Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOld [04a] Minutes1""P� My OF ST. JOSEPH Council Agenda Item 4(a) MEETING DATE: January 6, 2011 AGENDA ITEM: Minutes — Requested Action: Approve the City Council minutes of October 4, November 18, December 2 and December 15, 2010. SUBMITTED BY: Administration ATTACHMENTS: Request for Council Action 4(a):1-2 DRAFT CC Minutes — October 4, 2010 4(a):3-6 DRAFT CC Minutes — November 18, 2010 4(a):7-12 DRAFT CC Minutes — December 2, 2010 4(a):13-18 DRAFT CC Minutes — December 15, 2010 4(a):19-20 REQUESTED COUNCIL ACTION: Approve the City Council minutes of October 4, November 18, December 2 and December 15, 2010. 4(a):1 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 4(a):2 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the St. Joseph Town Board and Planning Commission met in joint session with the City Councils and Planning Commissions of the Cities of Waite Park and St. Joseph at the Steams County Service Center on Monday, October 4, 2010 at 7:00 PM. St. Joseph Township Board Members Present: Chair Jeff Janssen; Supervisors Jerome Salze and Matt Symalla St. Joseph Township Planning Commissioners Present: Ralph Eiynck, Brenda Stanger, Hal Undersander. St. Joseph City Council Members Present: Mayor Al Rassier; Councilors Dale Wick, Renee Symanietz, Steve Frank. St. Joseph Planning Commission Members Present: S. Kathleen Kalinowski, Michael Deutz, Brian Orcutt, John Meyer, Ross Rieke. Waite Park City Council Members Present: Mayor Rick Miller; Councilors Herman Bartz, Chuck Schneider, Mike Linquist, Frank Theisen. Waite Park Planning Commission Present: Bonnie Hermanutz, Bob Zabinski, Tim Zabinski Stearns County Commissioners Present: Mark Sakry Others Present: Joe Sieben, Mike McDonald, Karen Brick, Sue Fredrickson, Lillian Brick, S. Kara Hennes, S. Paula Revier, Lenny Gillitzer, Barb Gillitzer, Colleen Donovan, Karen Bechter, Don Steichen, Jeff Pleir, Dennis Barthel, Mike Rennie, Wally Stang, Rick Schultz Staff Representatives Present: Sue Kadlek (Waite Park/St. Joseph Attorney), Kirby Dahl (St. Joseph Township Attorney), Angie Berg (Steams County Land Use Division Director), Shauna Johnson (Waite Park Administrator), Anna Reischl (St. Joseph Township Clerk), Judy Weyrens (St. Joseph Administrator), Bill Barber (Waite Park Building Coordinator). Jeff Janssen, St. Joseph Township Board Chair welcomed those presented and stated that the purpose of the hearing is to consider revisions to the Orderly Annexation (OA) Agreement between each City and the Township to establish new provisions for zoning and administration of land use permits within the respective orderly annexation areas. Over the past months, the staff of the Cities of Waite Park and St. Joseph, St. Joseph Township and Stearns County have been meeting to define a more efficient development process in the OA areas. In orderto facilitate a revised development process, the existing OA agreements and Memorandum of Understanding will need to be amended. The changes in these two documents relate to the streamlining of the development process only. If each governing body is comfortable with the proposed revisions, actions on these changes could occur after the public hearing has been closed and each governing body will have to consider the action. Angie Berg, Land Use Division Director for Stearns County stated that, for the past year, she has been meeting with the cities and township to improvement the development process. The current process has multiple layers and is a lengthy process. Both Cites and the Township felt it was important to look at the process to establish a new development process that would save time and costs. It was equally as important for the cities to have input in development in the OA areas. The proposal changes the development process itself and appoints Stearns County as the Zoning Administrator. Therefore, persons seeking a development permit will complete a Stearns County Application and pay applicable fees to the County with the submittal. Once the application is received, Stearns County Staff will review the application in relation to the County Zoning regulations and prepare a staff report which is forwarded to the City. If a public hearing is required for the process, the County will prepare the hearing material including individual property notices. The City staff will then review the information in relation to City documents such as the Comprehensive, Transportation and Utility Plans. 4(a):3 Under this new structure, each city will have to create a Joint Planning Board which will consist of three Planning Commission members from the respective City and one member from the City Council and Township Board and a Stearns County Commissioner. Decisions rendered by the Joint Planning Board are final with appeals being handled by district court. This new structure will avoid an applicant having to appear before the OA Joint Planning Board, OA Joint Powers Board, Stearns County Planning Commission and Stearns County Commissioners. Waite Park City Administrator Shauna Johnson stated that the goal of the revised process is to enhance communications between all parties. The City, Township and county are all still part of the process, but the current system is flawed. In the recent past, applications that came before Stearns County did not always allow for City input. The process before the board at this time allows for open and collective discussion. With regard to the hearing including both the cities of Waite Park and St. Joseph, Johnson stated that both Cities have similar OA agreements, therefore; one process would provide for consistent standards in St. Joseph Township. The Township expressed interest in providing one process for all constituents of the Township no matter which Orderly annexation agreement they are part of. At this time Janssen opened the floor to those present: Colleen Donovan, property owner adjacent to CR 138 and CR 175 expressed frustration that the documents were not available for review prior to the meeting. Donovan stated that the current agreement would allow for annexation of their property in 2011 and she does not have a desire to be part of the City of Waite Park. She stated that she does not believe that she would receive any services that would be beneficial to her. City Attorney Sue Kadlek clarified that all the documents being considered at this meeting have been available for review at each jurisdiction as well as on each jurisdiction's website. Al Rassier clarified that, at this point, annexation is not being discussed. Each agreement has proposed timelines when annexation may occur, but annexation only occurs with a petition. Therefore, if your property is located in a time zone that indicates annexation in five to ten years, an application still must be received. Donovan stated the their property along County Road 138 was illustrated for annexation in 2011, and they were "land grabbed" before 2011 for the housing development that was going to develop, but today sits vacant. St. Joseph Mayor Al Rassier stated that St. Joseph has always taken the position that, unless the City can provide services, the property would not be annexed, even if the timeline for annexation has expired. Rassier stated that the purpose of this meeting is to accept a better process for development which will be more user friendly and efficient. Township Board Chair Janssen stated that the purpose of the meeting tonight is not to adjust timelines for annexation, rather to look at the two existing documents that need to be modified to allow for a revised planning process in the OA areas. This is a positive step forward and the document should be reviewed every three years. Donovan questioned who initiates a review the annexation areas, does St. Joseph Township or can a property owner send a letter of request. Janssen stated that that, for the Township, the document is used to manage growth and facilitate the planning process. For the City, the documents are used for future growth and planning for infrastructure. Janssen clarified that without current documents, the Township constituents would have less rights than they. do today. The OA agreement is protection for the Township residents. Rassier added that the current OA provides for good planning and cooperation. 4(a):4 Sue Kadlek stated that, without amending the existing documents, the revised planning process cannot be implemented. Neither City is looking to re -negotiate the terms of the OA, simply modify the development process. Waite Park Mayor Rick Miller stated that annexation does not happen overnight and requires a process. Property owners would be involved or made aware of any annexation. Janssen concurred with Kadlek that the OA and MOU must be amended if it is the desire of the Cities and Township to amend the development process in the OA area. Matters brought forward tonight, outside the process, can be discussed at a later meeting and it makes sense to follow up with the concerns expressed at this meeting. Township Supervisor Matt Symalla stated that he only has one comment and that is related to the language in the Waite Park OA and the criteria for annexation. The current language does not include that the property must be contiguous. He believes that such language assures that growth occurs outward, managing infrastructures costs. Johnson stated that is an area of disagreement and we can have a discussion, but do not want to prolong the process. Rassier stated that there is no one that does not respect the time that was spent by the staff on the proposal before the boards, but a public hearing is an opportunity for input and we should not, not listen. And if there is an outstanding issue and we stall the process because of such that is what the process if for. For us to say that we will push this through is not what we should be doing. Property owners should have had the opportunity to review the documents ahead of time and not be handed the documents at this time. Berg reiterated that all the documents were available before the meeting and notices were mailed to all residents impacted by the proposed change. Mark Sakry questioned if someone could you speak to the timelines or what is the process? Berg clarified that the new process includes the County receiving development/land use permits/applications then reviewing them for process and compliance. If a hearing is needed, County staff will provide the hearing notice and publish the information. A staff report is forwarded to the City Administrator or appointed official, at which time, the City documents are reviewed for compliance with the proposed action. Regular meetings will be established for the Joint Planning Board and they will consider all matters and their decision is final. The County will no longer consider matters in the OA areas unless it relates to rezoning. With regard to the deadline for implementation, there is not a required deadline. Each Board, including the County, will have to approve and execute the agreements, with the County only executing the MOU. Stearns County Commissioner Mark Sakry stated that the County Board discussed the revised process and is supportive of the County acting as the Zoning Administrator. The County, too, is interested in streamlining the development process. The only question raised was why a County Commissioner needs to be part of the Joint Planning Board. The Council wants to disengage from the decision making process, but will provide staff support. He stated that the County has a number of OA agreements and none of the other agreements include County Commissioner representation. Janssen thanked Sakry for his input and stated that it is now up to the City and Township to determine the appropriate makeup of the Joint Planning Board. Frank suggested that the City and Township consider requesting a County staff member to be an ex -officio member of the Board to help facilitate the process. St. Joseph Planning Commissioner Ross Rieke questioned the logistics as to how this matter will be moved forward. He stated that the proposed process is a positive movement and he looks forward to working with the new process. Janssen stated that either each jurisdiction can either caucus tonight or the matter can go back to each jurisdiction for a future meeting. Donovan expressed concern that, by eliminating one board member from the Joint Planning Board, a matter could result in a tie vote and she questioned how that will be handled. Janssen responded that if a 4(a):5 motion is made to approve a proposed use and it is a tie vote, the land use request fails. It was also stated that, if a matter fails on a tie vote, it does not have support and the County should not have to act as the tie breaker. St. Joseph Township Attorney Kirby Dahl stated that the Board and Council do not have the appropriate information to take action at this meeting. The documents need some minor changes and the boards should have an opportunity to review the final documents. S. Kara, 104 Chapel Lane, St. Joseph questioned if the platting process will utilize the new process, to which she was told all matter except zoning would be handed by the Joint Planning Board. Mike Mcdonald, 213 —13th Avenue SE, St. Joseph stated that he appreciates the attempt to streamline the process for developers, but expressed frustration that we were not following existing policies. We had growth that we did not follow. Either follow what we had or make it manageable. Miller made a motion to close the public hearing at 8:55 PM; seconded by Symanietz and passed unanimously by those present. Janssen stated that they need to determine what process will be used for moving this matter forward with anticipation of executing a revised Orderly Annexation Agreement and Memorandum of Understanding. Janssen suggested that each jurisdiction discuss this independently and have the staff coordinate the revised changes with a final draft distributed for review. It was clarified that the Memorandum of Understanding for both is identical and the OA has minor differences. Rieke stated that a decision will also have to be made regarding the County representation on the Joint Planning Board. It was clear that the County Board did not want to appoint a Commissioner to this Board, as they indicated that the decision should be that of the City and Township. Those present expressed the concern that someone from the County should be present and, by consensus, agreed to request the County Board to appoint a staff member as an ex -officio member of the board. Members of the Waite Park Council clarified that the only change to the Orderly Annexation Agreement is the process and that annexation dates within the agreement are not modified. Janssen stated that he is of the understanding that each party is willing to sit down after the amendment to address other concerns not related to process. It was agreed that the final documents will be forwarded to St. Joseph Township for execution first and, upon notice of approval, the Cities of Waite Park and St. Joseph will consider the document and forward executed copes to the County for final approval. Miller made a motion to adjourn at 9:20 PM; seconded by Rieke and passed unanimously by those present. Judy Weyrens Administrator 4(a):6 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the St. Joseph City Council for the City of St. Joseph met in regular session on Thursday, November 18, 2010 at TOOPM in the St. Joseph City Hall, opening the meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance. Members Present: Mayor Al Rassier, Councilors Dale Wick, Renee Symanietz, Steve Frank, Bob Loso and City Administrator Judy Weyrens City Representatives Present: City Engineer Randy Sabart, Finance Director Lori Bartlett, and Public Works Director Terry Thene Others Present: Tim Borresch, Margy Hughes, Thomasette Scheeler, Emily Grunke, Herman Gangl, Tom Gustafson, Dick Taufen, Mayor Rassier thanked Councilor Wick for acting on his behalf during the last council meeting. PUBLIC COMMENTS Margy Hughes, 128 Able Ct E, approached the Council to invite them as we as the public to an event to be held downtown beginning on Friday December 3 on the comer patio. The event is called "Something's Up Downtown". Tim Borresch, 11 3'd Avenue NW, advised the Council that he has some concerns regarding his utility bills. His concern is that of the line charges as he is being charged four line charges for each of the apartments in his home. With house values declining and property taxes rising, he asked for some relief. Approval of the Aaenda: Frank made a motion to approve the agenda with the following additions/deletions: Delete 2.1 Special Recognition Award Add 6b Park Terrace Update The motion was seconded by Symanietz and passed unanimously. Consent Agenda: Wick made a motion to approve the consent agenda as follows: a. Minutes —Approve the City Council minutes of November 4, 2010. b. Bills Payable —Approve check numbers 043452-043522 and EFT numbers 000467-000475, 000521-000522. c. Donations — Accept the donation for the disc golf in the amount of $21.50. d. Treasurer Report — Accept the October 2010 Treasurer Report and Cash Position. e. Interim Use Permit — Authorize the Mayor and Administrator to execute the Findings of Fact accepting the recommendation of the Planning Commission issuing a conditional Interim Use Permit to allow the issuance of a rental license to Cory Ehlert for 29 MN Street E. f. Gambling Report — Accept the 3rd Quarter Gambling Report as presented. g. Proclamation — Proclamation declaring November 26, 2010 as Loso's Store Day. The motion was seconded by Symanietz. Discussion: Loso questioned whether or not 29 MN Street E requires the property to be half business, half rental. Weyrens stated that the current Ordinance does not have that provision so it does not have to have a retail component. The motion passed unanimously. Public Hearing — 2011 Fee Schedule: Lori Bartlett, Finance Director for the City approached the Council to give a brief presentation of the proposed fee schedule for 2011. Based on Borresch's comments, Weyrens advised the Council that the line charge is based on the number of single-family equivalent units. Bartlett added that the purpose of the line charge is for everyone to pay an equal amount of the 4(a):7 fixed costs to include treatment, buildings, personnel, etc. She stated that the line charge was implemented about five years ago. Weyrens reminded the Council that, previously, there was a minimum charge and people used more water because they paid for it. Now, by paying for what they use, residents tend to use less water. The City needs to meet certain conservation rates so we need to promote conservation. Bartlett stated that staff began reviewing the fees this summer along with the budget process. There are proposed increases to the Park/Fire Hall Rentals, Land Use/Development Fees, Compost Permit Fees and Utility Fees. Park/Fire Hall Rental Fees: Bartlett suggested that these fees be increased to cover increased costs related to maintenance staff time and new equipment in the parks. She provided the Council with information on how St. Joseph compares to the area cities. The proposed increases are as follows: Current Proposed Resident $75 [+ tax] $80 [+ tax] Non -Profit $75 [+ tax] $80 [+ tax] Profit/Non-Resident $100/$75 [+ tax] $105 [+ tax] Damage Deposit $100 [Parks]/$200 [Fire Hall] No Change • Land use/Development Fees: Bartlett advised the Council that the proposed changes include: Bartlett stated that the Annexation and Lot Split fees are proposed to increase to cover administration costs associated with the hearings. The Joint Planning Application fee is a new fee for 2011 due to the creation of the Joint Planning Board. This is board consists of members from the City of St. Joseph, St. Joseph Township and Stearns County who review planning matters in the annexation areas in the Township. Bartlett explained that the Water Access Fee [WAC] is proposed to increase by $100 as was originally intended to help cover the water filtration debt. The proposed increase is due to a set increase of $100 annually to a max of $5,000. • Compost Permit Fees: According to Bartlett, there are a few concerns regarding the compost site. The current compost space is encroaching on the area neighbors and disc golf. Staff is also concerned about the introduction of Ash Bore in the wooded area. She also addressed some needs for the compost to include purchasing future land or modification of current operations or possibly a joint venture with the City of Waite Park. The compost fee is proposed to increase as follows: Current Proposed City Residents $15 $25 SJ Township Residents $15 [+250 SJT Subsidy] $25 [+$250 SJT Subsidy] She provided the Council with a comparison of the area cities as well. Along with the $10 increase, staff is recommending that St. Wendel Township Residents no longer have the option of using the site to minimize the use. Utility Rates — Water, Sewer, Stormwater and Refuse: Bartlett advised the Council that the refuse rates are not proposed to increase as the City remains locked into a three year contract with Allied Waste. The proposed utility rate increases are as follows: 4(a):8 Current Proposed Annexation Fee $300 $400 Joint Planning Application n/a $200 Lot Split Fee $300 $400 Water Access Fee $4,200 $4,300 Bartlett stated that the Annexation and Lot Split fees are proposed to increase to cover administration costs associated with the hearings. The Joint Planning Application fee is a new fee for 2011 due to the creation of the Joint Planning Board. This is board consists of members from the City of St. Joseph, St. Joseph Township and Stearns County who review planning matters in the annexation areas in the Township. Bartlett explained that the Water Access Fee [WAC] is proposed to increase by $100 as was originally intended to help cover the water filtration debt. The proposed increase is due to a set increase of $100 annually to a max of $5,000. • Compost Permit Fees: According to Bartlett, there are a few concerns regarding the compost site. The current compost space is encroaching on the area neighbors and disc golf. Staff is also concerned about the introduction of Ash Bore in the wooded area. She also addressed some needs for the compost to include purchasing future land or modification of current operations or possibly a joint venture with the City of Waite Park. The compost fee is proposed to increase as follows: Current Proposed City Residents $15 $25 SJ Township Residents $15 [+250 SJT Subsidy] $25 [+$250 SJT Subsidy] She provided the Council with a comparison of the area cities as well. Along with the $10 increase, staff is recommending that St. Wendel Township Residents no longer have the option of using the site to minimize the use. Utility Rates — Water, Sewer, Stormwater and Refuse: Bartlett advised the Council that the refuse rates are not proposed to increase as the City remains locked into a three year contract with Allied Waste. The proposed utility rate increases are as follows: 4(a):8 Bartlett stated that the Water & Sewer Rates are proposed to increase due to the following: o Cover current debt costs o Cover operational costs necessary to treat water to MN Dept of Health Standards o Cover depreciation to replace infrastructure o Cover proposed capital equipment purchases She stated that the proposed sewer rates were based on the following: o Cover current debt costs — City of St. Cloud ■ Rehabilitation/upgrades to treatment plant ■ Interceptor repairs • Tri -City Lift Station rehabilitation/upgrade o Operational supplied increased to slow down rapid deterioration of St. Cloud interceptors o Cover depreciation to replace infrastructure o Cover proposed capital equipment purchase According to Bartlett, ideally, the City would like to cover 100% of the depreciation. The City is trying to get that close to 50%. She added that the interceptor repairs were not included into the previous rates. She advised the Council that the Storm Water Fees are proposed to increase due to the following: o MPCA reporting requirements/protect waters o Cover proposed capital purchases o Cover operational costs to maintain system — including depreciation • Ponds, curb/gutter, mains Bartlett stated that the percentage increase in the Storm Water Fee for single-family residences is similar to the percentage for other users. Frank made a motion to open the public hearing at 7:30; seconded by Loso and passed unanimously. Tim Borresch approached the Council for a second time questioning why the City of St. Joseph has the highest percentage spike and why we are the highest paying place in the surrounding area. He expressed his concern about the compost permit and stated that the compost was there prior to the disc golf course and he does not feel that the pile has grown over the past five years. In his opinion, things are getting out of hand. Herman Gangl, 7th Avenue SE, approached the Council and questioned Bartlett as to what the proposed percentage increase is per utility bill to which Bartlett replied 13%. Thomasette Scheeler approached the Council as well to ask them to provide the residents with some education on how to conserve water minimizing the increase in rates. Margy Hughes appeared before the Council and questioned if the biggest culprit is the water filtration plant and the fact that the City did not receive the homes as projected. Rassier stated that those are two factors; however, the sewer repairs were another big expense. He added that the Lift Station repairs were unexpected. Hughes also questioned whether or not the Industrial Park has City services to which Rassier replied that the Industrial Park located behind Coborns does. 4(a):9 Current Proposed Water Use $2.40/1,000 gallons $2.70/1,000 gallons Water Line Charge $10.30/bill $11.00/bill Sewer Use $2.40/1,000 gallons $2.70/1,000 gallons Sewer Line Charge $11.50/bill $12.50/bill Storm Water [SF Residential] $7.50/bill $9.50/bill Bartlett stated that the Water & Sewer Rates are proposed to increase due to the following: o Cover current debt costs o Cover operational costs necessary to treat water to MN Dept of Health Standards o Cover depreciation to replace infrastructure o Cover proposed capital equipment purchases She stated that the proposed sewer rates were based on the following: o Cover current debt costs — City of St. Cloud ■ Rehabilitation/upgrades to treatment plant ■ Interceptor repairs • Tri -City Lift Station rehabilitation/upgrade o Operational supplied increased to slow down rapid deterioration of St. Cloud interceptors o Cover depreciation to replace infrastructure o Cover proposed capital equipment purchase According to Bartlett, ideally, the City would like to cover 100% of the depreciation. The City is trying to get that close to 50%. She added that the interceptor repairs were not included into the previous rates. She advised the Council that the Storm Water Fees are proposed to increase due to the following: o MPCA reporting requirements/protect waters o Cover proposed capital purchases o Cover operational costs to maintain system — including depreciation • Ponds, curb/gutter, mains Bartlett stated that the percentage increase in the Storm Water Fee for single-family residences is similar to the percentage for other users. Frank made a motion to open the public hearing at 7:30; seconded by Loso and passed unanimously. Tim Borresch approached the Council for a second time questioning why the City of St. Joseph has the highest percentage spike and why we are the highest paying place in the surrounding area. He expressed his concern about the compost permit and stated that the compost was there prior to the disc golf course and he does not feel that the pile has grown over the past five years. In his opinion, things are getting out of hand. Herman Gangl, 7th Avenue SE, approached the Council and questioned Bartlett as to what the proposed percentage increase is per utility bill to which Bartlett replied 13%. Thomasette Scheeler approached the Council as well to ask them to provide the residents with some education on how to conserve water minimizing the increase in rates. Margy Hughes appeared before the Council and questioned if the biggest culprit is the water filtration plant and the fact that the City did not receive the homes as projected. Rassier stated that those are two factors; however, the sewer repairs were another big expense. He added that the Lift Station repairs were unexpected. Hughes also questioned whether or not the Industrial Park has City services to which Rassier replied that the Industrial Park located behind Coborns does. 4(a):9 Jane DeAustin approached the Council to speak on behalf of the CMBA. She urged the Council to carefully consider the fees for development and building. According to DeAustin, the number of residential buildings has declined over the past few years. She reported that from January through October, 2005, there were 100 residential building permits pulled compared to 9 last year and 7 this year. She added that the good news is that the numbers are stabilizing. The decreased number of new homes is due to the fact that a comparable home is much less expensive for the buyer. DeAustin asked the Council to consider freezing the WAC fees or, do what other cities are doing, which is to defer the WAC/SAC until the Certificate of Occupancy is released or until the time of service. She added that this is being done in other cities and it seems to be working. Symanietz made a motion to close the public hearing; seconded by Loso and passed unanimously. Loso advised DeAustin that the City has already deferred the WAC/SAC fees as requested by a developer. Frank stated that he would like to see that as a standard for the City rather than done on a case by case basis. Frank stated that it is the assumption that St. Joseph is the highest. The Council needs to look at what it takes to operate and look at the current charges, budget and go from there. He questioned whether or not we are the highest. He stated that the City cannot change the fact that the St. Cloud updates needed to take place. Assuming that those were repairs were necessary, he questioned how the City compares and what is meant by covering capital expenditures and capital depreciation. Bartlett stated that it is hard to compare one City to another because each City has a different way of charging fees and each City has a different agreement with St. Cloud based on their needs. If refuse were removed, St. Joseph is in the ballpark. Bartlett added that other cities have different revenue streams as well. She explained that the capital expenditures are determined by looking at the Engineer's CIP and the Public Works CIP since capital projects are slotted in different years. Bartlett advised the Council that the water tower is in need of repair and the wastewater plant is scheduled for rehabilitation in 2012. These projects are included in the fee schedule. Weyrens suggested that they re -look at the rates to see if they can be reduced. This would be brought back again at the December 2 meeting. Frank questioned the status of the sewer use agreement with St. Ben's. Loso advised the Council that they are back in negotiations with them. Bartlett stated that the proposed fee schedule includes the revenue stream based on estimated usage for CSB; however, Rassier stated that we cannot make decisions based on their usage because we do not have actual numbers. Rassier expressed frustration with the lack of an agreement with St. Benedict regarding their sewer use and stated it has gone on too long and it is hard to stay positive. CITY ENGINEER/PUBLIC WORKS REPORTS Update on 16th Avenue SE: Sabart stated that, at the last council meeting, they were advised that this project is in the winding down stage. The contractor will be back tomorrow help clean up the street and remove the stormwater protection items. He advised the Council that there is a small amount of turf that has not yet been placed due to weather as well as the fact that some trees have yet to be transplanted. That process has been delayed until next spring. Sabart also addressed the drainage issues along the Vogel and Pueringer properties. He stated that it is feasible to extend a storm drain behind those two properties; however, he is not sure how this would affect the buried utilities in that area. Both Vogel and Pueringer have been accessing the back side of their properties through Outlot A. According to Sabart, they have not yet solicited any pricing nor have they discussed costs with the property owners. Loso questioned Sabart as to whether or not the Liberty Point Development is the cause for the drainage to which Sabart replied that it is reasonable to say that as the drainage is ending at the bottom of the hill. Sabart advised the Council that he estimates the construction costs to be between $10 and 15,000. He suggested that they use a concrete pipe rather than 4(a):10 plastic as vehicles will continue to use this alley and it is not paved. Frank questioned who would be responsible for this to which Sabart stated that is the question and added that it needs to be fair and equitable. Loso expressed his desire to see the drainage issues in the spring. Rassier and Frank both stated that they would like to see some preliminary cost figures. With respect to the 16th Avenue SE assessments, Weyrens stated that the City recently sent out notices of a re -assessment and there has been some contention. The current assessment is a legal assessment and the Council is being asked to keep it as is. The Homeowner's Association is the legal owner and they have been advised that if they can get all of the affected property owners to sign an agreement to pay, the assessment could be re -allocated. Loso made a motion to rescind the hearing for the re -assessment of the 16"' Avenue SE Assessments. The motion was second by Frank and passed unanimously. Loso stepped down from his chair. Park Terrace Update: Sabart stated that, last week, an informal neighborhood meeting was held with the residents of Park Terrace and there were about a dozen residents who participated. They discussed concerns relating to access issues, utilities, etc. He sees this as a good starting point to solicit feedback from the property owners. When looking into this, Sabart stated that there was not a lot of record information available. As part of the Feasibility Study, he stated that they would like to do a topographic survey to identify all the manholes and corresponding depths. The anticipated survey cost is $1,200 and can be completed before the end of 2010. Frank made a motion authorizing the expenditure of $ 1,200 to complete the survey as requested; seconded by Symanietz and passed unanimously. Loso resumed his chair. ADMINISTRATOR REPORTS Upcoming Meetings: Weyrens stated that there will be a budget meeting on November 22 at 5:30PM. The Intergovernmental meeting will be held on November 30 at which the agenda item is legislative priorities.. MAYOR REPORTS St. Augusta: Rassier stated that the City received a letter from St. Augusta thanking the Public Works staff for helping them with their sewer system jetting. He stated that we need to work with other communities as, in the future; they may be able to help us out. APO Executive Meeting: Rassier reported that he attended the APO Executive meeting. He advised the Council that a lot of changes are coming and a lot of projects are being re -looked at. They have no clue what will be happening until the new elected officials take office. COUNCIL REPORTS SYMAN I ETZ Upcoming Meetings: Symanietz reported that the APO will not have a meeting in November or December. She also advised the Council of the Park Board meeting on Monday, November 22. WICK — No Report LOSO — No Report FRANK — No Report 4(a):11 Adjourn: Loso made a motion to adjourn at 8:40PM; seconded by Symanietz and passed unanimously. Judy Weyrens Administrator 4(a):12 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the St. Joseph City Council for the City of St. Joseph met in regular session on Thursday, December 2, 2010 at TOOPM in the St. Joseph City Hall, opening the meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance. Members Present: Mayor AI Rassier, Councilors Dale Wick, Renee Symanietz, Steve Frank, Bob Loso and City Administrator Judy Weyrens City Representatives Present: City Engineer Randy Sabart, Finance Director Lori Bartlett, and Public Works Director Terry Thene Others Present: Emily Hawkins — Gruenke. Tom Klein, Mariterese Woida, Dick Taufen, Kirby Becker, Ellen Wahlstrom, Paula Revier PUBLIC COMMENTS Ellen Wahlstrom, 409 8t" Avenue SE, approached the Council to give input on the proposed Assessment Policy that has been presented. She stated that much of what the policy says is what is being done now, including that fact that some assessments are determined on a "case by case basis". Wahlstrom questioned who wrote the policy, how it was acquired and where the content of the draft came from as there was no policy prior to this. Weyrens responded to Wahlstrom by stating that she drafted the policy. She began by researching the minutes of when the original 60/40 split was adopted and then looked at the current practices of the City as well as those of the area cities. Wahlstrom stated that she is concerned about the ability to assess properties differently using a "case by case basis". In her opinion, this is not what the residents want. She added that they (the residents) will respond in a different manner after hearing the discussion under Administrator Reports. She concluded by reminding the Council of the Statement of Values which addresses the equity factor and stated that they need to be both consistent as well as equitable. Approval of the Aaenda: Symanietz made a motion to approve the agenda with the following items pulled for discussion by Councilor Frank. 4(c) 2011 Non Union Compensation 4(e) Cable Services 4(f) Prosecution Services The motion was seconded by Frank and passed unanimously. Consent Agenda: Symanietz made a motion to approve the consent agenda as follows: a. Bills Payable — Approve check numbers 043523-043571 and EFT numbers 000476- 000480. b. Pay Application — Authorize the Mayor to execute Pay Application #3 for the 16"' Avenue SE Improvements and authorize payment in the amount of $127,462.66 to JR Ferche. c. Removed for discussion. d. Audit Services — Authorize the execution of the engagement letter with KDV to prepare the 2010 Audit with an expenditure of $25,000. e. Removed for discussion. f. Removed for discussion. g. Liquor License — Issue Malt Liquor, Cigarette and Amusement licenses based on the attached list for the license period January 1, 2011 through December 31, 2011. The motion was seconded by Wick and passed unanimously. Public Hearing — 2011 Budget: Bartlett approached the Council to present the final 2011 Tax Levy. She began by giving an overview of the budget timeline. The process began in May with the Board of Equalization Hearing at the County, followed by a series of Council/Board budget workshops. The Council adopted the 2011 Preliminary Levy on September 2 and, in October; the County provided the 2011 4(a):13 preliminary tax rate. In November, the Council held a few more budget workshops prior to adopting the Final Levy which is due to the State by December 28, 2010. Bartlett stated that when the Council began the budget process, they had several goals. They include: Plan for 25% LGA cuts • Review fees • Review staffing levels • Review memberships • Consider collaboration with Area Cities As stated earlier, on September 2, 2010, the Council adopted the Preliminary Levy and set the general levy at $1,852,329. Once the preliminary levy is set, the final number cannot be higher than that amount. She advised residents that they should have received their property tax statements and may notice some changes to their property taxes. Those changes are due to the following factors: Taxable market value change [each property is affected differently] • County Tax rate increased • State General Tax increased • School District Levy increased Special Taxing District Levy increased Preliminary City Tax Rate increased Homestead Market Value Credit decreased Since the Preliminary Levy was adopted, there were some adjustments made based on the Council's goals for the 2011 budget process. They include: • EDA programming ($20,000) • Cable Commission ($6,310) • Building Inspector RFP ($15,000) • Prosecuting Attorney RFP ($22,000) • Health Insurance Costs ($28,595) • Full Time reduced to Half Time Police Officer ($34,635) • Reserve for future LGA cuts $105,125 • General Levy ($70,000) The proposed 2011 Final Levy shows a reduction in the General Fund Levy to $1,782,330 resulting in'a reduction in the estimated tax rate to 48.442%. The proposed budget includes an increase of $164,400. Bartlett provided the Council with an indication of how St. Joseph sits amongst the area cities and Stearns County, as a whole, with respect to its Final Tax Rate. With Sartell being at 33.13% and Waite Park being 53.96%, St. Joseph is in the middle. Mayor Rassier opened the Public Hearing. Dick Taufen, 32 2nd Avenue NW, approached the Council and questioned how his taxes could increase even though his valuation decreased. Bartlett stated that the tax statements were prepared using the preliminary budget which is higher than that which is being proposed at this hearing. He also stated that, previously, he was a City employee and remembers when "times were tough". He is urging the Council and staff to learn to "live within their means". Rassier responded that a lot of time has been spent on the budget and staff has cut where they could. Taufen advised the Council that Senior Citizens are not getting a "pay raise" this year. In response, Frank stated and he and Rassier, as state employees, have not had a pay raise in two years going on three. He added that the City Employees did not get a pay raise last year. He added that there has been a decrease in the City's contribution towards health care. With respect to the purchasing of equipment, Frank stated that the staff does a good job and that they have been quite responsible by purchasing 2nd hand equipment from other cities such as Apple Valley. 4(a):14 Clarence Fischer, 128 6th Avenue NW, questioned the Council as to why the City Employees need a raise. Loso stated that the employees are contractual. According to Frank, other cities are offering their employees pay raises and he feels that the City needs to stay competitive to keep its employees. Wick made a motion to close the Public Hearing relating to the Final 2011 Tax Levy at 7:30PM. The motion was seconded by Symanietz and passed unanimously. Wick made a motion to authorize execution of Resolution 2010-036, Adopting the Final 2010, Collectible 2011 Tax Levy and Approve the Final 2011 Budget. The motion was seconded by Frank. Ayes: Rassier, Wick, Symanietz, Frank Nays: Loso Motion Carried 4:1:0 Loso made a motion to adopt the proposed 2011 Fee Schedule as presented. The motion was seconded by Frank. Discussion: Bartlett provided the Council with revised utility rates. The Council previously reviewed the rates and requested that staff review the rates a second time with the intent to reduce the proposed increase. Bartlett stated that after reviewing the fees, the sewer and stormwater fees were reduced. This will result in a 6% increase to the average user and a 10% increase to the commercial user. She provided the Council with a comparison of the area utility rates. After analyzing the rates for the area cities, it seems as though St. Joseph rates are competitive with the area cities. Wick stated that he feels as though we are "front -loading" and he is unhappy with the water rates at this time. Frank stated that he would like a little more time to review the fees and see what can be done to mitigate the proposed increase. Bartlett advised the Council that the water fund increase is due to existing debt for capital improvements. At this time the City does not have the reserves left, nor do we have the connections as originally anticipated. Rassier added that the City needs to pay for the system and keep it going. The City has been working to try to increase its commercial/industrial users and that has, not happened. As a result, there aren't enough businesses to offset the residential costs. Wick questioned whether or not the debt service can be satisfied without raising the water rates and whether or not there is any water reserves left to which Bartlett stated there is not. Wick stated that he would like to see the fund balance if the rates are not increased. Wick made a motion to table the approval of the 2011 Fee Schedule until the next meeting. The motion was seconded by Frank. Ayes: Wick, Symanietz, Frank, Loso Nays: Rassier Motion Carried 4:1:0 Field Street: Doug Weiszhaar approached the Council on behalf of WSB to provide an update on the Field Street Study. He reported that this project started in 2004. Over the past few years, the City has been studying various alternatives for a Collector in the Southern portion of the community. They have gone through much iteration and have finally arrived at a series of routes that will work well for the community. The study process is in the end stage and MnDot is requesting the City execute a programmatic agreement which includes the requirement for the City to prepare the inventory to register the historic properties on the federal historic registry. If it is the intent for the City to solicit federal funding for the construction of any portion of Field Street, this programmatic must be completed. It is estimated that the cost of the inventory will range between $ 40,000 and $ 50,000. Kirby Becker approached the Council as well on behalf of the APO. He stated that there may be some Federal Funds available to help fund the stipulations of the agreement. He added that the local match on any project is 20%. 4(a):15 Frank clarified that the TAC has settled on a preferred route. He was advised that the preferred alternative skirts the northern edge and then goes along the other side of Lake Sarah and will be a 2 -lane road. He questioned the consequences for not buying into this at this time. Weiszhaar replied that if the City pursues the programmatic and completes the stipulations, the City would then have completed the study process, including the required environmental review and if funding were available, the City could seek federal funding. Without a completed study, the City would not be eligible to solicit federal funding for any portion of Field Street. The City could however use local funds to construct the corridor. When questioned if the City does move forward and execute programmatic how long is the environmental effective, Weiszhaar stated that an environmental document must be updated every three years. When the City is ready to construct the roadway, they would be required to do an amendment to the EIS if there are any changes in the corridor with respect to environmental effects. An amendment is not as expensive as doing the entire process all over again. Wick clarified that Field Street is not included in the current St. Cloud Area APO plan so funding is highly unlikely Becker concurred and stated that it could be placed in the plan when amended the 2040 plan is adopted. Loso made a motion to suspend the Field Street Study, documenting all the work that has been completed to date. The motion was seconded by Wick. Discussion: Loso questioned how much money has been spent to date. Weyrens replied close to $170,000 of City funds and additional $ 300,000+ in federal and state funds. Frank questioned what will happen if one of the stakeholders moves or changes. According to Weiszhaar, the current document is only accurate if the current properties remain as they currently exist. If this is picked up later on, one of the properties may no longer have historic value. He added that this process has raised the awareness of the historic significance in St. Joseph. Weyrens questioned whether stopping the process will have negative impacts with the APO. On behalf of the APO, Becker stated that it will not as the City has worked diligently to complete the project and it has come done to a financial constraint with execution of a programmatic agreement. The APO is supportive of putting closure to the study. Ayes: Wick, Symanietz, Frank, Loso Nays: Rassier Motion Carried 4:1:0 Weiszhaar thanked the City for the opportunity to work on this project over the past several years. Consent Items: Frank pulled the following items from the Consent Agenda for further discussion: c. 2011 Non Union Compensation: Frank clarified that the non union employees will receive a COLA increase with no change to the health insurance. They have agreed to the same terms as the union employees. After looking at the neighboring cities, he feels that this is reasonable. Requested Action: Accept the recommendation of the Personnel Committee for the 2011 compensation for the non union employees. e. Cable Services: Frank stated that he was unaware of the fact that the City does not have an Ordinance relating to the makeup of the Cable Commission. He clarified that the commission will consist of one person at a rate of $400 per month. Weyrens stated that the others that work in the cable booth will continue to receive $35 per occurrence. Only one commissioner is being paid a monthly salary to oversee the process. He stated that the City would like to bring in someone with unique expertise and talent. Requested Action: Appoint Brad Veenstra, Integrated Media as a Cable Commissioner and compensate $400 per month for cable services. f. Prosecution Services: Frank reported that this came up during the budget process. He questioned how this is saving money for the City. Weyrens stated that currently Rajkowski Hansmeier provides prosecution services for ordinance compliance and traffic matters. During the budget process the City of St. Cloud submitted a proposal to provide the samer service for $ 22,000 less than that of the current firm. St. Cloud can offer the service cheaper 4(a):16 as they have an attorney at the Courthouse every day and Rajkowski Hansmeier only has an attorney at the Courthouse when they are needed and the City is billed hourly as they wait for the case to be heard. St. Cloud is at the courthouse anyway so the City does not incur a cost for waiting. St. Cloud will also provide an appeal process for persons wishing to appeal an administrative citation. Currently the City does not have a process other than utilizing the court system and issuing a civil citation. Requested Action: Authorize the Mayor and Administrator to execute an agreement with the City of St. Cloud to provide prosecution services a charge of $3,000 per month. Loso made a motion to approve consent items c, a and f as presented. The motion was seconded by Frank and passed unanimously. CITY ENGINEER/PUBLIC WORKS REPORTS — No Report ADMINISTRATOR REPORTS Assessment Policy: Weyrens stated that in late October the Council was approached by a resident requesting the City adopt a formal assessment policy. The City currently has a policy based on past practice. The proposed policy is a legal document. It was questioned during open to the public that the policy allows for assessing property on a case by case basis and this does not seem equitable. Weyrens stated that most policies that she reviewed included language that allowed deviation from strict compliance to the policy and not all project are identical and it is impossible to establish a policy that address every possible situation. Weyrens stated that she did not include reference in detail of the entire 429 process. Rassier stated that with every project, we will look at how things were done in the past and make a policy that adheres to the 429 process. Frank suggested creating a policy that the average person understands. He would also like to see what other cities are doing. Loso added that he would like to see a history of how the past five or so projects were handled. Weyrens advised the Council that she will send some sample policies from other cities via email. Lot Sglit Request: Weyrens presented a lot split request on behalf of Thomas Schindler. The parcel is located on East Able Street and includes an overlapping legal. The lot split is to redefine the property lines and all impacted property owners have consented to the request, The lot split has been reviewed by the City Engineer for accuracy and he too is recommending approval. Loso made a motion authorizing the Mayor and the Administrator to execute the Certificate of Compliance approving the lot split request of Tom Schindler, 807 Able Street East. The motion was seconded by Symanietz and passed unanimously. Request to Vacate Public Right -of -Way: Weyrens stated that Kay's Kitchen is requesting the City consider vacating the street right-of-way in their front yard, parallel to County Road 75. The ROW was formerly Cedar Street and when the signals were installed at CR 75 and College Avenue Cedar Street was closed and should have been vacated at that time. The request for vacation is to allow for landscaping and possibly outside seating. Vacation of a public ROW does require the Council authorize a public hearing. If the ROW is vacated the City will retain an easement for the main sewer line that lies in the former ROW. Wick made a motion to authorize the Mayor and Administrator to execute Resolution 2010-037, Initiating the Hearing process for the vacation of a portion of Cedar Street, setting the public hearing for 7:OOPM on January 6, 2011. The motion was seconded by Symanietz and passed unanimously. Orderly Annexation Area Planning Process: Weyrens reported that the cities of Waite Park and St. Joseph have been meeting regularly to re -define the process for land use matters in the Orderly Annexation area. Through this process, a joint public hearing was held with St. Joseph Township, the City 4(a):17 of Waite Park and the City of St. Joseph on October 4, 2010. The purpose of the hearing was to accept input on creating a new process for handling land use matters in the Orderly Annexation Area. Staff members met after the public hearing an amended the documents to reflect the changes discussed at the hearing including changing the Stearns County representation of the Joint Planning Board from a Commissioner to a staff member. The staff member will be an ex -officio member of the Board. Frank made a motion to Authorize the Mayor and Administrator to execute the Memorandum of Understanding and Orderly Annexation Agreement between the City of St. Joseph and St. Joseph Township. The motion was seconded by Symanietz and passed unanimously. POLICE CHIEF REPORTS — No Report LELS Union Negotiations: Weyrens advised the Council that she will be meeting with LELS to get their initial offer. She would like to schedule a special meeting to discuss labor strategy to which the Council agreed to meet on December 15, 2010 at 5:00 PM. Joint EDA/City Council Meeting: Weyrens stated that the EDA would like to hold a joint meeting with the City Council to discuss a business prospect. The Council agreed to meet after the EDA meeting on December 15, 2010 at approximately 4:30 PM. COUNCIL REPORTS SYMANIETZ Park Board: Symanietz reported that the Park Board met to work on the budget. They talked about the St. Joseph Historical Society. She added that one of the Board members attended the national park conference and will bring back lots of information to the board. Intergovernmental Meeting: Symanietz stated that she attended the Intergovernmental Meeting in St. Augusta at which they discussed the Sustainability Study and St. Joseph was commended for their efforts in encouraging recycling via the recycle bank program. WICK EDA Meeting: Wick reported that the EDA meeting has been changed from December 22 to December 15, 2010 at 3PM. LOSO — No Report FRANK — No Report MAYOR REPORTS Rassier stated that, due to the fact that there will be no meeting on the 16t", this will be his last meeting. Adiourn: Symanietz made a motion to adjourn; seconded by Wick and passed unanimously. Judy Weyrens Administrator 4(a):18 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the City Council for the City of St. Joseph met in special session on Wednesday, December 15, 2010 at 5:00 PM in the St. Joseph City Hall. Members Present: Acting Mayor Dale Wick. Councilors Steve Frank, Bob Loso, Renee Symanietz. City Administrator Judy Weyrens. Approve Agenda: Symanietz made a motion to approve the agenda with the addition of Bills Payable. The motion was seconded by Frank and passed unanimously by those present. 2011 Park Shelter Fee: Symanietz made a motion to increase the Park Shelter fee for Millstream and Centennial Park from $ 75.00 per event to $ 80.00 per event. The motion was seconded by Frank and passed unanimously by those present. Bills Payable: Frank made a motion to approve the bills payable, check numbers 043572-43629 and EFT numbers 000481-000485. The motion was seconded by Symanietz and passed unanimously by those present. Closed meeting — LELS Labor Negotiations: Loso made a motion to close the City Council meeting pursuant to Minnesota Statute 13D.03 subd. 1(d), 2 to discuss labor negotiation strategy. The motion was seconded by Frank and passed unanimously by those present. The meeting was closed at 5:15 PM and reopened by Acting Mayor Wick at 5:35 PM. Closed Meeting — Pending Litigation, Deutz: Frank made a motion to close the City Council meeting pursuant to Minnesota Statute 13D.03 subd. 1(d), 2 to pending litigation. The motion was seconded by Loso and passed unanimously by those present. The meeting was closed at 5:35 and reopened at 6:00 PM by Acting Mayor Wick. Symanietz made a motion to adjourn at 6:00 PM seconded by Loso and passed unanimously by those present. Judy Weyrens Administrator 4(a):19 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 4(a):20