HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 09-24-2001
.
.
.
~
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
SEPTEMBER 24, 2001
7:30 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Mayor Dennis Probst called to order the regular
City Council meeting at 7:32 p.m.
Present:
Mayor Dennis Probst, Councilmembers Beverly Aplikowski, David Grant,
Gregg Larson, and Lois Rem.
Absent:
None.
Also present were City Administrator, Joe Lynch; City Accountant, Terrance Post; City
Attorney, Jerry Filla, City Planner, Aaron Parrish; City Engineer, Greg Brown, BRW; and
Recording Secretary, Nancy Czajkowski.
APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA
Mr. Lynch explained Consent Agenda Item 4 b should be removed. He stated there was no
bench handout due to technical difficulties.
MOTION:
Councilmember Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Grant seconded a motion
to adopt the agenda for the September 24,2001, regular City Council meeting as
revised. The motion carried unanimously (5-0).
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. August 13,2001 Regular Council Meeting Minutes, Corrected
B. August 27, 2001 Regular Council Minutes
C. September 12,2001 Special Council Minutes, Pavement Management Plan Discussion
Councilmember Larson requested the following change to the August 13,2001 Regular Council
Meeting Minutes, Corrected, on page 2, in the third paragraph, insert "necessary" after "bank
qualification was".
Councilmember Larson requested the following changes to the August 27, 2001 Regular Council
Minutes:
1, On page 3, Administrator Comments, in the third paragraph, replace "devise" with
"device" .
2.
On page 4, in the first paragraph, Councilmember Larson was frustrated by the fact there
was no progress and not by the issue.
On page 4, in the sixth paragraph, in the first sentence, insert "for a study" after "RFP".
On page 5, in the third paragraph, in the seventh line, replace "public works situation"
with "public works position".
3,
4.
.
.
.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - SEPTEMBER 24, 2001
2
5,
On page 6, in the third paragraph, in the fourth line, replace "He noted he" with "he noted
they".
On page, at the top of the page in the first paragraph, replace "the gentleman" with "Mr.
Vaughan" .
6.
Councilmember Rem requested the following change to the August 13,2001 Regular Council
Meeting minutes, Corrected, in the last paragraph before adjournment, the reference should be to
"Lake Valentine Road".
Mayor Probst requested the following change to the August 27,2001, Regular Council Meeting
minutes: on Page 5, in the fourth paragraph, replace "had to" with "should".
MOTION:
Councilmember Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Larson seconded a
motion to approve the August 13,2001 Regular Council Meeting minutes, the
August 27, 2001 Regular Council Meeting minutes, as amended, and the
September 12,2001 Special Council minutes, Pavement Management Plan
Discussion minutes as presented above. The motion carried unanimously (5-0).
CONSENT CALENDAR
A Claims and Payroll
Mr. Lynch explained that on the bill list the item referencing tennis instruction for Ms. Sheila
Stowell was actually mileage reimbursement for trips.
MOTION:
Councilmember Grant moved and Councilmember Larson seconded a motion to
approve the Consent Calendar and authorize execution of all necessary documents
contained therein. The motion carried unanimously (5-0).
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Mayor Probst invited those present to come forward and address the Council on any items not
already on the agenda.
Ms. Carol Linders, 1945 Glen Paul Avenue, asked about the arrangement for the neighborhood
meeting on October 1,2001, at the last City Council meeting. She stated that only a few
neighbors had heard about it.
Mr. Lynch stated staff identified an area to notify. He noted there was not a clear line. He added
no one north of Glenpaul Avenue or south of County Road D was given notice. He stated they
gave notice to the block coordinators.
Ms. Linders stated her block coordinator did not get a notice. She noted that other block
coordinators in her area did not receive a notice.
Mayor Probst asked Ms. Linders to forward the names of the Block Coordinators to Mr. Lynch,
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - SEPTEMBER 24, 2001
3
.
Ms, Linders questioned the location of the meeting. She stated Trinity Lutheran was so much
more convenient. She noted she had never been on the Northwestern campus. She added Mr.
Dan Lindh had said that it may be a conflict of interest to have the meeting at Trinity Lutheran.
She stated that was a petty point.
Mayor Probst stated he was not sure he would agree that the Northwestern campus was not a
neutral site.
Councilmember Rem stated that it was the first time she had seen this notice. She noted her
understanding that the notice would go to the neighborhood three streets south of the fire station.
She added she did not recall a discussion about the site of the meeting. She stated Trinity
Lutheran was the location where one neighborhood group had its annual meeting.
Ms. Jane Palumbo, a resident of Glenpaul Avenue, stated she wanted to make it clear they were
not anti-change. She noted they would like to see improvements on that comer. She added they
also see it as a gateway to Arden Hills. She stated that since there were no final decisions she
hoped there was room for discussion, compromise, and negotiation. She noted they did not want
to be shut out until the final decision was made. She added that she assumed there was no
problem sharing information. She stated she had been disappointed by the lack of sharing
information. She noted she hoped that the meeting next Monday would be an open discussion
about possibilities. She requested the rest of the Glen Paul residents be sent invitations from
Prior Street to Cleveland Avenue.
.
Mayor Probst stated he urged any residents present to get the word out. He noted they had no
problem sending out additional invitations.
Ms, Palumbo stated she hoped the Councilmembers would be able to be there.
Mayor Probst stated it had been noticed as a council meeting so all the Councilmembers could be
there.
Councilmember Larson asked about Ms. Palumbo's comment regarding trouble getting
information. He stated he was not sure what the city had to give her and what she had not
received. Ms. Palumbo responded they had asked specifically what had transpired with
Presbyterian Homes on August 7, 2001. She stated they were told nothing had happened and that
the city had not received a note or a telephone call. She noted Mr. Aaron Parrish said meetings
had been held since last December. She added each time they wanted to discuss it they were told
there was no final decision. She stated there was no one document. She noted they felt they
were pushed out of the process and did not get invitations for the meeting. She added they had
the impression they were not told the truth.
Mayor Probst stated he did not feel that was accurate. He noted the issue was raised at the last
meeting, He added those comments were made by a staff member who was unaware of the
discussions.
.
Ms, Palumbo stated notes in the file lead them to believe Mr. Moore was aware of the
discussions.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - SEPTEMBER 24, 2001
4
.
Councilmember Aplikowski stated many time discussions go on and nothing happens. She noted
it was similar to if one of them had stated they were thinking about selling their house. She
added discussions could go on and on and on and nothing happens. She stated there were two
other plans for that comer in the past and they did not materialize. She noted there had been
discussions, but nothing had happened yet. She added to staff until there was a formal proposal
nothing had happened worthy of note. She stated sometimes there were years of discussions
before a formal plan was presented.
Ms, Palumbo stated she hoped it had been a misunderstanding. She noted the neighborhood
heard about it when someone stated he or she had a contract to build a building. She added that
was upsetting for them.
Councilmember Rem stated the basic issue was that the neighbors were asking for information.
She noted she was disappointed to see they were starting off on the wrong foot again in a
neighborhood project. She added a little effort early in the process could save many problems,
She stated she does not understand why they were told nothing had happened on August 7, 2001.
She apologized for the response that was given.
.
Ms. Linders suggested that, in the communication area, the City update the website. She stated
she had searched through the minutes listed last August and the last update was April. She noted
that on September 4th the agendas were finally available. She added Mr. Moore had mentioned
that Presbyterian Homes was a good neighbor by hosting the city's website. She stated that
seemed to be a conflict of interest.
Mayor Probst stated that Presbyterian Homes does not host the web site.
Councilmember Rem stated the entire council packet was at the library by the Saturday prior to a
meeting.
Councilmember Larson stated it was their intent to keep the website up to date. He noted the
Council was very enthusiastic about it.
Ms. Linders stated the website was very convenient.
Mayor Probst stated he was disturbed by the lack of trust. He noted he was not sure how they
find themselves in this position. He added the city was approached all the time about projects.
He stated some of the projects were so absurd that it was hard to know when it was appropriate
to tell the public. He noted the city still does not know Presbyterian Homes intentions on how
big or how small of a building they were interested in. He added the city knows that Presbyterian
Homes was interested in cleaning up that comer since they view it as their front door. He stated
the city's intent was to follow this matter. He noted as information was available the city would
try to make it available. He encouraged the people present to let others know about the October
1,2001 meeting.
.
Ms. Rebecca Tabor, 1966 Edgewater Avenue, stated that she had spoken to Mr. Joe Lynch this
summer. She noted Mr. Lynch was professional and responsive. She added he had responded
.
.
.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - SEPTEMBER 24, 2001
5
quickly and promptly. She referenced a copy of a Star Tribune article of September 4, 2001.
She noted the article quoted employers stating there was a housing crunch. She added it quoted
Mr. Dan Lindh. She stated the articles explained about matching grants. She noted the article
stated Presbyterian Homes was interested in providing housing for their employees. She asked if
the city was aware of the 75 housing units in the Roseville and Arden Hills areas referenced in
the article.
Mr. Lynch stated staff was unaware ofthose plans. He noted Presbyterian Homes did own
property in Roseville. He added he did not know their intentions.
Ms, Tabor asked if the city would be notified if Presbyterian Homes applied for matching funds.
Mr. Lynch responded not necessarily.
Mayor Probst stated there was no legal notification by the state to the city.
Ms. Tabor stated Presbyterian Homes was getting $ 1.5 million for the Stillwater area. She noted
she assumed Presbyterian Homes would want matching money.
Mayor Probst stated the discussion about the triangle was for residential uses over commercial
units. Mr. Lynch responded they had only discussed six residential units.
Ms. Tabor stated she lived two blocks from that comer. She asked when the zoning was changed
the last time. Mr. Parrish responded the zoning was changed last year to neighborhood business
district
Mr. Lynch stated there was an amendment, but it had been zoned neighborhood business for
about four or five years.
Ms, Tabor asked about a Neighborhood Business Zone. Mr. Lynch responded it allows
commercial uses.
Ms. Tabor asked about housing. Mr. Lynch responded the amendment last year allowed housing
in all neighborhood business districts.
Ms. Tabor asked about light retail commercial. Mayor Probst stated it would allow commercial
uses that were pedestrian friendly. He noted it allowed uses helpful to the neighborhood.
Ms. Tabor asked if it would allow 20 residential units. Mayor Probst responded that the limit of
each parcel was site specific. He stated he would not know about this parcel until they receive a
formal proposal.
Councilmember Aplikowski stated that from a developer's perspective they were always
discussing concept options with the planning staff. She noted sometimes they need to float as
many as ten before they have one to move forward on. She added staff was not hiding anything.
She stated there was no formal proposal in front of the council to discuss.
No further public comments were made.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - SEPTEMBER 24, 2001
6
. UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS
A. Plannill1! Cases
1. Case #01-25, Guidant Corporation, 4201-4233 N. Lexington Ave., Sign
Ordinance Variance
Mr. Parrish explained the request.
Councilmember Rem asked what concerns the Planning Commission had with the
application. Mr. Parrish responded the primary concern was the image issue. He stated
with "Guidant" on the tower it could be mistaken for the City of Guidant. He noted they
also had difficulty finding a specific hardship related to the physical characteristics of the
site.
Mayor Probst stated there was no problem with the two monument signs. He noted the
size of campus would lend itself to these signs. He added if the campus was ever divided
it would be able to have two such signs. He stated he was concerned about the water
tower. He noted that if someone else comes in with a device just as high, what grounds
would the city use to deny the request. He added he would like to defer the decision until
staff finds out what happens in other communities.
.
Councilmember Aplikowski stated after viewing the pictures, there was a view where no
one could see the tower beyond a certain point. She noted that Guidant wants this to lead
the way due to their split campus. She suggested a time limit on the approval.
Councilmember Larson stated he drove around the neighborhood. He noted he had a real
problem finding a justification for a hardship. He added his strong concern about setting
a precedent. He noted the discussions about towers. He added these towers might be a
possible location for signage. He stated he would support the other sign requests since
they were reasonable.
Councilmember Rem concurred with the request for information on other communities.
Councilmember Grant stated he was not sure he agreed with the hardship found by the
Planning Commission. He noted that ifhaving a high structure and not using it was a
hardship, than there could be a number of other high structures in Arden Hills that would
be great places for a sign.
.
Mr. Dan Riehle from Guidant, stated the water tower was on a 90-acre site. He noted the
lettering was 2 feet 3 inches high. He noted it could not be read off campus. He added
Guidant was going through a branding process to get its name known. He stated part of
the criteria was that it could be read on campus, but not off campus. He noted the letters
could not be read beyond 600 feet. He added there were many doctors that came on the
site. He stated it was an internal branding on site to advertise to customers and to build a
sense of pride for employees on site.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - SEPTEMBER 24, 2001
7
.
Mayor Probst asked ifMr. Riehle was telling the Council that it was a marketing tool. He
stated 27-inch letters would be able to be read beyond 600 feet.
Mr. Riehle stated the hardship justification was done in conjunction with Mr. Mike
Cronin. He noted they went through the county assessor and the assessor thought the
name should be on the water tower. He added Guidant needed to paint it or take it down.
He stated it was not an economic hardship. He noted they needed a variance because of
the height.
Mayor Probst asked about the 60-day response requirement. Mr. Parrish responded the
Council needed to make a decision tonight or have the applicant waive the requirement.
Councilmember Rem stated she was not saying she would never approve this, but felt she
needed additional information on the long-term result of any precedent set by this
decision.
.
Councilmember Aplikowski asked where the city had another structure that tall. She
stated they would not allow another to be built. She questioned what precedential value
this decision might have. She noted Guidant would not have to come before the Council
if it were just painting the water tower. She added she did not see what problem there
would be with putting their name on their tower in a decorous way. She stated it was the
only private water tower.
MOTION:
Councilmember Larson moved and Councilmember Aplikowski seconded a
motion to approve the monument signage on Lexington Avenue for the reasons
and conditions contained in the staff report. The motion carried unanimously (5-
0).
Mr. Lynch stated Councilmember Aplikowski was correct that this was the only private
water tower in Arden Hills. He noted the city would want to control any water towers
built in the future. He added that antennas were structures that go through an approval
process. He stated the Council would have control and authority over signage at the same
height on any other structure. He noted buildings did not reach that height because of an
ordinance limitation. He added he was not advocating for the sign.
Mayor Probst asked if a deferral for 60 days would be a hardship. Mr. Riehle responded
only from the standpoint of weather. He stated Guidant wanted to do this in conjunction
with the signage on Lexington Avenue to announce the purchase of the property.
Mayor Probst stated he was very uncomfortable with the decision since he did not feel he
had enough information. He noted Guidant was a great corporate citizen. He added he
was struggling with this issue.
.
Councilmember Larson stated it was not an issue ofletter height, but one of the height of
the structure. He noted the city had other tall structures. He added taking this action
made it harder for the council to say no to other signage on high structures. He stated that
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - SEPTEMBER 24, 2001
8
.
there was discussion of tall buildings on the I-35W/I-694 intersection. He noted it was
not a good precedent that the city was establishing. He added he would like to postpone
the decision and wait for additional information. He stated if the Council denied this
application, Guidant could not return with another request for six months.
Mr. Parrish noted the sixteen-foot height limitation only applied to freestanding signs.
He added it was unclear if it applied to wall mounted signs. He stated the 50-foot office
building down the road could have signage on it.
MOTION:
Councilmember Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Grant seconded a motion
to approve a variance for a water tower sign for the reasons and conditions
contained in the staff report. The motion failed. (2-3 Larson, Rem, and Probst).
Mr. Filla stated that if the applicant did not give the Council more time the Council's only
alternative would be to deny the application.
Councilmember Rem asked if the Council had formally asked for more time. Mr. Riehle
responded Guidant could grant an extension in lieu of a denial. He stated he was
concerned that sixty days would put them at the end of November and they would not be
able to proceed this year.
Mr. Lynch stated staff could be ready first at the first meeting in October with
information on what other cities had done.
.
MOTION:
Councilmember Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Rem seconded a motion
to table the case until the October 29,2001 City Council Meeting. The motion
carried unanimously (5-0).
2. Case #01-24, T.J. Food Ventures (Perkins), 3855 N. Lexington Avenue., Site Plan
Review, Restaurant Expansion
Mr. Parrish explained the application. He noted the additional condition that the eastern
entrance be an "enter only" entrance due to traffic concerns.
Mr. Tom Cory, the owner and operator, stated existing front entrance was intentionally
redesigned so people would not think it was an entrance any longer. He noted Perkins
required them to do a remodel or move the restaurant. He added it did not comply with
American with Disabilities Act requirements. He stated these upgrades would address
that and allow it to look like the new stores. He showed illustrations. He noted the
dumpster was enclosed in brick to match the hotel next door and had a roof
.
Councilmember Grant asked Mr. Cory what he thought of the third condition. Mr. Cory
responded they had discussed it. He stated the lights at the intersection needed to be
changed. He noted most of customers were doing it anyway. He added until the traffic
signals were addressed they would have a continuous problem. He stated that with the
Super Target, traffic was horrible. He noted the traffic signals should be stacked. He
added the opening of the Target grocery store had added 18% to his business.
.
.
.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - SEPTEMBER 24,2001
9
MOTION:
Councilmember Grant moved and Councilmember Larson seconded a motion to
approve the site plan subject to the three conditions contained in the staff report as
recommended by Staff. The motion carried unanimously (5-0).
3. Case #01-26, McKinley Companies, 4420 Hamline Avenue N., Minor
Subdivision/Lot Split Parcel
Mr. Parrish explained the application and the recommendation by the Planning Commission to
deny the application.
Councilmember Larson stated he recalled that in order for the lots behind this one to develop
they needed access off Hamline Avenue. He asked if this lot split created a landlocked area
behind it. Mr. Parrish responded the lots behind this one had been developed.
Councilmember Larson asked about what properties did the Planning Commission have
concerns. Mr. Parrish responded the properties adjacent on Hamline Avenue.
Councilmember Aplikowski asked if each parcel had an individual owner. Mr. Parrish
responded in the affirmative.
Mr. Brian Sladek stated his parents purchased this lot in 1970. He noted he took over ownership
in 1995. He added his parents had received approval in 1978 to split the lot. He added it was
taken off the market when no buyer was found. He stated he assumed he had the same right to
split the parcel his parents were given in 1978.
Mr. David Venessey, a friend of Mr. Sladek, stated the Planning Commission was looking for a
hardship. He noted that years ago Mr. Sladek's parents paid an assessment to have water and
sewer stubbed in for the second lot. He added since that time the code had been changed. He
stated the only issue was the width of the lot. He noted the house was set off to one side to set up
the lot split. He added the other properties had centered homes. He stated those lots were not as
big as this lot.
Mr. Parrish stated he picked up these cases from the Planning Consultant. He noted that if the
applicant could acquire 13 feet from the property to the south then this would be a conforming
lot. He added he did not know if the applicant had considered this solution. Mr. Sladek
responded he was not open to that suggestion.
Councilmember Aplikowski stated if the applicant acquired 13 feet, it would make the
neighbor's lot to the south oddly shaped. Mr. Parrish responded in the affirmative.
Mr. Venessey stated there was an assumption that the city, by allowing the stubbing of water and
sewer, gave an impression it was a buildable lot. He noted this lot exceeds the minimum square
footage. He added the width of the lot was the only issue. He added the lots behind it were
developed so there was nothing left to be landlocked.
.
.
.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - SEPTEMBER 24,2001
10
Mayor Probst asked if the county would permit a curb cut there. Mr. Parrish responded he did
not investigate that issue since it was the responsibility of the applicant. He stated that
presumably it would not be a problem.
Councilmember Aplikowski asked about wetlands. Mr. Parrish responded there were no wetland
considerations on this property.
Councilmember Larson stated he felt uncomfortable voting either way. He noted he did not
think he had enough information to make an informed decision. He asked for another 30 days to
get more information.
Mr. Sladek asked what information would be helpful. He stated if one walked by the lot, the
split made sense.
Councilmember Larson stated from what one could see from the road it looked reasonable, but
he was not sure about the remaining undeveloped properties.
Mr. Filla stated the city could extend for another 60 days if it let the applicant know it needed
additional information. He noted the Council needed more information about the stubbing of
utilities and what occurred at that time. He added they needed to know what was it assessed and
for how much. He stated they could extend the time for an additional days if the city gives notice
to the applicant before October 6, 2001.
Mayor Probst stated he knew there were some concerns about land locking in this area. He noted
he wanted more information on this issue. He added he did not know if sewer and water stubs
made this buildable lot. He stated staff needed to update the information on what had been built.
Mr. Venessey stated the builder was trying to get the basement in before the ground freezes. He
noted they were willing to agree to an extension to October 29,2001.
Councilmember Larson stated the applicant needs to be aware the council needed additional
information. He noted a recommendation to deny the application from the Planning Commission
gives him some pause.
MOTION:
Councilmember Larson moved and Councilmember Aplikowski seconded a
motion to extend the deadline for review by 60 days based on a need for
additional information. The motion carried unanimously (5-0).
B. Pay Estimate #6 (Final), 2001 Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project (Lift Station #8
Reconstruction and Sanitary Sewer Test and Seal/Spot Repairs), Gridor
Construction
Mr. Brown explained the Pay Estimate and that all work had been completed.
MOTION:
Councilmember Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Larson seconded a
motion to approve Pay Estimate #6 (Final Payment) for Gridor Construction, Inc.
.
.
.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - SEPTEMBER 24, 2001
11
of Plymouth, MN in the amount of$11,746.24. The motion carried unanimously
(5-0).
C.
Pay Estimate #9 (Final), West Round Lake Road Improvements, Phase I, Forest
Lake Contracting
Mr. Brown explained the Pay Estimate and that it included the release of the final landscaping
retainage.
MOTION:
Councilmember Grant moved and Councilmember Aplikowski seconded a motion
to approve Pay Estimate #9 (Final Payment) for Forest Lake Contracting, Inc. of
Forest Lake, MN, in the amount of$4,232.85. The motion carried unanimously
( 5-0).
D. Personnel Policy Benefit Recommendation
Mr. Lynch explained the follow up information on the total amounts for benefits, including new
city employees, and the total financial impact for 2001 and 2002.
Mr. Post explained the recommendation for the policy to be effective October 1, 2001. He stated
one assumption made was that the benefit level would increase in 2002 by 5% over the 2001
level.
Councilmember Grant asked if nine people were not impacted by the change. Mr. Post
responded there were two non-bargaining unit employees that were not impacted because they
currently elect family health coverage.
Councilmember Aplikowski asked for the rationale behind the change. Mr. Post responded it
was a fairness issue. He stated all employees would have the same benefit level.
Mayor Probst stated the Council had had this discussion on a couple of occasions. He noted it
was a fairness issue. He added a person electing single coverage did not receive the same level
of benefits as a person electing family coverage.
Mr. Post stated the other alternative would be to give everyone single coverage and have those
electing family coverage pay the difference in premium. He noted the City benefit would then be
capped at $255.13 per month.
Councilmember Larson stated he was in support of the recommended change. He noted it was a
matter of elementary fairness. He noted they are trying to treat employees fairly by providing
benefits equally.
Councilmember Aplikowski stated she had a problem with that concept. She noted the
employees with family coverage have hospitalization that they mayor may not use. She added
this was not the same as putting the money in the banle She stated if they did not use it they did
not get any benefit.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - SEPTEMBER 24, 2001
12
.
Councilmember Grant stated trying to equate fairness was a slippery slope. He noted they had
two employees who elect family coverage and nine people who elect single coverage. He added
fairness could be seen as anyone who wants coverage has it. He stated this was sold at one point
to retain employees. He noted that if that was the intent, this was the wrong way to go about it.
He added he was not sure he was able to support this change at this time.
Councilmember Rem stated this was fair in a different way than the present system, but yet unfair
in a different way. She noted nine people could decide to put this compensation in any way they
want. She asked why they did not let all of them decide. She stated with the budget issues next
year, with the structure changes and a lot of uncertainties she would like to hold off and then go
retroactive for the previous 12 months. She noted what has been budgeted has been budgeted.
She added they know they could always spend less and move the money elsewhere. She stated
she had concerns about the budget including the reorganization and the move to the new City
HalL
Councilmember Grant stated if this was more SO/50 among the eleven employees, he might be a
more persuaded. He noted he assumed that this would be a standing item and would affect the
long term cost structure of the employee compensation.
Mayor Probst stated the city had budgeted these dollars and had not always spent them. He noted
these dollars did not affect any of the other expenditures. He added that after looking at total
compensation there was a difference here. He stated he supports paying each employee in
different circumstances the same.
.
Councilmember Larson stated the city offers employees benefits and each has a price tag. He
noted the employees that were married pay more because they had families. He added that
buying insurance gave them a piece of mind that their family was covered. He stated he did not
expect a huge turnover next year. He noted if next year all employees decided to get family
coverage it would be gone. He added it was an elusive savings. He stated they were trying to
make sure all employees receive the same dollar worth of benefits.
Councilmember Aplikowski stated she looked at it like a needs basis kind of thing. She noted in
business, not all employees were rated equal. She added this could go up every year and asked at
what point they not offer this difference. She stated just because it was budgeted does not mean
they had to spend it. She noted she would not vote against it, but wanted to know the rationale
behind it.
Councilmember Grant stated they would never make everything equal. He noted union
employees were paying a different rate. He added the disparity was higher between the union
employees and the other two employees that pay family coverage.
Mr. Post stated two employees electing family coverage were paying $100 more.
.
Councilmember Larson stated they were focusing only on people in this category. He noted in
this group, the benefits were not fair. He added he did not disagree there may be other inequities.
.
.
.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - SEPTEMBER 24,2001
13
MOTION:
Councilmember Larson moved and Councilmember Aplikowski seconded a
motion to approve a personnel policy change by expanding the definition of city
paid benefit to include not only health and dental insurance coverage, but also city
paid contributions to the ICMA 457(b) deferred compensation plan, up to the
maximum city benefit, effective October 1,2001, as recommended by staff. The
motion carried (3-2 Grant and Rem).
ADMINISTRATOR COMMENTS
Mr. Lynch stated there had been progress on the City Hall issue. He noted staff had reached an
agreement with the Contractor and work began last week. He added there would be an additional
18-inch sand base. He stated the furniture would be installed this week. He noted preparations
had been made to establish the turn lane and parking lot. He added staff should move in by
October 15,2001.
Councilmember Rem asked to be excused at 9:45 p.m.
COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Grant stated the Operations and Finance Committee met. He noted direction
was given to Mr. Tom Moore on follow up on the RFP for the joint Ramsey County and Arden
Hills maintenance facility.
Councilmember Larson stated the Parks Recreation and Trails Committee would meet tomorrow
to work on master park plan. He noted a park clean up for buckthorn at Crepeau Park would be
held on September 29,2001. He added everyone was invited to attend.
Councilmember Larson stated if they are going to plan the city event at Tony Schmidt Park then
staff needs to address reserving buildings.
Councilmember Aplikowski stated there was supposed to be an events committee meeting this
week. She noted Mr. Moore was concerned those requests must be turned in. She added the city
would have to pay $80 for such reservation. She added Mr. Moore's concern was that if the city
reserved Tony Schmidt Park, it must make a big deal out of the event or it would share the park
with other groups. She noted Mr. Moore felt if they wanted a big deal it meant a big budget.
Mayor Probst stated he thought the county would allow the city to reserve the entire park whether
it used all the shelters or not.
Councilmember Aplikowski stated a lot of money was spent on concessions and music. She
noted the city was probably looking at $20,000 to do a Day in the Park at Tony Schmidt Park.
She added that in discussion with committee members, they felt they could not ask the business
community for $50,000 each year. She stated they could certainly reserve Tony Schmidt Park.
She noted the people loved it there last year.
Councilmember Larson stated they should get the same arrangement as Shoreview gets for the
Island Lake Park for the Slice of Shoreview event.
.
.
.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - SEPTEMBER 24,2001
14
Counci1member Aplikowski stated the city hall dedication would be in the spring of next year.
She noted that was not what they wanted, but it was where they were.
Mayor Probst stated the school board filings were closed and he was disappointed that no one
from Arden Hills was running. He noted he would have liked to encourage some people from
the community of the Arden Hill to be active there.
ADJOURN
MOTION:
Councilmember Grant moved and Councilmember Aplikowski seconded a motion
t adjourn the meeting at 9:55 p.m. The motion carried unanimously (5-0).
NOTICE OF MEETINGS
The next Council Meeting will be held Tuesday, October 9, 2001 at 7:30 p.m. at the Arden Hills
Council chambers.