Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1978-10-24 CC MIN• • • • COUNCIL CHAMBER Stillwater, Minnesota October 24, 1978 7:30 P. M. REGULAR MEETING The meeting was called to order by President Junker. The Invocation was given by the Acting City Clerk, Schnell. Present: Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen Mahoney, Peterson, Powell and Mayor Junker Absent: None Also Present: Acting City Clerk, Schnell; Finance Director, Kriesel; City Attorney, Magnuson; Superintendent of Public Works, Shelton; Director of Parks and Recreation, Blekum; Consulting Engineer, Dick Moore; Building Inspector, Niska; Chairman of the Planning Commission, Zoller Press: Citizens: Stillwater Evening Gazette - Bob Liberty WAVN- -Gary Larson Free Press - Kevin Regan Paul Ravich, Thomas Barrett, Jack Hooley, Mr. & Mrs. Bill Hahn, Jayne Finnegan Smith, Sharon Baker, Al Hamel, Brad MacDonald, Owen Thomas, Guy Dilts, Dick Muller, Harry Peterson, Dave Heitmiller, Mr. & Mrs. Dwayne Nelson, Cecil Callahan, Dick Balfanz INDIVIDUALS - DELEGATIONS 1. PAUL RAVICH, representing Mr. Jack Hooley, Tom Barrett and other parties from the Stillwater Industrial Park appeared before the City Council asking them to pass an inducement resolution to issue Industrial Revenue Bonds to finance a commercial and office development on this property. There will be a shopping center which will contain in excess of 65,000 square feet of retail stores, proposing two free standing restaurants on the site, also proposing a small office building containing approximately 15,000 to 30,000 square feet. He was asking for authorization by the Council for the issuing of industrial revenue bonds to cover the cost of land acquisition and con- struction of the facilities and equipment up to a maximum of 4.9 million dollars. It was claified that this would in no way affect the obligation of the City - no responsibility for payment of these bonds should the bond holder not receive the payment from the developer - City is not responsible to levy any taxes or make any payments - it is just an inducement by the City allow- ing the developer to receive a lower interest rate. It makes the project feasible under todays' financial situation. On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilman Mahoney, a resolution was introduced "RESOLUTION RECITING A PROPOSAL FOR A COMMERCIAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OR PROJECTS GIVING PRELIMINARY PROJECT FOR PROJECTS PURSUANT TO THE MINNESOTA MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL DEV- ELOPMENT ACT AUTHORIZING THE SUBMISSION OF AN APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF SAID PROJECT OR PROJECTS TO THE COMMISSION OF SECURITIES OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA AND AUTHORIZING THE PREPARATION OF NECESSARY DOCUMENTS AND MATERIALS IN CONNECTION WITH SAID PROJECT OR PROJECTS ". AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen Mahoney, Peterson, Powell and Mayor Junker NAYS - -None (see resolutions) 2. ROBERT BURNS, Washington County Assessor, appeared before the Council to answer questions and explain the proposed increase in assessing properties for the City of Stillwater for 1979. Other communities are charging far more than they are - up to $4.00 per parcel - they will be charging $2.50 per parcel. The number of parcels has increased - there are 17 other communities that have their assessing done by Washington County They do one - fourth of the City each year plus the building permits, plus a house that was 80, last year - they will have to do 2,100 or 2,200 parcels which they will have next year. Assessors have to be certified and felt that actually they are subsidizing the City of Stillwater. • • • • • • October 24, 1978 On motion of Councilman Powell, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the Council directed that Washington County Assessor's office continue doing the assessing for the City of Stillwater. (all in favor) (The proposal for the assessing fees for 1979 was $11,855.00) 3. AL HAMEL, representing P. J. Gaughan, Inc., Forest Lake, appeared before the Council in response to a letter sent to them from the Stillwater City Attorney regarding the conditions of their Special Use Permit for an apart- ment complex on South Greeley Street. They intend to comply with everything to bring the property into con- formance and he has had conversation with the Building Inspector and the City Attorney. Tomorrow they will make payment of the $6,000 for the park dedication - the permit did not spell out the time of such payment. The apartment does not require any permits from the DNA for the site. The signs on the property will be moved -he will go out with Ron Niska so that they can comply with the ordinance -- they may have to move the signs back to the building line. The berm for the retention of the water will be taken care of. The posting of the bond - they have posted a bond of $1,038,000 to insure the completion of the building and all site improvements which has been posted with the Minnesota Finance Agency and a copy of which he had in hand and if the City feels they want a $15,000 bond in addition to this - they will post that. If there are other items that the City feels that are not in conformance, they would like to take care of them. Mayor Dunker asked him if he was aware of the problem with the neighbors and MR. HAMEL stated that they are in a lawsuit with their neighbors on the property line - they intend to try to resolve this out of court - he felt that this was a private matter, but if the Council wants to get involved with it, he would like to have his own counsel here to deal with that. COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK had one concern and that was a statement made at the Planning Commission meeting in that the four plexs were assured that they would not be denied permission to use this driveway - this has been changed and that was her big concern. MR. HAMEL - they felt that the driveway was such that they may have access off of it - their parking lot and their driveway are now on their property - that if the driveway was completely on their property that would be one thing. They are having trouble closing the mortgage on the property because there is an encroachment on it and they could get clear title and still do not have clear title on the property yet because the neighbors are using the property without an easement and without any rights to it at this time. They sent an easement agreement to the property owners and asked them to share in the construction of the drive that would serve the property - they did not wish to share in that cost - the cost was not going to be considerable - possibly several thousand dollars - they did not wish to share in that cost to serve their -� property and they were required to sign a statement to make a diligent effort to resolve the encroachment and to get clear title to the property before the construction is completed. Questions were raised about the amount of property that belongs to the four plexs and the amount belonging to Victoria Villas - there is room for them to park behind the buildings without encroaching on the apartment house property - what they are using is the property of Victoria Villa for the driveway. COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK stated at no time were they told 'that is our property'- they will not have access to the rear part of their property and MR. ZOLLER said that they were told they would be able to use this driveway. MR. HAMEL stated that the closing the mortgage came after the meeting here and the encroachment question and the fact that they did not get clear title to their property and that there was a problem. This was something that they tried to resolve and they could not resolve. COUNCILMAN POWELL said that somebody mentioned that if the owners of the four plexs could prevail upon the City to allow you to not blacktop it that you would then dissolve that action. 63 . • • 1 1 4 r • CA • • October 24, 1978 MR. HAMEL stated that he did not propose that - that was proposed to him and perhaps it was proposed to Mr. Nelson - if there is no expense involved in the piece of driveway at that point - then they have no problem in pro- viding the easement over the property. If there was curb and gutter that would make it impossible for them to have access to the property as they would have to go over the curb unless a cut was put in it. MAYOR JUNKER asked if the owners of the four plexs agreed with the property lines that Gaughan's surveyors established and MR. HAMEL stated that he assumed that Mr. Nelson did . . . COUNCILMAN POWELL stated that Mr. Heitmiller saw him today and he stated that the property line was different from what Mr. Hamel showed on the drawing - he said that it cut right through the back of his yard. MR. HAMEL indicated that Mr. Heitmiller's survey showed the property line to be two feet shorter than Gaughan's survey. There were some questions as to where the property line is and from what point it was measured. MR. HAMEL did not feel that this should be a concern of the Council. MAYOR JUNKER made mention of a letter in which Victoria Villa was going to barricade the road and put those cars out in the street and this would be in conflict with statements made at the Planning Commission meeting and he felt then it becomes a concern of the City Council. DAVE MAGNUSON felt that this is purely a bounda y dispute between neighbors and on the other hand if there were assurances made to the neighbors and the Planning Commission who were involved in planning process - it is certainly a moral obligation that has to be straightened out and it might even be a legal question in connection with the granting of the Special Use Permit: The problem involves an additional access for the three four plexs if they are not able to get the one from Victoria Villas and this would require Council approval for another driveway on to a very busy street and felt the Council should try to solve the problem. COUNCILMAN PETERSON asked about the request of the Council and the Planning Commission for a DNR study on the Special Use Permit and asked what it called for. MR. MAGNUSON - it required DNR approval be obtained before the issuance of the Building Permit and MR. HAMEL indicated that the DNR has no interest in it since it is not public waters and they are not concerned with it and that the work that they are undertaking does not require a premit - the permit stated that any permits that were necessary be obtained. COUNCILMAN PETERSON asked that the City have a letter from the DNR to this effect and MR. HAMEL stated that they will be supplying such a letter. COUNCILMAN PETERSON asked about the signs and MR. MAGNUSON stated that any signs shall be in compliance with the zoning ordinance as far as setback and size - and he was informed that one sign was required by the Minnesota Housing and Finance Agency. MR. HAMEL stated that he went over the matter with Ron and their sign is 15 feet in front of the building line. In all of their projects they have temporary signs and they don't seem to cause any problems, but if it is a problem here, they will alter that policy - they do have permanent signs that they have to install and they are not trying to circumvent the City Ordinances. MR. MAGNUSON - the assessments that they would like to make would amount to several thousand dollars - it seemed to him that a project of this size that if they put in the driveway and put in the curbs and granted them an easement over it to use it as a driveway that that should be the end of it and should not be a controversy on that end of it. MR. HAMEL stated that it is a matter of principle on their part as to what they feel is fair and equitable - the City puts in a street to serve the property they expect to assess it back to the benefited property and they feel the same thing and since the property owners do not have a right - they do not have an easement over that area and since they need to get an easement from thanto have legal access to the property - they are going to be benefited they should help tear the cost - fifty percent on the part of the three 4 plexs for their share of the driveway and this does not include the parking lot - just the driveway. (Mr. Nelson would pay one -third of the half and Mr. Heitmiller would be paying two- thirds of that half) MR. HAMEL stated that they do have their mortgage but they had to sign a declaration - sign a statement that they would make all efforts possible to resolve the property in dispute. They wish to solve the problem - it is costing them legal fees. COUNCILMAN POWELL asked how many points Gaughan Construction is in violation of the Special Use Permit and he was informed that it was five which were detailed in Mr. Magnuson's letter. • • • • r• • October 24, 1978 COUNCILMAN POWELL asked if it was possible for the City to revoke that building permit until these matters were resolved and MR. MAGNUSON did not feel the City could. MR. POWELL felt that the owners of the four pleas bought the property and then there was some property left in back owned by the same party and they were given permission at that time to go ahead to use it - all of a sudden now it becomes impossible for them to do it unless they do it at some considerable expense and felt that was unfair. COUNCILMAN MAHONEY indicated that the problem is that they should have gotten an easement at the time that they were given permission to do it and that is not a Council consideration. MR. HAMEL stated that they would rather not build that at all if the City Council decided not to let them build it - they have access to the property and the permit requires this as an emergency exit. MAYOR JUNKER asked if this was left as a gravel road by a special permit there would be objection and he did not feel that they did not need the blacktopping. MR. HAMEL stated that if it was for emergency purposes, they would be willing to have a barrier erected that would stop normal traffic, but would be man- euvered through with the emergency vehicles. They do not have a problem with it - it would save them money. COUNCILMAN PETERSON felt that it was pressure put on the Council with the law- suit - all of these stipulations and all of the requirements of the Special Use Permit were negotiated through Doerffler Construction - then Gaughan got involved and since Gaughan got involved the City has had nothing but problems - the copy of the letter that he received indicated that some representative of Gaughan Construction told one of the property owners that they would drop the lawsuit if the property owners put enough pressure on the City of Stillwater and withdraw this requirement and to him it was another effort on Gaughan's part. (This was in a copy of a letter that they received from one of the property owners). MR. HAMEL indicated that occurred in a conversation with himself and Mr. Dwayne Nelson - what they are trying to do here is, they are going to an expense - it is all on the border - this will serve some property owners - they are giving land to them so that they have rights of access - legitimate access to the property which they do not have now, they feel that they should share in the cost of that improvement - if they do not have to put in any improvement, they do not have any problem in giving them the right of access that they have to their property now, where they are really getting something for nothing- they are giving them easements for rights of access to their property and the same conditions that they have at this time. COUNCILMAN PETERSON - even though at the time of the Planning Commission hearing -°+ these same property owners who are now being sued were assured during this meeting that they would have no problems - no indication at that time that they would be expected to pay a portion of the cost and at that point and time the ..� construction company knew that it was a requirement to blacktop and during the Planning Commission hearing at no time did anyone in Gaughan's office tell these property owners anything about this problem. MR. HAMEL stated that at that time they did not know that they would have the encroachment involving the title to the property which came about later on. COUNCILMAN POWELL stated that if Gaughan paid for the improvement and still allowed them the parking that should resolve that - what difference would that make to the mortgage company. MAYOR JUNKER felt that if this was not blacktopped and they would go out the other way - the Nelsons and Heitmillers are not going to benefit by the 30 foot driveway and the parking lot will still be crushed rock - they will have a speedway going around their property which they could eliminate by putting up a little barricade which would make all the cars go out the street where they are suppose to. He felt that if it were blacktopped there would be more cars using that driveway. MR. HAMEL disagreed on this score. DWAYNE NELSON stated that P. J. Gaughan himself told him that Don Heitmiller's and his half would be in the five to six thousand dollar range and this has been a gravel road back there for the past 35 years. COUNCILMAN PETERSON - Mr. Heitmiller indicated that he would like to talk to his attorney on this matter. 65 • ■ t • / a 66 • • October 24, 1978 COUNCILMAN POWELL asked Mr. Zoller if the Planning Commission could have a special meeting soon so that all the parties involved could sit down and everybody see everybody else and have a clear understanding and work out something that might be acceptable. Questions were raised as to whether this meeting should be held with the Planning Commission or the City Council and MR. HAMEL felt that it should be the City Council since the permit allows the City Council to grant variances in the Special Use Permit without a hearing and this could be done this evening. thattRhisNatorneyasked isMr. working of the felt problems this and he could indicated not say anything at this time. The Council P. 14. to resolve this matter. wers on Monday, DWAYNE NELSON - felt that this could be resolved right now if the City and all parties involved agree to leaving it as it is - alternatively they would get legal access and they participate one -half of the improvements plus all future maintenance. He felt that the people living in their units will be paying these costs and that the half that would be borne by the apartment house would be divided among a greater number of units and this would not be in the best interest of equity. He objected to these units going in there, but now that they are there he will accept them - they are getting tax for- giveness for the apartment and have public financing and did not feel that this was a fair perspective. He would be in favor of leaving that driveway the way it is. Questions were raised about what would happen to the lawsuit so that the action could be dropped and the CITY ATTORNEY indicated if there is no answer to the lawsuit when the twenty days are up, he did not feel that it was some- thing to be concerned about. PETITIONS - -On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilman Mahoney, the Council accepted the petition for the proposed vacation of a portion of South Fourth Street and set the date for the public hearingtf for rfDecember512, 1978 at 7:30 P.M. (all in favor) - -On motion of Councilman Mahoney, seconeed by Councilman Powell, the Council erty was in agreement of the proposed annexation of the Gordon Bjorns pr pertr) to the City of Oak Park Heights from Baytown Township. THE MAYOR DECLARED A RECESS FROM 8:25 to 8:40 P. M. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. On motion of Councilman Peterson„ seconded by Councilman Mahoney, the Council directed that the Acting City Clerk send bills to affected property owners for Local Improvement No. 159 for the improvement on the alley in Block 18 as recommended by the City Attorney and if they refuse to pay, then the Council could have an assessment hearing on the proposed assessment. (all in favor) 2. MR. MAGNUSON stated that he got Duane's file on the problems on the plat of Radle's Sunny Slope Addition and it shows that there was a mistake in the plat and it is hard to tell where the services are located on the ground and also it is hard to tell where the right -of -way should be and before any conveyances can be obtained, the Council should decide where the street should be. In the past an attempt was made to get the s developer to do that and he is agreeable vingswhateverllandtise necessary to straighten the street out, but he should bear any cost of the survey. He felt that there should be an improvement of the street ordered in connection with this - the street put in and get the necessary easements - street properly located and it could be done in connection with the improvement project - no separate expense to the City for engineering. COUNCILMAN POWELL indicated that Mr. Elliott reported sometime ago that he put the improvements in where the street should be (the utilities) and according to the original plat the utilities are on private property. COUNCILMAN PETERSON moved and COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK, seconded a motion that this be referred to the City Attorney and Mr. Elliott to look for a solution to the problem and bring back a report to the Council. (the motion was later rescinded) • • • • 7 1 • • MR. SHELTON indicated that the plat has been straightened out - according to the letter that was received - he took two pieces off two of the lots and what they have to do is change the fire hydrant - the hydrant is in the middle of the cul -de -sac and put it over on the right -of -way that was taken from Mr. Kalinoff and then they have enough to put in the street and the property has been deeded over. MR. MAGNUSON stated that a certificate of correction could be filed to make this effective. He said that Art Holm should have been the one to do this and he felt that Mr. Elliott could probably take care of this since Mr. Holm had died and could certify to this. DICK MOORE indicated that this could be incorporated with another project since it will be a small project and it is rather late to get the work done this year. On motion of Councilman Powell, seconded by Councilman Peterson, the Council ordered a feasibility study and a preliminary cost estimate i'1 for the improvement of Lookout Street and the property lines would be defined to serve as an amended plat. (all in favor) 3. MR. MAGNUSON presented to the City Council the special assessment benefit proposal from North St. Paul which was used for assessing parking lot bene- fits and which he felt that the City could use in assessing the new parking lot. COUNCILMAN POWELL made mention of the amount of money that was pledged which was a substantial amount and these people followed along with their pledge which was a total of $82,000, and he asked Mr. Magnuson if this would have to be modified to some degree. MR. MAGNUSON stated that the Statutes require that more than 50% of the cost of the improvement be assessed as a special assessment - the statute does require that unless there is an election and then nothing has to be assessed - without an election more than 50% and the balance could be paid by all the taxpayers from the General Fund and it is within the discretion of the Council to decide on any manner of doing this. COUNCILMAN POWELL stated that we do not know the amount and it is possible that the pledges might not come up the amount that would be required - then could the City go back to the Downtown Council that their figures are short and let them provide the amount that they feel that they are benefited by it. MR. MAGNUSON indicated that the City would have to get them to agree to accept an assessment of a certain amount and also agree to a pro -rated increase by a supplemental assessment and in any event that it would be greater than 50 %. COUNCILMAN POWELL asked if the revenuf from this parking lot be put in a special fund to use that to retire the bonds and MR. MAGNUSON stated that it could be done that way. COUNCILWOMAN BODLOVICK was in agreement that the revenue from this lot should be used for the payment of these bonds. COUNCILMAN MANONEY felt that the City have some figures and a pretty good idea as to what kind of revenues that the City could anticipate to receive from that lot so that the City does not have to make a general tax levy. 4. On motion of Councilman Mahoney, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the Acting City Clerk was directed to send a letter to Larry Wolf to arrange a meeting with Mr. Aiple on his proposal and after that meeting is held the Council will meet with Mr. Aiple and /or Mr. Wolf on this proposal. (all in favor) 5. The Council was informed of a meeting to be held with Local No. 49 on Monday, October 30, 1978 at 6:30 P. M. 6. On motion of Councilman Mahoney, seconded by Councilman Powell, the Council authorized the Mayor and the Acting City Clerk to sign the "OPTION TO PURCHASE AGREEMENT" with Independent School School District No. 834 for the purchase of the old dumpsite property. (all in favor) 7. On motion of Councilman Mahoney, seconded by Councilman Powell, the Council waived the deposit in the City Park Fund for the Housing for the Elderly. (all Building r Inspector e f the dated October 20, 1978) October 24, 1978 • 671 • 1 t • • October 24, 1978 NEW BUSINESS 1. On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilman Mahoney, the Council granted a Dance :ermit and a "3.2 On Sale Beer" permit to John Hennessey, 13874 North 60th Street for a Benefit Dance to be held on Saturday, October 28,. 1978 from 7:30 P. M. to 1:00 A. M. (all in favor) 2. On motion of Councilman Mahoney, seconded by Councilman Powell, a resolution was introduced "DIRECTING ThE PAYMENT OF THE BILLS" AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen Mahoney, Peterson, Powell and Mayor Junker NAYS- -None (see resolutions) INDIVIDUALS- DELEGATIONS - continued 4. DEL PETERSON, 1303 South Fourth Street and representing Rivertown Restoration appeared before the City Council regarding the disposition of the Nelson School. It is his understanding from the City Attorney that the property is now available for development once again and on behalf of RTR they would like to offer their services again and try to develop and find developers to utilize this school property consistent with the neighborhood and the City more or less in line with what they worked with last winter. There have been four different groups that have contacted him and he hasn't reall, had a chnce to develop the seriousness of any of them - there does appear to be interest and at this time it would be appropriate to start adver- tising in at least the local papers and perhaps getting more publication on it so that everybody does know it is again available. MR. MAGNUSON called the Council's attention to a Supreme Court case in Minneapolis and what that case really says that you can convey to private parties even though it is going to be used for private use, if it is going to create the possibility of jobs and employment or some public use it can be conveyed for one dollar and we could charge money for it and sell it, also if the Council wanted to do so they can convey it for one dollar. JEFF ZOLLER stated that if the building can be put on the State and National Registry it can he available if a developer buys it for a tax incentive program the government has initiated. He has talked to the Historical Society and the City has agreed to this. The only restriction would be that if any government money is used that it will have to meet certain criteria. If they do improve the outside of the building, they amortize their tax increase over a five year period rather than a one year period. This might attract more developers if they know that they can get a tax incentive. On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick,the Council directed that either the Acting City Clerk or the Chariman of the Heritage Preservation Commission start whatever steps are necessary to put the Nelson School on the National Registry. (all in favor) 5. GUY DILTS AND DICK MULLER, 516 West Myrtle Street, appeared before the City Council requesting sewer to serve some lots that they own on Harriet Street - they were assured by Mr. Shelton that they would have to share the cost of this sewer since no one else would benefit from the improvements. They wish to build two houses and questions were raised as to whether or not he would have to sub - divide these lots in accordance with the ordinance. He will be making four parcels out of the entire piece of property counting the house that is already there - this parcel is unplatted. MR. MAGNUSON did not feel that it was necessary to have it platted in accordance with the sub- division code and the Council concurred. They asked if they could have a private contractor put in the sewer line and they would donate it to the City. On motion of Councilman Mahoney, seconded by Councilman Peterson, the Council directed that Mr. Elliott prepare a feasibility study and cost estimates for the sewer line on Harriet Street to serve the properties at 516 West Myrtle Street which abut on North Harriet Street. (all in favor) MR. DILTS was informed that he would have to pay for the feasibility study and this will become a part of the construction costs. • • • • ■ 1. '1 • • • October 24, 1978 APPLICATIONS On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilman Mahoney, the following Contractor's Licenses were granted: (all in favor) Figg Masonry 2981 N. Victoria, Roseville 55113 Masonry & Brick Work New J & P Degin, Inc. 7317 - 39k Avenue No., New Hope 55427 General New The Kingston Corporation 2345 Rice St., Suite 208, St. Paul 55113 General New Leibel & Pariseau 6209 Centerville Rd., Hugo, Mn. 55038 Masonry & Brick Work New Henry K. Lindahl & Sons 4601 Bloomington Ave., S., Minneapolis 55407 General New Spancrete Midwest Co. Hy. 152 West, Osseo, Mn. 55369 Pre -cast Concrete Structural Systems or Wall Panels New Thermo- Comfort, Inc. 1925 Oakcrest Ave., St. Paul 55113 General New COMMUNICATIONS From the Metro Waste Commission giving the Schedule of Current Value Credits. (no action) CITY COORDINATOR'S - FINANCE DIRECTOR'S REPORT 1. On motion of Councilman Mahoney, seconded by Councilman Powell, a resolution was introduced "ESTABLISHING A SAVING ACCOUNT AT THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK FOR TEMPORARY DEPOSITS ". AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen Mahoney, Peterson, Powell and Mayor Junker NAYS- -None (see resolutions) 2. On motion of Councilman Mahoney, seconded by Councilman Powell, a resolution was introduced "ESTABLISHING A PETTY CASH CHECKING ACCOUNT FOR THE LILY LAKE ICE ARENA IN THE AMOUNT OF $200.00 ". AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen Mahoney, Peterson, Powell and Mayor Junker NAYS - -None (see resolutions) 3. On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the Council authorized the attendance of LaVonne Simon and Nile Kriesel at the Modified Accrual Accounting Workshop on December 4 and 5, 1978 at the University of Minnesota. (all in favor) 4. On motion of Councilman Mahoney, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the Council authorized the Mayor and the Acting City Clerk to sign the contract with DeLaHunt & Voto Co., Ltd. to audit the City's books for the year ending 1978, as recommended by Mr. Kriesel. AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen Mahoney and Peterson and Mayor Junker NAYS -- Councilman Powell (motion carried) 5. On motion of Councilman Mahoney, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, a resolution was introduced "DESIGNATING DEPOSITORIES OF PUBLIC FUNDS ". AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen Mahoney, Peterson, Powell and Mayor Junker NAYS - -None (see resolutions) ACTING CITY CLERK'S REPORT 1. On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the City Attorney was directed to contact Mrs. Bergen's attorney and indicate that we would study the problem if she will be willing to pay for the cost of such a study (property located on McKusick Lake). (all in favor) s9) • • • • 1 70 October 24, 1978 . • • 2. Councilmen Powell and Mahoney along with the City Finance Director and the Acting City Clerk will canvass the election returns on Thursday, November 9, 1978 at 10:30 A. M. CONSULTING ENGINEER'S REPORT (Dick Moore) 1. On motion of Councilman Powell, seconded by Councilman Peterson, the Council authorized the Mayor and the Acting City Clerk to sign the contract with Arcon Construction for the construction of Local Improvement No. 165 for the retaining wall at the Olive Street Parking Lot. (all in favor) The total amount of the bid was $76,083.00 and the City has already received a grant from FHWA for $62,000 leaving a deficit of about $14,000. Mr. Shelton has been in contact with the PHWA in Chicago and they have assured him that the City would very probably get the remaining amount of money; however, they would have to make another application for that amount - application will have to be made through Mr. Rygg. 2. Mr. Moore delivered the plans and specifications for Local Improvement No. 157 - bids will be received for this project on November 9, 1978. PARKS AND RECREATION No report ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE No report CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT No report COUNCIL REQUEST ITEMS COMMITTEE REPORTS PUBLIC SAFETY On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the Acting City Clerk was directed to advertise for bids for police cars for 1979. (all in favor) PUBLIC WORKS 1. On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilman Mahoney, Mr. Kriesel and Mr. Shelton were granted permission to attend a meeting regarding the Government Grants and auditing of these funds - said meeting to be held at Arden Hills. (all in favor) 2. The Leaf Pickup has been scheduled for November 1 and 2 and November 6 thru 8, 1978 and notification will be put in the newspaper and on the radio. 1. Councilwoman Bodlovick, reported to the City Council regarding the annexa- tion of the Hauge property and in accordance with the Orderly Annexation, the Joint Powers cannot initiate such annexation - it has to be by petition by the owner only and the assessments that aresgainst that property will have to be resolved between the Township Attorney and our City Attorney. On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilman Powell, the City Attorney was instructed to contact the Stillwater Township attorney to take care of these assessments on the Hauge Property. (all in favor) 2. On motion of Councilman Powell, seconded by Councilman Mahoney, the Clerk made the first reading of an ordinance entitled "AN ORDINANCE REQUIRING THE PAYMENT OF CONSULTING FEES INCURRED BY REASON OF A DEVELOPER'A REQUEST ". (all in favor) 3. On motion of Councilman Mahoney, seconded by Councilman Peterson, the Acting City Clerk was directed to send bills to parties that owe the City for feasibility studies up to the present time and on which projects have notbeen initiated. (all in favor) 4. MAYOR JUNKER asked about the drainage problem on the Feely property and Mr. Moore was asked to contact Mr. Elliott on this matter. • • 1 • • n October 24, 1978 • �aa APPROVAL OF MINUTES On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilman Powell, minutes of the following meetings were approved: (all in favor) September 5, 1978 September 6, 1978 September 13, 1978 September 14, 1978 September 18, 1978 September 26, 1978 October 10, 1978 October 11, 1978 QUESTIONS FROM PRESS REPRESENTATIVES None Regular Meeting Special Meeting Special Meeting Special Meeting Special Meeting Regular Meeting Regular Meeting Special Meeting 7:30 P. M. 11:15 A. M. 6:30 P. M. 10:30 A. M. 6:00 P. M. 7:30 P. M. 7:30 P. M. 7:30 P. M. ORDINANCES First Reading - AN ORDINANCE REQUIRING THE PAYMENT OF CONSULTING FEES INCURRED BY REASON OF A DEVELOPER'S REQUEST RESOLUTIONS The following resolutions were read and on roll call were unanimously adopted: 1. Directing the Payment of the Bills. 2. Industrial Bonds for the Stillwater Industrial Park 3. Establish A Savings Account at the First National Bank 4. Establish a Petty Cash Checking Account for the Ice Arena 5. Designating Depositorie3 for the City of Stillwater - Public Funds ADJOURNMENT On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilman Powell, the meeting adjourned at 9:40 P. M. Attest: e4” --.. - cites .l shit < �' Acting City Clerk Mayor 71 • • t a. .4