Loading...
02/14/2005 - 4567OFFICIAL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 14, 2005 .. ' t .. � � CffY OF FRIDLEY FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 14, 2005 7:30 p.m. — City Council Chambers Attendance Sheet Please �rint name address and item number vou are interested in. Print Name (Clearly) Address Item No. ,{ -, . �IC r '� '< tc i 'L, — ; i . ,� � � '� +-- -- .. , i _ 0 >s��v ` , �-�" ;� - -,1 �� �, Lt` jv _ r_ ,� , _ ,. � :,, _ � r� � � r ` � .. ;, � �,, � f -- ��• �— iti.. � �. � , . , .� � �`�� G�,.L,�� �. . ���--� �`�. �� ( �� �� � � ;.� L ,, — � � CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 14, 2005 Cf1Y dF FRIDLEY The City of Fridley will not discriminate against or harass anyone in the admission or access to, or treatment, or employment in its services, programs, or activities because of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, disability, age, marital status, sexual orientation or status with regard to public assistance. Upon request, accommodation will be provided to allow individuals with disabilities to participate in any of Fridley's services, programs, and activities. Hearing impaired persons who need an interpreter or other persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids should contact Roberta Collins at 572-3500 at least one week in advance. (TTD/572-3534) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING Continuation of Abatement Appeal of Karin Tyra, 1501 Mississippi Street N.E. (Ward 2) ..................................................... 1- 2 CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Special Closed City Council Meeting of January 24, 2005 Administrative Hearing of January 24, 2005 City Council Meeting of January 24, 2005 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 14 2005 PAGE 2 APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: OLD BUSINESS: 1. Receive Bids and Award Contract for Springbrook Creek Restoration Project No. 358 (Tabled January24, 2005) .............................................................................................. 3- 4 NEW BUSINESS: 2. Preliminary Plat Extension Request, PS #04-04, by Park Construction Company, to Replat Multiple Parcels to Create One Lot, Generally Located at 30 — 81St Avenue N.E. (Ward 3) ........................................................................ 5 3. Approve 2005 Agreement for Residential Recycling Program between the City of Fridley and the County ofAnoka ....................................................................................................... 6 - 13 4. Receive Bids and Award Contract for the Repair of WellNos. 3 and 6 ............................................................................................... 14 - 15 5. Resolution Receiving Final Plans and Specifications and Ordering Advertisement for Bids: 73�d Avenue Mill and Overlay Project No. ST. 2005 — 2 ............................................................... 16 - 17 0 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 14 2005 PAGE 3 APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED)• 6. Resolution Authorizing Changes in Appropriations for the 2004 Budget for November through December, 2004 ....................................................................................................... 18 - 19 7. Appointments — City Employees ........................................................................ 20 8. Claims ....................................................................................................... 21 9. Licenses ....................................................................................................... 22 - 23 OPEN FORUM (VISITORSI: Consideration of Items not on Agenda — 15 Minutes NEW BUSINESS: 10. First Reading of an Ordinance Amending Chapters 602, 603 and 606 of the Fridley City Code Pertaining to Licensed Establishments Serving Beer or Intoxicating Liquors, Prohibiting CertainConduct Therein .................................................................................... 24 - 25 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 14 2005 PAGE 4 NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED): 11. Resolution of the City of Fridley Finding the Proposal of Time Warner to Provide Cable Communications Services within the City to Inadequately Meet the Cable Communications Needs of the City and Making a Preliminary Assessment Denying the Renewal of the Franchise of Time Warner ................................................................................. 26 - 29 12. Informal Status Reports . .................................................................................... 30 ADJOURN. MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CLOSED FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 24, 2005 SPECIAL CLOSED CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY OF FRIDLEY JANUARY 24, 2005 The special closed City Council meeting was called to order by Mayor Lund at 5:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Lund Councilmember-at-Large Barnette Councilmember Bolkcom Councilmember Billings Councilmember Wolfe 1. Pendinq Litiqation — John DeMello Discussion on this matter commenced at 5:00 p.m. and ended at 5:46 p.m. 2. Penclir�q Litiqation — ShorE�wood Lawsuit. Discussion on this matter commenced at 5:46 p.m. and ended at 6:00 p.m. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 6:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted by, William W. Burns City Manager 0 MINUTES OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OF JANUARY 24, 2005 ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING CITY COUNCIL CITY OF FRIDLEY JANUARY 24, 2005 An Administrative Hearing held by the Fridley City Council as called to order by Mayor Lund at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Lund Councilmember-at-Large Barnette Councilmember Billings Councilmember Wolfe Councilmember Bolkcom OTHERS PRESENT: William Burns, City Manager Frederic Knaak, City Attorney Scott Hickok, Community Development Director Jon Haukaas, Public Works Director Rebecca Brazys, Recording Secretary Karin Tyra, Petitioner James Tyra, Petitioner's Son ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING Abatement Appeal of Karin Tyra, 1501 Mississippi Street NE (Ward 2). Ms. Tyra questioned why this matter is being heard during a special session rather than at the regular Council meeting. She was concerned that the 30-minute timeframe available would not be adequate to resolve this matter. Mr. Tyra stated the city ordinance states the hearing should be held at the next regular Council meeting, not at a special session. Mr. Knaak, City Attorney, explained this is a regularly scheduled meeting night for the City Council and hearings are normally scheduled at a time certain, either before or after the Council meeting. Mayor Lund explained Council can continue or postpone the discussion if necessary. Ms. Tyra agreed to proceed. Mr. Hickok, Community Development Director, explained that in July, 2004, the Public Works staff observed that a retaining wall and fence had been constructed on the public right-of-way adjacent to the petitioner's home. Public Works referred the matter to ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OF JANUARY 24, 2005 PAGE 2 Community Development. Ms. Tyra's property is located at the corner of Mississippi Street and Arthur Street. The rear of the property had been used for parking in past years, but since the City Code required a hard surface driveway, the rear yard would not be viable for parking unless an asphalt or concrete driveway was installed. Ms. Tyra chose to install a concrete driveway and take access off of Mississippi Street rather than Arthur. She chose to eliminate vehicle access from Arthur entirely and enclosed her rear yard with a fence and retaining wall. The zoning on this property is R-1, Residential, and fences in this zoning can be up to 7 feet in height in the side and rear and must be entirely on the owner's property. Fences for residential properties do not require a building permit and retaining walls do not require a permit if they are less than four feet in height. No City staff oversight was required and Ms. Tyra had her fence and retaining wall installed. Mr. Hickok then reviewed pictures of the petitioner's property with the fence and retaining wall and pointed out how the snow was away from the curb because of the close proximity of the retaining wall to the curb. This fence and retaining wall are attractive and have eliminated a gravel slope which used to cover the slope and erode into the street and storm sewer. The concept of the wall and fence is a good one, but the location is not good. Snow removal and storage will be hindered by the location of these new structures. Mr. Hickok further explained that City staff contacted Ms. Tyra and she indicated her attorney had advised her not to speak with staff and that the City should take her to court, if that is what they planned to do. Staff was very interested in getting this matter resolved before snowfall. This construction on the right-of-way is akin to building a structure in a city park. Public land belongs to the public and is not meant to satisfy private interest. Ms. Tyra had indicated at the hearing that she was doing what the City and the staff had told her to do but this is not true. The retaining wall and fence were built without City review. Mr. Hickok stated the right-of-way on Arthur Street is 60 feet wide and the street width from curb to curb is 35 feet. The City engineering staff said Petitioner should move the retaining wall and fence back 12 '/z feet from the back of the curb. As an alternative to the retaining wall, Ms. Tyra could grade the property back as a maintainable slope and place the fence 12 '/z feet back from the curb. Staff recommends that Ms. Tyra either rebuild the retaining wall no closer than 12 '/2 feet from the back of the curb and replace the fence in that location or simply move the fence back no closer than 12 '/2 feet from - the back of the curb, remove the retaining wall, grade and dormant seed the land outside of the fence to create a minimal slope. Due to the season, staff asks that Council support stafFs position and that of the hearing officer and direct staff to proceed with abatement if the following has not been completed: 1. Staff recommends that the retaining wall and fence be removed by February 15, 2005, for the safety of the snowplowing staff. 2. The re-grading of the slope and re-establishment of turf should be done by June 1, 2005. ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OF JANUARY 24, 2005 PAGE 3 Mr. Hickok stated staff had hoped to have this matter resolved before snowfall. It is important enough to staff to have at least the retaining wall removed. Staff recognizes that any grading of the frozen ground could not be done easily until June 1. If the fence is not removed by February 15 and/or the slope is not re-graded and turF re-established by June 1, staff asks Council to authorize them to commence with contracting out each of the aspects of the project and billing the homeowner. Councilmember Wolfe pointed out on the picture provided by Mr. Hickok that the cut behind the Tyra property was done with a snow blower, not by a snowplow. Councilmember Billings commented that because the roadway is not always centered on the 60 foot right-of-way, the only way to ensure the retaining wall and fence are not located on the City's right of way is for the petitioner to have her lot surveyed. Mr. Haukaas, Public Works Director, responded the survey would be the best solution, but staff is offering the 12 '/2 feet in an effort to resolve the issue. MOTION by Councilmember Wolfe, seconded by Councilmember Barnette, to accept into the record the pictures and statement drafted and submitted by the petitioner. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. Tyra explained her neighbor to the north has used his snow blower to cut into the snow along the roadway for the last ten years because he has a handicapped son. It had nothing to do with her retaining wall and fence. She also stated the snow along her property line does not stick out into the street any more than it does in other places. She stated she contacted Mr. Hickok and requested more information on the right-of- way as she does not understand it. She also did research at the courthouse and the county could find no record of any public right-of-way being there. She asked if there is a legal document proving that the right-of-way is public. Mr. Haukaas stated staff did provide Ms. Tyra a copy of the plat that shows the street right-of-way. Ms. Tyra stated she did not receive a plat from the City. She believed the right of way should be legally documented, not just shown on a plat. Mr. Haukaas explained that Ms. Tyra's property is documented as Lot 18 and the plat for her property reflects the right-of-way. The right-of-way is dedicated to the public as a part of that plat. Ms.Tyra questioned the reason for a right-of-way on a dead-end road. Mayor Lund explained every property fronting on a roadway has a right-of-way. Such right-of-ways are necessary not only for snow storage, but for the installation of utilities ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OF JANUARY 24, 2005 PAGE 4 such as gas lines, cable or telephone lines. That is why fences and retaining walls must not infringe on the public right-of-way. Ms. Tyra stated all property owners then should have fences and retaining walls at least 12 '/2 feet off the roadway and that is not the case. Mr. Tyra, Petitioner's son, asked if this is a public right-of-way, shouldn't the property owner be absolved from responsibilities in that right-of-way? He stated there has been a retaining wall on their property for 25 years. Ms. Tyra claimed that Mr. Hickok had been on her property and did oversee what they were doing on their property. He did not indicate that there were any problerns with the retaining wall and fence. She said she did not understand the right-of-way issue and believed it was unreasonable to ask them to move the fence and retaining wall back 12'/2 feet because it would take up so much of their rear yard. She requested an extension on the deadline for removal of the fence and retaining wall. Mr. Hickok stated at no time did he stand on Petitioner's property and talk about a retaining wall being located in the public right-of-way. There have been a number of code enforcement issues on the Tyra property and a number of City staff members have been on their property, but at no time was there any discussion about the fence or the retaining wall or where it would be located. At one point, there was an issue with putting a storage building in the front yard, but at no time was there a discussion about building in the public right-of-way. He said Ms. Tyra may be confused about the difference between the right-of-way and an easement because at one point she did contact City staff and asked if she could place a fence in an easement. He explained as long as residents realize the limitations, they can place a fence in an easement area. Ms. Tyra stated in 1996, staff approached her and asked her to set the retaining wall back from the curb, which she did. The retaining wall has been in that location for seven years. The plow drivers have had no trouble, and she never heard a complaint from neighbors or the City. Mr. Hickok admitted that he has been at her property several times and did see the retaining wall and fence. She questioned why, after all these years, there was suddenly a danger. Mayor Lund asked what the height of the fence was. Ms. Tyra stated it was a standard six-foot fence. Mayor Lund asked when a building permit is required for residential fences. Mr. Hickok stated a permit is not required. Residents just have to keep the height below 7 feet. Mr. Tyra stated they are basically concerned about the retaining wall at this point. They plan to move the fence back in the spring. If the retaining wall needs to be removed at ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OF JANUARY 24. 2005 PAGE 5 some point for a Public Works project, they would comply, but it serves a purpose in stopping erosion in their yard. Also, petitioner is not strong enough to mow the steep hill. Ms. Tyra said she is not prepared to discuss the matter at this time, because she does not understand the right-of-way issue. Mayor Lund said City staff would be happy to meet with Ms. Tyra and explain the situation. Mr. Haukaas explained that there are other retaining walls in the right-of-way, but staff tries to discourage them whenever possible. When there is a change in a retaining wall, as there was to Petitioner's, it is immediately evident. Petitioner made her retaining wall significantly longer and taller than it was originally and it became an obstruction. If a plow should hit such an obstruction, the City becomes liable. Whenever they have the opportunity, staff works with homeowners to explain that they cannot build structures in the right-of-way. A year ago, Ms. Tyra had a small retaining wall behind the curb. Now it is a 3-foot tall retaining wall with a 6-foot high fence on it. It is a huge imposition and change and it can be a problem. He offered to meet with the Tyras at their convenience. Ms. Tyra and her son both claimed that the retaining wall was the same size it had been for 30 years. Ms. Tyra asked if the City could grant a special use permit to keep the retaining wall and fence v►rhere it is. She also asked if there is something in writing stating that they are responsible for maintenance of the boulevard in the right-of-way. Mr. Haukaas said City ordinances state that clearly. Mr. Knaak stated it is well established law in Minnesota, with a multitude of cases and long established law in terms of encroachment on public rights-of-way. He encouraged Ms. Tyra to seek recourse with legal counsel. Mr. Hickok stated it is the obligation of the homeowners to know where their property lines are. The City cannot survey for private property owners. Councilmember Bolkcom stated staff has requested removal of the retaining wall and fence by February 15. If this matter is continued, the next Council meeting is February 14. Councilmember Billings stated the facts are clear. The fence and retaining wall are on City property and he would have no problem making a motion instructing petitioner to get them off City property. ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OF JANUARY 24, 2005 PAGE 6 Councilmember Barnette asked if the Tyras would like to meet with staff during the council meeting and come back at the end of the meeting for final action. Mr. Tyra stated they would prefer more time to research this. Councilmember Billings stated the Tyras should have researched the matter before the review by the hearing officer and before the administrative hearing. The facts are not going to change. MOTION by Councilmember Wolfe, seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom, to continue this matter to February 14 at 7:00 p.m. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Respectfully submitted, Rebecca Brazys Recording Secretary MINUTES OF THE FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 24, 2005 CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY OF FRIDLEY JANUARY 24, 2005 The City Council meeting for the City of Fridley was called to order by Mayor Lund at 7:30 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Lund led the Council and audience in the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag. ROLL CALL: MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Lund Councilmember-at-Large Barnette Councilmember Billings Councilmember Wolfe Councilmember Bolkcom OTHERS PRESENT: William Burns, City Manager Frederic Knaak, City Attorney Scott Hickok, Community Development Director Richard Pribyl, Finance Director Jon Haukaas, Public Works Director Jack Kirk, Recreation & Natural Resources Director Rebecca Brazys, Recording Secretary Senator pon Betzold Representative Char Samuelson Representative Connie Bernardy Representative Barb Goodwin LEGISLATIVE UPDATE: Senator Betzold, Representative Samuelson, Representative Bernardy and Representative Goodwin commented on the activities of the state legislature. OPEN FORUM (VISITORS): Consideration of items not on agenda (15 minutes) Ms. Bonnie McDonald, Executive Director of the Anoka County Historical Society, thanked the Council for sponsoring the ornament presentation that was made on December 7 at the Anoka County History Center. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 24. 2005 PAGE 2 CONSENT AGENDA: APPROVAL OF MINUTES: City Council meeting of January 3, 2005. APPROVED OLD BUSINESS: Second readinq of an Ordinance Amendinq Chapter 603 and Chapter 606 of the Fridley Citv Code Pertaininq to Lawful Gamblinq. Dr. Burns, City Manager, explained that this ordinance amends Chapters 30, 603 and 606 of the Fridley City code to allow all forms of lawful gambling permitted by Minnesota Statutes to be conducted by licensed gambling organizations in both clubs and restaurants. Prior to these amendments, licensed local gambling organizations were restricted to the sale of pull-tabs in local restaurants. Staff recommends Council's approval of the second and final reading. WAIVED THE READING OF THE ORDINANCE AND ADOPTED ORDINANCE NO. 1200 ON SECOND READING. NEW BUSINESS: 2. Resolution Establishinq the Sprinqbrook Nature Center Special Revenue Fund. Dr. Burns, City Manager, explained that by this action, Springbrook Nature Center revenues and expenditures will be removed from the General Fund and placed in a new special revenue fund. Staff recommends Council's approval. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2005-09 3. Resolution Authorizinq Chanqes in Appropriations for the 2005 Budqet Associated with the Creation of the Sprinqbrook Nature Center Special Revenue Fund. Dr. Burns, City Manager, stated the Springbrook Nature Center budget was cut back from $303,000 in 2003 to $265,775 in 2004. The current City budget for 2005 provides $270,474 for the operation of the Springbrook Nature Center. This resolution raises the appropriation by $39,808 to $310,282. The new amount will allow for the restoration of evening and weekend hours as well as a part-time building maintainer. Staff recommends Council's approval. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 24, 2005 PAGE 3 THIS ITEM WAS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND PLACED ON THE REGULAR AGENDA. 4. Resolution Approvinq and Authorizinq Siqninq an Aqreement for Police Serqeants of the City of Fridley Police Department for the Years 2003, 2004, and 2005. Dr. Burns, City Manager, said the Fridley police sergeants certified as a bargaining unit with the Bureau of Mediation Services on October 15, 2003. The City has been negotiating a new contract since April, 2004. While it appeared as though the City was headed for arbitration in March of this year, an agreement was reached. The main terms of the agreement provide the sergeants with a 2% increase effective October 15, 2003 and 3% increases effective January 1, 2004 and January 1, 2005. The contract expires at the end of 2005. For the most part, it includes the same terms as found in the police patrol contract. Staff recommends Council's approval. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2005-11. 5. Approve Joint Powers Aqreement for Traffic Markinqs, Street Sweepinq, Crack Sealinq, Screeninq and Seal Coatinq. Dr. Burns, City Manager, explained that this agreement is with the cities of Andover, Brooklyn Center, Columbia Heights, Coon Rapids and Spring Lake Park. It provides for the joint bidding of various street maintenance items. Fridley's main interest is in seal coating. The agreement does allow us to take advantage of other street maintenance items. There is no obligation to use the joint bid. Staff recommends Council's approval. APPROVED. 6. Motion to Authorize the Fridlev Senior Companion Proqram to Apply for CDBG Fundinq for the Period July, 2005, Throuqh December, 2006. Dr. Burns, City Manager, stated as was the case in 2004, we are joining the City of Coon Rapids in making an application for CDBG funding. Together we are asking for $13,000 in 2005-2006 CDBG money to fund the Senior Companion Program. If successful, Fridley's share would be $6,500. Staff recommends Council's approval. APPROVED. 7. Appointments (Citv Employees). Dr. Burns, City Manager, stated staff recommends the appointment of Christopher McClish, Andrew Todd and Zachary Chlebeck as patrol officers. These three positions were vacated in 2004 as a result of two promotions and a resignation. APPROVED. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 24. 2005 PAGE 4 8. Claims (119898 — 120226). APPROVED. Councilmember Barnette requested that Item 3 be removed from the consent agenda and placed on the regular agenda. MOTION by Councilmember Barnette, seconded by Councilmember Wolfe, to approve the consent agenda with the removal of Item 3 to the regular agenda. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ADOPTION OF AGENDA: MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom, seconded by Councilmember Wolfe, to approve the agenda with the addition of Item 3. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. OLD BUSINESS: 9. Variance Request, VAR #04-15, by Bill Hinks, Furniture Outlets, USA, Inc. to Increase the Amount of Allowable Wall Signage on the North Facing Wall of the Building from 342 Square Feet to 734 Square Feet; to Increase the Amount of Allowable Wall Signage on the East Facing Wall from 289 Square Feet to 324 Square Feet and to Allow Signage on Three Walls of an Industrial Building, Generally Located at 5353 East River Road (Ward 3) (Tabled January 3, 2005). and Approve Findings of Fact for Variance Request, VAR #04-15. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom, seconded by Councilmember Wolfe, to remove Variance Request, VAR #04-15, from the table. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Hickok, Community Development Director, stated that at the January 3 City Council meeting, Council reviewed this item and directed staff to prepare findings of fact to support the approval of the variances at this location. The variance request for the west face of the building has been withdrawn by petitioner. The variances to be approved by Council include: FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 24, 2005 PAGE 5 1. The variance to increase the amount of allowable wall signage on the north facing wall (Interstate 694 side) of the building from 342 square feet to 734 square feet. 2. The variance to increase the amount of allowable wall signage on the east facing wall (front store entrance) of the building from 289 square feet to 324 square feet, which is the signage that exists on the building today. 3. The variance to allow signage on three walls of an industrial building instead of ' the code-allowed two. - The Council's findings of fact are as follows: 1. The property is unique from the standpoint that its main visibility is from Interstate 694 and there is not a through street running immediately adjacent to the property. 2. The property is unique because it is off a frontage road that needs to be accessed about a half mile away, on a street that is perpendicular to the frontage road. 3. A similar sign variance was granted for a neighboring industrial property. This property and use is comparable to the petitioner's as they are both located at the end of the frontage road which is only visible, not accessible, from Interstate 694. They also share a similar feature in that their principal use is warehousing, which is industrial, while also incorporating a retail interest as an accessory use. 4. Location overall is atypical for retail users and traffic. Mr. Hickok said staff recommends that Council review the request for the three variances listed above, review the attached findings of fact, modify them if necessary, and approve them for the record. Staff also recommends the following stipulations: 1. The petitioner shall obtain a sign permit prior to installation of any additional signage. 2. This variance shall remain in effect unless any of the following occur: a. The sign is altered in any way, except for routine maintenance and change of inessages which makes the sign less in compliance with requirements. b. The supporting structure of the sign is replaced or remodeled. c. The face of the sign is replaced or remodeled. d. The sign becomes dilapidated or damaged and the cost of bringing it into compliance is more than 50% of the value of the sign, at which time all of the sign and its structure shall be removed. e. Notwithstanding subparagraph (a) above, upon the change of the name of the business being displayed on this sign. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 24, 2005 PAGE 6 Councilmember Bolkcom asked about the letter dated January 25 to Furniture Outlets. Mr. Hickok explained if the variances are approved by Council this evening, the letter will be mailed to petitioner on that date. Mr. David Bailey, Furniture Outlets USA, stated he has no concerns with the stipulations recommended by staff. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom, seconded by Councilmember Billings, to approve Variance Request, VAR #04-15, based on the findings of fact and recommendations - specified by staff. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if the variance withdrawn by the petitioner needs to be addressed by Council in their motion. Mr. Hickok stated because the petitioner withdrew that variance, no action is necessary. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 10. Approve Findings of Fact for Variance Request, VAR #04-14, by St. Philip's Lutheran Church, Generally Located at 6180 Highway 65 NE (Ward 2). Mr. Hickok, Community Development Director, explained that at their last meeting, Council denied this variance on a 3 to 2 vote and instructed staff to determine findings of fact on which to base the denial. The findings are as follows: 1. The size of the church campus and architecture of the building, with the pronounced spire, make it clearly visible as a church without the need for additional signage beyond what code allows. 2. The physical placement of the proposed sign can be closer to the roadway than surrounding properties to the north, since St. Philip's Lutheran Church does not have a frontage road on the highway side of their property. 3. There is a lack of unique physical characteristics to the St. Philip's Church property. 4. Without a variance, the petitioner still has an opportunity to provide signage on _ the property, including a new 32 foot pylon sign, in addition to the existing corner monument sign, if used as an address marker. 5. A larger sign may have an impact on nearby residential property. Once approved, the Church intends to request a Special Use Permit for an electronic reader board sign at this location, which could create a visual distraction in the area, especially in the evening hours. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 24, 2005 PAGE 7 6. Neither City staff, the Appeals Commission, nor the City Council have been able to identify a hardship for the increased sign size request. Mr. Hickok further stated that staff recommends Council review the findings of fact, make any necessary modifications and approve it for the record. This variance was denied at the last Council meeting. � Councilmember Barnette stated one of the discussion items at the Council meeting was St. Philip's seeking rezoning for their property which would allow the sign. Councilmember Bolkcom stated she received an email regarding this matter that stated they planned to pursue the rezoning issue with the church board. Councilmember Billings stated he has been looking at some legislation for a possible overlay district that would include East River Road, University Avenue and Highway 65 to provide for an area that would go a certain number of feet back from the right-of-way to provide for larger signage for churches in residential zoned districts. He is also working on legislation for an overlay district for properties along Interstate 694. MOTION by Councilmember Barnette, seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom, to approve the findings of fact to support the denial of Variance Request, VAR #04-14, by St. Philip's Lutheran Church. UPON A VOICE VOTE, WITH COUNCILMEMBER WOLFE VOTING NAY, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED ON A FOUR TO ONE VOTE. NEW BUSINESS: 11. Receive Bids and Award Contract for Springbrook Creek Restoration Project No. 358. Dr. Burns, City Manager, recommended this matter be tabled until the February 14 meeting. The bids were opened today and they were all over budget. Staff needs time to work with the contractor and the other cities that are involved. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom, seconded by Councilmember Wolfe, to table this discussion on the Springbrook Creek Restoration Project No. 358. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED ON A UNANIMOUS VOTE. 12. Motion to Receive an Attorney Review of the Time Warner Cable Franchise Proposal and Direct Staff to Take Action as Warranted. Mr. Knaak, City Attorney, stated the formal process for the renewal of the cable franchise was undertaken at the request of Time Warner. The City issued a request for FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL_MEETING OF JANUARY 24, 2005 PAGE 8 proposal and Time Warner has responded. This discussion is intended to be an informational summary of an initial analysis of that proposal to see whether or not it meets the standards of the criteria for the request for proposal. There is not an immediate need for action, but the City has four months, beginning November 1, 2004, to decide whether or not it is going to renew the franchise or whether it will issue a preliminary assessment that the franchise should not be renewed, in which case findings of fact would have to be prepared as to the reasons and basis for the City's decision. If the City issues a preliminary assessment, they would then have to commence an administrative proceeding to determine whether Time Warner substantially complied with the material terms of the existing franchise, if the quality of the service was sufficient or appropriate and met the community's needs, if Time Warner has the financial and technical ability to provide the services, and if Time Warner's proposal is reasonable to meet the future cable-related community needs. Mr. Knaak explained his report to the Council includes a review of those issues and a comparison with the City's request for proposal. Council will note that Time Warner has not met the express terms of the City's request on a number of issues. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if the next step in this process would be for Council to schedule a conference meeting to discuss this matter. Mr. Brian Grogen, outside legal counsel for the City, stated ultimately, the question is simply whether or not the proposal Time Warner submitted is reasonable to meet the needs identified by the City. If so, we prepare findings of fact moving forward with the proposal and drafting a contract accordingly. If not, we draft findings of fact to outline where the deficiencies are in the proposal and issue a preliminary denial. As far as a timeline, the statute states Council has four months, which would fall on March 31, 2005. If Council takes no action by that point, the statute would imply that the City has accepted Time Warner's proposal by their inaction. Mr. Lance Lupold, representing Time Warner, requested a copy of the report submitted to Council by Mr. Knaak. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom, seconded by Councilmember Wolfe, to accept the attorney review of the Time Warner cable proposal and to take action as warranted, including discussing it with the City Council. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. After some discussion, the Council scheduled a conference meeting on this matter for 7:00 p.m. on February 7, 2005. 3. Resolution Authorizing Changes in Appropriations for the 2005 Budget Associated with the Creation of the Springbrook Nature Center Special Revenue Fund. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 24. 2005 PAGE 9 Councilmember Barnette asked for clarification on the budget figures submitted, specifically the $89,700 figure. Dr. Burns, City Manager, explained that the levy will bring in $275,000, another $58,500 is anticipated in program revenues and there will be a balance of abou� $30,000 set aside for capital improvements. Mr. Kirk, Recreation and Natural Resources Director, explained the $89,000 reflects approximately $20,000 for admission fees. About a month ago, the Parks and Recreation Commission recommended the fees be discontinued which reduces the level of revenue. The amount of $89,700 was put in the budget last April at a time when they did not know whether admission fees were going to continue and whether the fund- raising efforts were going to have to be part of the budget. After the referendum and discussion with Council, the Parks and Recreation Commission recommended the elimination of the fees. Councilmember Barnette asked if the referendum had failed would the $89,700 figure be in the budget. Mr. Pribyl, Finance Director, said the budget would probably be adjusted down because it was based on pre-election data. Councilmember Barnette asked what the actual budget figure is for Springbrook for 2005. Mr. Pribyl stated the amount of $310,282 will be the total budget. MOTION by Councilmember Barnette, seconded by Council Wolfe, to adopt Resolution No. 2005-10. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 13. Informal Status Reports. Mayor Lund stated the State legislators' town hall meeting is scheduled for Saturday, January 29, at 11:00 a.m. Mr. Kirk announced that Winter Fest is scheduled for Saturday, January 29, with events at the Springbrook Nature Center, the Community Center and Commons Park. ADJOURN: MOTION by Councilmember Barnette, seconded by Councilmember Wolfe, to adjourn. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 24, 2005 PAGE 10 UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:31 PM. Respectfully submitted by, Rebecca Brazys Scott J. Lund Recording Secretary Mayor � � CffY OF FRIDLEY AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 14, 2005 DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: INTRODUCTION February 9, 2005 �William W. Burns, City ManagerJ�(� Scott J. Hickok, Community Development Director Karin Tyra Hearing The purpose of this continued hearing is to allow Council time to complete their review of the facts surrounding a potential abatement to remove certain landscape modifications at 1501 Mississippi Street. Staff has proceeded with the abatement process, whereby abatement (removal of structures and restoration of slope and turf), will occur and the owner will be required to pay 125% of the cost of the project. In accordance with Code Section 128, a property owner may appeal to the City Council after the matter has been heard by a hearing officer. The property owner, Ms. Tyra, has requested a hearing before the City Council. This hearing was set continued until the February 14, 2005, City Council meeting. ELEMENTS In late July or early August 2004, The Fridley Public Works Staff observed a new retaining wall and fence on the Public Right of Way, adjacent to 1501 Mississippi Street. They were very concerned due to the location of the structure. Not only was it on the Right-of way that is used in the winter for Arthur Street snow storage, but it is also close enough to the curb that a plow driver could actually be injured if a blade were to strike the structure. The Public Works staff discussed the matter internally with the Fridley Community Development staff, which then called and sent representatives out to meet with the owner of the house, Karin Tyra. Ms. Tyra believes she was told by City staff she could install the retaining wall and fence as it is today. You'll recall, in 1996, the City of Fridley deemed unpaved driveways a public nuisance, due to the gravel impact to storm sewers, and a number of other detrimental impacts. The City, through various staff discussed Ms. Tyra's lack of a driveway and the impact of her gravel on the storm system. Staff also indicated that Ms. Tyra would need to discontinue parking vehicles in the back yard. She had indicated at that time that she was looking at fencing in her back yard. Staff acknowledged that that would be an improvement. Her back yard would be the operative phrase here (not the public right-of- way). Fences and retaining walls (below 4' in height) do not need a building permit. Ms. Tyra, and others installed the retaining wall and fence with out review of the City and without authorization to encroach on the public right-of-way. It is imperative that the City has it's rights-of-way for snow storage, to avoid damage to cars that may find themselves on the right-of-way in an accident and to keep our employees safe while plowing snow. On November 3, 2004, Hearing Officer James D. Gurovitch of Brooklyn Park heard the facts of this case. Later that month, Mr. Gurovitch's ruling was handed down. He supported the City's position in his ruling. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Council continue the hearing and require that all structural items be removed, and a suitable slope and groundcover be established by the homeowner no later than June 1, 2005. If the work is not completed by that date, staff recommends that Council authorize abatement of the nuisance in accordance with Chapter 128. M-05-10 �� � � CffY OF FRIDLEY Date To: From AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 14, 2005 February 9, 2005 � William Burns, City Manager ;.�� J1 Jon Hau aas, Public Works Director Scott Hickok, Conununity Development Director Julie Jones, Planning Coordinator Subject• Springbrook Creek Restoration Project No. 358 M-OS-13 _ Background Bids were received on January 24, 2005 for the Springbrook Creek Restoration Project No. 358. The lowest bid was received from G. L. Contracting, Inc. However, even the lowest bid was about $102,000 over the amount of cash funding left in the overall Springbrook Watershed Project budget. Therefore, upon staff's suggestion, the City Council tabled approval of the bid and contract at the last meeting. The following has occurred to meet the funding shortage: 1. The Advisory Conunittee reallocated $24,585 in funding planned for other projects to the creek restoration project, which is considered more beneficial to the wetlands. 2. This included reallocation of $7,940 in remaining Metropolitan Council MEP grant funds from outlet weir replacement to the creek restoration project, to which our agency contact has given verbal approval. 3. WSB, the engineering consultant, worked with the low bidder to redesign certain parts of the project which reduced the contract price by about $39,000. 4. Each of the four cities involved in the project were asked to forward their final cash conunitments, which totaled $60,503. This money, which was part of each city's original cash commitment in resolution in 2000, had not been requested since we were not completing all of the project work it was budgeted for. 5. The Six Cities WMO has agreed to provide an additional $4,150 in funding this year to the Springbrook Watershed Project if needed. 6. Springbrook Apartments agreed to provide a cash commitment to the project of $2,500 that they had indicated feasible at the beginning of the project but had not paid. 7. Staff also contacted Northtown Mall to see if they could make any further cash commitments to the project, but they indicated that they could not make any further cash contributions. Through these efforts, we have secured enough funding to cover the project costs and construction oversight by the engineering consultant. Staff has also included a$10,000 contingency in the project budget for possible changes due to unknown site conditions. All four cities have indicated they will provide the complete contribution they committed to in 2000, however, the Blaine City Council will not take formal action on their funding corrnnitment until their next meeting. Currently, there is $210,505 in cash commitments left in the Springbrook Project budget. With the additional cash from the various sources, there is $277,658 in funding available to cover the cost of this project. � Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council award the contract for the Springbrook Stream Restoration Project No. 358 to G.L. Contracting, Inc. for the amount of $264,635.10 and approve construction services by WSB Engineering in the amount of $8,040.00 for a total project cost of $272,675.10. 0 � � arr aF FRIDLEY Date To AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 14, 2005 February 10, 2005 �i �City Manager����i; William Burns, From: Scott Hickok, Community Development Director Julie Jones, Planning Coordinator Stacy Stromberg, Planner Subject: Preliminary Plat Extension Request, PS #04-04, Park Construction Company M-05-12 INTRODUCTION Park Construction Company received preliminary piat approval from the City Council on August 23, 2004, to replat multiple parcels to create one lot, generally located at 30 - 81St Avenue NE. Since that time, Park Construction has been able to obtain title to adjoining property located immediately to the south of the parcel that was the subject of the preliminary plat. Therefore, in the interest of efficiency, the petitioner is seeking an extension to complete the preliminary plat (on the south parcel), so that the subject property, and that adjoining south parcel can be final platted at the same time. PLANNING STAFF RECOMMNEDATION City Staff recommends approval of the 6-month extension to August 23, 2005. 5 r a CRY OF FRIDLEY Date: To: From: Subj ect: AGENDA ITEIVI CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 14, 2005 February 11, 2005 William Burns, City Manager � ,��� Scott Hickok, Community Development Director Julie Jones, Planning Coordinator Rachel Harris, Environmental Planner 2005 SCORE Recycling Funding Agreement Background: We have received the 2005 Anoka County Residential Recycling Agreement. This agreement allows us to receive up to $60,721.10 in state SCORE funds from Anoka County to subsidize the cost of our 2005 residential recycling expenses. This represents a funding reduction of $656.82 from the previous year. The 2005 SCORE funding allocates a base of $10,000 and $4.45 per household for each municipality. As household numbers in all Anoka County municipalities fluctuate, so does the "per household" amount. When populations increase in the county, the "per household" amount decreases. Other Anoka County municipalities experienced population growth as Fridley's population remained constant. Therefore, Fridley received a decrease in funding. Staff has reviewed the 2005 agreement attached and finds no noticeable language changes from previous agreements. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council approve this agreement at the February 14 City Council meeting for the City Clerk's and Mayor's signatures so that the City will qualify for our first 2005 SCORE payment in July. M-OS-9 0 f- � 1����`� ������� ��:������������ January 28, 2005 Rachel Harris Recycling Coordinator 6431 University Ave NE Fridley MN 55432 Dear Rachel; C O U N T Y 0 F A N O K A Integrated Waste Management Department Government Center ? 100 Third A� enue, Room 340 • Anoka, Minnesota 55303-2265 (763) 323-5730 • Fax (763) 323-5731 E-mail • recycle@co.anoka.mn.us www.co.anoka.mn.us The Anoka County Board of Commissioners approved 2005 Municipal Goals, SCORE Funding Allocations and authorized staff to prepare Residential Recycling Program Agreements on January 25, 2005. The Anoka County Agreements are based on the following: • 2005 Municipal Residential Recycling Goal — The abatement goal will remain constant at 175 pounds per person per year. The goals were based on the 2003 Metropolitan Council estimates that were released in July 2004. Specific goals are listed on the attached chart on the reverse side of this memo. • 2005 Municipal Funding — Anoka County has received the fall SCORE payment of $355,472 and is expecting to receive a spring SCORE payment of $355,471. The proposed 2005 municipal funding includes the additional payment. The 2005 SCORE allocation is a base of $10,000 and $4.45 per household and is indicated in the attached chart. 2005 Contracts — The 2005 residential recycling contracts are included in this mailing. Please note the new language in Section 7 regarding the SCORE funding. If we do not receive the 2°d SCORE allocation, the total SCORE allocation will be reduced. Section 7. Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary, the County reser-ves the right to reduce the funding provided hereunder in the event insufficient SCORE funds are available. If the spring SCORE payment of $355,471 is not received or is reduced, the County may reduce the project maximum amount payable to the Municipality. The County will promptly notify the Municipality in the event that the project maximum will be reduced. Please have the mayor/town board chair and clerk/administrator sign three copies of the agreement and return to Anoka County to complete the signature process. When the agreements are completely signed, an original copy will be mailed back to you. Thank you! Sincerely, �- � Carolyn Smith Solid Waste Abatement Specialist Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer Printed on 50% recycled paper of which 30% is post-consumer Anoka County Contract # 2005-0017 AGREEMENT FOR RESIDENTIAL I'cECYCLING PROGRAM THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into on the 25th day of January, 2005, notwithstanding the date of the signatures of the parties, between the COUNTY OF ANOKA, State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as the "COUNTY", and the CITY OF FRIDLEY, hereinafter referred to as the "MUNICIPALITY". WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Anoka County has received $355,472 in funding from the Solid Waste Management Coordinating Board and the State of Minnesota pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 115A.557 (hereinafter "SCORE funds"); and WHEREAS, Anoka County anticipates receiving an additional $355,471 in SCORE funds in the spring of 2005; and WHEREAS, the County wishes to assist the Municipality in meeting recycling goals established by the Anoka County Board of Commissioners by providing said SCORE funds to cities and townships in the County for solid waste recycling programs. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises contained in this Agreement, the parties mutually agree to the following terms and conditions: PURPOSE. The purpose of this Agreement is to provide for cooperation between the County and the Municipality to implement solid waste recycling programs in the Municipality. 2. TERM. The term of this Agreement is from January 1, 2005 through December 31, 2005, unless earlier terminated as provided herein. 3. DEFINITIONS. a. "Problem material" shall have the meaning set forth in Minn. Stat. § 115A.03, subdivision 24a. b. "Multi-unit households" means households within apartment complexes, condominiums, townhomes, mobile homes and senior housing complexes. c. "Opportunity to recycle" means providing recycling and curbside pickup or collection centers for recyclable materials as required by Minn. Stat. § 115A.552. d. "Recycling" means the process of collecting and preparing recyclable materials and reusing the materials in their original form or using them in manufacturing processes that do not cause the destruction of recyclable materials in a manner that precludes further use. e. "Recyclable materials" means materials that are separated from mixed municipal solid waste for the purpose of recycling, including paper, glass, plastics, metals, fluorescent lamps, maior appliances and vehicle batteries. C' 0 f. Refuse derived fuei or ct?:er material that is destroyed �y incineration is r.�t a rPcvclable material. g. "Yard waste" shall have the meaning set forth in Minn. Stat. § 115A.03, subdivision 38. 4. PROGRAM. The Municipality shall develop and implement a residential solid waste recycling program adequate to meet the Municipality's annual recycling goal of 2405 tons of recyclable materials as established by the County. The Municipality shall ensure that the recyclable materials collected are delivered to processors or end markets for recycling. a. The Municipal recycling program shall include the following components: i. Each household (including multi-unit households) in the Municipality shall have the opportunity to recycle at least four broad types of materials, such as paper, glass, plastic, metal and textiles. ii. The recycling program shall be operated in compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, ordinances, rules and regulations. iii. The Municipality shall implement a public information program that contains at least the following components: (1) One promotion is to be mailed to each household focused exclusively on the Municipality's recycling program; (2) One promotion advertising recycling opportunities available for residents is to be included in the Municipality's newsletter or local newspaper; and (3) Two community presentations are to be given on recycling. The public information components listed above must promote the focused recyclable material of the year as specified by the County. The County will provide the Municipality with background material on the focused recyclable material of the year. iv. The Municipality, on an ongoing basis, shall identify new residents and provide detailed information on the recycling opportunities available to these new residents. b. If the Municipality's recycling program did not achieve the Municipality's recycling goals as established by the County for the prior calendar yeaz, the Municipality shall prepare and submit to the County by March 31, 2003, a plan acceptable to County that is designed to achieve the recycling goals set forth in th' A t is greemen . ---- _ .,-,.�._. , _ _,-�-----�- i 5. REPORTING. The Municipality shall submit the following reports semiannually to the County no later than July 20, 2005 and January 20, 2006: a. An accounting of the amount of waste which has been recycled as a result of the Municipality's activities and the efforts of other community programs, redemption centers and drop-off centers. For recycling programs, the Municipality shall certify the number of tons of each recyclable material which has been collected and the number of tons of each recyclable material which has been marketed. For recycling programs run by other persons or entities, the Municipality shall also 2 9 provide c�ocumentation on forms provided by the County show:ng tre tons of materials that were recycled by the Municipality's residents through these other programs. The Municipality shall keep detailed records documenting the disposition of all recyclable materials collected pursuant to this agreement. The Municipality shall also report the number of cubic yards or tons of yard waste collected for composting or landspreading, together with a description of the methodology used for calculations. Any other material removed from the waste stream by the Municipality, i.e. tires and used oil, shall also be reported separately. b. Information regardi�g any revenue received from sources other than the County for the Municipality's recycling programs. c. Copies of all promotional materials that have been prepared by the Municipality during the term of this Agreement to promote its recycling programs. The Municipality agrees to furnish the County with additional reports in form and at frequencies requested by the County for iinancial evaluation, program management purposes, and reporting to the State of Minnesota. 6. BILLING AND PAYMENT PROCEDURE. The Municipality shall submit itemized invoices semiannually to the County for abatement activities no later than July 20, 2005 and January 20, 2006. Costs not billed by January 20, 2006 will not be eligible for funding. The invoices shall be paid in accordance with standard County procedures, subject to the approval of the Anoka County Board of Commissioners. 7. ELIGIBILITY FOR FUNDS. The Municipality is entitled to receive reimbursement for eligible expenses, less revenues or other reimbursement received, for eligible activities up to the project maximum as computed below, which shall not exceed $60,721.10. The project maximum for eligible expenses shall be computed as follows: a. A base amount of $10,000.00 for recycling activities only; and b. $4.45 per household for recycling activities only. Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary, the County reserves the right to reduce the funding provided hereunder in the event insufiicient SCORE funds are available. If the spring SCORE payment of $355,471 is not received or is reduced, the County may reduce the project maximum amount payable to the Municipality. The County will promptly notify the Municipality in the event that the project m�imum will be reduced. 8. RECORDS. The Municipality sha11 maintain iinancial and other records and accounts in accordance with requirements of the County and the State of Minnesota. The Municipality shall maintain strict accountability of all funds and maintain records of all receipts and disbursements. Such records and accounts shall be maintained in a form which will perniit the tracing of funds and program income to final expenditure. The Municipality shall maintain records sufficient to reflect that all funds received under this 3 10 Agreement were expended in accardance with Minn. Stat. § 115A.5�7, subd. 2, for residential solid waste recycling purg�ses. The Municip?lity shall a1_s� �aintain records of the quantities of materials recycled. All records and accounts shall be retained as provided by law, but in no event for a period of less than five years from the last receipt of payment from the County pursuant to this Agreement. 9. AUDIT. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 16C.05, the Municipality shall allow the County or other persons or agencies authorized by the County, and the State of Minnesota, including the Legislative Auditor or the State Auditor, access to the records of the Municipality at reasonable hours, including a11 books, records, documents, and accounting procedures and practices of the Municipality relevant to the subject matter of the Agreement, for purposes of audit. In addition, the County shall have access to the project site(s), if any, at reasonable hours. 10. GENERAL PROVISIONS. a. In performing the provisions of this Agreement, both parties agree to comply with all applicable federal, state or local laws, ordinances, rules, regulations or standards established by any agency or special govemmental unit which are now or hereafter promulgated insofar as they relate to performance of the provisions of this Agreement. In addition, the Municipality shall comply with all applicable requirements of the State of Minnesota for the use of SCORE funds provided to the Municipality by the County under this Agreement. b. No person shall illegally, on the grounds of race, creed, color, religion, sex, marital status, public assistance status, sexual preference, handicap, age or national origin, be excluded from full employment rights in, participation in, be denied the beneiits of, or be otherwise subjected to unlawful discrimination under any program, service or activity hereunder. The Municipality agrees to take affirmative action so that applicants and employees are treated equally with respect to the following: employment, upgrading, demotion, transfer, recruitment, layoff, termination, selection for training, rates of pay, and other forms of compensation. c. The Municipality shall be responsible for the performance of all subcontracts and shall ensure that the subcontractors perform fully the terms of the subcontract. The Agreement between the Municipality and a subcontractor shall obligate the subcontractor to comply fully with the terms of this Agreement. d. The Municipality agrees that the Municipality's employees and subcontractor's employees who provide services under this agreement and who fall within any job classification established and published by the Minnesota Department of Labor & Industry shall be paid, at a minimum, the prevailing wages rates as certified by said Department. 4 11 e. It is ur�derstood and agreed that the entire Agreement is contained herein and that this Agreement supersedes all oral and written agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. f. Any amendments, alterations, variations, modifications, or waivers of this Agreement shall be valid only when they have been reduced to writing, duly signed by the parties. �. Contracts let and purchases made under this Agreement shall be made by the Municipality in conformance with all laws, rules, and regulations applicable to the Municipality. h. The provisions of this Agreement are severable. If any paragraph, section, subdivision, sentence, clause or phrase of this Agreement is for any reason held to be contrary to law, such decision shall not affect the remaining portion of this Agreement. i. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as creating the relationship of co- partners, joint venturers, or an association between the County and Municipality, nor shall the Municipality, its employees, agents or representatives be considered employees, agents, or representatives of the County for any purpose. 11. PUBLICATION. The Municipality shall acknowledge the financial assistance of the County on all promotional materials, reports and publications relating to the activities funded under this Agreement, by including the following acknowledgement: "Funded by the Anoka County Board of Commissioners and State SCORE funds (Select Committee on Recycling and the Environment). 12. INDEMNIFICATION. The County agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold the Municipality harmless from all claims, demands, and causes of action of any kind or character, including the cost of defense thereof, resulting from the acts or omissions of its public officials, officers, agents, employees, and contractors relating to activities performed by the County under this Agreement. The Municipality agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold the County harmless from all claims, demands, and causes of action of any kind or character, including the cost of . defense thereof, resulting from the acts or omissions of its public officials, officers, agents, employees, and contractors relating to activities performed by the Municipality under this Agreement. The provisions of this subdivision shall survive the ternunation or expiration of the term of this Agreement. 13. TERMINATION. This Agreement may be terminated by mutual written agreement of the parties or by either party, with or without cause, by giving not less than seven (7) days written notice, delivered by mail or in person to the other party, specifying the date 5 12 oT terminatio�. ?f th:s Agree�r�ent is terminated, assets acquired ir� whale or in part with funds provided under this Agreement shall be the property of the MuniciYality so long as said assets are used by the Municipality for the purpose of a landfill abatement program approved by the County. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereunto set their hands as of the dates first written above: CITY OF FRIDLEY By:_ Name: Title: Date: By:_ Municipality's Clerk Date: Approved as to form and legality: 6 13 COUNTY OF ANOKA B y: Margaret Langfeld, Chair Anoka County Board of Commissioners Date: ATTEST: John "Jay" McLinden County Administrator Date: Approved as to form and legality: Assistant County Attorney f � CRY dF FRIDLEY To: From: Date: Subject AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 14, 2005 William Burns — City Manager � ;�,� � �� 0 Jon liauka — Director of Public Works February 9, 2005 Award of the Repair of Well #3 and Well #6 PW05-011 The Public Works Department prepared specifications and advertised for bids for the repair of City Wells #3 and #6. On January 31, 2005 the City received bid proposals from three well repair contractors. Well # 3 Results: Bergersen-Caswell Maple Plain, MI`I E. ti. Renner Elk River, MI`I Keys Well St Paul, MI`I �46,665 �54,4�-1 �47,666 Well #6 Results: Bergerson-Caswell Maple Plain, MI`I E. Fi. Renner Elk River, MI`I Keys Well St. Paul, MI`I �24�,ll1 �37,121 �26,942 The FY2005 Water Department capital budget has allocated �60,000 for the repair of Wells #3 and #6. The bids received are maximum amounts and will only be expended if all parts of the well need to be replaced. The well repairs are bid based on the unit cost of the parts that actually are replaced and therefore actual final repair costs are projected to be less than the budgeted amount We recommend that the repair of Well #3 be awarded to Bergerson Caswell in the amount of ��+6,665 and that the repair of Well #6 also be awarded to Bergerson Caswell in the amount of �2�,111. Attachment 14 To: FROM: DATE , ^ ; `;I. �. : � � � ,' MEMORANDUM Jon Haukaas, Director of Public Works Jim Saeflce, Water Department Supervisor February 4, 2005 SUBJECT: Bid Opening — Repair of Well #3 & Well #6 The Public Works Department prepared specifications and advertised for bids for the repair of City Weils #3 and #6. On January 31, 2005 the City received bid proposals from three well repair contractors. All the proposals met City specifications but only two met the bid bond requirement. Well #3 �tesults• Bergerson Caswell Maple Plain, MN E.H. Renner Elk River, MN Keys Well St. Paul, MN Well #612esults• $46,665 Bergerson-Caswell Maple Plain, MN $54,441 $47,666 E.H. Renner Elk River, MN Keys Well St. Paul, MN $24,111 $37,121 $26,942 I recommend that the repair of Well #3 be awarded to Bergerson-Caswell in the amount of $46,665 and that the repair of We11 #6 also be awarded to Bergerson-Caswell in the amount of $24,111. 15 � � CR7 OF FRIDLEY �C�� FROM: DATE: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 14, 2005 � William W. gurns, City Manager �� � Jon tt. I�a�, Public Works Director Layne Otteson, Asst Public Works Director February 9, 2005 PW05�013 SUBJECT: Street Improvement Project I`lo. ST. 2005 - 2, 73rd Avenue Mill and Overlay The attached resolution approves the final plans and specifications and authorizes the advertisement of bids for the 73rd Avenue Mill and Overlay Project 1`l0. ST. 2005 � 2. This is a project that was discussed with the City Council during last year"s budget work sessions. It is currently budgeted in the 200f heee o'ectPisare mbur able fi-omgour� State Aid Avenue is an MSAS route, the entire cost o p � construction account. Our State Aid °I`leeds" allocation will fund this construction without impacting the amount of money available from our ��Population° allocation, which we use off the MSAS system for our neighborhood street project Recommend the City Council adopt the attached resolution to proceed with the project and to expedite the construction process. LO/Jtit�l:cz Attachment 16 RESOLUTION NO. 2005 - RESOLUTION RECEIVING FINAL PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS: 73rd AVENUE MILL AND OVERLAY PROJECT NO. ST. 2005 - 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT, the City Council of the City of Fridley, Anoka County, Minnesota, as follows: l. That the following improvements proposed are hereby ordered to be ' effected and completed as soon as reasonably possible, to-wit: _ Street improvements including bituminous milling, hot-mix bituminous overlay, and other miscellaneous associated repairs to the facilities located as follows: 73rd Avenue Able Street to Central Avenue (CSAH 35) That the work involved in said improvements as listed above shall hereafter be designed as: 73'� AVENUE MILL AND OVERLAY PROJECT NO. ST 2005 - 2 2. The plans and specifications prepared by the Public Works Department for such improvements and each of them pursuant to the Council resolutions heretofore adopted, a copy of which plans and specifications are hereto attached and made a part thereof, are hereby approved and shall be filed with City Clerk. The Director of Public Works shall accordingly prepare and cause to be inserted in the official newspaper advertisements for bids upon the making of such improvements under such approved plans and specifications. The advertisement shall be published for two (2) weeks (at least 14 days), and shall specify the work to be done and will state the bids will be opened and considered in the Council Chambers of the Fridley Municipal Center and that no bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the Public Works Director and accompanied by a cash deposit, bid bond, or certified check payable to the City for five percent (50) of the amount of such bid. That the advertisement for bids for 73rd Avenue Mill and Overlay Project No. ST. 2005 - 2 shall be substantially in the standard form. I- PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS 14th DAY OF FEBRLiARY , 2 0 0 5. ATTEST: DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK SCOTT J. LUND - MAYOR 17 � � CITY OF FRIDLEY To: From Date: Re: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 14, 2005 William W. Burns, City Manager Richard D. Pribyl, Finance Director Craig A. Ellestad, Accountant February 3, 2005 MODIFICATIONS TO THE 2004 BUDGET Attached you will find a resolution amending appropriations to the 2004 budget in accordance with the City Charter. The adjustments listed have arisen as a result of various donations, unforeseen expenditures and revenues, and reclassification of account codings. You have informally approved all adjustments through the Budget Reappropriation form. We request that the Council approve the amendment of the attached budgets. � l� 0 RESOLUTION NO. 2005- A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CHANGES IN APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE 2004 BUDGET FOR NOVEMBER THRU DECEMBER, 2004 WHEREAS, the City of Fridley has involved itself in initiatives that provide for future charges and modifications that will allow for a better delivery of service, and WHEREAS, the City of Fridley had not incorporated these and other necessary changes into the adopted budget for 2004. ?�iOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the following funds ���ill be amended as follo«�s: GENERAL FUND REVENUE ADJUSTMENTS Police-Insurance Reimbursement Police-Donation Police-Reimbursement Fire-Donation Fire-Donation Muni Center-Insurance Reimbursement Recreation-Donation APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENTS Police-Other Services & Charges Police-Supplies Police-Personal Services Fire-Small Tools & Minor Equipment Fire-Small Tools & Minor Equipment Muni Center-Other Services & Charges Recreation-Other Services & Charges 467 1, 000 4, 500 1,695 4,988 1,400 2,500 16,550 467 1,000 4,500 1,695 4,988 1,400 2,500 16,550 Squad Car Wal-Mart Drug Task Force Heart Safe Community Heart Safe Community Main Ramp Entrance Fridley Legion Repair Squad Car Block Captain Supplies Drug Task Force Wages Two AED's for Fire Dept Five AED's for Schools Main Ramp Entrance Repair Fridley Senior Program CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND STREETS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT REVENUE ADJUSTMENTS Streets-Muni State Aid Fund Balance APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENTS Streets-Other Financing Uses Streets-Other Financing Uses 330, 000 68,614 330,000 68,614 Marion Hills Use of Fund Balance Marion Hills Alley Paving Project PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2005. ATTEST: DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK 19 SCOTT J. LUND - MAYOR � � CfTY OF FRIDLEY Name Matthew Noren Tammy Christiansen AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 14, 2005 Position Patrol Officer Non-exempt Acc'Yg/Data Proc'g Clerk/ Cashier Non-exempt A�pointments Starting SalaN $17.95 per hour (2005 contract) $16.43 per hour 20 Starting Date Feb. 16, 2005 Feb. 23, 2005 Replaces Thomas Swanson Sue Anne Kirkham 0 � AGENDA ITEM COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 14, 2005 CffY OF FRIDLEY CLAIMS 120227-120554 21 � � C.ITY �F FRIDLEY AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 14, 2005 Tvpe of License TEMPORARY FOOD SALES Fridley Historical Society 611 Mississippi St. NE Fridley, MN 55432 LAWFUL GAMBLING PERMIT Totino-Grace Parents Org. 1350 Gardena Av Fridley, MN 55432 Woodcrest Elementary PTA 880 Osborne Rd. NE Fridley, MN 55432 AUCTION LICENSE Totino-Grace High School 1350 Gardena Av. NE Fridley, MN 55432 LICENSES � Sue Meyers Julie Michels Jodi Lichtsinn Greg Balego Approved Bv Comm. Dev. Director Public Safety Dir. City Clerk Public Safety Dir. City Clerk Public Safety Dir Public Safety Dir. TEMPORARY INTOXICATING LIQUOR Totino-Grace High School Brother Milton Barker Public Safety Dir. 1350 Gardena Av. NE Fridley, MN 55432 (April 30 & November 19, 2005) MASSEUR / MASSEUSE CERTIFICATE Stephen J. Walker 14941 Butternut Andover, MN 55304 22 Public Safety Dir. v � AGENDA ITEM � CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF emr oF February 14, 2005 FRIDLEY Contractor T e A licant A roved B Arrow Electrical Contractors Electrical Floyd Dehate State of MN As en Air, Inc. Electrical Marcel Rivard State of MN Ber man Electric Co Electrical Jeff Ber mann State of MN Carpenter's Contractin Inc The Commercial/Residential Dean Baile State of MN Castle Construction Services Roofin Dave Eriksen Ron Julkowski, BO Draftsmen Home Contractor/Residential Dan Bydlon State of MN Im rovements, Inc. Custom Refri eration, Inc. Heating David C. Huss Ron Julkowski, BO Enviro Electric Inc. Electrical Geor e A le Bon State of MN Excel Electric LLC Electrical Devern Matson State of MN Gorham Oien Mechanical Heating Jon Gorham Ron Julkowski, BO Harrison Electric Inc Electrical Anthon En er State of MN Hendel Plumbin Plumbing Philip W. Hendel State of MN CF Ha lin & Sons, Inc. Commercial Tom Goerin Ron Julkowski, BO Ke ler, Harlen D Commercial Harlen Kegler Ron Julkowski, BO i Landwehr Construction Inc Excavatin Bill Nelson Ron Julkowski, BO Lazer Electric, Inc. Electrical Charles Schwieters State of MN Mar ue Plumbin Inc. Plumbin Ed Bigaouette State of MN Premier Electrical Co Electrical Colin Olson State of MN Practical Systems Gas Jeff Kline Ron Julkowski, BO Rike-Lee Electric Inc Electrical Te Wild State of MN JM Robinson Electric, Inc. Electrical Jeff Robinson State of MN Ro ers Electric Inc Electrical Harlen Stadel State of MN Sherwood Electric Electrical Greg Broberg State of MN TL Jacobson Enterprises Inc dba Sign Erector Tim Jacobson Ron Julkowski, BO Si n-A-Rama Sullivan Construction Com an Contractor/Resi/Roofin John Sullivan State of MN THD at Home Services Inc Residential Cont. Bo d Li ham State of MN Tower Systems, Inc. Contractor/Commercial Cynthia Bogart Ron Julkowski, BO Vadnais Paul Plumbin Plumbin Paul Vadnais State of MN Vetsch Plumbing Services Inc Plumbing Bill Vetsch State of MN Vo el Sheetmetal, Inc. Heatin Bonnie Vo el Ron Julkowski, BO Wire-Rite Electric Co Electrical Perry Colstrom State of MN 23 � � arr aF FRIDLEY To: From: Date: Re: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF February 14, 2005 t; William W. Burns, City Manager �� � Don Abbott, Police Chief Brian Weierke, Police Captain January 25, 2005 First Reading of an Ordinance Amending Chapters 602, 603, and 606 of the Fridley City Code Pertaining to Licensed Establishments. In February of 2004, Council listened to a proposal from Public Safety Director, Dave Sallman that would have regulated "Ultimate Wrestling." It defined conditions under which these events could occur. These conditions included the proscription of both the serving and consumption of alcoholic beverages. After hearing objections to the proposal from an "ultimate wrestling" promoter as well as the Manager of the Minnesota Sports Cafe, the first reading of tl�e legislation was tabled in order to give staff time to work out differences with the persons who had testified. After the tabling of the first reading other issues, including the retirement of Dave Sallman as Public Safety Director, absorbed the attention of Police Department leadership during much of 2004. In November, however, a 25-year-old male was badly beaten and suffered life-threatening injuries at the hands of three other males. Since the beating occurred after an "ultimate wrestling" event and since it appeared that all of those involved were under the influence of alcohol, the Police Deparhnent developed a renewed interest in moving forward with regulation of these events. Although the original legislation sought to regulate the conduct of these events, the latest proposal would eliminate events of this type from establishments that hold on sale liquor licenses. While removing fighting contests from bars and restaurants does not eliminate these events in Fridley, it purports to separate them from the serving and consumption of alcohol. It also keeps the City from getting into the technicalities of regulating a professional sport and limits City liability that might be associated with the regulation of these sports. The Police Department has some serious public safety concerns regarding these events and the potential for more problems. Experience tells us that when you mix a violent sport and alcohol, poor choices are made. Alcohol removes the inhibition people have and contributes to people wanting to emulate the fighters. The City Council received and discussed this issue at their conference meeting on January 24, 2005. Staff recommends approval. 24 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTERS 602, 603 AND 606 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE PERTAINING TO LICENSED ESTABLISHMENTS SERVING BEER OR INTOXICATING LIQUORS, PROHIBITING CERTAIN CONDUCT THEREIN The City Council of the City of Fridley does hereby ordain that Chapter 602, 603, and 606 of the Fridley City Code be hereby amended as follows: CHAPTER 602. BEER LICENSING 602.08. CONDITIONS OF LICENSE 11. Certain Exhibitions and Conduct Prohibited No licensee shall permit in anv licensed establishment or anv adjoininQ propertv owned or leased b�the licensee anv boxme wrestlin� or anv other form of entertainment whose primarv �urpose is ohvsical contact bv strikin� ar touching an opponent with hands head feet or bodv Team sports m which phvsical contact is incidental to the primarv nurpose of the eame such as basketball, vollevball soccer football baseball and softball are not included amon� activities prohib�ted bv this section. CHAPTER 603. INTOXICATING LIQUOR 603.10. CONDITIONS OF LICENSE. 22. No licensee shall nermit in anv licensed establishment or anv adjoinin� property owned or leased by the licensee, anv boxin� wrestlin� or anv other form of entertainment whose primarv purpose is phvsica] contact bv striking or touchine an opponent with hands head feet or bod� Team sports m which phvsical contact is incidental to the primarv purpose of the eame such as basketball, vollevball soccer football baseball and softball are not included amone activities proh�brted by this section � CHAPTER 606. 1NTOXICATING LIQUOR ON-SALE CLUBS 606.10. CONDITIONS. 10. No licensee shall permit in anv licensed establishment or anv adioining propertv owned or leased by the licensee, anv boxin� wrestline or anv other form of entertainment whose primarv purpose is physical contact bv strikine or touchin� an opponent with hands head, feet, or bodv Team sports in which uhvsical contact is incidental to the vrimar purpose of the game such as basketball, vollevball soccer football baseball and softball are not included amonQ activities prohibrted bv this section. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF 2005. — Attest: Debra A. Skogen, City Clerk First Reading: Second Reading: Publication: 25 Scott J. Lund, Mayor RESOLUTION RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY FINDING THE PROPOSAL OF TIME WARNER TO PROVIDE CABLE COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES WITHIN THE CITY TO INADEQUATELY MEET THE CABLE COMMUNICATIONS NEEDS OF THE CITY AND MAKING A PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT DENYING THE RENEWAL OF THE FRANCHISE OF TIME WARNER . WHEREAS, for a period of over 15 years, Time Warner or its predecessors held a franchise within the City of Fridley for the provision of cable communications services; and _ WHEREAS, at the expiration of the aforesaid franchise, Time Warner and the City attempted to engage in informal negotiations for the renewal of such a franchise within the City; and WHEREAS, the negotiations did not result in an agreement between Time Warner and the City; and WHEREAS, Time Warner demanded the commencement of Formal Renewal proceeding pursuant to Federal law; and WHEREAS, under the provisions of applicable law, the City was obligated to conduct a thorough assessment of the cable communication needs of the City; and WHEREAS, the City conducted an extensive study of the cable communications needs of the City and its residents; and WHEREAS, the City of Fridley, ha�ing done a needs assessment of the cable communications needs of the City, issued a Request for Proposal for the Provision of Cable Communications Services within the City as required by Federal law; and WHEREAS, Time Warner made a Proposal for the provision of cable services in the City of Fridley; and WHEREAS, the City through its Council, staff and consultants has thoroughly reviewed the proposal of Time Warner; and WHEREAS, under Federal Law, the City must either accept the proposal of Time Warner as _ made or issue a preliminary assessment that the franchise should not be renewed; and WHEREAS, the City has determined that there are numerous areas in which the proposal of Time Warner does not meet the stated needs of the City as articulated in the Request for Proposal and would not, therefore, meet the cable communications needs of the City, if accepted; and WHEREAS, the City has determined and made express Findings of Fact, which are attached to this Resolution, and incorporated by reference, dealing with some, but not necessarily all of the inadequacies contained in the Time Warner proposal. 26 Resolution No. Page 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City has, with this action, made the preliminary determination that Time Warner's franchise not be renewed in the City of Fridley. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2005. ATTEST: DEBRA A. SKOGEN — CITY CLERK � 27 SCOTT J. LUND — MAYOR FINDINGS OF FACT Time Warner's proposed language related to gross revenues seeks to change the current status of defining "gross revenues" in a manner likely to reduce revenues to the City by modifying the manner in which bad debt can be written off, as well as by modification of the manner in which revenues are defined so as to exclude cable-related services that may expand in the future. The proposed language also fails to protect the City from any revenue losses as may be generated by product bundling with services not currently provided for under the Franchise. 2. Time Warner proposes to change current performance bond and security fund lang�age in the franchise, as well as to limit its access costs under the City's Right of Way ordinance. The proposed security language would create an unfair additional financial risk to the City. The right-of-way provisions would impose unfair costs to the taxpayers, including those not customers of Time Warner, subsidizing the franchisees operations in the City 3. Time Warner's proposal refuses to agree with the requirement that the franchisee supply the City with maps of its facilities within the City, which is of great importance to assure the City, Time Warner and the public that there would be no disruption of service or costly repairs necessitated by the destruction of those facilities or equipment when work was occurring within the public right of way. 4. Time Warner's proposal does not provide for the long-term construction, upgrade or even maintenance of an adequate, much less state-of-the-art I-Net system, which has been and continues to be a critical component of educational communications within the City and would be so for the City's own facilities. 5. Time Warner's proposal inadequately addresses the stated need for PEG access and support within the City. Time Warner's proposal offers an equipment grant that is nearly one quarter million dollars below the determined need of the City. Time Warner's proposal eliminates entirely its current obligations regarding the provision of Public Access. 6. Time Warner's proposal is for a ten-year franchise with a five-year, automatic renewal if the system is "up to date." The transitional nature of technology in this area makes anything beyond the City's proposed ten-year limit inadequate and against the City's interest. 7. Time Warner proposes to eliminate the current emergency system override that public safety officials in the City have stated is a necessary public safety tool. 8. Time Warner's proposal would require the City to abandon its current role as the protector of consumers within the City. Time Warner contends that it should only have to follow FCC standards, but those standards expressly continue to authorize the role of City's as the guardians of their citizens' interests as consumers. : 9. Time Warner's proposal would radically change the current Local Origination and Public Access practices by shifting the entire cost, staffing, and a most of the equipment component, to the City. 10. Time Warner proposes taking one of the current four access channels from the City, which the City has determined could be used by public entities 29 � � AGENDA ITEM �rQF CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 14, 2005 FRIDLEY INFORMAL STATUS REPORTS 30