Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999/05/03 - ADMIN - Minutes - City Council - Regular CITY OF MINUTES jj ST. LOUIS CITY COUNCIL MEETING PARK ST. LOUIS PARK,MINNESOTA May 3, 1999 1. Call to Order Mayor Jacobs called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. 2. Presentations Amy Klobuchar, Hennepin County Attorney presented highlights of her 100-Day Plan. She explained how this plan would help achieve stronger results in law enforcement and ensure safer streets and safer homes for the residents of Hennepin County. 3. Roll Call The following Councilmembers were present at roll call: Ron Latz, Chris Nelson, Sue Sanger, Robert Young, Jim Brimeyer and Mayor Jeff Jacobs. Also present were the City Manager(Mr. Meyer); City Attorney(Mr. Scott);Director of Community Development(Mr. Harmening);Director of Public Works(Mr. Rardin);Planning Associate,(Ms. Peterson);Human Resource Manager(Ms. Gohman) and Finance Director(Ms. McBride). 4. Approval of Minutes 4a. City Council Meeting of April 19, 1999 The minutes were approved as presented. 4b. Study Session Meeting of April 12, 1999 With the following corrections, the minutes were approved as presented. Page 15, Item 3, change to"Councilmember Nelson asked if there be a higher priority in placing a sidewalk on 40th Street between Wooddale and Quentin." Page 16, Item 7, change to"Councilmember Nelson explained that a petition was submitted with several hundred signatures." Page 17, Item 8, change to"Councilmember Nelson informed the Council that it was premature to bring this before the Council since there was no neighborhood recommendation yet, but he did feel that the neighborhood was unworkably large." 4c. Study Session Meeting of April 26, 1999 The minutes were approved as presented. 4c. Study Session Meeting of February 8, 1999 With the following changes the minutes were approved as presented. Page 23,Item 1, last two paragraphs, substitute the word"subsidized" for"assisted living"under Councilmember Nelson and Councilmember Sanger comments. 5. Approval of Agendas a. Consent Agenda It was moved by Councilmember Young, seconded by Councilmember Sanger,to approve the consent agenda. The motion passed 6-0. b. Agenda It was moved by Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to approve the agenda. The motion passed 6-0. c. Resolutions and Ordinances By consent, Council waived reading of resolutions and ordinances. 6. Public Hearings 6a. Amendment to Special Permit to construct a 45-unit apartment building in the R-4 Zoning District. Public hearing continued from April 19, 1999 1351 Hampshire Avenue. Case No. 99-5-CUP Resolution #99-60 Sacha Peterson, Planning Associate, presented a staff report and recommended approval of the amended Special Permit with seven conditions. Norm Cole, Project Architect, asked if there was any possibility for movement on condition 4 b that a sidewalk be installed along Hampshire Avenue. He stated that there were a number of residents at the Planning Commission who expressed concerns about diminishing the amount of green space and he felt that adding a sidewalk could decrease some of the current green space. He was also concerned that a sidewalk would be a maintenance and ice hazard and that it would be an isolated sidewalk that doesn't lead anywhere. Mayor Jeff Jacobs closed the public hearing subject to the right of the Council to reopen it at a future time. Councilmember Young stated that he was pleased to see that the traffic projections would accommodate this development and that the sidewalk would be included. He felt that concerns about inclusion of the sidewalk from the Planning Commission,Neighborhood, and Council had been heard. He indicated that the Architect may not be aware of the City's intent to build sidewalks wherever they can logically be included in development plans. He indicated that the 111 City's draft sidewalk and trail plan includes continuing that sidewalk all the way up to Wayzata Boulevard and moving it south on Hampshire. It was moved by Councilmember Young, seconded by Councilmember Brimeyer,to adopt a resolution approving an Amendment to the Special Permit subject to conditions included in the resolution. The motion passed 6-0. 7. Petitions,Requests, Communications-None 8. Resolutions and Ordinances 8a. Law Enforcement Labor Services,Inc. Local#218 Labor Agreement Resolution #99-61 Nancy Gohman, Human Resource Manager presented a summary of the staff report. Councilmember Nelson asked about the change with respect to insurance. He asked if we were getting into a position where we are contributing more than the benefit actually is projected to cost for a single person in two years. Ms. Gohman indicated that this was the case because right now on our insurance plan we contribute more into our cafeteria benefit for single benefit contributions than the cost of single health insurance. The cost of single health insurance is approximately $195 a month at the present time in 1999, but our cafeteria plan includes health, life, dental, and supplemental life insurance which can add up the cost depending on what options from the plan are selected by the employee. Councilmember Nelson asked if the $430 per month was a pre-tax contribution. Ms. Gohman stated that depending on how it works out in the cafeteria contribution, part of it will be pre-tax for health insurance, long term disability and dental and it will be after-tax if there was any money remaining. Councilmember Nelson asked if it was possible that in two years we would be spending $525 a month and the single employee will be able to cash out some of that benefit as an after-tax benefit. Ms. Gohman stated that this was a possibility. Councilmember Nelson indicated that this was exactly why he didn't think that'we want to be going in this direction. He thought this was going a too far toward political correctness by providing a benefit to persons who don't need it. Those persons are able to cash out and increase I - their pay while on the other hand, there are employees who do not receive enough benefit payment and must dip into their own pockets to meet their family's needs. He felt there was no legal or justifiable reason to increase the single benefit to the family benefit level. 1 Councilmember Young asked if staff was planning to simply raise the level of the single employee up to the level of married family or if there was something in between. Ms. Gohman stated that the amount contributed to the cafeteria plan for each employee does not fully cover benefits for those who select a family plan for health and dental. What we are doing is continuing to increase the benefit contribution for those selecting family coverage, but also bringing the single rate of contributions up over three years to equalize the cafeteria benefit dollar contribution per employee. , Councilmember Young felt that staff had taken the easy way out and that this was the most expensive option for the City. He believes that we should equalize the benefits, but that it should be done through another approach where employees would not have money coming back to them because a cap would be in place. He felt all flexible dollars should be contributed in some way into the options that were before them. He felt the option of taking a surplus in cash was bad policy. Flexible benefits programs are valuable,but should not be used as a supplement to salary. Councilmember Brimeyer concurred with Councilmember Young. Ms. Gohman stated that if the City allows employees to contribute excess dollars to a deferred comp plan, the City was also mandated to allow employees to choose the cash option. Councilmember Brimeyer stated that he felt we have built a marriage penalty into this system. I Councilmember Sanger disagreed saying that what the city has have done is given every employee an equal opportunity to select benefits most appropriate to their personal needs. She commended staff for coming to terms on this contract and felt it was an equal opportunity for all of the employees in the bargaining unit. Councilmember Brimeyer asked if in addition to allowing employees to get the benefits to which they are entitled and need, we are going beyond that and providing cash after they have exhausted all the benefits that they can get. Councilmember Sanger questioned if employees truly exhausted all benefits that were appropriate whether there really was cash available back or whether people could only get cash if they chose to forego other benefit options She would suggest that any extra cash was used to purchase vacation days rather than straight cash, but only if it could be mandated. She believed benefits were another form of compensation and if someone would choose to have cash rather than benefits in the form of long term disability or dental care it wasn't a policy problem. Councilmember Brimeyer indicated that he would agree that if you got$525 you should be required to purchase $525 worth of benefits and or vacation days or something else, but not be allowed, as a policy, to purchase $700 worth of benefits and have $300 left over as cash in your pocket. Councilmember Sanger believed a match for a deferred comp program was a good idea that could be explored as a possible benefit option in the future, but did not feel it should delay approval of contract before the council at this discussion. Councilmember Nelson suggested that the opt-out option was inconsistent with equal benefit contributions. He disagreed that benefits were the same as compensation since Congress had made a policy decision that benefits are not compensation by declaring them non-taxable. He believed what we are really doing was paying single people more than people with families and questioned if as a policy matter this was something that Council wanted to do. Councilmember Brimeyer did not want to delay approval of the contract and wished to see the City go toward the policy suggested by Councilmembers Young and Sanger that improves the quality of life for employees through providing more benefit options, possibly through a match. Mr. Meyer, City Manager stated that staff would explore the option of whether matching contributions to a 457 Deferred Compensation Plan was possible, but noted that the 457 Plan was set up strictly for public employees and may very well restrict employer contributions. Councilmember Young questioned whether the actual pay increase was more than 3%. He indicated that by suggesting a match for the 457 Plan, he did not want to see a proposal that just adds another 5% match. His intent was that any contributions to the 457 plan be taken out of the whole package and not create another additional cost to the City. It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Latz, to adopt the attached Resolution approving the Labor Agreement for 1999-2001 for LELS #218 covering Police. The motion passed 4-2 with Councilmember Nelson and Councilmember Young opposed. 8b. Labor Agreement: International Union of Operating Engineers Local 49 and the City of St. Louis Park Resolution #99-62 Nancy Gohman, Human Resource Manager presented a staff report and indicated that the flex- leave policy had been placed in the contract. It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Latz, to adopt the attached Resolution approving the Labor Agreement for 1999-2000 for IUOE#49 Maintenance employee. The motion passed 4-2 with Councilmember Nelson and Councilmember Young opposed. "I 8c. Ratify Appointment of City Treasurer It was moved by Councilmember Latz, seconded by Councilmember Young, to ratify the appointment of Director of Finance, Kathleen McBride as City Treasurer. The motion passed 6- 0. i Councilmember Sanger indicated that her preference would be that people didn't have cash, but if that was what someone really wanted that was not a problem. Ms. Gohman stated that this was the first year where the City has allowed an opt-out that has a $50 rebate to that and the rest of their premium is reduced from the benefits pool. Councilmember Young stated that it was bad corporate employee policy to do anything that encourages an employee not to take out the kind of insurance they really need and rewarding them with incentive to try to reduce their benefit so they can actually get the cash out. He strongly encouraged that the options be limited to things suitable to employment and not something that brings them cash into their hands. Councilmember Latz asked staff to clarify the deferred comp requirement. Ms. Gohman stated that it was an IRS regulation that if deferred comp was allowed then the City could not restrict it just to deferred comp, but would have to allow the cash compensation. Councilmember Latz also believed that benefits are another form of compensation and questioned if government ought to be determining what form of compensation an employee is going to take. Mr. Meyer, City Manager stated that as a basic safety net,the City required employees to either have an insurance plan or to prove that they have access to a health insurance plan through a partner or spouse. He indicated that people are encouraged to use discretionary dollars from the cafeteria plan as appropriately as possible. He did not want somebody opting out of health insurance altogether or selecting minimal level of benefits to be forced to buy coverage they didn't need or want just because they didn't want the money to go to waste.. He believed that providing a fixed amount across the board gave employees maximum flexibility to tailor their options to their needs and felt comfortable with phasing this in over three years. He was opposed to any reduction of city contributions for family coverage. Councilmember Latz asked if the concerned Councilmembers would suggest not offering deferred comp as an alternative. Councilmember Young believed it would be logical to put these dollars into a fund that basically matched up to 5%of whatever employee would put in towards a 457 Plan. Mayor Jacobs believed it was good to give employees as many options as possible and believed that generally people will make choices for themselves which are in their own economic best interest. He did feel that benefits were another form of compensation. Mr. Meyer stated that the Council had the option of delaying, but typically the only reason for a delay was to go back to table to renegotiate something that wasn't ratified by the Council. M 8d. Minnehaha Trails Request for Extension of Time to Apply for Final Plat By consent, Council authorized the Mayor and City Manager to execute the Trail Cooperative Agreement with the Suburban Hennepin Park District. The motion passed 6-0. 9. Reports from Officers,Boards, Committees a. Vendor Claims Report By consent, Council accepted report for filing. b. Financial Report By consent, Council accepted report for filing. c. Charter Commission Minutes of May 26, 1998 By consent, Council accepted report for filing. d. Cable TV Advisory Commission Minutes of February 18, 1999 By consent, Council accepted report for filing. 10. Unfinished Business 10a. Board and Commission Appointment(s)-None 11. New Business lla. Trail Cooperative Agreement-Suburban Hennepin Regional Park District Councilmember Latz questioned if there was a provision in the agreement that specified that Hopkins must approve construction in Hopkins by the City of St. Louis Park . He was concerned about any liability issues. Mr. Harmening referred to the cooperative agreement that stated that the Park District will enter into a cooperative agreement with the City of Hopkins authorizing the trail construction - operations and maintenance as part of the St. Louis Park Contract. He indicated that through the relationship that exists between Hennepin Parks and Hopkins, the City of St. Louis Park will be given the permission to go into Hopkins to construct that trail. There wouldn't be anything preventing us from having some authorization directly from the City of Hopkins to construct the trail. He stated that the City of Hopkins is in agreement with this project and not adverse to having some type of written agreement with us that addresses concerns about liability. Councilmember Latz asked what would happen if Hopkins was unsuccessful in acquiring the property and easements that were necessary for the trail. Mr. Harmening stated that Hennepin Parks was acquiring the easements and that they have been working with Hopkins and Supervalu to achieve that end. He stated that Hopkins had come to terms with Supervalu regarding the purchase of an easement over their parking lot near Excelsior Boulevard and Highway 169. Hennepin Parks will be paying for the cost of that easement. Councilmember Latz asked about anticipated cost of the bituminous overlay on the trail. Mr. Harmening stated that the $100,000 figure was obtained from SRF Consultants and intended to reflect the cost of the bituminous surface in the City of St. Louis Park as well as the design costs associated with constructing that surface. Councilmember Latz asked the City Attorney to clarify the intent of the language in the paragraph in the agreement related to Utilities. Mr. Scott, City Attorney stated that the clear intent was that the City retains the right to repair existing utilities and to install new utilities and indicated that the language could be changed to reflect that intent. Councilmember Latz raised a question about paragraph 11b: Duration of License in the agreement and asked if there was a provision to protect the City in the event that the Park District terminated before 10 years. It was his intent that the Park District could not avoid its obligation under the agreement to repay us up to $100,000 for the bituminous by deciding to terminate the agreement early. Mr. Scott, City Attorney clarified that there was no specific language that stated that. Mr. Meyer, City Manager believed that if there wasn't any specific language that does give them any access to get the money back and if we start opening up the agreement to discuss that,the Park District may want to do some sort of a pro-rating negotiation. In the absence of language, they would have no basis of a claim. Mr. Scott, City Attorney concurred with the City Manager. Councilmember Latz was satisfied with the City Attorney's interpretation. It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute the Trail Cooperative Agreement with the Suburban Hennepin Regional Park District. The motion passed 6-0. 11b. Bid Tabulation: One(1) Overcenter Articulating Aerial Device for Tree Trimming By consent, Council designated Truck Utilities and Manufacturing Company, Inc. as the lowest ., responsible bidder for one(1) new 1999 Overcenter Articulating Aerial Device for tree trimming and authorize execution of a purchase agreement with Truck Utilities and Manufacturing, Inc. in the amount of$58,170.30. 11c. Bid Tabulation: Mini Pumper By consent, Council designated Kovatch Mobile Equipment Corp. (KME)the lowest responsible bidder for one(1)Mini Pumper and to authorize execution of a purchase agreement with KME in the amount of$115,911.00. 11d. Bid Tabulation: Emergency Vehide Preemption (EVP)at Two (2)Traffic Signal Locations -Project No. 98-05(S.A.P. 163-030-01) By consent, Council designated Killmer Electric Company the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of$16,133.00. 12. Miscellaneous-None 13. Claims,Appropriations, Contract Payments a. Contract Payments-Partial Lead Con, Inc. $ 95,375.25 Reservoir Repairs Contract No. 51-98 By consent, Council approved and authorized payments. 14. Communications From the City Manager: Mr. Meyer announced that a Community Gathering for the Littleton, CO tragedy would be held on Thursday, May 6 from 8:00 p.m. - 8:30 p.m. at the St. Louis Senior High School. Mr. Meyer gave an update on the Railroad Study and upcoming meetings scheduled for the community. From the Mayor: Mayor Jacobs asked what the Council consensus was related to the applicant interviews for the 3rd Ward Councilmember vacancy. The Council discussed preferences and options and agreed to conduct interviews on May 17th and May 18th. Cindy Larsen, City Clerk, will contact the Councilmembers and the candidates to determine their availability on these dates. 15. Adjournment It was moved by Councilmember Latz, seconded by C' ouricil emb Nelson, to adjourn the meeting at 9:05 p.m. The motion passed 6-0. City lerk May! /