HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001/10/22 - ADMIN - Minutes - City Council - Study Session AST.CITY LOUISOF
PARK OFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
October 22, 2001
The meeting convened at 7:00 p.m.
Present at the meeting were Councilmembers Ron Latz, Chns Nelson, Susan Sanger, Jim
Brimeyer, and Jeff Jacobs.
Staff present: City Manager(Mr. Meyer), Director of Public Works (Mr. Rardm), Public Works
Coordinator(Mr. Merkley), Director of Community Development (Mr. Harmening); Economic
Development Coordinator(Mr. Kleve); Finance Director(Ms. McGann); Community Outreach
Coordinator(Ms. McDonell); Housing Supervisor(Ms. Schnitker); Housing Coordinator(Ms.
Larsen); and City Clerk (Ms. Reichert).
1. Home Renewal Program Modifications
Staff met with Council to discuss proposed modification to the Home Renewal Program whereby
the program would expand to include acquisition by the city of lower-valued, structurally sound
homes, which would be remodeled by private remodeling firms as move-up homes.
Discussion focused around the purchase of an already identified property and the applicability of
this program to the City's goals in housing development.
Councilmember Bnmeyer emphasized the benefits of program as it related to this particular as a
model for others which may follow.
Councilmember Sanger asked what cntena would be used for choosing homes to participate in
this program.
Mr. Harmening responded that acquisition would be done on a case by case basis considering the
pnce of the home, repairs needed, and special situations related to the property. He did not
expect that great numbers of sellers would want their home to go through this process.
Councilmember Nelson inquired about funding the acquisition, use of CDBG funds and if there
were other programs available more appropriate for rehabilitation this property.
Mr. Harmening stated that though this property was in need of repair and renovation, it did not
meet federal guidelines containing a definition of"blighted property".
Councilmember Brimeyer suggested that this program be undertaken not as a profit making
venture, but to improve housing opportunity in the City. He felt this illustrated a creative use of
city funding to produce better housing.
Councilmember Sanger agreed with the program conceptually but wasn't sure about this
particular acquisition. She asked if there were other ways to do a demonstration of the program.
Councilmember Latz was concerned about long term viability of the program and wanted to
ensure that homes were not renovated to the point of being removed from the affordable housing
market.
Study Session Minutes -2- October 22, 2001
Councilmember Sanger requested that any contractor hired to do the renovation of the homes in
the program keep improvements compatible with the architectural style of the properties
involved.
Councilmember Nelson felt the City should be able to come out as well as possible financially
and suggested that language be included so that the city could be a partner with the contractor in
enjoying profits that may come from the renovation and subsequent sales.
Mr. Harmening agreed that with the concept and suggested that the contract could be structured
to ensure the city enjoyed a favorable financial position should profits be realized.
Mr. Harmening suggested that the Housing Authonty manage the program with parameters as set
by Council policy.
Council directed staff to bnng forward a formal proposal for Council action.
2. League of Women Voters New Neighbor Handbook
Members of the SLP League of Women Voters were at the meeting to present to the council
copies of their newly published new neighbor handbook. The handbook has been designed to
meet the needs of immigrants new to our community to help them to adjust to society.
Information in the handbook is very basic and covers those things most important such as where
to buy food, find housing assistance, and other basic needs.
The book is currently pnnted in English, but translations are being done to Spanish, Somali and
Russian.
The Council and the LOWV discussed the future of the publication, and on-going financial and
upkeep issues.
3. EDA Budget and HRA Levy
Jean McGann, Finance Director presented the proposed EDA and HRA budgets to the council
for their consideration. The council discussed the restructure of the budget in response to
legislative changes made in the last session. Ms. McGann also informed the Council that the
city's reporting format will be presented differently in 2003 as a result of changes in GASB
(Government Accounting Standards Board) requirements.
4. Solid Waste Contract
Public Works staff met with Council to discuss a process to evaluate contracting for residential
solid waste collection in the city.
Discussion ensued as to how performance can be measured and what mechanisms other than
customer complaints can and should be used.
Mr. Meyer said that there are several options available for measuring a contractor's performance
such as customer complaints, information about missed pickups, community surveys (such as the
survey) done by Decision Resources) and comparative performance measurements.
Study Session Minutes -3- October 22, 2001
Councilmember Brimeyer said that he favored establishing criteria for evaluating contractor
performance, but did not feel taking this current contract out to bid would be in the best interest
of the community. Councilmember Nelson agreed.
Councilmember Sanger felt very strongly that the service provided by the city's current
contractor is unacceptable and felt going out to bid is absolutely essential.
Mr. Meyer said that prior to either renewing or going out to bid, criteria must be developed to
evaluate contractors and to serve as a basis for designing services that best meet the needs of our
residents.
Mr. Merkley proposed that in order to ensure we are moving forward appropriately, Council and
Staff should work together to more specifically define the following:
• Purpose, Goals and Objectives of the City's Solid Waste Program
• Services desired as part of the program
• Performance indicators that can measure and monitor service delivery and contractor
performance
• Specific contract provisions to specify minimum levels of service delivery and performance
• Options for delivery of services (by contract, in-house, subscription, etc. )
He also said that customer service calls are being tracked and statistics are being kept that can
help to evaluate the current contractor's performance.
Mr. Meyer pointed out that the 2000 Decision Resources survey had indicated a"high" level of
satisfaction with the solid waste collection program and that our records show that the incidence
of reported missed pickups were low considering the number of pickups that regularly occur.
Mayor Jacobs was comfortable with setting quality standards for contractor performance
regardless of whether council directed that the city go out to bid or renew the existing contract.
Councilmember Latz asked if there were industry standards established that the city could use as
a comparison. Mr. Meyer responded that we had just received a document from ICMA
regarding performance measurement that had been compiled from data submitted by cities across
the country. There may be other methods for determining industry standards as well.
Councilmember Latz questioned the reliability of complaint data submitted to the City by Waste
Management. Mr. Merkley responded that staff had recently started following up on complaints
and calls for service entered into the database by the contractor. He has found no reason to
believe that the current contractor has not been logging entries into the system.
Mayor Jacobs suggested that complaints and calls for service should be taken in-house by city
staff to ensure that they were properly handled.
Mr. Rardin did not believe that to be feasible due to logistical and communications limitations.
Customer service is currently structured so that when a caller contacts the contractor that call is
immediately dispatched to the provider in the field. If calls were to come in to the city, that
direct communication link would be lost which would undoubtedly result in a reduction in
service and/or slower response times.
Study Session Minutes -4- October 22, 2001
Councilmember Latz suggested there may be three reasons why we may want to go to bid rather
than renew the existing contract: as a pnce check; to send a message to the current contractor
that we are open to evaluating other options; and to improve tracking of customer service
complaints.
Mr. Merkley suggested that in order to fully address the issue of can treatment, blowing and
spilled garbage, the Council should consider going to a city-wide cart system which would allow
for an automated system for pickup. The current conditions are such that the quality of the
containers used by the homeowners is not regulated, which increases opportunity for scattering
of refuse by animals, blowing cans, etc.
Councilmember Bnmeyer repeated his position that going out to bid would be disruptive and
counterproductive. He favored working with the current contractor to improve services.
Councilmember Nelson agreed saying that there is no proof that the current contractor is not
doing a good job.
Council directed staff to refine the steps to be used in the evaluation process and to present
concrete indicators to assist the Council in focusing their discussion.
5. Recodification
Ms. Reichert presented the Council with a timeline for adoption of the newly codified municipal
code which is proposed to be effective January 2, 2002, the first business day of the new year.
6. Adjournment -The meeting was adjourned at 10:45 p.m.
. s
C Clerk Ma,or