Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP July 6, 1978 J CITY of ANDOVER SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING - JULY 6, 1978 MINUTES A Special Meeting of the Andover City Council was called to order by Mayor Windschitl at 7 :30 P. M., July 6, 1978, at the Andover City Hall, for the purpose of discussing the proposed Bond Election for the purchase of fire fighting equipment and a building in which to house the Volunteer Fire Department and public works vehicles; discus sion on the requested Round Lake Boulevard realignment; and for payment of claims continued from the July 5, 1978 Meeting. Councilpersons present: Lachinski, Orttel, McClure, VanderLaan. Councilpersons absent: None Also present: City Fiscal Agent, King Forness, City Clerk, P. K. Lindquist, Fire Chief, Vic Evans, Road Committee Member, Ray Sowada, and interested residents. The legals requirements along with the time frame involved preceding a bond election were reviewed by the City Clerk, who noted, that based on this information, the earliest date on which an election could be held would be August 8, 1978, should the resolution be approved at the July 6 Meeting. Mr. Evans stated that he would require approximately four weeks to rework the Election Brochure, have it printed and circulated. In light of information presented by Mr. Forness as to "ideal" special election days, the date of August 10 or 17 was tentatively set. A lengthy discussion was had on the number of questions to be on the ballot. The Bond Attorney previously handling our issues was recommending three (3), i. e. l)Fire Department Building, 2) Public Works Building, and 3)Fire Fighting Equipment. Mr. Forness reported that he had again discussed this with our Bond Attorney who stated that he would go along with just two questions, i. e. 1 )Building, 2)Equipment. Two other Bond Attorneys had been contacted and were of the opinion that this could be dealt with as a single question, their reasoning being: "a single purpose is a single natural relationship to form a rounded whole or single plan". The City of Maple Grove just recently approved an issue in the amount of $890,000.00 on one question similar to that which we would be requiring. Councilperson Lachinski noted that the Road Improvement Committee preferred s",pa::-3te questions for the Fire Department and Public Works Department, their reason being that the City would be better assured of getting at least enough for some type of building; and by separate questions, the citizens could decide if they wanted fire, public works, or both. Mayor Windschitl stated that it was his opinion that a public works building could be built for considerably less than $100,000, especially if it were entirely "cold storage". Mter some discus sion it was agreed that to prevent unneces sary wear on the equipment, at least those items used for winter maintenance, should be kept in a heated (40oF. ) area. - - Special City Co~,cil Me~.mg July 6, 1978 Page 2 Councilperson Orttel expressed concern that such a high amount ($500,000) may result in a defeat of the bond issue. He felt that the Volunteer Fire Department could be put into operation for considerably less money-cited neighboring cities that have done this. Discussion was had on the merits of constant purchasing rather than all at one time. Round Lake Boulevard Improvement/Realignment Commissioner Edward Fields, County Engineers Paul Ruud and Bud Redepenning were present as representatives of Anoka County to review and answer questions on the County's plans for this roadway. It was stated that the improvement from County Road 116 south to SAH 242 was proposed to be on the same alignment as the present roadway, but with 24' driving surface and 12' shoulders, noting that even if an alternate route is selected at a later date, this particular stretch is needed as well with records indicating approximately 8,000 vehicles using it per day; possibly the existing roadway could become an extension of County Road 116 to alleviate some of the traffic that is now going through the heavil}" populated residential area to the west. Mr. Ruud stated that the County is now in the process of acquiring the additional right-of-way along the existing roadway; and could not at this time, afford right-of-way for an entirely new location. The County representatives presented several possible realignments for CSAH 9, both north and south of County Road 116, and noted that each one would be thoroughly researched and reviewed as to feasibility. It was further noted that it is their intention to look to means by which to relieve the present traffic situation on Round Lake Boulevard, such as the extension of Hanson Boulevard; and that they were still open as far as the location of Hanson Boulevard north of County Road 116, however, there was a possibility of getting right-of-way between the power lines which would very substantially reduce the acquisition costs. Commissioner Fields briefly discussed the requirement and costs of environmental impact studies for any changes or extensions of roadways. Concerns of the Council, such as safety, costs, accessibility, and use, for each possible realignment were reviewed and noted by the County. They assured the Council that a County representative would be present at the meeting with the residents scheduled at the Andover City Hall on July 13. 10 minute rece s s Meeting reconvened - 9 :00 P. M. Proposed Bond Issue (continued) Mayor Windschitl requested that each Councilperson present their views on the proposed issue as follows: Spedal City Co~.cil Me~.lng July 6, 1978 Page 3 Councilperson VanderLaan - Stated that she had asked for a long time to allow the citizens to make the decision whether or not to establish a fire department; that it began with a Committee issuing a report which unfortunately contained many under estimates, so the planning aspect has changed to some degree- "if we have a situation where we are asking the people to approve a building, we are asking them to approve a concept; the questions asked should be 1) are we replacing what we have with something better-it must be better, we are going to be spending more dollars, operating costs are going to go up-we are looking at a situation where homeowners insurance will go down, but we are still going to have an increase in costs in the long run; 2) are we being up front with this thing-are we looking at it where we are letting the people decide. " She further stated that she wholeheartedly endorsed the concept of the bond issue and would now have to make an analysis based on information as to the dollar amount; and that there has been no public hearing on the proposed Capital Improvement Program, so if it is worded properly, the people can decide. Requested information from Mr. Forness on how the proposals should be combined. Mr.·, Eor:less informed the Council that by adding the public works portion of the building, you would save on insurance and operating costs; and that as far as selling the concept, the Council would have to ask themselves if the City is ready. He further went on to say that from his observations, it appeared to City was ready for the Fire Departmeùt, and realistically, with the City growing as it is, public works is emminent in tile very near future. He advised the Council that his experience would indicate that the $100,000 for the public works portion of the building would not "tip the scales" as far as passage of the bond issue. In answer to a que stion from Councilperson Lachinski, Mr. Forness noted that if there is a definite awarenes s on the part of the people for public works and road improvement, this portion of the question could help sell the bond issue, and that the dollar amount was not paramount-he referred to an issue just approved for the City of Maple Grove in the amount of $890,000 for fire department and public works items. He also noted that he felt that if the question were put on the November ballot, it could become a "political football" with many of the facts becoming distorted. Mayor Windschitl stated that from some reports he had received, many people do not care if service is improved-they are more concerned with keeping the mill rate at its low level. The savings in insurance rates were discussed-Mr. Forness suggested that only a one-year projection be shown in the Election Brochure; after one year it is difficult to predict because of, for example, legislative changes in the means by which to compute assessed valuation. Councilperson Lachinski - Stated that he felt it was great if the City could go first class on the Fire Department, but also felt that thepeop.e would balk on this with $430,000 just for the Fire Department. He further went on to state that he objected to the one question concept of all or nothing because the City definitely has something to lose if they do not get some type of building, expecially since there is already a substantial amount of tax dollar s inve sted in the Fire Department; and it was very distasteful to him to go out and secure money by other means to construct a building after a bond is sue for one has been turned down at an election. i:)pecial City Coun~ll Meetmg July 6, 1978 Page 4 Councilperson Lachinski (continued) - Went on to state that this is the first bond election for the residents; and that they know the present mill rate is under 7 mills and another 3 mill increase is a big jump_ was firmly convinced that the dollar amount could be reduced. Councilperson McClure - Noted that he first felt that two questions were the way to go, but after listing to comments made at this meeting, now felt it to be a "one way street" because you can't put a fire department vehicle in a public works garage and vice versa. He stated that he had no problem in trusting the expertise of Mr. Fornes s as far as the dollar amount, noting that he did not have a feeling at this time for the "pulse of the people". Councilperson Orttel - Commented that it was not up to the public by virtue of the election to decide whether we have a Fire Department-the decision was made by the Council; and that this should be stated in the Election Brochure, noting that the approval of the issue would put the Department into action and improve the quality of it. He further went on to say that he believed that $500,000 was a very high frightening number to many people; and that many of the residents do not feel that the City has to go "top shelf'~ and that he believed $250, 000 would serve the residents as well as $500,000, that is the service would not be any better for twice the amount. Mayor Windschitl - Informed the Council that it was his feeling that the Bond Question should be on the November ballot to get a better cross-section of the residents; he agreed with Councilperson Ortte1 that $500,000 would be difficult to sell-that the costs were his principal concern and not the concept of an Andover Department. He further stated that many residents do not care if the services are increased in the area of public works and that this question could hurt the issue. Charles Vieman, a resident in attendance, noted that he perhaps was influenced on the necessity of a City Department from a recent event involving the Anoka Fire Department-he had called them on a fire at his residence with their arrival time 25 min.~..,after the call (his residence is approximately one mile from the Anoka City Limits), however, prior to their arrival he had extinguished the fire and went to look for the truck_he found it a short distance from his home "out of gas ". He also emphasized the additional costs in the reconstruction and content replacement of a home destroyed by fire. After some discussion it was agreed that three (3) cost items must be resolved, 1) cost of equipment, 2) cost of fire department portion of building, and 3) cost for public works portion of building. Mayor Windschit1 requested Council consensus on these items. Mr. Evans outlined some of the requirements used to establish the points controlled by OS1 to reduce the fire clas s from 10 to 9. Such items mentioned were 1) pieces of equipment, 2)capabilities of equipment, 3) storage facilities, 4) meeting room, etc. With regard to the rating and savings as shown in the Election Brochure, Councilper son VanderLaan stated that she did not feel that any type of savings should be shown inasmuch as the figures did not include operating costs and therefore, was misleading. Special Council1-__"ting July 6, 1978 Page 5 Mayor Windschitl suggested a cost figure for equipment of $160,000. Mr. Evans informed the Council that the $156,000 figure presented by the Fire Department in the report given the Council some two week s ago was 6 months old and with increases was now $178,000. Mayor Windschitl commented that this was much of the problem_the Council has been given so many figure and costs that they never know when and where the costs were gotten or even if they were accurate and feared that this amount might be outdated by the time we got to the Bond Sale, and cited material received from the Fire Department over the past few months in which costs had changed from report to report by considerable amounts, which made him doubt the 10/0 increase per month on the equipment. Discussed were the 100/0 contingency cost allowance and the possibility of bidding the equipment prior to the bond election in order to determine an accurate cost. Ms. Lindquist informed the Council that bonds would not be sold until after the election and by that time bids would be secured and therefore, bonding would only be for the amount required. It was agreed that the 100/0 contingency fees sould remain as a safeguard. After considerably more discussion, the Council agreed on the $180,000 figure for Fire Department Equipment (2 trucks equiped and building supplies such as desks, etc.). A lengthy discussion was had on the pros and cons of cement block vs. metal construction for the building, size requirements, heat/unheated, separate structures, etc. The Council unanimously agreed that a dollar liInit should be set and both Fire Department and Public Works would have to work together to get the best mileage for that amount of money. The general feeling was that $350,000 was an escalated figure and that suitable housing for both departments could be secured for $250,000 without sacrificing size (minimum 8,900 sq. ft- maximum 9,800 sq. ft.). Further discussion resulted in a final figure of $430,000 ($180,000 equipment/supplies and $250,000 for building, with the building to have maximum 5600 sq. ft. for Fire Department)~ and a determination that there would be only one (1) question on the ballot, i. e., "Fire Department Equipment and Public Service Building". MOTION by Orttel, seconded by McClure, to contract with the firm of Dorsey, Windhorst, Hannaford, Whitney & Halladay to act as Bonding Attorney for the City of Andover, and to authorize Springsted, Inc. to contact the Bonding Attorney directing them to prepare a resolution determining date of election, setting amount of $430,000 to cover Fire Department Equipment and a Public Service Building and to set for form of question on the ballot. Motion carried unaniInously. Paytnent of Claims MOTION by Lachinski, seconded by McClure to approve claims as follows: General Fund _ Check No. 1868 through No. 1902 in the amount of $9,916.33 1975 -1 Fund - Check No. 166 and No. 167 in the amount of $3,455.46, 1976 - 1 Fund- Check No. 225 in the amount of $52,028.50 and 1977-1, Check No. 226 in the amount of $23.40. Motion carried unanimously. N10TION by McClure, seconded by Orttel to adjourn. Mo~ed una Meeting Adjourned: 11:15 P.M. . , Respectfully Submitted:-·- 1 1 . .