Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12.21.09 Council Minutes lc COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR December 21, 2009 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Mayor Larson at 7:00 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Larson led the audience and Council in the Pledge of Allegiance. 3. ROLL CALL Members Present: Members Absent: Also Present: Audience: Larson, Donnelly, Fogarty, May, Wilson None Joel Jamnik, City Attorney; Peter Herlofsky, City Administrator; Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director; Kevin Schorzman, City Engineer; Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director; Brenda Wendlandt, Human Resources Director; Cynthia Muller, Executive Assistant Shelly Eldridge, Beve Preece, David Pritzlaff, Colin Garvey 4. APPROVEAGENDA City Administrator Herlofsky added supplemental items 7j) Approve AFSCME Clerical, Technical and Professional Unit Settlement and 7k) Approve AFSCME Maintenance Unit Settlement MOTION by Fogarty, second by Wilson to approve the Agenda. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS Mr. David Pritzlaff, 20255 Akin Road, stated Toys for Town was held on Saturday and thanked everyone who helped or donated gifts or money. He also thanked those who helped with getting the food from EconoFoods to the high school and sorting and bagging of all items. He recognized Councilmember Fogarty for her assistance with wrapping gifts at the event. Mr. Pritzlaff stated when he was on the Council, all five Councilmembers participated in the event. Mr. Pritzlaffwanted to address a statement made during Roundtable at the last Council meeting. He also spoke to Councilmember Donnelly following the budget workshop. Nothing he has said is personal to the Council. It is merely questions. He discussed with Councilmember Donnelly that when Mr. Pritzlaff started on the Council the City Attorney informed them that they were public officials and they will be questioned and have statements made. As public officials they need to have thicker skin to deal with this. As elected officials, the public has the right during Citizen Comments to question the Council as a whole or individually. There is nothing wrong when making a statement to refer to a specific Councilmember's statement from a past meeting. All of the Council Council Minutes (Regular) December 21, 2009 Page 2 may not agree with one's point of view and he did not want to assume that. He understood that asking Council a question that requires staff response might take time. If the question is for all of the Councilor just one Councilmember on his or her viewpoint that does not need staff involvement like some of the questions he has asked Mayor Larson. Mr. Pritzlaff stated he still has not received a response to the three questions. You are all elected to represent the taxpayers and sometimes that is not easy to do. Shutting out a few is not right. a) Response to Bonnie Andrusick Staff sent a response to Ms. Andrusick. b) Response to Mark Dixon Staff sent a response to Mr. Dixon c) Response to Colin Garvey Mr. Garvey had four issues. First was the Ice Arena. He asked if Council was going to form a task force. He stated if Council would think outside the box, the improvements could be done for less money. He would be willing to volunteer his time and supervise three City employees and use City equipment to tear out the concrete. That should save an unbelievable amount of money. There are ways to save money instead of inflate the price. He heard the price at first was $1.3 million and now it is $850,000. Mayor Larson stated that is a range. Mr. Garvey stated that is already $500,000 less than the original estimate. Mayor Larson stated we need to receive bids. Mr. Garvey felt the Ice Arena could be done for a lot less and we do not need feasibility studies. The City has an engineering staff. Just go out for bids, cut some costs, and get it done. He suggested going to the public and get some help from citizens and the hockey association. It is a way to get the project done for a lot less money. Sometimes too much government is not a good thing. His second issue was the CDA project. He asked what fees would be received in lieu of taxes. According to the County, it depends on the Development Contract. If it is based on rent and income the City could receive almost nothing. Mr. Garvey asked what the fee will be to the City. If there is no benefit, why put it in? Then it is a liability. Regarding the Denmark project, it was supposed to eliminate a lift station. The sewer and water was installed, but the lift station was not removed. Why did the line go in? In meetings in 2003, that line was supposed to be put in by developers when the area was developed. Now it was pushed up and installed by the City. The reason was to eliminate the lift stations, but the lift stations are still there. On City projects, there are administrative fees. Why is the City charging itself administrative fees? Council Minutes (Regular) December 21, 2009 Page 3 He received his tax statement. It is a tough economy. His City portion on the proposed statement is going up 19%. Along with quarterly and City fees it will take $35,000 - $40,000/month in revenue to pay his tax and City fees. It is something Council needs to look at for all businesses. Weare being taxed out of business. Raising fees to pay wages is not working. Council has to figure out a way to get things done without increasing fees. The fiscal disparities jumped over $1,200. The City receives a big portion of that back and it goes back into the general fund and is used for payroll and other expenses. The increases have to stop. The value of his building is down $600,000 - $700,000. He asked Council to work harder at the budget instead of rubber stamping it and increasing fees without looking at other options. He did not need a response to this item. d) Response to David Pritzlaff He previously asked for a response from Mayor Larson on three questions: - Why did you not take comment after a three hour public workshop? - Tell people when you will and will not take public comment at a meeting. - Do you value the taxpayer's thoughts? It has been five weeks and Mr. Pritzlaff asked when he will receive a response from Mayor Larson. Mayor Larson stated he will prepare a letter this week. Mr. Pritzlaffasked about the $15,000 - $20,000 extra budgeted for the Finance Director than what the paper states we would actually pay now for that new position. The response he received was the current proposed 2010 budget already reflects a reduction. On page 65 of the budget, Personnel Services, Code 6110 Salaries Fulltime, 2009 adopted was $234,370 and 2010 proposed is $233,549. It is only a reduction of $1 ,321. This document was created before we knew the position would be vacant so where is the reduction? Why isn't the reduction reflected? Mr. Pritzlaff's next issue was the extra $15,000 for City Hall electric. The answer he received was the amount budgeted for 2009 was a guess for City Hall. Mr. Pritzlaff stated out of all the professionals that worked on the building, who could have guessed that far off? There should have been some data to work from. Why were there no revisions to Council for this amount of spending change this year? The answer he received stated the amount budgeted for 2010 is based on actuals to date. This document was presented to the Council in August and actuals to that date might set you off by $10,000 next year. Regarding the street light utility fee, the Finance Director stated this fee would be based on a multiplier used for storm water charges. That is Council's decision how to set it up. Mr. Pritzlaff stated he has asked many times about the number of households per apartment. The latest number he has is 461 households versus 13 apartment buildings. This is a policy Council is in charge of setting. Are we using a multiplier of storm water or per household charge? He asked for the minutes of that meeting and how Council voted to set the policy for the next meeting. Council Minutes (Regular) December 21, 2009 Page 4 He understood the solid waste fund balance is around $416,000. Why would that not be used to offset the increase proposed in solid waste? What is the Council's goal for this fund? During the budget process he has attended all the meetings and workshops and has had several questions to which some Councilmember stated good question. You like me have not gotten all the right answers or very short, one line answers that do not completely explain or answer the question. At the last workshop, Council made the decision one week in advance not to take public comment and very easily could have answered his questions from the responses Council had in hand. Council chose not to off camera, which Mr. Pritzlaff would have been happy with. The decisions that night left him feeling that Council attacked each other more that night than any resident could have. It was a two-hour workshop that had no positive outcome. He realized Council had to approve the budget tonight and there will be a tax hike we all have to incur as a result of this. For him 15.75% with the new fees and a $6,600 drop in value. He wanted to thank Council for that. At the last meeting there was a statement made about no new voices at these meetings. He wished people were here. On the other hand, the community was here; all the foreclosures speak very loud. 7. CONSENT AGENDA Councilmember Wilson pulled items 7g) Approve Non-Bargaining Agreement, 7j) Approve AFSCME Clerical, Technical and Professional Unit Settlement, and 7k) Approve AFSCME Maintenance Unit Settlement for separate vote due to a conflict of interest. MOTION by Fogarty, second by Wilson to approve the Consent Agenda as follows: a) Approved Council Minutes (12/7/09 Regular) (12/14/09 Workshop) b) Received Information November 2009 Financial Report - Administration c) Approved School and Conference - Engineering d) Approved Joint Powers Agreement Dakota County Drug Task Force - Police e) Approved Training Reimbursement Grant - Fire t) Approved Various Licenses - Administration h) Approved Bills i) Approved Temporary Liquor Licenses - Administration APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 7g) Adopted RESOLUTION R62-09 - Approving Non Bargaining Agreement- Human Resources 7j) Adopted RESOLUTION R63-09 - Approving AFSCME Clerical, Technical and Professional Unit Settlement - Human Resources 7k) Adopted RESOLUTION R64-09 - Approving AFSCME Maintenance Unit Settlement - Human Resources MOTION by Fogarty, second by May approving the above agreements. Voting for: Larson, Donnelly, Fogarty, May. Abstain: Wilson. MOTION CARRIED. Council Minutes (Regular) December 21, 2009 Page 5 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS a) Approve Various Licenses -Administration Pilot Knob Pizzeria has applied for an On-Sale Wine License and Ms. Sherry Jackson has requested to renew her Therapeutic Massage License for 2010. MOTION by Wilson, second by May to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Wilson, second by May to approve the On- Sale Wine License for Pilot Knob Pizzeria and the Therapeutic Massage license for Sherry Jackson. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. b) Adopt Ordinance-2010 Fee Schedule -Administration Council received proposed changes for 2010 fees. MOTION by Wilson, second by Donnelly to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Wilson noted there has been discussion on the surface water management fee and the watermain trunk fee. There is a change in the calculation of the formula from square feet to acre. Before fees are increased on those we want to develop here by 65% we need to take a closer look at these fees. The rationale from staff is looking at full build out of the system will require this amount. One of Council's goals is to encourage economic development and this would have the opposite effect. For the items that are changing he would like some rationale as to why they are increasing before the fee schedule is brought to Council. Councilmember Fogarty asked for an explanation of the development fees. City Engineer SchorZInan explained the surface water management fee. Every ten years as part of the comprehensive planning process, staff reviews the surface water management plans and other system plans. This was an update of the 1997 version in which they were estimating the total build out of the system at about $28 million. Based on additional information and requirements, staff is estimating the cost to be $47 million. The increase is to do what is required now that was not required back then. It is also a combination of going outside the corporate limits of the City into the orderly annexation area with Empire Township and some areas south of 225th Street to look at an ultimate system. The costs will not change, however it is up to Council as to how those funds are collected. In the past it has been Council's policy that development pays for itself. There is another option in which the residents subsidize that development so the development fees can remain low. The numbers in the fee schedule reflect the current position of the Council which is development pays for itself. They are higher than surrounding communities; however, there are differences in what we have to do with surface water management because of the trout stream. City Engineer SchorZInan suggested removing this section from the fee schedule and discussing it at the January 11,2010, workshop. He asked Council which direction they wanted to go; whether development should pay for itself or have the residents subsidize development. Council Minutes (Regular) December 21, 2009 Page 6 Councilmember Fogarty suggested not pulling this section from the fee schedule but to discuss it at the workshop and change it if necessary. Councilmember May stated her concern is adopting this schedule now as the memo says the proposed changes in fees were taken into consideration in the budget. If we do not approve the fees, what happens to the budget? It seems fees should have been discussed a month ago before looking at the overall budget. City Administrator Herlofsky stated the routine fees are very small and will not cause a major issue with the budget. We have already exceeded building permits for this year by $80,000. The major goal with the fees is to keep them current so they are justified by the cost the City incurs by providing the service. The fees for the Ice Arena non-prime time have been reduced to sell more ice time. Councilmember May stated most of this information on the fee schedule is new to her and all she is getting is a flat number without any rationale behind it. City Administrator Herlofsky stated in the future we can add some rationale; that has not been requested before and the fees will be brought in a month earlier. Councilmember May stated regarding the philosophy of the development fees, she asked if it was a moot point if the fees are raised and there is no development. She has never been a fan of the street light utility fee, so that is a flat no. Some are small increases and there are some decreases. In relation to the Rambling River Center, there had been some discussion on the membership fees. She feels the proposed changes in membership fees are not high enough. This is a space that the seniors want and she understands they are on limited incomes, but feels the proposed fees are not high enough. Parks and Recreation Director Distad stated the proposed fees have been brought to the Rambling River Center Advisory Board and the Parks and Recreation Commission. They felt by raising the fees too much the drop in membership would be drastic. They suggested doing a gradual increase over time to get to a higher amount. There used to be a fee for couples which has been eliminated and the individual fee remains which will add revenue. Councilmember Donnelly noted the fee for ice time was lowered and the hours for non-prime time were increased. Parks and Recreation Director Distad explained they sell very few non-prime time hours and they are trying to entice people to rent the early morning or late evening hours. Councilmember Donnelly stated regarding the surface water management fees, he does not want to do anything to discourage development, but he would not like to have the high fees published and someone sees them and then Council reconsiders them. He would like to see published what Council agrees to rather than go back to it. He would like to pull that section. The two fees that have the biggest impact on the budget are the street light and the garbage fees. Those are not surprises. Councilmember Wilson would like to pull the subdivision section from the fee schedule. He felt Council was on the same page that development should pay for itself. As opposed to a dramatic increase, he felt there needs to be an increase, but there has to be a different way to look at it. We have to figure out a way to Council Minutes (Regular) December 21, 2009 Page 7 encourage development now and get the money here and slide the fees along at a reasonable schedule. City Administrator Herlofsky stated if we want to get to a dollar amount for the future, the fees on an annual basis would have to be increased. Staff can divide the amount and split half with fees now for properties and half increase the other way. Council could see how the numbers affect existing property. Staff will bring back a couple options showing the $47 million result. Councilmember Wilson stated they are being presented with a fixed number down the road. The quote for $47 million will not be the number in the future. Staff has reviewed the history and Council needs to agree on a number and then that number is inflated each year in the fee schedule based on the construction cost index. MOTION by Fogarty, second by Donnelly to approve except the section on Permits - Subdivisions/Developments. This should be discussed at a workshop and brought back to a future meeting. Voting for: Larson, Donnelly, Fogarty. Voting against: May, Wilson. MOTION CARRIED. 9. AWARD OF CONTRACT a) Reconsideration of Ice Arena Improvements - Administration MOTION by Fogarty, second by Donnelly to bring this item back to the table. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. City Administrator Herlofsky received a call today from a businessman who would like to privately build two ice rinks with a field house and other retail and commercial development. A meeting has been scheduled for tomorrow including representatives from the school district, from the City and representatives from the private sector to discuss this option. This item was to discuss hiring someone to do designs and specifications for improvements to the current Ice Arena. David Pritzlaff, 20255 Akin Road, provided articles from the newspapers on what other communities were doing with their Ice Arenas. His main concern was to look at a company that would bid engineering and do the work. This may save the $40,000 discussed previously. Some cities are applying for grants for this type of work. Councilmember May asked if it was possible to send out an RFP to companies that can do an all encompassing bid to keep the process going and are there companies that would allow participation by the community to lower the cost. City Administrator Herlofsky stated they have spoken with one company that would be a turn key operation. You still pay for engineering and all costs. We were anticipating when designing the building to use a construction manager where the design work would be laid out in a way that the project has different contracts. If someone wanted to do the work and not charge the full amount, that Council Minutes (Regular) December 21, 2009 Page 8 would be their contribution. Staff's concern with volunteers working on the building is this is heavy construction work and we would not want to have anyone hurt. We should have people working who have the appropriate insurance and warranties on the work. Councilmember May stated as far as the feasibility study, is there any reason why we cannot send RFP's out to companies that do this work and include the design work. We know what we want. City Administrator Herlofsky stated a bid and a proposal are two different things. A bid is a fixed dollar amount we can rely upon as a cost of that operation. A proposal is not a firm number which requires additional negotiations. We would be required to have a bid because of the size of the project. In the public sector there are certain rules that govern how we do things. There are different types of equipment that can provide the ice. There is geothermal and currently there is a Freon unit. There are too many issues with engineering that we cannot use our own engineering staff. Councilmember May asked if staff could review the bids. City Administrator Herlofsky stated with bids there are certain performance criteria used to determine the cost. Mayor Larson stated Council is asking for just a design build and is that an option? City Attorney Jamnik replied no. State law does not authorize it. It is only authorized for very limited transportation projects. Design build needs some parameter set as far as what kind of ice arena you want. Mayor Larson asked do we need a feasibility study for this. City Attorney Jamnik replied technically no, you need plans and specifications or other design standards. Mayor Larson stated we need an engineering firm to put designs, plans and specifications together. City Attorney Jamnik stated or someone other than an engineering firm to copy plans and specifications from other facilities that meet what you have identified as your needs. Buildings are difficult because many contractors do not have the insurance necessary to build an off the shelf design. Architects or engineers that design the plans and specifications do not like having their work product appropriated so you would have additional hurdles to go through. There is the capability of integrating design features from others into the plan. We have to have plans and specifications that allow us to meet the uniform contract law requirements for competitive bidding. Councilmember Wilson stated he is frustrated because he wants to solve this Ice Arena problem, but it seems we are so quick to jump in and we need to do a feasibility study and it always ends up being the same firm. We have talented staff and he felt we do not look outside the box for solutions. City Administrator Herlofsky stated there were two firms; one at $60,000 and one at $40,000, so staff recommended the $40,000. Regarding the issue of grants, whoever does the work we will discuss grants with them but until we get going it is not feasible to get to those issues. Councilmember Wilson asked what if there are two or three companies that have a high quality flooring product, but the bid does not match up with the feasibility report? City Administrator Herlofsky stated the design is reviewed to determine if it can be included. Council Minutes (Regular) December 21, 2009 Page 9 Councilmember Donnelly asked if ADA compliance is part of the feasibility study. City Administrator Herlofsky stated all engineers have said there is no need for additional ADA compliance, but we will keep it in mind. Mayor Larson stated he hears Council wants to keep the process going and we have been asked to do so. He asked if the feasibility study for $40,000 is our only option right now. Councilmember Fogarty stated that is our best option to start the process. We want this to be very flexible. The hockey association is very interested in helping to bring down the cost with as much in-kind donation as they can. When the task force is meeting and we are going through the bidding process, she wants that to be an option. There are people willing to work with everyone involved and that message is not being lost. City Engineer SchorZInan stated based on being a part of reviewing the proposals, the $40,000 is not just for the feasibility report, but to carry it through the entire design. It should get us to the point where we have plans and specifications in hand to use for bidding. Councilmember Donnelly stated there was a lot of volunteer help with the Rambling River Center and asked why this is different. City Administrator Herlofsky stated painting walls and that type of work is easy to do. Even at the Rambling River Center there were electricians. Parks and Recreation Director Distad stated the biggest thing is the mechanical system and making sure it works correctly. Councilmember Donnelly felt the developer staff is meeting with tomorrow is important to consider. Councilmember Fogarty was concerned with delaying this for another two weeks. If City Administrator Herlofsky received good information tomorrow and approving this should not go forward, he would make us aware of that. The task force is meeting next month and they would like to have this information. Councilmember May stated the other option was to get plans and specifications versus a feasibility study. If you take an existing plan and alter it to our specific building is that different than what the feasibility study would provide. City Attorney Jamnik stated the feasibility report is a preliminary analysis of options, alternatives, methodologies, things such as whether you do geothermal versus Freon and what you can anticipate for costs. Then you could decide whether or not to bid both types or not. In order to go to bid you would have to have plans and specifications designed for each type that specifies the size of the rink, the size of the pipes, the types of compressors and the details that would be required for each of those. That is the traditional way of proceeding on a construction project. Councilmember May asked if we could request proposals from companies that provide this work and then have the engineers review those proposals and is there a cost savings? City Attorney Jarnnik replied yes, but it is much the same. The cost of providing the feasibility report or the estimates for the types of projects in response to your RFP are not construction design, plans and specifications. There is a second step that the firm you would select would Council Minutes (Regular) December 21, 2009 Page 10 have to do the plans and specifications and would have to bid off of that. You are still getting the same steps done, but in a different order and a different focal point as to who is doing what. Councilmember May felt it would address the fact that there may be some newer models that would be presented and if we had the feasibility study first then they would say this is what I propose based on the product we provide. City Administrator Herlofsky stated the feasibility is a small portion of the work. Most of the work is the design of the new sheet of ice and the appropriate mechanical equipment to make it work. The feasibility report is a means to that end. Councilmember May stated we know exactly what product we want. Weare talking about replacing the ice. She was trying to save costs in this initial step. Mayor Larson stated as far as these two steps, the cost is about the same. City Attorney Jamnik stated you would not save much. There is the potential if you went with a construction manager to execute the contracts, you might achieve a cost savings by segmenting out the various contracts to see if people would do the work at or above cost rather than putting out the total amount to a general contractor that would deal with their own subcontractors. Councilmember Wilson stated his issue two weeks ago was to have a more thorough discussion on this. It is not a matter of doing the improvements; it is a matter of doing them the right way. He presumed if this was approved, City Administrator Herlofsky would not do anything to deter any activity from the meeting tomorrow. He would like staff to reach out to the City of New Hope. Their arena feels like it is a chapter out of Farmington. MOTION by Fogarty, second by Wilson to approve Bonestroo to initiate preparation of a feasibility report, design, plans and specifications for bidding. Voting for: Larson, Donnelly, Fogarty, Wilson. Voting against: May. MOTION CARRIED. 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) Approve Engineering Services Agreement Rambling River Center HV AC System - Parks and Recreation Staff is proposing to replace the heating, ventilation and air conditioning system at the new Rambling River Center in the older part of the building. Staff is proposing to remove the existing furnace which was installed in 1969 and replace it with rooftop units that would be more energy efficient. Staff received two proposals from engineering firms. Bonestroo is proposing the cost would be $8,000 and ATS&R is proposing the cost would be $25,000. Staff would utilize HUD money through the CDBG program of $65,000. The money would be used to help pay the cost of the engineering services, but also the new equipment. As of the end of November there is $42,000 left from the original $265,000. Staff would like to use $20,000 as a contingency in case the bids come in above $65,000. MOTION by Fogarty, second by Wilson to approve the agreement with Bonestroo to perform the engineering services needed to complete the Council Minutes (Regular) December 21, 2009 Page 11 replacement of the HV AC system at the Rambling River Center. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) Adopt Resolutions - Approve Bond Sale - Administration Staff had refinanced two bonds. The first was a $4,000,000 General Obligation CIP bond to finance the acquisition of the Central Maintenance and Public Safety Facilities. Seven bids were received. The winning bid was Morgan, Keegan & Company. Financial advisors were able to drop the principal amount by $150,000. So a bond will be issued for $3,850,000. For a 12-year bond the interest rate is 2.897%. This amounts to a savings of$585,259. The second bond was a $1,210,000 General Obligation Utility Revenue Refunding Bond. There were five bids received. The winning bid was Wells Fargo Advisors with an interest rate of3.04%. The principal amount was reduced by $10,000. This amounts to a savings of$150,191. MOTION by Fogarty, second by Wilson adopting RESOLUTION R65-09 approving the sale of $4,000,000 General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds, Series 2010A. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Fogarty, second by Donnelly adopting RESOLUTION R66-09 approving the sale of $1 ,21 0,000 General Obligation Utility Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2010B. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. b) Adopt Resolutions - Approving 2010 Tax Levy and Budget -Administration The goals for the 2010 budget were: - Maintain service levels. - Maintain current levels of staffing. - No increase in levy beyond pre-approved items and mandates. - Ability to sustain 2010 non-personnel expenditures through 2011 and 2012. There were seven workshops and three Council meetings to discuss the budget. Staff started with a 5% increase and cut it down to 2%. Department budgets have been cut, and bonds have been refinanced saving $50,000. Councilmember Wilson stated Council has a policy of maintaining a certain fund balance in the general fund. He noted the solid waste fund has a healthy balance and asked why we don't delay the increase in solid waste fees until the balance goes down. City Administrator Herlofsky stated this fund purchases its own equipment without borrowing. This operation pays for itself, provides the general fund some cost associated with construction of the garage, some administrative costs for payroll, etc. There is a very well planned scheduled for replacement of equipment without requesting large fees at one time to cover those costs. The main reason for the increase in solid waste fees was because of the recycling Council Minutes (Regular) December 21, 2009 Page 12 issues and to keep the fund balance sufficient to cover operational costs which includes purchase of new equipment. Councilmember May commended everyone for their work. Her main concern is the street light utility fee. She is not in favor of that type of taxation because it is misleading when we say taxes are not going up because the values went down, but there are these other fees in addition to an increase. That is why she did not approve the fee schedule and felt the process was backwards. She was a proponent of looking at substantial cuts while development is down. We had good discussions in workshops, but we have not made any substantial changes in light of the current economy. She will not be approving the budget. Mayor Larson stated the first year of this budget process was overwhelming. There are a lot of things we want to say and do, but cannot because of all the rules and regulations. When you take the debt service and public safety out you have a small piece of the pie to work with. He felt we did the best we can with the budget. He will support the budget. Councilmember Wilson stated the most challenging factor this year is without any say, the market dictated with the fire levy that we were stuck by over $100,000. In the absence of that, the proposed budget would be negative 1 %. There are the commitments made earlier in the year with the Rambling River Center, etc. He does not agree with the way the process goes. Council is involved far too late. He does not want to be part of the day-to-day operations, but there has to be a middle ground. It is more than reasonable for Council to set the framework for the direction we should go. The budget is more good than bad so he will support it. Councilmember Donnelly stated there was a lot of work put into the budget. We differ on our priorities and how we approach things. There were a lot of things done to reduce the budget such as refinance the bonds, good agreements with the bargaining units, delayed capital projects, etc. We took on new initiatives like $50,000 to operate the new Rambling River Center, we participated in the move to the new Rambling River Center for $20,000/year, a new SRO at the high school, fixing the Ice Arena, and maintained our contribution to the Fire fund. We had to balance the cutback from the state with cutting things and doing new things and what the community asked. He felt the budget was fair and reasonable given the current situation. He will support the budget. Councilmember Fogarty stated no one likes the budget. There is more good than bad and after the last workshop she left very frustrated. Some of it came from some of the comments Councilmember Wilson said, but he has spent a great deal of time working through this budget, and the conflicts he has had with the budget. At the beginning of the process he laid out what he envisioned and we met that vision. It was not easy to get there. Councilmember May said at the last workshop that she was looking to Councilmembers who have been here to gain Council Minutes (Regular) December 21, 2009 Page 13 information and insight from them. Councilmember Fogarty apologized if she was not forthcoming in the last year to help her reach that goal. In the next year she will do that better. One bit of advice, she has heard consistently from Councilmember May that this is not a big enough cut, one thing Councilmember Wilson did, that Councilmember May was not able to articulate is that he wanted to reach a certain number for a certain reason. That is something Councilmember Fogarty can understand. She never saw a number or a reason from Councilmember May. She needs to know why she is doing something and what the goal is. She will support the budget, but is concerned with what the legislature may do to us this year. Farmington does not need to write the state a check; we do fine paying into the state. MOTION by Fogarty, second by Wilson adopting RESOLUTION R67-09 setting the 2010 Collectible Property Tax Levy and RESOLUTION R68-09 revising the 2009 Budget and approving the 2010 Budget. Voting for: Larson, Donnelly, Fogarty, Wilson. Voting against: May. MOTION CARRIED. 12. NEW BUSINESS 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE Councilmember May: She is not against the Ice Arena, but Council and staff has realized she is a planner and likes lists. She likes to see all the options and does not think we have seen all the options. She will vote with her conscience and she could not vote yes with the information they had. There would be more savings to segment the work out. She thanked all the seniors who attended the Rotary Club luncheon. She thanked Brenda's School of Dance and City Engineer Schorzman. Councilmember Fogarty: She and her children attended Toys for Town along with dozens of people in the community. There were 90 families served. The generosity of this community never ceases to amaze her. She thanked everyone who contributed. Councilmember Wilson: Regarding Toys for Town he felt like Mr. Pritzlaffmade a negative comment towards those on the Council who were not there which was out of line. There are many people who give gifts or donations which is equally as valuable. Councilmember Donnelly: Wished everyone a happy and safe holiday. It has been an interesting first year on the Council. City Administrator Herlofsky: Wished everyone a happy holiday. He thanked the employees who have made this a very successful year. We accomplished the bridge over 19Sth Street, the new high school, Flagstaff Avenue was completed, and other projects. The house on Elm Street was demolished due to the positive contact with the CDA. Council Minutes (Regular) December 21, 2009 Page 14 Employees had a furlough this year and when negotiating contracts they were willing to meet us halfway. He is proud to be a Farmington employee because of the type of people we have working here. Mayor Larson: Thanked everyone who helped with Toys for Town. Asked residents to check their Nixie accounts or City Calendar for upcoming events. He asked residents to shovel out the fire hydrants. The liquor store is having a huge sale this week. 14. ADJOURN MOTION by Fogarty, second by Wilson to adjourn at 9:12 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, /y? ,/7 ~fr ;?7-'1 ~ LY->-7.--C/~ to ,,' c;/ Cynthia Muller Executive Assistant