Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-08-09 - Council Minutes CITY OF CORCORAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING August 9, 2007 CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Call to Order The Corcoran City Council met on August 9, 2007, at city hall in Corcoran, Minnesota. Present were Mayor Guenthner, Councilor Grabowski, Councilor Roll Call Jacobs, Councilor Hudok and Councilor Thomas. Also present were Administrator Vergin, Engineer Vander Top, Planner Gartner, Public Works Director Meister, and Chief Gormley. Mayor Guenthner called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. AGENDA APPROVAL Agenda Approval A suggestion was made to create a new category for items to be added to the agenda that currently aren’t part of the agenda. This category could be added after reports and it can be labeled “Unscheduled Items.” This will enable the council to take care of business on the agenda first and then unscheduled items can be taken care of later in the meeting, if there is time. If there is an unscheduled item involving a threat to life or property and the council doesn’t tend to it, the council during the meeting, by motion can modify the agenda and say, “due to this impending issue I would like to consider moving Item 12 b – Unscheduled Items up into the agenda”. The concern is that currently items are getting added to the beginning of the agenda and scheduled business items are getting pushed back and are not getting dealt with. If anyone on the council receives advanced warning prior to the agenda deadline it can be submitted to Administrator Vergin to be added to the agenda. MOTION by Grabowski, seconded by Hudok, to approve the agenda with the following changes: move Item 8b to follow item 8e, add item 12a – handling of the mail and add item 12b – Rural Transportation Charge Voting Aye: Grabowski, Guenthner, Jacobs, Hudok, and Thomas (Motion carried 5:0) OPEN FORUM & ANNOUNCEMENTS Open Forum & Announcements: Ken Kluck a representative from the Elm Creek Watershed District explained that a presentation was done at their last meeting that described and showed pictures of the current condition of the creek. During the presentation a fact was brought up that only two cities in the Elm Creek Water Shed District have submitted their storm water run off plans. Mr. Kluck questioned what the status was for the city in submitting their plan to the Elm Creek Water Shed District. Mayor Guenthner answered that the city is working on storm water run off plan and the work plan is going to be discussed under Item 7b in tonight’s meeting. Scott Qualle of Waldron and Associates asked that he be allowed to address the council under agenda item 7.f., Select Firm for Building Inspection Services. The Mayor indicated he would allow it. Planning Business: PLANNING BUSINESS Kelly’s West Oaks Prelim Kelly’s West Oaks Preliminary, Resolution No. 2007-54 City planner Gartner was present to review the proposal of a 2 - lot subdivision on 35.33 acres. Lot 1 will consist of 10.98 acres and Lot 2 will consist of 22.98 acres. The property has a major wetland complex on the west side of it and this blocks all of the access between the northern and southern upland areas. The applicant can only gain access by Willow Drive to the proposed Lot 2. Page -1- CITY OF CORCORAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING August 9, 2007 A question was asked if the purpose of this lot division was to accommodate the applicant’s horse situation, or is he recommending the lot split to eventually sell the lot. City planner Garner answered that the applicant originally approached the City because he wanted to put up a horse barn. Since then the applicant has decided the best use of the property is development and he eventually will be moving to a more suitable area for his needs. The memo from the city planner stated that under the subtitle Density Calculation it states that one new home will be constructed on Lot 2 by someone other than the developer. But the resolution states under number five that zero building entitlements remain for future development on Lots 1 and 2. There should be one lot reserved for building and if he were to sell it for a home site, the resolution needs to be corrected to clarify that there would be zero building rights on one lot and one remaining on the other lot. It was questioned if there would be any building rights remaining on Lot 1. The city planner answered that existing buildings would remain on Lot 1. The resolution will need to be clarified and it can be done during the motion to approve the resolution. In the memo under the Park Dedication Requirements subtitle it is pursuant to the Comprehensive Plan that an “On Road Trail” is proposed for Horseshoe Trail. But due to the large amount of wetlands adjacent to the north side of Horseshoe Trail it is recommended that the trail be installed on the south side of the road in this area. A question was asked if the planner or the planning commission is familiar or aware of any topographical or easement issues that could create implications of this plan. Planner Gartner answered currently the city engineer is recommending a 80 foot roadway coming through there and just from a physical stand point, the way it sits right now, he is recommending the trail to be on the south side of the road because there is less wetlands in that general area. Whichever side the trail does get installed, the trail is intended to be part of the city right of way. The city doesn’t want to create a dilemma where a plat gets hung up because of the consideration of an entire trail course. If there is a degree of specificity in the park and the city is conscious of this when doing the trail comp plan then the city won’t inadvertently contradict that in some areas. The planner’s memo states that some items need to be clarified or added to the plans. It was questioned how many of the items should the city be requiring the applicant to have done, before putting the package together for review by the planning commission or council. There needs to be the right balance in getting the matter before the city, but also applying enough pressure to the applicant without having a lot of contingencies in the final. approval. The city planner answered that is a policy of the city. Most of the items listed are cosmetic items, which aren’t major issues. If there is an item that has a direct impact to the plan or layout of the plat then it should not be brought forward to the council for approval. It would be nice to avoid contiginency’s in the final approval and this also takes administrative pressure off of the staff to have to make judgment calls after council approval. Councilor Thomas expressed his thoughts about having the trail on the south side of the road instead of having the trail in the north side. Looking at the overall length of Horseshoe Trail and there being a lake to the south side of it, which is also a block or two west of the intersection, he would be more comfortable having the trail issue looked into more. The planner stated that in the future maybe it could be identified as a proposed trail for Horseshoe Trail within the public right of way and leave it at that. Then later make it a recommendation of which side of the road the trail should be on. The Mayor stated that the city doesn’t get specific Page -2- CITY OF CORCORAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING August 9, 2007 about the trail in the preliminary plat and that this item could be resolved at a later time. The planner stated that it doesn’t even need to be resolved because the construction of the trail isn’t being proposed and the trail will be part of the city’s right of away. The planner explained that the main question would be whether the city wants to at the time of the preliminary plat request conditional easement for trail purposes. The Mayor explained that it is irrelevant for this case because it is in road right of way and it would be different if the trail was going to be an off road trail through a wetland or natural feature that was unbuildable. MOTION Hudok, seconded by Grabowski to approve Resolution 2007-54 with the clarification to paragraph 5, identifying one building right remaining for Lot 2. It was noticed that there was a 100 foot wide lot right at the intersection of the northwest corner, the planner was questioned if that was part of his reasoning for not putting the trail there for the fact of having to carve that off of the side of the small house lot. The planner answered that it definitely has a bearing on his decision and there is always obstacles when it comes to construction. It was questioned if creating a 10-acre lot on the north side how much of it will exceed the limits of buildings etc. The planner answered the applicant has 30x80 barn on the site with one small shed, so there should be no problem. The Mayor added that a 30x80 on 10 acres does work. VOTE ON MOTION Voting Aye: Guenthner, Grabowski, Hudok, Jacobs and Thomas. (Motion carried 5:0) PARKS & TRAILS COMMISSION BUSINESS Parks & Trails Commission Mayor Guenthner explained that there was a request for consultant, Sherri Buss, to make a Woodland Ordinance Presentation. Request Consultant – Woodland Ordinance Councilor Grabowski questioned if the council is even going to consider the Presentation ordinance. He has spoke to some residents and the feedback he has been given is that this ordinance will only cause problems. His opinion would be to direct staff to say we aren’t interested in pursuing the ordinance at this time. The Mayor added that the input that he has received from the community is that it would be worthwhile. The purpose of this meeting was to get input from the community and the approach will be more of a town hall meeting so the community can say how they feel. Councilor Hudok’s opinion is to keep what is in place instead of creating another chapter of the ordinance. A meeting is fine to get public input, but as far as having a consultant attending the meeting isn’t needed. The park and trails commission have done a lot of work through out the years and he feels they have enough information to provide at this meeting to where having a consultant at this meeting would be premature. The council isn’t even certain at this point of what is going to be done with the ordinance. A town hall meeting is for getting input, and knowledgeable members of the commission can field and answer the questions from the community. Councilor Thomas stated that he would go for the recommendation of having the consultant at the meeting because having a little more expertise will help in answering questions or handling issues from the community. Councilor Jacobs explained that he saw Ms. Buss’s presentation and thought that some of the presentation was documented into city files. He believes that some of Page -3- CITY OF CORCORAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING August 9, 2007 the information is in the comp plan from 2003 and those pages could be copied and handed out during the meeting. He has also gotten negative feedback from residents regarding this. This feedback has been heighten due to the loss of trees on Highway 55 about 3 years ago and looking around there doesn’t seem to be too many residents getting rid of the woods. The Mayor stated that the council will pass on requesting Sherri Buss to attend the meeting. Unfinished Business UNFINISHED BUSINESS Minutes – legal Mayor Guenthner explained that there are seven items related to the minutes sufficiency including a discussion to speak about legal sufficiency of the minutes. The Mayor felt it might be efficient to combine all of the minute discussion to one item and consider them as item 7g. He also stated that it would be best to start the discussion with the legal sufficiency of the minutes and then move onto approval off the minutes. Mayor Guenthner added that also on the agenda is to discuss the Budget Workshop minutes from July 19, 2007. The council could consider discussing this item as 11a under the budget workshop report item. Councilor Thomas stated that it would be best to discuss it along with the other minutes. Restructure Agenda Items MOTION made by Thomas, seconded by Grabowski to change the order of items 7d, 9a, 9b, 9c, 9e, 9f, and 9g as new item 7g. Voting Aye: Grabowski, Guenthner, Jacobs, Hudok, and Thomas. (Motion carried 5:0) Shannon Lane Shannon Lane Bridge/Culvert Bridge/Culvert Mayor Guenthner explained that a memo was received from the City Engineer with information regarding the replacement of the Shannon Lane Bridge/Culvert. A letter was received from Tom Cossette, a resident of Shannon Lane with his suggestions for the bridge replacement. The Mayor expressed his feelings that the debate centers on the difference of $20,000 of City’s expense. The least expensive alternative to the city was roughly a $30,000 approach with the use of corrugated pipes solution with a shorter pipe approach. In his mind the determining fact was whether the $20,000 expense increase brought enough value for the increase in dollars. His conclusion is that the value is worth the increase and he would tend to favor the longer-term solution with the state participation. The Mayor stated that he has heard sufficient assurance that it is a fairly routine administrative approval if the city submits materials to the state. He added that he would be concerned with pursuing this approach with the state if there was a risk in not getting the money, at that point the city would delay the project. The city would have to presumably have to redo and pay for different engineering to go with the corrugate pipe or just hold the project off for another year and apply in the subsequent budget year for state funding. The terrible collapse of the 35W bridge might have a big impact on state funding and it is fair to wonder if there will me more state funding for bridge repairs. It might be in the best interest for the city to submit materials for state funding because the state most likely wont step back with bridges that have deficient ratings and there might be a lot of state money available for that type of infrastructure. The Mayor stated that he is in favor of the city doing the concrete box culvert. It was questioned why the city would be spending that much more money. Having received feedback from residents in that area and overall for aesthetic reasons and character of the neighborhood most of the residents want a culver instead of a Page -4- CITY OF CORCORAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING August 9, 2007 bridge. Because of the feedback from the residents that tend to flavor this way of thinking of doing the culvert. It was added that the area is prime for development and it might be wise for the developer in the future to deal with it at that time. The expensive approach would also be adequate for the neighborhood. It was questioned if the city could get assistance with the replacement option. The city engineer answered that the city would still have to go with the engineering design and would have to put the plans together, but he believed the city could get assistance. With the additional cost in engineering it puts the city in the same range, same cost as out of the pocket price with the concrete kind. If the city is going to go with that effort on spending those dollars then what is the rationale on going with the corrugated pipe. The construction limits and impacts will be the same. If the culvert is the same length, same width, the material is different; the construction impact is going to be very similar with regards to the same required trees to be removed and minimum slopes. The material is something that is being discussed with the issue of aesthetics and construction impacts. The recommendation from engineering would be to go with the higher durability material. If the city were to go with the replacement of the corrugated pipe can the pitch of the slopes on the side be resolved? With the width of the road the use of a guardrail for safety, what is the safe amount of surface needed for emergency vehicles to get through? The Mayor stated that if the city could say at the end of the day that the physical layout is sound from a maintenance and safety standpoint, he would be less concerned with it having a thirty or fifty year life span. The engineer answered that in his opinion regardless of material, the configuration is going to be the same. If the city uses a corrugated metal pipe it doesn’t enable the city to using a shorter pipe. It was talked about after the last meeting that the intent of the guard rails is to limit the length of the pipe, but from the engineering and maintenance perspective they would want to make sure that which ever option is chosen there needs to be adequate slopes and adequate width on top so there isn’t a need for guard rails, still working to minimize the length of the pipe. The engineer explained that even with option 0 of replacing the culvert with exactly what’s in place being the least expensive, the engineers feel this option isn’t feasible because it will be too steep. Option 1 and 2 are the same option with the same lengths, but the material is different. With design consideration such as putting in guard rails or changing the slope it can be done with either option 1 or 2. It was asked if option 1 and 2 are the same aesthetically with the only difference being Option 2 is made with concrete and the Option 1 is made with corrugated pipe. The engineer answered in the affirmative. The engineer is recommending a 22-foot top width of the road, which is similar to the roads that have been done in other cities. The only difference being the city would have a wider shoulder due to the slopes being a bit steeper than usual, but engineering chose to do that to minimize the length. The total width than would be 28 feet with a 2–1 slope. The length of the culvert is going to about 62–68 feet, regardless of if the city does it or a contractor does it. Given the length, tree removal, minimal construction and the width of the shoulders, there will be a change in the character and a change of appearance in that location. Currently you can't see that there is a culvert there because of all of the vegetation. It can be brought back to that stage, but it’s going to take time. The engineer noted that the manufacturing of the gage steel of the corrugated pipe isn’t the same as the pipe that is there currently, it is being made thinner. A question was raised if the aesthetic issues were mainly related to the vegetation Page -5- CITY OF CORCORAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING August 9, 2007 of the area or the width of the road. The engineer answered that the concerns were mainly over the vegetation and removal of trees. The Mayor added that every time public works does something, there are always concerned residents because of the change in looks, but safety and longevity should trump over the looks of it. The vegetation will grow back eventually and it doesn’t take much for public works to pop some trees into the area. It was questioned if the Public Works Director would feel comfortable putting in a corrugated pipe in. The public works director answered honestly he would feel more comfortable putting in concrete, just because of the flow and things going through the creek. The city engineer explained that there isn’t any impending deadline and the design of the bridge doesn’t need to be authorized right now. But regardless of which approach is taken plans should be ready to go by the end of the year so the city can be added to the list for funding. The engineer expressed his concern with the underlying soil not being able to support a concrete pipe. He recommends doing some soil borings with some preliminary engineer work, to make a determination of the accuracy of the preliminary estimates. If piling is needed to be done to support the pipes it still would be eligible for state funding and the out of pocket cost for the city would not increase. If the city were to apply for state assistance under each alternative would the additional engineering cost qualify under both options as being reimbursable? The engineer answered that the engineering is a city cost. It was clarified that in order for the city to apply for state funding it is still necessary to have the engineering to submit, but the question is how much engineering is needed. The engineer answered it would be the same amount with either option. It was questioned if this would include the costs for the borings and soil sampling. The engineer answered in the affirmative and stated that it would be reasonable to anticipate 18 to 20% for total indirect costs for the level of the project. Based on the construction estimate it equates to about $31,000 and $3,100 of that is for soil borings. It was asked if the soil testing determines that piers would be necessary to support the concrete pipe would that increase the over all construction costs and possibly the city’s out of pocket cost. The city engineer answered that it would not necessarily increase the city’s cost. But the engineer added that he wants the council to be aware of this so there isn’t the impression of unknown costs being added. Councilor Jacobs explained that he is reluctant to go against the neighborhood’s need to have the image that they currently have, knowing that vegetation will grow back but there is a bit of a wait for trees to grow back and the trees that are there now are pretty big. This raised an issue in the past where the state had cut some pine trees down on a right away on the state highway north of Brainerd. At the time it made great engineering sense but since then they have looked at it and realized they could of lived with the trees. Jacobs explained that he doesn’t see why the city can’t live with a narrower bridge structure, if that fits the footprint of the site. That will require some change with some standardized engineering, but he believes that is what the neighborhood would like. The city engineer added that the minimum of the width of the road would be 20 feet to maintain a fire access. With a guardrail on either side there would need to be another foot on each side, so there would be a top width of 22 feet. But given the recommendation for 2 - 1 side slopes the engineer will not reduce the recommendation. From a stabilizing standpoint it will be difficult enough re-vegetating and stabilizing a 2 - 1 slope with Page -6- CITY OF CORCORAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING August 9, 2007 an approximate 10-foot drop. Shannon Lane Bridge – Replace with Option 1- MOTION made by Grabowski, seconded by Hudok to authorize replacing the Design & Details to be Shannon Lane Bridge culvert and pursue Option 1 with details and designs to be present to Council at a done by the City Engineer and presented at a later date. Voting Aye: Grabowski, later date Jacobs, Hudok, and Thomas. Voting Nay: Guenthner (Motion carried 4:1) Met Council Grant Work Plan & Budget Met Council Grant The city engineer explained that the scope of work needs to be done and there is grant money available to help with the financing. Administrator Vergin added that the council has already approved the resolution and the resolution was sent into Met Council with a note stating the plans were tentative and could possibly change. The city engineer described the work being broken into two different categories the policy track and the technical track. Based on past discussions and issues it is recommended that the council really spend time on the policy track. This is required to be done as part of the comprehensive planning. It was asked if the issues that would be discussed are related to the general drainage in the city. The city engineer answered that a policy needs to be put together and the have to meet the statutory requirements that are compatible with watershed plans and meet the Metropolitan Council requirements. The plan can be customized to which ever way the council would like to go. MOTION made by Grabowski, seconded by Thomas to approve the Met Council Work Plan, tasks 1, 2 and 3. Voting Aye: Grabowski, Guenthner, Jacobs, Hudok, and Thomas. (Motion carried 5-0) 2008 Assessing Services 2008 Assessing Services Councilor Jacobs explained that he spoke to Hennepin County Assessor Tom May th on the 25 of July, and the reason he wasn’t sure if he was able to take the city on right a way was due to an emergency in another city where an assessor has died. Because of the death they are taking in a lot of other work. They are working on hiring more assessors and that it would not impossible to have a start date in August. The Mayor explained that an alterative is to continue with the current assessor until the valuations are certified and then during the budget process consider switching over to the county. The options are for the city are: a) to maintain the current vendor and pay $46,464 with processing and having the local board of review stay the same, b) the city could hire the Hennepin County Assessor and still have the local board of review but pay approximately $50,000 or c) the city could keep an open book process for approximately $50,000 but at that point the city looses control of setting valuations. It was asked if the quote of $46,464 was for 2007 or 2008. Administrator Vergin answered that the contract is October 1, 2007 thru September 30, 2008 but they like to start assessing right after the board of review that is held in April. MOTION made by Grabowski, seconded by Thomas to retain the existing assessor for the 2008 services and address this further during the budget review. Voting Aye: Grabowski, Guenthner, Jacobs, Hudok, and Thomas. (Motion carried 5-0) Parks Commission Interview Process Park Commission Page -7- CITY OF CORCORAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING August 9, 2007 Mayor Guenthner summarized what happened during the parks facility complex Interview Process interview process. The firms provided a 10-minute overview about their firms, followed by questions from the commission. The commission was going to review their notes and discuss their recommendation at their next meeting, and following that the Parks Commission will make a presentation to the council. Select Firm for Building Inspection Services Building Inspection Services Scott Qualle, President and Building Official, of Waldron & Associate thanked the Mayor and council for giving him the opportunity to speak and for also for the opportunity giving a bid for the building inspection services for the city. He presented to the council why Waldron & Associates is considered a full service company. He also explained that the city would generate additional revenue if Waldron & Associate were chosen. Currently the electrical is being handled by the state, but with their firm the city would get the revenue for the electrical inspections and also the fees. In addition the state electrical inspector doesn’t make sure there are permits pulled for the jobs, and his company has a process and can be sure that things are done correctly and all permits are being pulled which will create more permit revenue due to enforcement. MOTION made by Grabowski, seconded by Hudok to recommend Waldron & Associate for building inspection services. Councilor Thomas raised discussion on a letter that was received from Haugin Law Office in regards to the process the city took in choosing a building inspection service and a conflict of interest. Administrator Vergin clarified that the City Attorney has received a copy of the letter and he has no concerns about the letter from Haugan Law Office. VOTE ON MOTION: Voting Aye: Grabowski, Guenthner, Jacobs and Hudok. Voting Nay: Thomas (Motion carried 4-1) Councilor Thomas noted he was voting nay because he feels the change wasn’t necessary. Minutes – Legal Sufficiency, Councilor Jacobs Minutes – Legal A discussion was started about how much narrative the minutes should contain. Sufficiency The minutes should contain the legal action that is taken at a meeting such as motions and votes. Procedural items such as calling to order, quorums and adjournments also should be in the minutes. The Mayor and councilors want to enhance what the minute’s reports them saying during the meeting and it ends up being a very long process in getting the minutes approved. There was discussion of the importance of accuracy in the minutes and what needs to be done to make sure the minutes are accurate. The minutes need to reflect what was said or done during a meeting so a third party that reads the minutes knows the topics and exactly what was discussed at the meeting. Corrections to the minutes shouldn’t be correcting of what someone else said at the meeting, if there is a correction to a statement needed than the person stating the original comment should be the one to request the correction. The minutes should contain accurate and complete information. The minutes should speak the substance of what was being talked about at the meeting with conclusions drawn of being for or against items without showing attribution to anyone. A suggestion was made that the approved minutes be published on the city web page. \[Minutes, once approved, are posted to the city’s web site.\] Page -8- CITY OF CORCORAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING August 9, 2007 June 14, 2007 Regular Council Minutes 6/14/07 Council Minutes MOTION made by Grabowski, seconded Hudok to modify, page 4, paragraph 8 to include “Jacobs asked why the City Engineer did not bring the City’s Planner into this meeting with the County. Vander Top stated he did not do so. Voting Aye: Grabowski, Jacobs, and Hudok. Voting Nay: Guenthner and Thomas (Motion carried 3:2) MOTION made by Jacobs, seconded by Grabowski to modify page 5, paragraph 2 to add “Jacobs asked Alcon if the term “within capacity” did he indicate the level of service rating (A, B, C, D, or E)? Alcon did not answer, Vander Top said the roads would have heavy traffic and would be “within capacity.” Voting Aye: Grabowski, Jacobs, and Hudok Voting Nay: Guenthner and Thomas (Motion carried 3:2) MOTION made by Hudok, seconded by Grabowski to modify page 5, paragraph 4 to add, “Alcon said one idea would be a light at County Road 10 and County Road 50.” Voting Aye: Grabowski, Jacobs, and Hudok.. Voting Nay: Guenthner and Thomas. (Motion carried 3:2) MOTION made by Thomas, seconded by Grabowski to modify page 6, paragraph 4 to add the word “plus” between year and if and to add the words “an additional” between needs and $1M. Voting Aye: Grabowski, Guenthner, Jacobs, Hudok and Thomas. (Motion carried 5:0) Council passed by consensus to add the word “Status” to the end of the title “Laurent Hedgestone Project.” MOTION made by Jacobs, seconded by Hudok to modify page 6, to add under the title, Laurent Hedgestone Project Status, the following sentence, “Administrator Vergin reported the unpaid portion of the Laurent Hedgestone escrow was $38,000 and that there now was an additional service charge of $5,500.” Voting Aye: Grabowski, Jacobs, Hudok and Thomas. Voting Nay: Guenthner (Motion carried 4:1) MOTION made by Hudok, seconded by Grabowski to modify the end of page 6 and top of page 7 to add “Thomas said he would back the motion only if the developer speaks to the Council first. He also stated that he agreed the developer has forfeited the extension, and that legal action is costly but he will support it. Grabowski stated that his perspective is that the Laurent President was here and stst said they will pay before June 1. They should have contacted us before June 1. Jacobs stated that the Planner since February has had no calls from this developer so there is a question if there was a good intention to pay.” MOTION TO AMEND by Grabowski, seconded by Hudok to modify the end of page 6 and top of page 7 to add “Thomas said he would back the motion only if the developer speaks to the Council first. He also stated that he agreed the developer has forfeited the extension, and that legal action is costly but he will support it. Grabowski stated that his perspective is that the Vice President was here and said stst they will pay before June 1. They should have contacted us before June 1. Jacobs stated that the Planner since February has had no calls from this developer so there is a question if there was a good intention to pay.” There was discussion about attributions and whether a statement was made during the meeting or not and whether it should be added to the minutes. Page -9- CITY OF CORCORAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING August 9, 2007 A suggestion was made that the last four sets of minutes be redone with the “less is better approach” and then resubmits for approval. It was suggested that the city attorney be consulted about how long the city should retain the audiotapes of the council meetings after the minutes have been approved. Councilor Jacobs voluntarily withdrew his two sentences with attribution to Councilor Thomas’s statement on page 6 and 7 of the minutes. MOTION AS AMENDED by Grabowski, seconded by Hudok to modify the end of page 6 and top of page 7 to delete “Thomas said he would back the motion only if the developer speaks to the Council first. He also stated that he agreed the developer has forfeited the extension, and that legal action is costly but he will support it. To add “Grabowski stated that his perspective is that the Vice President st was here and said they will pay before June 1.” And to add “Jacobs stated that the Planner since February has had no calls from this developer so there is a question if there was a good intention to pay.” Voting Aye: Grabowski, Jacobs, and Hudok. Voting Nay: Guenthner and Thomas (Motion Carried 3:2) MOTION made by Grabowski, seconded by Hudok to modify page 7, the motion by Councilor Grabowski to read “Motion to amend by Grabowski, seconded by Thomas to direct the City Attorney to proceed under his advisement the best possible means of recovery of the money owed from Laurent Development whether it be a letter of intent or whatever is best.” Voting Aye: Grabowski, Guenthner, Jacobs, Hudok and Thomas (Motion carried 5:0) MOTION made by Hudok, seconded by Grabowski to modify page 7 and accept the following addition “Mayor stated the City Attorney could go either way, say a 10-day demand letter”. Voting Aye: Jacobs and Hudok. Voting Nay: Grabowski Guenthner and Thomas. (Motion failed 2:3) MOTION made by Thomas, seconded by Hudok to approve the June 14, 2007 minutes as modified incrementally by motions. Voting Aye: Grabowski, Jacobs, and Hudok. Voting Nay: Guenthner and Thomas. (Motion carried 3:2) 06/28/2007 Council Minutes June 28, 2007 Regular Council Minutes Modification of eliminating first names and fixing of a typing error on page 1 was accepted by consensus. MOTION made by Guenthner, seconded by Grabowski to modify page 2, paragraph 1 to add “and short term disability” between insurance and for, to change Carrie to Ms. Theisen and to add “employment data” to end of the paragraph. Voting Aye: Grabowski, Guenthner, Jacobs, Hudok and Thomas (Motion carried 5:0) MOTION made by Grabowski, seconded by Jacobs to modify page 2, paragraph 2 to eliminate the words “After some” and “regarding”, add “include the” between members and existing and add “and” between trails, and access. Voting Aye: Grabowski, Guenthner, Jacobs, Hudok and Thomas (Motion carried 5:0) Modification of change of the dollar sign to the word indebtedness under the Page -10- CITY OF CORCORAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING August 9, 2007 heading Laurent Development Status accepted by consensus. Modification to page 2 of eliminating first names is accepted by consensus. MOTION made by Hudok, seconded by Jacobs to strike out the following paragraph on the bottom of page 2: “Councilor Hudok stated he understands his position but questioned why he is asking for extension after already being denied at last meeting and has made no attempt to pay and that its insulting to the City.” And to add the additional changes requested from Councilor Hudok. Voting Aye: Grabowski, Jacobs, and Hudok.. Voting Nay: Guenthner and Thomas (Motion Carried 3:2) Modification to page 3 of eliminating of a first name is accepted by consensus. MOTION made by Thomas, seconded by Guenthner that the modification from Councilor Jacobs on page 3 attributed to Councilor Grabowski in regards to the plat being expired be stricken. Voting Aye: Grabowski, Guenthner and Thomas. Voting Nay: Hudok and Jacobs. (Motion carried 3:2) MOTION made by Jacobs, seconded by Grabowski to modify page 3, in the paragraph starting with Terry to read as follows: “Terry replied there was communication with the City by e-mail and phone calls to our staff. City Staff was diligent in doing their job and he would like to retain the PUD for the City’s sake for future city development. He said a $40,000 charge on a $50,000,000 project debt is small. He said he will pay but just can’t right now. He stated he knows discussion with our staff did occur, if not to the Council.” Voting Aye: Grabowski, Jacobs, and Hudok. Voting Nay: Guenthner and Thomas. (Motion carried 3:2) Guenthner noted that he won’t approve third party attributions. Modification of changing Councilor Thomas to Councilor Jacobs on the bottom of page 3 is accepted by consensus. Modification of eliminating first names on top of page 4, second paragraph is accepted by consensus. Modification of changing the word Council to Councilor, changing the dollar sign to the word debt and adding the heading of Escrow Fund Activity on page 4 is accepted by consensus. Councilor Jacobs raised a question of why part of his statements were being stricken. Mayor Guenthner answered he was striking it because it seemed inflammatory. Mayor Guenthner voluntarily withdrew his modification to strike that out. MOTION made by Thomas, seconded by Grabowski to modify page 4, to add the words “to over $40,000” in the first paragraph under Escrow Fund Activity. Voting Aye: Grabowski, Hudok, and Jacobs. Voting Nay: Guenthner and Thomas (Motion carried 3:2) MOTION made by Thomas, seconded by Hudok to accept the additional modifications by Administrator Vergin made to page 4, first paragraph under the heading Escrow Fund Activity. Voting Aye: Grabowski, Guenthner, Hudok Jacobs and Thomas (Motion carried 5:0) MOTION made by Thomas, seconded by Grabowski to accept the modifications to page 4, paragraph under the heading Corcoran Business Park. Voting Aye: Grabowski, Guenthner, Hudok Jacobs and Thomas (Motion carried 5:0) Page -11- CITY OF CORCORAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING August 9, 2007 Modification of adding the subtitle “Petition Process” and “Area Charges” under the heading Pavement Management Matters accepted by consensus. Council Thomas voluntarily withdraws his modification to page 4 in regards to a definitive opinion. Modification to page 5 in regards to a vote clarification was accepted by consensus. MOTION made by Guenthner, seconded by Grabowski to modify page 5, paragraph under Planning Consultant Appointment to change “Council” to “Councilor”, to change “legal documents” to “ordinances” and to change “the city” to “a city.” Voting Aye: Grabowski, Guenthner, Hudok Jacobs and Thomas (Motion carried 5:0) MOTION made by Grabowski, seconded by Hudok to accept the modifications of shifting Councilor Jacobs statements two sentences down in the paragraph under the heading “Planning Consultant Appointment” Voting Aye: Grabowski, Hudok, and Jacobs Voting Nay: Guenthner and Thomas (Motion carried 3:2) Modification to vote on motion on page 5 accepted by consensus. Modification to vote count on page 5 accepted by consensus. MOTION made by Grabowski, seconded by Thomas, to accept the modification to the first paragraph on page 6 and include “..in 90 days and whether to …”. Voting Aye: Grabowski, Guenthner, Hudok, Jacobs and Thomas (Motion carried 5:0) Modification of clerical errors to page 6 accepted by consensus. MOTION made by Grabowski, seconded by Hudok to approve the July 28, 2007 minutes as modified incrementally by motions. Voting Aye: Grabowski, Jacobs, and Hudok. Voting Nay: Guenthner and Thomas. (Motion carried 3:2) 07/12/2007 Council Minutes July 12, 2007 Regular Council Minutes MOTION made by Grabowski, seconded by Hudok to modify page 4, second paragraph, first sentence to read, “Mayor Guenthner stated that the City should be asked through a referendum whether the public wants to borrow to improve these roads.” Voting Aye: Grabowski, Guenthner, Jacobs, Hudok and Thomas (Motion carried 5:0) Modification to page 4, correcting comments from Jacobs, are accepted by consensus. MOTION made by Grabowski, seconded by Hudok to modify page 3 and add “Councilor Jacobs felt that this information would be useful for budgeting purposes and future planning”, under the heading Consultant Services Revenues. Voting Aye: Grabowski, Guenthner, Jacobs, Hudok and Thomas (Motion carried 5:0) MOTION made by Grabowski, seconded by Hudok to modify page 5 to add discussion on the motion. Voting Aye: Grabowski, Guenthner, Jacobs, Hudok and Thomas (Motion carried 5:0) Modification to page 6 adding comments made by Councilor Hudok are accepted by consensus. Modification to page 7 adding comments made by Councilor Hudok are accepted Page -12- CITY OF CORCORAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING August 9, 2007 by consensus. Modification to page 10, adding to a sentence in paragraph 1 are accepted by consensus. MOTION made by Grabowski, seconded by Thomas to approve the July 12, 2007 minutes as modified incrementally by motions. Voting Aye: Guenthner, Grabowski, Jacobs, Hudok and Thomas. (Motion carried 5:0) July 26, 2007 Hwy 55 Corridor Workshop Minutes 07/26/2007 Hwy 55 Corridor Wkshp Minutes MOTION made by Grabowski, seconded by Thomas to approve July 26, 2007 Highway 55 Corridor Workshop Minutes. Voting Aye: Guenthner, Grabowski, Jacobs, Hudok and Thomas. (Motion carried 5:0) July 26, 2007 Council Minutes 07/26/2007 Council thnd Modification to page 17, 4 paragraph and 2 sentence to add the words “city Minutes wide” between have and fees, was accepted by consensus. th The modification to page 14, 4 paragraph correcting a typing error changing “extended” to “extending” was accepted by consensus, MOTION made by Grabowski, seconded by Hudok to approve the July 26, 2007 minutes. Voting Aye: Grabowski, Jacobs, and Hudok. Voting Nay: Guenthner and Thomas (Motion carried 3:2) Mayor Guenthner and Councilor Thomas noted that they are voting Nay to approving these minutes because they disagree with the length of the minutes. MOTION made by Grabowski, seconded by Thomas to table Item 8b – Council Conduct, Item 8e – Tools of Civility, Resolution no. 2007-56 and Item 9e - July 19, 2007 Budget Workshop Minutes to the next meeting. Voting Aye: Guenthner, Grabowski, Jacobs, Hudok and Thomas. (Motion carried 5:0) NEW BUSINESS New Business: Emails from Residents in SW District – Request for Infrastructure SW District Request Mayor Guenthner explained that emails have been received from residents in the SW district, requesting infrastructure in that area. The request can be acknowledged but it is conditional on services arriving and at that time it can be handled as a normal request and consideration. The assumption is that they are asking the city to add the services in and then wait for a developer to come in. Currently the city adds the services in when area is developed. The staff was directed to send a message to the residents making them aware that the city is working with Medina regarding extensions to the United Property project. Once that has been accomplished then this can be brought up for discussion again. Public Use Conveyance of Outlot A – Lake Jubert, Resolution No. 2007-55 Conveyance of Outlot A Mayor Guenthner explained that this is a procedure in which the city directs the – Resolution No. 2007-55 county to make the conveyance of a tax-forfeited property to the city for public purpose. MOTION made by Grabowski, seconded by Hudok to approve Resolution No. 2007 – 55, conveying Outlot A of Lake Jubert Estates to the City of Corcoran for Page -13- CITY OF CORCORAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING August 9, 2007 public purpose. Voting Aye: Guenthner, Grabowski, Jacobs, Hudok and Thomas. (Motion carried 5:0) MOTION made by Hudok, seconded by Thomas to modify the agenda to move item 12b – Rural Transportation Charge up in the agenda. There was discussion about the lack of urgency of this item. Voted Aye: Hudok and Jacobs Voted Nay: Guenthner, Grabowski, and Thomas (Motion failed 2:3) Emergency Management Emergency Management Memorandum of Understanding/Ordinance Memorandum of Chief Gormley explained that there were four emergency management groups Understanding within Hennepin County which are now being consolidated into three. This will not impact the way of doing business, but does require the City to sign a Memorandum of Understanding and modify the city’s municipal code. Administrator Vergin, Attorney Langel and Chief Gormley have reviewed this and recommend approval of the Memorandum at this time, at that the ordinance modification will come forward to the council at a later date. MOTION made by Grabowski, seconded by Hudok authorizing execution of the Memorandum of Understanding. Voting Aye: Guenthner, Grabowski, Jacobs, Hudok and Thomas. (Motion carried 5:0) Consent Agenda Items CONSENT AGENDA Approved: MOTION by Thomas, seconded by Hudok to approve the consent agenda items: City Website Gov Office 9.d. City Website Gov Office Fire Works Display 9.i. Fire Works Display Permit – Corcoran County Daze Call Budget Workshop 9.j. Call Budget Workshop, August 16 at 6:30 p.m. Hennepin Cty 9.l. Hennepin County Information Technology Contract, Res. No. 2007 –58 Information Contract 9.m. Police Reserves Golf Cart Purchase Police Reserves Golf Cart Purchase Voting Aye: Guenthner, Grabowski, Jacobs, Hudok and Thomas. (Motion carried 5:0) Charitable Gambling 9.h. Charitable Gambling License Maple Grove Lions, Res. No. 2007-57 License – Maple Grove It was questioned why the council is requested to approve the Maple Grove Lions Lions Charitable Gambling License without any documentation from the Corcoran Jaycees stating they are in agreement with Maple Grove Lions in sharing the space at Mama G’s. Mayor Guthener answered that he knows only by background that an agreement by which community organizations will operate pull tabs at an establishment is a contractual agreement between the bar and that club. It has nothing to do with the geographic location of the club. The issue is, what are the terms by which the city can grant licenses to extraterritorial clubs to operate in our city. It was suggested to table this discussion so a review can be done on the charitable gambling license policy. Administrator Vergin added that she believes that the only way the city can regulate this is by adopting an ordinance which had been discussed previously. MOTION made by Thomas, seconded Hudok to table discussion for further Page -14- CITY OF CORCORAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING August 9, 2007 review. Voting Aye: Guenthner, Grabowski, Jacobs, Hudok and Thomas. (Motion carried 5:0) 9.k. Termination of Civil Defense Contract Termination of Civil It was questioned who Mr. Rouillard is and what has he has been doing or is doing Defense Contract with the city until this change. The council was informed that the former police chief was responsible for creating this structure and at the time the cities were required to designate a responsible person for emergency management. At that time the city agreed to appoint Mr. Rouillard to coordinate emergencies on a need be basis. At this time our present police chief has been certified to perform this function for the city. MOTION made by Thomas, seconded by Grabowski to terminate the contract with Mr. Rouillard effective September 1, 2007. Voting Aye: Guenthner, Grabowski, Jacobs, Hudok and Thomas. (Motion carried 5:0) CLAIMS Approval of Claims Escrow Claims (Fund #500) $39.00 MOTION made by Grabowski, seconded by Thomas to approve the escrow claims as presented, totaling $39.00. Voting Aye: Guenthner, Grabowski, Jacobs, Hudok and Thomas. (Motion carried 5:0) Building Inspection Claims - None All Other Claims - $70, 249.76 MOTION by Grabowski, seconded by Hudok to approve all other claims as presented, totaling $70,249.76. Voting Aye: Guenthner, Grabowski, Jacobs, Hudok and Thomas. (Motion carried 5:0) COUNCIL AND STAFF REPORTS: Council & Staff Reports Budget Workshop Report, Admin Vergin Budget Workshop Administrator Vergin reported that the meeting was an overview of what each departments expectations are in moving forward with the budget process. The council was then asked to give their expectations. There was a discussion of goals and objectives for next year which provided staff some direction to proceed with the preparation of the budget for 2008. The next meeting will be August 16, 2007. United Properties Status Mayor Guenthner reported that he is collecting copies of contracts that the City of United Properties Status Plymouth has with Medina and Maple Grove with regards to extension services. Administrator Vergin has requested master agreements from Met Council by which Plymouth extended into Medina to see how that was handled. A letter has been drafted to go to Mayor Crosby that identifies our city’s concern. This draft will be going to Councilor Grabowski, Engineer Vander Top, and Administrator Vergin for their review. The letter will be copied to the department heads, Councilmember Johnson and the Mayor. A question was asked of how soon this letter could go out. The Mayor answered it will go out as soon as all the feed back and master agreement is received, it could be as early as next week. Page -15- CITY OF CORCORAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING August 9, 2007 PW Facility Committee – Open House on August 25 th Administrator Vergin reported that the open house has been delayed and will be PW Facility Committee rescheduled to sometime in late September or early October. City’s Server, Administrator Vergin Administrator Vergin reported that the past few months the staff has been City’s Server challenged by the existing server, which has made it necessary to move forward with the acquisition of a new server. MOTION by Thomas, seconded by Hudok to continue the meeting another 10 minutes. Voting Aye: Guenthner, Grabowski, Jacobs, Hudok and Thomas. (Motion carried 5:0) Planning Commission Planning Commission Councilmember Jacobs reported that there were two public hearings held at the last meeting. The first one was for a permit similar to a home occupation. This occupation would be working on corvette cars. There was a preliminary plat for classifying a development on County Road 19, north of the storage building. It was approved but there was discussion of lot sizes after the development is done. There was a presentation from the public works facility committee, the planning commission didn’t engage in the issues of the land use and voted to send the discussion and plan back to the public works facility committee for review. The Nichols home occupation was talked about at the meeting. There was a letter with attachments presented 5 minutes before the meeting. A question was asked how the council and commissioners can accept such documents only given 5 minutes before the meeting. Applicants have to have their materials in before a deadline, it was suggested that neighbors should have their material in before a deadline also. The Corcoran Wildlife Preserve plat was not acted on due to the lack of information. UNSCHEDULED ITEMS Unscheduled Items: Handling of mail Handling of mail Councilor Jacobs explained that he received a letter in his box that was in the envelope, unopened and stamped received on July 30, 2007. On March 9, 2006 the council directed staff to create a policy for staff to open the envelopes, date stamp the documents and decide if the documents should be public information. Mayor Guenthner reminded the staff to follow the policy. ADJOURNMENT Adjournment MOTION made by Grabowski, seconded by Hudok to adjourn, 10:10 pm. Voting Aye: Guenthner, Grabowski, Jacobs, Hudok and Thomas. (Motion carried 5:0) ______________________________ Barb Larson, City Clerk Page -16-