CC_Minutes_2014_0127 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday,January 27, 2014 Page 26 by the City Council to approve the transfer and renewal was premature, even though she understood there was no place for people to move into. Therefore, Councilmember McGehee stated that she would support a stay. Mayor Roe clarified that this motion was not an action to reconsider previous City Council action to transfer the liquor license; but was a request by the Minnesota Licensed Beverage Association and Stephens Liquor (a/k/a Fairview Wine & Spirits) to temporarily set it aside pending litigation. Mayor Roe spoke in support of the motion as stated, stating that he agreed with the findings as stated; and agreed that there was no harm to Minnesota Licensed Beverage Association or Stephens Liquor Store. Roll Call Ayes: Willmus; Laliberte; Etten; and Roe. Nays: McGehee. Motion carried. c. Consider Waiving Delinquent Utility Charge for 2462 Prior Avenue Finance Director Chris Miller summarized this delinquent utility billing in the amount of $12,665.04, for 2452 Prior Avenue, as detailed in the RCA and At- tachment A (City Code, Chapters 801, 801, 803) dated January 27, 2014; and At- tachment B, a January 15, 2014 Opinion from the City Attorney on potential ram- ifications of granting the request of Roseville Properties. At the request of Mayor Roe, City Attorney Gaughan offered nothing specific be- yond his written opinion, other than to note the clear language of code using "shall" versus "may" as it relates to certification to the County Auditor any utility charges in excess of ninety days past due for collection with real estate taxes, re- moving any discretion of the governing body. Discussion ensued among Councilmembers and staff regarding the number of commercial/industrial properties (estimated at 200) currently in the name of the tenant versus the property owner or a management company for the tenant or landlord; whether or if there could be a remedy for tracking that information to avoid recurrence of similar situations; and whether staff could monitor these sit- uations and copy all parties on utility bills to keep lines of communication open. Councilmember Willmus expressed concerns in setting a precedent if the City Council elected to waive this charge given the bankruptcy circumstances, and po- tential for future exposure. At the request of Councilmember Laliberte, City Attorney Gaughan reiterated his interpretation that the City Council did not have the right to waive the fees at any point, per current city Code, but that they be certified to the property taxes of the property owner.