HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011 [09] Sept 01 September 1, 2011
Page 1 of 6
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the St. Joseph City Council met in regular session on Thursday,
September 1, 2011 at 7:OOPM in the St. Joseph City Hall, opening the meeting with the Pledge of
Allegiance.
Members Present: Mayor Rick Schultz, Councilors Renee Symanietz, Dale Wick, Steve Frank, Bob Loso
and City Administrator Judy Weyrens
City Representatives Present: City Attorney Tom Jovanovich, City Engineer Randy Sabart, Finance
Director Lori Bartlett, Police Chief Pete Jansky, Public Works Director Terry Thene.
Others Present: Mike Phillip, Bud Reber, Jane Reber, Clarence Fischer, Tom Klein, Jim Graeve, Mary
Ann Graeve, Bruce DeWenter, Gary Heltemes, Denny Pfannenstein, Jan Pfannenstein, John Walz, Dick
Taufen, Jeff Taufen, Mike Deutz, John Meyer, Carole Tamm, Tasha Tamm, Leonard Walz, Robert Fries,
Sally Lorentz, Bill Lorentz, Roy Walz, Cory Ehlert, Mary Niedenfuer, Mike Philips, Del Sheets, Jane
Reber, Rose Diedrich, Jodell Johnson.
Approve Agenda: Loso made a motion to approve the agenda as presented; seconded by
Symanietz and passed unanimously.
Consent Agenda: Loso made a motion to approve the consent agenda as follows:
a. Minutes — Requested Action: Approve the minutes of August 18, 2011.
b. Bills Payable — Requested Action: Approve check numbers 044357 - 044396 and EFT
numbers 000569 — 000573(Payroll).
c. Joint Powers Agreement — Requested Action: Authorize the Mayor and Administrator to
execute the amended Joint Power Agreement for the Gang Strike Officer adding the City of
Little Falls as a participant.
The motion was seconded by Frank and passed unanimously.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Bud Reber, 118— 2 Ave SE approached the Council to state his objection to the proposed Park Terrace
Improvements. He stated that most of the residents in the City have paid a larger proportion of the
projected then proposed for the Park Terrace project.
Dave Keller, 15 — 4th Avenue NW approached the Council regarding an old parking ticket that he
discovered at his home. He realized that it was mis -paid at the time and offered to make the correct
payment if it would help the City.
Public Hearing — Park Terrace Improvement: Mayor Schultz stated the purpose of the public hearing is to
solicit public testimony as to whether or not the City Council should order the improvements for the Park
Terrace Improvements, as the ordering of the improvement will result in a large tax levy for fifteen years.
At this time Mayor Schultz opened the public hearing.
Jim Graeve, 619 Minnesota St E, spoke in support of the project. He stated that he likes the direction the
council is going with regard to assessing projects. He stated that residents should only be assessed once
for improvements and then after the initial assessment, the responsibility should be that of the community.
Dick Taufen, 23 2" Avenue NW, spoke in opposition to the proposed financing for the Park Terrace
Improvements. Taufen stated that over the past years he has been assessed two and three times and
the lowest cost participation he received was 50 %. He encouraged the Council to use the existing policy
for cost distribution of the project. .
Dave Keller, 154 Avenue NW, questioned how many times residents should be expected to pay for
hookup fees for water and sewer. What basis is the Council using to determine the cost sharing.
September 1, 2011
Page 2 of 6
Bruce Austin, 545 8th Avenue SE, spoke in opposition to the proposed financing for the Park Terrace
Improvements. Austin stated that he previously lived in Park Terrace and paid the assessment requested
by the City, and he owns a business where he once again to pay the larger portion for the extension of
services. At this time he does not feel that he should pay for services for a specific neighborhood, the
improvements do not benefit he or his business.
Cory Ehlert, 427 4 Avenue SE, spoke in opposition to the proposed financing for the Park Terrace
Improvements. Ehlert stated that he owns a number of residential and commercial properties and it is his
opinion the City is not being equitable to all residents. At one time the residents paid 80% of the
proposed improvements, and then the Council reduced the cost sharing to the resident contributing 60 %.
He stated he understands the challenges facing the City, but he does not understand how the City is
justifying the change in policy.
Mike Phillips, 338 7 Avenue SE, spoke in opposition to the proposed to the proposed financing for the
Park Terrace Improvements. He stated that in 2005 he was annexed and assessed for utility services
and street, curb and gutter. The residents impacted by that project did not receive assistance from other
resident, they paid the entire assessment. Therefore he does not see why he is being asked to pay a
portion of a project that he does not benefit from. .
Mary Anne Graeve, 619 Minnesota Street E, questioned how the new policy will be implemented. It is her
opinion that the resident should pay for water and sewer and the community at large pay for the
improvements to the street as we all use streets. The assessments in the past have imposed financial
hardship to some. She also encouraged the Council to look at alternatives to curb and gutter, such as
rain gardens. Communities such as Sartell have used them effectively and maybe St. Joseph should re-
consider the design standards.
John Meyer, 951 13 Ave SE., stated that he understands that the proposed improvement is necessary.
However, he stated that the report prepared by independent appraiser provided a range for the proposed
assessment, but the City accepted the low end amount. He questioned what motivated the Council tuse
the lower number, why not use the maximum that could be assessed.
Del Sheets, 1619 Dale Street, spoke in opposition to the proposed financing for the Park Terrace
Improvements. Sheets stated that he shares the concerns of those who spoke before him and
encouraged the Council to find a more equitable cost sharing for the project.
Jane Reber 1314 E Minnesota Street spoke in opposition to the proposed financing for the Park Terrace
Improvement project. She stated that she was assessed at two different times and paid 60% of the
project cost and it is inequitable for the City to change the cost sharing at this time.
Rosie Deidrich, 18 1 Avenue NE, spoke in opposition to the proposed financing for the Park Terrace
Improvement project. She stated that she too paid 60% of the costs for improvements as they abutted
her property and she should not be expected to pay the costs for another neighborhood. She also stated
that her taxes have been increasing each year and while the Council may indicate the impact to be $ 50
per year, that does not include any increase for the general operation.
Ron Eiynk, 134 Avenue NW, spoke in opposition to the proposed improvement. First he stated that he
did not appreciate the comments of Councilor Symanietz at a past meeting when she indicated the she
would thing the improvements "are a piece of cake and they should jump on the band wagon ". Secondly,
he stated his opposition to paying for a service he already has and questioned the Council how many
times they will be asked to pay for the same services. If the Council is compelled to complete the project,
he encouraged the Council to pay the service line costs for residents that will have to redirect their sewer
service as it comes to their home.
Ray Walz, 110 E. Ash, spoke in opposition to the proposed financing of the Park Terrace Improvements.
He stated that he agrees with those speaking before him and encouraged the Council to look at other
cost sharing alternatives.
September 1, 2011
Page 3 of 6
Dave Keller, 154 Avenue NW, stated that the letter mailed to the residents does not explain the process
and he questioned what process was used.
Bill Lorentz, 40 5 Avenue NW, stated that he has paid an assessment in the past and he acknowledges
that the project needs to move forward. He further understands that one on likes to pay taxes, or
assessments, but there should be some mechanism or system that could help defray cots.
Jodell Johnson, 225 —12 Avenue SE, expressed concern that the letter she received in the mail was the
first information that she received regarding the proposed improvement and she is opposed to the
proposed cost sharing. She stated that she was involved in a project and was required to pay 60% of the
project cost and in her opinion the street was better before the project then when it was finished.
Mary Niedenfuer, 202 5 Avenue NW, stated that the project is more complex than what was mailed to
the residents. The information did not say that the residents of Park Terrace already have water and
sewer and that the City attempted to assess the residents approximately $ 16,000. She stated it is her
opinion that there is no benefit to reconstructing the road and the water and sewer should be paid by the
City, not the residents.
Weyrens stated that she has received considerable written testimony regarding the matter and identified
the following as submitting testimony: Norman and LeeAnn Ruegemer, Dan Schreifels, Dan Wippler, Joe
Leach, Bernard & Elizabeth Schloemer, Bruce Gohman, Mike Gohman, Aleta Kvatum, Rick Schroeder,
Bill Elfering, Charles Potter, Sy Prom, Bob and Marcella Gill, Ken Jacobson, Harvey Notch, Luke Kalla,
Judy Meyer and Marty Meyer, Susan Hennen, Tim and Bill Nelson, Pam Pierskalla, Brad Cobb, Mark
Holthaus, David and Marsha Schneider, Kevin and Jeanne Schirmers, Tom and Jane Lowell, Jeff Tesch,
Dorian Davidson, Gina Dullinger, Marilyn Ruhr, and Linda Sniezek.
There being no one further wishing to testify, Mayor Schultz closed the public hearing at 7:50 PM.
Schultz requested staff provide an overview of the project. Weyrens stated that in the late 1990's the City
was required to chlorinate the water system, and when the chloride was added to the system residents
experienced cloudy, rusty and particles in the water. The City turned off the chlorination and realized that
the old water lines had considerable mineral buildup and the lines needed to be repaired. With that in
mind the City inventoried the water infrastructure and developed a plan to replace the old water mains so
that when a new filtration plant was constructed the City would be ready for chlorination. The inventory of
the system included a prioritization of the pipes and other than a small section of water main in Elm
Street, the Park Terrace area is the last area to be improved.
As a financial management tool, the City has adopted a Capital Improvement Plan where the City
identifies capital projects that need to be completed to keep the City viable. The Park Terrace project is
part of this plan. Last year the City started discussing the proposed improvements and in February the
City authorized the Engineer to prepare a feasibility report, which was accepted by the City and a public
hearing was scheduled for April 14.
On April 14, 2011 the City Council conducted a public improvement hearing for impacted residents. In
order for the City to assess a property the City has to be able to illustrate that the proposed assessment
will equal the benefit that is received by the property. To address this issue, the City hired an
independent appraiser to review the proposed project and determine what benefit will be recognized by
each property. The City received the report and it indicated that the maximum benefit ranged between $
4,500 and $ 6,500. The initial assessment roll prepared illustrated the assessment with a 60%
contribution by the resident, but once the assessment analysis was prepared the City did not have the
ability to assess a larger amount.
Once it was determined that the City could not support an assessment of 60 %, the Council discussed the
financial impact to the entire. City and it was that discussion that prompted a public hearing. Before this
project, impacted residents paid a larger portion of the project than the City as a whole, so those paying
September 1, 2011
Page 4 of 6
the larger portion of the assessment had an opportunity to speak. Therefore, since the residents are
being asked to pay the larger portion of the assessment, the Council opted to conduct a public hearing.
City Engineer Randy Sabart discussed a summary of the project and stated that the proposed
improvements will replace infrastructure that was constructed in the 1960's, with utilities located in rear
yards. The location of the utilities creates difficult maintenance and some of the pipes are not located
within an easement. The proposed project will relocated the sewer lines in the street and increase the
size of the water main. The existing water main ranges from 1 - 1/2" to 2 inches and the standards today
would include a (6) six inch water main. The City had televised some of the sewer lines and pipe distress
is illustrated. In some areas the clay pipes are cracked, pipes are sagging and roots are intruding. With
regard to the street, the pavement is starting alligator and will continue to deteriorate until it is replaced.
In an effort to reduce costs, the City Council considering lining the sewer pipes rather than replacing the
pipes; however that did not prove to reduce the costs significantly. In addition, sewer pipes that are
sagging are not candidates for lining. Sabart stated that due to the condition and location of the sewer
lines, City Staff is required to perform additional maintenance than if the lines were in optimal condition.
City Attorney Tom Jovanovich stated that the City Council did not arbitrarily chose to assess only ten (10)
percent of the project; rather they are limited by MN Statute 429 that limits the amount of an assessment
to the benefit received. The appraiser hired by the City did not give any value to the sewer pipes that
have out lived their useful life. Appraisers take the position that only those benefits that are visible add
value. When a party is looking at purchasing a property, they can see that the road is new, and if a
property is connected to a municipal utility system they assume it is working. Jovanovich stated that if the
infrastructure was not operation, there would be added value.
When questioned what happens if the City does not complete the improvements and the sewer system
backs up, Jovanovich stated that the City has some discretionary immunity. If the project does not move
forward the City has to articulate the reasons for not moving forward, and sewer backups would occur the
courts have ruled on behalf of Cities. Loso expressed his disagreement with Jovanovich and stated that
he believes the City would be negligent. Jovanovich clarified that the City is not negligent. The City staff
currently maintains the system and documents preventative maintenance and follows a guideline. The
City Council has proposed a project to the residents, but financially the project is not viable. With these
circumstances the courts have ruled on behalf of the City's.
Symanietz clarified her statements from a previous meeting as referenced by Eiynck. She stated that her
comments were in reference to the significantly lower assessment and she figured that the residents
would see the project as more affordable and they would support the project.
Schultz made a motion to table action on the proposed improvement for Park Terrace until
September 15, 2011. The motion was seconded by Loso and passed unsnimously.
Public Improvement Hearing — Capital Improvement Amendment: Weyrens stated that the purpose of the
public hearing is to accept testimony on the amendment of Capital Improvement Plan to add the following
items to the 2011 CIP: Replacement roof for City Hall, new HVAC equipment for City Hall and repairs to
the police garage to increase energy efficiency. In order for the City to bond for the improvements, they
must be included in the CIP. Based on information from Bond Counsel a draft amendment to the CIP has
been prepared identifying the need for the improvement. It was initially thought that the publication
requirements only needed 10 days, instead fourteen are required. Therefore, the Council can open the
hearing at this time, but cannot take action until the meeting on September 15, 2011.
Mayor Schultz opened the public hearing and with no one present approached the Council. Frank made
a motion to continue the public hearing on September 15, 2011 as requested by Bond Counsel.
The motion was seconded by Schultz and passed unanimously.
Fire Truck Replacement: Fire Chief Jeff Taufen approached the Council to discuss the replacement of
the pumper truck. Previously the Fire Board requested each jurisdiction request authorization to move
forward with purchasing a replacement pumper truck with at an estimated cost of $534,000. The Fire
September 1, 2011
Page 5 of 6
Board received favorable responses from each entity so they authorized drafting of specifications for the
soliciting of competitive bids. The funding for the Fire truck includes $60,000 trade -in value for the
existing truck, $ 60,000 from the existing CIP and $ 20,000 from reserve funds. Therefore the Fire Board
is requesting the City issue ten year CIP bonds in the amount of $ 400,000 to finance the purchase.
Taufen stated that he was requested to look at used Fire Trucks to see if one would meet the needs of
the Fire Board. In researching Fire Truck Taufen stated that he searched Craigslist, Ebay and some
trade magazines. The trade magazines do list some used trucks; however, none of the trucks are in
Minnesota. Therefore, the cost of the truck would have to include traveling to the state in which the truck
is located and then there would be shipping to bring the truck back.
Taufen expressed frustration as he thought the Council had already moved to proceed with the purchase
of a new truck. It is his opinion that if the Council would rather purchase a used truck, the Fire Board
would be better served by keeping the existing truck as you know what problems the truck has.
Schultz stated that he is not opposed to purchasing a fire truck; however, the comments expressed at the
public hearing regarding the proposed tax impact of the Park Terrace project is an indication that the
taxpayers are looking to maintain or reduce costs not increase. Schultz stated he is asking departments
for due diligence when making purchases. Frank concurred with Schultz and stated that asking the Fire
Department to consider used vehicles is no difference than asking the public works department. The
public works department has saved considerable equipment costs by purchasing used trucks from Apple
Valley. Wick clarified that the Council only asked the Fire Department to see if any used trucks were
available and unless the Council intended to change the prior action authorizing the purchase, no action
is needed at this time.
2012 Preliminary Budget: Weyrens presented the Council with a summary of the proposed preliminary
budget for 2012. She stated that it is difficult to determine the impact due to the Legislative changes to
Market Value Credit. The impact will vary between residential and commercial. The proposed budget
indicates a negative impact to homes valued under $ 250,000 but a positive impact to homes over that
value and to businesses. The proposed budget does include $6,000 for addition park related activities
and the memberships remained as they are for 2011. The budget also included joint powers agreements
to include Human Rights and Gang Strike Police Officer. Since Tri -Cap will not have funding for 2012,
busing services are not included. Wick questioned the status on the update for Human Rights activities to
which Weyrens stated she would contact the office and report at the next meeting.
Weyrens questioned if the Council had additional items they would like to include in the proposed budget.
Loso stated that he would like to see the City start funding the St. Joseph Historical Society. Currently
the City does nothing to support them. Frank disagreed with Loso and clarified that the City does provide
the building and pays for the building expenses. Loso withdrew his request.
Schultz stated that he would like staff to bring back the budget at the next meeting along with requests for
memberships that the Council has received to include the Partnership. Symanietz stated that the City
has prepared a list of all membership currently paid and that information should be included for the next
meeting as well. Schultz made a motion to table action on the proposed budget until September
15, 2011; seconded by Symanietz and passed unanimously.
Street Closure Requests: Weyrens reported that the Police Department and Administration have been
receiving requests to close roads for neighborhood parties. While the City encourages and welcomes
neighborhood interaction, a policy needs to be established for closures. Police Chief Pete Jansky stated
that Cities such as Sartell have created an application for street closure and each request is considered
by the City Council and if approved, barricades are provided by the Public Works Department. Weyrens
questioned if the Council would like to approve each request or if the matter can be handled
administratively. Symanietz made a motion authorizing staff to administratively review and approve
street closure requests for neighborhood gatherings. The motion was seconded by Wick and
passed unanimously.
September 1, 2011
Page 6 of 6
UPDATES
Office Staffing: Weyrens reported that Sarah Bialke has submitted her resignation as Office Specialist
effective September 7, 2011. Weyrens stated that she has contacted an office staffing company to assist
with the placement. Loso stated that he does not feel the position should filled due to budget constraints
and may want to consider restructuring.
Meeting with Michelle Bachman Staff: Schultz reported that he will be meeting with Michelle Bachman's
staff to discuss current issues and avenues for which the office can be of assistance to the City.
Adjourn: Symanietz made a motion to adjourn at 10:00 PM; seconded by Wick and passed
unanimously.
d,
J -• a Y runs
A. ' strator
1