HomeMy WebLinkAbout08.21.89 Council Packet AGENDA
COUNCIL MEETING
REGULAR
AUGUST 21, 1989
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. APPROVE AGENDA
3. APPROVE MINUTES
a. August 7, 1989
4. CITIZENS COMMENTS
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS
a. 7:15 P.M. - Preliminary Plat of the Replat of Lots 1-10, Block 18
b. 7:15 P.M. - Request to Rezone Lots 1-6 and 7-10, Block 18
c. 7:30 P.M. - Continuation - Grading Permit - Reisinger Excavating
6. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
7. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS
a. Resolution Accepting Assessment Roll and Setting Public Hearing -
TH 50 Sanitary Sewer
b. Industrial Development Bonds - Duo Plastics
8. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
a. Space Needs - Public Works Update
b. Street Improvement Project 89-1, 89-3 and 89-14
9. NEW BUSINESS
a. Official Depository Amendment
b. Equipment Purchase - Public Works
c. Equipment Purchase - Public Works
10. MISCELLANEOUS
11. CONSENT AGENDA
a. Resolution Accepting Donation
b. Approve Pay Estimate - 1989 Seal Coating
c. Blanket Approval to Attend LMC Regional Meeting
d. School/Conference Request - Fire
e. School/Conference Request - Fire
f. Approve Payment of the Bills
12. ADJOURN
The agenda is closed out at noon on the Tuesday preceding the meeting.
AGENDA REQUEST FORM
90.ITEM NO.
NAME: Larry Thompson
DEPARTMENT: Administration
DATE: July 27, 1989
MEETING DATE: August 21, 1989
CATEGORY: Unfinished Business
SUBJECT= Space Needs Public Works
EXPLANATION:
iscuss Referendum
REFERENCE MATERIAL/RESPONSIBILITY:
REFERRED TO: (NAME) DEPARTMENT:
Tarry Thnmpsnn Administration
Department Heads
6or�
f
SIGNA
MEMO TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL
SUBJECT: GENERAL SERVICES SPACE NEEDS - REFERENDUM
DATE: AUGUST 16, 1989
During the past several months, the City Council and staff has been exploring
different approaches to solving the General Services Space needs problems.
The Council directed staff to approach it from two directions:
1. Explore the possibility of acquiring property for the construction of
$1,100,000 building as outlined in the space needs study.
2. Negotiate with George Marschall and Ken Hanson, Jr. for the purchase/lease
of their existing buildings.
As mentioned previously, there has been interest in selling property to the City,
but without a budget or the certainty that the property will be purchased, it
has been difficult to obtain a firm pricefrom anyone. Regarding the purchase
or lease of existing buildings, the City has arrived at a general lease agreement
with Mr. Hanson as outlined in the July 31st letter. The City still has not
received an actual proposal for purchasing the Marschall site, because Mr. Marschall
is still waiting for quotes for constructing a new facility and needs a site on
which he can build.
I feel that the sentiment of the Council and staff has always been to construct
a new facility, but concerns have been raised regarding the favorable outcome of
a referendum.
As noted in previous discussions, each proposal has its pros and cons (cost,
design, location, age, etc.) . I feel that, ultimately, it is in the City's best
interest to purchase a site and construct a new facility. I feel that if we
purchased an existing building, the City would have to redesign the building to
meet its needs and even then it probably would not be entirely satisfactory.
The Council may be forced into this option, however, because of the expense of
a new building.
The situation the Council faces is this; while it would be in the long term best
interest of the City to construct a new facility, concerns have been expressed
regarding the outcome of a referendum, coupled with that is the expressed concern
regarding the purchase of an existing building. Rather than trying to second guess
the public, I feel that the Council should hold a referendum to determine the
sentiments of the public. The Council would be in a better position to evaluate
its options based on the outcome.
I must state that while the negotiations are continuing, the General Services
Department is still faced with a space crunch. I feel the Council should take
a positive step by requesting a referendum in order to more clearly define the
Council's options. Karen Finstuen has informed me that a special election would
cost approximately $2,000 and could be held within 30 days. If the Council gives
the go ahead to pursue a referendum, I will request that a representative of
Springsted, Inc. attend the next meeting to present impacts and discuss strategy.
".27
Lar y Thompson
City Administrator
cc: Department Heads
file