Loading...
11/17/1975 - 00014958, �,�� � .�., TNE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL OF NOVEMBER 17, 1975 The Regular Meeting of the Fr�dley C�ty Council of November 17, 1975 was called to order at 7:38 P,M. by Mayor Nee. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: f4ayor Nee welcomed those present and invited them to ,7oin the Council in saying the Pledge of Alleg�ance to the Flag. ROLL CALL: � MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT' PRESENTATION Councilwoman Kukowski, Counctlman Breider, Counctlman Starwalt, Counctlman Fttzpatr�ck and Mayor Nee. None PRESENTATION OF FLAG AND CERTIFICATE FOR DESIGNATION OF FRIDLEY AS BICENTENNIAL CITY Mr. Gus Doty presented a Certificate from the Nati�nal American Revolution 6icentennial Admim stration, which designates Fridley as a Federally recogntzed Bicenten m al Commu m ty. He also presented a Bicentennial Fiag - official emblem, which �s a g�ft to Fridley as 250th Bicentennial Community. A Proclamation to be endorsed by the Council was read. Mr. Gus Doty also submitted a request for contri6utions of iunds for the Fridley 49'ers participation in the 6tcenten m al activities. The Counc�l asked this be su6mitted at the end of the Agenda. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MDTIGPI by Council�N��man Kukowski to approve the Minutes of the Meeting of November 3, 1975 as submitted. Seconded by Councilman Starwalt Upon a voice vote, all votinq aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. ADOPTIDN OF AGENDA � MOTION by Councilwoman Kukowski to adopt the ,4genda w�th the followtng add�tions• l. Bicentenm al Request for Funds. 2. Request from Southern Anoka Count,� Assistant for use of Library for Christmas donations 3 Item to receive some resignations. 4. �iscussion of Conference Meetings of November and December Seconded by Councilman Breider. Upon a voice vote, all votinq aye, Playor Plee declared the motion carried unanimously. PU6LIC HEARING: PUBLIC NEARING ON PROPOSED REASSESSMENT OF STORM SEWER IMPROUEPIENT PRO�EC7 NO 107_ P�OTION by Councilman Breider to watve the second reading and open the Publ�c hleartnq of Storm Sewer Improvement Pro,7ect No. 102. Seconded by Councilwoman Kukowski Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. The City Assessor explained that this item is a reassessment of a former assessment that was in error. A complete reassessment was made on the property After the assessments was completed, we checked on Znterest either under paid or over paid and came up with a new assessment. Fle said we also looked into the amount of principal that has been paid. The C�ty Assessor further stated that every parcel was affected There was a � �ifference in footing and it reflected on the price per foot Mayor iVee asked if there were any further questions or comments regard�nq th�s �tem. Mr. Roger Jones, 8100 University asked how many dollars we are talking about The City Assessor said it comes out to be $48.D0 approximately The Finance Director told Mr. Jones that on his particular piece of property the assessment would be raised by $89.00 divided by eighteen weeks 'nr! REGULAR MEETING OF NOVEMBER 17, 1975 rAGE 2 MOTION by Councilman Bre�der to c1osP the Public Hearing. Seconded by Councilwoman Kukowski Upon a vo�ce vote, a�3 voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously, and the Public Hearing closed at 8•00 P.M. OLD BUSINESS: CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR UARIANCES BY A J.L. & S, TNVESTMENTS, 7421 CENTRAL AVE, IV. E TABLED 11/3/75 � The Public Works Director explained this request was for approval of variances to allow construction of an offtce-storage building on Central Avenue and Ftreside Dri��e. This item was tabled at the 7ast meeting due to lack of representation. There were questions regarding the tenancy of this office-storage build�ng. The Appeals Commission at their Meeting of May 27th, recommended approval of the variance request wh�ch basically called for a reduction of a setback required for a main 6uilding to a public right-of-way. In this case, the setback requirement affects three streets The parcel under consideration abuts Fires�de Drive and Central Ave. The Publ�c Works Director also stated that we have researched the zoning code and are convinced that the zom n� is proper for the use that ii is proposed and as indicated by the petition, and it is hoped the office will be rented to individuals who would make use of the storage facil7ty also, Councilman Starwalt said that a resident in the area, located southeast of the proposed building, asked about the possibility of a fence be�ng �nstalled. He sa�d that she was the only person who raised any questions concernina this construction. Mr. Robert Sandgren who was present representing A.J. L. & S. Investments, said that they had assumed and planned to fence the whole east side of the build�ng. On the north edge of the property there is a vacant lot, but he felt sure they would have to fence in the whole pertmeter He also said that they were going to move into the building themselves, and he will be one of the owners, and a tenant also. Two members of their partnership will be moving into the buildlnq. He said they are in the drywall business. Councilman Starwalt asked what, basically, were their plans for progression, 61r. Sandgren said they may possibl� be able to get started before the first of the year, but his was not firm yet MOTION by Councilman Starwalt to concur with the Appeals Commission and approve variances for the property at 7n21 Central Ave. N,E. Seconded by Councilwoman Kukowski. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unam mously. CONSIDERATIDN OF REQIIEST FOR RESERVING LIQUOR LICENSE FOR FRONTIER �LUR. REQUEST BY RICHARD POULITZKI. The City Attorney explained that the Public Hearing on th�s item has been closed and a motion would be in order either denying or granting the Reservation of a License. Councilman Starwalt said in that the Public Hearing was closed, unless there is someone who would like to act �n the affirmative, he is prepared to make a motion. MOTION by Councilman Starwalt that the Reservation of a Liquor License be denied Councilman Starwalt said he has reasons which are listed below: The location of the establishment for which the licensc� is requested, is not properly zoned for sale of a7coh�;�c beverages. 2. Evidence received by the Council supports a finding that the past record of the applicant in operating his present business esta6lishment, is such that it would not be condusive to health, welfare or safety of the residents of the neighborhood or the City of Fridley, should an intoxicatinq l�quor license be granted to the applicant 3, That the present place of bus�ness does not meet the requ�rements for a restaurant, contained in the Fridley City Code 603. The information furnashed b� the applicant fails to establish that such requirements will be made. � � � REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 17, 1975 PAGE 3 Seconded hy Councilman Breider. Upon a roll call vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the mot�on carr�ed unan�mously. NEW BUSINESS: CONSIDERATION OF FIRST READING 0 DINANCE FOR REZONING REQUEST: ZONING The Publtc Works Oirector explained that this �s a request for rezoning by Robert Olmstead from C15 to R-2, a portion of Lot 14 , Auditor's Subdivision 129 7ocated east of Central and north of Fireside Drive The Public Works Director pointed out that the Planning Commission, at their Octo6er 8th Meeting, recommended approval of this request. A petition was su6mltted at that meet�ng by residents requesting this property 6e zoned from R-1, commercial zoning. He further stated that similar types of comments were made at the Public Hearing last week, November 10. It should also be pointed out that one of the sttpulations regarding tne rezaning was that the Old P�ano Store building 6e removed. MOTI�N by Counc�lman Starwalt to adopt this First Readtng of the Zontng �rdinance to rezone from C-lA to R-2 with the st�pulation that the Piano Store building be removed Seconded by Councilwoman Kukowski. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the mot�on carr�ed unanimously. CONSIDERATION OF FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE FOR REZONIyG RECUEST �^� The Public Works Director explained that thls request was to rezone some lndustrial property they presently have their existing building on. This would allow the re- � zoning to match the existing use. The Planninq Commission recommended approval wtth the stipulat�on that a performance bond be posted for landscaptng plan that we have worked out t�ith the Holiday Village people. No ob�ecttons noted at the Planning Commission Meeting or at the Public Heartng last week It would be in order at this t�me to adopt the First Reading of this Ordtnance. � MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to concur with the recommendation uf the Plamm �g Commisslon and adopt the F�rst Reading of this �rdinance to rezone from M1 and M2 to C2S with stipulations of a performance bond being posted for landscaping plan Seconded by Councilman Bretder. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Plee de- clared the motion carried unan�mously. CONSIDERATION OF FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE AMEN�ING CHAPTER 115, SWIMMING POOLS crr ni nninirmr rnnnnnrccrnr.i MT�IIITCC onr_rc �n � r — The Public Works Director said basically this Ordrnance is ,7ust a continu�nq process the Admin�strat�on performs in trying to up-date and clarify various ord�nances. This is a clarification of our existing ordinance, with the inclusion of certain items to bring it in conformtty with State requirements. The Amendments to the Swlmming Pool Ord�nance were submitted to the Environmental Qual�ty Commission for their review and has also been reviewed by the Planning Commission It would be in order to adopt the First Reading of this Ordinance Councilman Breider ques�ioned the criteria of fencing required, and how this would be interpreted The Public Works Director satd he believed this would be a type fence constructed as to not allow climbing, and one that was properly constructed, with a 6" diameter that would not permit an ob�ect to pass through. He said the intent of the ord�nance was to keep children from entering the pool area. Councilman Breider said that children could climb right over chain link fences and redwood fences. He indicated that he has a problem with this paragraph and also the paragraph on Nuisance Prohibited, etc. He asked if a neighbor called and said the ch�ldren were making too much noise, would this be cons�dered a nu�sance. There was dtscussion concerning the interpretations of these two paragraphs, with Councilman Starwalt ind�cating that he felt Adm�nistrat�on would use discretion in their determinations on these items. `,`.a� t� REGULAR COl1NCTL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 17, 1975 PAGE 4 The City Attorney stated that he assumed Administration would use discretion in the portion that refers to home owners and family. In taking a narrow �nterpretation, this could probably mean a person who was renting the home would not be entitled to use the pool. This may be a conservative viewpoint, but may- be the term resident family would be more appropriate. He also said that he has not had an opportun�ty to examine this Ordinance before it was presented, and that he has no ob�ecttons to it being passed on first readtnq, but he feels there is some form of the Ordinance that needs to be changed before the second reading Mayor Nee stated he would like for th�s Ordinance to be a little more thorouyhly processed. P10TION was made by Councilman Breider to table this item until the City Attorney has had an opportunity to examine it. Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried. Mayor Nee also requested that the changes that are made be indicated for review. The Public Works Director said that the Planning Commission also indicated that they would like a motion on what notification, tf any, should be g�ven on this Amendment to the Ordtnance so that the people would be aware of the changes. After discussion by the Council it was decided that when people come to the City Hall for a permit for building a pool, at that time, we could explain what is required. Also, when the Newsl�tter comes out next Spring, it could be pointed out that there is a new Drdinance and anyone who is interested could come to the C�ty Hall for information � CONSIDERATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSTON MINUTES FROM THE MEETING OF NOVEP1BER 5, 1975. MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to accept the M�nutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of November 5, 1975. Seconded by Councilman Starwalt. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. RECEIUING THE MINUTES OF THE CABLE TELEVISION COMMISSION P1EETING OF OCTOBER 24, 1975. MOTION by Councilwoman Kukowski to receive the Minutes of the Cable Television Commission Meeting of October 24, 1975. Seconded by Councilman Starwalt. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. Councilman Starwalt said on page SD, there is a mot�on by the commission to donate funds for some hours of playback time and wanted to know if someone could enl�ghten him on this matter. Mr. Mark Scott, chairperson of the Cable TV Commission explained that this motion by John Haines has been superceeded by a letter we received from the F.C.0 The motion is invalid. He further stated that the letter he wrote dealt with public access and the�r response was they felt the $10.00 playback fee was not correct with the section 76.251 (either during business hours or prime time - between 7:00 to 9.00 P.M. RECEIVING THE MINUTES OF THE CABLE TELEVISION CO��IMISSION P�EETING OF NOVEMBER 7, 1975 AND RECEIIfING OPINION REGARDING PAY CABLE CHANNELS FROM STATE OF MINNESOTA AND F.C.C. Mayor Nee said he thought the pertinent item in these minutes is the motion by Ken Brennen that the CAT� request the City to employ a specialized attorney out of , funds, regarding the legality of operational changes. Cou�icilman Starwalt said he had a couple of questions reaarding certa�n funds going into the general fund, and questioned the need for this. Mayor Nee said he felt the same way and that it seems to him the Commission could set aside those funds until they are in a position to use them more reasonably, rather than come back in the City treasury He asked if they could reserve the 5% for uses related to cable regulations or otl�er activrty they may have carried over to subsequent years. i `.i�( REGULAR C011NCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 17, 1975 PAGE 5 The City Manager said he thought if the Council wishes to ear mark the funds, this could be done. He said when we made the request to F.0 C, we laid out a number of areas of activity that we would use these funds for, and certatnly one area was the Commission activ�ty. He asked how much of the total fund the Council would want committed. The way things look this year, there is not going to be a large amount of revenue coming in for CATV He explained that in the intitial stages, when the system was being put into effect there was a lot of engineering costs � 6ecause of the review of the systems installat�on. Now, maybe some of the funds could be geared to the Commission activ�ties. As a matter of reserving it, it would be 7n order for the Council to say for example - we have $5,OD0 and we want to reserve $2,000 to carry over to next year. Budgetwise, we can do this It would still show on the revenue side Our budget wculd show a carry over from one year to another. Mayor Nee said it would seem to him to be more desirable for the money be used in support of the public activity for CATV, plus the regulation. The City Manager said the amount is so small, it depends on the num6er of subscribers. Also, the pro,7ection was $3,500 subscribers fee for the City, but the company does not have that many subscribers at this time The Gity Attorney said there may be some kind of legal requirement because the ,7ustification that was made to get approval of that 5% was made on the basis that the money would be used for that purpose and it is pro6ably not only a moral but also a lega1 requirement that the money be used for purposes relating to Ca61e TV. Councilman Breider said he would suggest 6efore we htre an attorney we lay out whether we need these addit�onal funds. He said it was his understanding that the money we have in the budget now was the remains of the $25,000 performance bond originally put up by GTV and the other question mentioned in the minutes is whether it is legal for GTV to offer Cinema 3 without offering the people who receive Cinema 3 the public service channels. � Mayor Nee said that vaas his real concern - that it was a matter of principals. He also said he feels the City has some obligation to the whole field of commum ty cab�e casting since this is the ftrst instance, that I am aware of, this has happened. I feel obligated to ratse the question whether that is explicit in the franchise. Mr. Dennis Schneider, 6190 Stinson Blvd, said he feels the Cinema 3 has been pushed with a significantly higher public relations campaign than the hook-up �reviously has been. He said promoters have been around his neighborhood push�na the one free month on the C�nema and no one called or him oriqinally. Ne also stated that most of the people in his neighborhood are taking both, but most of them are on the one month free hook-up. Sara Hayes, employee of the Cable TU was present in the audience and said she would like to clear up some misunderstandings Firstly, Cinema 3 and Cable TV are never sold by knocking on a door, or sold outriqht alone. Everyone, she satd, �s sold on Cable TV and the option of having the Cinema 3 channel. There is an option at the end of your 30-day money hack guarantee, that if youi� cable reception has not �mproved you can have Ctnema 3 only. However, C�nema 3�s not pushed alonq in the beginning Mayor Nee asked Ms. Hayes how the system worked to get Cinema 3 only. Ms. Hayes explained the theory of receiving Cinema 3 nnly, however, she said at the � present time all of the equipment is not available to filter out the other channels. Therefore, at the present ttme, people who are apalyin� for �inema 3 only, are also receiving all the channels as before, but are only payina fer tfie Cinema 3. Mr. Ken Brennan, chairman of Cable TV Commission said the imoression of the Commission members is that the sinale serv�ce offered by GTV may not be in keeping wZth the terms of the franchise with the Gi±y of Fridlev, and they would like to have an opin�on on thts. It htnqes around certain definitions, in their view, as to what a subscriber is and what the capa6ility te receive the nu61�c channels really means in the light of F.C.C, and State Rulings. Counctlman Starwalt asked Mr. Brennan if they had talked with the City A,ttorney He said he felt that this should be coordinated aaith the City Attorney. r � t'� REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 17, 1975 PAGE 6 The City Attorney said he had been contacted First of all, he explained, he is �ot a special�st in Ca61e TV, and he has no object7on to the Commission seeking outside legal opinions, but he would l�ke to caut�on the Council on a couple of aspects. 1 Counc�l should take a serious look at any sugqestion th�,t the best way to solve the problem �s through litigat�on. Hr� ;aid he was not convinced this was the case. 2 If Council is going to authorize outside council there should 6e a handle on the amount of funds we are going to be committed for this. 3. In respect to the question of whether he had communicated with the Commission, he said he tlid and furnished them with certain information he received directly From the attorney for GTU. My adviCe im tially was that I felt GTV could present the separate Clnema 3 service and that the C7ty should be entitled to receive their percentage from that income. That is, subscribers within the meantna and �ntent of the Ordinance. If the Comm�ssion is interested in obta�ning lega] service, to keep abreast of what the F C.C, is do�ng as far as rules and regula- tions, I would see no ob,7ection to that type of contract, Councilwoman Kukowski said she would like to go along with the recommendation of the Cable TV Commission, but said she was concerned with the cost and wanted to know how we could find out what the cost would be. Mr. Brennan sa�d they had rece�ved resumes quoting prices, but it would depend on how much time is involved and said they thought perhaps the Council could set some kind of a l�mit on the expenses tnvolved. The C�ty Attorney said it would seem to him that one limit would be the budget they now have. They should not aet into a situation of obligating themselves for more funds than in the budget. Mr Brennan said at the last Commission P1eet�ng they asked Mr. C1��de Morav7tz, who is our represertat�ve from the Cit,y for some sort of information on our budget, and he believed the figure he gave the Commission was about $8,000 in the budget. The City Manager explained that this was premised on getting revenue from the Cable TC Company, and they were basing this on the pro�ected �a3,500 subscribers fee for the City �n the year 1975, and they are not close to th�s kind of a figure. He explained that on the revenue side of the budget, we do not have this yet. He said he felt that we need a little more data for the Council to know whether we can legally commit any part of it for lena7 research at th7s t�me, and if not, do we wish to commit any general fund money for this purpose. Mr. Brennan explained that the Commission's intentions was not to proceed on any- thing that would provide a financial encumberance on the funds without bringing it before the Counctl. Mayor Nee said as he understands the Ordinance the Commission cannot spend any of the funds until it is recommened h�� the City. He said it has to be an order of the Ctty and not the order of the Commission. He also stated he was interested an what they are proposing, but he feels we should g��t more background, and perhaps the Commission should cons�der if this is the way they want to use the money or whether they would want to put it ini,o something else. MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to receive the Minutes of the Cable T�/ Commiss�on, and ask Administration to bring back more information on this request Seconded 6y Councilwoman Kukowski. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Playor Nee declared the motion carried RECEIVING REQUEST FROM �OHN AND DARLENE ZURAIJSKI FOR CHANGE IN LOCATION OF HOCKEY RINK IN TERRACE PARK Mr. John Zurawski, 5767 7th Street, N. E. addressed the Council and said he lives on the northwest corner of the park He said he �s not opposed to the hockey rink itseif, ,7ust opposed to where they want to put it. They want to install a iight for better l�ght�nq which would be ten feet from his patio w�thout having an on and off switch, He a]so explained that the ice-skating rink for the little children will not have a light and he feels it is �ust as �mportant that they can see where they are skating so as not to run into bad ice. 1 , / , ; �' C; REGULAR MEETING OF NOVEMBER 17, 1975 PAGE 7 Councilman Breider said that a locat�on for the lights, which would solve this problem would be running them parallel with the ternis courts. This woula cost $200.00 above what is authorized, but For that amount it would solve the whole problem, and also provide l�ghts for the ten m s courts in the Summer MOTION 6y Councilman Breider to authorize additional $200.00 and locate lights � parallel with the tennts courts. Seconded by Councilwoinan Kukowsk� Upon a voice vote, all vot�ng aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried. The City Manager said that the information Counc�lman Breider gave is correct, it would be an addittonal $200.00 for putting the hockey rink in that location, 6ut that there will also be an additional $60 00 a year for maintenance on the lights. He expla�ned there will be two lights - one new l�4ht, 4�0 watts, and an existing one of U 5 watts. At this time, Mayor Nee requested that items 27 and 2Fi be moved forward to accomodate the number of people waiting for these items. MOTION by Council Fitzpatrick to move items 27 and 28 forward. Seconded by Councilwoman Kukowski. Upon a voice vote, all votirrq aye, P4a,yor Nee declared the motion carried. No. 205-1975 CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION�ORDERING IMPROVEMENT AND FINAL PLANS AN� SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMATES Of THE COSTS THEREOF� STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJFCT ST. 1976-1, nnm CONSIDERATION OF A RESQLUTION QRDERING IMPROVEMENT ANO FINAL PLADIS AND SPECIFICATIQNS AND ESTIMATES OF THE COSTS THEREOF• SANITARY SEWER, WFlTER AND STORM SEWER PROJECT � 119 AND RECEIVING PETrTION �20-1975. Mayor Nee explained that we held a Publtc He�rrnq on these pro,7ects last week He said he has recetved telephone ob,7ections on one part of the pro,7ect ar�d he had � some reservations himself on 71st. The other item concerns 57th. Rather than pro- ceed in formal fash�on, perhaps we should listen to what the people have to say concerning these items. He asked if anyone would like tc speak on 57th. Mr. Barney Buhs presented a petition to the Council. MOTION by Councilman Breider to receive the petition No 20-1475.�econded by Councilwoman Kukowskl. Upon a voice vote, all votina aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Buhs explained that the people are for the street improvement, however, as stated in the petition, the estimate of $17.14 is based on the fact the street would be 6roken up, graded, concrete curbing instal'ed and resurfaced w�th black- top Ne said the people who signed the petition feel this street only be resur- faced (1 to 2 inches of blacktop), and allowing only that portion of the street to be broken up to accomodate the installation of r_oncrete curbing He said they felt utilization of the present surface should reduce the original estimate of $17.14 per foot, and they are asking that a new estimate be made on the basis described. The Publtc Works Dtrector explained that �he estimates we are making now are based on making use of the existing Street. About 80 to 85% of the cases, we were able to use the existing mat fot- a base material. He said they are try�ng to use a similar pattern we used this preceding year, so these figures are accurate. He said some of these estimates are for streets that have to he regraded. � Mr. Buhs said they feel on their street the reqrading will not be necessary, and the estimates for the streets that need regrading are the same as their street. The Public Works Director satd this is correct. He explained that the basic street we have the most problem w�th is 57th Place. This street will have the similar section, and we hope to save the ma;,or�Ly of that street also There are ,7usti a couple of streets on the al�gnment that will have to be replaced We always try to come up with the least expenstve method poss�ble and sttll maintatn the de- sired results. � l, {rl, REGl1LAR COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 17, 1975 PAGE g Mayor Nee explained that to ask for a bid ;�rice on one street alone would probably be higher than what we presently have for the entire improvement. It would 6e diff�cult to �solate the difference in cost for just that one street. Counc�lman Bre�der explained also that on the improvement on 71st Way, a new plat, it is only 25 feet wide, less width than your street, yours is 36 feet wide. He said their assessment per front foot �s $18.25, That is flagged out as a higher price than what these residential streets that already have the base are. Mr. Buhs said another question he had was if there would be another petition of the people not wanting the improvements, would this change the price from $17.14. The Public Works Director explained that when you remove one street, it would not fluctuate much,but that it would fluctuate some. Mr. Carl Paulson said he had a question concerning the location of the curbin9 matching the existing lawn or driveways, which the Public Works Dtrector explained the procedure to him. Mr. Paulson said the people on his street do want the im- provements. They realize the time to do it is now before the costs go up. A resident asked if the price went over $17 14 would they be notified. The Public Works Director assured them they would. Councilman Starwalt asked if anyone was present for 57th Place. There were four gentlemen present. Gne of them addressed the Council and said they would like to know what the chances would he of getting the street closed at the other end. He explained that they have a lot of tra('fic. All of the houses face 57th Place He said there were a lot of children in the area, and they would like to close aff the east end of the street. ' The Public Works Director explained that the proposal before us is not to dead ' end that street. He said he dtd not believe the traffic is that much to warrant having a dead end street. There are stop signs installed at each end of that section. Also, there is no right-of-way for a cul de sac, and we would end up going into property owners front yards. He said he felt this would not be feasible. There was considerab1e discussion conerning the traffic flow in that particular section. The Public Works Director said if there is a problem, it seems it would be more of an enforcement problem. He also su9gested we look into evaulation of signing in that areae Councilman Breider told the Public Works Director that he assumes he understood that these people have a problem, and he suggested we try and do something about it, at least some recommendat�ons during the next couple of months. Other residents asked the Council about sidewalks in the area. Councilman Starwalt suggested the fastest way of getting sidewalks is to present a petition. The Public Works �irector said if there was an tnterest for a sidewalk, which could eliminate the haza•�ds of the children's safety, right in the begtnntng we could align the street such as to make room for a sidewalk. If they want sidewalks on both s�des, there would probably be easement acquisitions. Mayor Nee said we have treated everyone on 57th Place and 5th Street, and suggested we move on to 71st Street. Councilman Fitzpatrick opened the discussion concerning 71st Street, saying he has one single objection to the project, and that was the $15,OD0 assessment to one person. The Ctty P�anaqer sa�d the po�nt was made that lf the Council des�red, an agreement could be made that we develop two building sites arrd there would be a reduced rate of assessment. It would be more like $13,000. He commented that this question has 6een raised three times before, and the Council should dec�de if they want this property developed or not, He said he feels if the property owner indicates he wants two lots developed, this could be worked out with a reduced assessment, as long as they indicate they would g�ve us the easement. 1 F� � � I REGULAR COUNCTL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 17, 1975 PAGE 9 Councilman Fitzpatrick said he does not feel this is a Council decision, he feels the property owner should dec�de if he thinks the property can 6e developed or not. He thought perhaps at this point, this was Mr Henriksen's decision. Mr. Leif Henriksen addressed the Council. He said last week he told the Council he would pay $45,000 for these eight lots for sewer and water. Later on, he said he discovered th�s was a mistake He said he paid �20,600 on the property up to th�s time He felt it could be a little flexible, however, we said tt might be � $41,000 to $43,000 When I questioned this, you said it could go up to �45,000 He further explained that he will have a park fee cf $2,400, a sewer hook-up fee of $2,8D0, $1,400 to split up the lots again and he has to reqister these eight lots going through an attorney, which is $800.00 He said it would 6e $72,000 to develop eight lots. This would be $9,000 out of his pocket for each lot with- out makrng a d�me_ He sald he would make a proposal tontght, and �f �t is not agreeable, he would have to close the books on this pro,7ect He said he would sign a contract for $40,000 for the eight lots and not over, and also that he wanted the City to drop the park fee since this is a complicated part for him to develop and then he would go along with it A resident said he was getting tired of coming back and he feels that �t has been presented and we should vote on �t He said he sort of agrees with Mr Henriksen. On the eight lots, he ts asking for about a$5,000 compromise. He said he feels it is unreasonable because the City would get that back �n taxes in a couple of years. He further stated that he would like to see the improvements go in so he would like a vote on it. Mr. Don Nielsen, 115 712 Way said he has seen this voted down three times before and he thinks it �s about time the City gtves a little in order to get something accomplished. He said if tt fails this time, it will only make it more difftcult later on. Councilman Fitzpatrick said he did not exactly understand what he means by the ' City giving a little The City does not have a choice The costs have to be paid. He said perhaps the cosFS could be distributed in different ways, however, he did not know of any. He said �erhaps he did not understand what P4r. Henkiksen pro- - posed. Mr. Henrlksen said he �ust felt the City should come up with some accurate f�qures What we are saying is too flexible. The City Attorney said that he should realize the City is dealing with estimates He said certainly the City car come up with accurate f;gures, but not until after the pro�ect is b�d. He said these people are dealinq with engineer's estimates and they could come out to be higher or lower. Like Councilman Fitzpatrick said, whatever the ultimate costs are, they have to be assessed aga�nst somebody. The question the Council has to answer is whether they want to have plans drawn up and put the bid out. Mayor Nee said his problem was with Mr. Sangsters lot assessed at $1,837 DO for• no potential benefit at all, and he feels it should be charyed to the pro�ect that benefits. Mayor Nee also stated that if the Council adopts the Resolution and the costs are over �45,000, he would guarantee Mr. Henriksen they would get back to him before contracts are made Mr. Henr�ksen asked if they could have a vote on tt and Mayor Nee said yes, they � will vote on it. Mr. Sangster suggested making a hypothetical assessment based on the roadway go�nq to East River Road and that assessments would actually benefit the people more than the assessments before us at this time, with the improvement qoing to Riverview Terrace. The Pu61ic Works Director said he indicatea to fir Sangster before that this is not a final hearing. In the past, Council has ordered that alternate assessments be prepared for certain areas. A solution to this nature miqht be in order. The City Attorney said he would like to repeat what P�ayor �lee pointed out, that the City does havP a formula because it is usually better to have conformity, but :'��l REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 17, 1975 PAGE 10 many times the courts have sa�d if the formula would not be approved of, the results are unfa�r He said he feels uneasy about assessing some of these properties as he sees them. If the property owner appeal them and he had to go into court to prove the residents dollar benefits, it would be hard to do so. Mr. San9ster said he felt �f Mr. Hedron was present he would indicate it would be very d�fficult for any action being taken on any easements w�thout total costs and an assessment procedure not being settled beforehand. Councilman Fitzpatrick asked if they were saying the project would be assessed on one plan and developed by a different plan, The f'<<tlic Works Director said that was correct. That is what is proposed. He said �t should be kept in mind that these $18.25 calculations are based on this type of construction. It would be constructed the way it shows and assessed a more beneficial way If all parties are agreeable, it may be workable. The owner of lot 32 said he wouldn't have ob�ection to the changing of the assessments. As far as the cul de sac heing extended, he would have no ob,7ection to g�ve property in the corner sr� that the cul de sac did not interfere wtth the school. He also asked if he would be assessed for access to East River Road, and the Public Works Director said that is what is proposeda The resident of this proper�Cy said he would then be in the same shape as Mr. Novak. Mayor Nee asked if there was any feedback from the Council. Councilman Fitzpatrick sa�d he would like to see Administration bring 6ack the alternate method of assessing. The Public Works Director said he did not feel the costs would vary that much, they are �ust going to be realigned from one property owner to anothero The City Attorney said the property on 7170, the front part of the lot would not benefit appreciably by having a street on the south because he already has access from the east on East River Road. There was further discussion concerning the size and splitting of the lots of the properties involved. Mayor Nee asked if Council wanted to leave this plat in the Resolution or take it out before they vote on it. He said it could be handled separately, Councilman Starwalt sa�d he would be interested in seeing what the spread of assessments would be. MOTION by Councilman Breider to adopt the Resolution rorderiny improvements and f�nal plans and specifications and estimates of the costs thereof: Street Improvement Pro,7ect ST. 1976-1, with improvements on particular streets. Seconded by Councilman Starwalt. Upon a Roll Call vote, all votinq aye, Mayor Nee de- clared the motion carried unanimously. FS�TION by Counc�lman F7tzpatrick to amend the motiorr by deleting the part that refers to 71z Way. Seconded by Councilwoman Kukowski. Upon a roll call yote, Councilman Breider voted aye, Councilman Starwalt voted aye, Councilman Fitzpatrick voted aye, ISayor Nee voted aye and Councilwoman Kukowski voted aye. Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unantmously. MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to direct Administration to compile some alternate assessments. Seconded by Councilmarr Starwalt, Upon a voice vote, all vot�ng aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unam mously. MOTION by Councilwoman Kukowski to table item #28 - Consideration of a Resolution ordering improvements and final plans and specificat�ons and estimates of the costs thereof; San�tary Sewer, ldater and Storm Sewer Project #119, until the next meeting. Seconded by Councilman Starwalt. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the mot�on carried unanimously. � 1 , 1 � � REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 17, 1975 CONSI ON GF APPROVAL OF VISION P S �i75-02. BY LEIF rn�� [ ' � PAGE 11 HENRIKSEN. MOTION by Councilman Breider to table this item until the next meeting Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. RECESS: Mayor Nee called a recess at 11•30 P.M. RECDNUENED: Mayor Nee reconvened the meeting at 11•47 P.M. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF SPECIRL USE PERMIT REQUEST SP #75-17, BY BREDE, INC :�� CONSIDERATION QF APPRQUAL OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST SP #75-18, BY BREDE, INC CONSIDERATIOIV OF APPROVAL OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST SP #75-19, BY BRE�E, I CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST SP #75-02 BY &REDE, INC 5457 4th STREE7 N.F. CONSI�ERATION OF APPROVAL DF SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST ,�75-21, BREDE INC IDERATION OF APPROVAL OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST SP #75-09, BY NAEGELE CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST SP '�75-10, NAEGELE OUT- CONSIDERATION OF APPRDVAL OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST SP. #75-11 NAEGELE ION OF APPROVAL OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST SP #75-12, NAEGELE OUT- TISING COMPANY, 93 HIGHWAY I.694. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST SP #75-13, NAEGELE OUTDOOR A�VERTISING COMPANY, 8410 UNTI/ERSITY AUENUE N E. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST SP #75-15, NAEGELE MOTION by Counc�lman Breider to collect�vely approve Spec�al Use Permits, Items #11 through #21, as listed above, and delete two of the Planning Commissions stipulattons: 1 When this advertising stgn was destroyed or damaged by an act of nature, vandalism or other means, this sign cannot be repaired or rebuilt and will have to be removed. 2 The expiration dates of these bi116oards be co-terminated with signed leases with a five year maximum. Seconded by Council- woman Kukowski for discussion. Councilman Breider said he would like to state his reasons for wanting these delet�ons: 1. Both stipulations refer to the complete elimination of all bill- boards in Fridley. In my mind, he said, I see no dlsadvantage to the City to have these7ndividual billboards. He stated that Item �5 especially qives him a problem - Prov�sion of the Drdinance stating the b7116oards had to 6e removed. The other item, if a s�gn is destroyed or damaged, etc it is not replaced. I understand the person would not be able to rebuild �t ��11� REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 17, 1975 PAGE 12 Councilman Fitzpatrick said he agrees with Counc�lman Breider except without those stipulat�ons, we are not really approving the Planr�ing Commissions recommendations He sa�d he feels if they had not put in those stipulations, they may have looked at some of them differently. In some cases, he stated, I feel they approved them because they had that lease expiration date. Councilwoman Kukowski said she also agrees with Councilman Breider on the expiration date. She does not like to see that stipulation in the motion. , She satd, in regard to the second stipulation, where it states that this special use permit is to be reviewed anrually, she would like to change the word review to inspect. The Public Works �irector said he would like to clarify the one st�pulation in that �t might be a mute point as the sign owners declare these billboards legal non-conform�ng uses and we already have the section in the zoning code that addresses legal non-conforming uses, which actually indicates that iF it is des- troyed, basically 50% of it's structural capacity, it will be removed. I do not think that one stipulation is applicable. The City Attorney sa�d that is correct. He said he is not sure what the Planning Commission means by an annual rev�ew of this special use permit. Seems to him that Administrat�on would review the condition of the sign, would be more appropriate. One other thought, he said, that perhaps the special use permit should run for the length of t�me tha present lease exists� Then the Sign Company would have to come back to the Council for another permit before they could sign a future lease He said he agrees w�th Councilman Breider's logic that they ought not to have a definite date when they have to be removed, but it might be reasonable to have the existing special use permit continue until the lease expires. The City Manager sa�d that the difference is the question of does the Council want to have a review process again when the lease comes up. The Planning Commission came out negative, they want the signs removed. The Council could take the option that the special use permit would exist up to the present date of the lease and � then a re-application of the special use permit would be required. Council, at that time, could r�aassess it or review it. Councilwoman Kukowski said that some of the sign compa m es would then be coming back every year The �ity Manager said that is the decision the Council will have to make - if you want to review them depending on changing times. Mayor Nee said and also, if we want the Council dem ed the right to review them. Councilman Bretder said he would clar�fy his motion to read• When this lot was developed, the advertising sigr, located on it will be re- moved. This osie, he said, I agree to. I think it is standard throughout. 2 When this advertising sign is destroyed or damaged by an act of nature, vandalism, or other means, this sign cannot be repaired or rebuilt and will have to be removed. This Item I would like to have removed. 3. This Special Use Permit sub,7ect to yearly review. This is standard. I would go along with Councilwoman Kukowski to change review to inspect. 4 This billboard be maintained in good quality condition. �. This bill6oard be removed on or 6efore the expiration of the lease on (date). � Counc�lman Breider explained that this item varies throughout. Some cases in five years and other cases in 9/77 or whatever. We could change this to read� Special Use Permit to coincide with the term of the present lease. Councilman Fitzpatrick said that he could support that motion except he has trouble with the stipulation that says when the sign is destroyed in a zoning which is a nonconforming use - we have that st�pulation on everyth�ng, not only signs. Councilman Breider said that is why he is deleting it, it is already covered. � � , ��� r G1i"1 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF NOUEMBER 17, 1975 PAGE 13 Mr� Kraig Lofquist, represent�ng Naegele Advertisir�g, said he would noi m�nd the termtnation of the Special Use Permit at that time, but if the billboard is not in the way of development, this is two different things. Councilman Breider said to change Item #1 to read: if this lot is developed, the Spectal Use Perm�t expires. The City Manager said that we were still not quite clear on Ttem #3 - regard�ng the words, subject to rev�ew. After some discussion, Counci1woman Kukowski said she would agree to keep the word "review" in the stipulation. Councilman Breider's motion would then read: MOTION by Councilman Breider to collectively approve Special Use Permits, Item #11 throu9h #21, with the following st�pulations: 1. When this lot is developed, the Special Use Permit will expire 2. Deleted. 3. Th�s Special Use Permit sub,7ect to yearly review 4. This billboard be maintained in good quality condit�on. 5. The Special Use Permit to coincide with the expiration term of the present 1 eas e. Mayor Nee said because he has some advertising interests, he would abstain 5econded 6y Gouncilwoman Kukowsk�. Upon a Roll Call Vote, Councilman 6reider voted aye, Councilman Kukowski voted Aye, Councilman Fitzpatrick voted nay, Councilman Starwalt voted Aye and Mayor Nee abstained Motion carried. Councilman Starwalt sa�d he felt that since changes in ihe stipulations were made, he felt someone shou1d go back to the Planning Commission with our reasons for doing so. Mayor Nee asked Councilman Starwalt if he would a�ree to do this, and Councilman Starwalt said that he would. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST SP �r75-14 MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to concur with the Planning Commission"s recommendation to deny this Special Use Permit. Councilman Fitzpatrick explained that his ob,7ection to this is that he feels that kind of sign is out of character with the street �t is on. He said he is surprised they put such a high value on that sign Mayor Nee sa�d he wauld say it is a valuable sign on this motion. Councilwoman Kukowski seconded the motion. He asked if there was a second Councilman Starwalt said he would like to speak aya�nst this mot�on for the same reason that Mayor Nee is trying to ma4:e a nice slow thoroughfare of East River Road Mayor Nee said this would require three votes. Upon a roll call vote, Councilmar Breider voted ^lay, Counctlman Fitzpatrick voted Aye, Councilman Starwalt voted Nay, Councilwoman Kukowski voted Nay and Mayor Nee abstained. The MOTION failed. MDTION by Councilman Breider to approve the Special Use Permit with the original stipulations. Seconded by Councilwoman Kukowski. The City Manager pointed out there was a problem because the lease expired in October of 1975. The question is are you thinking of extending a new lease or the item will come back to you again in any case. The City Attorney said that the City Manaqer"s point is well taken If there is no current lease one of two things has to happen. Either it has to be for the term of a new lease, which is unknown to *he Council, or for a f�xed period of time ��v� REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMRER 17, 1975 PAGE14 Mr. Lofquist commented that he did not know when it expired, but he assumed they had a five year lease, The City Manager asked �he Council if it would be realistic for the Council to renew this in three years Councilman Breider raid he would change the stipulation #5 to read - three year , lease Upon a roll call vote, Councilman Fitzpatrick voted Aye, Councilwoman Kukowski voted Nay, Councilman Breider voted Aye and Councilman Starwalt voted Aye. Mayor Nee abstained The MOTICN carried. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST SP #75-08, NAEGELE OUT- � OR A�VERTISING COMPANY. 8150 EAST RIVER ROA� N.E. MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to concur with the Planning Commisston for denial of the Special Use Permit SP #75-08 Seconded by Councilwoman Kukowski. Upon a roll call vote, Councilman Breider voted aye, Councilman Starwalt voted aye, Council- man Fitzpatr�ck voted nayand Councilwoman Kukowski voted naY, Mayor Plee abstalned. MOTION fails MOTION by Councilman Breider to adopt the Spectal Use Permit #75-08, with the exception of having only three st�pulations. Seconded by Councilman Starwalt. Upon a roll call vote, Councilman Starwalt voted Aye, Councilman Fitzpatrick voted Nay, Councilwoman Kukowski voted P�ye and Councilman Breider voted Aye, Mayor Ple� abstained. MOTION carried. CONSIDERATION OF ABATEMENT OF NUISANCE AT 101 CROWN ROAD The Public Works Director expla�ned that th�s is a snow fence which runs along the west property line of 101 Crown Road and extends into a public right-of-way of Crown Road He said that at th�s time, the manner in which the fence is installed, is �n violation of a zoning code which calls for a 25' triangle in the southwest ' corner for a visual safety control zone. This was brought to our attention re- gartling the hazards along Main Street. At this point, the zoning code is in violation and it does present a nuisance in that the City is liable for any types of acc�dents that could occur there. The property owner is present. He feels snow being dumped on his property causes him maintenance pro6lems. i!�n PuUlic Works Director said that there are two ways we can proceed. One is to proceed with litigat�on regard�ng the filing of the citation and then that would result rn a �udge deciding to have the fence removeda The other is outlined in Sect�on 110 of the City Code - The Council direct City forces to abate the nuisance. We would like to try to cooperate w�th the property owner. Mayor Nee asked tf we have ever enforced that provision of the Ordinance el,ewhere, The Public Works Director said in two instances this summer this prov�sion was enforced. One regarding trees blocking vision and the owner did cooperate, and the other a hedge that was blocking vision and they also cooperated. The prcperty owner of 101 Crown Road said that he has lived there since 1967. and there has never 6een an acctdent since that ttme. He said it is not traveled that often. He also explained that the reason for the snow fence was to keep the mud, salt and weeds from depositing in his yard The City Manager said the point should be brought up that th�s gentlemen filed a compiaint against the City and the Judge awarded in favor of the City. As poTnted out, we could proceed through the courts again, or if you feel the problem urgent � enough, you could �ssue an order for abatement action that would expedite this. Also, if you do not w�sh to take any action, you could �ust receive the reporY. Mayor Nee said, as he understands it, the pi°opprty owner has received a summons and asked the property owner if he understands that there is a law that provides that. The proper�y owner sa�d he d�d not care if it did or not, he would go to �ail. Mayor Nee asked h�m if there would be a possibil�ty of working out an agreement to acquire an easement. The property owner said that he would not The City Manager said, as he pointed out, the Council only has to receive this information, they do not have to act on it. MOTION by Councilwoman Kukowski to receive the report of Abatement of Nuisance at 101 Crown Road. Seconded by Councilman Starwalt. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 17, 1975 CONSIDERATION OF APPROUAL OF �OINT USE PAGE 15 ��� �,a The Public Works Director explained that this is an existing line that existed prior to the MWCC. They had a policy when they were formed, that they did not take over any interceptors that served two Municipal�ties of a certain area They provided a,7oint agreementthat they would not have to be involved in the main- � tenance of that facil�ty. Therefore, they contracted with the City of Fridley that they would pay Fridley a certain amount of money annually in order to maintain that facility. This is a perennia� type of agreement MOTION by Councilman Starwalt to approve the �oint Use Rental Agreement for 1976 with MWCC. Seconded by Councilwoman Kukowski llpon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee dec1ared the motion carried unanimously. CONSIDERATIDN DF POLICE SUP�ERVISORY COMPENSATION FOR 1975-1976. MOTION by Councilman Starwalt to approve Police Supervisory Compensation for 1975- 1976. Seconded by Councilman Breider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. No. 206-1975 CONSI�ERATION OF A RE50LUT10N/CONFIRMTNG REASSESSMENT OF STORM SEWER 1MPROVEMENT PR�JECT N� 102 MOTION by Councilman Breider to approve Resolution confirming reassessment of Storm Sewer Improvement Project No, 1�2. Seconded by Counc�lman Starwalt. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. CONSIDERATION �F CHAPlGES IN PENSION PLAN FOR POLICE OFEICERS Mr. Fred Bebensee, President of the Fridley Police Pension Association stated that he had a comparison to what the Counctl received �n the Agenda, and that bas�cally � he agrees to most items, and there ts only a couple of items he takes difference to. One thing, he said, he would ltke to say he feels there is pro6ably a need for portability �n their plan that they do not have. He felt this was important and they should talk about it. He said he wondered also, why four of the men were re- quired to sign papers over a year ago, that they would be put into P E R A. None of these men seem to remember s�gm ng this agreemente Another thing I take difference to in the Ordinance is, what would be wrong with our pension association having some input into the change of the plan. This week I have come across one reason we are not any better funded is because of the age of our plan. We have only been working since 1967. We have had men come into our plan that had over ten years service, and if they had been in our plan from the day it was started, we would not have to make up the deficit and carry the load for these men. He sa�d, even at that, since our last actuarial we have doubled since 1973 and we are still in 1975. He requested we get another actuarial and see what krnd of growth they have made tn 1975. Mr Bebensee said another thing he would like to point oui is that he talked to a gentlemen in St Pau1 toda_y, and there plan is currently �8 million dollars �n deficit. They have a six-million dollar current budget, and they are not concerned about it. They cannot see any reason for havinq a whole bunch of money in a pot that nobody can use for anythinq but pensions. They prefer to have a more pay-as you-go type of thing, and this is what we are talking about He said he is trying to convince the Counc�l that it is not necessary io havP that amount of money in a bank account somewhere on paper. � Councilman Starwalt stated actuarily solvent to him meant when you stretch the whole thing out it is going tu wark out proper He said he thinks what St. Paul is really saying is that somebody is going to bail them out some time later. Counciiman Fitzpatrick said he believed one point is there �s r�ot totally a matter of choice. Mr. Bebensee said this is correct. This relates back to what the City Manager said last week - if the fund is not fully amortized, you have to pay a penalty 6ut thai some money goes tnto the fund so it does not make any difference. Mayor Nee sdid that to him pay-as-you-go means to pay as you incur the obligation We rncur our ob'igation to you on a daily basis. He said he would like to see the City put the money in the bank as our l�ability and obligation occurs. ',�i� REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 17, 1975 PAGE 16 Mr. 8ebensee said he cannot say that by splitting the plan we are going to save a lot of money. He feels the only way we will benefit is if the P.F.R.Ao benefits are not increased, and the only reason P.E.R A. is funded the way that it is - is because �t has never paid any benefits. Councilman Fitzpatr�ck said he believes we have been shown comparisons of the cost pro�ections into ±he future, He agrees with Mr. Beb�nsee that those comparisons are based upon assumptions that P.E.R.A, is not automatically the Fridley Plan - becomes more expens�ve because of the escalator clause and that is in the pro,7ec- � tion. Also, he said, we are going to see an increase cost in P,E.R.A. too, so the comparison is not really as great a contrast as maybe f.he figures shown would indic.,te. Mayor Nee stated that he thought what we have to assume is that in a normal pension plan you get back in relation to what you put in. That is how a private pens�on plan works and unfortunately does not have an escalator clause �n it. Mr. Beben�ee asked the Council if they had any objections to another actuarial study being made. He feels this is too important an item to be done in any great haste. Councilman Starwalt stated that the employees input as well as the City's input will have to be increased in P.E.R.A. and he agrees with this, He said he would agree that also has to be done with the present plan to make it actuaria�ly sound at some point in the future. As far as Mr Bebensee asking for another actuarial check of this, he agrees this has to be done, but that is not the sole answer to �t all, even if we adopt this Ordinance. He said as he sees it, this would stop the present fund from gettinq in worse shape. Councilman Fitzpatrick said he agrees wiih Mr. Bebensee that this should not be done in haste. It may be true that this has been talked atout for four years, but it has only been talked about, from the police viewpoint on this particular aspect, since the Supreme Court decision. I do not think until that time they felt the split was eminent or that the City could take that action. , Councilman Fitzpatrick further stated that we agreed to fund the private plan and we have that obligation clearly, there �s no doubt about it. He said kns feeling on the four new men - until we resolve this scsir�ehow, we should not fill any new posit�ons. He said his feeling on this, is that you cannot ask a per- spective employee to waive his rights. Councilman Fitzpatrick explalned the reason for his point of view, as he explained to the City Manager and Mr. Hill, is that I did not think we could afford to let the plan get further into �eopardy and tak�ng on new obligations until we have resolved it. The City Manager said a number of items have been discussed and he would like to make a few points that he bel�eves are worth mentioning. He said he thinks ample documentation has been provided *_o the Council that we incur greater obligation under the private plan that we would be incurring under P.E.R.A. It is the recommendation that existing officers be kept in the present plan of their opt�on. In turn, putting new officers into P.E.R.A. basicalty improves the ability of the community to keep fundin9 their plan at a 6etter level. There is a leaal obliga- tion and the City has to meet this obligation. He said he 6elieved the point Mr. Bebensee made was �f some of the officers move from the p7an and want to go to P.E.R A., or some other plan, it really improves their situation of the�r• f��nd. We put th�s informat�on in to compare the private plan with P.E.R.A. merely to give Council a background It is obvious that the direct contribution required of a City to P.E.R.A. would be 7%, whereas we are making almost a 21% contribution in the private plan Whether or not the plan the Fridley Police have is good or not , really depends on the individual officer. What might affect one, might be better for another, depending on his age and type of position and type of dependents. Councilman Fitzpatr�ck said he part�ally agrees with the City Manager, that one way to protect your City plan �s to protect the City's ability to pay for tt. He said he real�zes the police, at least some of them, feel the best way to protect it is not to have it eroded by membership It is already in trouble because of the population covered and that is why the actuartals are arriving at these widely compared numbers. The population covered by P.E R.A. is greater in number and different in character. You have a smaller group and older group and this is one of the reasons of the d�fference in the comparisons, along with other reasons. He said in his estimation, another one �s that it was beh�nd from the beginning and another that it pays more expensive benefit. He feels that is what we have to look at. � � � >i)t� REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER U, 1975 PAGF17 Councilman Starwalt said he feels there has te be a cut-off point of �ff�cers gotng into P.E.R A. and he thinks th�s should 6e the four people who s�gned the paper, and all new men, and he would be comfortable with the Ordinance Mr. Bebensee said that �f the City wants to formulate another alan whereby when a person starts they can either go into our plan or go �nto P.E,R.A „ and maybe this would 6e an alternative. Mayor Nee said the young men cominq into the force are not going to make the plan solvent. Their contribution in proport�on to the total obligation is too small to make your plan more sound. The Gity Manager said we feel �t is not our o6liaation to tell you what to do, it is our obligation to let the Counc�l know, as far as the numbers are concerned, there is no question, You indicated an actuar�al study for 1975, we have a study which gives us the figures to establish our figures for 1976 We know it is going to cost 25.8$% of top patrolman's salary to fund y�ur p1an to make it actuarially sound to meet our obligat�ons. Councilman Starwalt asked Mr. Bebensee, in his opinion, how would he change the beneflt of their plan, and Mr. Bebensee said they would have to make by-law changes. Councilman Starwalt asked tf as a body, could they vote to reduce the benefits, and Mr Bebensee said he supposed they could, The City Attorney said he would question it, probably with�n a limited ranqe but as he understood the 6enefits are set forth in the State Statute ar+d the def�nition of the units is set forth and there is a couple of sections that indicate how you accumulate these um ts. He said his recollection is that there is within a rather narrow range, an area of benefits that can be determined by the by-laws, and he believed the by-laws are at the upper end of that range as far as benefits Councilman Starwalt said, hypothetically speaking, if people in their plan could assure him that sometime in the future, there would never have to be a harsh increase in the taxes to make the fund solvent, then he would not have any qualms and that Mr. Bebensee stated that the State legislature could do that - that is, cut the benef�ts of their plan. Mr. Bebensee said he was sure they could, but thev are not go�ng to cut them any lower than P.E.R A. Councilman Breider said from what he understand=, our ebligation is growing by more than 29% a year. The City Manager said we can show you the last four years, There is no question we have met all the legal obligations by law But each year the def�cat has increased I keep repeating myself, that the City would be in a better position to put the new officers �n P.E.R.A. I feel that this will be the step tn the rtght direct�on to really favor the plan The City Manager also said the level of funding they are prov�dinq now would actually go a longer way if the City did not continue to take on additional obltqattons. We are not saying we should keep increasing our contributions we are saying the same contributions is go�ng a longer way because you are not expanding the obligation. Mayor Nee said every new man that goes into that increases the ,7eopardy of the fund. He believes this and believes it is in their best interest. Councilman Starwa1t satd he would move for adoption if it is in order. Councilman Fttzpatrick said he believes, unless they say otherwise, if they still have questions, it is not ,7ust a matter of having the answers, but whether these answers are correct. He said he does not see any urqency in a rule ton�ght 14r Bebensee asked if they could sit down together and go over it. He said he would like to talk to Mr. Nerr�ck and have some input �nto the type of Ord�nance change that comes a6out. Councilman Bre�der said his posit�on now is that he believes what the Mayor is saytng is true. We are going to be in deep trouble a few years from now As far as funding, if this plan goes, I auess I would he willing to coinpromise and leave , Z,s, REGULAR COl1NCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 17, 1975 PAGE18 the four off�cers in the present plan and s9mply state that any new officers next year will go into P.E R.A. He said he feels this puts the pressure on us too - that if you real�ze you have to do sometliing positive in the next legislature session, it will happen. There is no way the City of Fridley can go to the State Legislature against your police lobby to get anythina if you do not want it to happen. He said I am practically will�ng to let these four officers that signed the Agreement stay in the private pian and say alT neu� officers next year will go � into P E R.A., and let the association work with us and see if we can work this out, In the meant�me, we are protected if we cannot work something out, and that is the only solution we have Ule have �t available to us and we can take it, In the meantime, nothing changes. Mayor Nee said a mot�on to table is in order and if you make the motion I w�sh you would expand on it. MOTION by CouncTlman Fitzpatrick to table the Consideration �f Changes �n Pension °lan For Police Clfficer, to g�ve the �aal�ce more time to think about this and ta7k about this until at least the provisions are defined, and I do not feel as though they are, not in their minds. Mayor Nee said his personal view is that it should be adopted 6efore the next legislature session starts The Senator said there would 6e a January 27th Meeting. Mayor Nee said the motion to adopt is on and the motion to table is in order. He said he did not ob,7ect to table if there was some sort of procedure outl�ned. Councilman F�tzpatrick said his only position was to give the police more time for discussion and more time for them to agree that this is the plan for them or to define their opposition to 7t MOTION by Counc�lman F�tzpatrick to table this Ordrnance to give the police more time for discussion and more tir�e for them to agree that this is the plan for them , or to define their opposition to it. Seconded by Councilwoman Kukowski and to set a date for a meettng when the three groups will get together and at least start to work out some of the problems. Upon a roll call vote, Councilman Starwalt voted Nay, Councilman Breider voted Nay, Councilman F�tzpatrick voted Aye, Councilwoman voted Aye, and Mayor Nee voted Nay. Motion failed 3 to 2a MOTI6N 6y Councilman Breider to adopt the ;irst f�e3ding of the Ordinance, deletin9 Section 2. Seconded by Counc�lman Starwalt. Upon a roll call vote, Councilman Breider vc;ted aye, Councilman Starwalt voted aye, Mayor Nee voted aye, Councilwoman Kukowski voted nay, and Counci1man Fitzpatrick voted aye, MOTTON carried 4 to 1. MOTION by Councilman Breider to set meeting date for November 24 in the Community Room at 7.30 P.M Seconded by Councilwoman Kukowski Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. APPOINTMENT: CITY EMPLOYEE: MOTION by Councilman Breider to approve appointment of City Employee, seconded by Councilman Fitzpatr�ck. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carr7ed unanimously. NAME POSITION SALARY EFFECTIVE DATE REPLACES Ken Holmstrom Operations $ Maintenance $940 Month Nov. 3, 1975 �ohn Ma,7erle ' 5761 NE 7th St. Person Fridley, Mn. Public Works Dept. Streets Division � � -? REGULAR MEETING QF NOVEMBER 17, 1975 APPOINTMENT• ENVIRONMENTAL OUALITY COMMISSTON PAGE 19 Councilman Breider said he would also like to submit a nominee: Mr. John ivers, 6271 Trinity �rive and Councilman Fitzpatrick also su6mitted a nominee Mr. Alex Barna. MOTION by Councilman Breider that the Council is given more time to review the resumes, and bring this item back next week. Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. LICENSES� MOTION by Counctlwoman Kukowski to approve licenses as submitted Seconded by Councilman Starwalt. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously ESTIMATES MOTION by Councilman Breider to approve estimates as submitted Seconded 6y Councilwoman Kukowski, Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. CLAIMS: MOTION by Councilman Breider to approve claims as submitted. 5econded by Council- woman Kukowski. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motton carried unanimously. COMMUNICATIONS: EASTSI�E YMCA: RESOLUTION REQUEST NAMING SWIM MARATHON DAY RESOLUTION N0. 207-1975 MOTION by Councilman Breider to adopt Resolution as requested by the Associate Director of the Eastside YMCA. Seconded by Councilman Starwalt Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, etc. ANOKA COUNTY LIBRARY: REQUESTING SNOW REMOVAL WORK MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to receive the letter from the County Library and concur to provide snow removal work at the City"s expense Seconded by Council- man Breider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. COLUMBIA HEIGHTS SCHOOL DISTRICT #13: APPOINTEE TO COMMUNITY E�UCATION ADVTSORY COUNCIL. Councilman Fitzpatrick agreed to 6e appointed to Commum ty Education Advisory Council. BICENTENNIAL COMMITTEE Mr. Gus Doty submitted a request for some funds for the Frtdley's 49'ers participa- tion �n the Bicentenm al activit�es. MOTION 6y Councilman Starwalt to take from the contingency fund an amount of $5,000 � and issue to the Fridley's 49'ers for C�centennial activities. Seconded by Council- man Breider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously SOUTHERN ANOKA COUNTY ASSISTANCE: Councilwoman Kukowski presented a request from the Southern Anoka County Assistance to use our old l�brary far.ilities to set up a distributton point to distribute 200 to 300 Christmas haskets, including food and toys, two weeks prior to Christmas going into the week of the 24th of Ilecember. MOTION by Councilman Starwalt to approve use the old library facilities for this request. Seconded by Councilwoman kukowski. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. ;�� REr-+1LAR CQUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 77, 7975 AD�OURNMENT• PAGE 20 MOTION by Councilman Starwalt to ad�ourn the meeting. Seconded by Councilwoman Kukowski. Upon a vo�ce vote, a11 voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously, and th� Regular Meeting of the Fr�dley City Council of November 17, 1975 acl,7ourned at 2:38 A.M Respectfully submitted, `�., / � ' ' "Y"r G-� "?f G YL ' �� iJ� 'LL t J Helen Fagtn Secretary to the Counc�l Late Approved: la'IS�"7s ��,J���� �i�-��� William J. f�e Mayor � �� � � �