Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC August 21, 1979 .- ~ o¡ ANDOVER REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - AUGUST 21, 1979 AGENDA 1. Call to Order - 7:30 P.M. 2. Resident Forum 3. Agenda Approval 4. Public Hearings - None 5. Legal and Engineering a. Award Contract - Prairie Road Bridge Approach b. De Gardner Roads c. Dostaler Hane Addition Roads d. 161st Avenue - State Aid Project Discussion e. Sale Date - Section 17 & Section 18 Bonds f. Assessment Policy g. Policy on Deadend Streets - Stenquist Addition 6. Ordinances and Resolutions a. Rum River Ordinance b. Zoning Map c. Mobile/Modular Homes Amendments d. Lot Split Ordinance Amendment 7. Petitions, Requests, Communications a. Bingo Permit - Andover Firefighters b. Junkyard Licenses 8. Committee Reports 9. Old Business a. Probationary Increase-V.Volk b. Temporary Employment-Starr, Reitan 10. New Business a. Budget Meeting Date 11. Approval of Minutes 12. Approval of Claims 13. Adjournment ~ o¡ ANDOVER REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - AUGUST 21, 1979 MINUTES The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover City Council was called to order by Mayor Jerry Windschitl on August 21, 1979, 7:33 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Anoka, Minnesota. Councilmen present: Jacobson, Lachinski, Orttel, Peach Councilmen absent: None Also present: City Attorney, William G. Hawkins; City Engineer, John Davidson; City Clerk, P. K. Lindquist; and interested residents Agenda Approval MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, approval of the Agenda for Council Meeting of August 21 as printed with the exception of the addition of 5h, Extension of Final Plat Time of Wobegon Woods. Motion carried unanimously. Award Contract - Prairie Road Bridge Approach Attorney Hawkins explained that there are five easements that need to be acquired for the bridge approach project along Prairie Road. He has reached an agreement with Mr. Mellen, Mr. Chaffee, and Mr. Nehring, based on $1,500 an acre. He has not reached an agreement with Mr. Rydh, who owns 1/3 of an acre needed for easement. Mr. Rydh has asked for $1,500 for that 1/3 acre, which Mr. Hawkins felt was excessive based on the agreement reached with other property owners. The cost would amount to $465, and Mr. Hawkins counter-offered with $675; however, because Mr. Rydh is out of town, no agreement has been reached. The major property to be purchased is owned by 11r. LaFromboise and Mr. Konen, and Mr. Hawkins has received a verbal agreement and has mailed the documents to them, although they have not yet been signed. It was his opinion that right of way easement could be authorized on that verbal agreement. Discussion was on the concern over the easement from Mr. Rydh. The Engineer stated that the City only owns easement to the edge of the road in that area and that the property from Mr. Rydh would be needed at this time as construction could not be contained to the edge of the roadway. Bids for the project were opened on August 6, 1979. Since there is a Council meeting on August 28, it was hoped that Mr. Hawkins could have more information on an agreement with Mr. Rydh and action could be taken on the bids at that time. Mr. Hawkins requested approval of those right of way easements that have been agreed to. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that the Council approve the following purchases of rlght of way: from Thomas Mellen, .13 of an acre and 12 trees at $50 each for a total of $765; Randall Chaffee, .27 of an acre, $405; Robert Nehring, .04 of an acre at $60; Joseph LaFromboise and James Konen, 20 trees at $50 each, 1.25 acres for a total of $3,000. (See Resolution R73-9) Discussion: Councilman Jacobson was concerned that if settlement with Mr. Rydh is at a higher price than these were agreed upon, he felt it would be fair that the other people be treated equitably on a per acre basis as well. Attorney Hawkins stated when people have asked him about that situation, he has told them the Council is fair and may look at this again if somebody holds out and the City has to pay more for that property. Motion carried unanimously. - DeGardner Roads Attorney Hawkins has reviewed the Minutes relating to the DeGardner Road proposal and has determined that the lower portion of the road would not need to be blacktopped; but the northern portion which was presented to the Council after passing the Resolution re- quiring blacktopping on all incoming roads would have to be blacktopped. The Council agreed with that opinion. Discussion between Council and Mr. DeGardner was on the con- Regular City Council Meeting August 21, 1979 - Minutes Page 2 (DeGardner Roads, Continued) fusion of the blacktopping requirements on this road. Mr. DeGardner was agreeable to blacktopping the northern section of the roadway, Flintwood Street. Engineer Davidson noted that minimum grade standards are S/lOth grade and that the engineering firm has never reviewed the entire roadway. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Peach, that the matter of the road location in the Northwest \ of the Southeast \ of Section 1, Township 32, Range 24 be referred to the City Engineer for his approval of the plans and specifications. Motion carried unanimously. Dostaler Hane Addition Roads MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Orttel, to approve the road for maintenance purposes on the Dostaler Hane Plat contingent on the posting of a security maintenance bond in the amount of $1,000 over a one-year period. Discussion: Mr. Jim Hane presented a pass- book from Rand Construction Company in the amount of $1,000. Attorney Hawkins requested that the document be executed in front of a notary and be brought back to City Hall. Motion carried unanimously. 161st Avenue - State Aid Project Discussion Mayor Windschitl stated that all the property along 161st between Round Lake Boulevard and Tulip is owned by three property owners. There is a question as to how much of that street can be assessed back to the property owners if it were improved under the Section 17 Street Improvement project. If all of it cannot be assessed to the property owners and not built under State Aid, the costs would go into the entire Section 17 Street Project. Mr. Davidson reported on the costs of building that portion of 161st as a State Aid Road: a rural section would cost approximately $117,000; an urban section would cost approximately $187,000. It was also his recommendation that the City establish an assessment policy for MSAH roads, because there is a benefit to the property owners. This is especially true when constructing MSAH roads through urban areas or through rural property that has the potential of subdivision in the future. Discussion was on assessing for MSAH street projects and that it has not been done in the City in the past but that possibly some consideration should be given to it when the project goes through an urban area. The Engineer noted that this section of 161st could not be constructed MSAH unless Tulip from 161st to County Road 20 were also constructed MSAH. Tulip does have property directly fronting on it, and he felt that assessment should be considered. Mayor Windschitl felt that assessing for an MSAH road on this particular road would not be changing anything from the existing problem. If the Planning Commission and Council takes the position that no one can front on 161st, it is at best an indirect benefit to that property. He felt the Council needs to make a decision on this section of the road so that the residents in Section 17 know what is going to take place prior to the Council taking action on the bids for that project. During further discussion on assessing for MSAH projects, it was suggested that if the right of way for 161st could be acquired at no cost to the City, that that would have a direct bearing on assessing this. The property on the south already has the necessary 60 feet of right of way dedicated in the Pine Hills Plat. Mrs. Royce Bennett - felt it would be foolish for them to give the City property for easement and the City. turn around and assess them. (It was felt that the donation of right of way could have a bearing on the assessment.) She was told if they ever came through with sanitary sewer and water after it becomes a State Aid road, they wouldn't be reliable for that assessment. (The road drainage that is part of the road con- struction would not be a factor. Sanitary sewer or water lines are assessed completely Regular City Council Meeting August 21, 1979 - Minutes Page 3 (161st Avenue - State Aid Project Discussion, Continued) independent of the road and have no relationship to the road whatsoever.) Whose responsibility would it be to move their fence line? (In contract specifications, the City would require that the fence be relocated to the new right of way.) They have a whole row of evergreen trees, including some five- and six-foot blue spruce trees. Would they have to be removed? They are only 10 to 15 feet off the existing road. (They could be given the option of removing them.) Stanley Knoll - didn't feel there was enough traffic on that road to warrant the lmprovement. Last night only One car went down that portion in an hour to an hour and a half's time. After Xenia is blacktopped, those people will have access down Xenia to County Road 20 in which they can travel either east or west to exit out. He was in favor of deleting 161st completely from any improvement project, at least for awhile. It might be necessary, but not at this point in view of the few cars using it now. Mabel Palmquest - people who moved out there are recent residents who knew there wasn't a road there. They have County Road 20 which goes both to Seventh Avenue and to County Road 9. Her family moved to that farm in 1935 when there wasn't a road there, but her parents let neighbors use it. After seven years the County said it has been used for seven years and it is now a road. Most of that land was taken away from their farm. She didn't think it was fair to have to pay $30,000 or $35,000 for assessmen~on that road. She'd rather not have the road built at all, as she didn't see the need for it. But she would be willing to donate the easement to the City. At this point, Scandinavian Construction has only an option to buy the property for development. She appealed to the Council on an emotional basis, noting they'd have to come up with all that money to satisfy those few people who have only lived there a few years. Discussion was on possibilities for assessing on a Nunicipal State Aid Road and it being offset by land donation. Mrs. Bennett asked how the value of the land would be evaluated. The difference between selllng land and using land is two different things. It would be taking part of their income for the road. Mayor Windschitl explained there is a legal procedure to determine the market value. He thought it was a very good possibility that the donation of the right of way could be considered as the assessment that would have been paid. It was also explained that the market value of the land would also take into consideration their using the land. Suggestion was made that if 161st were done as an MSAH road, it should be done as soon as MSAH funds are available, which may not be for a couple years. 161st is not listed in the five-year plan for MSAH street projects in the City. Larrf Koep, 16055 Vintage - what is going to happen to Tulip? He disagrees with Mr. Knol , as llvlng on Vlntage, going west to Xenia and down to 20 and across to County Road 9, he adds quite a bit to his trip going to St. Paul every day. It was explained that Tulip from 161st south is designated MSAH. Mr. Wes Mand - wondered how this would affect the parkland at the corner of Tulip and 161st. The Council was told at the last meeting that if 161st wasn't done, no storm water drainage would have to go to that park. The Engineer stated there is a natural pond on the property and some alternate outlet would have to be provided for if that low area could not be used. Ms. Palmquist - Tulip was taken out of the project because a majority of the people were opposed to It. The three of them own all the land on 161st, and they are all opposed to it. Tulip would be the most logical one to pave, as that is where most of the people are. Mayor Windschitl explained that along 161st there are two parcels that are being or proposed to be developed, which would create additional demand for the use of that road. If the neighborhood business would be approved on the corner of 16lst and Round Lake Boulevard, it would draw a substantial amount of traffic down 161st. Councilman Lachinski felt that constructing 161st as an MSAH road is also committing to building Tulip Street as an MSAH road, which, he felt, would create a problem with the residents because it will be going through a residential area. He felt 161st should be deleted Regular City Council Meeting August 21, 1979 - Minutes Page 4 (161st Avenue - State Aid Project Discussion, Continued) from further consideration with the Section 17 project and refer it to the Road Improvement Committee for its priority at the earliest possible time. He also felt that there was a substantially greater benefit to property owners of having an MSAH road through an urban/residential area than through farmland/rural area. If that happens, he felt the Council will have to contend not only with the people not wanting it on Tulip but also with having to assess them for putting it there. Further discussion was on what to do with 161st and that the people voting for the project in Section 17 should know what the Council is going to do with 161st so they can re-evaluate their position. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that the whole matter of the assessment policy tor Municipal State Aid road, urban and rural, be addressed by the Finance Committee and a report made back to the Council as soon as possible. Motion carried unanimously. Any further action on 151st will be taken at the August 28, 1979, Special Council Meeting when action is to be taken on the bids for the Section 17 Street Improvement Project. Councilman Lachinski stated they have a Road Improvement Committee meeting on August 27 and could discuss the problem of when 161st could be constructed as an MSAH road. Sale Date - Section 17 and Section 18 Bonds MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Jacobson, that we set the sale date for the bonds for lmprovements in Section 17 and 18 for the 28th day of August, 1979. Motion carried unanimously. Assessment Policy Mayor Windschitl explained the problem with the aSS2ssment policy as it relates to the large lots in the rural areas, that when the assessment policy was set up it was dealing essentially with urban areas. They created a theoretical lot size that would equalize everybody as fairly as possible. Now we are taking that policy to the rural area. It would seem that the theoretical lot should change wit ¡ the area being assessed, otherwise you are not equalizing among the same types of lots as in the urban area. Mr. Davidson stated that the Council does have the latitude that at the time of the assessment, Council can deviate from the assessment policy to determine, as in this case, that because of the location, 300 feet shall be the reasonable side-yard setback. Discussion was on the desirability of having a policy applicable in all areas rather than changing the present policy for every project; that the concept of the theoretical lot for an area being assessed is fair; that the minimum assessment should also be addressed; that there is the difference between the l-acre lots and the 2~-acre lots; and suggested the policy contain a formula establishing the average lot for every project, and from that have percentages of those figures that would be used for assessment purposes. Attorney Hawkins pointed out that formulas can be used, but one must also be concerned with justifying the market value increase to the lot. He suggested running a formula through various lots to see if it would be a reasonable assessment. Mr. Davidson stated they can work out a theoretical lot of various sizes, but cautioned it may not always work out because topographically you may never be able to build additional lots. In discussing the problem with properties fronting on a County road but having sides along a street proposed to be improved, Mr. Hawkins reported he could find no policies from other cities dealing with this situation. He thought there may have to be a separate provision in the assessment policy for this. He didn't think the formula as it is presently in the policy can be sustained because the market value increase would not be as much as what was being calculated. He felt there is some advantage to having a blacktop street along the side, but where to draw the line is a difficult question. Regular City Council Meeting August 21, 1979 - Minutes Page 5 (Assessment Policy, Continued) The question the City has is did that assessment increase the market value that much. It was the feeling of some on the Council that on those lots in question in this project, an appraiser will be needed when it comes to assessing them. Mr. Davidson stated that changing the policy does have some long term effects on future projects, but he will have a report for the Council on the 28th outlining what can be answered at this point and where the questions remain. Recess at 9:13; reconvene at 9:33 p.m. Policy on Deadend Streets - Stenquist Addition Mr. Davidson indicated that a substantial number of residents have askea to have the extension of 160th, 161st and 162nd go only 50 feet past their driveways rather than to the section line. The owner of the property to the west of this area has indicated that he intended to sell with potential development of that land in the near future, which would mean the extension of those streets to the west at that time for continuity of the street system. If the Council chose to terminate the streets short of the platted distance, the property owners would have to sign a document acknowledging that they would be obligated in the future to allow the street to be extended and to pay for the cost. (Reference TKDA report, Commission No. 6929) Mr. Davidson reported the cost savings to cut back the westerly extension of the streets would be $3,813.50 and $1,005.35 for cutting back the easterly extension of 160th Lane. By reducing the total amount of frontage to be assessed, it would increase the estimated project cost from $15.78 to $16.22 per front foot for everybody in the subdivision; plus the burden to those people having to pay additional cost at some later date for the extensions. He recommended that the streets be extended to their full terminus, particularly to the west because of the potential of future development on that side. After discussion which noted that because the City would have no authority to require the developer adjacent to this Addition to put in the rest of the roads to tie into this, and that because cutting back the extensions of those streets would cause problems in the future in getting these short strips surfaced, assessing residents, etc., the general consensus of the Council was that the streets be surfaced to their full length as originally proposed by TKDA. Extension of Final Plat/Wobegon Woods Dea Lutterman, 19529 Flamingo Street, developer, was present. Mayor Windschitl stated the developer and surveyor were not aware of the provision in the ordinance, and through an oversight neglected to call two weeks before the expiration to allow him to request extension. He is having problems getting the abstract current in order for the Attorney to.dothe title opinion. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Peach, that the City Council approve a six-month extension tor the filing of the Final Plat of Wobegon Woods. (See Resolution R74-9) Motion carried unanimously. Rum River Ordinance Page 7, 5.02.01, (2) and (3): See memo from Dave Almgren of August 17, 1979, recommending 250 feet. Page 9, 6.02.01 (9), should read: Single family residential uses, except mobile homes and modular homes. Page 8, changes suggested by Councilman Lachinski were to delete the idea of landowners having to combine property just because they didn't sell a lot prior to the ordinance Regular City Council Meeting August 21, 1979 - Minutes Page 6 (Run River Ordinance, Continued) taking affect and to leave existing lots at the same status they are now. Under Section 5.03 Substandard Lot, just have 5.03.01: Lots of record in the Office of the County Recorder on the effettive day of enactment of this ordinance which do not meet the dimensional requirements of this ordinance (refer to the revised dimensions of the P & Z) shall be allowed as building sites, provided such use is permitted in the land use district; and all sanitary and dimensional requirements of this ordinance are complied with as far as practicable and the lot meets or exceeds 60 percent or more of the lot standards of these regulations. Discussion: Applying this land use to the 60 percent requirement would be making many existing lots unbuildable by this.Ruggestion. Chairman Bosell stated that they have been told by the DNR that the language/5.03 must be inserted verbatim. Attorney Hawkins stated that their Minnesota reulgation is MR79Cl aa and bb which requires this. It was also noted that the City of Andover is the enforcement body of the ordinance; and should legal action arise out of this stipulation of mandatory combing lots under same ownership to meet dimensions, the DNR has nO enforcement power or monies to defend the ordinance. It was also pointed out that there is a variance procedure under the ordinance which could be used for undue hardships on the land, etc. Councilman Lachinski was asked to present the language he desires in this section; Chairman Bosell will see that the ordinance is retyped for Thursday evening's meeting. Then it can be sent to the Commissioner for comments. Page 16, 10.02.03 (1): Attorney Hawkins recommended the following change: Any structural alteration or addition to a substandard use which will increase the substandard setback shall not be allowed. This Ordinance will be discussed again on Thursday, August 23, a Special Council meeting. Mobile/Modular Homes Amendments Council discussion was on whether or not it would be desirable to allow a modular home in the residential zoning district. It is currently restricted to an R-S district. Attorney Hawkins recommended that the definition of mO'dular homes be added to the ordinance but not add it to special uses in a residential zoning but leave it as an allowable use in an R-S district. Consensus of the Council was not to allow modular homes in residential zoning districts. Discussion was also that modular homes would be an allowable use in an R-5 zone and would come before the Planning Commission as a planned unit development. A lot larger than the minimum requirements in an R-S zone would be needed in order to meet the setback requirements. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Jacobson, adoption of Ordinance No. 8E, An Ordinance Amending Ordinance No.8, Ordinance No. 8A, Ordinance No. 8B, Ordinance No. 8C, and Ordinance No. 8D, an Ordinance for the Zoning of the City of Andover. The City Council of the City of Andover hereby ordains: Ordinance No.8, adopted January 1, 1971, Ordinance No. 8A, adopted on February 14, 1975, Ordinance No. 8B, adopted September 21, 1976, Ordinance No. 8C adopted October 17, 1978, and Ordinance No. 8D, adopted March 20, 1979, are hereby amended to read: SECTION 3 - SUBSECTION 3.02 - DEFINITIONS, Add FFF-l Modular Homes: A non-mobile housing unit that is basically fabricated at a central factory and transported to a building site where final installations are made permanently affixing it to the site, built to meet or exceed the Uniform Building Code. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Andover this 21st day of August, 1979. Motion carried unanimously. Lot Split Ordinance Amendment Attorney Hawkins had not had an opportunity to review the AmenLment. Several Councilmen were concerned with the proposal in that they felt the original intent was not to make the lot split ordinance applicable to urban areas only as was recommended by the P & Z. They felt the Lot Split intent was also to allow for the splitting off of 2~ acres in the rural areas as well (father wanting to split off 2~ acres of the farm for his son, for example), especially when the result would be the same if it were platted. It was Regular City Council Meeting August 21, 1979 - Minutes Page 7 (Lot Split Ordinance Amendment, Continued) felt that the referral to the Planning Commission was because of the confusion that has always arisen over park dedication fees. Councilman Orttel's concern was that the park dedication fee should be for any increase in housing units that would put more people into the park system. The Clerk stated in working with this ordinance since it was enacted, the only problem has been in the definition, because it is contradictory. She recommended making the change to: ...when one or both divided lots have a width of less than 300 feet or (instead of and) are less than five acres... Further discussion was held over to the Special Council/P & Z Meeting on August 23 Bingo Permit - Andover Fire Fighters Terr{ Lindquist, fire fighter, requested approval to conduct Bingo games on September 16, 979, at the Andover Fun Day sponsored by the Andover Fire Fighters and the Andover Li ons Cl ub. Discussion was on the procedure for issuance of such license pursuant to the Ordinance. The Clerk explained the procedure she has always used was to have Council approve the license; then she has the required ir,spections by building inspector, fire department, and police department done; if everything is correct, the license is issued 20 days after Council approval. Attorney Hawkins felt that normally the Council would get the reports; but if they elect to trust the Clerk's judgement, he didn't think the ordinance requires it. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Orttel, the Andover Fire Fighters be authorized a permit to conduct Bingo games at the Andover Fun Day on September 16 and that they be declared exempt from the provisions of the Minnesota Statutt 349.19 subject to compliance with other portions of the Bingo Ordinance. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Lachinski, Orttel, Peach, Windschitl; ABSTAIN-Jacobson Motion carried. Mr. Lindquist stated they have received donations for prizes from area merchants, and he asked the Council to donate time during the Fun Day (for the dunk tank). Junkyard Licenses (Reference August 20, 1979, list of Junkyard License A~plicant~ from City Clerk, noting what needs to be done for compliance with the ordinance by all applicants) Council discussion was on whether to approve the licenst contingent upon compliance with the ordinance within a certain time period and on the problems of doing so; that a variance should be applied for if there is a real hardship in any situation; and if the Council denies these licenses for noncompliance, they can file a written request for a hearing before the Council. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Jacobson, that we deny Junkyard Licenses to the following applicants: Wilber's, Anoka Auto Wrecking, Andover Auto Parts, Bob's Auto, William Batson, Commercial Auto Parts, K & K Salvage, Pumkin City, and RiteAway; and direct the Clerk to forward information of the denial to the applicants along with the reasons for the denial. Motion carried unanimously. Park/Recreation Commission - Andover Park Ordinance Mr. Hawkins stated his comments basically dealt with the illegal activites in the park that would be prosecuted (Reference August 16, 1979, letter to Lindquist from Hawkins, Andover Park Ordinance, recommending using the language found in the disorderly conduct statute for the State of Minnesota and eliminating Section 2.3). Section 2,2.1: Mayor Windschitl's concern was that according to the wording of the ordinance of "City parks and recreational areas", the regulatior,s would also apply to Regular City Council Meeting August 21, 1979 - Minutes Page 8 (Park/Recreation Commission - Andover Park Ordinance, Continued) any other governmental area. He also had a problem of the definition of firearms as it relates to the Firearms ordinance. Attorney Hawkins felt that this ordinance could make reference to the Firearms Ordinance for definition: "No firearms as defined in Ordinance 12 sha 11 be brought into or used in park areas." Mayor Windschitl also expressed concern over sections of the ordinance which do not allow motorized vehicles in parks except for designated trails, as no park to date has designated trails in them and he didn't know of a program to set them up; and over not allowing camping in parks except for designated areas, when to date no camping areas have been designated in the City parks. Mr. Mand argued we don't want motorized vehicles tearing up parks until we have a trail for them. Discussion noted that some councilmembers had not had an opportunity to read the latest draft of the Ordinance; concerns on the time it takes before action is taken on ordinances and other things. Discussion was carried over to the Special Meeting on Thursday, August 23, 1979. Mr. Mand reported that the DNR is in the process of negotiating with the property owners for the purchase of the land for the Crooked Lake Boat Landing project. The DNR has requested that a public hearing or informational hearing not be held until after the negotiation process is completed; but they would be happy to answer any questions the Council has. It was requested that the Rules Committee meet to cietermine ways to expedite action on items before the Council. Volunteer Fire Department The Clerk reported that as of August 1, there is a balance of $10,843 from the Public Services Building/Fire Department Equipment Bond. Council reviewed the list of items requested by the Fire Department Equipment Committee, dated August 20, 1979, with Tom May and Fire Chief Bob Palmer. Chief Palmer explained that with the monies available either a partition, doors, stairway, etc., for the mezzanine could be installed for $4,700 with some of the work being done by the Fire Fighters or the blacktop on the driveway and parking lot west of the building could be laid. The Fire Fighters generally felt the partition on the mezzanine would be first priority, as it is their hope to have Fire Fighters stay overnight in the building on cold nights in the winter. Mayor Windschitl questioned the room for the stairway on the Fire Department side, and re- quested the Building Committee give an opinion on the stairway. Further discussion on the list: It was felt that the water filter for the bathrooms should not be more than $25 (not $250 as suggested by the Equipment Committee on the list) . Mr. May explained there are plans to purchase a used compressor in conjunction with Public Works, and the Fire Department's share would come from surplus funds. The Clerk stated that Public Works has no funds for this and W3S hoping to use some of this overage on the bond for their share. Question was raised whether a compressor would be considered part of the building and whether or not this overage from interest on the bond could be spent for Public Works, as the bond itself was for Fire Department equip- ment. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Peach, that the following items from the Fire Department Equlpment Committee list dated August 20, 1979, be authorized: Carpet and linoleum for meeting room, offices, restrooms and hallway; concrete apron fer Fire Department side; epoxy floor paint; landscaping; water filter for bathrooms; water fountain; gas pump lighting; fire extinquishers; plumbing and mechnical for air system and water fill system and a used air compressor; air chisel set; two door closers; with the total not to exceed $8,000. Motion carried unanimously. Regular City Council Meeting August 21, 1979 - Minutes Page 9 (Volunteer Fire Department, Continued) Chief Palmer asked the Attorney that if fire fighters must go to court for testimony, is there a way to charge for expert witness testimony. Attorney Hawkins stated they are entitled to 15 cents a mile plus $10 or $15 a day if fire fighters are subpoenaed. He felt probably fire fighters would be called in for an opinion on what was seen or observed and wouldn't try to qualify them as an expert on arson techniques, etc. Chief Palmer felt that funds for having to take off work by fire fighters to attend court should be investigated further. Mr. Hawkins explained that Councilman Peach was going to contact Mr. Herr of Bloomberg telling him the City has set the deadline of September 16 for items to be completed on the Public Services Building. If they are not completed as of that date, the City is going to. consider them in default of the contract and will hire someone to complete the work and deduct the cost from the balance of the contract. Council discussion was on various other ways of handling the situation and that it was felt that rather than having Councilman Peach contact Mr. Herr, the Attorney should handle the matter. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Peach, that the Attorney be authorized to contact the bUllder of the new Fire Department Building and advise him that he is going to be in default of his contract as of the 16th Day of September and try to arrange a settlement. Motion carried unanimously. Discussion was on moving the fire trucks from the Public Works side of the Building to the Fire Department side. Attorney Hawkins stated the City does not have to get the contractor's approval to issue an occupancy permit, and he didn't think that putting the trucks in implies acceptance of the Building or waives our rights to the defects. The Building Official will issue a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy to allow the fire trucks to be parked on the Fire Department side. Road Committee Councilman Lachinski explained the Road Committee is requesting going out for bids on a new truck. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Peach, that the Council authorize the Clerk to advertise for bids for a new dump truck/snow plow according to the Road Improvement Committee's truck specifications. Discussion: was that some of the items were very specific and that "or equivalent" should be added to increase the competition. Councilman Orttel ADDED TO MOTION: to have "or equivalent" put in wherever a specific brand name is listed. Second still stands. Motion carried u~animously. Personnel Committee Councilman Orttel stated the Committee met in June. They are trying to get away from the mid-year increases as was done in the past, but the Co~mittee felt there are some people who had assumed responsibilities over and above that which were originally assigned to them or are doing work outside their normal job description. Pay increases were recommended based on the assumption of those extra duties. Pat Lind uist, Clerk/Treasurer/Actin Administrator: Committee recommended a Clerk/ reasurer sa ary lncrease rom ,0 on anuary, 1979, to $17,500 plus an additional $150 per month for Acting Administrative duties. Councilman Lachinski was concerned with the increase, especially how it relates to any increase at the first of the year again. Mayor Windschitl also felt an attempt should be made to stay within President Carter's wage guidelines and felt that the total amount recommended was excessive. Councilman Orttel felt that these increases were for additional duties being performed, and it is not a mid-year raise. Discussion was on the reasons for the recommended increase; that the compensation given for the Acting Administrative position in 1978 was not a continuing thing; that the City is no closer to hiring an Administrator now than it Regular City Council Meeting August 21, 1979 - Minutes Page 10 (Personnel Committee, Continued) was last January; and that the compensation for Acting Administrator is to be re- evaluated in the event an Administrator is hired. Councilman Jacobson explained it is the Committee's intent to establish a salary range for every position by the end of this year; and at that point, on a yearly basis, employees would know what their increase would be. Once a year the Council will determine a percentage figure that the entire range would shift upwards to compensate for inflation. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Jacobson, that Pat Lindquist's salary be adjusted to $17,500 per year effective July 1, 1979, with an additional $150 per month as Acting Administrator until January 1, 1980. Discussion: Mayor Windschitl still didn't feel the President's Guidelines should be exceeded. It was argued that the $150 is only to do the Administrator's work and that the Clerk/Treasurer increase is only 1 percent. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Jacobson, Orttel, Peach; NO-Lachinski, Windschitl Motion carried Mayor Windschitl - My no vote reflects that I don't think that the Council should be passing an increase that exceeds President Carter's Guidelines, and we should respect those Guidelines. Dave Almgren, BUildint Official: The Committee recommended an increase from the $16,500 salary on January 1, 979, to $17,680 based on raising the average number of hours a week to 43 and because of the extra duties he has been performing -- snow plowing, building committee, etc. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Jacobson, that Dave Almgren's salary be increased to $17,680 effective July 1, 1979, until January 1, 1980. Discussion: Dave Almgren requested that the effective date be made as of June 1, which is the same date that Mr. Sowada's salary was increased. Discussion was again on the reasons for the increase, the percentage of increase, and on the President's Wage Guidelines. Councilman Peach CHANGED MOTION to effective June 1, 1979. Second still stands. Motion carried unanimously. Vicki Volk, Secretary: The Personnel Committee's recommendation was to raise her salary to that which she agreed to when hired at the end of her probationary period -- a $20 a month increase. The Clerk had recommended an increase of 20 cents an hour. After Council discussion, it was agreed to increase Ms. Volk's salary $20 per month as had been agreed to when hired. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Peach, that Vicki Volk be paid an increase of $20 per month from the Probationary Period of July 9. Motion carried unanimously. Marcie Peach, Council RecordinJ Secretary: Councilman Jacobson reported that she had not recelved a pay increase since uly, 1978. She had logged hours worked on Minutes and wrote a memo to the Personnel Committee of the results as she had been directed in December, 1978. The Clerk recommended a pay increase to 550 for meetings prior to 11 p.m. and $12.50 an hour after 11 p.m. Because of the amount of time spent on Minutes and the competency of her work, the Personnel Committee felt that that request was not unreasonable. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, that we increase the rate of pay for Marcella Peach from the present $46 per meeting and $12 an hour after 11 p.m. to the rate of $50 per meeting and $12.50 an hour after 11 o'clock, retroactive to June 1, 1979. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Jacobson, Lachinski, Orttel, Windschitl; ABSTAIN-Peach Motion carried. Mary Kiley, P & Z Recording Secretary: Councilman Jacobson explained the Committee. felt that because some of the P & Z meetings have been going longer, rather than having her ask for separate authorization every time, that they compensate her at an hourly rate after 11 o'clock as is done with the Council Recording Secretary. Regular City Council Meeting August 21, 1979 - Minutes Page 11 (Personnel Committee, Continued) MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, that Mary Kiley be given, as of June 1, 1979, the rate of $40 a meeting and rate of $8 per hour after 11 o'clock. Motion carried unanimously. Temporary Employment - Starr, Reitan Discussion was on whether these individuals should be hired; should they be on a permanent part-time basis; and if this type of person is needed, should a college student be hired instead to be able to operate trucks, etc. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Orttel, that we hire Mark Reitan and Kevin Starr at a rate of $3.10 per hour as part-time employees. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Lachinski, Orttel, Peach, Windschitl; NO-Jacobson Motion carried. Budget Meeting Date Council discussion was on the amount of mill levy desired for next year. The Clerk testified that taking out the limited market value has virtually no affect on the City's revenue. Councilman Orttel felt that with the City putting in more blacktop roads, sealcoating ~ijti~~T~ecessary, plus other increased expenses for the City, . that at least two/M w be required to maintain the things the City has started.' Councilman Lachinski stated that the CIP Committe~ is wanting to take the improvement of dirt streets to gravel and sealcoating out of surplus funds and put it in the budget. Mayor Windschitl stated he was not exactly sure what was in the law passed by the last legislature, but he will try to have an answer by the next Council meeting. Due to the lateness of the hour, the Approval of Min~tes and Claims are to be carried over to the Thursday, August 23, Special Council Meeting. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 1:02 a.m. Respectfully submitted, '7 \'f\ ~~~~~ ---,- ~ £L~~ cl' Marcella A. Peach Recording Secretary