Loading...
10/12/2009 - 29267CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY OF FRIDLEY OCTOBER 12, 2009 The City Council meeting for the City of Fridley was called to order by Mayor Lund at 7:32 p.m. ROLL CALL: MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Lund Councilmember-at-Large Barnette Councilmember Saefke Councilmember Varichak Councilmember Bolkcom OTHERS PRESENT: William Burns, City Manager Fritz Knaak, City Attorney James Kosluchar, Public Works Director Scott Hickok, Community Development Director Richard Pribyl, Finance Director/Treasurer Debra Skogen, City Clerk PRESENTATION: Siah St. Clair — Pumpkin Night in the Park at Springbrook Nature Center. APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: APPROVAL OF MINUTES: City Council Meeting of September 28, 2009 Councilmember Saefke pointed out on page 17, paragraph 4, instead of "Scott Lund" it should read "Scott Hickok" APPROVED. NEW BUSINESS: 1. Resolution Confirming the Statutory Limit of Tort Limits. William Burns, City Manager, stated the legal limits of municipal tort liability are capped under State law at $500,000 per occurrence and $1,500,000 in the aggregate. In conjunction with renewal of our municipal liability insurance with the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 12, 2009 PAGE 2 Trust, staff recommends Council reconfirm that it only accepts tort liability limits expressly provided under State law. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2009-51. 2. Resolution Approving and Authorizing Execution of Convention and Tourism Bureau Agreement. William Burns, City Manager, stated on August 24 Council approved the Articles of Incorporation for the Minnesota Metro North Tourism. Tonight Council is being asked to approve an agreement with the newly established Minnesota Metro North Tourism. The agreement defines the services of the Bureau, the composition of the Board of Directors, the indemnification of the City, and other terms and conditions of our participation in this organization. Fridley will be joining the cities of Arden Hills, Anoka, Blaine, Coon Rapids, Ham Lake, Mounds View, and Shoreview in this newly formed convention and tourism bureau. Staff recommends Council's approval. THIS ITEM WAS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND PLACED ON THE REGULAR AGENDA. 3. Resolution Approving the Agreement for Collection of Fluorescent Lamps with Xcel Energy. William Burns, City Manager, stated Xcel has a statutory obligation to collect and recycle fluorescent lamps in Minnesota. This resolution is the renewal of the two-year agreement between Xcel and the City of Fridley for reimbursement of the City's costs for collecting and recycling at its recycling drop-off days. Staff recommends Council's approval. THIS ITEM WAS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND PLACED ON THE REGULAR AGENDA. 4. Claims (143484 — 143681) APPROVED. 5. Licenses APPROVED THE LICENSES AS SUBMITTED AND AS ON FILE. 6. Estimates Veit & Co., Inc. 14000 Veit Place Rogers, MN 55374 2009 Sanitary Sewer Lining Project No. 383 FINAL ESTIMATE ................................... $ 7,816.70 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 12, 2009 PAGE 3 Standard Sidewalk 10841 Mankato Street N.E. Blaine, NIN 55434 2009 Miscellaneous Concrete Repair Project No. 375 FINAL ESTIMATE ................................... $ 1,847.30 Colt Construction 285 Forest Grove Drive Suite 126 Pewaukee, WI 53072 85th Avenue Trail Project No. ST. 2007-04 Estimate No. 8 ............................................. $ 14,811.69 Hardrives, Inc. 14475 Quiram Drive Rogers, MN 55374-9461 2009 Street Rehabilitation Project No. ST2009-01 Estimate No. 3 ............................................. $ 39,330.80 APPROVED. APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: Councilmember Bolkcom asked that Item Nos. 2 and 3 be removed from the consent agenda. MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to approve the consent agenda with the removal of Item Nos. 2 and 3. Seconded by Councilmember Varichak. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA: MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to approve the agenda with the addition of Item Nos. 2 and 3. Seconded by Councilmember Saefke. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. OPEN FORUM: Tom Myhra, 6360 Able Street NE, stated he has never seen anything come out in the paper or from the Council regarding the actual cost per person to ride the Northstar rail. It is $12. They FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 12, 2009 PAGE 4 are going to be paying for it. It stated in the Star Tribune that money will be paid by counties and cities. It will be about $1,600 for a person to ride both ways for a year. He believed the cost to the public is going to be $4,355. Multiply that by 20 years and multiply it again by all 10,000. It is an astronomical amount of money. He thinks the public should be told they are in on this and will be paying for more than two-thirds of the cost. Mayor Lund stated it is subsidized. It is well known it is subsidized multi-modal transportation. Mr. Myhra stated his neighbor and other people do not know it. Councilmember Bolkcom asked whether that same person knows the buses are subsidized. Mr. Myhra stated the cost of the bus does not compare to this astronomical Northstar commuter. The buses run all the time. The commuter is going to run morning and night. It is terribly, terribly expensive Mayor Lund said Mr. Myhra's arguments really belong at the County level. Mr. Myhra stated Councilmember Barnette has told him we have been money in for a long time, and it has been used for the Northstar. Mayor Lund replied, the HRA which is separate function from this body also. Mr. Myhra stated but equity still spent on HRA happened for advertising before it even happened. Councilmember Bolkcom stated we have not used City money to advertise for Northstar. Mr. Myhra replied, we have put money into the rail authority, and that was used for the propaganda before they ever got started. Councilmember Barnette stated Anoka County Rail Authority has financed some of this. All public transportation is subsidized. Roads and highways are subsidized as well. Mr. Myhra asked how much freight are they going to handle on the Northstar? How much are they going to carry? Highways and roads do. Councilmember Bolkcom stated for the record the City of Fridley has not had in our budget any money for advertising or anything else related to the Northstar. Yes, there has been money from Anoka County Rail Authority. Council has not used taxpayers' money to develop Northstar Commuter Rail. Other than the HRA buying some property that is being used for one of our rail stations. Mr. Myhra stated we have put Fridley money, his money, that has been used, the County has levied that. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 12, 2009 PAGE 5 Pat Delaney, 6250 Riverview Terrace, stated he observed six garbage trucks in his neighborhood at one time. He is wondering if this is really necessary to have that many. He referred to a newspaper article in the Star Tribune and offered to provide it Council. Mayor Lund stated he believed they had received a copy of the same article. This is not a new issue and has been discussed on more than one occasion. There have been numerous citizen surveys over the years. It makes perfect sense to have only one dedicated carrier. The citizen survey has come back every single time with a vast majority saying they do not want the City regulating their garbage haulers/collections, even with the knowledge it should be cheaper. It would basically put the City in the garbage collection business which means the City would have to collect the money from residents. We could put it on utilities with the quarterly water and sewer bill. We have hundreds of thousands of dollars, however, in uncollected water and sewer bills now and the problem is getting worse. Now is probably not the time to add another service that ultimately has a cost to all the taxpayers for all those who do not pay their utility bills. William Burns, City Manager, stated he saw the article, too. He took the article and drafted a set of questions relating to the cost figures and asked staff to research whether those were good for the cities surrounding Fridley. He also asked staff to give him figures on delinquent utility bills and how that might translate into delinquent sanitation bills. He will be doing a newsletter article based on questions arising from the newspaper article. It has been a bitterly debated issue in communities such as Coon Rapids. PUBLIC HEARING: 7. Consideration of the Modifications to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 and the Tax Increment Financing Plans for Tax Increment Finance District Nos. 1, 6-7, 9, 11-14 and 16-19, Creation of Tax Increment Financing District No. 20 (Columbia Arena Property) and Approval and Adoption of a Tax Increment Financing Plan Relating Thereto (Continued September 28, 2009). MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom removing the item from the table. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE ITEM WAS REMOVED FROM THE TABLE AT 8:01 P.M. Scott Hickok, Community Development Director, stated staff recommends Council cancel a public hearing scheduled for this meeting. There is no formal resolution or motion required. Simply the Mayor can inform the audience the project has been moved to another site, and there is no need to create a tax increment financing district at this time. Mayor Lund said this was a complicated issue with two developers, each developing half the site. One developer has pulled out. The other developer (a medical facility) did not want to take on the whole property on its own and they could not wait to find another developer. They needed to be in a new medical facility this time ne�t year. They will be staying in Fridley and FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 12, 2009 PAGE 6 they are making some arrangements with Unity Hospital. The Fridley clinic across from the hospital will now move onto the hospital's campus towards the west side. Mr. Hickok replied the financial position of the senior developer on this case was not well known to us. They did have another facility they were gong to build in Blaine at the same time. The City asked if that meant the facility in Fridley would not happen. At that time, they stated it is only nine miles away but it is worlds apart. Generally, financially for developing a senior building is e�tremely difficult. Part of it is the equity piece of it. How much has to go into it up front. Banks have revised their schedules completely. It is almost getting to a point where you almost have to finance it yoursel£ There are a couple of other senior developers who are interested in our site. Another thing we hear is seniors are having difficulty selling their homes, and you need to have that market. It absolutely is not something that the City did. William Burns, City Manager, stated TIF is not something that is a site-driven vehicle. It is a project-driven vehicle. When a developer comes in and asks for TIF for a project, the City requires them to pay the expenses of putting together the TIF project. He thought it was around $7,500. Mayor Lund asked for clarification. This item talks about modifications to a number of other districts. Why is this not simply allowing for the creation of a TIF District No. 20? Mr. Hickok replied, it is good housekeeping. Mayor Lund asked for examples of housekeeping items that he would embed or into the creation of District No. 20. Mr. Hickok said there are districts reaching their expiration and the point of decertification. Mayor Lund stated they do not need to bring those forward at the time that they actually do. They just wait until they have another issue up for tax increment. Mr. Hickok said if the timing allows that, and it did in this case. Richard Pribyl, Finance Director, stated there are a lot of smaller kinds of legislative items that occur during the year; and we do have a few TIF districts that are actually rolling off onto the tax rolls. This legislation would formalize some of those TIF districts back to the tax rolls. This is a housekeeping item. Staff wanted to wrap this into one legislative item just to consolidate it. MOTION by Councilmember Saefke to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE HEARING CLOSED AT 8:17 P.M. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 12, 2009 PAGE 7 NEW BUSINESS: 8. Receive Referendum Petition No. 2009-01; and Adopt Resolution Declaring an Election to Approve Ordinance No. 1260, an Ordinance of the City of Fridley Amending Chapter 7 of the Fridley City Charter. Richard Pribyl, Finance Director, stated with the projected continuing loss of local governmental aid (LGA) and unallotments of LGA, declining interest earnings, and considerably reduced permits and license fees, the City has had to focus on reducing costs prior to its 2010 budgeting process. We have implemented numerous cutbacks for 2009, as well as identified more than $700,000 in cuts to the 2010 general fund budget. A combination of revenue and expense adjustments will leave us about $750,000 short of balancing our general fund budget for 2010. The shortfall will be made up from transfers from our general fund reserve. This has been noted in our management report from our auditors as far as our continuing reliance on that move from funds in that reserve. We are also moving money from other external funds for 2010. We are projecting that we could potentially reach the point where we would need to borrow money to keep up with our cash flow needs by early 2012 if we were to continue in a downward spiral as far as an economic crisis. By this time ne�t year, the City will be facing the choice of either cutting services or attempting to raise revenues. Chapter 7 of our City Charter only allows the City Council to ask for additional revenues during regular municipal elections which would be November 2010, and that was staff's concern. Debra Skogen, City Clerk, stated in order to get the issues to the voters in a more timely manner, City staff approached the Charter Commission on June 10 with a request to initiate an amendment to Chapter 7 of the City Charter to allow the City Council to bring a revenue issue to the voters in a special election. The proposed amendment also asks that the 51 percent majority requirement for approval be changed to a majority of those voting on the issue. The Charter Commission agreed to initiate the amendment by a vote of 8 to 2. The City Council held a public hearing on July 13, and Ordinance No. 1260 received a first reading. Ordinance No. 1260 was adopted on July 27, 2009, and published in the Fridley Sun Focus on August 6, 2009. Ms. Skogen stated Ordinance No. 1260 would have become effective on October 5, but Referendum Petition, No. 2009-01, with the signatures of 1,037 registered voters was received by staff on September 25, 2009; therefore suspending the ordinance. Staff reviewed all of the names from the petition in the state voter registration system, an electronic database which holds permanent records of all voters, and found the petition to be sufficient. In order to be sufficient, the petition needed 5 percent of the registered voters. Staff used the date of June 1, 2009, which is the date Anoka County regularly uses for all of their elections when determining the numbers for the fall election. As of June 1, 2009, there were 15,443 registered voters which required a minimum of 773 signatures to be sufficient. The petition was found to have a minimum of 773 valid signatures and was then certified, and a letter was sent to the referendum committee of its sufficiency. There were 883 registered voters on their petition. The petition's committee asked staff to review some additional names, and there were three additional registered voters, making FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 12, 2009 PAGE 8 the total 886 active registered voters. There were 151 signatures who were not registered because their voter registrations had become inactive due to the lack of voting in the past four years or because they were not registered. There was one signature and two individuals with the same exact name but they did not have a birthdate to verify which individual signed the petition. Also, there was one signature where the first name and middle initial were different. Staff certified 886 registered voters. Ms. Skogen stated State law requires Ordinance No. 1260 to be reconsidered or reaffirmed by the City Council. Reconsideration would repeal the ordinance, and reaffirmation would send the matter to the voters to let them decide whether it should be adopted. At this time staff is recommending the following two actions: A motion receiving Referendum Petition No. 2009-01 and a motion adopting a resolution scheduling a special election for December 8, 2009. Council also has the ability to repeal the ordinance. MOTION by Councilmember Saefke to receive Referendum Petition No. 2009-01. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mayor Lund asked Attorney Knaak how many votes are required for the actions they can take. Fritz Knaak, City Attorney, said if they move to reconsider, any affirmative action they take on the ordinance they have already passed needs a 5-0 vote. If they were to re-pass it they would need a 5-0 vote. A motion to reconsider would take the majority of Council and then the matter would be back on the table for reconsideration for their review, and it would then again take a 5-0 vote in order to affect that. He thinks the question is what vote would be needed to pass the resolution to put it on the ballot. It would take the simple majority of the count of Council. Because of the 5-0 language in State law for passage of the ordinance itself, he thought that was pretty strong and emphatic. However, the language that deals with placement of the issue on the ballot, does not include that specific language. It simply says they may by resolution put it on the ballot. In looking at the City Charter, that resolution language does not require a super majority. It is a simple majority of the Council to pass the resolution and put the matter on for election. Mayor Lund stated to be clear he asked Attorney Knaak if they wanted to proceed with a special election, they could do that with one motion and it could pass by a simple majority or better. Attorney Knaak replied, yes, that would put it on the ballot he believed in December. Mayor Lund asked if they needed to take any other actions prior to that. Councilmember Bolkcom stated, normally to reconsider something, it has to happen at the very next meeting because Roberts Rules of Order allows you to reconsider if you are one of the FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 12, 2009 PAGE 9 majority votes. When Attorney Knaak states it takes 5 people to reconsider the ordinance, she does not understand that clearly. Attorney Knaak stated the motion to reconsider first has to be brought by whoever it was who was on the prevailing side. All 5 of them voted for that motion and that is not an issue. However, for that to pass they would have to have a majority of people agree to reconsider the item, otherwise it is not reconsidered and remains in effect. So it takes a simple majority to move to reconsider. Once it is before Council again, it would need to have a 5-0 unanimous vote to re-pass it. Councilmember Bolkcom stated any one of them can make a motion to reconsider. Once they get the majority to go along with it, then they can actually take the ordinance and reconstruct it. Attorney Knaak replied if they chose to do so and, again, it would take 5 people. Councilmember Bolkcom stated there is also the option for them to change the date of the special election. William Burns, City Manager, stated the genesis of the ordinance was the Charter Commission. So if they are going to reconsider, Council will have to go back to the Charter Commission. Attorney Knaak stated when the councilmember said there would be a process that it would re- initiate or words to that effect, that is the process that they would be talking about re-initiating. Councilmember Bolkcom stated as a City Council they could also bring an ordinance change forward. Attorney Knaak replied, yes. Dr. Burns replied except if they do initiate a Charter amendment, he believed it has to go back to the Charter Commission for a review over 60 or 90 days. They have to be involved one way or another. Councilmember Bolkcom stated it would not have to go back to them originally. They could just start it and pass it off to them. She said in the information they received it referred to the language in the Minnesota statute, which was confusing. Ms. Skogen replied, yes, because this is a Charter amendment, they have to refer it to State Statute which is in Section 410.12.7. It is a 51 percent majority of those voting on the question. Councilmember Bolkcom stated so not only do they have a resolution asking them to vote on the question but it is also in the Minnesota Statutes that we have to have a 51 percent vote in the affirmative. Ms. Skogen replied, for a Charter amendment. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 12, 2009 PAGE 10 Councilmember Bolkcom stated and that is what we are trying to do by having a special election. Mayor Lund asked the audience how many people were there to see Council repeal the ordinance they approved a couple of months ago. (Mayor Lund noted a vast majority of people were there to see that the Council repealed the ordinance.) Councilmember Barnette stated the ordinance the Charter Commission sent to the City does state that it will only take a majority of the votes cast on the election, so that is different from the State Statutes. Dr. Burns replied, no, that is a different issue. Ms. Skogen replied that would be if they went to the special election for a revenue increase or a fee, then those voting on that question would be approved by the majority. Councilmember Bolkcom stated they have to have 53 days basically once the resolution is passed so the earliest this could be is 53 days from tomorrow because you have to notify the County, so it is December 4? That is a Friday so it would wait until Monday. She asked Ms. Skogen whether she has checked what polling places are available. Ms. Skogen replied, yes. Councilmember Bolkcom asked whether all the polling places are available. Ms. Skogen replied they are. All 13 polling locations would be available to the City. Mayor Lund asked how much it would cost to put on a special election. Ms. Skogen replied, the biggest cost for any election is the wages for the election judges. If you have 6 or 8, the cost is going to be between $12,000 and $15,000. You also have to pay to have the ballots printed and for any additional supplies needed. There is some employee overtime and mileage. That will probably cost around $1,000. Mayor Lund stated in looking at the 2010 "proposed" budget, he saw there are election costs for about $53,000. He asked Ms. Skogen why that is such a significant difference. Ms. Skogen stated they have a primary and a general, so there is double the cost. The City hires between 10 and 12 election judges per precinct to make sure they have enough people. Mayor Lund asked where the money would come from if they decide to move forward with a special election this year. Dr. Burns replied from one of two places. We would probably take it from the general fund reserve or there is a line item for non-program studies for the general fund budget for 2009 that is FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 12, 2009 PAGE 11 around $25,000. The money originally was projected he believed for a citizen survey and we did not do a survey. Councilmember Varichak stated she is disappointed that they have to do this. The City is running out of money. It needs to raise funds. She is not positive that a special election and spending $12,000 to $15,000 is the right way to go about doing this. She is not sure how they are going to raise the funds at this point. If they wait unti12010, they have to wait until 2011 to start collecting that money. Already the City has lost LGA funds. Mayor Lund stated if they wait until the general election year as the Charter required them to, just to ask the question of will the City be allowed to ask for a raise, and then we ask for the raise and the voters say no, do we wait unti12012 again to ask for a raise? At that point, the reserves are gone. Councilmember Bolkcom stated we can ask for an increase in our levy. The problem is we could not do it this year on its own. Attorney Knaak replied correct. Councilmember Bolkcom stated there is more than one option. The option would be this ordinance could go on the ballot in November 2010. Also there could be a different ballot question related to increasing our tax levy beyond what our Charter amendment says, and that is something that is allowed by State Statute. Dr. Burns stated the special levy Councilmember Bolkcom is talking about is the special levy to recover 2010 unalloted money. However, that would not be a voted levy, it would be a special levy that Council would approve as part of the levy-setting process in 2010. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if we could put a ballot question related to increasing our levy in the general election. Dr. Burns replied, yes. Councilmember Saefke asked if this new ordinance is not passed, we need a 51 percent voter turnout of everyone who votes in the general election for even the amendment to change. If there is a levy question on the same ballot, if the ordinance does not pass, then the 51 percent of all those who voted, or even if it does pass, how does that figure then on the same day. Attorney Knaak replied it can be the same ballot. There is a 51 percent requirement that the State Statute imposes to amend the Charter which is the same standard basically that your Charter imposes on that question. If you have both questions on the ballot at the same time, it would essentially need the same number of votes passed. Either the Charter amendment itself or, in the alternative, the question related to the levy increase. Dr. Burns stated but if you have a levy question on the ballot as well as the special election question, the levy question would be governed by the City Charter which would require 51 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 12, 2009 PAGE 12 percent of those voting in the election but not necessarily on the issue. Now past experience with numbers and voter falloff shows that there is considerable falloff by the time you get from the Governor down to a levy issue. Looking at past voting numbers, his observations have been that can be anywhere from 58 to 68 percent of those voting. In order for a levy to pass it would have to pass by 58 to 65 percent depending on the amount of voter falloff. It is very difficult for a levy to pass in a general election based on the current Charter language. Attorney Knaak stated there is a distinction. It is 51 percent of all ballots cast on language having to do with the levy. It is 51 percent on any amendment in favor of its adoption. The standard is slightly lower for an adoption of a Charter amendment. That is the important distinction to make. Dr. Burns stated if you use the 2008 presidential election as an example, he calculated that if they had a levy on the ballot that year or some sort of fee increase issue that year, it would have had to pass by 63.5 percent under the current Charter requirements. Attorney Knaak stated the amendment to the Charter takes 51 percent of the votes cast on the amendment. On that question only. The 51 percent rule that the Charter requires for a levy is actually 51 percent of all ballots cast in that election, and that is the point Dr. Burns is trying to make. Councilmember Bolkcom stated there is more than one option. There is this resolution and special hearing now. There is an option of a special hearing later on. She said the reason she will vote against this resolution tonight, unless she hears something different, is because she does not think it gives them enough time. December 8 is right around the corner. She understands that over 1,000 people signed the petition. In order to really be educated on the issue, you have to hear both sides. She does not think the general citizens have any idea of what financial straits the City is in. Maybe what we need to do is to start cutting services so people do realize how tough it is. Mayor Lund said he did not know if giving it a year would help. Councilmember Bolkcom stated she is not saying they need to wait a whole year, but she does think they need to realize there is more than one option. For one thing it could go on the general election. Granted this would be just a Charter amendment. She does not want to spend $12,000 on December 8 and not have everyone know both sides of the story. Mayor Lund stated the petitioners only had 60 days, and they did it within that time. We knew this issue had been coming up. MOTION by Mayor Lund to adopt a Resolution Declaring an Election to Approve Ordinance No. 1260 and scheduling an election for December 8, 2009. Seconded by Councilmember Saefke. Mayor Lund moved to amend his original motion to change the actual ballot language to: "Shall the Fridley City Charter be amended to allow the City Council to bring revenue issues to FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 12, 2009 PAGE 13 the voters in a special election which will be won or lost by a majority of those voting on the question?" Seconded by Councilmember Saefke. Mayor Lund asked attorney Knaak if this adequately addressed the actual changes. Attorney Knaak replied in his opinion it does. They have different options on how to present this language, but they have to present it in a way that accurately reflects the proposed change. Mayor Lund asked if it also changes how the casted votes are tallied. Instead of having 51 percent of all votes passed, that is changed to a majority of the votes cast on the ballot question. Attorney Knaak stated although he thinks what was in the original resolution was clear, he thinks this does clarify it more. Councilmember Bolkcom stated she felt the resolution had too many "or's" and to her the language is much simpler. Councilmember Saefke said if both the question of a levy increase for more taxes and this amendment are on the same ballot ne�t fall and the amendment passes, does that automatically change the Charter so that the second question dealing with the tax or increase now is 51 percent of the majority voting on that question or 51 percent of all those voting in the election? Does it take effect immediately? Attorney Knaak replied, no. It would be the current standard that would be applied to it, the 51 percent. Councilmember Saefke asked had they not received the petition, there would have been a good possibility they would have had a special election anyway to ask the voters for income to keep running the City in a more timely manner. If they would have had the election this fall, they could probably get revenues to make up for the 2011 budget. If they do not ask the voters whether they will accept this Charter amendment, they could put it on the ballot again in 2010 and they could ask for more money then, but that would be underneath the old standard. The City has been criticized for not being forward-looking enough to try and solve some of our problems. He thinks they are doing that by having a special election this fall, December 8, to allow the voters to tell them what they want done with this amendment. He asked people to contact him and let him know what the City should cut back on, for example, senior programs, potholes not filled, some streets not plowed at times, etc. Pam Reynolds, 1241 Norton, stated as people went out and petitioned, they did not tell people to tell the City that you cannot go to the voters and ask for tax levy increases or fee creation. They told people by signing this petition you are not saying that you agree or disagree with these things. You are merely saying did you have a preference as to when these things are brought to the voters. You keep mixing in all the budgetary cuts and this and that and granted it all falls in together; however, this language is not the language that appeared on the ballot on this petition. This petition specifically asked that the Charter language not be amended. This has nothing to do with the Charter language. This is a totally separate question. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 12, 2009 PAGE 14 Mayor Lund stated that is the question that would be on the ballot. Ms. Reynolds asked where is the reference in that question to what the Charter language says. The Charter language does not currently say, "revenue issues." It says, very clearly, "tax levy, fee creation." Councilmember Bolkcom stated one would argue that those are revenue issues, fees and tax levies. Ms. Reynolds asked if they were going to change the language after the election to read that way. Mayor Lund asked what she meant. Ms. Reynolds stated the special election is for the purpose of bringing forward the petition regarding the Charter language. That is not the Charter language. Attorney Knaak stated the purpose of the election is to ratify or not ratify Ordinance No. 1260. The Council's task, when they pass the resolution, is to provide language that succinctly summarizes the question. It does not have to repeat the entire ordinance, but has to succinctly in the Council's judgment summarize the question. That is the purpose of the language in the resolution and, as he understood it, that is the purpose of the Mayor's amendment which was to clarify it even further. Councilmember Bolkcom stated it has nothing to do with the petition that was passed out. She thinks what Ms. Reynolds is saying is they need to have an election with a ballot question related to their petition which is two different things. Ms. Reynolds said to check Chapter 5 of the City Charter. Ms. Skogen stated that is initiative referendum and recall. That is completely different than a charter referendum. Ms. Reynolds asked if this was not a referendum petition. Ms. Skogen replied, we are amending the Charter, and we have to go through the State Statute to amend the Charter. That is the referendum petition process. It is completely different than initiative referendum and recall which refers to ordinances. While it is an ordinance amending the Charter, we have to follow State law as far as the referendum. Even the number of signatures we need is different. Mayor Lund stated he is not suggesting Ordinance No. 1260 have any other changed wording. He was talking about the question. If they do proceed with a special election on or about December 8, the earliest possible date, he suggested they change the verbiage on the question in front of the voters at that time. He is trying to make it as easy as possible. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 12, 2009 PAGE 15 Ms. Reynolds stated by using language that is not included in the Charter language that he altered in Ordinance No. 1260. Mayor Lund stated, no, the Charter language remains the same. The question simply is, if we go to a special election, voters come to the poll, say yes or no, they want us to make these changes that are written right now in front of you and me. Will they allow us to ask you in a regular or, additionally, in a special election if the need arises, to ask the voters if we can raise the property taxes or potentially some other fee. It does not necessarily mean taxes. The other thing is how we count the ballot. We are not changing the Charter language at all. Ms. Reynolds stated that is what the ordinance is, to change the Charter language. Attorney Knaak stated the ordinance changes the Charter language. The resolution is intended to summarize succinctly the change to go on the ballot. Councilmember Bolkcom stated Mayor Lund's ballot question really does answer where the changes in the Charter were done. She thinks what Ms. Reynolds is trying to say is her petition should be the ballot question which has nothing to do with changing the Charter other than the amendment to the Charter which did not take effect on October 5 because we received the petition that had the required signatures. That does not mean we have to put the question on the petition on the ballot. Mayor Lund asked if Ms. Reynolds is saying that her verbiage has to be on the ballot. Ms. Reynolds stated she is saying they are using the ballot to ask the voters whether to approve the language change they made in Ordinance No. 1260, so how can they then change the language to read that way instead of asking the voters whether they want to change the language as it exists today? Councilmember Bolkcom stated it says shall the City Charter be amended. That does ask the question. Ms. Reynolds stated but the City Charter does not say "revenue issues." It says "tax levies and fee creation." Are you going to put in there the definition of "revenue issues" in order to make those clear to the voting public because this is what they have been looking at all along. She had to provide them with this for them to read what the language currently says and what the Council wishes it to say. That is neither of those items. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if revenue issues are not taxes and fees. Ms. Reynolds stated revenues could be selling pencils on the corner or collecting money for any general fund item, not just tax levies and fee creation. They are required to present a clear and concise question. That might be a clear and concise question when you go and ask them for an increase. It is not a clear and concise question, should you be allowed to enact this ordinance or change this language. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 12, 2009 PAGE 16 Mayor Lund stated they are not changing that language. Councilmember Bolkcom asked Attorney Knaak for his opinion. Attorney Knaak replied it is really Council's call to decide whether revenue issues are tax levies or new fees generally. He thinks the only objection Ms. Reynolds brings to that language is to bring tax levies or new fees to the voters. Mr. Pribyl stated the only revenue issue that you would bring before the voters are those restricted by the Charter. Councilmember Bolkcom stated originally the question said, "Shall the Fridley City Charter be amended to allow the City Council to hold a special election to increase the tax levy or to increase or create new fees that are approved by a majority of those voting on the question?" Mayor Lund stated here it says, approved by the majority of those voting on the question. He asked how you simply it to make is non-confusing. Councilmember Saefke said either one of the languages they adopt is not asking anyone for an increase in taxes or levy right now. All they are asking for is the ability for people to vote one way or another when it is timely, which could mean a special election. We can have special elections on Charter amendments but the City cannot ask persons for any revenues or fees unless it is in a regular election year. Even if we adopt this one that talks about tax levies, an increase in fees, etc., it does not mean it is going to happen for certain. There is a good possibility that we will go to the voters and ask, but you will still have the ability to say yes or no. Councilmember Bolkcom asked Ms. Skogen to read the question at the top of the petition. Ms. Skogen stated, "This petition proposes a repeal of an ordinance to amend the City Charter which would change the language in Chapter 702, Power Taxation, Section 2(C) and (D), thereby permitting the use of special election and a simple majority voter acceptance rate on the question when seeking voter approval for an increased tax levy fees in excess of the Charter restriction. The preferred language prior to this ordinance required voting on tax levy increase fees in excess of Charter restrictions to a general election and a 51 percent acceptance rate of those voting in the election. A copy of the ordinance hereto is attached. The proposed repeal is sponsored by the following committee." Their petition is proposing repeal of an ordinance. Councilmember Bolkcom stated if she understands it, they are not against having a special election related to tax levies. Ms. Skogen replied, tax levies and fees in excess of the Charter's restrictions. Councilmember Barnette stated he thinks it is very difficult for all of us to understand the dire straits that not just cities, but counties and schools, have been thrown into with the unallotments, LGA loss, etc. The City of Fridley is in a very, very difficult situation. We have done a lot of work through the efforts of the City Manager to try and understand where we are at. They have FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 12, 2009 PAGE 17 had staff make cuts in each of their departments. He does not know if all the residents understand that. He is in favor of the special election. He thinks that spending $12,000 to $15,000 is not small by any means, but he thinks they have to get it out and let the people know the situation we are in, and give them the choice under the democratic process to say yes or no. Mayor Lund stated he agrees, it is a tough call. A thousand signatures or thereabouts does bear a lot of weight. He has struggled with this the last couple of weeks. He does not see it as a real win-win situation. They will continue to do some budget cutting. Can they cut right now another million dollars out of our budget so we stop using our savings accounts? The City is also on a fixed income. He personally thinks they have been unfairly burdened by the State. Since 2003 it has been one hit after another. We do budget cuts to try and get ourselves back into close an even keel and we get hit by another change. Then the unallotments came which was like a double whammy, and they came at the end of the year. Councilmember Bolkcom stated she is going to change her vote. She thinks there are a lot of options. She will work hard in the ne�t 53 days to get the word out. Mayor Lund called for a roll call vote on the amendment of the ballot language: Mayor Lund - Aye Councilmember Barnette — Aye Councilmember Saefke - Nay Councilmember Varichak — Nay Councilmember Bolkcom - Aye THE MOTION CARRIED ON A 3 TO 2 VOTE. MOTION by Mayor Lund to adopt Resolution No. 2009-54 as amended. Mayor Lund called for a roll call vote: Mayor Lund - Aye Councilmember Barnette — Aye Councilmember Saefke — Aye Councilmember Varichak - Nay Councilmember Bolkcom - Aye THE MOTION CARRIED ON A 4 TO 1 VOTE. 9. Approve Revised Roadway Major Maintenance Financing Policy. James Kosluchar, Public Works Director, stated this policy applies to surface repair, mill and overlay, sealing of roadways, etc. It does not apply to reconstruction. The policy was developed and passed in 2006. It did not address low-density multiple-unit properties. Duplexes are treated as two single-family units for purposes of policy. Triplexes are three units. These were treated as commercial, along with fourplexes and based on a front foot assessment. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 12, 2009 PAGE 18 Mr. Kosluchar stated the 2009 resurfacing project this year in Sylvan Hills included the first duplexes. The 61st Avenue resurfacing project included the first triplex. Staff developed a revised policy which calculates assessments for two to four unit residential uses based on the lower of either the commercial rate (which is the current rate for three and four unit properties) or for two units, 1.5 times the single-family residential rate; for three units, 2 times the single- family residential rate; or for four units, 2.5 times the single-family residential rate. Mr. Kosluchar stated the draft revised policy impacts are minimal overall. They are spread out among all the residential assessments within a project. For the 2009 project, the increase proposed single-family rate to balance out the five duplexes. Most projects will have fewer than five duplexes. Mr. Kosluchar stated the exception to this, which we have not encountered for four years prior, is a planned resurfacing for 2011 in the Hyde Park neighborhood. About 26 (20 percent) have two to four units in the assessment area. A single-family rate could increase as much as $50 to $80, looking at the streets that are to be done in this neighborhood. The City's share of the project will also go up because the three- and four-unit properties are not assessed on a commercial basis, and, therefore, are not assessed for side yard work under the policy. All the commercial properties are assessed for both front and side. Mr. Kosluchar stated additional minor revisions that staff included are (1) standardizing some of the language in the policy; and (2) eliminating the dollar-specific limit for storm sewer e�tension. Staff feels that should be calculated for each project. The limit was set at $1,000. He thinks that is a good guideline, and policy of the Council has been to allow that limit. It should be at Council's discretion outside of the policy to set that rate for each project itself. It allows for terms other than the customary ten years. It does say that the ordinary term would be ten years. Also, it includes exceptions for payment or alternate payment schemes, such as prepayment and deferral that we currently have. Councilmember Bolkcom stated she thinks it is very confusing how it is written. Under "(A) Benefited Property" why even put the low density residential? Why not just say, four or fewer dwelling units, those properties with frontage? It seems to her it would be clearer. She asked him to explain to her the section where it says, "In the event a residential lot has frontage on two streets and is of sufficient size or subdivide, those portions of the lot that front on a second street will be assessed for current projects and may be assessed for future projects." Mr. Kosluchar stated what it is saying is that if someone has an excess of property that could be subdivided at a future point, the City will assess for two properties for that parcel. That has been done and has been the history of this policy. William Burns, City Manager, said this is existing language. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if she has a really big lot and could divide it, would the City charge her double. Mr. Kosluchar replied yes. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 12, 2009 PAGE 19 Councilmember Bolkcom asked if that had been the City's practice. Mr. Kosluchar replied, since 2006 that has been the City's policy. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if he could actually go back to properties and tell her they have done that. Mr. Kosluchar said he believed there was one on Gardena last year that was assessed in this fashion. Councilmember Bolkcom asked what number they used to determine whether a lot is large enough to fall into this category. Mr. Kosluchar said he was not sure there is a definite number. He believed it depended on the zoning as to whether it could be subdivided or not. In the case of the Gardena property, it was obvious there were two lots there. The property could be subdivided easily, and the second lot could be sold off. Councilmember Bolkcom asked whether he could say fairly that since we started this policy any lot we thought could be split, not just the obvious ones, was charged twice. Mr. Kosluchar replied he believed so for the residential properties which this portion of the policy applies to. Councilmember Bolkcom commented but the language states "may" be assessed. Mr. Kosluchar stated it may be assessed for future road construction. Ultimately that is up to the policy at that time. The existing policy says that current or future road construction will be assessed as defined under this policy statement. He does not think that is necessarily correct. Councilmember Bolkcom asked why it was in there. Mr. Kosluchar replied, that is a good point. They could eliminate the future condition altogether because none of this policy deals with the future condition. The idea in the current policy is that they will be assessed for the current projects and may be assessed for future projects. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if this item needed to be voted on. Mr. Kosluchar replied it should come back to them at the ne�t meeting because there are some duplexes that would be subject to this policy change. Dr. Burns asked if there was a timing problem. We have the assessment hearing on the ne�t meeting agenda. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 12, 2009 PAGE 20 Councilmember Bolkcom stated they can bring back language changes as long as they are agreeing to the policy. She is not saying she does not agree with the policy. Mayor Lund stated he did not really have a problem with it but asked Councilmember Bolkcom whether she had other issues with it? He does like the changes where it related to the two units, 1.5; three units at 2. Councilmember Bolkcom stated and she is not arguing those, but her understanding is that revisions are not just about that. Mayor Lund stated the only other issue he had was the word "may," which should be more definitive. Councilmember Bolkcom suggested to just end it and not refer to the future. She also asked about the last sentence in the ne� paragraph. Mr. Kosluchar stated what they were getting at is removal of the term "actual street," but the policy should speak about a constructed street as part of a project. Councilmember Bolkcom suggested not adding the word "constructed." She then referred to (III)(1) on page 3 of the proposed policy at the paragraph which says the current lot assessment will be set by the City Council. She asked if it should say "per project" or something similar. Mr. Kosluchar stated if that is the choice of Council this could be modified. He has not encountered a storm sewer e�tension project yet. He knows this Council has set that limit, and he does not know if Council would want the discretion to set the amount on a project-by-project basis. That would probably be a very good way to handle any kind of storm sewer extension. Councilmember Bolkcom stated she guessed if they just did it per project then they can understand the impact and the cost and everything else related to it. Council should just change it. Mr. Kosluchar stated to summarize the changes discussed, in (I)(A) we do something with the definition of the low-density residential or forget that term altogether. In (I)(A)(1) on page 2 at the bottom of the paragraph, his suggestion would be they exclude all the words after " rp ojects." In other words, it will read, ". .. on a second street will be assessed for current projects as defined in this policy statement." Then, under (III)(1), they would modify that to read, ". .. The current per lot assessment will be set by the City Council on each project." Councilmember Bolkcom stated, right. Then under (A) the "30 foot wide standard street divided by a 36 foot wide" just leave out "�" and "constructed." Mayor Lund asked if he had any problems with the changes. Mr. Kosluchar replied these will be fine. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 12, 2009 PAGE 21 MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to approve the Revised Roadway Major Maintenance Financing Policy with the changes. Seconded by Councilmember Saefke. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 10. Resolution Approving the Agreement for the State Health Improvement Program (SHIP) Grant with Anoka County. Mr. Hickok stated this is a State health improvement program grant administered by Anoka County to the City of Fridley. It is a two-year agreement which provides $73,300; and the grant term would end June 30, 2011. The grant's objective is to implement policies and practices to create an active community and increase opportunities for non-motorized transportation, such as walking, biking, and access between recreation facilities. Staff has outlined six transportation- related action steps in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Community Development and Engineering will use these grant funds to work jointly with the Citizens Task Force to begin implementation of those action steps. The SHIP grant provides funding towards completion of as many of Fridley's 2030 Comprehensive Plan goals and action steps as possible. The grant creates another avenue for continuation of Fridley's tradition of citizen involvement in policy planning. Staff recommends Council adopt the attached resolution authorizing the execution of the proposed agreement for the SHIP grant with Anoka County. Councilmember Bolkcom stated there is a lot of "to be decided" or TBD projects. As far as the City Council, there are no City funds. This is all part of a grant. City staff worked with a group of people so in a sense it is staff time but there are no City funds being used for this project, correct? Mr. Hickok replied, right. Some may recall an article published in the Star Tribune regarding the SHIP program. In that article it talked about a 10 percent match for local communities. That 10 percent match is being paid for Anoka County on our behalf. The out-of-pocket cash comes from other sources, and our contribution of course is time. William Burns, City Manager, stated he was very concerned about the City putting our money into this thing because there is none. One thing Council should realize is we are putting our money in up front and being reimbursed for these things. So there is a reimbursement factor. That made him very concerned about getting some assurances from the County Health Department that the kinds of projects we had in mind met their objectives, so we sent these six Comprehensive Plan action steps to the Health Department, they in turn reviewed it with the Minnesota Department of Health, and they liked them. For all intents and purposes we believe they will accept our expenditures in these areas. Councilmember Bolkcom asked and how will staff determine the community involvement. Is there an action plan on how they are going to get people involved? They are wonderful projects and make sense to her. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 12, 2009 PAGE 22 Mr. Hickok stated this is an e�tension as staff sees it of our comprehensive planning process. The beauty of this is we had six action steps that we wanted to take as part of that comprehensive plan and would get folks that were interested in the original document and others to come back and be involved in our community outreach program to get their feedback on these ne�t steps. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if Council would be involved in the future. Mr. Hickok replied, this is a program that has a structure to it that will have staff reporting back to Council and letting them know of their progress as they move through Year 1 and into Year 2. In talking with the people at the State on this program, it is possible that with success in this first round there would be other implementation dollars later to move forward if there are other more brick and mortar type improvements. It is possible that funds might become available. Being involved with this first round and first two years of funding, really enables the City to move forward hopefully in the future in other funding that might become available. Councilmember Bolkcom asked Attorney Knaak if he had seen anything that would cause alarm in the document. Attorney Knaak replied, no. Mayor Lund stated when he looked at the six steps, talking about defining safety or issues of multi-modal traffic impacts and how it relates to pedestrians, cyclists, he takes that as a broader view of the continuation of making these more livable communities, walkable communities, and trying to get away from having to get into your car every time to run errands, etc. He asked if the walkway on 85th Avenue was the last of their trail system and if a need may arise for additional bikeway/walkway systems in our community. Mr. Hickok said this is more like taking what we use for bikeway/walkway already and enhancing that opportunity by making sure the striping is there, signage is there, maybe making additional signage stating you are at the 3-mile mark, etc. Use incentive type things for people to get out and exercise. We might create, for example, a 3-mile loop and maybe then graduate to a 5-mile loop. A lot of it is infrastructure that is already there, but it takes it to the ne�t step. Ultimately it makes a healthier community. Dr. Burns stated it could conceivably be a major capital improvements project also. Mr. Hickok replied, yes, it could be. We do want to make sure we do not miss that opportunity. We want to be involved in the first couple of years. If there are funds available down the road, we want to make sure we have done the first part so we can get some of those other funding opportunities later. Mayor Lund stated it makes sense the City is taking it to another level. He would not spend our local dollars on it as we have more important things to spend it on. He understands these have been approved as the six items to ensure we would get reimbursement. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to adopt Resolution No. 2009-55. Seconded by Councilmember Varichak. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 12, 2009 PAGE 23 Councilmember Saefke pointed out a typo on page 34, it should say "HEALTH IMPROVEMENT." UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 10. Resolution Determinin Substandard Buildings District. g that Certain Parcels are Occupied by Structurally and are to be Included in a Tax Increment Financing Mr. Hickok stated this is a request to consider certain properties blighted and provide for their demolition. The HRA currently owns six vacant properties along University Avenue in the area referred to as Gateway Northeast. The City through the HRA owns the Sinclair station, the former Van-O-Lite facility and former Carquest facility, newer Van-O-Lite facility, an Alano building, a Specialties Office Product building, and the Oriental House restaurant. A blight analysis had been done on those buildings. The City is ready to move on to the ne�t phase which is demolition of those buildings. It is important now because the buildings are blighted and present a poor image along University Avenue. The City has had problems with break-ins, vandalism, copper theft, huge cost of maintenance, and even dangerous booby trapping. One of our inspectors had three of his tires punctured by purposely set nail strips along this corridor. Costs were determined using a means data source. This is the standard for determining blight. All buildings far exceed the 60 percent rule. Five buildings need fire sprinklers, all need new roofs, HVAC, plumbing upgrades, and would require substantial improvements to meet the energy and accessibility code. All the buildings exceed the 15 percent rule in terms of the amount of blight that is necessary. These buildings have stood vacant for some time. Mr. Hickok stated the resolution allows the demolition of the properties now while allowing the properties to be included in the future tax increment redevelopment district. The HRA would have three years from the date of demolition to create a TIF district. If the project is not ready at that time, they can defer the collection of increment for four years. Essentially that means there are seven years between now and the time they would need to start construction on a new proj ect. Mr. Hickok stated staff recommends adopting the resolution to allow for a late fall demolition. The demolition was approved by the HRA at their meeting on October 1. Councilmember Barnette asked if all the buildings are included. Mr. Hickok replied no. The owners of the Tae Kwon Do building have chosen not to negotiate with the City. The veterinary clinic has also chosen not to negotiate. The City only does an arms-length transaction. We do have an offer out to the Sikh Society, and negotiations continue. Councilmember Barnette stated after the demolition there will be two or three other buildings there. What does that do as far as chances for any kind of developer to come in? FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 12, 2009 PAGE 24 Mr. Hickok replied he thinks they would all agree that they went into this to enhance the image along the corridor. We began to purchase those buildings because of the opportunity. As for a developer being interested, we went through the corridor initiative with the corridor folks. Staff talked to some neighbors about what they would like to see. It may be a more truncated project. Have a nice northern block project and then something smaller on the southern end of the block. He thinks it is in the City's interest to eliminate as much blight as possible. Hopefully it will inspire the remaining buildings to maintain their properties. MOTION by Councilmember Saefke to adopt Resolution No. 2009-56. Seconded by Councilmember Varichak. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. Resolution Approving and Authorizing Execution of Convention and Tourism Bureau Agreement. Councilmember Bolkcom said the agreement says a budget will be submitted for review by the City on or before the first day of October. She asked how that works. Debra Skogen, City Clerk, stated they just incorporated and are now in the process of having their first board of directors meeting. There is not an established budget at this time. The agreement actually would begin January 1, 2010. This is a similar agreement that we have had with Visit Minneapolis North since 1986. In October of 2010, Council will be presented a proposed budget for the following year. Councilmember Bolkcom asked whether they have actually seen a budget in the past for this. Ms. Skogen stated she thinks they have come in and reviewed it with the City Manager on an annual basis. William Burns, City Manager, replied not regularly. Richard Pribyl, Finance Director, stated he thinks probably the only one who has seen one is either Ms. Skogen or the prior representative. Ms. Skogen stated it is supposed to be brought to the board of directors for approval in September so that it can go to the cities in October. Councilmember Bolkcom stated this might be something that somebody should be approving besides just the representative. Councilmember Bolkcom referred to paragraph (6) where it states "The Finance Officer of the city shall have the right of access to the books and records. .. at any time." She asked if they normally gave the City a copy of the monthly financial statements and if someone looked at them. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 12, 2009 PAGE 25 Ms. Skogen replied, she has been on the executive committee for the last three years; and they are reviewed by the executive committee on a monthly basis. Councilmember Bolkcom stated, it states the Bureau will provide the "city" a copy of the monthly financial statement. Ms. Skogen stated she thinks they are given to the representative. She has not brought it forward to the City since 2000, but they do provide a copy to her as a representative. Mayor Lund stated he thinks it probably appropriate to provide a copy to Council. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to adopt Resolution No. 2009-52. Seconded by Councilmember Saefke. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. Resolution Approving the Agreement for Collection of Fluorescent Lamps with Xcel Energy. Councilmember Bolkcom stated our recycling contract expired in 2008. She asked if it was normal for them to be a year behind in submitting a new contract. Mr. Hickok replied he did not think that it s typical. They have never denied their obligation or their duties to collect. Councilmember Bolkcom stated we have not had any problems with getting reimbursement. When we have our recycling drop-off days, do they pay for the recylcler? Mr. Hickok replied, yes. They also collect the fluorescent bulbs for the Municipal Center and the Public Works facility. They have a regular collection schedule. Councilmember Bolkcom stated someone stated they could not come on Saturday and asked if there was something else they could do with their fluorescent bulbs. Mr. Hickok stated they can call Rachel Harris at 763-572-3594, and she can help them. Councilmember Bolkcom said the agreement outlines two methods of payment. She asked which one we are choosing. Mr. Hickok said they use the second method. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if it needed to be spelled out in the agreement. Mr. Hickok stated this has been our standard agreement. This is their standard contract they use with every City. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 12, 2009 PAGE 26 Councilmember Bolkcom asked Attorney Knaak if it should be spelled out in the agreement what method we will be using. Attorney Knaak replied, as long as the City is clear in choosing the option. The agreement provides for the necessary understanding. It does not have to be city specific in this case. Mayor Lund stated it is probably all pretty minor anyways because of the fact that it is an ongoing program. He asked about the term of the contract. Attorney Knaak stated they have pretty clearly a two-year contract that has been e�tended because it is retroactive. He read the contract as being from 2010-2011 or for two years. MOTION by Mayor Lund to adopt Resolution No. 2009-53. Seconded by Councilmember Saefke. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MOTION by Mayor Lund to amend the Resolution by adding: "Whereas, the contract term begins January 1, 2009, and ends December 31, 2011." Seconded by Councilmember Saefke. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 11. Informal Status Report Councilmember Bolkcom asked Mr. Kosluchar what he knew about the signal and lane changes. She saw they are starting to work on East River Road. Does he think that will be able to happen yet? Mr. Kosluchar replied he is guessing they are going to complete what they need to on the roadway yet this fall. Dr. Burns asked about the elevated storage tank. Mr. Kosluchar stated the contractor is late and knows it. The contractor is a slave to the weather and probably needs three good days. Dr. Burns asked if there is a danger it will get held over until ne�t year. Mr. Kosluchar replied, there is, but his expectation is they will get barely get their three days. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if there are penalty fees in the contract related to their being behind schedule. Mr. Kosluchar replied there are. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 12, 2009 PAGE 27 Councilmember Bolkcom asked if there was any danger painting this late. Mr. Kosluchar stated staff has made them aware of the stipulations in the contract regarding completion and he believed the paint was warranted for two years. It is their duty to complete it on time and to complete it right. He thinks it may still happen this year. Ms. Skogen stated regarding the special election they will now be having on December 8, residents can vote by absentee ballot. They have to file an application and their ballot will be sent out 30 days before the election. The applications will be made available to the public on Wednesday. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if they can call and get an application. Ms. Skogen replied, they can call her at 763-572-3523, they can e-mail her at sko end �Ici.fridle .y mn.us, or they can come in person. Mayor Lund asked for those people campaigning, can they bring absentee ballots. Ms. Skogen replied they can bring the applications and voter registration cards. In order to get the names in a roster book for a special election there is always is a 20-day window where they cut off voter registration for 20 days before December 8. ADJOURN: MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to adjourn. Seconded by Councilmember Varichak. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:43 P.M. Respectfully submitted by, Denise M. Johnson Scott J. Lund Recording Secretary Mayor