Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005 [01] Jan 06 I I I , , January 6, 2005 Page 1 öf4 I , I Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the City Council for the City of SI. Joseph met in regular session on Thursday, January 6, 2005 at 7:00 PM in the SI. Joseph City Hall. Members Present: Mayor Richard Carlbom, Councilors AI Rassier, Dale Wick, Ross Rieke, Renee Symanietz. City Administrator Judy Weyrans. City ReDresentatives Present: City Engineer Tracy Ekola, City Public Works Director Dick Taufen. Others Present: Jeff Milbert, Matt Milbert i ADD rove AQenda: Rassier made a motion to approve the agenda with the following changes: 7b Remove for discussion on January 20, 2005 The motion was seconded by Wick and passed unanimously. Consent AQenda: Rieke made a motion to approve the consent agenda as follows. a. Mayor Appointments - Accept the Mayor Appointments for 2005 as presented by Mayor Carlbom. b. FSA Plan Amendment - Authorize the Administrator to execute a plan amendment to include the COBRA Regulations issued May 26, 2004. I c. 2004 Audit - Authorize the Administrator to execute the Engagement letter between the City of St. Joseph and KDV to perform the 2004 audit. . d. Recreation Association - Authorize the Mayor and Administrator to execute the Park Property Lease for the period January 2005 through December 31, 2009. ' , Discussion: Rassier questioned the Mayor Appointment for the Emergency Services Director. I He was under the understanding that a Council Member would be appointed to that position. I Carlbom stated that he has asked the Fire Chief to ask for a Volunteer from the Fire Department to fill that vacancy. The motion was seconded by Rassier and passed unanimously. Public Comments to the AQenda: No one present wished to speak. Noise Ordinance. Request to Amend- Jeff Milbert: Weyrens stated that Jeff Milbert has requested to approach the Council to request an amendment to the Noise Ordinance. Weyrens stated that the request is the result of his son receiving a noise violation in November of 2004. At the time of the violation an' evidentiary hearing was not requested, therefore the Council determined a violation occurred and I assessed the landlord a fine in the amount of $ 150.00. In addition to the fine imposed by the City, the property owner, ASK Management, assessed a fine of $ 750.00. Milbert has expressed concern that 'the fine for noise violation is excessive and arbitrary. Weyrens stated that the fine assessed by the property manager cannot be considered by the Council. The only fine imposed by the City as a result of the noise violation is $ 150.00. ¡ , , . ¡ The request before the Council is to consider using a decibel meter reading to determine noise violations. In preparation for this meeting, Weyrens stated that she researched the use of decibel meters. Decibel meters are used to determine land use noise activity such as industrial and commercial noise. The Pollution Control Agency (PCA) has established a list of acceptable noise levels for such activity. However, noise violations are not listed because disturbance of peace can occur at many noise levels and is not purely objective. In addition to differing tolerance levels, using decibel meters requires ! considerable training and the equipment must be maintained and calibrated. Meter readings can also I vary depending on weather conditions and where the equipment is placed for the reading. January 6, 2005 Page 2 of 4 Weyrens stated that the current method used to determine noise violations has been effective. If noise can be heard of the property line, a noise violation has occurred. The Police Chief has contacted the I area Cities regarding noise violations and determined that noise complaints are being handled the same as in SI. Joseph. Jeff Milbert addressed the Council and stated that he feels the current process for noise violations is arbitrary and requested that a noise standard be established. Milbert stated his main concem is the compounding of fines and compared the noise violation to a speeding violation. It is the opinion of Milbert that the noise violation was minor and the fine of $ 1,000 appears to be exorbitant. The Council clarified that the City only imposed a fine of $ 150 any additional fines are outside of the Council control. Rassier stated it is his opinion that the speeding analogy is not similar to a noise violation and he does not believe that enforcement of the Noise Ordinance is arbitrary. The Ordinance is being applied equally throughout the City and either the noise can be heard of the property or it cannot. Therefore in his opinion the enforcement of the Noise Ordinance is not arbitrary. Rassier stated that landlords are compelled to have fines for noise violations to protect their rental license. The City has the ability to revoke or suspend a rental license upon multiple noise violations. Therefore typical lease in SI. Joseph include large tines for Ordinance violations. With regard to the fines imposed by the Council, Rassier stated that they are based on the severity of the violation and the cooperation with the Police Department. Rassier stated that the SI. Joseph Police Department does a good job at determining noise violations. Therefore he is not supportive of amending the Ordinance. Symanietz concurred with Rassier and stated that the Police Officers do a good job in enforcing the Ordinances. Rieke stated that the City has struggled with the issue for many years. In fact when he was on the Council in the 90's the CORE Committee was established. CORE consisted of long term residents, students, College/University administration and monastery representatives. The role of CORE was to increase relations between the long term residents and the students. CORE researched altemative I Ordinances and reviewed the Noise Ordinance and enforcement. The Ordinance has been working over the years and relations between the College and City have increased. Therefore, Rieke stated he is opposed to changing a process that is working. Rieke stated that the Council must balance the competing interests and Ordinances cannot be changed for one person or group of persons. Wick concurred with Rieke and clarified that the City only imposed a fine of $ 150.00, which is the minimum fine. Therefore, it is his opinion that the fine imposed was not excessive nor was it arbitrary. Carlbom discussed the noise violation process and stated that once the officer receives a complaint, they are required to verify the complaint. If they can hear noise from the property line, a noise violation is issued. With regard to tines imposed by the City, the Ordinance requires that the fine be assessed to the Property Owner, as the City issues a license to operate the rental unit. Sanctions are considered when licenses are renewed. Most often the landlords pass on the fines imposed by the Council to the tenants, again this is not a City issue. Carlbom stated that of the $ 1,000 fine received by the tenants, the City issued a total of $ 250.00 ($ 150.00 Council imposed fine and $ 100.00 Administrative Police Fine), the remaining balance was fined through the property manager. Carlbom encouraged tenants to review their lease before signing and negotiate the terms. After hearing the comments made by the Council, Milbert stated that he respects their opinions. however, he does not think it is fair for the Police to tine them as well as the Council. Carlbom explained that the fine from the Council is imposed on the Property Owner and they in turn pass that on to the tenant. Rieke concluded by stating that the best way to avoid these types of situations is to communicate with the neighbors. Abandoned Vehicle Ordinance: Weyrens reported that the City Attorney has had an opportunity to review the proposed amendment to the Abandoned Vehicle Ordinance as discussed at the January 3, 2005. At I that meeting the Council approved an amendment allowing for storage of a certain number of vehicles on the property that would be described as abandoned vehicles. Based on the letter from the City Attorney the proposed amendment is in contrast with Minnesota Statute. An Ordinance amendment can be more I I I '''·"'''-''',_~~'_''""~r.",...",."",,.-.,,;..·"_ I : January 6, 2005 Page 3 of4 stringent that State Statute but not less stringent. The proposed Ordinance Amendment is less stringent that MN Statute creating a potential liability for the City. : I Rieke made a motion to repeal the action from January 3, 2005 regarding the amended Aband0!1ed Vehicle Ordinance, nullifying the Ordinance Amendment. The motion was seconded by Wick arid passed unanimously. I ¡ Wick made a motion for Weyrens, City Attorney, Property Owner, and Mayor Carlbom to meet to discuss the issue. The motion was seconded by Rieke. ' Discussion: Wick questioned if meeting with the property owner would resolve the issue as thØ City cannot amend the Ordinance in the fashion requested by the property owner. JR would I either need to be licensed as a Junk Yard or fence the area storing the 'vehicles. With regard ~o a Junk Yard, the property is zoned R3 and Junk Yard is not a permitted use in R3 Zoning District. I Wick withdrew his motion. The Council agreed that the Administrator and Carlbom would meet with the property owner if he wishes to discuss this matter further. CITY ENGINEER REPORTS Well Field UDdate: City Engineer Tracy Ekola reported that the test wells have been installed at the future water filtration plant and progressing as anticipated. The preliminary reports indicate that there. s sufficient water and good quality. To assure that the area can accommodate multiple wells, Ekola I requested authorization to drill a second well. It is anticipated that the total cost of the test well project will be $ 45,000.00. Rassier made a motion authorizing the expenditure to drill a second test well at the future site of the water filtration plant. The motion was seconded by Rieke and passed unanimously. 2005 ImDrovement Schedule: Ekola reported that the City will be accepting bids for the 2005 Improvement Projects and the Council must establish the dates for the final assessment hearing. Weyrens clarified that the City will be conducting the final assessment hearing before the project is constructed to reduce financial risk. Weyrens requested that the Council establish the following hearing dates: February 8, 2005 February 10, 2005 Hill Street Cloverdale Wick made a motion adopting Resolution 2005-01 and 2005-02, Resolution For Hearing on Proposed Assessment. The motion was seconded by Symanietz and passed unanimously. MAYOR REPORTS Healthv Communitv PartnershiD: Carlbom reported that he attended the HCP monthly meeting where they discussed the 25m Anniversary of the Tour of Saints. In recognition of the anniversary, HCP will plan Sommerfest, a festival honoring the Anniversary. COUNCIL REPORTS RIEKE - No Report RASSIER - No Report WICK - No Report SYMANIETZ - No Report January 6, 2005 Page 4 of4 Adiourn: Wick made a motion to adjourn seconded by Rassier and passed unanimously. ~..dý~j Judy eyrens nistrator I I I