CCM 12/08/2014
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF FRIDLEY
DECEMBER 8, 2014
The City Council meeting for the City of Fridley was called to order by Mayor Lund at 7:04 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Mayor Lund
Councilmember Barnette
Councilmember Saefke
Councilmember Varichak
Councilmember Bolkcom
OTHERS PRESENT:
Wally Wysopal, City Manager
Darcy Erickson, City Attorney
Scott Hickok, Community Development Director
Julie Jones, City Planner
James Kosluchar, Public Works Director
Darin Nelson, Finance Director and Treasurer
Kay Qualley, Environmental Planner,
Pam Reynolds, 1241 Norton
Kevin Faye, 6034 Fourth Street
Ron Bloch, 5201 Pierce Street NE
Leroy Anderson, 7581 Alden Way
Jim Woodison, 6241 Sunrise Drive NE
Pat Delaney, 6250 Riverview Terrace
Eric Larson, 69th Place
Richard Svanda, 1521 Woodside Court
Brenda Michnowski, 6297 Jackson Street
John Krack, 7629 Lakeside Road NE
Jim Kiewel, 1627 Rice Creek Road
Ted Kueppers, 7361 Tempo Terrace
Adam Hardy, 6845 Channel Road NE
Norma Rust, 5735 Quincy
,
Gary Alfernes570 Rice Creek Boulevard
,
Justin Foell6005 Gardena Circle
Joan Olson, 6320 Van Buren
Brian DuRose, Gibralter Avenue
PROCLAMATIONS:
Student Foreign Exchange Week - December 8-14, 2014
Daniela Fernandes from Portugal
Simen Angell-Olsen from Norway
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 2
APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA:
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
City Council Meeting of November 24, 2014
Councilmember Bolkcom
referred to the "Informal Status Reports" section. At the end of the
first sentence, she asked that the following sentence be added: "She also wanted to thank the
residents who attended the informal session."
APPROVED AS CORRECTED.
OLD BUSINESS
:
1. Second Reading of an Ordinance Amending Fridley City Charter, Chapter 7,
Taxation and Finances, Section 7.04 Preparation of Annual Budget, and Section
7.05 Passage of Budget.
WAIVED THE READING OF THE ORDINANCE AND ADOPTED ORDINANCE NO.
1318 ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLICATION.
2. Resolution Denying Final Plat, P.S. #12-01, and Easement Vacation, SAV #13-02,
Pertaining to the Columbia Arena Property, Located at 7011 University Avenue
N.E. (Ward 1).
ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2014-88.
NEW BUSINESS:
3. Special Use Permit Request, SP #14-05, by University Auto Sales & Service, LLC, to
Allow an Indoor Used Car Sales Facility, Generally Located at 7700 University
Avenue N.E.;
and
Resolution Approving Special Use Permit, SP #14-05, for Indoor Auto Sales,
Petitioned by University Auto Properties, LLLP, the Property Owner of 7700
University Avenue N.E. (Ward 3).
APPROVED SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #14-05, by University Auto Properties, LLP,
AND ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2014-89.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 3
4. Special Use Permit Request, SP #14-08, by University Auto Sales & Service, LLC, to
Allow an Electronic Changeable Message Sign as Part of the Free-Standing Sign,
Generally Located at 7700 University Avenue N.E.;
and
Resolution Approving Special Use Permit, SP #14-08 for an Electronic Changeable
Sign, Petitioned by University Auto Properties, LLLP, the Property Owner of 7700
University Avenue N.E. (Ward 3).
APPROVED SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #14-08, BY University Auto Sales & Service,
LLC, AND ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2014-90.
5. Special Use Permit Request, SP #14-06, by DeMars Signs to Allow an Electronic
Changeable Message Sign as Part of the Free-Standing Sign, Generally Located at
661 Highway 65 N.E.;
and
Resolution Approving Special Use Permit, SP #14-06, for DeMars Signs, on Behalf
of Crooners Real Estate Company, LLC, the Property Owner of Crooners Lounge
and Supper Club, Located at 6161 Highway 65 N.E. (Ward 2).
APPROVED SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #14-06, AND ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO.
2014-91.
6. Request for Public Hearing Postponement for Special Use Permit, SP #14-07, by
TCO Design, to Allow a Comprehensive Home Health Care Use in an R-3, Multi-
Family Zoning District, Generally Located at 5310 Fourth Street N.E. (Ward 1).
Councilmember Bolkcom asked that the e-mail requesting the postponement be added.
APPROVED.
7. Resolution Amending Resolution No. 2014-54, which Approved a $1,500,000 Loan
to the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Fridley,
Minnesota.
Wally Wysopal
, City Manager, stated this loan provides for any extraordinary expense paid
before principal. This was an amendment to the existing resolution of agreement that would
require any TIF (tax increment financing) monies would be pay any extraordinary expenses
before the HRA and City received their payment of principal.
ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2014-92.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 4
8. Resolution Approving the Anoka County Fire Protection Council Joint Powers
Agreement.
THIS ITEM WAS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND PLACED ON
THE REGULAR AGENDA.
9. Receive Bids and Award Water Treatment Plant No. 3 Filter Drain Pump
Improvement Project 459
.
RECEIVED BIDS AND AWARDED PROJECT TO MUNICIPAL BUILDERS, INC.
10. Approve Change Order No. 1 for Water Main Project No. 427/Sewer Forcemain
Project No. 433
Mr. Wysopal
stated this was for $8,000 or 3 percent of the project cost.
APPROVED.
11. Claims (166317 - 166452)
APPROVED.
12. Licenses
APPROVED THE LICENSES AS SUBMITTED AND AS ON FILE.
13. Estimates
Sunram Construction, Inc.
20010 - 75th Avenue North
Corcoran, MN 55340
Main Street Bike/Walk Project No. ST2011-22
Estimate No. 5..............................................................$15,390.00
Blackstone Contractors, LLC
7775 Corcoran Trail East
Corcoran, MN 55340
Oak Glen Creek Erosion Control
Project No. 380
Estimate No. 7..............................................................$ 4,632.52
APPROVED.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 5
APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA
:
Councilmember Bolkcom
requested that Item No. 8 be removed and placed on the regular
agenda.
MOTION
by Councilmember Barnette to approve the proposed consent agenda with the
removal of Item 8 and addition of the e-mail under Item No. 6. Seconded by Councilmember
Bolkcom.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
OPEN FORUM:
No one from the audience spoke.
NEW BUSINESS:
8. Resolution Approving the Anoka County Fire Protection Council Joint Powers
Agreement.
Councilmember Bolkcom
stated not in the agreement itself, but in the Bylaws, on Page 75 in
Section 19, it says "Written Action. Any action required or permitted to be taken at a Board of
Director's meeting may be taken by written action signed, or consented to by authenticated
electronic communication. . .." There is comment about how the business is related to a quorum.
She asked Attorney Erickson to explain this.
Darcy Erickson
, City Attorney, stated she had a brief conversation with Jennifer Urban, the
attorney for the Joint Powers; and they discussed the written action Councilmember Bolkcom
had a question about. Essentially, a JPA is subject to the open meeting law. If there is going to
be action by just a written instrument, that would be very difficult. It needs to mesh with the
requirements of the open meeting law.
Attorney Erickson
stated she recommended Council approve the Joint Powers Agreement and
the attached Bylaws with the understanding that the JPA entity and legal counsel are looking into
that matter. The entity cannot do anything in contravention of the open meeting law, but there
will be some consultation with the Department of Administration for clarification. That power is
a power that non-profit entities have but, because this is a governmental entity, so there is kind of
a grayish line that they want to clarify.
MOTION
by Councilmember Bolkcom to adopt Resolution No. 2014-92. Seconded by
Councilmember Saefke.
Councilmember Bolkcom
asked that the By-Laws come back to Council for review.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 6
ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA:
MOTION
by Councilmember Bolkcom to approve the agenda. Seconded by Councilmember
Saefke.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
2015 BUDGET AND PROPERTY TAX PUBLIC MEETING:
14. Presentation of the 2015 City of Fridley Budget.
Darin Nelson,
Finance Director and Treasurer, stated the major component of the budget is the
tax levy. Fridley levy limits are unique as we have, in addition to the Council's levy setting
authority, two additional authorities that govern the levy. The first is the City's Charter and,
based on the City's Charter, the City's levy is limited to the lower of either 5 percent or the CPI
for all urban consumers in the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area. The City's cap for 2015 is
1.94 percent according to the Charter.
Mr. Nelson
stated the other authority that governs the City's levy limit is the State Legislature.
Compared to previous years, the Legislature did not impose levy limits for 2015.
Mr. Nelson
said about 89 percent of the City's levy is allocated to the general fund with the
remainder being designated to debt service, Springbrook Nature Center, and capital project
funds.
Mr. Nelson
stated on August 25, Council approved a preliminary levy of $11,734,607. That is
an increase of 1.94 percent, the City's cap for 2015.
Mr. Nelson
stated as to a breakdown of how the levy is allocated comparing 2014 and 2015, the
general fund is the majority, and there are some changes in allocations and shifting of funds to
the general fund from capital project funds for this year. The bottom line is 1.94 percent, and
that equates to just over $223,000 additional levy for this year.
Mr. Nelson
stated the question often asked is, what impact does 1.94 percent have on the
homeowners in Fridley. Commercial and residential properties are reacting differently in the
current market, and that is having a dramatic impact on property taxes. For taxes payable in
2014 (which is your value actually in 2013), residential property saw about a 10 percent decline
in value throughout the City, and commercial properties stayed relatively flat. That shifted the
tax burden from residential properties over to commercial properties. The City actually had a 2.3
percent levy increase last year, but yet residential properties saw decreases in about the 10
percent range.
Mr. Nelson
stated this year, we are seeing increases in residential properties. The residential
market is beginning to recover with increases of 15 to 18 percent in market values. Property
taxes are consequently going up. Commercial properties have also increased but at a much lower
rate. The property tax burden for 2015 is shifting from commercial property back over to
residential. In essence, what we wanted to do is take three separate homes and demonstrate over
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 7
a three-year span the tax comparisons. Taxes are generally going up for 2015, but they took a
pretty dramatic decrease in 2014.
Mr. Nelson
stated the market is really playing two different factors here. There is the
commercial and the residential and the two interact differently. They both come into play in
determining property tax liability.
Mr. Nelson
presented charts comparing the levy over the last ten years. Debt service will be
declining. For 2016, there is one debt service bond that will be paid off in 2016 so there will be
a small decline there.
Mr. Nelson
stated in reviewing operations, the City continues to monitor expenditures to achieve
cost savings without negatively impacting service levels. An example of this was the extensive
analysis completed this summer regarding the labor distribution for the City's three utility funds.
Mr. Nelson
stated the analysis concluded the Storm Water Fund was relying heavily on
Engineering and Public Works employees for both the general fund and sewer utility fund. We
did an extensive analysis on each individual's time and whether it was being costed to the job
they were actually doing. We found a lot of the employees, Engineering staff specifically, and
then a lot of the sewer employees, were doing work that actually should have been charged to the
Storm Water Fund. The Storm Water Fund is an enterprise fund just like the Water and Sewer
Funds but it was not standing alone on its own. With the help of Jim Kosluchar, the Public
Works Director, we have allocated the labor accordingly. In 2015, each fund will stand on its
own.
Mr. Nelson
stated the general fund does not have as much flexibility as some of the other funds.
Therefore, it is imperative we make sure the general fund is not paying for other funds' expenses.
That is really what was happening. By doing the labor redistribution, it freed up some funds
within the general fund which has allowed the City to rehire or have in the budget for 2015 a
police officer position that has been frozen in prior years.
Mr. Nelson
stated another initiative of Council and the staff is we continue to be independent of
local government aid (LGA). We have dedicated all of the City's LGA over the last couple of
years to capital project funds so it is no longer in the operational budget. LGA is not budgeted in
the General Fund. The State has the ability to pull LGA (the City gets its second half of the
LGA payment December 20), and we want to make sure the City covers itself. With LGA
dedicated to capital project funds, it is intended to be used for one-time purchases which we are
more able to adjust in the budgets if we need to at the end of the year or the following year.
Mr. Nelson
stated we also have a goal of eliminating capital equipment certificates. The City
last issued those back in 2010 and 2012. This budget, along with the 2015 through 2019 CIP,
does eliminate any of those future capital equipment debt issuances.
Mr. Nelson
stated we also want to improve on our capability to measure outcomes and current
budget linkages so the public can better understand the performance of their tax dollars. The
City revised the budget last year to make it more of a narrative form and included indicators and
key measures. We intend to take the budget a step further in the upcoming year.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 8
Mr. Nelson
stated as for the overall economic climate, property values in the City have
increased for the first time in a couple of years. The City's housing stock is also beginning to
recover. There was an 18 percent on average increase in property values for residential
properties. Distressed sales have declined. Commercial redevelopment continues to be an
economic driver within the City. There are a couple major projects going on right now that are
adding both jobs and capacity to the City.
Mr. Nelson
stated the improving economy, increase in home values, and the City's conservative
management practices has paid off for the City in its bond rating. Moody’s was in the City for a
review, and they confirmed the City's Aa1 credit rating, which is the second-highest rating that
any City can receive. The City is eliminated from receiving a AAA rating as it just does not
have the size to achieve that rating. The negative outlook rating has been removed. In 2012, we
had a negative outlook rating because of the declining values in the City.
Mr. Nelson
stated moving over to the General Fund, the budget also includes a revised 2014
budget. The budget includes a column for the original 2014 budget and then a revised 2014
budget. Every year we would come to Council after the end of the year and do reappropriations
for donations that would come in which would offset expenditures. We tried to incorporate a
majority of these into the revised budget column. This should be the final budget for 2014.
Mr. Nelson
stated the General Fund are revenues coming in higher than anticipated. We have
had some additional building and permit revenues related to the redevelopment taking place.
Municipal state aid came in a little higher than anticipated. Also, the City had some public
safety grants that were not anticipated.
Mr. Nelson
stated with the expenditures coming in on budget for 2014, we estimate about a
$345,000 surplus compared to the original budget which was about a $30,000 to $35,000 surplus.
We want to make sure the City's fund balance stays at that appropriate guideline, which was
about 35 to 50 percent of expenditures. Ensuring a small surplus each year will keep that
percentage where we want it to be.
Mr. Nelson
stated looking at the 2015 budget for the General Fund, we are shifting the
allocation of the levy. The levy is going to increase in the General Fund by $337,000 or about
3.4 percent. The City's total revenue is only increasing about $100,000 or .7 percent. The cause
for that is the City is shifting part of the tax levy from the Capital Equipment Fund to the General
Fund. In addition, the City is transferring the liquor store profits that had typically gone into the
General Fund, to the Capital Equipment Fund and to the Park Improvement Fund. The idea
behind this shift is the City wants to demonstrative that liquor store proceeds are purchasing
tangible items. In the past, it has been hard to promote the liquor store proceeds since they
reduced the general operating budget but were not tied to any specific item or service.
Mr. Nelson
stated as to the expenditure side, the City has expenditures increasing about
$134,000 or .9 percent. The City has included the addition of a frozen police officer position
from a number of years ago. What really aided here was the reallocation of labor, shifting those
actual Public Works costs to the appropriate funds. Also, there is a moderate cost of living
adjustment for personnel of 1.5 percent.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 9
Mr. Nelson
presented a breakdown of the revenue from the general fund. The taxes are a vast
majority of how the City derives its revenue. The City has about 69 percent or about three-
quarters of its revenue within the General Fund coming from taxes. The remaining part comes
from licenses, charges for services, etc. The City is heavily dependent upon property taxes for
its General Fund just like any other municipal government would be.
Mr. Nelson
stated Public Works and Public Safety equate to about 70 percent of the City’s
expenditures from the General Fund. Being a service organization, the City's personnel costs are
going to be a majority of the costs. Three-quarters of the City's costs are dedicated to personnel.
There is very little supplies and the remainder leftover for other services and charges.
Mr. Nelson
stated the budget also includes a capital projects funds. This is the second year of
the City's stand alone Capital Improvements Plan. In June, Council reviewed a draft version of
the CIP and reviewed it again in August before approving the CIP in late August when the
Council also approve a preliminary levy.
Mr. Nelson
stated the CIP is the driver of the operational budget, and 26 percent of the entire
budget is dedicated to capital outlay. The 2015 CIP items are included in this budget for final
review and approval.
Mr. Nelson
stated moving onto Enterprise Funds, these funds do incorporate the utility budget
and the rate increases approved at the November 24 Council meeting.
Mr. Nelson
said within a $38 million budget, there are other sources, bond proceeds, at $4.2
million. That is not a reoccurring item. That happens once every so often. Also, under "other
income" the bond money from the State for the SPRING project is included in there.
Mr. Nelson
stated the number are a little different for expenditures. They have about
$37,500.000 in 2014 compared to about $40,420,000 in 2015. A lot of that again is because of
the bond issuance. It probably will not be issued in 2014 but will be issued in 2015; however,
we have a couple of years to spend all those proceeds. We will issue it the one year and not
necessarily spend it all in that same year.
Mr. Nelson
stated when they bring all the funds together, here is how the City-wide revenue is
derived. As we saw in the general fund, property taxes made up 66 percent of the revenue within
that fund. When we put all of the funds together, property taxes are about 28 percent and the
user fees and charges, that include utility fees, and liquor receipts which is $4,000,000 a year or
so, become a significant piece of the pie with some smaller pieces included within
intergovernmental revenue and other income.
Mr. Nelson
said with respect to the expenditures, a lot of the CIP projects that are Public Works
related or Police and Fire related continue to be major factors.
Mr. Nelso
n stated the general government may seem a little heavy here, but that includes liquor
store expenditures as well.
Mr. Nelson
stated the City has complied with the appropriate sections of the City Charter that
require certain formats and information be contained within the budget document, and the budget
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 10
needs to be approved by the Council and submitted to the County by the end of December. No
action is required for tonight.
Mr. Nelson
stated the budget is available and has been available on the City's website for a few
weeks. We also put up a video that came up from Anoka County that he saw out on Twitter a
week or so ago that explains the distribution of taxes and how taxes are derived.
Councilmember Barnette
said for many, many years they have talked about how low Fridley
residents' property taxes were compared to most of them in Anoka County partly because Fridley
has a large commercial/industrial base. It used to be that the commercial/industrial paid 60
percent, and residential only 40 percent. He asked if that has changed much.
Mr. Nelson
replied that percentage has completely flip flopped now. It is now 60 percent
residential and 40 percent commercial/industrial, give or take 1 or 2 percent on either side.
Mr. Wysopal
said it does not just have to do with redevelopment but also some of the changes
in the property tax classification rates at the State level.
Mr. Nelson
replied, yes, the fiscal disparities program is experiencing shifts in contributions and
the distributions.
Councilmember Bolkcom
asked if this is just a presentation. There is no actual action item on
the agenda, correct?
Mr. Nelson
replied, correct, they will take formal action at the December 22 City Council
meeting.
Pam Reynolds,
1241 Norton, stated in one of the last slides, it says it complies with everything
in the Charter. The Charter says that the Council shall approve their compensation and
renumeration by the first meeting of November. That was never an agenda item. It was not in
compliance with the Charter.
Councilmember Saefke
said it was not on the agenda as Council decided not to give themselves
a raise for 2015. Therefore, it is not part of the budget.
Mayor Lund
stated there was no change in the budget.
Ms. Reynolds
replied, but the Charter says you have to approve whatever it is.
Mayor Lund
stated historically they have never approved a line item such as their
compensation, only when there has been an increase.
Councilmember Bolkcom
stated in the past they have always either denied or approved it at a
meeting. This is the first year they have not done that since they were not giving themselves a
raise. They will look into it.
Kevin Fay
, 6034 Fourth Street, said regarding the 40/60 split, Mr. Nelson mentioned that would
kind of be made up with some of the changes that are taking place. He asked is that because of a
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 11
shift back over to commercial heavier taxing or is that because of the shift the City seems to
desire in more upscale residential properties?
Mr. Nelson
replied it has taken many years to make the 60/40 split. They have seen a decline in
values in commercial properties over the years, and residential properties have kind of taken the
place of that. It may take years to get it back to that.
Mayor Lund
stated it is actually from the State legislatures. They are making the shift. There
was a major shift throughout the State of Minnesota which has been taking place for the last
decade, and a lot of it has to do with the local government aid shift. They have changed the
formulas. It is a State thing.
PUBLIC HEARING/NEW BUSINESS:
15. Consideration of Organized Residential Solid Waste Collection by Districts;
and
Motion to Set a Date for Taking Formal Action on the Proposal for Organized
Residential Solid Waste Collection by Districts.
MOTION
by Councilmember Bolkcom to open the public hearing. Seconded by
Councilmember Saefke.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE HEARING WAS OPENED AT 7:49.
Mr. Wysopal
stated the process has taken about 12 months to arrive at a draft proposed
agreement, and they have met with all five haulers. Those haulers include Ace Solid Waste,
Waste Management of Minnesota, LePage & Sons, Republic Services, and Walters Recycling
and Refuse. They followed the State Statute in this regard. It was a fairly new statute, and they
were obliged to meet with those haulers who are currently licensed to do business in the City and
have accounts. The City staff met exclusively with them during the last year.
Mr. Wysopal
stated they had a number of meetings and they took into consideration all of the
haulers' concerns, as well as the concerns the City had with regard to developing a proposal.
There was a minimum 60-day negotiation period that is required by statute. It took longer than
that, but the City was not interested in a quick decision but a good decision.
Mr. Wysopal
stated this came about as a result of the Environmental Quality & Energy
Commission which made a recommendation to the City Council to address this issue. In
December of last year, the City Council made the recommendation to do that, and staff began
meeting with the haulers.
Mr. Wysopal
stated the goal was to organize garbage collection by districts. They divided the
City into five zones. From the beginning, the haulers did not reveal their books of business
because they felt it was a trade secret, but they were very willing to participate in the rest of the
process. Staff held off on requiring them to disclose who their customers were. The haulers told
staff they would have no problem with identifying who their customers were if the City Council
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 12
were to enter into an agreement. If the City Council did not enter into an agreement, they did not
want to have all of their accounts made public. They have had a very good relationship with the
haulers in terms of good dealings and fair play. The haulers were very up front and open with
staff and staff was with them, and they exchanged ideas in very good negotiation sessions.
Mr. Wysopal s
tated the crux of the agreement is that single-family homes, duplexes, and
triplexes are affected here. They do not include any of the townhomes, manufactured home
parks, apartment buildings, and commercial or industrial areas. The garbage would be picked up
on days that recycling is collected.
Mr. Wysopal
stated the problems City staff identified included wear and tear on the streets,
some environmental issues, and concerns about noise and safety. Price was not the number one
issue. Staff was dealing with issues that affected the City and its assets. However, staff was
concerned about fair pricing and wanted the prices to be uniform through the City for the same
types of services.
Mr. Wysopal
stated the services they have now under this proposed agreement would remain
the same. The 30, 60, or 90 gallon container options would be available to the residents. Any
additional services, such as yard waste or special items such as refrigerators and sofas, would be
picked up on a separate operation with the hauler.
Mr. Wysopal
stated the haulers would be responsible for the billing under this proposal. It
became evident to the City staff as they went through the negotiations that the haulers have a
tremendous respect for their customers. Staff felt it would be a good idea to allow the haulers to
retain the billing operation and, therefore, the customer relation piece as well.
Mr. Wysopal
stated the haulers would divide the City up based on their average customer count
six months prior to the commencement of the negotiation period. That language comes exactly
out of the State Statute. What it means is that the five haulers would have no less of a market
share in 2015 if this were to be enacted than they do today. As a matter of fact, they may pick up
some additional accounts because not every resident in Fridley has garbage collection even
though it has an ordinance that requires that.
Mr. Wysopal
stated with respect to snowbirds, people who take off for a month or more at a
period of time would be able to contact the hauler and request they not be billed for that period
of time. The one-month period was suggested by the haulers as that is what they have as current
practice.
Mr. Wysopal
stated the City would guarantee payment only if the resident was in arrears and
that would be after 75 days. The City was able to offer that guaranteed payment so that the
haulers would be able to do the collection of the homes even though a homeowner may not make
payment. This they felt was very similar to what the City currently does. It is exactly what it
does with the water and sewer accounts. If the City has delinquent accounts, it submits it to the
City Council for assessment onto the homeowner's property, and then the City gets the collection
of that money in due time along with fees that go with it. The City has the Charter authority to
be able to assess for unpaid garbage bills.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 13
Mr. Wysopal
stated staff felt there are five key points this proposal addresses. One, it is an asset
preservation for the City. The roads represent over a $67 million asset to the City, and they need
to be protected. Two, the City feels it keeps within the spirit of the Charter if it spends wisely.
We are all familiar with the Charter limitation. It also has a reciprocal relationship that the City
is a wise spender of taxpayer dollars. At $67, million the streets represent the largest asset in the
City. Any percentage of savings on that is going to be big.
Mr. Wysopal s
tated third, the City also wanted to reduce the number of code enforcement
situations that are related to garbage. The numbers are also quite impressive in terms of gross
numbers of code enforcement issues the City deals with related to garbage.
Mr. Wysopal
said fourth, it will improve the rates for most of the City's residents. They
recognize that under the current system residents may be paying what the haulers presented as
the market rate or they may have what they call “sweetheart deals.” There might be some
residents who can show that their current bill is less than what the City negotiated. Staff feels
that cost is not everything, because there are the dollars that are being used by the City for the
deterioration of the streets. The garbage collection system is the only business that operates in
the City on a public street that contributes significantly to its deterioration, but that does not pay
any taxes, etc., towards that. For example, the City's cable provider, Comcast, has their cables,
in the City's right-of-way; and the City receives hundreds of thousands of dollars from Comcast
in return for being in the City's right-of-ways.
Mr. Wysopal
stated fifth it addresses environmental safety and noise improvements.
Kay Qualley,
Environmental Planner, stated they are doing sort of a 5-4-3-2-1 on the key points
Mr. Wysopal talked about. The call she gets most frequently at the City is on noise impacts.
Road impacts and then proper disposal of garbage as well which Julie Jones, Planning Manager,
will be addressing shortly represents the rest of the calls.
Ms. Qualley
stated with respect to fuel consumption during collection activities, one of the
things the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency has put out is that open hauling systems typically
use higher amounts of fuel than cities with organized systems that are organized or in zones.
Fewer vehicle miles traveled also results in less air pollutant materials and particulate matters
from heavy daily waste collection vehicles. Public concern is increasing about the human health
impacts because of emissions, and this is just another category of emissions.
Ms. Qualley
stated another thing that happens every couple of years is a hazardous spill.
Although infrequent, by reducing the number of trucks in the neighborhoods, they are also
hoping that number will continue to decrease.
Ms. Qualley
stated probably they could spend the rest of the night talking about potential
environmental benefits, but safety is probably the other thing they hear about with the potential
for garbage truck conflicts with autos, bikes and pedestrians. A lot of schools would like kids to
walk more, but they are uncomfortable with traffic and sidewalks being absent in some areas,
etc. Reducing the number of potential conflict points with all of the modes of transportation
could be a possible benefit as well.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 14
Ms. Qualley
stated because 17 percent savings in this negotiated draft contact is an average,
some people will pay more and some people will pay less. At the open house on November 20, a
lot of people reviewed the additional benefits for a contract of this sort and said, well, I might
pay a little more; and right next to them was someone who paid a little less.
Ms. Qualley
presented pricing information for the first year for 30, 60, and 90 gallon cart sizes.
The $80 yard waste cost per season includes 12 compostable bags and 12 bundles. That $4 per
additional bag is a Metropolitan solid waste bag surcharge if you exceed your cart and you have
a bag sitting out there. You could be surcharged if you had additional bags beyond 12 bags of
yard waste or 12 bundles.
Julie Jones
, City Planner, stated as far as the code enforcement key points, this is something she
brought up to the City Council over a decade ago. She was concerned about all of the staff time
they were spending on code enforcement related to the City's open system and at the time the
Council directed staff to try and get the garbage haulers to at least change their routes so they
would pick up on the same day as recycling, which they have done voluntarily for the most part
over the years. The City still continued to have problems.
Ms. Jones
stated outside storage and solid waste issues are the City's top two code enforcement
violations. The last year she has full data was for 2012, when they did systematic inspections on
residential properties over the summer. In that year the City had approximately 400 code
enforcement cases that were outside storage and solid waste related cases. That was about 30
percent of the City's cases which is pretty average because the City will have between 1,000 and
2,000 code enforcement cases a year. Probably a good 25 percent of those cases related to
households that either did not have garbage service at all or had inadequate garbage service.
They know from other cities that have gone through this process that, once they become
organized, you find that about 10 to 25 percent of the population does not have garbage service
even though the City Code requires weekly garbage service.
Ms. Jone
s stated this takes a great deal of staff time. A lot of these cases are not just a simple
letter or two but involves multiple letters, multiple inspections, abatements, and citations.
Determining whether someone has garbage service is very time consuming in the City's current
system. When the City gets a call that says my neighbor is stockpiling their garbage in their
garage or back behind the shed, the City has to call all five haulers and confirm whether there is
an account for that address and then go from there.
Ms. Jones
stated in an organized system, staff would simply be able to go to a map and
determine what company is servicing that particular address. Also in an organized system, the
haulers will be more willing to work with the City and let it know when they have a property
within their route area that does not have service or is not putting out garbage.
Ms. Jones
stated as to other difficulties with the open hauling system, even though the City
requires weekly garbage service, the City knows there is a high percentage of people in the
community who do not contract for service. Probably the City's biggest problem with that is
with duplexes which of course they are proposing to be included in this proposal. With a duplex,
the owner of the duplex who does not live there, requires the renter to contract for garbage
service, and they do not do anything to follow up to make sure the renter does contract for
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 15
garbage service. Sometimes people are using their recycling carts for their garbage service.
Sometimes they are disposing it in other places that are not legal.
Ms. Jones
stated the biggest problem the City sees is that people jump from one hauler to the
next in an open system. They will contract with company "A", not pay that company, and when
that company takes away their cart, they will contract with the next company down the list, and
keep going down the line. It is not unusual for the City to have code enforcement cases where
they talk to all five garbage haulers, and all five of them give staff the same story that these
people owe them money and they would not provide them a garbage cart again until they pay the
amount they owe in arrears plus pay the next three months forward.
Ms. Jones
stated they feel like an organized system can give the City more accountability as far
as code enforcement because staff will have a way of knowing that everyone has garbage
service. In the proposal the haulers have provided, there is an opt-out option for people that
maybe do have a legal means to get rid of their garbage.
Ms. Jones
stated there really is more incentive for the occupant to pay for monthly garbage
service in this system, too, because if they do not, as they heard from the City Manager, the
proposal in the contract is that after 75 days, the hauler can turn those delinquent bills over to the
City; and the City would be able to assess that unpaid amount. That allows the City to help solve
some of these long-time problems. In the current system staff is often dealing sometimes for
years on some of these cases trying to get the people to contract for proper garbage service.
Ms. Jones
stated, where do people dump their trash when they do not have service? Well, at the
nearest apartment building, park, or business; and that is a cost to everyone in the community. It
is a very unfair and difficult thing and has been a real problem in the community. Inadequate
service really is a cost to the taxpayers, not just in terms of the property owners who are getting
illegally dumped on, but it is also a cost in staff time for all of these cases they are dealing with
code enforcement-wise.
Mr. Wysopal
stated he made references in his earlier comments that staff is very aware of the
restrictions the Charter places on the City's levy limitation; but it also has a reciprocal
requirement that the City takes care of the assets it has. The City needs to protect its investments
and over $60 million in its streets.
James Kosluchar,
Public Works Director, said the City's streets are a public asset with an
estimated value of $67 million. It has 80 plus miles of centerline asphalt streets in the City and
220 lane miles of asphalt streets in the City. The street assets are owned by the public, and it is
the City's charge to maintain them in the most efficient way possible.
Mr. Kosluchar
stated vehicle loading is the major factor in street deterioration. Stresses
because of vehicle turning movements and starting and stopping can also deteriorate pavement.
Environmental factors caused by water intrusion and frost, can have impacts. However, with
Fridley's typically well-drained soils, proper minor maintenance can largely address these. In
other words, if they do frequent sealcoating, crack sealing, and pothole sealing and make sure
that water cannot intrude and, in knowing the City has a good drainage subbase later, it can
typically mitigate those environmental factors quite well.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 16
Mr. Kosluchar
stated vehicles cause pavement stress which will eventually require major
maintenance to avoid pavement failure. Heavy vehicles, such as refuse trucks, cause greatly
increased loading.
Mr. Kosluchar
stated deterioration because of a loading vehicle is considered in design of
pavements using a unit of loading known as an ESAL or equivalent single axle load. He
presented a listing of different ESAL factors for different types of vehicles, including residential
recycling trucks and residential trash trucks. There are some variations in some of these ESAL
calculations depending on the type of truck, the spacing of axles, etc. Generally it has been the
City's practice that residential trash trucks of the type they have in Fridley are typically 1,000 to
1,500 times the loading of a single-passenger vehicle.
Mr. Kosluchar
stated heavy vehicle loads have the greatest impact on pavement life. The
damage caused by a particular vehicle is roughly related to the load increased by a power of 4.
Doubling the load of a vehicle or a tire or an axle produces 16 times the damage of the foremost
single load. MnDOT no longer takes into consideration passenger vehicles in its latest revision
to pavement design software. They just say passenger vehicles are negligible so they only
consider heavy vehicles in their design calculations at this time.
Mr. Koslucha
r stated seasonal load restrictions also address heavy vehicles through Minnesota
statute. There is an exemption for certain refuse vehicles. Again, traffic loading during the
spring thaw results in five to eight times the amount of damage to pavement and that is often
because of subsurface moisture.
Mr. Kosluchar
stated heavy loading concerns have been recognized by public roadway officials
for a long time. Multiple heavy vehicles are required to serve customers under the current open
collections system arrangement, and it reduces cost efficiency in maintaining the City's roads.
The intensity of loading has increased over the past decade to maximize refuse collection
efficiency on the hauler side. They want to get as much as they can with each load. Trucks and
their payloads have gotten heavier over the past decade.
Mr. Kosluchar
stated excess trucks under the current system can consume the design life of the
pavement or reduce the length of time between major rehabilitation.
Mr. Kosluchar
stated in August of this year, a final version of a heavy vehicle impact tool was
developed by Dr. W. James Wilde, P.E. He is with the Minnesota State University-Mankato.
The tool compares the impact of vehicle loading that was expected when the pavement was
designed to the impact of the vehicle loading including additional vehicles. The City actually
hired Bolton & Menk, Inc., a civil engineering firm, to use this tool and develop a model of
refuse vehicle impacts to Fridley’s asphalt pavements. The model considers the impacts on the
City-maintained asphalt streets which are 95 percent of its local streets, not County or State. The
model considers loading factors only. The model considers impacts of an organized collection
system for refuse with one hauler vs. the current system of five haulers.
Mr. Kosluchar
stated the heavy vehicles model provides comparative predictions of traffic
loading and predicted pavement condition. Analysis was performed on 547 asphalt residential
street segments in Fridley. A comparison of one refuse vehicle trip per week vs. five refuse
vehicle trips per week was performed.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 17
Mr. Kosluchar
presented a chart showing where the excess heavy loads consume over 10
percent and over 30 percent of the total ESAL’s impacting the streets. Commercial areas were
not analyzed. They also did not analyze for the concrete streets in the southeast corner of the
City.
Mr. Kosluchar
said the results of the analysis show that according to this tool the refuse trucks
and the current open refuse collection system consume a significant portion of pavement life
estimated by the model at 17.9 percent over Fridley's asphalt streets. This is all Fridley's asphalt
streets on average. This results in worse pavement conditions that require street resurfacing
sooner.
Mr. Kosluchar
stated the heavy vehicles model estimates an excess cost because of heavy
vehicle loading under the current open collections system is just over $4 million over 20 years or
$208,000 annually. Over the long-term, savings through extension of paving life would be
realized if they were to convert to a reduced traffic scenario under an organized collection
system. They would not see savings in year zero or year one. The savings would migrate
upward. Generally over the pavement life cycle, what they would be able to do is extend some
streets and take them out of the reconstruct mode and come back to them five years later. They
would delay that major maintenance and, therefore, save those dollars. Those projects are
funded by a special assessment through benefitting property owners, and MSA has funds which
are State aid funds originating from gas taxes.
Mr. Kosluchar
stated impacts of trucks routing into and out of a neighborhood are not
considered under this analysis. Impacts of starting, stopping, and turning vehicles (particularly
heavy vehicles) are not considered. Additional minor maintenance and changes to costs or
increased costs on the open collections system vs. an organized collection system are not
considered. Changes in the numbers of haulers or heavy vehicles are not considered.
Mr. Kosluchar
stated it also does not consider how much of that potential savings could be
captured. The analysis gives them an ideal condition. Obviously they know with scheduling the
City's pavement maintenance and rehabilitation, that it could capture the majority of that savings.
The City probably would not be able to capture it all, because the City does not typically jump
around and do a small street segment in one corner of the community and then in another. The
City tries to combine them together for the economy but at the same time extend the life
significantly for all of the City's asphalt pavement.
Mr. Kosluchar
stated he asked himself if this was consistent with estimated impacts on other
communities. Some estimates provided by other communities include Roseville estimated at
$188,376 per year, Oakdale estimated at $120,000 to $300,000 per year, and Robbinsdale at
$150,000 per year. Arden Hills indicated there was no savings. These amounts were developed
without the benefit of this tool but seem to be in the ballpark.
Mr. Kosluchar
stated Fridley's asphalt pavements are significantly impacted by additional
refuse trucks operating under the current system. The model prediction is the most exact
prediction currently available for a Fridley street, and it shows opportunity for real cost savings
over the long-term. Moving to an organized refuse collection system would have a positive
impact by extending asphalt pavement life, resulting in reduced frequency of major maintenance
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 18
and special assessments and local costs associated with construction funded by gas taxes and
other sources.
Mr. Kosluchar
stated, finally, in order to maintain the Fridley's roadway assets in the most
efficient way possible over the long-term, organized refuse collection is superior to the current
open refuse collection system. Also, organized collection would provide the City and its
residents with significant long-term savings.
Councilmember Bolkcom
said staff only mentioned the first year. She asked if they could talk
about the rest of the contract. There were some questions some people had related to fuel
surcharges, etc. The Agreement that was worked out is for seven years.
Mr. Wysopal
stated the Agreement does call for a seven-year service term. That was at the
request of the haulers. They wanted to have as long a term as possible to recoup their
investments and capital equipment, etc. As they negotiated price, they saw the cost to the
customer has two components to it. The first cost component being the actual cost involved to
go down the street, collect it, and then go to the garbage dump. The second cost component has
to do with the actual tipping fee which is the charge from the ERG plant, the flow control for the
County of Anoka and what they charge per ton.
Mr. Wysopal
stated they extrapolated how much garbage is collected by pound in a 30, 60, 90
gallon container. They came up with some costs and then tried to contain those costs as much as
possible. For that first component, the collection cost, they tied that to the CPI so that the
portion of the bill that is attributed to the collection can only go up on an annual basis as much as
the CPI goes up. The second part of the cost, the tipping fee, would only increase the property
owner's bill if there was a commensurate increase at the ERG plant. If there is no increase at the
ERG plant, the customer’s bill would not go up for that particular cost factor. If there was an
increase of a dollar per ton, they extrapolate that back down to the actual per unit collection.
Mr. Wysopal
stated the numbers, however, in the contract are the limits that can be charged. It
cannot be affected by any additional charges the hauler would want to include. Fuel service
charges that are common on most residents' bills would not be added to these numbers. Any
taxes that come up have to be applied. They cannot get around that. There would not be any
fuel service charges on these bills primarily because they looked at ways to identify what the
current costs are for fuel right now and is represented in those numbers. Any increases would be
a part of the CPI.
Ron Bloch
, 5201 Pierce Street NE, stated he has been following this for the past year or so. He
is very much in favor of the Council going ahead. He is the block captain on his block. A few
years ago, he contacted everybody on the block and tried to convince them to go with a single
hauler. It made no since to him to have multiple trucks coming up and down their block. He did
manage to convince most people. It would be nice if those couple of people who wanted to stay
with their haulers would be willing to pay more when it comes time to redo the streets at an
earlier time. He has his doubts there.
Mr. Bloch
stated they have been presented with a whole host of good reasons why they should
go ahead with this. The only reason he can think of opposing this is freedom. People like the
freedom to choose. The City does not give them the freedom to choose their fire service, police
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 19
service, or utility services. This service is like those services, which makes sense for the City to
go ahead and enact this plan.
Leroy Anderson
, 7581 Alden Way, stated he is all in favor of this. A few weeks back at their
monthly meeting, Councilmember Barnette stated there is little disparity in what some people are
being charged so he looked into it. To make a long story short, he has the smallest garbage can
available and he is paying $30 more than his neighbor is paying for identical services.
Jim Woodison
, 6241 Sunrise Drive NE, stated he stands in opposition to the plan. He could
dispute more or less everything that has been presented tonight in one shape, form, or another.
However, the reason he is here tonight is more of choice. He believes they have limited choices
today in many things they do. This is one choice that they should keep.
Mr. Woodison
stated he happens to be in the industry. He sells semi trucks. He disputes the
fact the trucks are loaded all the time. The wear and tear on the streets is progressive based on
the weight of the truck. He disputes the factors such as the green footprint. He made a note
during the comments about whether it is a function of the truck and the specking of the truck or
whether it is function of the provider. For example, if the truck is built wrong and the bridge is
wrong, you are going to have damage. But he would rather choose a waste hauler that is green,
natural gas, wave of the future. Diesel is going to be a thing of the past eventually. They did not
take into account the options that are afforded to them.
Mr. Woodison
asked how they would compel a vendor when the choice is taken away from him.
While he is only one voice, he still has a choice. When Turner left, Comcast had no motivation.
You hear about it in the paper all the time, falling asleep while on hold. Seven years? He scoffs
at it. What is the life cycle of a truck? 30 years? What is compelling the vendor to keep
modern? What is compelling them to do anything?
Mr. Woodison
stated he is with Walters. They could not always get the lid all the way down.
The previous provider, $20 surcharge. They had a choice. The customer service he received at
Walters was better than the previous vendor. He had a choice.
Mr. Woodison
stated he shared with various members what Bloomington was doing and why
St. Paul was an abysmal failure. Why do they have to do what everyone else does? We do have
a choice, and he implores them to think hard about removing their choice and controlling as the
public the vendor instead of the City controlling the vendor. He is the guy writing the check. He
should have that choice.
Councilmember Saefke
stated he was going to read Mr. Woodison's e-mail but seeing how Mr.
Woodison has already covered the material, he will put it into the record along with Mr.
Wysopal’s responses to his questions.
MOTION
by Councilmember Saefke to receiving Mr. Woodison's November 27, 2014, e-mail.
Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, THE MOTION WAS CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 20
Pat Delaney,
6250 Riverview Terrace, stated it is a no brainer that this project should go
through. The saving on the streets with not having the 5 or 6 trucks running around making
noise and pollution is ridiculous.
Eric Larson
, 69th Place, stated he is not 100 percent opposed to the City's plan. It has some
merits. However, right now he currently pays $162 a year. Under the City's proposed plan, he is
going to pay $309. That is a terrible deal. He thinks they could have done a lot better
negotiating.
Mayor Lund
asked what size cart he used
Mr. Larson
replied he has a large cart and he has yard waste. The yard waste is included in that
figure. He has been getting a good rate for about five years. If someone tries to give him a bad
rate, he calls around and gets the best rate he can get.
Mayor Lund
asked who his hauler was.
Mr. Larson
replied Ace. He had Walters before. It seems they could do a lot better than the
numbers the City was given.
Councilmember Barnette
asked what he was paying every three months?
Mr. Larson
replied, the yard waste goes the whole season. He is paying $36.50 per yard waste
can for the entire season, and he is paying a monthly rate of $10.50 for a large can. He realizes
that is a good rate. They are almost doubling his rate with the plan. His yearly rate is $162. He
does not think the haulers are giving the City a good rate.
Mayor Lund
stated they definitely agreed that was part of the premise of the discussions was if
there is an economy of scale, they would get a better deal.
Mr. Larson
stated he might not even mind paying just a little bit more to having only one truck
coming. There is a benefit to that.
Councilmember Bolkcom
asked what is a little bit more?
Mr. Larson
stated a little might be $40 or $50, not $150.
Councilmember Saefke
asked Mr. Larson whether he has a fuel adjustment column on his bill.
Mr. Larson
replied, there is one. It is $1.70 a month.
Councilmember Bolkcom
asked whether that was added onto the $162.
Mr. Larson
replied, the $162 does not include that.
Richard Svanda
, 1521 Woodside Court, stated he moved to Fridley in 1975. Shortly after he
moved into the City, he was appointed to the then Environmental Quality Commission and has
been there ever since. Shortly after he was appointed, he was assigned by the Commission to
represent the Commission at a City Council meeting where the curbside recycling program was
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 21
being debated. There was a decision made at that meeting to proceed with curbside recycling
which he views as an organized collection proposition, and they have the one hauler carrying all
the recycled materials. It has been very well run and very efficient and has served the
community and the residents very well.
Mr. Svanda
stated the second gentleman talked about saving on his garbage rate. In 2010 when
the Commission sponsored public meetings on this issue, he started getting a feeling that maybe
he was paying a little too much for garbage and yard waste. He conducted a survey of the
Commission members and different neighbors who had different haulers than he did, and he
concluded he could save over $100 if he changed haulers. During the first year after that he
saved $114. Under the proposal here the yard waste rate is approximately what he is paying
now, and he uses the 30-gallon garbage can for garbage. He will save about 18 percent there
which will be about 38 percent.
Mr. Svanda
stated he figures from the beginning of the formal discussions here in Fridley to the
organized collection, he is going to save about $150; and he considers that very substantial. He
had a number of points to talk about, but staff has done an exemplary job of their presentation
and the points he was going to make are points they already made with regard to increased
efficiencies. He is a retired civil engineer so the discussion about the wear and tear on roads
makes imminent sense to him. He has not reviewed the points to kind of validate the numbers;
but it makes intuitive sense to him that garbage trucks are having much more of an impact on the
roadways than automobiles.
Mr. Svanda
stated in the Council's budgetary discussion they talked about the certain limitations
that are placed on the City through levy limits. It seems as though the money that is projected to
be saved on roadways, for example, could go a long ways towards addressing the financial needs
of the community and/or of moderating future levy increases. He would encourage the City
Council to adopt the necessary resolutions to make organized collection of garbage in Fridley a
way of life for the future.
Brenda Michnowski
, 6297 Jackson Street, stated she had her current bill. She pays $9 a month
plus there is a fuel surcharge ($5.74 for three months) on there. She understands she is getting a
sweetheart deal, but she worked hard to get the deal. She called all the haulers and shopped for
the best deal. She does have the medium sized cart. Also, Fridley is an aging community with a
lot of senior citizens in it; and she happens to be very good friends with a senior in Fridley. She
calls the Star Tribune, Comcast, the haulers and she explains she has a friend who is a senior
citizen; and she is on a fixed income. Every one of those calls she makes, she get a deal for her.
There are a lot of other people in Fridley who could take advantage of that freedom.
Councilmember Bolkcom
asked if she had yard waste pickup?
Ms. Michnowski
replied, it is $73.50
Councilmember Bolkcom
replied, so it is a little more than what is proposed here.
John Krack
, 7629 Lakeside Road NE, stated he kind of has mixed thoughts about this. On the
surface it looks like a good idea but first thing he looked at was what the financial impact would
be. He expects to see his bill go up about 50 percent. He is currently paying $27 a quarter plus
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 22
fees which are about $38 so about $35 per quarter for a medium-sized container, and they are
looking at going up to around $52.35 a quarter under the new proposal. As has been noted, he
fully expects the operators will be saving a lot of money in that they will be restricted by one
area. He agrees the City could have gotten a better deal from these haulers. He also has taken
advantage of the competition. He goes around every few years and tries to get the best deal.
That is part of the rationale for choice.
Mr. Krack
stated he is with Republic right now and they will do a vacation hold for a minimum
of two weeks. This proposal limits it to four weeks' minimum. He thinks that has to be
reconsidered, too. If Republic can do it for two weeks, why can't the rest?
Mr. Krack
stated he has the option of paying on-line by credit card. It is very convenient. He
does understand there is damage to the streets; but he questions the methodology used to
determine that. Out of $4 million plus savings or additional cost to the streets every 20 years, he
figures there is roughly 4,000 operations caused by those extra four trucks going through once a
week over 20 years, that comes out to about $1,000 damage to the City's roads per truck for
going down his street. That sounds awfully high.
Mr. Krack
stated he also questions whether 20 years is a reasonably useful life. They moved
into their house in 1980. They had their streets replaced once in 2013. By these calculations, if
the street is good for 35 years, then they really got a bargain if it costs them $4 million over a 35-
year period vs. a 20-year period. The other method they use to compute the additional cost of
building the streets to support the additional damage comes out over $100,000 every 20 years.
Maybe they should look at making the pavement a little thicker and spending that $100,000
every 20 years and supporting the additional traffic that these trucks bring.
Councilmember Bolkcom
asked if he has had his street resealed.
Mr. Krack
replied, they come through every so often and do the sealing; but they are not
assessed for that. He knows it is a cost for the City; however, the City will pay for that anyway
as you get deterioration from weather and atmospheric conditions. The only assessment they
have had was last year when they dug up the entire street and replaced it.
Mr. Krack
stated his big concern is the pricing and the inability, once this goes into effect, to
negotiate a better deal.
Jim Kiewel
, 1627 Rice Creek Road, stated he believes the anticipated savings would be
$150,000 per year if they enacted this.
Mayor Lund
stated it was like $208,000 and they took some other factors into consideration,
making it 75 percent of that, which is where the $150,000 came from.
Mr. Kiewel
asked how many would be willing to relinquish your freedoms or your choice for
$150,000 a year.
Mayor Lund
replied, they are just taking public comment. There are a lot of other factors that
were brought into that presentation.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 23
Mr. Kiewel
said it was on the board. Anyone who did not receive a bill or missed it, that
amount would be certified to their taxes and/or to their utility bill.
Mayor Lund
replied after 75 days, the haulers would pass the bill over to the City; and it would
be assessed on the property taxes.
Councilmember Bolkcom
stated, similar to water or sewer or anything else they do not pay for.
Mr. Kiewel
replied, he personally would not be willing to sacrifice his freedom for any amount
of money. He just would not do that. He thinks the definition of socialism is the combination or
control of the means of production and industry. Any time a government entity comes to him or
the citizens here and states they are going to save them money or things are going to be
wonderful, they are adding a third party.
Mr. Kiewel
stated he has a fundamental mistrust as they are probably aware of, of government,
of social engineering or controlling individual choices. It really is not worth sacrificing their
freedom for that.
Pam Reynolds
, 1241 Norton Avenue N.E., stated she is vehemently opposed. She wants to
choose her own hauler. She wants to set her rates. She wants to be in charge of her own
household budget. She does not want government controlling anything that she cannot have
them control. One thing no one has talked about is that 70 percent of Minnesota cities have an
open hauling system. She is not going to cheer that they could end up becoming another of 20
around Fridley. Roseville Council just put it aside and said they are not talking about it. There
are so many cities right now that are jumping on the band wagon to go to open hauling.
Everybody started out with, oh, it is so noisy and so bad for the environment. They got down to
the only thing left to wave their flag for was the streets.
Ms. Reynolds
stated the industry polices itself. Most of the haulers are going to trucks that burn
natural gas. The old behemoth garbage truck spitting and spewing the diesel fumes are not there
anymore. Her biggest issue with this is she wants to pick. If Walters ticks her off, she wants to
get on the phone, and she wants to get rid of them. If her rate gets too high, she wants to be able
to get a better one. By eliminating free market, you eliminate competition. By eliminating her
right to choose, you have eliminated her right to choose.
Ms. Reynolds
stated the saving of such a little dab of money on streets, you have to do them
anyways. It is not like, for how many years, has the City been maintaining the streets; and all of
a sudden a light comes on and they say, oh my God, look at how much money they could save if
they took way the people's rights to pick their own garbage man.
Ms. Reynolds
stated she does not see anything in the document that gives a senior discount or
anything that covers the senior who currently shares with their neighbor because they have one
little Target bag full of trash a week. She sees nothing in there that tells her who they are going
to control next. What if she has a private lawn care service, is that next? Because of this
proposal her garbage and yard waste service is going to almost double.
Mayor Lund
asked what she was paying now?
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 24
Ms. Reynolds
replied her bill is $39 something for three months. That is not a sweetheart deal;
she has been with the same company for four or five years. She switched because she was not
getting the service she wanted. If it is like anything else the City does, it will not enforce it so it
will not matter.
Ms. Reynolds
stated Ms. Jones talked about how many code enforcement violations are based
on solid waste. At the EQEC meeting she pointed out 143 that were probably a real issue. The
rest of them are because someone leaves their garbage can in front of the house or they do not
store it inside.
Ms. Reynolds
stated something else she noticed in the document, where is the control when it
comes to townhouses. She understands they operate under a homeowners association which is a
business pretty much, but on her street the townhouses are at the end of the street. Therefore, if
they still have their own garbage hauler, and the City assigns her one, she is still going to have
double. Most of the people on her street pretty much use two haulers. Sooner or later she is
going to get assessed for the street being done. If they noticed in Mr. Kosluchar's presentation,
the word, "predicted" is on the flag where it says, how much extra road life they are going to get
and how much less they are going to pay. Because nobody has figured it out. They have a chart
where you can plug in the numbers that tells her how much damage that truck is doing to my
street. On her street she sees kids out there, picking rocks out of the street, banging things, and
people dragging things.
Ms. Reynolds
asked if they remembered Mr. Juaire driving the D9 cat down the street on the
metal runners. He damaged the street, and it has never been repaired because right where he was
running that thing is exactly where the surface breaks up all the time. They put a patch on it.
The road has not buckled or failed, and she still has probably 7 or 8 garbage trucks. However,
she thinks when they hit Norton Avenue they are pretty much empty as it is where they start their
route.
Ms. Reynolds
stated the other thing is what happens to people who have long-term contracts
with a garbage hauler so as to maintain a price for a longer period of time. Or, a very unique
thing she came across is there are some people in this City who currently have a lifetime service
provided for free as a result of a buyout of a smaller garbage company by a large one. It kind of
sounds to her the City is going to say, it does not matter what deal you worked out with your
hauler or what kind of contracts you have.
Ms. Reynolds
stated this is not necessary. She asked, if this goes through, then who is next?
The one thing Mr. Wysopal pointed out was that this is the only industry that does not pay to use
the City's streets in a franchised sort of fashion. They do pay wheelage taxes and those sort of
things. However, what about the post office? UPS? FedEx? The Post Office truck runs along
her gutter every day. She does not know what one weighs, but it drives in the same place every
day. Eventually the curb is going to give. Are they going to stop the United States Postal
service? It is wrong to mess with the free market system, and it is definitely wrong to take away
her right to achieve a better rate and maintain the budget in her household by using competition.
Ted Kueppers
, 7361 Tempo Terrace, stated he appreciates what staff has prepared and agrees
with many of the items they have brought up; and he and his wife have discussed these prior to
this time and agree with them and support the organizational use of refuse hauling.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 25
Adam Hardy
, 6845 Channel Road NE, stated he has a couple of concerns. A lot of them have
already been addressed by several members. He stands in opposition to the proposal. It is about
freedom and a lot people have already touched on it. That is one of the main reasons he opposes
it. According to the website, residents will save an average of 70 percent from current rates. He
would like to know if those savings are going to be reflected on his taxes.
Mayor Lund
asked how so, because he is getting a savings? The haulers are the ones who are
giving him a savings for those who will get a savings. Does he mean because of the wear and
tear on the streets?
Mr. Hardy
replied right.
Mayor Lund
replied, there would not be a cost savings. It means that they will not have to raise
the taxes or charge assessments according to some of these studies.
Mr. Hardy
stated he would be willing to pay the assessment for the street because his freedom is
that important to him. The non-residential dwelling units, how is their refuse collected? Can
they pick and choose their own hauler right now?
Mayor Lund
replied, under this proposal it is up to three units. The townhouses and mobile
home parks have single collection sites. A lot of them do not have the carts.
Mr. Hardy
stated they are still able to negotiate with any of the five haulers in the City.
Mayor Lund
replied correct.
Mr. Hardy
stated he wanted to know why the City wants to negotiate on his behalf when he is
capable of doing that himself.
Mayor Lund
replied, that was pretty clear in the presentation that it is about long-term cost
savings to one of the City's most expensive assets in the community.
Mr. Hardy
stated the City thinks they can do a better job of negotiating his service than he can.
Mayor Lund
replied, not necessarily. There have been some comments here by people who are
getting some pretty good deals.
Mr. Hardy
replied, exactly, and he wants to keep his pretty sweet deal if that is okay with the
City. Apparently not, because in this proposal they want to raise his rates.
Mayor Lund
asked how much his rates would rise.
Mr. Hardy
replied on his current rate right now, it would probably go up about 20 percent.
However, apparently hearing from other people he is getting robbed on his yard waste right now.
His real concern here is his right is being taken away to negotiate his own services, his own
prices.
Norma Rust
, 5735 Quincy, stated it sounds like a good deal; but she is opposed to it because it
takes away her freedom. She knows of previous neighbors who combined their garbage
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 26
collection services because of the minimal amount of garbage they had and because of their
limited income. For her, if she were to come under this type of program, she would have a 100
percent increase in her garbage collection because she does not have garbage collection now.
She takes it to another place.
Mayor Lund
asked if she takes it to her employer.
Ms. Rust
replied another property that they have.
Councilmember Bolkcom
stated but it would not increase. It is her understanding in the new
agreement, if Ms. Rust can show that she is taking it to her business because they know Ms. Rust
has an apartment complex, as long as she can show that and fill that out, she would not have to
have garbage collection at her home.
Mayor Lund
replied it is the opt-out clause.
hen a garbage truck comes to the City Hall, they should put this proposal in
Ms. Rust
stated w
there and let the garbage hauler haul it away once and for all.
Gary Alfernes,
570 Rice Creek Boulevard, stated he is all for it and the biggest reason for him is
to have less trucks going around the neighborhood. He has been hearing some people who are
getting some really good deals. He has been happy with his hauler. He is surprised at some of
the prices some people have been getting. He does not even know what his new price would be
but he is all for it.
Justin Foell,
6005 Gardena Circle, stated he is for organized collection. It has never really been
an issue of cost for him. During the summer when there is composting, nine garbage trucks
come by on a given day. Although looking at the presentation today, he pays $40 for
composting currently for the entire season. They apparently are not getting a good deal on their
composting. By inviting five trash haulers, they have kind of created this haulers union and it
seems like the contract term is really long. He was just wondering if anyone knew how the
contract renegotiation works and, if they cannot do it in like two minutes, it is probably too
complex.
Mr. Wysopal
asked Mr. Foell is he saying that the seven-year period is too long and how does
the renegotiation happen?
Mr. Foell
replied, his concern would be that if they feel they are not getting a good deal, they are
going to have to wait a really long time to try and get a better deal. Whereas, on their own right
now they can change whenever they want. He would think a yearly basis would be more normal.
Mayor Lund
stated that is a little short-term for him. The biggest thing that comes to mind right
away is that it is a good thing for the haulers as they have a dedicated seven-year contract with
what they are proposing. With that they can go to the bank if they need to get new equipment,
new trucks, etc. It gives them some stability. Seven years is a long time though especially if
they are not happy with it.
Councilmember Bolkcom
stated State Statute says they can go from three to seven years.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 27
Mr. Wysopal
stated as to how the renegotiation would occur, they would put the haulers on
notice that it is time to renegotiate. They would be gathering data from every year on how things
are going. They would be looking at the other cities and what the prices are and go to the
negotiation table with direction from the City Council as far as what items they need to negotiate
on. It is completely up to the City and the haulers to decide if they want to go into an extension
of the term. It is not obligated. They would come into it just like they would on any contract
and say, okay, what do they need to work on. What needs to be better. What are our business
points.
Councilmember Bolkcom
stated right now the proposal is for seven years. The renegotiation
would be somewhere maybe in the sixth year.
Joan Olson
, 6320 Van Buren, stated she is a 48-year resident of the City. She remembered
when her street was rebuilt. Her 48-year old son was in kindergarten. Her street was sealcoated
only one time.
Mayor Lund
asked, sealcoated or redone?
Ms. Olson
replied, nothing.
Mayor Lund
stated the sealcoat program is every eight years.
Ms. Olson
replied, she has not seen one. She is opposed to it. She wants to keep her hauler.
They are very good. She uses the yard waste in the spring and in the fall. She has a lawn
service. Everything is mulched right back into the lawn. She does not have grass clippings. She
still pays for it but she does not need it. She lets her neighbors use it if they need extra. She
wants to keep what she has, and she likes her walk-up service.
Mayor Lund
asked if she is disabled. He did notice in the contract that for those who are
handicapped or have some disability, they do have a walk-up service.
Ms. Olson
replied, she has a disability and she has enough of a slope in her driveway that her
kids would have 16 fits if she tried to haul a garbage can down there.
Councilmember Bolkcom
stated that would not change.
Mayor Lund
stated he read in the contract they would still have valet service for those who need
it.
Ms. Olson
stated she gets it for free from her hauler. She called several others and they wanted
$6 to $10 a month extra to do it. She is against it.
Brian DuRose
, Gibralter Avenue, stated every year he calls up his trash hauler and he has not
paid for more than nine months of service in the last three years. He just changed haulers and he
got three months free because he asked for a better deal. What the City did was sent out a notice
to five trash haulers and said give me a bid, and every one of those people called each other and
said, okay, we are all going to bid $35. How many bids were different of the five?
Mayor Lund
replied, that actually was not the case.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 28
Mr. DuRose
asked how many bids were different?
Mayor Lund
replied, he did not know. He was not a part of the negotiations.
Mr. DuRose
stated, another example is, he had Sirius radio. It was $86 for six months. He
called up and said, he would like a better deal, and they said they could offer $50 a month. He
said it was not good enough, let me talk to your supervisor. Supervisor got on the line. He got
Sirius radio for $25 for six months. It is their fault they do not negotiate with their trash hauler.
Councilmember Bolkcom
said she never thinks of it.
Mayor Lund
stated this item may come up at the next Council meeting. They need to take this
input. He does not know if they will even make a final selection at the next meeting. They need
to discuss the input they have received tonight. It is a worthwhile venture. They should be
looking at these things.
Mayor Lund
stated governments get criticized often and maybe rightfully so about spending
taxpayers' money and maybe not so wisely. On the alternative side it is only right to look for
alternatives to save money, and that was the premise. They never did look at just going to one
hauler. Why should they not be getting a better deal like some of them are getting. He is certain
they would have gotten a better deal in the negotiation if they had gone to a single hauler. They
felt that they have had five haulers in the City for a number of years, and it is kind of a nice deal
for them to know they do not have to sit there and fight each other for trying to steal the other
guy's business. However, they also do not lose business this way.
Mayor Lund
stated he heard a lot of positive things. Staff has done a lot of work and
negotiations over the last 11 plus months. The EQEC looked at this almost three years ago.
They are listening to people, and the fact is, it was citizen input that started this whole thing three
years ago.
Mayor Lund
stated the one thing that is prevalent here in this room is cost and probably No. 1 is
freedom of choice. Understand that there is always a give and take in negotiations. He asked
they be given time for them to weigh in on this.
Councilmember Barnette
stated he very much encouraged people to call them and e-mail them.
They need to get all those opinions. That is why they got elected is to serve the public.
Councilmember Bolkcom
stated she just had one e-mail in support of it from a couple who
lived over on Alden Way. Another one on her own street, and another one from a gentleman
who lives on Riverview Terrace supporting the project for some of the very same reasons that
were part of the staff presentation.
Councilmember Bolkcom
asked, going back to if there is a renter in a duplex, and the renter
does not pay for their garbage, then it goes on the utility bills for the actual homeowner of the
property, correct?
Ms. Jones
replied correct.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 29
Councilmember Bolkcom
stated on Page 82, she does not undersatand (H). It says the City
shall not amend the City Code during the term of this Agreement in any way that prohibits,
frustrates, or makes it economically prohibited for a hauler to maintain his Class I license unless
required by state or county law or mandate. What does that mean?
Mr. Wysopal
stated that is telling her the concern from the haulers is that they have this
Agreement and then the terms of the Agreement are changed via an ordinance, and they are then
without the customers they thought they had. This Agreement ties the performance of the license
to the ordinances, etc. It is a protection that they do not go and do anything that would violate
the terms of this Agreement through an ordinance as opposed to changing the Agreement within
the seven-year period of time.
Councilmember Bolkcom
stated she and Mr. Wysopal have discussed this. It actually says they
can pick up garbage from 6:30 a.m. to 8:30 p.m. but then it says in the Agreement, if you have
not had your garbage picked up at 4:30 p.m. (a lot of people do not get home until after 4:30).
The way she reads this is that if she does not get home until 5:00 p.m. she can call her hauler and
leave a message. She might not get it picked up the next day, but they have to promise it by the
following day. In the meantime she should not get into any trouble for leaving her garbage out
there, correct?
Mr. Wysopal
replied correct.
Councilmember Bolkcom
stated, on Page 86, something very simple but under 18(b), the last
sentence, is the word, hauler shall notify the City of said purchase or acquisition and provide the
City with "contract" information for the new party.” Should it be contact?
Attorney Erickson
replied, she believed the word should be "contact."
Councilmember Bolkcom
asked Attorney Erickson is it not true in the way the State Statute is
that they could not really just pick one hauler, and say, okay, you are the magic person. They
would have to negotiate with all five of them.
Attorney Erickson
replied, the statute requires that you have a mandatory negotiation period
with all of the haulers. You have to have a minimum of 60 days. Essentially the State carves out
an exception that requires the City, before it goes to look at going out for an RFP from a single
hauler, that it sit down with the currently licensed haulers in the City. It allows them an
opportunity by statute to preserve their market share.
Councilmember Bolkcom
stated tonight it was mentioned that seven years is a long time. This
is speculation on Mr. Wysopal's part but what would happen if it were only for three years since
there were concerns voiced here related to cost. For one thing, could they go back and negotiate
a cost? Maybe not as high as here. Maybe after three years look at it and see if it makes sense. It
sounds like Mr. Wysopal had really good negotiations. The haulers need to make money, too,
and have to pay their employees. However, what if it was only for three years and they look
back and investigated whether it made sense.
Mr. Wysopal
replied, when they completed negotiations, both the haulers and the City, himself,
said we need to have an agreement that we can live with if it is approved and without major
change in the contract itself. He would constitute the change in the term as a major change
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 30
because the pricing was reflecting on that. That is not saying that they were very open to small
detailed types of things that might need to be relooked at but they felt very good about the
proposal. From the City's standpoint, the seven-year term was a reasonable term and it has
annual meetings involved so that service requirements can be addressed. He thinks this one
seems to go more towards the price piece which concerned him.
Councilmember Bolkcom
asked what it meant.
Mr. Wysopal
said his concern is that this is a foundational issue. They would be kind of
negotiating back from the Council table. That is not saying that it cannot be done but, as they
left negotiations, they said this is the best the haulers can do, the best the City is expecting, and
they would not be coming back to negotiating the significant terms and conditions of the
agreement.
Smaller things that have been brought up tonight certainly can be talked about, but the term piece
is a major thing. It is not to say they could not go back and say we want to talk about it because
there is an issue here. However, it sounds like they are going back to negotiate the price of it.
Councilmember Bolkcom
stated they heard from people who were against it, and their concern
was that it was taking away their ability to talk to the hauler about complaints. Even if they do
not change the price but they only do it for three years instead of seven years, does that make it
more palatable for people who are against it?
Mr. Wysopal
stated they can explore that with them if that is the will of Council. They just
want to be careful about trying to negotiate too much from the Council table. If the price is the
issue, that should be talked about publicly and go forward with it. One thing he has learned
about the haulers in the last 11 months is they are excellent companies and they are excellent
people. They work hard to do the service they have and to earn the service they have gotten.
They are reasonable people and, if there was a reasonable explanation of why seven years or
some other term would be better, they would be willing to at least sit down and talk about it.
Councilmember Bolkcom
stated way the contract reads is, if you sell your house your yard
waste goes away. Someone else who comes in your house does not get that yard waste. If she
pays that $80 and goes from Hauler B to Hauler C, does that Hauler B pay Hauler C so that she
does not pay the yard waste again?
Mr. Wysopal
replied, from what he understands from the haulers is that, in their current
practice, if you are under an open system, if you were to move, they would honor your previous
payment to wherever you move if you use them as a hauler; but the new homeowner would not
be able to take advantage of what you paid for already. Under the proposed Agreement that
would be the same.
Councilmember Varichak
asked how they would determine if the haulers are meeting the
requirements.
Mr. Wysopal
replied there are a couple of ways. One is in just the continued relationship that
they have with the haulers. He thinks they are in good stead with them now to be able to have
that relationship to say that we got these calls. This is an issue and let's work on it. Remember
the first point of caller contact is to the hauler itself. If the resident feels they are not getting
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 31
good service, they can call the hauler right away. If that is not being addressed, the resident can
call the City who would work with them to remedy the issue. There are sections in the
Agreement that deal with this. The majority of what they would be doing is having the ability to
work specifically with that hauler and say, this resident is having issues, here is what they are,
let’s get them worked out. They would discuss issues at the overall performance review on an
annual basis the haulers.
Councilmember Varichak
stated if the billing goes delinquent, then the City takes over. Have
they estimated how much staff time it would take?
Mr. Wysopal
stated their estimates are it would be a very low amount of time. It would be
higher in the first year of operation and then go down based on experiences other cities have had
with this similar type of thing. On an ongoing basis they would be able to do it with the existing
staff in the Finance Department.
Councilmember Varichak
asked can they even estimate the amount of delinquent people who
do not pay their utilities, how many would not pay their garbage fees; and what does that equate
for the savings for the streets?
Mr. Wysopal
replied, their estimate on the high side was about $90,000 a year that people
would not be paying. The City would be assessing fees on top of that to recover it. Therefore,
the City's time cost of money would come back to it and then some of the fees.
Councilmember Bolkcom
stated just like if someone does not pay their water bill, there is an
administrative fee.
Councilmember Varichak
asked does that come back to the City now and go on the tax rolls.
That just goes to the hauler, right?
Mr. Wysopal
replied, that is correct. If the hauler does not get payment, they just stop servicing
that unit. That is the common practice.
Mr. Krack
stated the point on the delinquent payers is well-taken, but couldn't that be handled
under the existing program by inviting the haulers to turn that complaint over to the City and
then have the City put it through the collection process?
Mr. Krack
stated the whole process looks like the situation is where they got together with the
haulers and put together the design and poured the concrete which is now hardening, and now
they come out to the public and ask for suggestions. The suggestions they offer require some
major changes to the deal they cut with the haulers. They sat here a year ago on December 2 and
listened to a presentation that took absolutely no comments from the public, and nobody even
considered the cost which is the concern of many of them and the choice. It would have been
very helpful if they would have had some kind of a session mid-Fall to say what are your big
concerns on this.
Mayor Lund
stated they have to understand that he and the Council received this Agreement the
same time it was presented to the public. They were not a party to those negotiations.
Mr. Krack
stated who negotiated it then?
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 32
Mayor Lund
replied the City Manager met with the haulers on 11 different occasions during the
process.
Mr. Krack
stated then maybe the City Manager should have had some meetings with the public
to get their suggestions.
Mayor Lund
stated they could have made comment at any time via e-mail or letter. Now he
finds out that some people have some really awesome deals.
Mr. Krack
stated they did not know all of this was going on until they got notice of the
information session.
Councilmember Bolkcom
stated she would like Attorney Erickson to speak on the whole
process of what State Statute says they can and cannot do.
Attorney Erickson
stated the Statute Statute, 115A.94 sets a mandated process for organizing
collection. It is the sole process that exists, and the City has been following that process. To Mr.
Krack's point it is kind of backwards to the extent that the Statute mandates that you go and meet
for 60 days at a minimum with the haulers and then you come forward with a proposal. There
were many meetings at the EQEC level where citizen input was sought, and she believed was
provided, as to what were priorities, concerns, etc. The way the Statute sets forth it is kind of a
different process where there is negotiation that precedes the presentation and public hearing.
And that is a requirement and the legislation was just changed in 2013 to create that process.
That was done at the legislative level with lobbyists on both sides of the issue, the cities have
their lobbyists and the haulers have theirs. There is give and take in legislation.
Mr. Krack
stated then there needs to be a provision in the process which they are having right
now with the public hearing where the public can comment but then they have to have the
provision where they can go back and renegotiate with the haulers. The concrete has been
poured. They heard Mr. Wysopal say it would be almost like tearing it apart and starting it over
again to go back and try and negotiate some of the major terms of this deal.
Attorney Erickson
stated there is nothing that prevents the City from doing that, but the results
of the negotiation sessions were what the haulers believed to be their best offer. Otherwise, they
are going to have a constant pick, pick, pick at the issues that they may never get a resolution.
The intent of this is to solicit a proposal from the haulers and then have this open meeting.
Otherwise there could be ongoing public meetings. The intent is that the parties walk away with
a pretty firm proposal.
Mr. Krack
stated he expects the haulers would say they don't want to put anymore time into
this. They are happy with the situation the way it is now. His big concern is the public for the
most part is left out of the decision-making process until tonight.
Attorney Erickson
replied, again, she would say the Statute contemplates that City staff goes
and discusses this with the haulers and then brings the haulers' proposal to the City Council and
the public for comment. That is Subdivision 4(d) and it is a relatively new provision.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 33
Mr. Wysopal
stated the other piece of this is answered through two things, one, what if that
price was one of the components that the Council directed himself and the staff to negotiate
about. It was one of the items. It was not the highest item. The highest item had to do more
with the street impacts and the cost that the City was incurring on these roads. And then the
environmental and safety issues and price was one of the issues.
Mr. Wysopal
stated, as to the second part of his answer related to what are the next steps? The
next steps are the Council can accept the Agreement and execute the Agreements and move
forward. The other option would be for the Council to reject the Agreements and end the
process. The third option would be to reject the Agreements and create a committee (this again
is out of the Statute the City Attorney talks about) by the Council by whomever they choose.
Whereas, the negotiations that took place were between the haulers and the City in a closed
environment. Again that was specified by Statute that is completely different than how they
normally do business.
Mr. Wysopal
stated the haulers had at risk if they chose not to be a part of that. They could lose
their market share and be excluded if they chose to exclude themselves. They all chose to
negotiate in good faith. They worked on all the information that was presented. And it was not a
bid. They did not say, okay, you five haulers send us your best bid. It was we have to sit down
and say what are prices; and they worked together to figure out what their average market rate
was and, based on what they considered their market rate numbers, the number that was
negotiated is about 17 percent below that. If the Council were to decide to go to a single hauler,
then they would say, okay, everybody, here are our specifications, give us a bid and that drives
the price down.
Mr. Wysopal
stated comparing Fridley's prices to the most recent city to do this process -
St. Anthony was the first city they were aware of to go through this process and successfully
negotiate an agreement. Fridley's numbers are right in line with theirs. However, if they
compare their numbers to Blaine which has a single hauler based on a one bid price, these
numbers are higher. They are probably more in line with what are the sweetheart deals they
heard today. Again, that was not the direction they were given.
Mr. Woodison
stated he would take his opposition off this proposal if they could somehow go
back and say, a shorter term, for the very reason Councilmember Bolkcom spoke of it. He is
willing to give up his freedom for three years. No one disputes they are trying to do the right
thing. They do not want these haulers to be relaxed. Seven years is relaxed.
Councilmember Bolkcom
asked with Councilmember Barnette asking for persons to call him
and e-mail him where do those comments go? Why close the public hearing tonight? She asked
how long was St. Anthony's agreement for?
Mr. Wysopal
replied, five years.
Councilmember Bolkcom
asked what have the agreements been for some of the others who
have gone to organized hauling in the last couple of years? How long are their agreements?
This is the first night people have really received a chance to give them their input. She would
like to continue the public hearing so they can pursue some of these other options.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 34
Mayor Lund
stated it was his intent to close the public hearing and then have discussion after
the public hearing because there are sufficient outcomes from this that she and others have
expressed.
Councilmember Bolkcom
asked Mr. Wysopal when he said that the percentage of people would
save 17 percent, where did that come from?
Mr. Wysopal
replied, that was from the number the haulers represented and they verified with
actual bills, statements, from people. They have to understand if you take five different haulers
and figure out what their average cost per level of service was and they verified it the best they
could and said, yes, that is pretty accurate.
MOTION
by Councilmember Bolkcom to continue the public hearing to December 22, 2014.
Seconded by Councilmember Barnette.
UPON A VOICE VOTE. COUNCILMEMBER BARNETTE, VARICHAK, SAEFKE AND
BOLKCOM VOTING AYE, WITH ONE ABSTENTION, THE MOTION WAS
UNANIMOUSLY PASSED.
NEW BUSINESS:
16. Resolution Approving Adoption of a Master Plan for the Northstar TOD Area as
Prepared by HKGI.
Ms. Jones
stated they have asked the City's consultants to come in and present the final master
plan to them for tonight.
Jeff Miller,
HKGI, stated Brian Harjes is also here from HKGI. Mr. Miller is a planner and Mr.
Harjes is a landscape architect. They have been working with the City since February on this
and they have met with the City Council three times during that process in developing the plan.
He is aware they have seen a lot of this information. They have all the important components to
present, and they are open to questions at the end.
Mr. Miller
stated TOD is transit-oriented development and TIF is tax increment financing.
They will see a lot of references to these as they go forward. The purpose of this master plan is
to provide guidance for the use of the transit TIF funds since they can only be used for transit-
related improvements. It is also meant to entice private redevelopment by showing parks,
improvements, and access to transit that should be amenities for redevelopment when it occurs in
this area. It is also meant to guide future TOD applications from developers by proactively
showing them what the City has preliminarily approved and is hoping will happen in this area
but is not meant to open what the redevelopment looks like.
Mr. Miller
stated just as a reference the background planning of this process was the TIF district
which was established in 2008, the overlay district in 2011, the East River Corridor Study in
2012, and then the Islands of Peace Park Plan the City undertook the process for that last fall and
then Anoka County subsequently also planned it since it is a regional park managed by the
County. The goal of the master plan is to build upon previous plans: Islands of Peace Plan
which they saw a year ago for the first time; leverage amenities which include the river, the parks
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 35
which are pretty hidden in this area, the school; and the transit station among other things
probably. Also, to tie those things together to create a place around this transit station area.
Mr. Miller
stated another goal is to reconnect the community to the river in the Islands of Peace
Park. Also to plan and characterize infrastructure improvements like roadways, bike trails, storm
water planning in the future, and those sorts of things. Lastly is to identify potential funding
opportunities and partnerships. One of the best ways to attract win funding and grant money is
to have a really good plan that you can use to show that you know what you want for that area.
Mr. Miller
stated, as to project involvement, there were three meetings with the HRA and the
City Council over this process. There were two open houses and then staff met with many
stakeholders including property owners in this area, the school district, the County, Metro
Transit, etc.
Mr. Miller
stated as to the first key component of the plan they would be adopting, the first one
is the land uses and streets. The key features include a mixed use area at the corner of Interstate
694 and East River Road, the John Allen site, which has already been approved. They expanded
and enhanced Islands of Peace Park on the west side of the district, a new loop parkway better
linking the park and existing and future housing to East River Road, and redeveloped housing
along that parkway and across from that park within walking distance of the school and to the
transit station as that area redevelops over the coming years. Also, redevelopment within the
underused transit park and ride lots, both east and west of the station. They met with Metro
Transit and they are very open to looking into that process. Industrial and commercial
businesses are anticipated to stay in place on the east side of East River Road.
Mr. Miller
stated, lastly, there are three traffic signals shown on the plan including an additional
one at Island Park Drive that they have discussed with the County; and they would be open to
that when there is enough redevelopment and traffic to warrant that.
Brian Harjes,
HKGI, stated he just wanted to touch briefly on appeal of the redevelopment
concept. He presented a graphic to kind of illustrate what could be developed in the future. It is
intended to show footprints and kind of take that next step beyond the land use plan to kind of tie
the urban design features of the district together. What they see are building footprints. It may
not develop exactly like this, but the intent of the ordinance as it is written today reflects this
kind of development character with buildings towards the street. Parking, organized away from
the public view either in surplus lots or a potential for structured parking. They can see
predominantly in these plans on the west side of East River Road it is a housing focus, a narrow
area right at the 53rd Street intersection a potential for some mixed use in that area.
Mr. Harjes
stated they have two numbers here. Really one to illustrate the growth of net
housing units with or without the southern leg of Georgetown. A lot of the focus of potential
redevelopment maybe in the first ten years or so of the plan. It would be north of 57th Avenue
all the way up to the school. In that zone the transformation could occur where they would have
about 650 to 800 units and then a transformation even much more long-term beyond that about
950 to 1,150 housing units in that area for net growth.
Mr. Harjes
stated projected office development is really focused at the John Allen site towards
the southwest corner of that. The light industrial development is another component of the John
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 36
Allen project. There is a small portion along Main Street, just southeast of the TOD station.
Also, some potential retail in kind of a one-third, two-thirds split of maybe some commercial pad
infill sites near the Home Depot and others, as well as some of that opportunity for a little mixed
use retail right at the 57th Avenue intersection.
Mr. Harjes
stated some of the key features are the pedestrian/bike network. There is the Main
Street sidewalk lanes. Those have been improved. There is additional funding being prepared
for a bridge over I-694. A lot of the plan illustrates trail connections towards the school with the
safe routes to school program as well as extensive trails through Islands of Peace Park both kind
of on top of the bluff where the new park area would be and as long as some enhancements to the
trails down along the riverfront, the natural areas of the park. As well as the strong activity along
the East River Road corridor itself, both from the station all the way to the trail that exists along
694.
Mr. Harjes
stated a lot of talk early on in the process was the about the potential for a roadway
connection from 57th Avenue. SRS Consulting Engineering Company who was a partner with
them on this project looked at that extensively and just concluded the cost to be too prohibitive at
this moment but to allow for that planning to still continue as ongoing discussions both at the
railroad and adjacent properties may open the opportunity for that in the future. However, the
plan does reflect the opportunity for near term pedestrian crossings over that rail line as an
opportunity for a bridge, local connection there as well.
Mr. Harjes
stated street design concepts was another good point that Mr. Miller talked about.
There are four main streets they really focused on trying to develop the design character for each
of these. The East River Road section really was just continuing the same vision if you will that
was set forth in the East River Road master planning that was done in 2012. They are carrying
that forward and trying to merge and blend some of the same design ideas between other key
streets such Main Street, the new parkway street, as well as the residential parkway.
Mr. Harjes
presented a graphic from the East River Road plan and the top section shows more
of a central component of the street where you may have a treed boulevard as well as a treed
median. The lower section shows the extent near the intersection where you may have turn lanes
and bus pulloffs for a transit facility. It is a little wider section of that area to accommodate those
turning movements. They have kept that in play and bringing that thinking throughout.
Mr. Harjes
stated the Main Street section on the right shows some of the recent improvements
with the bike lane and the sidewalk components with the light industrial being to the left side of
the graphic and the existing residential to the right side.
Mr. Harjes
stated two new features involved really that little mixed use section along 57th
Avenue along 57th Avenue from East River Road down to the parkway. The graphic on the left
shows a plan and then a corresponding section below it. Envision the river on the north side of
the graphic, just beyond the park, East River Road, just off the map to the south. This street
would have the ability of on-street parking to serve some of the commercial businesses. It would
have a center median with kind of a high quality storm water treatment and natural open space
amenity to draw people from East River Road down towards the park in that location. In
addition to that they are tying in bicycle facilities along there as well. So a combination of
striped on-street bike lanes that lead to a green painted identifiable connection all the way into
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 37
the park. It is a combination that can balance transit bike commuters at the same time as
recreational bikers that want to get to the park.
Mr. Harjes
stated the other image on the right is the parkway section which really tries to create
more of a residential character with the housing facing the park and provide on-street parking as
well. A couple of images that were shown at the open house, and just for reference, this is to
kind of give everybody of the flavor, the potential character for development in these areas. He
showed the Islands of Peace parkway section. The small segment that could potentially have a
mixed use component from 57th Avenue looking to the west, down towards the park in East
River Road. In the far distance of that elevation they can see as they always talked about as a
Park Centrum building, an opportunity to make that maybe a park gathering space that has a
rental lease tenant which could be a restaurant or a small service use. Four to six-story housing
lining the street there.
Mr. Harjes
stated, moving up the road a little bit to the next parkway access, a little lower of
character of building height away from kind of that mixed use street but again allowing the
combination of pedestrian and bicycle enhancement along the corridor integrating bus stops in
that area as well.
Mr. Harjes
stated on the other side of the railroad tracks at the station, looking back along 61st
Avenue to the west and towards the transit station in the distance again, that housing coming
towards the street, enhanced streetscape and characteristics along the boulevard parking and
including bicycle activity as well.
Mr. Miller
stated the last part of this is the City's TOD overlay district which the City has in
place already, has landscaping and streetscape standards in it. One of the reasons for working on
this project is to specify what those standards should be. What is shown here is the character of
the streetscape elements that would be amended into the zoning district after this process. This
project is not going to change in the zoning district but as a follow-up to this project. This would
get incorporated into the zoning for this area. It shows a bench, trash receptacle, bike rack,
planters, bollard and aerial lights, the character that they would want to have in that area as
redevelopment comes to this area. If they remember the last session they had, they looked at
some different options and got the City's preferences in this area.
Mr. Miller
stated there is the complimentary street light which is a down-facing light even
though it is a more contemporary light. It was preferred the benches were not wood so he
showed metal benches and waste receptacles. They feel these are complementary and there is
the design element that have the organic or natural features and then a bench with a similar style
without the images. He showed metal bike racks which would be in this area and metal movable
planters would be an option. One of the things in the overlay district is that if there is not enough
space on some of these sites to meet all of the landscaping tree requirements there is some
flexibility in the ordinance to replace it without things like planters, planting beds.
Mr. Miller
stated another piece of it is in the overlay district it talks about sidewalks and
pedestrian pathways, that they should look different than the street and be called out. There is
the option to do scored concrete or colored concrete with patterns or concrete pavers and that
would include pedestrian crossings of driveways as well.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 38
Mr. Miller
stated the ordinance does have standards for fencing and walls and railings. This is
specifying what is desired in that area. He should one of the substitutes for if it is difficult on the
site to fit all the required trees, there is flexibility in the ordinance that the developer could do
public art or land mark signage or way finding is also something they wanted in this area. He
showed the planters that were an option instead of trees or there is one you could actually put
trees in there as well.
Mr. Miller
stated, lastly, they talked about the stormwater. He showed tree trenches which
instead of having the traditional pond which takes up a lot of development space, the idea is to
have this area look at more innovative ways where there are tree trenches or green roofs or
underground cisterns. There are about 7 or 8 ways you can handle stormwater including these
two. That would be brought into the ordinance as well.
Mr. Miller
stated the scope of the project was for them to recommend changes to the ordinance.
The recommendations are that the overlay district refers specifically to the TOD TIF district
master plan and what is in there. Add a requirement for a streetscape plan from developers.
Sections that are not in overlay district today that should be added really to benches, waste
receptacles by racks and bollards, add a table with design specs for those features which gets into
who manufactures them and how to contact them, the materials, etc. Lastly, add other
regulations related to varying materials, colors in this area, way finding signage pavements, and
then storm water.
Ms. Jones
stated as far as kind of wrapping up this project, they are asking for the City Council's
approval for this master plan. They do need to complete this project by the end of the year.
They are looking probably as the next step to this doing some amendments to the City's TOD
overlay zoning district to add some of these specifics they had given the City for streetscape.
The whole idea of that overlay district and the language that is in there now is that the City
would eventually do that but wanted some time to work on a complete plan to go with that. They
will likely also want to complete a minor comprehensive plan amendment to incorporate these
documents and drawings into the City's comprehensive plan as well as incorporating some of
these drawings they would like to have as a guide in the comprehensive plan.
Ms. Jones
stated they are already looking at some funding opportunities because of the Islands
of Peace Park being next to the river which is a national park and does open some opportunities
for the City particularly since the MRT bike trail recently got designated as not just a national
bike trail but a national water trail as well and there is some new funding that is expected to
come along related to that. Staff is looking at some federal grants to possible use as leverage to
get some state money or vice versa, use some State DNR grant trail money to generate some
federal money and looking at some opportunities and where they can push through grant funds to
do some of these trail connections rather than waiting for tax increment financing funding
through the City's capability with the transit TIF Fund in the future. They will be looking at that
and of course using this plan as a guide for those grant applications.
Councilmember Bolkcom
stated the space ship lights are kind of wild to her. That is just a
thought and they do not have to go with quite that design. She likes the idea of the smaller lights
but they would get dated quick. It was a great process. The attendance at the neighborhood
TOD meetings were not huge but at first the people who came were a little leery but they came
back and were incredibly excited. The ones she spoke with were very happy there was going to
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 39
be some new development in that area. Some of the housing, the apartment complexes, are some
of the worst ones in the City as far as maintenance and that type of thing. It would be nice to get
rid of some of the stuff on East River Road, all the signs, etc. and have some better streetscape
which goes along with the whole master plan they had a few years ago. People wanted to have
more kind of a parkway.
Mayor Lund
stated he is not necessarily keen on those lights either but he does like the idea of
the downcast.
MOTION
by Councilmember Bolkcom Adopting Resolution No. 2014-94, the Master Plan for
the Northstar TOD Area as Prepared by HKGI. Seconded by Councilmember Saefke.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, THE MOTION WAS CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
17. Approve Agreement between the City of Fridley and Partners & Sirny, LLP, to
Provide the Design Services for the Renovation and Addition to the Interpretive
Building at Springbrook Nature Center (Ward 3).
Jack Kirk,
Director of Parks and Recreation, stated he is here to talk about the architectural
design services for the Springbrook Nature Center project. The SPRING project committee
which is what they call the local group that is working very hard on helping with the design were
very involved with reviewing the proposals and also the interviewing of three architect firms for
this project. The three firms which were interviewed were Perkins and Will; Rafferty, Rafferty,
Tollefson and Lindeke; and Partners & Sirny. While they felt that all the firms were very good
and they did a nice job in the interview process, the committee felt that one firm did stand out
and was the best fit for the project that is on the table right now. That firm is Partners & Sirny,
and the lead architect with that firm is Paul Anderson.
Mr. Kirk
stated Partners & Sirny demonstrated through the interview process a really good
understanding of the overall SPRING project and they come with some excellent experience in
very similar nature center interpretive building projects. They put together a really good team
for the building design, landscape architecture, the structural, mechanical, the electrical
components of the project. They have lined up Hoisington Koegler Group to provide the
landscape architect services; BKBM Engineers to provide the civil and structural engineering
services; and Engineering Design Initiative to provide the mechanical, electrical, and fire
projection design. All of those firms have really excellent reputations for doing really quality
work.
Mr. Kirk
stated something that really impressed the committee was the previous successful
nature center buildings that Partners & Sirny and the architect, Paul Anderson, have been
involved with. They designed the Lebanon Hills Nature Center in Eagan, Richardson Nature
Center in Bloomington, the Interpretative Center at North Mississippi Park in Minneapolis, the
Midwest Center for Wind Energy in Lincoln County, the McCall Pond Environmental Center in
Savage, and the St. Croix Natural Scenic Riverway visitor center in St. Croix Falls.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 40
Mr. Kirk
stated Partners & Sirny is ready to begin work with us upon approval of an Agreement
and they expect if the Agreement is approved they would begin working with them this week. It
is his recommendation that the City Council approve an Agreement with Partners & Sirny to be
the architects to provide the design services for the renovation and expansion of the Springbrook
Nature Center interpretative building.
Councilmember Bolkcom
stated on the first page, on page 217, it says Partners & Sirny's
representatives at the interview were clear. Is that what he meant to say?
Mr. Kirk
replied, he believed they were clear.
Councilmember Bolkcom
stated she found this Agreement really hard to read. You had to flip
back and forth, things were crossed off. Where does it say that the B3 is included in here?
She is concerned about the cost and there was a lot of discussion about that. Also, on page 44, it
talks about liability, $2 million, and workers' compensation is $100,000, and professional
liability at $500,000 but over on which is page 6 of their Agreement they have, and maybe it is
on there, page 242, 2.62 it says automobile liability and there is no number in there. Is 2.24 null
and void? It is only everything on these other pages, is that the Agreement they are supposed to
be looking at? She asked if Mr. Kirk understood her question?
Mr. Kirk
replied, sorry, he did not think he did.
Councilmember Bolkcom
stated there is a whole bunch of information starting on page 219 and
it talks about additions and deletions and the document has important legal consequences. Is
everything up to page 242 just null and void?
Attorney Erickson
stated she has not reviewed this contract. She saw it for the first time today,
but what they have used is kind of a standard document that is used in construction industry. It is
an AIA document. Having prefaced with her experience with the document and first seeing it
tonight, it looks to her like what they have done is, starting on page 245, prepared a list of
changes to the standard contract. It is not necessarily part of the contract from what it is saying
on its face.
Councilmember Bolkcom
stated on page 6 it says 2.61. There is $2 million there. Is
everything up until there all part of this contract?
Attorney Erickson
stated the way she understands it is, basically it is like looking at a redline.
The redline is essentially an addendum. It shows you what they have changed. The items that
have changes are the ones with the lines on them, so 2.61 was changed, 2.64 was changed, 2.65
was changed.
Councilmember Bolkcom
stated but 2.62 has no number.
Attorney Erickson
replied, right it has no numbers. The way she would interpret this is that
there is no obligation to provide any automobile liability coverage.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 41
Councilmember Bolkcom
asked, who is paying this liability? Are they paying or is this
something the City incurs?
Attorney Erickson
replied, it is a requirement that the architect provide this kind of coverage.
Councilmember Bolkcom
stated so 3.13 has been changed. Where is that in that paragraph?
Attorney Erickson
replied, it is crossed out so it is deleted so you would not see it in the
contract.
Councilmember Bolkcom
asked, so this is the real contract on page 224?
Attorney Erickson
replied, yes. The first portion before 242 shows the contract. It is just for
ease of someone being able to pick up the contract at a later date and know that it has been
changed from the standard AIA contract. That is how she is interpreting the two sets of
documents.
Mr. Kosluchar
stated if they go to 1.1.7, page 221, then can make an addition to state the design
shall be to B3 standards.
Attorney Erickson
stated to piggyback on that then they could approve the contract subject to
the inclusion of that language.
Mayor Lund
asked whether that is something Partners & Sirny will go along with?
Mr. Kirk
replied, they knew about that the project has to be built to B3 standards since it is a
State bonding project; and that was in the RFP and in the interviews it was discussed.
MOTION
by Councilmember Bolkcom to Approve Agreement between the City of Fridley and
Partners & Sirny, LLP, to Provide the Design Services for the Renovation and Addition to the
Interpretive Building at Springbrook Nature Center with the inclusion of Section 1.1.7, that the
project shall be constructed pursuant to the B3 guidelines. Seconded by Councilmember Saefke.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
16. Informal Status Reports
Councilmember Bolkcom
stated as far as the SPRING design committee, there was some
discussion at their first two meetings, that they need to bring the public in but first they have to
meet with the architect and design team to look at what they need and then there will be some
opportunities for people who work at the nature center and people who use the nature center to
provide input as to what they like about the nature center now and what they would like to see
happen. It will be a very important part and a lot of it will be including the schools and other
groups who use the nature center.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2014 PAGE 42
ADJOURN:
MOTION
by Councilmember Barnette, seconded by Councilmember Varichak, to adjourn.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:38
P.M.
Respectfully submitted by,
Denise M. Johnson Scott J. Lund
Recording Secretary Mayor