Loading...
10/28/1996 - 00002212� THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL OF The Regular Meeting of the Fridley City Council was called to order at 7:34 p.m. by Mayor Nee. PLEDGE OF AI,LEGIANCE: Mayor Nee led the Council and audience in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. ROLL CALL: MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT PRESENTATION: Mayor Nee, Councilwoman Jorgenson, Councilman Billings, Councilman Schneider, and Councilwoman Bolkcom None AWARD TO DAVE SALLMAN, PUSLIC SAFETY DIRECTOR� Ms. Pat Prinzevalle, Alexandra House, introduced Connie Moore and Colleen Schmitt from their staff. She spent most of the day at Target Center listening to President Clinton talk about community � and leadership and how critical it is for everyone to work together on issues that affect this country. Ms. Prinzevalle stated that one of the issues was domestic violence. She appreciated Council's support and feels very privileged to offer an award to Dave Sallman, who has not only supported Alexandra House and their efforts, but went above and beyond to make sure domestic violence is held as a crime. This award to Dave Sallman is in honor of his exemplary services on behalf of battered women and their families. � Mr. Sallman thanked Alexandra House for this award. He said he receives great cooperation from Alexandra House, and he appreciates their support. PROCLAMATION: HOME CARE MONTH - NOVEMBER, 1996. Mr. Burns, City Manager, read this proclamation, which was issued by Mayor Nee, proclaiming November, 1996 as Home Care Month. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: COUNCIL MEETING, OCTOBER 14, 199b� MOTION by Councilwoman Jorgenson to approve the minutes as presented. Seconded by Councilwoman Bolkcom. Upon a coice vote, � FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOSER 28, 1996 PAGE 2 all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: OLD BUSINESS: l. ORDINANCE N0. 1076 APPROVING A VACATION REQUEST, SAV #96-02, BY INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT N0. 14 (WARD 1). A. TO VACATE STREETS AND AI,LEYS GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF 61ST AVENiTE, EAST OF SEV�NTH STREET, SOUTH OF 63RD AVENLTE, AND WEST OF JACKSON STREET; B. TO VACATE STREETS AND ALLEYS GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF 59TH AVENUE, EAST OF SEVENTH STREET, SOUTH OF 61ST AVENUE, AND WEST OF WEST MOORE LAKE DRIVE; AND C. TO VACATE STREETS AND ALLEYS GENERALLY LOCATED NOkTH OF 59TH AVENLTE, EAST OF SEVENTH STREET, SOUTH OF 61ST AVENiJE, AND WEST OF WEST MOORE LAKE DRIVE Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that this vacation is in three parts to vacate streets and alleys located on School District No. 14 and City-owned property in the areas of the high � school, middle school, and Commons Park ball field This is a housekeeping item, done in con�unction with clarification of property ownership. WAIVED THE READING AND ADOPTED ORDINANCE NO. 1076 ON THE SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLICATION. 2. ORDINANCE N0. 1077 RECODIFYING THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE, CHAPTER 31, ENTITLED "PAWN SHOPS," BY AMENDING SECTION 31.01, TRICTED TRI�NSACTIONS: Mr. Burns, City Manger, stated that these amendments have been requested by City Prosecutor Carl Newquist The recommended changes are additions of the words "corporation, partnership, or business association" after the word "person" in the definition of licensee or pawnbroker. Currently, Fridley's two operating pawn shops are licensed to partnerships or corporations rather than to a person. Mr. Burns stated that another change is the addition of the words "nor any agent or employee of a licensee" after "no licensee" in the section covering restricted transactions. Both of these changes apply to Chapter 31 of the Fridley City Code, entitled "Pawn Shops," and staPf recommends Council's approval of these changes. � WAIVED THE READING AND ADOPTED ORDINANCE NO. 1077 ON THE SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLICATION. NEW BUSINESS: ' FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 28, 1996 PAGE 3 3. FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE RECODIFYING THE FRIDLEY CITY 205.17.O1.0 (13� AND 205.18.O1.0 (14). Mr Burns, City Manager, stated that this request is by Northco Corporation to allow daycare centers as a special use in M-1 and M-2 zoning districts. The daycare center must be located in a multi-tenant building that is located on an arterial street, and the area used by the center may not exceed thirty percent of the floor area of the building. WAIVED THE READING AND APPROVED THE ORDINANCE ON FIRST READ I1VG . 4. ESTABLISH A CONSIDERATIOD NOAH'S ARK, ENTITLED "ZC 205.08.O1.0 IC HEARING FOR NOVEMBER 4,1996 � ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT, ZTA #96- NSr/li�\�11� CHAPTER )7.Ol.0 FOR BY 05, PROVIDE PARKING STANDARDS FOR HOSPITALS, NURSING HOMES, CONVALESCENT HOMES, AND HOMES FOR THE ELDERLY , Mr Burns, City Manager, stated that this text amendment was made by Noah's Ark, a residences. They wish to construct a property located at the intersection of University Avenue service drive. � 67 6 request for a zoning developer of senior senior high rise on 83rd Avenue and West Mr. Burns stated that the petitioner is requesting the City make a distinction between senior apartment buildings and general purpose apartment buildings. Currently, our ordinances that apply to all multi-family buildings require 1.5 parking spaces for one bedroom and .5 parking spaces for each additional bedroom. The petitioner is asking that the requirement be reduced to 1 parking space per unit, with 50 percent of those spaces being enclosed for multiple family residences that are dedicated to senior living Staff also suggested that the parking ratio be reduced for convalescent homes to one space for every four beds and three spaces for every four employees on a shift. SET THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT, ZTA, #96-02, FOR NOVEMBER 4, 1996. RECEIVE THE MINiJTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 16, 1996. RECEIVED THE MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 16, 1996 ESTABLISH A PUBLIC HEARING FOR NOVEMBER 4, 1996, FOR � � � FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 28, 1996 PAGE 4 CONSIDERATION OF A ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT, ZTA #96-03, BY ROLAND STINSKI, TO ALLOW PROFESSIONAI, JEWELRY SERVICES AS A PERMITTED USE IN THE CR-1 ZONING DISTRICT: Mr. Burns, a11ow the permitted Commission amendment, permit. City Manager, stated that this amendment is to addition of professional �ewelry services as a use for the CR-1 zoning district. The Planning voted unanimously to recommend approval of this sub�ect to permitting the use as a special use SET THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT, ZTA #96-03, FOR NOVEMBER 4, 1996. 7. RESOLUTION N0. 97-1996 IN SUPPORT OF A PREMISES PERMIT APPLICATION FOR A MINNESOTA LAWFUL GAMBLING PREMISE PERMIT TO WORLD ASSOCIATION OF THE ALCOHOL BEVERAGE INDUSTRY (WAABI) (MAIN EVENT, 7820 UNIVERSITY AVENLTE N.E.) (WARD 3): Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that the adoption of this resolution would allow WAABI to conduct a pull-tab operation at the Main Event, 7810 University Avenue N.E. If approved, this would be WAABI's second gambling permit in Fridley. WAP.BI has contributed over $41,000 from their gambling proceeds to local causes. The application has been reviewed by the Police Department, and they found no reason to ob�ect to the permit ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 97-1996. 8. RESOLUTION NO 98-1996 CERTIFYING CERTAIN DELiNQUENT UTILITY SERVICES TO THE COUNTY AUDITOR FOR COLLECTION WITH THE 1997 Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that property owners hace been notified that utilzty bills are being certified to the County, and residents have been given adequate opportunity to pay the bill. The penalty shown in this resolution is in addition to regular penalties that accrue on utility bills. Mr. Burns stated that the property owners have thirty days after adoption of the resolution to pay the amounts posted without penalty. There are 290 delinquent accounts with delinquenc�es amounting to $127,67� 22 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 98-1996. 9 CLAIMS• AUTHOftIZED PAYMENT OF CLAIM NOS. 70639 THROUGH 70857, 10. LICENSES: � � � FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 28, 1996 PAGE 5 APPROVED THE LICENSES AS SUSMITTED AND AS ON FILE IN THE LICENSE CLERK'S OFFICE. 11. ESTIMATES: APPROVED THE FOLIAWING ESTIMATES: ASTECH Corporation P. 0. Box 1025 St. Cloud, MN 56302 1996 Street Improvement Pro�ect No. ST 1996-10 FINAL ESTIMATE . . . . . . . . Struck & Irwin Paving Company 812 Williamson Street Madison, WI 537D3 (Sealcoat) . . . . $172,208.63 1996 Street Improvement Pro�ect (Slurry Seal) No. ST. 1996-11 FINAL ESTIMATE . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 34,415.82 W.B. Miller, Inc 6701 Norris Lake Road N.W. Elk River, MN 55330 1996 Street Improvement Pro�ect No. ST. 1996-4 Estimate No. 3 . . . . . . . . . . Newquist & Ekstrum, Chartered 301 Fridley Plaza Office Building 6401 University Avenue N.E Fridley, MN 55432 Services Rendered as City Prosecuting Attorney for the Month of August, 1996 $ 20,828.40 . . $ 14,070 10 No persons in the audience spoke regarding the proposed consent agenda items. 1KOTIUN by Councilman Schneider to approve the consent agenda items. Seconded by Councilwoman Bolkcom. Upon a voice vote, all votzng aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. � � � ERIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OE OCTOBER 28, 1996 PAGE 6 ADOPTION OF AGENDA: MOTION by Councilman Schneider to adopt the agenda as submitted. Seconded by Councilwoman Bolkcom. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. OPEN FORUM, VISITORS: MR. JTM GLASER, 16 RICE CREEK WAY N.E, RE: LIGHTING IN PARK• Mr. Glaser, 16 Rice Creek Way N.E., stated that there is a City park across the street from his residence that has one light that is not operating correctly and needs to be fixed. He would also like another light installed in the park closer to the railroad trestle. Since so many people use the walking path he felt another light would be beneficial. Councilwoman Bolkcom stated that staff would check into rhis request and contact him. MR. DANIEL GUHANICK, 55 66TH WAY N E.: Mr. Guhanick, 55 66th Way N.E., stated that he would agreed with Mr. Glaser's comments. The existing light in the park is constantly switching off and on. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 12. PUBLIC HEARING ON THE ADOPTION OF A FAIR HOUSING ORDINANCE FOR THE CITY OF FRIDLEY. MOTION by Councilman Schneider to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilwoman Bolkcom. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing opened at 7:54 p.m. Ms. Dacy, Community Development Director, stated that the purpose of the hearing is to evaluate the proposed ordinance to adopt Lhe fair housing standards for the City. The ordinance states that it is the policy of the Crty to fully comply wrth the Federal Fair Housing Act and the Minnesota Human Rights Act. In summary, it is unlawful to refuse to sell, rent, or lease housing to any person or groups of people based on their race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, status with regard to public assistance, disability, sex orientation, or familial status. Ms Dacy stated that the Human Resources and Planning Commissions, as well as the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, have reviewed this ordinance and recommend approval. � � � FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 28, 1996 PAGE 7 No persons in the audience spoke regarding this proposed fair housing ordinance. MOTION by Councilwoman Sorgenson to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing closed at 7:56 p.m. 13. PUBLIC HEARING TO AMEND CHAPTER 205 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE, ENTITLED "ZONING," AND CHAPTER 211, ENTITLED "SUBDIVISION," TO COMPLY WITH MINNESOTA STATUTE 15.99, "60 DAY AGENCY ACTION LAW:" MOTION by Councilman Billings to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing opened at 7•56 p.m. Mr. Hickok, Planning Coordinator, said the State of Minnesota adopted a law that would require municipalities to process their land use applications in a timely fashion. The City's process has been reviewed and refined for a number of land use applications. The proposed amendments are to bring the City into compliance with this 1aw and ensure that these land use matters are processed within the sixty-day time period. Mr. Hickok reviewed the new land use application processes for variances, special use permits, vacations, lot splits, rezoning and zoning text amendments, plats, comprehensive plan amendments, and wetland replacement plans. Public hearings before the Council would only be for rezoning, zoning text amendments, plats, and comprehensive plan amendments. Hearings on all other items would be conducted at the Planning Commission level In addition, there would be a Charter amendment which the Charter Commission will discuss at their next meeting. The Planning Commission has recommended approval of these changes to Chapters 205 and 211. Councilman Schneider asked what would happen if Council did not act within the sixty-day period Mr. Knaak, within the approved. City Attorney, stated that if the City did not act sixty days, the action being sought is automatically Councilwoman Jorgenson asked if residents would be able to make their concerns known rather than waiting until the next Council meeting since action would be taken the same night as the public hearing. Mr. Hickok stated that the public hearings before the Planning Commission would be televised. The plan is to broadcast Commission � � FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 28� 1996 PAGE 8 meetings on the cable channel. This would give ample time for citizens to submit comments before an item is before Council Councilman Schneider stated that it would then be more important for citizens to appear at the Planning Commission meetings since that will be the only public hearing held on some requests. Councilman Schneider stated that if an application is incomplete, he understands that a waiver can be signed to go beyond the sixty- day limxt. Mr. Guhanick, 55 66th Way N.E., asked the means for no�ifying persons about a rezoning for those who do not have cable television. Mr. Hickok stated that the State law is clear about notification, everyone within 350 feet of the property to be rezoned is notified by mail. A legal notice is also publlshed in the City's official newspaper. Councilwoman Bolkcom suggested that the taped Planninq Commission meetings be available at the library. Councilwoman Jorgenson also suggested that these tapes be available at the Municipal Center. Mr. Hickok stated that these tapes would be on file at the Municipal Center. Councilman Schneider asked if a sign was posted on the property. Mr. Hickok stated that posting a sign on the property is not done. Ms. Dacy stated that only for rezonings. some of the land use and rezonings. in the past the posting of slgns has been done Staff is evaluating the costs for signs for applications, such as variances, subdivisions, No other persons in the audience spoke regarding the proposed amendments to Chapters 205 and 211. MOTION by Councilwoman Jorgenson to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilwoman Bolkcom. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing closed at 8:15 p.m. 14. PUBLIC HEARING FOR ASSESSMENT FOR THE EAST RIVER ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROSECT N0. ST. 1994-03• MOTION by Councllwoman Bolkcom to waive the reading of rhe public � hearing notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all votiny aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing opened at 8:15 p.m. � ERIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 28, 1996 PAGE 4 Mr. Pribyl, Finance Director, stated that this assessment roll is for the East River Road Improvement Pro�ect No. ST. 1994-03 which involved the improvement on East River Road from Hartman Circle to Glen Creek Road. The total cost of the pro�ect is $189,617.02. Mr. Pribyl stated that $46,080.21 is being assessed against the affected property owners for curb and gutter, with the remaining amount of $143,590.81 paid from the City's Caprtal Improvement Fund. The assessment may be spread over a ten-year period at an interest rate of 6-1/2 percent. Mr. Pribyl stated that the $9 00 per front foot assessment was established early in the improvement process based on curb and gutter. This $9.00 cost is maintained across the pro�ect area for that year. He was not sure whether the final cost was in on this pro�ect when the assessment process was developed for the bond issue. He understands that the contract the County let on this pro�ect was very favorable. The proposed assessrnent o£ $9.00 per front foot is the uniform ad}ustment. Mrs. Janice Hammerstrom, 6931 East River Road N E., stated that the cost to the City for this pro�ect was $5.75 a front foot Mr. Flora, Public Works Director, stated that for this particular � pro�ect, the County received very good prices. In the next segment of this pro�ect, the costs will probably be higher, and the City tries to keep the prices the same for everyone. � Mrs. Hammerstrom stated that she spoke with the County, and they told her that the cost of the concrete curb and gutter for which the City will be billed was $23,422 covering a total of 4,073.5 lineal feet. This amounts to $5.75 a foot or a difference of $3.25 from the actual cost being assessed. Mr. Flora stated that the County will not finalize the cost until the total pro�ect is completed. Mrs. Hammerstrom stated that in her correspondence regarding this assessment, it states that she is being assessed only for concrete curb and gutter. The balance is to be paid by other sercices. Councilman Schneider questioned if costs were being averaged for all the pro�ects done in this year. Mr. F1ora stated that that was true. The numbers are slanted, as the City has to pay for other items such as medians, storm water, and sanitary sewer improvements. There is a different distriburion of costs the County passes along to the City The City will be charging for all the concrete curb and gutter that oaas installed in this pro�ect. � FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 28, 1996 PAGE 10 Mrs. Hammerstrom asked if she is being assessed only for curb and gutter based totally on the front footage of her property. Mr. Flora stated that it is based on the front footage, and she is paying for all the concrete installed in this pro�ect. Mrs. Hammerstrom stated that there is a retaining wall that faces East River Road for properties that front on Hartman Circle. She questioned if she was paying for the curb and gutter in front of this retaining wall. Mr. Flora stated that the City is only assessing the front footage and not side yards. Only persons who face the street pay the front foot assessment for the improvements. Councilman Schneider stated that what is in question is the amount being assessed per front foot. The City has to recoup the total cost of the curb and gutter. The formula the City has used for years is that property owners do not pay a side yard assessment. This cost is split between the property owners down the block. Mrs. Hammerstrom stated that the $46,080 being assessed to the property owners is double what the County stated was the cost for � the curb and gutter If the total lineal feet of concrete curb and gutter was 4,073.5 and owners were charged $9.00 a front foot, the cost would be about $36, 657 or still $10, 000 higher than what is being assessed back to the property owners. Mrs. Hammerstrom stated that perhaps there is also a question of the moral issue on how the City could charge twice the actual cost of the curb and gutter. Councilwoman Sorgenson stated that there seems to be two different amounts, and she would like to know the correct amount of footage Mrs. Hammerstrom stated that if the property owners are assessed from the end of this year for the curb and gutter, it means the property owners are being assessed at 6-1/2 percent interest for two years before the final bill is even received from the County Councilwoman Jorgenson asked when the City receives the final costs from the County. Mr. Flora stated that when the County has all their final numbers they notify the City. This is a 1994 pro�ecL, and the City still does not have all the figures. Councilwoman Sorgenson asked how the charges can be assessed if the � City has not received a billing for the costs Mr. Pribyl stated that the Internal Revenue Service instituted new rules for the way reimbursement bonds are sold. The City has a � � � ERIDLEY CITY CO[JIICIL MEETING OE OCTOBER 28, 1996 PAGE 11 short window of opportunity to sell debt on this improvement pro�ect. The assessment pays the costs over a long period of time. Until the City can recoup the assessment, there is a cash flow problem. Councilman Schneider stated that the question is whether the City assesses the estimate or actual cost. Mr. Flora stated that on City streets, the actual cost is assessed. The City has estimates from the County and is trying to obtain the bonding. Councilman Schneider stated that he would like to know how many lineal feet of concrete was installed and how much the City is assessing. Mayor Nee stated that the issue Mrs. Hammerstrom raises is very valid. Councilwoman several years The City has pro�ect. Bolkcom stated that it seems like it could take before the City knows the actual cost of the pro�ect. to come up with a figure in order to assess the Mr. Flora stated that last year the assessment was less than what was actually paid. Councilman Billings asked where the figure of $189,671 for the total cost of the pro�ect was obtained. Mr. Pribyl stated that it was from communications with the County. This was their best guess for the total cost of the pro�ect. He receives the total contract costs. Councilman Billings asked if the costs can be broken down. There are two things that are troubling to him. He was under the impression that Council established a$9.00 front foot rate as being the maximtun to be assessed. However, that actual costs would be assessed, but would not exceed $9.00 a foot or whatever dollar amount was established for that particular year. He understood if the costs were less then the City would be assessing less Councilman Billings stated that if, in fact, the figures quoted by Mrs. Hammerstrom are correct, it was his understanding that the City should be assessing $5.75 a front foot for the East River Road properties regardless of whether or not some other street improvements are more costly for the City. In terms of properties where there is no front footage, he thought this cost was coming out of the general city funds. In any case, he would like to see the actual figures for the cost of curb and gutter on East River Road. There is a question in his mind as to whether or not a � � � FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOSER 28, 1996 PAGE 12 particular property benefits from curb and gutter installed two blocks away. Councilman Schneider stated that his reference to assessing for side yards was, basically, for street improvements. He did not know what is done for curb and gutter. Mr. James Sandstrom, 6941 East River Road N E., stated that he is being assessed for too much frontage. Councilman Billings stated that if Mr Sandstrom's property is on a curve, this would extend his frontage. Mr. Sandstrom presented several maps, one indicating 127.68 feet and another indicating 113.61 feet. He is being assessed for 117.68 feet. Councilwoman Bolkcom asked how the front footage is established. Mr. F1ora stated that this information is taken from the plat maps. Mr. Sandstrom's maps do not reflect property frontages, but are survey maps which do not reflect descriptions. Councilwoman Jorgenson stated she felt that Council does not have sufficient information to proceed. Councilwoman Bolkcom asked what would happen if Council did not act on the item this evening Mr. Pribyl stated that the pro�ect will probably have to be assessed next year. Councilman Schneider stated that rt is difficult to proceed wrthout having the figures and breakdown. Mr. Guhanick, 55 66th Way N.E , stated that with this assessment, it is about $300 higher than what was expected. Property owners would be paying 6-1/2 percent for several years before the bill even arrices. When Council plans these pro�ects, he would ask them to take into consideration the folks that have been laid off. There are a lot of people who cannot afford these improcements and do not qualify for deferment. He is particularly talking about this pro�ect and the $9.00 a front foot figure being used for all City properties. No other persons in the audience spoke regarding this proposed assessment MOTION by Councilwoman Bolkcom to continue this public hearing to the next meeting on November 4 and direct staff to submit further data on this pro�ect. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a � � CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 28, 1996 PAGE 13 voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 15. PUBLIC HEARING ON ASSESSMENT FOR THE MAIN STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT N0. ST. 1994-08 (COMMERCIAL). MOTION by Councilwoman Bolkcom to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing opened at 8:55 p.m. Mr. Pribyl, Finance Director, stated that this assessment roll is for improvements on Main Street from I-694 to 44th Avenue. The total cost of this project is $177,702.30, with $173,111 02 being assessed against the affected commercial property owners at $8 00 a front foot for concrete curb and gutter. There is also a$3.03 per 100 square feet based on 75 percent lot coverage for storm sewer. The assessment will be certified for ten years at an interest rate of 6-1/2 percent. Councilman Schneider asked if this was the actual figures were from the County. He questioned the curb and gutter and if the $8.00 a front foot is an estimate. cost and if these cost for concrete a true figure or Mr. Flora, Public Works Director, stated that it was an estimate, but it came out at $8.00. The City does not have the final figures from the County, as the County has not completed the pro�ect. No persons in the audience spoke regarding this proposed assessment. MOTION by Councilwoman Bo1_kcom to continue this public hearing to the November 4 Council meeting and direct staff to obtain further information from the County. Seconded by Councilman Schneider Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 16. PUBLIC HEARING ON ASSESSMENT FOR THE MAIN STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT N0. ST. 1994-08 (RESIDENTIAL): MOTION by Councilwoman Bolkcom to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilman Schneider Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing opened at 9•00 p.m. � Mr. Pribyl, Finance Director, stated that this assessment roll is for improvements on Main Street from I-699 to 44th Avenue. The total cost of the pro�ect is $177,702.30, with $21,728 being assessed aga�nst the affected residential property owners at $8.00 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 28, 1996 PAGE 14 � per front foot. The remaining amount will be assessed to the commercial properties. The assessment will be certified for ten years at an interest rate of 6-1/2 percent. � No persons in the audience spoke regarding this proposed assessment. MOTION by Councilwoman Bolkcom to continue this public hearing to the November 4 Council meeting and direct staff to obtain further information from the County. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 17. PUBLIC HEARING ON ASSESSMENT FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT . SI. lyyb-U4: MOTION by Councilwoman Bolkcom to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing opened at 9.02 p.m. Councilman Jorgenson stated that this is another county pro�ect and asked if the costs have been finalized. Councilman Schneider stated that everyone has agreed to the costs for this improvement of the Mississippi and Third Streets intersection No persons in the audience spoke regarding this proposed assessment. MOTION by Councilwoman Bolkcom to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing closed at 9•03 p.m. 18. PUBLIC HEARING ON ASSESSMENT FOR 1995 STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1995-1 & 2: MOTION by Councilman Schneider to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilman Billings. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing opened at 9:03 p.m. Mr. Pribyl stated that this pro�ect included street improcements on 68th Avenue from Monroe Street to Brookview Drive; Arthur Street � from 64th Avenue to Mississippi Street; 69th Avenue from Central Avenue to Stinson Boulevard; the 69th Avenue slipoff on University Avenue to Third Street; and the Rice Creek Townhouse parking lot. The total cost of the pro�ect is $588,749 02, with $21,495 being � FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 28, 1996 PAGE 15 assessed against the affected residential property owners at $9.00 a front foot. The remaining amount of $567,254.02 will be paid from the City's Capital Improvement Fund. The assessment will be certified for ten years at an interest rate of 6-1/2 percent. Mr. Pribyl stated that a letter was received from Angela Percic ob�ecting to the assessment on her property at 1020 68th Avenue. Councilman Schneider asked the cost for curb and gutter. Mr. Flora stated that they were told it was $9.00 a front foot. Councilman Schneider stated that he would like a breakdown on the numbers before taking any action on this item. MOTION by Councilman Schneider to continue this public hearing to the November 4 Council meeting when staff is prepared to discuss the figures. Seconded by Councilwoman Bolkcom. Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 19. PUBLIC HEARING ON ASSESSMENT FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT MOTION by Councilman Schneider to waive the reading of the public � hearing notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing opened at 9:10 p.m. Mr. Pribyl, Finance Director, stated that at the City Council's July 22, 1996 meeting a request was approved from Steiner Development to spread the interest owed on two deferred special assessments over ten years. The remaining four years of principal and interest will be paid as scheduled and collected through this assessment. The interest owing on the 1990-1996 principal will be spread over the next ten years. This assessment roll amounts to actually $21,250.17. No persons in the audience spoke regarding this proposed assessment. MOTION by Councilwoman Bolkcom to close the public hearing Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all coting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing closed at 9:11 p m. 20. PUBLIC HEARING ON ASSESSMENT FOR LOCK LAKE DAM RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT N0. 211: � MOTION by Councilman Billings to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, Councilman Billings, ' � � FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOSER 28, 1996 PAGE 16 Councilwoman Jorgenson, Councilman Schneider, and Mayor Nee voted in favor of the motion. Councilwoman Bolkcom abstained from voting. Mayor Nee declared the motion carried and the public hearing opened at 9:11 p.m. Mr. Pribyl, Finance Director, stated that this assessment roll is for the Locke Lake Dam Reconstruction Pro�ect No. 211 for a total cost of $662,927.81. $190,536 will be assessed against the affected residentzal property owners. For lots abutting the lake the assessment will be $3,056, and for buxldable lots in the drainage area the assessment will be $389. The remaining amount is to be paid from a State grant of $150,000 and the City's Storm Water Fund in the amount of $322,391.81. All properties assessed will be certified for ten years at an interest rate of 6-1/2 percent. Mr. Don Russell, 6631 East River Road, stated that he would receive a$389 assessment. He asked how many property owners would be assessed at $3,056. Mr. F1ora, Public Works Director, stated that there are 41 properties. Mr. Russell asked how many property owners will be assessed for the $389. Councilwoman Jorgenson stated that it is a large number. Mr. Russell questioned who would pay this assessment on a neighboring property where the owner has sold and there is a new owner. Mr. Flora stated that this amount should have been in escrow and paid by the seller. Mr. Russell asked if there was public access to Locke Lake. Mr. Flora stated that there is access through Locke Lake park and Manomin Park. Mr. Guhanick, 55 66th Way N.E., asked if other residents were not paying to dredge someone else's property. Mr. Flora stated that this assessment is for the Locke Lake dam pro�ect, and there is an equal assessment for all properties abutting the lake. Mr Guhanick questioned the assessment for those residing in the drainage area. He has not seen any concrete plans on the improvements to be made as far as canoe landings. There are rocks on the parcel next to the dam which makes access difficult. There FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 28, 1996 PAGE 17 � is no access by the railroad tracks and no way to launch a canoe or get to the lake. Mr. Guhanick stated that it seems the City is asking residents to pay for things for which there are vague references such as a wonderful canoe landing and parks, but he has not seen any plans. He asked how accessible the lake would be to those who do not live on the lake and how it would benefit other property owners. Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that the basis for the secondary assessment was drainage area rather than park benefit. Mr. Flora stated that this assessment pro�ect concerns the dam. Contributions from the sub-watershed is assisting to pay the cost for replacement of the Locke Lake Dam. Mr. Guhanick asked if there would be an additional assessment for future work done on Locke Lake Mr. Burns stated there is no secondary assessment on the drainage pro�ect for the area, but there is for the abutting property owners. Mr. Flora stated there would be an ad valorem tax through the Rice � Creek Watershed District for al1 those affected. This would amount to approximately $6.00 a year on a home valued at about $89,000. Mr. Guhanick asked how much more than the $389 will have to be paid. Mr. F1ora stated that the $389 is strictly for the dam reconstruction, and that should be the only cost. Mr. Guhanick asked if there was a way to review the final plans for the entire Locke Lake area. Mr. Burns stated that Mr. Guhanick should come in to the Municipal Center to review the information on file, however, plans are still being formulated. Mr. Guhanick questioned the use of the drainage material being dredged from Locke Lake. He felt it would be good organic soil that could be used. Mr. Flora stated that the plan is for the contractor to do what he wishes with the soil, but permits are necessary from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency who has authority on lake dredging The material being removed is mostly silty sand, not high quality soil. � Mr. Glen Moren, 20 70th Way, stated that there is access off East River Road between the dam and the County lot. He asked if it � FRIDLEY CITY COUIdCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 28, 1996 PAGE 18 would be blacktopped so that vehicles may drive in this area or if he would have to portage a canoe across the street Mr. Flora stated that the County has plans to install a fishing pier and a canoe landing in that area. Mr. Glaser, 16 Rice Creek Way N.E., stated that he is not necessarily opposed to the dam. The lake currently exists as it did many years ago before a dam was constructed. The residents on Locke Lake treated the lake like it was their own personal property and fought access. Mr. Glaser stated that about twenty years ago someone built a walkway down to the lake, but residents around the lake really do not want it. He felt that the property owners between the railroad tracks and University Avenue should also be assessed Mr. Flora stated that those properties are in a different sub- watershed and are not included in this pro�ect. Mr. Glaser felt that the residents on the lake are getting by cheap. The accessibility is ridiculous, and he felt the assessment area should be expanded from the trestle to Universlty Avenue, perhaps even farther back. � Mr. Harry Bolkcom, 6821 Hickory Street, stated that he would agree wlth Mr. Glaser's comments regarding property owners co the east However, it has already been decided that these properties would not be included in the assessment. The people who live in the area around Locke Lake will increase the value of their homes because of the lake, Also, because there is not a lake there now, his home is devalued from $7,000 to $10,000. He knows the property owner in back of him will increase his value at least $389. He is happy the pro�ect has gone this far, and he asked that the Council vote to approve the assessment. Mr. Guhanick, 55 66th Way N.E., stated that the area near the dam is not deep enough. He asked if it was going to be improved Councilwoman Jorgenson stated that there will be a sedimentation basin on the west side of the tracks which will be maintained by the Rice Creek Watershed District. The Department of Natural Resources and the Army Corps of Engineers would not a11ow expansion to the east side because they want this to remain a marshland. Mr. Guhanick asked if the area on the east side of the railroad bridge would benefit from the higher water level once the dam was operating. � Mr. Flora stated that the elevation of the lake will be at 820 feet. Over time it will silt in and become shallower FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 28, 1996 PAGE 19 1 Mr. Guhanick asked if there was a way to have a waterfall under the railroad trestle. Councilman Billings stated that this public hearing is on the assessment for the dam reconstruction. However, since Mr. Guhanick has questions on the drainage he could meet with Mr. Flora or his assistant to discuss the actual drainage of Locke Lake. MOTION by Councilman Schneider to close the public hearinq. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, Councilman Schneider, Councilwoman Jorgenson, Councilman Billings, and Mayor Nee voted in favor of the motion. Councilwoman Bolkcom abstained from voting. Mayor Nee declared the motion carried and the public hearing closed at 9:46 p.m. 21. PUBLIC HEARING ON ASSESSMENT FOR STONYBROOK CREEK BANK STABILIZATION PROJECT N0. 246: MOTTON by Councilwoman Bolkcom to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all vot�ng aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing opened at 9:46 p.m. � Mr. Pribyl, Finance Director, stated that this assessment roll is for the Stonybrook Creek Bank Stabilization Pro�ert No. 246. The total cost of this pro�ect is $385,121.81, with $36,000 being assessed against the affected residential property owners at 52,000 per property. The remaining amount of $349,121 81 will be paid as follows: $89,000 from ad valorem taxes, $50,000 from other cities; and $210,121 81 from the City's Storm Water Fund. The assessment will be certified for fifteen years at an interest rate of 6-1/2 percent. No persons in the audience spoke regarding this proposed assessment. MOTION by Councilwoman Bolkcom to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilman Schneider Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing closed at 9:49 p.m. 22. PUBLIC HEARING ON ASSESSMEN`P FOR 1996 TREES� MOTION by Councilman Billings to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing opened at � 9:49 p.m. Mr. Pribyl, Finance Director, stated that there is only one assessment for trees involving the property at 7892 Firwood Way in � ' FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 28, 1996 PAGE 20 the amount of $1,340.81. This assessment will be certified for five years at an interest rate of 6-1/2 percent. No persons in the audience spoke regarding this proposed assessment. MOTION by Councilman Schneider to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilwoman Bolkcom. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing closed at 9:49 p.m. 23. PUBLIC HEARING ON ASSESSMENT FOR 1996 NUISANCE: MOTION by Councilman Schneider to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilwoman Bolkcom. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing opened at 9:50 p.m. Mr. Pribyl, Finance Director, stated that this assessment roll involves four properties for a total of $5,086.51. The assessment will be certified for one year at an interest rate of 6-1/2 percent. No persons in the audience spoke regarding this proposed assessment. MOTION by Councilwoman Jorgenson to close the public hearing Seconded by Councilwoman Bolkcom. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing closed at 9•50 p.m. 24. PUBLIC HEARING ON ASSESSMENT FOR 1996 SERVICE CONNECTION: MOTION by Councilman Schneider to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing opened at 9:50 p.m. Mr. Pribyl, Finance Director, stated that this assessment roll involved the property at 5660 Main Street The total cos� of these connections is $23,996.00. The assessment will be certified for twenty years at an interest rate of 6-1/2 percent No persons in the audience spoke regarding this proposed assessment. � MOTION by Councilman Schneider to close the public hearing Seconded by Councilwoman Bolkcom. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing closed at 9•51 p.m. � � � FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 28, 1996 25. PUBLIC HEARING ON ASSE55MENT FOR 64TH AVENUE STORM WATER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT N0. 260: MOTION by Councilman Schneider to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing opened at 9:51 p.m. Mr. Pribyl, Finance Director, stated that this assessment roll is for the 64th Avenue Storm Water Improvement Pro�ect No. 260 and involved 64th Avenue from Central Avenue to Arthur Street; Mississippi Street from Central Avenue to Arthur Street, Arthur Street from Mississippi Street to Rice Creek Road; and Central Avenue from Mississippi Street to Rice Creek Road. The total cost of the pro�ect is $173,105.08, with $41,000 being assessed against the affected residential property owners at $1,000 per property. The remaining amount of $132,105.08 will be paid from the City's Storm Water Fund. Mr. Pribyl stated that this certification involves only one property that was in dispute during the past two years. The other affected properties were certified in 1994. The assessment will be certified for fifteen years at an interest rate of 6-1/2 percent. Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that staff inet with the property owner in mediation last December, and the mediation was inconclusive. Mr. Burns said that Mr. Flora met with Mr. Schwartz to discuss the potential of enlarging the retention basin. Staff felt that the pond was serving the purpose for which �t was intended, but Mr. Flora agreed to monitor the storms that were occurring to determine if the flow of storm water through the ditch along Rice Creek Road was being impacted by the ditch as the Schwartzes were contending. There were field people out on numerous occasions. There was evidence the retention basin was working and did not overflow the banks but carried the water as it was intended. Mr. Mark Schwartz, 1372 64th Avenue, stated that he is appealing this assessment He believed that he has not benefited from this pro�ect, but that it was actually detrimental. This has been a dry year so it is difficult to compare. The recent commercial development ad�acent to his property changed the drainage ditch to some effect. He does not know how this will affect his property because there has not been any storms this year. Mr. Schwartz stated that hz has video tapes showing the water on his property since this pro�ect was completed. He met with Mr. Flora, away from the site, and discussed the same issues discussed in mediation. Their land is now a possible wetland worth thousands of dollars less All the problems have not been � FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 28, 1996 PAGE 22 corrected. The water causing flooding on Old Central Avenue has now been transferred to his yard. He would like this rectified. MOTION by Councilman Schneider to receive the letter from Mr. Schwartz. Seconded by Councilman Billinqs. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously Mrs. Jean Schwartz, 13�2 64th Avenue, stated that their meeting with Mr. Flora was 1n October, 1994, and mediation was in December, 1995, She has a copy of the mediation dispute settlement in which it states Mr. Surns would talk to engineering about possible changes to the detention pond and would contact them. Mrs. Schwartz stated that Mr. Burns called on February 6, 1996 after mediation. He advised them to wait because it was a dry year and stated that he would call them back in May. At that time they decided to wait again because Yt was still a dry year. The next thing they heard from the City was when they received the assessment notice in the mai1. People were barred from mediation, and the mediation people told them they could not bring a lawyer. Councilman Schneider stated that this is If there are problems the City will work time, everyone else paid their share for � City went the extra mile to resolve thzs approves the assessment, the City will there is one. � a disagreement of fact. to correct them. At this this pro�ect and felt the issue. Even if Council work out the problem if Mr. Schwartz stated that this puts them in the position to go to court, as they have no other option. Councilman Schneider stated that the pro�ect has been completed. It appears to solve the problem for which it was intended. The City Engineer, as well as an independent engineer, reviewed the issue. Both concurred it should not create a problem. St is the Schwartz's opinion that it does, but this is not fact. Mr. Schwartz stated that he would be suing for damages because the City destroyed their land. Mrs. Schwartz stated that they would not ob�ect to the assessment if it improved their situation. MOTION by Councilman Schneider to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilwoman Bolkcom. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing closed at 10:05 p.m. � FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 28, 1996 OLD BUSINESS. 26. ORDINANCE N0. 1078 UNDER SECTION 12.07 OF THE CITY CHAFtTER TO VACATE STREETS AND ALLEYS AND TO AMEND APPENDIX C OF THE CITY rnn�' rt�nrnmrnrT RFnrrF'cm cn�� ifaF-n'3 nv rr,nvmnN ANn �TFATi u7r"uC_ �e�ar� ���w�R•��r�n Mr. Hickok, Planning Coordinator, stated that Council held a public hearing on September 30 regarding this vacation request for property at 106 Hartman Circle. The Planning Commission recommended approval of this vacation, and staff recommended approval of the second reading of the ordinance. MOTION by Councilwoman Bolkcom to waive the reading and adopt Ordinance No. 1078 on the second reading and order publication Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, Councilwoman Bolkcom, Councilwoman Jorgenson, Councilman Schneider, and Mayor Nee voted in favor of the motion Councilman Billings voted against the motion. Mayor Nee declared the motion carried by a four to one vote. NEW BUSINESS: 27. FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE REPEALING CHAPTER 12 OF THE � FRIDLEY CITY CODE IN ITS ENTIRETY AND ADOPTING A NEW CHAPTER 12, ENTITLED "TOBACCO PRODUCTS" AND AMENDING CHAPTER 11 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE, ENTITLED "GENERAL PROVISIONS AND FEES:" Mr. Gary Lenzmeier, Deputy Public Safety Director, stated that the Police Department is suggesting a new tobacco ordinance be adopted to replace the present ordinance. In 1994, because of complaints and concerns, the Police Department conducted tobacco compliance checks resulting in several arrests. When those cases went to court they became aware of some problems with the State Statute and the City ordinance. This is an effort to try to rectif_y those problems. Mr. Lenzmeier stated that the new ordinance expands on the o1d ordinance to help insure that �uveniles are unable to obtain tobacco products from Fridley retailers It controls access by vending machines; regulates self-service merchandising; and makes the licensee responsible for the conduct of its employees. The ordinance also increases fees for a tobacco license and establishes civil penalties. Mr. Lenzmeier outlined the amounts of civil penalties and stated that the fines were suggested by the retailers. � Mayor Nee stated that he felt the Police Department did an excellent �ob of working with the retailers. � FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 28, 1996 PAGE 24 Councilwoman Jorgenson asked if revocation of a license was permanent. Mr. Lenzmeier stated that it was permanent, and the retailers did not express any concern on this issue MOTION by Councilwoman Bolkcom to receive a letter dated October 14, 1996 from Warren Roberts, 1448 Windemere Drive, requesting a stronger enforcement and harsher penalties to more effectively discourage tobacco sales to minors. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Lenzmeier stated that a letter was received from the Minnesota Non-Smokers Coalition regarding this proposed ordinance. They wanted the display of cigarettes completely off the counters; wanted to reduce the fine for clerks to $100 or less, and wanted specific amounts on the penalties. There was rationale for all three of these suggestions, and the ordinance was re-worked to incorporate those changes. Mr. Lenzmeier stated that a copy of the proposed ordinance was sent to all retailers and discussed with them. With regard to raising � the fines for the clerks, the retailers wanted the fine high enough to make sure it would have some impact when the clerks were told not to sell cigarettes to minors. They felt that the fine had to be higher than $100. Mr. Lenzmeier stated that with regard to specific fines, they do not want room to barter. As far as the tobacco displays, several contacts were made with the non-smokers group concerning this issue. Mr. Lenzmeier stated that the purpose of the ordinance is to try to keep cigarettes out of the hands of minors The non-smokers group felt there were two main reasons to keep cigarettes off the display counters. The first is to make sure shoplifting did not occur and, secondly, they felt it was more difficult for youth to obtain cigarettes if they had to ask for them. The Non-Smokers Coalition presented some information that these things were true One study was from San Diego and another from the University of Minnesota. Mr. Lenzmeier stated that the retailers advised that they receive a lot of money from the tobacco companies for displays. In order to resolve this issue, it was decided to go back to the original language but to try to do a study to find out whether or not it would be easier for youth to buy cigarettes if there was a counter display. If the study proves this is true they would come back ro Council for a change in the ordinance. � Councilman Billings stated that he heard two things from Mr. Lenzmeier's comments. One is that there were meetings held with retailers. He wanted to know if this was starting to become a common practice with the City since this was also done with the � FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 28, 1996 PAGE 25 pawn shop ordinance. He asked if the Police Department has found they have had success when they actually go out and work with businesses. Mr. Lenzmeier stated he felt that meeting with the businesses shows the Police Department where there are concerns. No one attended the first meeting, but when the language was changed regarding cigarette displays, nine people attended the meeting. Councilman Billings stated it was mentioned that retailers want stiff penalties and fines but they also want to continue to receive money Prom the tobacco companies for displaying their products. He hoped the decision not to eliminate the displays has to do with the cooperation with the retailers rather than profit being the bottom line. Ms. Connie Bernardy, 6840 Siverts Lane, stated that she is a 28 year resident of Fridley and is actively involved in a group that is very concerned about alcohol, tobacco, and other related issues. She thanked the Mayor and City Council for their commitment to this pollcy that affects the health of young people. However, some critical work needs to be done. She appreciated staff following through and advising her of this meeting � Ms. Bernardy stated that there are three very important issues that need to be addressed to make this ordinance effective. Larqer penalties do not assure compliance. She felt that the fines for clerks should be reduced, as well as the proposed penalty to businesses. The goal should also be to conduct regular compliance checks. She was sorry the proposal to require tobacco products to be behind the counter was eliminated. Councilwoman Bolkcom asked that a copy of the University of Minnesota study be sent to Council. Councilwoman Bolkcom felt that this ordinance sends a message that the City wants to be very strict on tobacco sales by having the larger fines. If retailers want their penalties twice as high as the clerks, it seems they are showing they are very opposed to selling cigarettes to minors. Councilwoman Jorgenson asked Mr. Sallman to furnish a list of businesses that have vending machines in the City She has found only two with displays One of the issues is that cigarette smoking is legal for adults, and this comes down to a moral issue. The City has to be careful they are not taking access away from people that have the legal right to use tobacco. She is satisfied with the ordinance presented by the Police Department. � Ms. Bernardy stated that the proposed ordinance no longer allows compliance checks for the purposes of research, regulat_ion, or training. � FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OP OCTOBER 28, 1996 PAGE 26 Councilman Billings stated that it is not the intent of the City to restrict, for example, the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension from coming in and conducting a compliance check. At the same time, if these types of monitoring are done in the City by many organizations, there should be some kind of control on how many research pro�ects they may have going on in the City. Ms. Barbara Hughes, 598 Rice Creek Terrace, commended the City for this proposed ordinance. She has worked for 23 years for the American Lung Association dealing with people who have health problems related primarily to smoking. She would like a stronger ordinance. The best way to keep people from having to suffer from tobacco is to do one of two things; either to raise the price or eliminate access to cigarettes. The compliance checks would reduce the levels of buying. Ms. Hughes stated that the fines should be reduced and a look taken at what would be reasonable. A$250 fine was too high for those who may be working at a minimum wage. The retailers wanted the fines this high because they felt they would not be enforced. They would use the other option and go to court and pay a$50 fine, as this is how they operate The compliance issue should not be restricted only to the Police Department. These are a few of her concerns and she urged Council to consider some of the changes that � she felt would be a stricter ordinance. She has access to a lot of research if Council would like this information. Councilwoman Bolkcom encouraged Ms. Hughes to furnish the Council with any information. The information was needed in order to be informed. Ms. Bernardy stated that Mr. Lenzmeier did a very good �ob in working with the industry. Councilwoman Jorgenson stated that from the comments she felt there was an interest in restricting sales, not only for youth, but for adults as well. Ms. Hughes stated that it was not her intenrion to put cigarettes out of the reach of adults. However, if tobacco is behind the counter, merchants do not get slotting fees. It is not the City's business to help retailers promote cigarettes. Council should be concerned about youth having access. Having tobacco behind the counter is the best control. Mr Sallman, Public Safety Director, stated that he does not disagree with Ms. Bernardy's or Ms. Hughes' conunents. They are trying to determine the best way to alleviate access of tobacco for � youth. He has some concern about the studies because they are incomplete. The approach is to hold the licensee responsible for the conduct of their employees. � ' ' FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 28, 1996 PAGE 27 Mr. Sallman stated that they are not ignoring suggestions but will try doing their own study. If this ordinance does not work, they wi11 recommend a stricter ordinance relative to the self-service issue. It comes down to the issue on whether or not the City would be better off having the support of the vendor because behind the counter sales would be taking away a source of their income. He knows they wi11 not want to lose that and will do everything to work with the City on this issue. Mr. Al Norris, Manager of the 5uper-America on East River Road, stated that he totally supports this proposed ordinance. He is not in the business of selling tobacco to minors. His employees go through an extensive training program for compliance. The reason for the fines being so high is that they want to make sure the clerks realize the seriousness of the problem. The retailer's fee has been increased because we accept responsibility for the clerks. Mr. Norris stated that as far as limiting the access to minors, the main focus is to stop the sales altogether. Teenaqers are bold, and it does not bother them to ask for cigarettes. Even if they do not sell to minors, friends or parents come in and purchase the cigarettes for them. It is more than �ust easy access. The retailers do receive money for the displays, and it does affect their bottom line. He felt the ordinance should be passed. Councilwoman Bolkcom asked Mr. Norris why he did not have a lot of displays. Mr. Norris stated that he only has two small displays because he wishes to discourage shopliftinq. Councilwoman Jorgenson asked Mr. Norris how he would feel if the fine for clerks was reduced, but left the fine as is for the retailers. Mr. Norris stated that he would agree with the fine although he felt it would not make as much as an impact. He is in favor of the retailer's fine as they are proposed. Mr. Mike Tarasar, Store Manager for Holiday Plus, stated that they have a smoke shop in their store, and no one under the age of eighteen can enter He felt that the fine would be effective, and they would not have to go to court. A retailer does not want to se11 cigarettes to someone who is under eighteen-years-old. They receive a bottom line ad�ustment from the tobacco companies for the display. Ms. Joy McConville, 631 Helene Place, stated that she would like for tobacco to be behind the counter. She felt that this was not preventing adults from access. � � � FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 28, 1996 PAGE 28 Mr. Sallman stated that the bottom line of putting cigarettes behind the counter will restrict access to a point. He also recognizes that this is an expense for the retailers. He would recommend that Council consider this ordinance for a year. If it is not working changes can be made. Reviewing the studies might not particularly change his mind on the issue. The Police Department is totally committed to trying to eliminate youth access to tobacco. He does not disagree with the presentations made this evening, but what they are proposing might be more reasonable. Mayor Nee stated that he was pleased with the work Mr. Lenzmeier has done on this ordinance. It may be prudent to ask Ms. Hughes for her input. He is making this suggestion, as it might be appropriate to talk to some of the experts in the field, and not only those in the tobacco trade. Mr. Sallman stated that they are not �ntentionally excluding anyone. He pointed out that Mr. Lenzmeier is a member of an Anoka County group concerned wrth smoking issues The Police Department does have access to the issues and arguments raised. Councilman Billings stated that law enforcement is to prevent crime from happening, and the other is to punish those that violate the rules The intent is to deter persons from actually selling tobacco to minors. The fine has to be high enough so that it has an impact. Mr. Knaak, City Attorney, stated that the administrative offenses provisions are quite innovative. It is a fairly recent development in Minnesota, and he is very intrigued to see this technique used. It affords cities greater control and enforcement. With the hearing process, there is authority to impose greater penalties. This is a remarkable imaginative use of this provision, and it speaks well of the Police Department. MOTION by Councilman Schneider to waive the reading and approve the ordinance on first reading. Seconded by Councilman Billings. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 28. FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE UNDER SECTION 12.06 OF THE CITY CHARTER DECLARING CERTAIN PROPERTY TO BE SURPLUS AND AUTHORIZING MOTION by Councilman Schneider ordinance on first reading. Upon a voice vote, all voting carried unanimously. to waive the reading and approve the Seconded by Councilwoman Bolkcom aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion � FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 28, 1996 PAGE 29 29. RESOLUTION CONFIRMING ASSESSMENT FOR EAST RIVER ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECT N0. ST. 1994-03: MOTION by Councilwoman Bolkcom to table this item. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. � 30. RESOLUTION CONFIRMING ASSESSMENT FOR MAIN STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT N0. ST. 1994-08 (COMMERCIAL): MOTION by Councilwoman Bolkcom to table this item. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 31. RESOLUTION CONFIRMING ASSESSMENT FOR MAIN STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST. 1994-08 (RESIDENTIAL)• MOTION by Councilwoman Bolkcom to table this item. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voxce vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 32. RESOLUTION NO 99-1996 CONFIRMING ASSESSMENT FOR STREET IMPROVEMENm PROJECm NO. 5T. 1996-04; MOTION by Councilman Billings to adopt Resolution No. 99-1996. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 33. RESOLUTION CONFIRMING ASSESSMENT FOR 1995 STREET 1MPROVEMENT PROJECT N0. ST. 1995-1 & 2• MOTION by Councilwoman Jorgenson to table this item. Seconded by Councilwoman Bolkcom. �pon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 34. RESOLUTION N0. 100-1996 CONFIRMING ASSESSMENT FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT N0. ST. 1989-05� MOTION by Councilwoman Bolkcom to adopt Resolution No 100-1996. Seconded by Councilman Billings. Upon a coice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously 35. RESOLUTION NO 101-1996 CONFIRMING ASSESSMENT FOR LOCK LAKE DAM RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT N0. 211: MOTION by Councilman Billings to adopt Resolution No 101-1996. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, Councilman Billings, Councilwoman Jorgenson, Councilman Schneider, and Mayor � Nee voted in favor of the motion. Councilwoman Bolkcom abstained from voting. Mayor Nee declared the motion carried by a four to one vote. � � � FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 28, 1996 PAGE 30 36. RESOLUTION NO. 1Q2-1996 CONFIRMING ASSESSMENT FOR STQNYBROOK CREEK BANK STABILIZATION PROJECT N0. 246: MOTION by Councilwoman Bolkcom to adopt Resolution No. 102-1996. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declare the motion carried unanimously. 37. RESOLUTION N0. 103-1996 CONFIRMING ASSESSMENT FOR 1996 TREES: MOTION by Councilwoman Jorgenson to adopt Resolution No. 103-1996. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 38. RESOLUTION NO. 104-1996 CONFIRMING ASSESSMENT FOR 1996 NUISANCE• MOTION by Councilwoman Bolkcom to adopt Resolution No. 104-1996 Seconded by Councilman Billings. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 39. RESOLUTION N0. 105-1996 CONFIRMING ASSESSMENT FOR 1996 SERVICE CONNECTION: MOTION by Councilman Schneider to adopt Resolution No. 105-1996. Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 40. RESOLUTION NO. 106-1996 CONFIRMING ASSESSMENT FOR 64TH STORM WATER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT N0. 260: MOTI�N by Councilman Schneider to adopt Resolution No. 106-1996. Seconded by Councilwoman Bolkcom. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 41. INFORMAL STATUS REPORTS: Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that there were no informal status reports. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION by Councilman Billings to ad�ourn the meeting. Seconded by Councilwoman Bolkcom. L3pon a volce vote, all voting aye, Mayor 1�3ee declared the motion carried unanimously and the Regular Meeting of the Fridley City Council of October 28, 1996 ad�ourned at 11:45 p.m. Resgectfully submitted, ' ��,^_ `� �7i�-,� � �i7"-,��G'a�� � l� ���; (it.livy-•'' �� Carole Haddad Ulilliam J. Nee Secretary to the City Council Mayor