Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-04-22 Council Minutes CITY OF CORCORAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 22, 2004 1 The Corcoran City Council met on April 22, 2004 at City Hall in Corcoran, Minnesota. Present were Councilors Bucher, Gageby, Guenthner, Lymangood and Thomas. Also present were Administrator Vergin, Clerk Tillmann, Planner Lindahl, Police Chief Schutte, Public Works Director Meister, and Engineer Vander Top. Mayor Guenthner called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag. Volunteer Recognition The Council recognized City volunteers with the presentation of plaques. Mayor Guenthner stated that it was appropriate to recognize all of the City’s volunteers in a public setting because of the significant investment of time these individuals have made to the community. Good government is the backbone of a civil society, and our government is truly run by those that take the time to participate. Corcoran is fortunate to have so many committed individuals participating in City business through the Charter Commission, Home Occupation Commission, Parks and Trails Commission, Planning Commission, Wastewater Commission and as volunteers at City Hall. The following individuals were recognized: David Andersen Brent Anderson Thomas Anderson Virginia Anderson Craig Brolin Jim Bullert Stan Chastek Tom Cossette Gina Dorethy Kelly Dima Greg Ebert Doug Erickson David Gageby George Gmach LaVerne Hanson Joel Johnson Karen Johnson Mark Johnson Ken Kluck Gordy Koehler Loren Kohnen Charles LaBerge Gene Lau David Lieberman Brian Lother Jacque Lother Chuck Lymangood Karen Lymangood Chad Robran Diane Rodine Rod Snyder John Spaeth Dennis Stieg Steve Tillmans Diane Walli Mayor Guenthner added that the number of volunteers has considerably grown from a number of years ago, which is an excellent representation of the community and the involvement that people take to ensure that Corcoran remains a viable, thriving community. Agenda Approval MOTION by Bucher, seconded by Gageby, and carried unanimously to approve the agenda as presented. Open Forum There were no requests by the public to speak during open forum. Consent Agenda MOTION by Thomas, seconded by Bucher, and carried unanimously to Call to Order Roll Call Pledge of Allegiance Volunteer Recognition Agenda Approval Open Forum Consent Agenda Approval CITY OF CORCORAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 22, 2004 2 approve consent agenda items b through g, with the exception of item a, as follows: b. Approve the April 8, 2004 Regular Council Meeting Minutes as presented. c. Approve payment of the April 8, 2004 Claims, #4143 - 4180, in the amount of $120,420.20, as presented. d. Rescind the existing driveway agreement between the City of Corcoran and J. Phillips Construction for Lots, 1, 2, and 3, Block 1, Weinand Woods; and approve the Driveway Maintenance Agreement to bind current and subsequent owners of Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1, Weinand Woods, to various maintenance obligations, releasing J. Phillips Construction from obligations on the two lots that J. Phillips Construction no longer owns. e. Adopt Resolution #2004 – 25, appointing Phillip Gleason to fill the vacant Planning Commission Alternate position, effective immediately and expiring on December 31, 2004, as recommended by the Planning Commission. f. Adopt Resolution #2004 – 26, approving the topography waiver for platting of property at 6701 Pioneer Trail, as recommended by the Planning Commission, based on the finding of fact on file with the City Clerk’s Office. g. Adopt Resolution #2004 – 27, approving an exemption from the moratorium to allow the submittal of a preliminary and final plat application by Ken and Phyllis Doboszenski, as recommended by the Planning Commission, based on the findings of fact on file with the City Clerk’s Office. Consent Agenda Item 6.a. Discussion was held regarding consent agenda item 6.a. Minutes of March 23, 2004 Special Council meeting. The following changes were proposed: Page 4, last paragraph regarding Section 955 – Park Dedication Councilor Thomas reiterated his objection to taking land irrespective of the based on the market value of the property land, or taking a fee based on the market value of the property. Page 6, second paragraph regarding Section 955 – Park Dedication Councilor Thomas requested clarification regarding land acquisition versus collecting a per unit fee. Planner Lindahl advised that when a development is reviewed, the City should consider the acquisition dedication of land first, if a park is identified on the park plan in the development area. If not, then should consider cash-in-lieu of land. According to state statute, the City has the right to acquire land. Councilor Gageby added that parks are created through the acquisition of land, whether purchased or dedicated. The City has the option of also taking cash, or negotiating other options with the developer. Councilor Thomas reiterated his disapproval of taking land the requirement of the Consent Agenda Item 6.a. CITY OF CORCORAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 22, 2004 3 dedication of a fixed percentage of the land, irrespective of the market value of the land, or taking a fee based on the market value of the property. MOTION by Thomas, seconded by Bucher, and carried unanimously to approve consent agenda item a. March 23, 2004 Special Council Meeting Minutes, as modified. Audit Presentation – Steve MacDonald, Abdo, Eick & Meyers. LLP Steve MacDonald, City Auditor, Abdo, Eick, & Meyers, presented the 2003 City Audit Report and Management Letter. Advised the Council that in the past, the audit report contained a qualified opinion due to the exclusion of the City’s general fixed asset records. MacDonald reported that this year, the City’s general fixed asset records are included in the financial statements, so the Auditor is reporting an unqualified opinion regarding the City’s fiscal health. Discussed the segregation of duties due to the size of the City staff and reported that in the last year, staff has worked diligently to put policies in place to address the segregation of duties and other accounting functions. This note regarding the segregation of duties has been removed from the audit report because processes have been changed and internal controls have been put in place to ensure that accounting functions are well segregated. Discussed an appropriate level of fund balance. The City has actively worked over the past three years to increase the fund balance, making significant improvements to bring it to an appropriate level. Discussed preparation for GASB 34 reporting and MacDonald advised that much of the information has already been summarized. Councilor Lymangood requested that the report regarding Fund Balance compared to Budget (page 4) include budget v. actual figures for all revenues and expenditures for the last 5 years. Council agreed by unanimous consensus to accept the 2003 Audit Report as presented by Abdo, Eick & Meyers, LLP. Public Hearing – Dust Control Mayor Guenthner called the Dust Control Public Hearing to order at 7:27 p.m. Administrator Vergin reported that over the past several years, the City has been providing dust control to City residents. At the start of the program, it was strictly voluntary, and that program still exists for those not included in the organized dust control program. In 2000, the City organized a dust control program, providing dust control to 11 roads in the City. Since that time, the City has also subsidized the dust control program. This year there are 26 areas that will be provided with dust control. The City’s contribution is approximately $29,716, or 37% of the total cost of the application. Residents are assessed for the remainder. Vergin advised that if the Council approves the dust control assessments as presented, residents have until May 22, 2004 to pay the assessment in full without interest accruing. If paid after May 22, interest accrues at a rate of 4.5%, and if the assessment is not paid by November 1, it will be certified to the County Auditor and placed on property taxes to be paid in 2005. The County will charge a surcharge and additional interest. The following public comments were heard. Approve Consent Agenda Item 6.a. March 23, 2004 Minutes 2003 Audit Presentation Public Hearing – Dust Control CITY OF CORCORAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 22, 2004 4 Joel Sandstrom, 10643 Maple Lane – His neighborhood used to voluntarily pay for dust control and it would cost approximately $55. Now Maple Lane is part of the organized program, and with the City participation, they pay $60. Other communities have dust control considered as a tax and not an assessment, therefore it can be deducted on income taxes. Why is it considered an assessment in Corcoran? Ron Freund, 22472 Sunset Lane – The neighborhood is upset that last year the dust control didn’t go on until August. The timeline for application is a concern to residents. Gary Scharber, 7970 Strehler Road – Thank you for offering the program. It is beneficial to the residents. MOTION by Thomas, seconded by Bucher, and carried unanimously to close the public hearing at 7:35 p.m. and reconvene the regular Council Meeting. Public Works Director Meister addressed the concern regarding last year’s timeline. The City has to wait until road postings come off before gravel can be put down on the roads. Last year, there were roads that washed out due to heavy spring rains and those roads had to be repaired before the dust control applications. There was also a shortage of magnesium chloride and a railroad strike that delayed getting the product to the City for application. The first application went down on July 1 last year, and the seconded happened in August. This year, barring unforeseen circumstances, the first application should be done by June 15. Regarding the cost, the City goes out for bids for dust control every year, however, Dust Coating is the only vendor that has responded in past years. The price of material has actually gone down, but additional roads have been added that drives the cost up. Mayor Guenthner addressed the concern regarding having dust control as a tax through the general levy or as an assessment. Council must consider how much of the project should be financed by the entire city through general levy taxes as opposed to how many residents actually receive the benefit. There needs to be equity between those residents that have paid to have roads paved versus those that haven’t. Dust control is a compromise until all the roads in the City have been paved. Eventually it may be a general levy tax, but that decision has not been made. MOTION by Gageby, seconded by Thomas, and carried unanimously to adopt Resolution #2004 – 28, accepting the assessments for dust control in the City of Corcoran as presented. Charter Commission Report Chuck Lymangood, Charter Commission Chair, updated the Council on the Charter Commission’s response to a petition received regarding an amendment to the City Charter. The Corcoran Charter Commission met on April 12 to review the proposal received. There was no one present on behalf of the five Public Comment Close Public Hearing Adopt Dust Control Assessment Charter Commission Report CITY OF CORCORAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 22, 2004 5 electors and no data was received in support of the petition. The Charter Commission has returned the proposal to the CUT committee per direction of the City Attorney. Attorney Carson advised the Charter Commission, in a memorandum dated April 12, 2004, that State Statute governs Charter action regarding bonding and the comprehensive plan. The five electors were also invited to the next Charter Commission meeting, which will be held on June 21, 2004. Mayor Guenthner added that the City Council is financially responsible for the Charter Commission and a very small budget has been established for that Commission. The City Attorney was authorized to work with the Charter Commission regarding this petition because the members do not have sufficient expertise relating to the petition topic. Chair Lymangood added that he had requested that Attorney Carson account for his time separate from his regular duties as City Attorney in order to appropriately track expenses relating to Charter business. Public Hearing – Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Program and Bonding Mayor Guenthner called the CIP and Bonding Public Hearing to order at 7:49 p.m. Administrator Vergin provided an overview of the CIP program and need for bonding. The CIP is utilized to identify and prioritize expenditures of public funds, assuring sound financial decisions. The objectives of Corcoran’s CIP includes planning for capital maintenance and projects, providing a consistent investment in City equipment, facilities and infrastructure and preserving and expanding capital in a way that is sustainable and affordable to the Citizens of Corcoran. The 2004 – 2009 CIP is focused on the Police Department Facility Expansion and Equipment Certificates, which are used for the purpose of maintaining and replacing equipment for various City departments. Facility Committee Member George Gmach provided an overview of the proposed Police Department Facility Expansion project. The Facility Committee identified the following concerns related to the existing building: • Security and Safety of current police entrance • Housing of the North Ambulance Team in a temporary trailer • Inefficiencies of the current layout relating to office space, training areas and privacy and security of staff, visitors and detainees • Inefficient Heating and cooling system needing costly repairs. The committee looked at a number of factors before developing the expansion plan, including the current and future role of the Police Department, the impact of population growth on service demand, and expected responses to growing needs. The committee identified several options to increase the office space, including leasing space off-site, a lease purchase agreement, or building and owning the facility. Building and owning was seen as the least expensive solution and easily off set any temporary excess capacity costs. Public Hearing – CIP Program and Bonding CITY OF CORCORAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 22, 2004 6 Paul Donna, Northland Securities, advised that General Obligation Bonds can be repaid over a period of 10 years, and appears to be the most efficient way to finance a project such as this. The interest rate is less than four percent right now. If things proceed according to schedule, bonds would be issued around May 27, and funds would be available in mid-June. The following public comments were heard: Bill Halverstadt, 6420 Old Settlers Road – Requested clarification on the different types of General Obligation Bonds. Mr. Donna informed the Council and audience that there is only one type of GO Bond, with three methods of financing. There is Lease Revenue, which is not actually a bond, a General Obligation Capital Improvement Bond, which is proposed for this project, and a Bond issue, which is voted on by the general public. Bob Staplin, 6760 Olde Sturbridge Drive – Questioned what the Police Department currently does with detainees until they can be transported to the Hennepin County Jail. Gmach advised that at the present time, the interrogation room is also used to detain people temporarily until they are transported to the Jail. However, office staff work in close proximity to the interrogation room and safety is a concern. This project does not include holding cells for prisoners, however it does include adequate space for detention if necessary. Mr. Staplin added that he has done a great deal of work in city government and most big projects like this are usually put to a vote. The City is doubling its current indebtedness with this project. All citizens have a financial obligation to repay the bond. Would think that the Council would want citizens to vote. The facility plan is excellent. If residents were allowed to vote, more would participate. Questioned how much the Zoning Open House newsletter cost. Staff reported that it was $1800 for printing and postage was additional. Mr. Staplin continued that he feels that was inexpensive and improved communication. Do some good public relations for this excellent plan. Chad Robran, 19805 Olde Sturbridge Drive – Feels the plan, as presented is very good and likes that the building will retain similar rural characteristics as the remainder of City Hall. Questioned why the garage space will now be facing County Road 116, as opposed to being hidden from view like the current garage area. Gmach advised that the area in front of the garage will be landscaped in the future, but the landscaping is not included in this project. David Andersen, Principal, Andersen Group Architects, added that they are aware of the concern to hide the garage, so the garage was designed on a different plane as the rest of the building. It is set back from the front of the building and landscaping will be completed. They are hoping for some volunteer efforts with the landscaping to soften the visual effect. Mr. Robran added that he understood both points of view. People should be allowed to vote, however, you run the risk of putting power into the hands of people that are not educated about what they are voting on. Have to find a good balance. Public Comment Bill Halverstadt, 6420 Old Settlers Road Bob Staplin, 6760 Olde Sturbridge Drive Chad Robran, 19805 Olde Sturbridge Drive CITY OF CORCORAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 22, 2004 7 Gary Scharber, 7970 Strehler Road – Regarding the petition submitted to the Charter Commission to amend the Charter, the Corcoran United Taxpayers (CUT) is asking that citizens be allowed to vote on what Corcoran looks like. He expects the Council to respect this request. Another petition will be submitted next week regarding the bond issue. Citizens want an answer and the Council should allow this project to stand on its own merit. If it is a good project, it would pass a vote and a vote is justified. The City is using taxpayer dollars to pay for a project of this magnitude and creating more tax bur den on the community. The Charter is spending taxpayer money and getting little involvement. There are 6000 people in Corcoran and less than 100 came to the Zoning Open House. That is less than one percent. This is a bedroom community. People don’t have time to volunteer, come to meetings and get involved in city government. Give people the right to vote. Let the people decide. The Mayor’s message in the most recent city newsletter said that the issuance of bonds would automatically require a vote. The newsletter should be revised if this is not the case. Added that regarding the dust control hearing, he received a two-page letter from the City, but regarding a $500,000 project, he has not received any special mailing or information. People want to know more about what is happening in the City but don’t want to come to meetings. Mailing letters, flyers and surveys is not that expensive and should be done more. Everyone that signed the petition said that they would vote if there was a special election, but they won’t come to any meetings. Diane Sommer, 19795 Hunters Ridge – The Council will be receiving another petition next week. On the March 11, 2004 Meeting agenda, discussion was held regarding financing GO Bonds, which is subject to a referendum with a petition. The CUT did their homework. There were 2889 voters in the last election and 5% of those were needed on the petition, which is 145 signers. 321 people signed the petition. The people of Corcoran want a say, and most were happy to be asked if they wanted to vote. Residents don’t know that this project is even happening. Listen to what the people want. Council needs to listen to us. Dennis Stieg, 19320 Stieg Road – What would this mean to the City in the future if anything requiring a bond issuance is put to a vote? If a road needs to be paved, no one will want to pay for it except the residents that live on that particular road. If it something for the good of everyone in the city, being given the privilege to vote is understandable. Society today is focused on themselves and won’t look at what other people may need. Have to look at the broader good. The people of Corcoran already have a vote. The residents of the City elect the Council, and Council members can be voted in or out. We have to look at the future to ensure that what we do today won’t hinder us then. George Gmach added that the cost of the project is relatively small, and is a remodeling of current space and the addition of garage space. If this is delayed, the City will run the risk of higher construction costs. It is also very costly to run a special election. Interest rates are near historic lows and construction costs are starting to increase. This project should have been done last year. It Gary Scharber, 7970 Strehler Road Diane Sommer, 19795 Hunters Ridge Dennis Stieg, 19320 Stieg Road CITY OF CORCORAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 22, 2004 8 will have to be done eventually, because of the safety and space concerns of the current facility. The City Council and Facility Committee have been very conservative with this project. A delay would cause an increase in costs and may derail the project. Brent Anderson, 21100 – 93rd Avenue – The Crow River News is the City’s legal newspaper and an excellent source of what is happening in the City. It is an inexpensive way to get information to the public, much cheaper than sending mailings and flyers. However, only 22% of Corcoran residents currently subscribe to the City’s legal newspaper. Bill Halverstadt added that the Council has to understand what Ms. Sommer and Mr. Scharber said. According to State Statute, a GO CIP Bond automatically gives the voters a chance to submit a petition for a vote. An election needs to be called, and the Council should seriously look at doing so. The Council should honor the wishes of the 321 people that signed the petition. Don’t make the five electors go back out on the streets and get more signatures. Accept what has been submitted to the Charter Commission. Another petition will be presented to the City Council next week. This is “slam dunk” as far as what the law says. MOTION by Gageby, seconded by Thomas, and carried unanimously to close the CIP Program and Bonding Public Hearing at 8:42 p.m. and reconvene the regular Council Meeting. Mayor Guenthner addressed the distinction amongst GO Bonds and stated that his open letter to the community in the City Newsletter was not an attempt to mislead the public in anyway. Members of the audience responded that they did not interpret his statement in the newsletter as such. Guenthner continued that Council and the public need to be conscious of the formal operation of government. Rules and processes are vitally important. The City of Corcoran has two sources of governance with the City Council and the Charter Commission. The petition was addressed and managed according to the statutes that apply to both forms of government. Citizens have to proceed correctly and accurately through the Charter first, if that is the process. The petition went through the Charter Commission and the Charter responded as appropriate. Like the City, the public also has a responsibility to be accurate and focus on the issues at hand. If people are concerned with the facility expansion, then the petition should focus on the facility expansion. There was a reference in the petition to an $18 million project, which is not accurate. Guenthner added that the impression he is getting based on the public comments is that people think the project is a good one and definitely needed, but they want to chance to vote against it, because they have a right to. A GO CIP Bond is limited to certain types of uses, including this type of project. The Facility Committee has identified the needs, researched the project and developed a design that will serve the identified needs well into the future. Have we missed the mark? The City has issued debt for fleet maintenance, how is this different? Brent Anderson, 21100 – 93rd Avenue Bill Halverstadt, 6420 Old Settlers Road Close Public Hearing CITY OF CORCORAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 22, 2004 9 The Council’s role is an extension of the types of decisions each person makes to protect his or her family. Councilor Thomas added that in 2002, the City spent $305,000 on Capital Equipment and no one requested to be able to vote on that. Why is this different? If people are allowed to vote on every capital expenditure, people will vote their own personal interests and nothing will get accomplished. A GO CIP bond can go before the public for a vote if the Council chooses. The Council could have chosen to fund this as a Lease Revenue, but thought this was the least expensive and best way to proceed. If residents are against this project, than the petition should be specific to this project, not so general. The cost to average household, based on market value, for this bond issuance would be approximately $8 per $100,000 of market value. To say that the City is doubling its indebtedness is inflammatory and wrong. Was not in favor of the project at the start, but can see the clear benefits to the City. It is money well spent. Councilor Gageby stated that based on his experience in the construction industry, this project is small compared to anything else the city may do, such as sewer, water, roads, water towers, etc. To put the cost into perspective, the total amount of the expansion project is approximately 1/8 of what the City of Maple Grove spends on boulevard flowers. Keep the project in perspective. This is a benefit to the entire community and necessary because of safety concerns for staff. It is a significant cost savings to have the ambulance crew and the Hennepin County Sheriff’s Department at our facility. It cuts down significantly on response time. To try and replace those services at the City’s expense would be extreme. Gageby added that he was not in favor of the project at the beginning of the process, but now sees the value of it. It is important to have the ambulance crew and County Sheriff’s Department in close proximity when the Corcoran Police Department is not on duty. If we had to pay for the extra coverage from the Sheriff’s Department, it would cost more than the project itself. Having the Sheriff’s Department here allows us to have police coverage 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Money has been spent wisely and great progress has been made to improve service to residents. This project has been well studied and thought out by the Facility Committee. Councilor Lymangood added that the process followed with the petition accurately reflected the separation of powers between the Charter Commission and the City Council. The petition was addressed to the Charter, and the Charter attempted to have an interactive dialogue with the electors through the Commission meeting on April 12, 2004, but the electors chose not to attend the meeting. The Charter Commission, based on advice from the City Attorney, determined that what the electors were requesting was outside the boundaries of the Charter, and governed by State Statute. An appropriate time to express concerns about the budget or expenditures is during the Truth in Taxation hearing with the City Council in December every year. Reminded the Council that in December 2003, he stated that he took exception to taking on this project in 2004. Thanked the Council for allowing him to express his views and CITY OF CORCORAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 22, 2004 10 dissent. Feels that the timing is off and the City has too many other projects going on to take this on right now. Feels that the City is not thoroughly reviewing decisions and expenditures and needs to be more careful. The Comp Plan should be the first priority and he appreciates the Council’s willingness to consider alternate points of view. Councilor Bucher stated that this project has been in process for over 2 years. There are many merits, including increased security and safety for staff, corrections to the HVAC system, space for the North Ambulance Crew and Hennepin County Sheriff’s Department and a limited capacity storm shelter for City Hall staff, since there is no shelter in the facility as it is currently built. We need to focus on the long-term effect of the project. Mayor Guenthner added that he agreed with Councilor Lymangood regarding the timing of projects, which can sometimes be overwhelming. Appreciates Councilor Lymangood's honesty, but also feels that Council needs to take advantage of opportunities as they arise if it is beneficial to the City. Councilor Lymangood added that he feels it is easy to justify spending other people’s money and feels that it would be appropriate to review current spending to see where we are spending money that we shouldn’t be. When Council begins reviewing the budget in May or June, should discuss ways to reduce expenditures. Councilor Thomas added that he doesn’t feel it is easy to spend taxpayer money and has always acted on the conservative side. Agrees that it would be appropriate to review expenditures when developing the budget. MOTION by Gageby, seconded by Thomas, and carried to adopt Resolution #2004 – 29, approving the facility expansion project and plan, authorizing staff to carry out all aspects of said plan, including the negotiation and sale of capital improvement bonds in the maximum principal amount of $350,000, in order to finance the capital improvements identified in the Plan. Roll call: Bucher, aye; Gageby, aye; Guenthner, aye; Lymangood, naye;; Thomas, aye. Motion carried. Mayor Guenthner called a recess at 9:16 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 9:23 p.m. Unfinished Business There was no unfinished business for consideration. New Business There was no new business for consideration. Council and Staff Reports County Road 116 Intersection Surveying Administrator Vergin advised that Hennepin County survey crews have staked existing right-of-ways of certain intersections along County Road 116 to look at potential layouts at the following intersections: County Roads 116 and 10, County Roads 116 and 30 and County Roads 10 and 30. Temporary signals will be installed at these locations and the City will not be expected to contribute to the costs. Information will be forwarded to the Council by staff as it is received. Adopt Resolution #2004 – 29 Recess Unfinished Business New Business Council and Staff Reports County Road 116 Surveying CITY OF CORCORAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 22, 2004 11 Police Department Report Police Chief Schutte highlighted the following concern in the April Police Department report. A complaint had been received regarding loud exhaust and Jake braking at the intersection of County Road 30 and County Road 19. Vehicles were identified and given verbal and written warnings. Council requested that the Police Department contact Hennepin County about putting up a sign in the vicinity regarding Jake braking. City Police Officers are not in service at the time the offenses had occurred. Council suggested forwarding information regarding the complaints to the Hennepin County Sheriff’s Department and Commissioner Steele, or possibly reallocate resources so officers are on duty earlier in the day. Also suggested a letter to the complainant regarding appropriate course of action or contact information if City Police Officers are not on duty. On May 18, 2004, a meeting will be held at Maple Hills Estates with CEO Reger, Chief Schutte and a mediator from North Hennepin Mediation services to resident concerns. NW League of Municipalities Meeting Report Councilor Gageby was unable to attend, but gave information to the group regarding Corcoran’s current events and issues that are being addressed. Councilor Lymangood expressed his concern with the meeting format, which includes dinner, and added that he would like to attend the meeting portion only, which begins at 7 p.m. Councilor Lymangood will contact Gary Eitel to address his questions regarding meeting agenda order. Administrator Performance Evaluation Mayor Guenthner requested that all Councilor’s complete the performance evaluation form for Administrator Vergin and return to him by April 30. The next Council meeting will include a closed session to discuss the evaluation. MOTION by Bucher, seconded by Lymangood, and carried unanimously to adjourn the meeting at 9:36 p.m. _______________________________ Kary Tillmann, City Clerk/Treasurer Police Department Report NW League of Municipalities City Administrator Performance Evaluation Adjournment