. OLD BUSINESS:
Consider Approval of Report on Fire Safety Access to Certain Private and Public Streets.
City Manager Boyles reviewed the staff agenda report as prepared.
MOTION KEDROWSKI, SECOND PETERSEN TO ACCEPT THE REPORT AS
SUBMITTED.
Schenck: Raised a question regarding Centennial Street and if the neighborhood should be
contacted.
Bovles: Good point.
Mader: Has a problem accepting report and waiting until spring. There have been sixteen
streets identified where the City can't get a fire truck through. The City needs to address
public safety issues.
Kedrowski: Inquired whether the streets are public or private streets.
Pace: If the Fire Chief declares a public safety hazard to exist, the City can do this whether
the streets are public or private.
Mader. We have a known condition.
Kedrowski: Asked Dave Chromy to comment.
Chromv: The ones identified as problems.
Schenck: Can you prioritize the private streets?
Chromv: They are prioritized.
Bovles: The Staff is trying to build in enough time to get this done, while advising the public
beforehand.
Wuellner. What about the snowbird issue?
Chromv: A policy of some sort needs to be established.
Mader: Not very responsible for us to continue this.
IIkka: The City can get out now and install the support posts before the freeze.
Schenck: Does the City need to address the issue of notifying the public?
MOTION BY KEDROWSKI, SECOND BY PETERSEN TO AMEND MOTION TO AGREE
WITH GREG ILKKA'S RECOMMENDATION THAT BY YEAR END THE SIGNS WILL BE
UP.
111698,DOC
9
Council Meeting Minutes
November 16. 1998
Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck and Wuellner, the motion
carried.
A. Consider Approval of Park Advisory Committee Recommendation for Land Acquisition
for Community Park/Athletic Complex:
1. Resolution 98-XX Approving Purchase Agreement for "Busse Property".
2. Resolution 98-XX Approving Purchase Agreement for "Mahoney Property",
City Manager Boyles indicated that this item was removed from the agenda,
10. NEW BUSINESS:
A. Consider Approval of Resolution 98-XX Approving Conditional Use Permit for Larry
Mechura D.B.A. Billiards and Arcade on Property Located at 16760 Toronto
Avenue.
City Manager Boyles introduced the item and outlined the staff report, including comments
from the Planning Commission. He also outlined the recommended conditions of approval.
Comments from Council members:
MOTION BY KEDROWSKI, SECOND BY PETERSEN TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 98-
XX APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR LARRY MECHURA D.B.A.
BILLIARDS AND ARCADE ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 16760 TORONTO AVENUE.
Schenck: Question regarding loitering ordinance and youth related question.
Rve: Under 21 was the initial intention.
Bovles: Revised approving resolution was distributed.
Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck and Wuellner, the motion
carried.
B. Consider Approval of Mayor's Recommendation for Appointment to Fill the Vacancy
on the Prior Lake Economic Development Authority.
Mayor Mader commented that there were 4 good candidates and outlined the process
used to select finalist.
Mayor Mader appointed Bob Jader, subject to Council approval, for his:
* Desire to serve public
* Business experience
* No conflict of any sort with city business.
MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECOND BY WUELLNER TO APPROVAL OF MAYOR'S
RECOMMENDATION TO APPOINT BOB JADER TO FILL THE VACANCY ON THE
PRIOR LAKE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
111698,DOC
10
Council Meeting Minutes
November 16, 1998
Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck and Wuellner, the motion
carried.
At 9:25 p.m. the City Council adjourned to the Executive Session
11. OTHER BUSINESS:
A. Executive Session to Discuss Pending Litigation and Labor Negotiations.
Upon returning from Executive Session at 11: 18pm, the Mayor announced that the items
discussed in Executive Session included:
* Vierling Property
* Kop Farm
* Shady Beach
* Johnson Litigation vs. City
* Labor Negotiations
12. ANNOUNCEMENTS/CORRESPONDENCE
Kedrowski: Reminded the Council about the proper procedure for giving staff directives
and that it should be in the form of a motion. He noted that the minutes showed a direction
to the Staff about presentation items which was not voted on. We should be doing this as
a Council.
MOTION BY MADER, SECOND BY PETERSEN TO DIRECT STAFF TO FORMULATE A
POLICY ON PRESENTATION BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL.
Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Petersen, Schenck and Wuellner, nay by Kedrowski, the
motion carried.
13. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION BY KEDROWSKI, SECOND BY SCHENCK TO ADJOURN THE REGULAR
MEETING.
Upon a vote, ayes by Mader, Kedrowski, Petersen, Schenck and Wuellner, the motion
carried.
The meeting adjourned at 11 :25 p.m.
City Manager
111698.DOC
11
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
OF
THE PRIOR LAKE CITY COUNCIL
NOVEMBER 18, 1998
Councilmembers Schenck called the November 18, 1998 Special Meeting of the Prior
Lake City Council to Order at 5:03 p.m. Present were Councilmembers Schenck,
Petersen and Wuellner. Also present were City Manager Boyles, Finance Director
Teschner and Juran & Moody Fiscal Consultant Steve Mattson. Mayor Mader and
Councilmember Kedrowski were unable to attend.
Councilmember Schenck indicated that the purpose of the Special Meeting is to
Consider Approval of Resolution 98-133 Approving Sale of $1,275,000 General
Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1998. He also introduced Steve Mattson.
Steve Mattson reported that the City Council had established this Special Meeting to sell
bonds at a time when there would be great market demand and that objective has been
achieved.
Mattson stated that a number of factors came together to give the City excellent interest
rates for this bond sale:
1. A strong bond rating from Moody's. Moody's nearly gave Prior Lake an A-I
rating on the basis of rapid residential tax base growth, sizable general fund
reserves, and above average debt loads reflecting growth pressures.
2. Federal Reserve cut in prime rate.
3. Reaction of industrial investors to one and two above and a desire by such
investors to have tax free municipals in their portfolio.
Mattson believes that the City could receive an A-I rating soon which is unusual for a
city the size of Prior Lake.
Four bids were received. The interest rates quoted are excellent. The low bidders
aggregate rate below 4% over 10 years is unheard of. This will save annual debt service
levy costs by $11,000 a year.
16200 q~:@{)~~IFE~SPMFli1q,sM;{J@?sota 55372-1714 / Ph, (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
MOTION BY WUELLNER SECOND BY PETERSEN TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 98-
133 PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF $1,275,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION
IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 1998.
Councilmember Schenck asked what the City Council can do to best assure continued
strong bond ratings.
Mattson stated that the Council should not reduce the General Fund Reserve as a
percentage of the budget nor should they issue a large amount of debt ($5 million plus)
without explicit plans of reducing debt loads.
Councilmember Schenck called the question.
Upon a vote taken, three ayes, the motion passed unanimously.
MOTION BY WUELLNER SECOND BY PETERSEN TO ADJOURN THE
MEETING.
Upon a vote taken, three ayes, the motion passed unanimously.
u
I:\COUNCIL\MINUTES\SPMT1118.DOC