Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987/08/10 - ADMIN - Minutes - City Council - Study Session r 1 4B .MINUTES ' CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION 11111 ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA August 10, 1987 w 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Mayor Pro Tem Keith Meland at 7:00 pm. 2. Roll Call The following members were present at roll call : Council members Tom Duffy, Allen Friedman, David Strand and Mayor Pro Tem Keith Meland. Park and Recreation Commission members present were Barbara Brown, Ken Huiras, Andy Peacock, Jim Rhodes, Marjean Ruddle and Erica Strohl . Staff members present were the City Manager, Assistant City Manager, Director of Parks and Recreation and Administrative Assistant. Councilmember Mitchell arrived at 7:05 pm. Coopers & Lybrand, consultants for the organizational study of the Parks and Recreation Division, were present to provide an overview of the report prepared. The consultants indicated that there was a section in the report on municipal 1110 comparisons which provides a framework for the study. The municipal comparisons found that the number of facilities were appropriate for the population and that St. Louis Park has more than twice the park sites of other cities. This may indicate the alternative of contracting out maintenance services or selling particular park sites. The comparison also found that fees are not as high in St. Louis Park as in other communities. The consultants indicated that increased marketing efforts would be a benefit and that a quarterly Parks and Recreation newsletter may be appropriate. The consultants indicated that the Westwood Hills Nature Center with the schools is good and the nature center may want to work towards seeking donations. The consultants indicated that there should be an increase in the evaluation of , programming i .e., beginning, middle and end of programs. Relocation of the Recreation Department to the Recreation Center was reviewed. The benefits include longer hours, more increased supervision of the arena and less duplication of support staff. The consultants suggested the development " F of a long-range park recreation/nature plan which would include a review and projection of the number of ice rinks needed/utilized, etc. The consultants concluded by stating that the City has well maintained parks and has a good . start on a trail system. Councilmember Strand asked whether costs have been assigned to particular items. The consultants said they had. ILO Councilmember Strand asked the Parks and Recreation Director to give a general response to the report. The Director felt it was a good report; however, he questioned some of the immediate availability to respond to the major tasks included in the report. He stated that there is a need to build a program and to establish priorities for responding to the report. He said there is a need to look at facilities, gymnasium space and to work closer with Community 'I _1 Ed to avoid duplication and competition. In response to the fee schedule, the Director felt he didn't want to exclude anybody from Parks and Recreation programming due to costs. He concluded by stating there is a need to implement the high priority items and work with a staff committee to develop a program to implement the report. 41111 Councilmember Strand asked what the next step of the process is. The City Manager responded that as in the past, a committee of staff people will meet to eva luate the items listed in the report and develop a program for implementing the results. The City Manager will periodically report to the Council on the progress. Councilmember Strand -asked haw Dutch elm diseased trees are beteg taken care of. The Director said that the City provides a 40% subsidy which comes out of the General Fund for the removal of diseased trees. He added that St. Louis Park is one of few communities complying with state law. Councilmember Meland asked the consultant whether or not the Council is making the best use of the commission in terms of referrals. The City Manager stated that in all fairness to the consultants that was not a part of the proposal . Councilmember Strand stated that if the commission felt they were not being utilized properly, that he hoped they would communicate that to the City Council . Councilmember Strand asked about the demographics of the community in comparison with others. The consultants reponded that the demographics look like a typical Midwest suburban community. Councilmember Strand asked whether or not the user fees in relationship to income were comparable to other communities. The consultants said they were not. Councilmember Friedman asked if the fees in St. Louis Park were not too high in terms of what the market would bear. The consultants said that the user fees vary between communities and are most often based on what the General Fund will support. SAF stated that St. Louis Park fees are lower, but are others too high St. Louis Park may be low in terms of what the market will bear. The Director added that the user fees at the Rec Center are now at the median of other communities in the area. He also added that participation level is higher than in other communities by 5-8%. Councilmember Meland asked for a cost comparison with Community Ed. The consultant responded that they have a higher pay scale for employees and therefore have a higher user feel . 3. Levy limit appeal Councilmember Mitchell asked what was unique about St. Louis Park's appeal as com- pare to o er communities. The Assistant City Manager explained the law passed in the last legislative session was that a city can appeal if they are required to use their reserves or expenses incurred in 1988 that were not incurred in 1987. She added that the letter was designed for the narrowest interpretation of the law. Councilmember Strand asked about the impact on the City if we don't win the appeal . The City Manager responded that $323,044 would have to cut from the 41111 budget or approximately .8 mills. Councilmember Freidman asked how would our levy be affected as a result of the appeal . The Finance Director responded that the base would be increased 1111 but the City wouldn't have to levy. It would be available but the City would not have to use it. The City Manager added that currently the maximum cash limit would be 3% over last year. He said that if the City spent the same amount in 1988 as in 1987, the City would not have to worry, but there would be no additional capital outlay expenses and no salary increases. Councilmember Mitchell asked the timeframe. The Finance Director stated that the final date for submittal of an appeal is August 21 and the final decision will be received by the City no later than October 1. It was moved by Councilmember Friedman, seconded by Councilmember Strand, that the City Council endorse the appeal and direct that staff submit the appeal . The motion passed 5-0. 4. Cable television The Council briefly discussed theletter directed to Nortel Cable and recommended that the City maintain good factual records so that we have documentation and that we operate under the fullest extent of the law and that financial stability be established. 5. Governance committee report ill Councilmember Strand reported that the committee has been reviewing the placement of items on the consent agenda vs. the regular agenda and reported the following: That staff is working on a definition for minor modifications to special permits in an attempt to place minor modifications on the consent agenda. To place all financial matters on the consent agenda as these are more in the nature of a_report. That union contracts be placed on the regular agenda. Preliminary engineering reports be placed on the consent agenda. That traffic studies be placed on the consent agenda until a formal policy is developed. Licensing be placed on the regular agenda as it is often a public hearing. The selection of consultants be placed on the consent agenda if it is in the approved budget. Purchasing be placed on the consent agenda until a formal policy is developed. Intergovernmental/agency agreements/appeals to other governmental units be 011/ placed on the consent agenda. Charges for use of public facilities be placed on the consent agenda with an annual staff report for the development of the fee structure. Councilmember Mitchell asked about the status of the legal opinion. Councilmember Strand responded that the attorney is re-reviewing the first opinion so as to permit resolutions under certain circumstances by consent. The City Manager added that there have been discussions about changing the Charter. Councilmember Duffy moved and Councilmember Mitchell seconded that the report by the Governance committee be accepted and to place those items as indicated on consent and to direct the Governance committee to further refine the policies as indicated. The motion passed 5-0. Councilmember Strand brought forth the policy developed for the appointment to boards commissions as follows: Establish a subcommittee of the City Council responsible for recommending appointments to boards and commissions. The subcommittee would consist of the Mayor and either two at-large members or the Mayor, one at-large and one ward representative. This would ensure continuity and facilitate the process. Councilmember Friedman stated that under the current procedure, everyone can attend. Councilmember Strand responded yes and still would be able to under the proposed change. Councilmember Friedman asked what is the problem with the way it is currently set up. Councilmember Strand stated there is no continuity and an applicant would not have to go through the process over and over again prior to being appointed. The subcommittee would assure responsibility for this action. Councilmember Friedman stated that his experience in serving on commissions leaves him very disappointed as to the representation on those commissions and stated he felt obligated to interview to ensure the highest quality. Councilmember Mitchell stated that when he first served on the Council , the full Council interviewed applicants. He stated that from a practical standpoint it ties up time of all Councilmembers when one Councilmember has a vested interest. Councilmember Strand stated that the Governance committee may need to come up with a criteria for Nappointments. Councilmember Friedman stated that the Council needs to look at the role of commissions and what the Council 's expectations are. Councilmember Mitchell stated that interviews could be held on a regular basis, i.e. 60 days, identify what boards and commissions an applicant is interested in serving on and then interview for all . Those individuals could be maintained on file and be considered as an applicant at the time of an opening. Councilmember Friedman stated he was not concerned about the interview but rather the decision by three members. He questioned whether or not the vote could be counted for additional Councilmembers showing up for the interview. The Governance committee was directed to review the following and report back to Council : establishment of set times for interviews; selection of three members of the Council for the subcommittee; criteria for selection; and that other Council members can attend and vote. ill . Councilmember Strand noted the policy developed for change orders. He proposed the following change to the first two Whereas in the resolution as it relates to change orders and recommended that the language be consistent throughout the following resolutions: Whereas, the City Council , in order to most fully utilize personnel talent and its own opportunity for leadership, deems it to be in the best interest of the City to delegate to the City Manager and staff certain administrative matters not involving City policy; and Whereas, whenever matters are delegated to the City Manager and/or staff, action taken pursuant to such delegation shall be taken in keeping with generally accepted administrative prudence and ethics; In addition, the following two changes were made to the resolution as it relates to change orders, under Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved, No. 2: The City Manager shall report to the City Council time extensions on a monthly basis. No. 3, change the scope of the contract including additional projects. Councilmember Strand presented the resolution dealing with disposition of 411 real property. He questioned whether or not the property can be given away without a public hearing. The consensus of the Council was to distribute the existing policy and review it. Councilmember Strand presented the resolution dealing with City Council policy as it relates to purchasing and made the following changes: in paragraph, Now, Therefore, delete the language on the last line except "those that" and replace it with "provided that in doing so, the City Manager:". Insert language for items 1-5 at the beginning of the sentence to read "shall not make" and amend subparagraph 4 to read: "Shall not make any purchases that do not follow mandates or guidelines-as prescribed by state statute." ` Councilmember Friedman asked what the procedure would be if a bidder was upset with the bid results. The City Manager said that as always, they would have the right to go before the Council . Councilmember Strand presented the resolution as it relates to traffic control items and provided the following amendment: in the Now, Therefore paragraph, delete on the last sentence as follows and insert "as long as the following procedure is followed." Councilmember Strand presented the next resolution related to boards and commissions. Council decided to leave that alone for the time being and have the Governance committee report back to Council . I/ Councilmember Strand presented the next resolution relating to employees. He commented that this resolution may be beneficial to whoever the Council and City Manager may be. He added that the current City Manager has done a good job for career development and promoting staff. The City Manager asked if anything should be added or deleted for which there was no response. Councilmember Strand asked for direction from the Council to develop a policy for the Planning Commission. A comment was made relative to providing training for the chair of the commissions III in parlimentary procedure. Councilmember Mitchell asked how much guidance should the Council give boards and commissions. Councilmember Friedman stated that presently there are items that go to boards and commissions when they don't need to. He added that if the request complies with the ordinance, it would not need to go before the Planning Commission or the City Council . Councilmember Duffy suggested that the Planning Director address the Governance committee as to-what he views the role of the Planning Commission to be. The City Manager stated that John Carver is still willing to work with the City at some level and suggested that perhaps all staff liaisons to boards and commissions come to the Governance committee. Councilmember Mitchell stated that the Be It Further Resolved clause be more general to encompass all boards and commissions. 6. Housing inspection program Councilmember Friedman had the following comments regarding the survey for the housing inspection program. _ 1. Provide more space for general comments; 2. Add question: do you understand the program? 3. Add question: do you feel the program benefits the City's needs? homeowner needs? 4. Add question: should the program continue? Councilmember Strand didn't believe that question number 1 would accomplish anything and the rest of the Council concurred. 7. Adjournment The study session adjourned at 9:30 p.m. 4/2"11/4-- /441171/L- Carmen Kaplan Recording Secretary