Loading...
CC Minutes 2001 02 26CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING FEBRUARY 26, 2001 Mayor Jansen called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Jansen, Councilman Labatt, Councilman Ayotte, and Councilman Kroskin COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: Councilman Peterson STAFF PRESENT: Scott Botcher, Roger Knutson, Todd Gerhardt, Todd Hoffman, Kate Aanenson, Bob Generous, Teresa Burgess, Bruce DeJong, and Kelley Janes Public Present for all items on the agenda: Name Address Steve Berquist Debbie Lloyd Janet & Jerry Paulsen Jim Eggen 7207 Frontier Trail 7302 Laredo Drive 7305 Laredo Drive 1161 Bluff Creek Drive PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: Mayor Jansen: This is our first evening where we're actually being televised live, just so everyone's aware. We are now on live TV on Channel 8 so anytime you want to tune in when we're here on Monday nights, you'll be able to catch us. But now you have to be on your best behavior too. We have a public announcement this evening that actually is the presentation of the Maple Leaf Awards for our Public Safety Commissioners that served on our commission for a number of years. If I might be able to go ahead and have them come forward and then we'll ask council to also step forward so that we can all present the plaques. I'll tell you now that Jill Sloss is unable to join us, and unfortunately if we will hold him in our prayers. He has had some health complications and hopefully will be joining us in a couple of council meetings to be accepting his award. The other gentleman who was unable to join us was Greg Weber. He in fact had a conflict with this evening. While I have the microphone why don't I introduce each of you. Colleen Dockendorf served on our Public Safety Commission from '97 until 2000. We have Bill Wyfels with us from '97 also to 2000. And then Bill, and forgive me, I always pronounce your last name wrong. Bernhjelm, served from 1988 until the year 2000 so put in 12 years on behalf of our community and we certainly appreciate all the public service that all 3 of you on our Public Safety Commission provided for us and it's certainly an honor for us this evening to be able to present you with your awards. Do please step forward and council if you'll join me in presenting the awards. We can just go around front. And Steve, you also served on the Public Safety Commission so if you would like to present these. Councilman Labatt: Oh sure. Mayor Jansen: The plaques read, in recognition of outstanding service and dedication to the community. Please join us in congratulating these folks. City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Ayotte moved, Councilman Kroskin seconded to approve the following consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations: Resolution/t2001-11: Approve Resolution Supporting the Use of 2001 CDBG Funds in the Villages on the Ponds and Santa Vera Apartments. c. Approve Findings of Fact, Variance 00-14, 960 Carver Beach Road, Anita Benson. d. Approve Amended Development Contract for Arvidson's Addition, Project 00-12. e. Approval of Bills. Approval of Minutes: - City Council Work Session Minutes dated February 12, 2001 - City Council Minutes dated February 12, 2001 Receive Commission Minutes: - Park and Recreation Commission Minutes dated January 23,2001 All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 4 to 0. B. APPROVE RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING 2001 LIQUOR LICENSE FEES. Mayor Jansen: Councilman Kroskin, you removed item l(b) from the consent agenda for separate discussion. Councilman Kroskin: Yes. I was looking at the spreadsheet for on-sale beer and wine, as well as the on- sale non-intoxicating and I guess I'd like a little bit more input, and just looking at the spreadsheet as far as the averages. I didn't run the numbers but just by eye-bailing it, the averages of some of the other cities on the spread sheet, and I just saw a bit of a discrepancy that we're running on the wine license fee, you know it looks like we've got an average of $900 roughly with the other cities and we're at about $280 and I'm looking at an average on the 3.2 of you know maybe $500-$600 and we're at $280 and I was just, I'd like to have some discussion on that as far as maybe getting our license fees a little bit more in line there. I wanted to get some feedback from my other councilmen. Mayor Jansen: I actually looked at that same issue when I went through this and the average on the 3.2 beer came out to almost $400, and your average on the wine license was about the same. And part of why I did take a look at that was staff noted that we have not had an increase in the fees since 1994 so just looking for whether or not we're being consistent with the other communities, and whether or not there was any room for adjustment, it does appear that the on-sale intoxicating fee is certainly reasonable as far as not doing an adjustment there. Are there other council people with comments? On those two issues. Are you comfortable with the fee? Would you be. Councilman Labatt: I'm not opposed to putting us more in line with the average. I certainly don't think we should be the leader in license fees but I'm not opposed to meeting the average. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Any comment? City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 Councilman Ayotte: I don't have an opinion one way or the other. I don't have enough information really to see why there is that disparity. There's got to be a reason for it, but I don't know what that reason is. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Councilman Kroskin, do you have any recommendations as to the fee amount? Councilman Kroskin: Well if, did you just say you did do the math on the wine license fee? Mayor Jansen: Yes. Councilman Kroskin: The average is $994 of the other 9 communities listed. And what was the 3.27 Mayor Jansen: Was $392. Councilman Kroskin: Well, you know maybe a 50% increase on the 3.2 beer fee and then 100% increase in the wine license fee from where we are right now. Mayor Jansen: Scott Botcher: Staff comment? It's certainly a policy call. Councilman Kroskin: We're still, even at 100% increase on the wine license we're 50% of the average. Scott Botcher: Here's the rationale behind it, and this certainly changes from council to council and it's been since '94 so it probably needs to be addressed. But this has been the rationale. If you look at who holds the types of licenses, I think that in the past has generally been the concern as to what the rates are. If you look at the spreadsheet, the city has put the emphasis obviously on the on-sale intoxicating fee as a major revenue generator, just partially because of how many people have that license but also maybe it's not always fair, who pays it. And I can't disagree with what you said. I mean we are lagging and it maybe needs to be addressed. I think, but realistically that's been sort of the rationale. You've got the small businesses there, absent probably Byerly's, that pay that small amount. Secondly though, and I think more importantly, whatever you want to change on this, if you want to increase the fees, you do need to have a public hearing. We'll publish it and we'll come back and you need to do it in that manner. Councilman Kroskin: That'd be fine. Why don't we get some public input. Scott Botcher: Just so you know that. Mayor Jansen: So we'll need a motion to table to move it to a public hearing if we're going to increase them. Scott Botcher: Yeah, you can just instruct the staff to call a public hearing as soon as practicable and that gives, you know your constituents an opportunity to contact you with their thoughts, but I can't disagree. Mayor Jansen: Councilman Labatt, are you comfortable with that? Councilman Labatt: Yeah. Councilman Ayotte: Yes ma'am. City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 Mayor Jansen: Okay. If I could have a motion to table with direction to staff to set the public hearing date. Councilman Kroskin: Motion to table with direction to staff to set a public hearing date so we can hear from the community. Mayor Jansen: And do I have a second for that motion? Councilman Ayotte: I'll second that. Mayor Jansen: Any more discussion of the motion? Councilman Kroskin moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded to table establishing the 2001 Liquor License Fees and directing staff to set a public hearing date on this item. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 4 to 0. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: CARVER COUNTY QUALITY OF LIFE REPORT, PAUL MOLINE. Mayor Jansen: Hi Paul. Thanks for joining us tonight. Paul Moline: Thank you for having me. I'm going to use the screen here if it works out okay. My name's Paul Moline with the Carver County Planning Department and I'd like to just make a couple introductions here before I start. Commissioner Swanson is here. Teresa Pesch from Ridgeview Medical Center and Nancy Rhinehart who is with the University of Minnesota Extension. Mayor Jansen: Thanks for joining us. Paul Moline: ... mailed the city about a month ago but if anybody doesn't have one I've got a few extra copies. Mayor Jansen: Everybody set? Nancy Rhinehart: We also want your input as we present the report and so if there's anything that you'd like to jot down, give us input on... Paul Moline: Hopefully by the end of this evening, well at the end of 15 minutes or so, I'd like to have these questions answered. Essentially what are quality of life indicators? Why is the County talking about this? Why are we making an effort tonight in your city council meeting to talk about this? And what does the report say that is referenced here? And lastly, where are we going from here with this project? Just to set the stage a little bit. I know most of you are familiar with the changes we've seen in the county here. This graph represents just population changes since the mm of the century. You can really see the last couple decades the rapid rise in population, and just to give a couple examples of that for folks, I think if you were to look back beginning of even this decade, you would see a lot less traffic on Highway 5. You would see a downtown here in Chanhassen that is markedly smaller than it is today. And other facilities in the county for example the Ridgeview Medical Center in Waconia would be a much smaller medical facility in the 90's. Again, this is stuff that's been in the newspapers. We've seen it quite a bit. Carver City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 County is one of the fastest growing counties in the state. I think during the 1990's they were the third fastest growing. One of the fastest growing in the upper Midwest. And there's a lot of changes that are going to continue and really are changing every day here. We've got a major highway sort of knocking on the door of the county that will bring some changes. We've got a Super Target opening up in Chanhassen. A major development area down there. And we've got again smaller towns even, Chanhassen has the bulk of the population in the county but even smaller towns out in the western part of the county are going to be seeing 3 to 4 times the increase in households. So every town, every township in the county has seen a remarkable amount of change. City of Chanhassen again, you're looking at getting up to about 35,000 folks in about 20 years from now. So you are seeing the change as rapidly as anybody else. So what does quality of life mean to Carver County residents? We did a survey in 1997 and one of the questions we asked on there was what was important to the residents that lived here or have just moved here. What was important to them about being in Carver County? And these are some of the things that they responded. With accessibility to the metro area. The open space and rural character of the county. Some things you associate with that quite a bit, quietness, safety, small town feel, lack of congestion, safety, good schools, friendly people. There's a lot of things that people hold dear to the county and again whether they're lived here for 50 years or it's one of the reasons why they moved here. We've got again in the poll...what people thought of quality of life in 1997 currently and we've got a fairly good attitude about what that life is like. About 50% of the population has lived here less than 15 years so there's a large bulk of people that moved here for a reason. Those things that those people are concerned about over the next 20 years are problems related to population growth and development, keeping tax increases reasonable, control of drugs and related problems, criminal problems, the road system, traffic, transportation are a large concern. Control crime and quality school systems. Those are all things people are thinking about when they see this, the urban changes coming to the county. So this project, this sort of sets the stage a little bit for why we did this project. This quality of life indicator piece was fully together through a partnership between the county, a couple of departments at the county, University of Minnesota Extension and Ridgeview Medical Center, and I guess I can't emphasize enough that Ridgeview's involvement here, as a private/public partnership really has kept this thing moving and I think will keep it moving as we move along here. Why did we do this? One of the reasons, the initial reason why we did this was to organize some data and information. We get a lot of requests at the county and a lot of departments are tracking information about the changes I just mentioned. We saw some initial efficiencies of starting to share data, not only within the county but within communities and with public. That's really what sparked this. We started, it started to grow a little bit when again we thought it might be really helpful to track how those changes are affecting the county. How things are affecting the county over time. Not just today, but what things looked like 10 years. What they're going to look like 10 years from now. And again recognizing that all this, most decisions that are made at the county are based on solid, good information, whether it's at the county level or at the local level. And lastly, coordinating community goals and values. There are a lot of different plans that come out. At the county we have a comprehensive plan, we have health plans. The city you have your own comprehensive plan. Private entities, Ridgeview Medical Center for example has a plan for the future. This, we saw as a way to begin to coordinate those. A lot of values are similar. So what are these indicators? Really they're pieces of data that reflect the important vision of the county and trying to reflect some of the values I just mentioned. They also give an opportunity to provide feedback on the overall health of the community, in this case the entire county. Maybe provide a symptom if something if something's headed in the wrong direction. It's a good chance to raise a flag and then see what can be done about that. And really the main point of this is to get, pull a lot of different indicators together to look at what the big picture is in the county. I guess I can't emphasize that enough either that we are looking at a lot of different areas here. It's not just land use. Not just transportation. We're trying to pull it all together to look at that big picture. We had a 10 step process here that was borrowed from some other places around the country. We did check some other counties, some other cities that have done quality of City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 life reports and we tried to borrow some of the best pieces from those. I'm not going to go through all of these but just emphasize a few of them. One of the things we did early on was trying to get out to the communities. Community leaders. Decision makers and that's then what they felt was important. Before we decided what indicators should be, we wanted to get out and ask folks what they would track if they wanted to know how quality of life was changing in the county. After that we tried to narrow them down. Some of the other studies we've seen had up to 400 different indicators. What we wanted to do was produce a document which people would actually pick up and look at, so we wanted to get it to around 40 indicators. We had to take, I think initially we had about 75 and we had to narrow that down to a reasonable number. We also wanted to make sure we had reliable data. A lot of indicators that people were interested in, there just wasn't data out there. Or the data that was available was really spotty. We had the bits and pieces but not something we were comfortable with producing. We also involved the University, through Extension... university faculty to look at how we interpreted the data to make sure we made some good assumptions and we were tracking the right thing. And what we're doing right now is promoting this report. We did finish it essentially early fall. What we're doing right now is trying to get this out to as many decision makers and community leaders as possible to really see how useful this is to you and what kind of tool you think this is in terms of making your decisions. We're going to all the townships, all the cities and the school boards in the county. And then also some other organizations, Chamber of Commerce. So just to summarize quickly what's in the report. We've got 9 topic areas. Economics, and I'm not going to go through all of these but early on in the report there's a few pages which summarize, they list all the indicators. Summarize a trend. What direction the data is telling us it's going in. For example the top one, unemployment rate. The trend is that our unemployment rate is getting lower and lower. And then the next column we have a comparison to either the region or the state, or in some cases national we have the data. How's Carver County doing compared to other places? We made some assumptions there. And again, with unemployment rates, when you consider the region or state, our unemployment rate is much lower. Education, we've got a list of indicators there. Environment. Growth and housing. Health. Mobility. Perception. We wanted to include some more qualitative indicators from residents. How they perceive things in the county. Public safety and some social indicators. This is just a quick example of how each page has one of the, every page lists one indicator. I just wanted to walk through how we set this up so when you're looking at it you can understand it a little better. In this case it's the added home value. We tried to document what the significant of the indicator was. Why we chose it? Why we put it in here? What it means? What exactly is being measured? In this case we were looking at assessed value data from the county assessor. We wanted to make sure that people understood exactly what was being tracked here. A little summary of the trends. Again in this case looking at the chart, no surprise. Everybody has an average value of homes in the county has been going up quite rapidly. This is just during the 1990's. And then the links, which I think is one of the most important pieces of the document. We tried to link what this indicator, average home value, what kind of affect it had on other indicators in the report. The ones listed here, medium household income. There's obviously a relationship between how much people make and what kind of home they can afford. The second one was percent of housing that is affordable. Again, one of the larger issues here in the county is how the increase in home value is affecting the folks that are trying to buy their first homes. Folks that work in the county that want to live here but can't. Another link would be the link with the home value versus the taxable market value. Essentially the tax capacity that we have in the county. And point of distribution. Again, those folks that the types of jobs that are available in the county and their ability to live here or not live here. I'm going to turn this over to...just to talk about where we're going from here and then we can take any questions you may have. Nancy Rhinehart: We put together a... 3 year plan and it includes 4 different areas. The first one is continued research. The second.., technology. The third, community education, which we're doing tonight City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 with your group. And the fourth being staff development. In the area of continued research, what we want to do is to continually update this. Our plan is as soon as the census data becomes available, the census data in this report will be updated. And so we'll be using the web site that we have currently put this on as well as the printed materials to update that information. We also are working on a county wide survey that was done in '97 to get your feedback, like you're going to give us tonight of is the data that you're seeing here, the data that.., and continue to be using as data to watch, or are there other pieces that need to be added. And so that's why we want your input here and our survey coming up will be using that information. So collecting that. Another area of research that we're going to do is family focus groups. Again getting more qualitative data and going out to different demographic areas. Right now we want to look at young workers, new immigrants, new residents, not necessarily immigrants, commuter employees, not necessarily residents. I mean they're not residents. Farmers, senior citizens, school aged parents and youth that are 18 years and older. And so what we hope to do is collect qualitative data to add to our report here. The second area we're working on is to update annually, not only on the web site but we do hope to update our printed reports every, approximately 2 years as well. And so you can go on, it is on the Carver County web site as printed in our report there that you can go in now and access the same report that you have in print form. And then making it in the future more interactive. Hopefully attracting youth and that type of thing in the web site development. Our third area is to present this, as Paul stated, to every city, school and township board or council in the next couple of months and to get your feedback. Have an opportunity to dialogue and discuss these indicators. Our second area is with Carver County Elected Officials Leadership Program. You may have recently received, each of you.., letter from Commissioner Swanson and Ische inviting you to participate. I do have a folder here that also gives the same application. You're welcome to take this one as well. In here, this is a partnership that we've included. If you'll open it up here, on the inside, on your right hand side is a description actually of a Minnesota Political Leadership Program. The Humphrey Institute is dedicated to help, not to help. To support elected leaders and currently they're working on a Minnesota Political Leadership Program with the legislature. You may have heard about it. The opening day of the legislature there was a leadership program that was started the morning of the opening session. And so on your right hand side just talks a little bit about what they're doing with the state legislature and who's on the design team. The objectives and the focus of that particular project. And then on the left hand side is a description of our county program that is being developed. Our major goals are to provide action oriented leadership education around these indicators, and issues. Build understandings of key issues impacting Carver County. Provide a forum for supporting partnerships among elected officials to address common issues and to celebrate the leadership that you provide in Carver County. It goes a little bit more in depth. As to our sessions, we're going to just start it out with a steering session and you can see the list of design team members of which Commissioner Swanson and Ische and also Teresa in her elected official hat from District 110 School Board are serving to design this program with you. I don't know if you want to add anything else to it Teresa? Okay, so anyhow we would like to have your discuss this and encourage you to have a couple people.., leadership program. Our fourth area that we had as a goal is internal staff development and so we are in the process of training internal department heads, staff at the county as well as statewide in our.., process used here as well... With that. Paul Moline: I guess we can take any questions if you have any. Mayor Jansen: Well it's really an exciting program. I had a chance to look through the information and it is just very well pulled together and certainly with everyone's schedules, I think everyone will have an opportunity to be able to go through and really use it constructively. I had gotten, I held it up as Nancy came around. I had gotten my letter. I would love to participate in this planning process and be a part of it City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 and I commend you for pulling something together like this. Does anyone on the council have any questions or comments you'd like to share? Scott Botcher: I have two questions if the council's passing. Mayor Jansen: Go ahead. Scott Botcher: I guess I've got one comment. First of all, Nancy's not from Ridgeview. What's your name? Teresa, I'm sorry. I guess just an aside. I'm very, very pleased to see Ridgeview involved in this process. I know you all have made a commitment to the County and to this community and sometimes I think we overlook that and I know that in my conversations with Bob Stevens, and even down to Darrell, the EMS guy, as we worked with our EMS location, you all have been very, very committed to this community and you need to be commended for that. Secondly though, Nancy said, no Paul said, that you had a plan for the future.., is that a public. Teresa Pesch: Just to go off your comment. I'm Teresa Pesch. I'm the Acting Secretary for the Foundation for Ridgeview Medical Center Human Services. Mayor Jansen: Welcome. Thanks for being here. Teresa Pesch: Thank you. I'm here on behalf of our organization. Part of our.., looking at one of the quality of life indicators was that a lot of employers, there are many issues that we face that impact our quality of work environment that we offer as well as housing. Quality of housing in Carver County. We have co-founded and sponsored... As we looked at that we thought housing was.., and part of the area of interest that we have is the area of transportation and unemployment and affordable housing. We also, we're doing.., in terms of entry level and what is affordable and Nancy has marshaled, through the Humphrey Institute, sort of the key leaders in that issue...that would come out to Carver County and work with us in terms of some problem solving. I think the Mayor, you attended our housing... Mayor Jansen: Yes. Teresa Pesch: ... housing and growth as those first three.., and then the participants will be able to watch the.., so we would very much be willing to come and.., and appreciate your comments. Scott Botcher: I guess if you have a business card or something with you, just maybe give it to Todd right there and he can hand it to me. I guess my second question is this, and this is more of a comment to what we're trying to do. Outside of the census data, which often times by the time you get it compiled and analyzed is outdated, do you all, and we as a community are moving ahead with a community survey, which is in fact on the agenda this evening. And I guess the question is two fold. First of all, do you plan on having frequent local canvas community surveys outside and apart from census data? And then secondly I guess it's more of an offer. Assuming the council goes ahead with this, which is premature because it's still on the agenda but I'm sort of assuming we're going ahead with this process, if you have questions as we develop our question list, that you think are important to Chanhassen, or to us, I personally would like to see what they are because I don't claim to have all the questions in my head that we would be considering. I'm sure there's some good ones out there. So we'd be more than happy to receive those as well. City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 Paul Moline: To answer the first question. I think the last time we did the survey we did try to break the results down in sub-groups. Every city and townships as a whole. I think this time around we weren't recommending to do that just because of the cost issues. That we'd probably break it out between urban and rural or... which gets to your second point that, maybe this is more since we'll have similar questions that we're asking on the surveys and then we can prepare... I think that's pretty crucial to you and to us. And our question list, is in a very.., state right now. If you want to ask some of the questions we did on the last survey but we're trying to get some input on this. If there's maybe some data that we're missing and ask those questions on the survey so we haven't quite gotten as far down the road. Scott Botcher: You're farther than we are because we don't have a single question but I think that. Mayor Jansen: We're starting to work on that in March. Scott Botcher: I mean it's something that I'm supporting and obviously it's up to these folks whether or not we do it and I think they've been supportive but I've been in contact with Minnetonka Community Ed. They came in and made a presentation here and they have agreed to put together some questions to forward to us and I would seriously like to look at your questions as well and maybe we can piggy back some of those but anyway, I'm sorry it took so long. Mayor Jansen: Well we're also parallel tracking a little bit on the housing issue too because we are talking about having a housing forum here in the community so I think we've got some good opportunities for partnership with you informationally and educating our community at the same time we're educating on county issues so thank you. It's an exciting project and appreciate your being here tonight and Commissioner Swanson for your being here also. Commissioner Swanson: Thank you very much. Mayor Jansen: Thank you. And we will get our feedback sheets back to you. LAW ENFORCEMENT & FIRE DEPARTMENT UPDATE: Mayor Jansen: Thank you for joining us this evening. Sgt. Dave Potts: Good evening Mayor, Council members. I'm going to be real brief tonight. As you know, if you had a chance to look at my memo to the council, you'll see there's no area call report or area citation report. As I believe you might be familiar with, the Sheriff's office is transitioning to a new record system. That's one glitch in our current system that they're transitioning. The other thing is that they're down 2 or 3 people in our records division right now. They just don't have enough people to get all the different things done that they have to get done. So I was hoping to maybe bring those tonight and you could just take them home with you but they are not ready as of yet so I don't have any comments on those. You'll see item number 3 is the community service officer highlights. That's something that I mentioned to the council previously that will be included, just as a piece of information that I pass onto the council. The activities that Jeff is involved in on a monthly basis. Mayor Jansen: That's a nice addition to the information you're giving us. Thank you for including that. Sgt. Dave Potts: Beth Hoiseth, the Crime Prevention Specialist will also be doing something similar on a bi-monthly basis so we'll probably see one for the first two months of this year next month in a report. City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 Under miscellaneous items, for our new councilman. Something that I try to do each month is maybe list some things that the sheriff's office was involved in that's out of our ordinary, every day role in the city here. And anything of more significant importance that I think the council may be interested in. So the first one there I mentioned is just a situation where a scout troop leader contacted us at the last minute looking for some crime prevention information. An officer to do a presentation so we were able to line that up for them. That is something we do to any group that is looking for an officer. A law enforcement employee to come and speak at their organization or put on some kind of presentation and this is just an example of one of those we were able to do for a scout troop in Chanhassen here. Update on the American Legion robbery. As you well know this is a fresh crime and obviously an ongoing investigation so I won't be talking specifically about the activities that our investigators are involved in. Initially, not a lot of information to go on but that doesn't mean there aren't a lot of angles to investigate in a crime like this. There are quite a few and that will be ongoing for quite some time, or if we get a sudden break and an arrest or something like that, who knows. Hopefully it can be wrapped up but just a couple of tidbits regarding that situation. The Wednesday afterwards Carver County has a critical incident debriefing crisis team set up for when something like this happens in the county affecting a good number of people, as everybody that was at the legion that evening was you know greatly affected by this situation. So they were able to line up what we call a critical incident stress debriefing program for all the victims that were at the legion that evening and that was the Wednesday after as I mentioned. Put on by mental health professionals from the county so that was kind of a nice thing that went on there. Beth put together a crime alert that we distributed to all the downtown area. Tried to hit most all of the retail type establishments. Just kind of keep the information out there and some reminders and what not. I believe the council got a copy of that. Mayor Jansen: Yes we did. Sgt. Dave Potts: As I mentioned, that's going to be something new that we're going to be getting the council. Along with that crime alert was an attachment. You know that Beth is working on an e-mail bulletin for businesses in town. Crime alerts and that type of thing so that was attached there. Hopefully we'll get more businesses signed up for that. And the sheriff had some other business with the Rotary so he took that opportunity to touch on this situation as well. Any questions on that particular incident from the council? Mayor Jansen: I just want to share publicly the compliments that I know I received from the members of the Legion for the sheriff's department's reaction to this event, if you would. That the timing of being on the scene was prompt, and the handling of the victims was significant to them because they were terribly thrown by what occurred and the deputies that were there and Sheriff Olson's responses just numerous times have been complimented to me on your behalf so I'm going to pass that along and I've been sharing that with the other community members. And the sheriff coming to the Rotary meeting on Wednesday morning was certainly appreciated again letting business people know as well as raising their awareness of what had happened with these individuals and you know seeking the community support was a significant effort so our thanks. Sgt. Dave Potts: Well I appreciate those comments and this was huge for this community. This is not a common, every day occurrence. Mayor Jansen: Yes it was. 10 City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 Sgt. Dave Potts: I think back to the bank robbery was '97. Was probably the last time we had something of this impact and this significance happen in the city of Chanhassen. Very bold. Very brazen and we're looking very much forward to getting our hands on the suspects in this case. Mayor Jansen: Thank you for your efforts. Sgt. Dave Potts: ... certainly made a huge impact on them, but just as a side note, the deputies that work this town feel violated as well when something is pulled off in what they consider to be their community so we have the greatest hopes that our investigative team will put a quick end to this. Mayor Jansen: We'll look forward to good news. Sgt. Dave Potts: Yeah. Just a tip, State patrol is handling an investigation of Shakopee Auto, on the used car lots down at what we call the lower Y. Highway 101/212 area there. Did a search warrant into some of the practices down there. Assisted by one of our deputies, just more as a standby. They always notify the locals when they're in a jurisdiction doing investigation. And that was our only participation in that. Also something I try to keep the council up to date on is anything that affects the city directly or city property. In this case I mentioned North Lotus Park had some vandalism. It wasn't a real significant crime. Just some windows broken out at the warming house but I do like to mention those incidents to the council when they come up. And a significant burglary occurred at the Westwood Community Church office, located near Highway 5 and Park Drive in the light industrial area over there. Where their office is currently houses. A break-in over there. Netted the suspects. Computers and other electronic items with initial value estimates of over $20,000 so that was a significant one that again is, that was from the end of January so again another ongoing incident that's being investigated. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Sgt. Dave Potts: Any other comments or questions from the council for me? Mayor Jansen: Councilmen, comments? Questions? Okay. Thank you very much for the update. Appreciate it. Then we have Chief Wolff with us this evening. Hello John. John Wolff: How you doing? Mayor Jansen: Good. John Wolff: Thanks for inviting me. Just a reminder that next Monday afternoon we have the council orientation. You're be rotating through departments, the fire department included. We're looking forward to the opportunity to kind of share with you in some detail the kind of services we perform and a little more about our organization. Tonight I'm only going to spend a minute or two because I know you have an extensive schedule but a couple of reminders. May 5th of 2001 is our 35th Anniversary of the Fire Department itself and invitations will be going out to the council and some key staff here at the city. That's a Saturday evening and we're hoping that you folks can attend. Councilman Labatt: May 5th? John Wolff: May 5th. The actual anniversary is the 6th so, but we have to be out of there by 11:00 so we may not make it. Our staffing is eligible for 45. We're at 44 right now. When we look at our staffing plan 11 City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 and we get down to the individual levels, we can see 8 to 10 potential terminations in the next 2 years resulting from retirements, kind of the normal burnout that we get from call activity, and just the challenges between managing a paid on call position and your work and personal life. And also just some performance related anticipations that we have. With this in mind we constantly are in a recruiting mode and I'm happy to report that we have between 10 and 12 applications which we're currently reviewing and are scheduled to start another class in June, which is typically when we do start a class. Typically the first quarter of the year is our slowest quarter. Normally for call activity. But our calls this year are up 36%, which is a significant number. We don't think that's a straight line trend for the year. We think it somewhat has to do with having a real winter, which we certainly have had this year and a lot of weather related activity from that. Most of our major calls fortunately have been out of town. We've been on 6 major mutual aid calls in our neighboring cities, including the significant apartment fire in Chaska where there was a fatality. We've had 2 very major car accidents here in town on the corridor between Powers Boulevard and Galpin Road has been kind of a significant area for us and as we all know, that's an area under development and we anticipate that when we get 4 lanes out there with the divided, that that will improve significantly. But both the recent ones were incidents where it's taken a significant amount of time to get the victims out of the vehicles because of the extent of damage to the vehicles resulting from head on collisions. In both cases air bags and seat belts but the victims still having major and significant injuries. We had one yesterday in the middle of the storm, or the day before. And the victim is improving but is in very serious condition. Just a couple of other points before I close here. With all the snow on the ground we're anticipating some weather related activity as it goes away, in the form of flooding and the report I heard recently was this is the most snow this area has seen since 1991. I'm not sure how that will impact us in where we are upstream but we'll keep our eye on that because the southern part of our city has a significant river with some significant exposures down there. Finally in March we'll be meeting with you folks at a work session to go over a pension proposal which we have submitted to the city and we'll have copies for you folks before that work session. I'll take any questions if there are any. Mayor Jansen: Great. Any questions for John? See none. Thanks for being here. Appreciate it. Moving on to unfinished business. DISCUSSION OF TRAIL ADJACENT TO TH 101, PROJECT 97-12-3. Public Present: Name Address Joan Janke Lynn Thompson Dianne Whiting Leon Narem Pamela & Tom Devine Frank Mendez Steven Posnick Ed Bennett Charles Hauau Mel Kurvers Sandra Resnick Jay Strohmaier 7002 Sandy Hook Circle 41 Hill Street 51 Hill Street 20 Sandy Hook Road 7640 South Shore Drive 7361 Kurvers Point Road 7010 Dakota Avenue 7017 Sandy Hook Circle 115 Choctaw 7240 Kurvers Point Road 80 Sandy Hook Road 12 City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 Mayor Jansen: Before we get started on that item, I just want to make sure that everyone who's here is clear as to what we're actually discussing. The flyer that went out in the neighborhood actually seems to make it appear as though the discussion this evening was around the roadway as well, and this discussion in fact is centered around the, I shouldn't say recent but the last communication that we had gotten from MnDot denying the construction of the trail in the right-of-way. So this item, it's the first time that it's coming to this council. We at this point have had no review of the roadway concepts as a council and numerous questions came up of course as we were looking at the trail segment. So we will, in discussions with staff, be scheduling another meeting time to be able to actually review the roadway configurations and get everyone up to speed since we do have 3 new members of the council who did not go through all of those public hearings and aren't aware of the background data on that. So I want to applaud whoever is keeping residents informed and keeping you involved in the system. What I hope maybe we can be sure we're doing is distributing the right, accurate information because I'd hate to have people engaged in a meeting and taking time out from a busy night to come up here thinking we're talking about something that in fact isn't what's on the agenda. And I know that that can in fact lead to some disengagement with the system if you would. So if we ever need to get some clarification for the flyers before those go out, I would just encourage you to touch base with Teresa or if it's Todd Hoffman that has the item on the agenda, that that might be the direction to go. Back to the item that is on the agenda, before turning this over for the staff report, just so everyone's clear where we're going tonight. Staff is simply looking for direction from us tonight on whether to, for one, pursue the trail. And the different discussions around location, timing. You know we'll probably end up with something of a list of things that we'll need to address after this meeting. That in fact we will not be able to address this evening since we've not covering the roadway, but I will turn it over for the staff report please. Teresa Burgess: Thank you Madam Mayor. As the staff report goes through, there is a real brief trail history. I have not included the roadway history. I have only included trail history and I'll run through that real quick for the people that don't have the benefit of the staff report in front of them. On May 22nd of last year the council authorized us to begin exploration of a possible trail along Highway 101 within the existing MnDot right-of-way and that would require us to apply for a limited use permit or an LUP. In June of last year we submitted that document to MnDot for LUP review. In October we received documentation from MnDot that they were taking the road back out of the turnback process. That did not impact our application however. In September we received documentation from MnDot that, I'm sorry. I switched two dates around. In October we submitted a grant application to MnDot for the trail. In September we received a letter from MnDot stating that they were taking back the roadway. In November we actually received our documentation from MnDot that they were denying our LUP request. At that time we met with MnDot and their statement was, if we did full design of the trail, they would reconsider their denial. And in January we received denial of our cooperative agreement grant application. Again their statement was, if we would do full design of the trail, they would reconsider their denial. They have not given us indication that they would approve it. Only that they would reconsider. At this time the trail is estimated at approximately $1 million. Using a 10% engineering fee, that leaves the design at approximately $100,000, which is a substantial amount of money. We are coming to council tonight to answer questions. Gain what insight you need to be able to answer the question of should we either pursue this trail as a separate project, or should we put it, continue to keep it in the city plan but not pursue it quite as aggressively as we have been at this point. With that I'll answer any questions. Councilman Ayotte: MnDot had asked us to respond by 19 February. Is the information that they have requested, this information that you're referring to? 13 City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 Teresa Burgess: What they wanted by February 19th was full design of the entire trail. It was not possible. Councilman Ayotte: Yeah, okay. Teresa Burgess: And so we have informed them that we would not be responding in that time frame. We would not be able to get cooperative grant funding until 2003. Councilman Ayotte: I just want to make sure that that was the...to the request. Okay. Teresa Burgess: Correct. Mayor Jansen: That was your question? Councilman Ayotte: Yeah. Mayor Jansen: Okay. I guess maybe to help frame this up a little bit. Some of the questions that were flying back and forth today as we were all trying to get our arms around the funding of this issue. At one point when we were in our discussions with MnDot last year, we were addressing this as a project that could in fact have been funded with TIF. But at this point, because of the timing and because we're beyond the year 2000, that's no longer an option so as of last year we lost $2.6 million in funding source for the trail, correct? Scott Botcher: I can't confirm the $2.6... Mayor Jansen: From TIF, okay. The other part of the questions that we were posing was around the state funding the construction of the trail, and if I understood correctly, if in fact this had proceeded with the roadway, it would have been covered by the tumback funds, correct? Teresa Burgess: The majority of the cost would have been covered by the tumback funds. There were city funds involved in the tumback and just as there is with the Highway 5, the city would have had a share of the cost but the majority of the cost would have been bom... Mayor Jansen: And you reflected it was 90% that the state had picked up on the Highway 5 trail and bridges? Teresa Burgess: I'm not sure. The Highway 5, it's approximately 10% that the city is paying and 90% that the state picked up. Actually those are federal dollars. In this case, looking back at the file, I'm not sure what the final discussion was but it does look like it was the 90/10 split again. However the right-of- way would not have been city funded and so that's a difference that doesn't get incorporated into that 90/10 split. Mayor Jansen: Okay. And then the other question that has come up is if in fact we do get permission to build the trail in their right-of-way, and they come through and do Option lA. Let's say we get them to agree to that. We lose, or at least 90% of the trail is then impacted by even Option lA. Teresa Burgess: We've estimated 80 to 90% of the trail would have to be reconstructed. The mill and overlay does not impact the trail because that takes place in the existing asphalt area. But any drainage 14 City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 improvements would immediately impact because we would be in the ditch area. The other thing to keep in mind also is that when we do apply for an LUP permit, we are in the same position as any utility that comes to the city or any one that comes to us for a right-of-way permit. Just as we can ask them to relocate something at their cost, the State could ask us to remove this trail at a future date. That would be a condition of the LUP. Mayor Jansen: So the cost to actually demolition it and remove it would be the city's to get it out of MnDot's way. Teresa Burgess: That is a potential. If we were talking about a turnback, it would be a negotiation point for us in that turnback agreement. Mayor Jansen: Okay. And if it does then, if I understand correctly, if it does become a turnback project, the cost of reconstructing the trail then. Teresa Burgess: Would be negotiated as a part of that turnback agreement. Mayor Jansen: Okay. So then to construct it we'd be hit once, but we might also then be hit to do the demolish ourselves. Teresa Burgess: We could potentially be required to remove the trail at some point. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Okay. I can keep going. Are there other council questions? Councilman Ayotte: Well if they put the trail in. If we put the trail in, if I heard the mayor correctly, we would, there's a possibility that we'd have to take the trail out. Teresa Burgess: MnDot reserves the right to require us to do that. They have not said they would, but they do reserve the right in the permit to do that. Councilman Ayotte: And we could potentially, if required to do that, also incur the expense for the demolition of the trail. Teresa Burgess: Correct. IfMnDot required us to remove the trail, it would be at our expense. Councilman Kroskin: Do you know roughly what that would be? Teresa Burgess: No. We have not estimated the cost to remove the trail. It would depend what they wanted to do. If they were looking at demolishing the trail so that they could return it to a grass slope, then we would be looking at restoration costs. If they were looking at demolishing the trail so they could widened Highway 101, that's a substantially different demolition because we don't have to do restoration work and so there's really not a way to estimate that. Councilman Kroskin: How many linear feet is the trail? Teresa Burgess: Approximately 8,000. 15 City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 Councilman Kroskin: In your e-mail today, one of your e-mails to us you were saying that your estimated costs.., was roughly about $125 per foot, not including design, engineering fees. Teresa Burgess: Correct. Councilman Kroskin: And then you did an average of all of 7 other trails? Teresa Burgess: Todd Hoffman supplied that information. The average of the 7 other trails. Councilman Kroskin: $38.00. Teresa Burgess: $38.00. That includes design and engineering. Our typical indirect costs that includes our design and our construction engineering as well as legal expenses and administration expenses is 30%. If you're looking at just design, approximately 10% is just design of that total 30%. 8% would be construction engineering. The remainder of that is legal and administrative. Councilman Kroskin: Todd also sent out an e-mail today where I saw a figure where the, and clarify this. That the homes roughly used about what, 400 homes? The neighborhood that's impacted by the trail have been assessed $75,000 to date. Mayor Jansen: That the Highway 101 neighborhoods have generated approximately $75,000 in trail fees. Councilman Kroskin: To date. Mayor Jansen: To date. And that took into account about 400 homes. And what we were trying to really get a feel for is what has actually been paid in towards the trail, because that did come up as an issue when we were reviewing this previously with the roadway as to the actual cost. Councilman Kroskin: I was just trying to understand what the $75,000 was about. Mayor Jansen: So the $125 per foot does not have the design and engineering in it? Teresa Burgess: No. That is just considering the $1 million construction fee. It also does not include right-of-way acquisition. Councilman Ayotte: What's that? Teresa Burgess: The right-of-way acquisition? Councilman Ayotte: No, what would be the guess that that cost would be. Teresa Burgess: We have not estimated the right-of-way acquisition at this time. It is our hope that we can negotiate a reasonable acquisition, if not a donation with those property owners. However until we have a LUP, it doesn't seem reasonable to approach those property owners and try to negotiate something and get ourselves, the horse in front of the cart. We want to do it in the right order. 16 City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 Councilman Ayotte: What do you think the risk would be with respect to liability to the city and it's residents on whether or not we would have to put that path in and take it out? What do you think the risk is? Teresa Burgess: I don't see MnDot approving a limited use permit that they know they're going to require us to take it out in the short term. So MnDot tends to program in 20 year segments. They are going to try to be upfront with us and let us know if there's a potential for that relocation. The bigger issue at this point in my mind is, is the design worth the gamble that MnDot will approve the project or not. Councilman Ayotte: The hundred plus thousand. Teresa Burgess: Is it worth trying to get the LUP at this point, or should we re-evaluate the trail? Mayor Jansen: Well and I guess part of the questions in where I was going today with my questions is not only the $100,000 that would be spent in the design fees, but backing up and looking at the overall expenditure that we're addressing and comparing it to what was actually spent within the referendums for trails. I was quite frankly floored at how much more expensive this trail corridor is to construct. It would have taken the entire referendum amount that we spent on 7 trails to build this 1. It's amazing the disparity. Or going in reverse, if you took that $38 per foot and applied it to this trail, we should be spending $350,000. What I'm now hearing you say could be more like a million three once you put the 30% additional on that million. Teresa Burgess: Correct. Councilman Kroskin: Where's the disparity coming from? Teresa Burgess: This trail is trying to fit, it's trying to be a low impact trail and that causes some problems. We're trying to fit into an existing right-of-way. The right-of-way has two wetlands that we would end up having to traverse. Those have significant impacts, as well as the grades. We do have to meet ADA grades and to do that causes problems with the trail. And then also addressing a number of the neighborhood concerns. Trying to meet those, and MnDot drainage concerns increase the cost of this project approximately $300,000 is directly related to MnDot concerns. We did not go back through and re- estimate. We are basing the $1 million figure off of what MnDot is estimating the trail to cost from our original $750. Councilman Ayotte: There was the MnDot concerns, the ADA issue, two wetlands and what was the fourth? Mayor Jansen: Existing right-of-way. Scott Botcher: Grades. Teresa Burgess: Within the existing right-of-way. Mayor Jansen: Sitting within the existing right-of-way. Teresa Burgess: To fit into the existing right-of-way we end up with some retaining walls, and those are expensive. We end up with some other problem areas that to stay in those areas, the grades are very 17 City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 difficult. Anybody that's been down 101 can, if you try to imagine a trail in there with reasonable separation from both the homes and from the roadway, it is a very tight corridor. It's a problem we ran into with the whole Highway 101 issue. It's always been the issue. It's a very tight corridor. We certainly feel this trail is important. The question is, is now the time? And that is really why we're bringing it back to council. Mayor Jansen: And is now the time, and how do we finance this because now if we're at a million 3, and even within the CIP we had moved the allocation for this project from 600 up to 800, and now we're talking about a million 3. And it's certainly a disparity to what's been funded on the previous trails, but I guess what I keep coming back to was, there is that opportunity if we can get back into negotiations with the other jurisdictions for the State to pick up the million at least. Teresa Burgess: A majority of the cost, correct. Mayor Jansen: The majority. Councilman Kroskin: What about the county? Is there any option? Teresa Burgess: If this was a turnback project the county would be interested but as a trail project the city would be financing this project on it's own. Councilman Ayotte: Out of 410. Teresa Burgess: Out of our CIP budget. Councilman Ayotte: Out of the CIP. Mayor Jansen: And again, maybe you're speculation as to the other parties coming back to the table. Teresa Burgess: I have actually had conversations with Hennepin County, Carver County, and with MnDot. The only party I have not discussed it with is Eden Prairie. However Eden Prairie has previously made statements that they will do whatever Hennepin County recommends. Councilman Ayotte: What'd they say? When you had conversations. Teresa Burgess: They are all interested in continuing to talk about a possible turnback project. MnDot is very anxious to get this project off their books. The discussion that comes up is that they are not in support of Option lA, which is what Chanhassen is in support of. And we certainly can provide the information to the councilmembers. I do have somebody working on pulling that together this week so we can provide that information and we would be happy to present all of that to the council so we can decide what we should do with the roadway as well. Councilman Kroskin: The rest of you may know this already but why are they not in support of IA? Teresa Burgess: There's a discrepancy in what's recommended for the roadway. MnDot recommends a 3 lane. However they agree that eventual traffic will require 4. Hennepin County has stated their support for a 4 lane because they feel that we should design for that level of traffic. Eden Prairie has chosen to take a position of supporting Hennepin County's position. That is their position. Literally, we support Hennepin 18 City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 County. They made that before Hennepin County made their recommendation. Carver County has stated that they are in support of functional, restoring the functionality of the roadway and they have not stated what that functionality requirement is. Councilman Kroskin: Can we find out? Mayor Jansen: They'll work with us on it. Teresa Burgess: They're willing to support Chanhassen's position. However, they want to make sure that that position meets the functionality. When I did talk with MnDot, one thing they did bring up with the turnback funds, is turnback funds cannot be used unless the roadway at least meets state aid standards. We have not run the calculations based on the traffic counts but we do estimate that that would at a minimum be a 2 lane with shoulders and possibly a full length mm lane which would be the 3 lane but we have not done width calculations. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Keep in mind councilmen that we do have a new city engineer since we went through this project the first time and I am going to state this publicly and I've always appreciated Teresa's handling of the public on the projects that we have had come before us since you've been with us. And I think that openness and willingness to share information and help with more of an education and working with us and being able to lead us along those safety issues, I think would make a big difference in how we might be able to work this project. And also having someone who might be able, better able to communicate with the other parties that we have to actually come to consensus with and do the negotiations with. In that you've already had some discussion with them. I'm getting a sense from you that they're at least open to talking and that's a step in the right direction. Teresa Burgess: Representative Workman has also come forward and stated that he is interested in seeing this project move forward and has offered his services to facilitate those discussions. I'm not sure how far that will actually carry but with his position in the legislature it does carry some weight with MnDot and also with Hennepin County. At this point he is not choosing a position. He is only saying that he wants to see this project reach some final determination. So certainly the other parties are willing. I will get the information to the council and schedule an item for us to discuss the project because it is something that has become very political, and certainly the council needs to understand and make a position known before we approach those other groups and discuss how far are we willing to negotiate if they are willing to come our direction. Mayor Jansen: And I guess councilmen that would be the direction that I would be the most comfortable going in. If only because this number on this trail just continually escalates as to how much this is going to cost. And we have an opportunity that if in fact we can improve the roadway, and also get the trail and not impact all of the taxpayers to the sum of what is sounding like a million 3 now, it would be the more fiscally prudent step to take. At least to explore those negotiations one more time to see what we can reach as far as some sort of an agreement. Now the position that was taken previously, and I do not want to get into the politics of the roadway discussion tonight but if you take the labels off these roadways, I think it's a much easier discussion to have as to where we're trying to go. Part of the belief as we were still referring to this as lA. Concept 1 within the proposals as you'll see was for an overlay and that was it. It was just for a resurfacing. So as we labeled our's lA, it seemed to keep that stigma around it just being a resurfacing. Where in fact once you see the resolutions and everybody has to go through them, it was much more extensive than that and it would have been addressing some of the safety issues so I am hopeful that we might in fact be able to resurrect these discussions and not have the neighbors impacted by it being a 19 City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 huge project. That in fact we may be able to move forward with this trail, which right now because of the financial position that the community's in, we don't have a million 3 to be moving forward with this particular facility and I don't know that the neighbors would be willing to be assessed for the difference between a typical trail and the cost of this one. I believe we all in fact see, and correct me if I'm wrong in your comments, I think we all see the significance of wanting this trail along Highway 101. It's just the delicate balance of how we do that and do it fiscally correct too. But go ahead council if anyone else cares to share comments here. Councilman Ayotte: I don't see any other choice but to solicit the input and see if we can get a meeting going to talk about the options. Mayor Jansen: Initially we would need to first direct staff to run through the roadway review with all of us so that all of us are in agreement as to where we're negotiating from. Everyone needs to get a familiarity with all of the issues that we covered. It's a very extensive review. Prior to, as Teresa said, then at that point bring the jurisdictions back together for a discussion because it would be a negotiation. It won't just be sitting down, because they do want a larger facility than I think we're going to be willing to construct. Teresa Burgess: And ifI could Mayor. I'm not sure, and Roger you'll have to advise on this. When we're talking about negotiation. Obviously the public, the City of Chanhassen residents want to know what the council is directing but do we want to have that in a less public forum when the council is telling staff this is as far as we're willing to go before I approach Hennepin and say, okay we're willing to go this far. How far can you come our way? If it's a public meeting and the staff says, and council tells me this is as far as we're willing to go, that's how far we'll have to go. Do you understand where I'm going? Councilman Ayotte: Go ahead Rog. Roger Knutson: Yes I do. It's generally not considered a good strategy in negotiations obviously to load all your cards on the table and then say we'll only play these two or something, if that's what you're suggesting. That's obviously not a great idea. If you want to negotiate, and that's what it's all about, it's a difficult way to do it. Teresa Burgess: So something to keep in mind for the council is, well I know the citizens of Chanhassen want to know what we're doing and we need to share as much information as possible. Before we approach Hennepin County and MnDot, does the council want to do that discussion in public first? Or do you want to have the discussion in a more closed setting because we are discussing a negotiation? And then come back to the public with information. It's a difficult situation. Roger Knutson: Just so we're clear, we can't have a closed City Council meeting. Teresa Burgess: Well we could have it not as a council meeting. We could have it in a work session which isn't, it's not televised. Scott Botcher: I think, just to be more upfront than that, I think, I mean I'm personally not interested in, and this sounds negative and it's not meant to be but I can't come up with a better word, playing games with the dissemination of information. I mean that's just my own personal opinion. I mean I've been in some of these meetings with Teresa. I'm very comfortable just letting her go with it. We've got to see where people are. We've got to see if there's movement on the other side and Teresa is very good at handling people, and that's why she was hired and I'm very comfortable letting her go with it and she can 20 City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 give us periodic updates and check-in's and do that but I think instead of losing a tactical advantage by indicating to Teresa how far you'll go, or in the alternative saying well let's just do it but let's do it when no one's here, I'd just as soon say you know let's just be up front. You know Teresa go do your job. You represent us and let her do the check in. Mayor Jansen: I like the idea preceded by just a review of the projects and proposals and concepts with council and then they can always be posing questions to you for us to get answers back to them. And then certainly you know where we're probably going to want to attempt to end up and I think that's an excellent suggestion if council's comfortable with doing the review ahead of time. To get a feel for the different concepts. You may need to have some general feel of consensus. Teresa Burgess: Right. We will pull that information together. There is a substantial amount of information so if the council doesn't mind, rather than our typical we supply the information the week before a council meeting, I'd like to give you at least a full week or perhaps two to review the information and then those of you that need some additional information, if you can contact me, we have minutes from public hearings. We have, it's going to take a lot of reading so we will get that information pulled together in the next week or two. Get it out to you as soon as possible and then schedule, once we see how big the pile is, schedule that for a council meeting at some time in the future. But allow you more time than usual for reviewing those staff reports. Mayor Jansen: And there were numerous, numerous public hearings so if you care to come in and be able to take a look at all of the comments and public hearing results. We've got everything. Teresa Burgess: Right. We have it all on tape. We also have it in typed out format and I would encourage you to at least catch a portion of it if we're going to be discussing it so you can catch the tenure of the conversations I've listened to. Not the whole thing but large pieces of it. We'll get you the information that you need. If I could just reiterate, just so I'm clear on what the council's directing at this point. You're directing us to put this trail on hold while we explore the Highway 101 issue. However the trail is still an important issue for the City of Chanhassen and we are not eliminating it. We are simply placing it on hold in the time being. Mayor Jansen: Exactly. That's what I was about to get consensus on. I'm hearing from council that everyone's interested in pursuing this trail. That we are still committed to it but we have a financial hurdle to get over here as far as how we go about funding it and possibly with the roadway is the most feasible, if possible. Councilman Ayotte: Simplisticly, because I'm so slow, all we're saying tonight is that we're not going to spend $100,000 on design. Mayor Jansen: Correct. Councilman Ayotte: And that we're going to pursue a trail and if need be we're going to tie the pursuing of the trail to the various options in a negotiation with all the entities. Is that correct? Teresa Burgess: That's what I'm hearing from council. Mayor Jansen: When you're saying options, are you talking about the roadway options? 21 City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 Councilman Ayotte: Yeah. Don't we have to tie the roadway option to this? Mayor Jansen: No. Teresa Burgess: We're going back to review the roadway options and possibly negotiate a turnback with MnDot. Scott Botcher: Unless we can somehow de-link them. Councilman Ayotte: Okay. Councilman Kroskin: When you're negotiating with the other entities, you don't necessarily have to put your cards on the table. You can see where they're going to go first. Mayor Jansen: There's been a lot of that so, a lot of that. Scott Botcher: Have you ever sat in a room with 5 engineers? Councilman Kroskin: Yeah. Teresa Burgess: We don't play poker well. Mayor Jansen: Okay, straight with direction? Teresa Burgess: I believe so. If not, I will certainly come back and ask for more information. Mayor Jansen: Okay. And then let's just maybe get the roadway on as soon an agenda as we can. Teresa Burgess: We'll pull the information together and see how pile looks for reading. Scott Botcher: Let's talk about it Wednesday and see how it schedules out. Mayor Jansen: It will probably end up being March 26th potentially. Scott Botcher: We'll just have to move some stuff. Mayor Jansen: Yeah. Our 12th agenda is packed so keep an eye on the date but we may in fact then be reviewing this on March 26th would be, it's two council meetings out for us to actually do the roadway review with Teresa. Audience: ...there's no public hearing? Mayor Jansen: Oh this isn't a public hearing. Audience: We can't speak? We can't speak to anything that's happened over the last 8 years on this trail? And now it looks like we're going to wait another 5 years... State of Minnesota. 22 City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 Mayor Jansen: Excuse me. If we could maybe keep this at a professional tone. That's why I was concerned about the flyer that went out through the neighborhood. It was raising a level of anxiety that, well in fact we have had a great deal of public comment around this project over the last year which is what I was sharing with our new council people and they will need to go back through and go through those comments. Now we also then need to have the new council people get up to speed on what that whole roadway project was about and the different options so for us to be taking comment tonight is somewhat premature. We certainly feel the frustrations of the neighborhood and, but the financial picture here is not what may have been reflected to the residents previously. It's coming as a surprise to me that we're now at a million 3. Audience: ... Mayor, if maybe one from each neighborhood could speak? Mayor Jansen: If council members would be willing to open this to a public hearing, I would keep it to 10 minutes but it is certainly up to the council as to whether you're willing to do that. Councilman Kroskin: I'd prefer to get up to speed first so what they're saying has, I'm. Audience: Here's the problem. We've been waiting.., construction this spring. Excuse me for being out of order but, it was supposed to be under construction this spring.., we're going to miss a whole other season again. Mayor Jansen: No see that's the misinformation that's out there. It was not going to be under construction this spring. Audience: I've been to all the meetings for 7 years on this trail so please try not to inform me of what was talked and not talked but I've been here. Mayor Jansen: As far as a public hearing. Councilman Labatt: I've sat through all that. Let the new guys get up to speed. Mayor Jansen: Next meeting. The next meeting we will schedule some time but you've got to allow council to get up to speed and that was not what this meeting was proposed for this evening. And you're certainly welcome to submit whatever comments you would like to share in writing to all of the council members and you've got all of our e-mails. You have all of our phone numbers. So as everyone's getting up to speed you may in fact experience they're not being able to speak to your issues until they've got the background data. And I would appreciate your giving everyone an opportunity to get up to speed so that they are better able to address your concerns. Audience: I would agree with that except your city employee just stood here in front of the whole council and sit here and talked and discussed about how you were going to maneuver around making this discussion out of the public. Mayor Jansen: That wasn't to the public. That was to the. Audience: Did I just hear that or did I not hear that? 23 City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 Mayor Jansen: It was to the jurisdictions that are involved in the, okay. I'm going to have to clear the council chamber if you would mind. We do need to get on with business. Moving onto new business. DISCUSSION OF CONTRACT FOR METER REPLACEMENT PROGRAM. (Councilman Labatt left the meeting during the discussion of this item.) Mayor Jansen: Staff report please. Teresa Burgess: Thank you Madam Mayor. Tom Devine: Can I just make one quick comment? The trail as it was proposed in the mm down was 10 feet wide. If we go back to 3 to 4 foot in the negotiations as she has, it won't be... Mayor Jansen: We can't go to that size. Submit your comments and we'll certainly get back to you. We're moving on with the meeting, thank you. Teresa Burgess: Thank you Madam Mayor. I would like to make one statement before we get started. In the beginning of this report it does have a recommendation from staff. That recommendation has been revised. What we're here to discuss tonight is the meter replacement. We have two major issues with the meters. One is to improve meter read accuracy and one is to reduce the meter read time. The most important issue with this is the meter read accuracy. As meters age they have a tendency to slow down. They don't register all of the water that runs through them. In addition, as we have rust build-up and magnamese build-up in those meters, that also slows down the meter. As all of the council members are aware, Chanhassen does have a high mineral content in our water so we do experience a lot of that problem. I've enclosed information on the back of your report that shows the water that we've lost in the last few years. And when I say lost, it's not that this water ran out of a pipe someplace. It's that we cannot account for where it went. And the majority of that water is anticipated that it went through meters and was not, it was registered in those meters. When that happens we do not bill for that water but we are still charged by the Met Council for sewage. They base how much they charge us for sewage on the amount of water we pump from our wells. And also the water that we do not collect, the rates that we charge our customers for, they are getting the water but they are not paying for it. In 2000 we were unable to account for approximately 35 million gallons of water. Now a city of our size we should be talking 3 to 5 million gallons of water, and we are not able to account for 35 million gallons. That's a substantial water loss. I don't want to misrepresent to the council that a meter replacement would correct the problem. However it is the first and most obvious step in correcting the problem. It also will help us to bring into control a better understanding of what the problem really is. At this point we cannot start a leak detection program because we have no idea where to start. We don't know how much is actually running through meters. This is the first step. The second issue, as we've talked about, is the meter rates. The water rates that we've talked about. As we've talked about the street improvements and should the city be participating in the cost of that watermain replacement. As we've talked about the water treatment plant and the cost for that and the water towers and replacement of those towers, or construction of new towers, we will be needing to look at our water rate and right now because we're not billing everyone for everything they use, we are having a much higher rate increase than if we were actually billing for the amount of water that we are actually pumping. If we were correcting it, the 35 million, assuming we recapture it all and I've already admitted that we're not going to, we're talking $136,000 that is something that we're producing and we're not collecting money on. What we're asking for tonight is the council to at least authorize us to consider a meter replacement program. At this point if we were to approach the DNR for a 24 City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 well permit, they would say no. With this kind of loss they would not allow us to drill a new well. We are scheduled in 2002 to drill Well No. 9 and we are anticipating that we do not need Well No. 9 in 2002. We would like to delay Well No. 9. Actually we would delay all of the wells by 2 years and then use the money that is scheduled this year and next year for Well No. 9 to initiate the meter replacement program. The other issue that's at place is also the reduced meter read time. As you can see, and I asked all the council members to pass by before they took their seats just so we could speed this up this evening, but as you can see, what we currently have is a touch meter read. Kelley, our Utility Superintendent is here tonight. With the touch meter read we actually have a pad out on the outside of the house. What that requires is that once a month, actually once every 3 months because we only do a quarter of the city at a time. A utility worker actually walks up to the house and touches the house to do a meter read. Now not all of our houses in town have that. Some of our houses actually have a little dial on it and somebody has to go out there, read the dial and type the number into the meter reader. That, in and of itself lends itself to some...putting those into houses for about 2 or 3 years. That's a radio. And what it does is you can now do a radio signal from the meter instead of the touch pad and that radio is already in a number of homes. We are installing them as we install new meters because that is where things are going. With the radio reader that we have, it's a manual radio reader, you can read that from quite a distance and I don't know Kelley, have we ever gotten a distance how far we can read that one from? Kelley Janes: This unit's probably a couple blocks away. In certain circumstances it's an omni directional antenna so it sends a signal out. It may not be as easy to get it you know seeing the house. We may get it the street behind it. Teresa Burgess: We have gotten in on a program, the city was registered for a program that has one that actually goes into a car, a much larger unit than what Kelley has in his hand. It's this one over here. We actually put it in a car. We drive around the city. We can do the entire city, all of the meters in the city with radios installed, in approximately 4 hours. Right now it takes us 4 man team, one week out of the month that we pretty much dedicate almost our entire utility crew for one week to go out and do meter reads. It decreases our time requirement. It also increases our ability to respond to customer service. At this point your meter is read sometime between, in that 2 week period while we run around and do that. If we were to move to the mobile unit, we would be able to guarantee that all the meter reads would be done within a 2 or 3 day time period because we would do them for instance the second Monday of the month every month and the time requirement is substantially lowered. We did receive a quote from US Filter for the replacement program. US Filter is our current supplier. They are the only supplier that supplies the type of meter and the type of radio we use. Right now we would be willing to consider an alternative supplier if one were to come into our area, but right now there's nobody else available. Compatibility. We need to use radios and readers that are compatible with our reading equipment. However, if somebody was to come in and be able to do it at a reasonable cost to retrofit what we have, we would be willing to consider them. So I know the question came up, why do we use US Filter? They're the only ones out there right now. And we do have a good relationship with them so we are confident. What they have proposed is they would come in and obviously we have to bid this. But they would come in with qualified utility workers on a part time basis. They hire them. They are not city employees, to replace the meters. It is done on a, we have to make appointments with property owners. They would be able to do those appointments on evening and weekend hours which are more convenient for property owners. And the change out is done. They do it for slightly above cost for the labor to do the work because what they're interested in is getting the city onto a meter program. They want us to buy their product is where they make their money. And so they are willing to work with us. Other cities have done similar projects and have seen turn around of the cost within 4 to 5 years. We're estimating approximately 4 to 5 years. Also we would be looking at rate increases or potentially staying at the same rate if we're able to capture, re- 25 City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 capture enough of the water that's currently unaccounted for. I believe I covered it all. If the council has any questions. Mayor Jansen: Well I guess one of the questions that I posed was just looking at the relative young age of, what 60% of our homes have been constructed in the last 10 years. There's another 30% that are only 15 years old. What's the warranty on one of these meters that we're losing? Teresa Burgess: I'll let Kelley answer that question. Kelley Janes: What our situation is, this is a meter that is made by Rockwell Corporation which is now this corporation here has since, they've changed names. These are the original meters that were put in probably in the early 70's. This is 1961-62 technology. It's a generator head. The meter itself down here where the chamber is, is virtually the same meter as this one is. Down below. The difference is the ability for this meter to, this meter will calculate 1,000 gallon flow through it. Send a generator pulse up to this meter here, and by doing that it sends to an electrical coil, as you can see here and cause the odometer to click. Now the weather can cause this to not function. This is, as the generators get weak, eventually it tries to turn this number after 3,000 or 4,000 clicks and then one goes. Mayor Jansen: But I guess my question, not to interrupt you. Kelley Janes: No, I'm sorry. Mayor Jansen: That's okay. You're good at this. You mentioned that these were from the early 70's. When did they make the transition then over to this other model? Kelley Janes: This meter, we started installing these meters because this product run ended in about 1994. And we started putting in what they call the ECR chip head. They no longer make the generator head so we were forced to convert. And we converted to this type of meter. It's basically the same meter, just a different, more accurate reader head and access. Mayor Jansen: So what was the warranty then on the original? Kelley Janes: They give a warranty of 5 years for accuracy only in the meter part of the meter itself. Okay, they do not guarantee the accuracy of the outside reader, which presents it's problems which is what we have found as we went through this, and my predecessor Jerry Boucher, was that the meters themselves, the older installations in town and those that were pre '96 1 guess. It would be '95, I'm sorry. What we would find typically is that this meter would maybe show 800,000 gallons of flow through it in the house, and the outside reader could show anything up to that number. In some cases I had seen myself 600,000. 650,000 so there's the loss. We've never billed back for what we find on the inside reader because depending on how properties have changed over, you can't really hold someone easily responsible for that. I only know one community that did that so, and it was not pretty. Councilman Ayotte: The council was assassinated. But what you're saying is we've got a pig in a poke. We've got old technology that, and our ordinances allow that old technology to go in. Kelley Janes: Yeah, the technology... Teresa Burgess: At the time it was not old technology. 26 City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 Councilman Ayotte: Well, but the design, so what we've got is we've got a better. Teresa Burgess: We have a better model available. Kelley Janes: Same actual meter. Same actual chamber. Right here. Different type of access head. There is no error between here and there. This thing only reads what's in here. It either reads the number that is used on the meter or it says I don't work. So then we get our reading from that. WE go down. We replace the meters. Scott Botcher: Kelley I guess the question is, and maybe this is more Linda's question. Given the composition of our water supply, obviously as this stuff affixes itself to the insides of the meter, is there some sort of warranty with the performance of the meter given those particulates within the water. Is that, that's still your question. And I guess so if we put that meter in 2 years ago, just for argument sake, and it slowed down, and you know you can pull those down. You can calibrate them and you can show it's rate of reduction in terms of reading it, is that a warranty issue? Kelley Janes: I do not believe so. They can only guarantee accuracy with, it's a factory set accuracy with clear water. We do have high iron magneses levels. I could pull this chamber apart and show you the iron manganese on this and in the screens. Mayor Jansen: If what you're saying is that that one, on the inside is accurate, and that it's the reader on the outside of the house. Teresa Burgess: It's the piece on the top of the meter. What we have is we have some that have the chips but then we have some that actually have little odometers in them. They have little generators. Mayor Jansen: Is there maintenance that can be done to that outside unit in order to capture the accuracy since we're losing it inbetween the two pieces versus going to the new technology? Teresa Burgess: The problem is that it's the connection between the two. What Kelley's talking about is this piece, where my hand is covering, this piece is a digital little chip. It's a little computer chip. This piece is a generator. Councilman Ayotte: That's electromechanical and that's electronic. Kelley Janes: Yes. Teresa Burgess: Yeah, we can't replace this piece... To replace this piece we've got to put in a new meter. The problem is, this chunk right here. Now we have some problems inside the meters. They slow down.., rust. But this is our real problem. Councilman Kroskin: What percent of the meters out there are the old style? Kelley Janes: We have approximately of the roughly 6,000 accounts we have in, currently we have approximately 1,800 of these ECR meters installed. That is both new installations for new homes and buildings and retrofit because this meter's no longer... 27 City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 Councilman Kroskin: How many of the old, what percent? What number of the old meters are out there? Kelley Janes: I would guess that'd. Scott Botcher: That'd be 4,200. Councilman Kroskin: So you're saying the difference? Kelley Janes: Yeah. Now I would like to state one point is that when we take this meter out, in many cases we will bench test this meter and see if we can retrofit a ECR head onto this meter and re-use it, okay? Now that does not always happen because the meter is, if we have to replace internal components, the cost overruns what it would cost us to buy these. But we do try to recycle what we have. Councilman Ayotte: What's our meter population? Kelley Janes: About 6,000. Teresa Burgess: Approximately 6,000 accounts. Councilman Ayotte: That's all? Kelley Janes: Yeah. That's commercial. Mayor Jansen: That's how many households. Councilman Kroskin: What are we losing in dollars annually? Teresa Burgess: $136,000 last year. We were able to reduce the amount of unaccounted for gallons last year. We have been running right around 70 million unaccounted for gallons. We're not sure where the entire 35 million went to but we are sure that part of it was attributed to the sprinkling restrictions of last fall. And so because people were not sprinkling, they weren't using the water as fast and. Councilman Ayotte: Of the 35 million gallons that you mentioned before, are the 35 million gallons lost, what would be your guess that the 6,000 accounts has something to do with that 35 million? Teresa Burgess: We expect the majority of that 35 million gallons is lost through meters. Is that it's being pumped into homes. Councilman Ayotte: So the 35 million gallons meter loss? Teresa Burgess: We are estimating that the majority of that water is running through meters and not being accounted for. A city of our size, we should be seeing 3 to 5 million gallons of unaccounted water loss, and being trying to track down that amount. If we do not see a significant reduction when we start to replace meters, and we would certainly be looking at our most troublesome neighborhoods first. The areas we expect the most problems. If we don't start to see a reduction in that water unaccounted for, then we know that we have a leak problem someplace that we need to look for, or that we have a theft problem. We can start to look for those problem areas and start looking for that other water. Currently, because we have 28 City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 such a significant loss, we do not have a place to start except to start with the most obvious location. Meters that are not accurate. Councilman Ayotte: I don't think we have a choice. Personally I don't think we have a choice. Just a couple other questions. How many heads, meters do you think you lose as a result of manganese and iron, would you say? Teresa Burgess: They probably all eventually fall victim to. Councilman Ayotte: What do you think a life is on those things? Teresa Burgess: Actually this meter actually came out of a house. Kelley Janes: It's difficult to... how many we lose because of the manganese and iron. I think our most significant problem, and prior to being superintendent I was the assistant superintendent and I read all of the routes. And did many of the changeovers with the crew and I did find significant number of, you can see that's iron manganese. This is supposed to black and shiny. And you can see it's like a light powder. What it does, typically meters never run fast. That's a fallacy. They will usually be very close to a percentage acceptable to being on. What happens as that grit material... Councilman Ayotte: Don't do that. Don't do that. Kelley Janes: I'm sorry. As the meter eventually slows down because of the mineral build-up and the water is still flowing through it but the meter has now slowed down. And it slows down the amount of registry on the meter and that's where water loss occurs. Councilman Ayotte: I understand. Mayor Jansen: I guess what I'm wondering, one of the comments that you made was that the DNR would in fact probably not approve Well No. 9 because of the level of water loss. Teresa Burgess: Because of the level of our unaccounted water, they would require us to find that water before. Mayor Jansen: So they would make the assumption that it's not being lost through the meters? Teresa Burgess: They would make the assumption that first of all, we need to account for our water because they don't really care how much money we make. They only care about where is our water going. The first, they don't care if it's going through meters. They want us to be able to account for all of it. Whether it's being stolen or whether it's, which we do have a problem with accounts being turned on without authorization or with people pulling up to a hydrant and filling up a tank. But the more significant thing is, if our customers are not being billed for what they are using, then they are not being conscience of how much water they're using and they cannot incorporate proper conservation methods. A meter replacement program is actually considered a conservation method by the Met Council. They will recognize that as a conservation method, similar to an odd/even or any other sprinkling restriction that we were to implement on the city. 29 City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 Mayor Jansen: Understood. Is there a way, right now you've got total water pumped, total water billed. Do you have that by well or by zone to where you? Teresa Burgess: No. Mayor Jansen: You only have a total? Teresa Burgess: We have a total. Our well system is interlinked. We can certainly break it down by how much each well pumped and how much each, how much we billed per zone of the accounts. The problem is that the water we pump from any of the wells could theoretically go to any house in Chanhassen. There is no physical separation in the system. We know where our biggest problems are. We know where the oldest homes are and that is where we would start. The oldest homes have the oldest meters, therefore they are the most problematic. And we would start in those areas and work our way out. They are also the most difficult to read and so we would like to initiate in that area, because as we get those meters changed out they become easier for our meter readers. Mayor Jansen: Because I guess one of the alternatives I'd maybe like to see us explore is that when we first reviewed this particular proposal back in 1999, the way that it was brought forward to us was in a stepped, or a phased implementation and it actually was drawn out over, it was a 4 or 5 year period that was being proposed. And I'm just looking at this million 2 number and realistically that's like $200 a home that we're talking about for implementing this new technology. Teresa Burgess: Right. What we are proposing to do is that we delay all of the wells. We would bump 9 actually to the end and renumber all the wells. We would use that money to jump start this project. That initial half million dollars that is currently allocated towards Well 9. Both this siting and the drilling of Well 9. Then we would use existing budget, recaptured funds as we start to reduce the amount of our water, unaccounted for water. Start putting some of that money towards it and step up our meter change program with those funds. If we start to see an accelerated improvement we may approach the council and ask for additional funding but this time we're asking to initiate. And US Filter has told us that this cost is based on a per each basis. They have estimated at that point, it doesn't matter if we do it in a year or if we do it in 2 years or 3 years. But at this point we have asked them to give us an idea of what kind of dollars are we talking about. Councilman Kroskin: This bid is for 3,600 units? Teresa Burgess: This would be for retrofitting the existing ones that do not have the MXU, which is the radio reader. And also for new meters and MXU units in those that have the old meters in them. So that we would be switching over, at the same time that we're switching over to the new meters and doing the meter change out, we're also retrofitting those existing units so that we can do radio reads. Councilman Ayotte: What do you think the time is that you save from reading from the road versus, what's the hidden cost opportunity? Teresa Burgess: Right now it takes us, it takes a 4 man crew one week per month to read one-third of the city. And we bill a third of the city at a time. We would be able to read the entire city of Chanhassen, every account in 4 hours. Councilman Kroskin: What's the dollar amount? What's the savings? 30 City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 Kelley Janes: ...FTE. Councilman Kroskin: What's the value of that FTE? Mayor Jansen: But that's the other part as we're looking for the values and the expenses around this. I think we need to throw this back to staff to actually give us the financial piece of this picture that we didn't have to review this, as far as actually taking a look at that full time equivalent and rolling these numbers out. And the potential impacts that it will have on this utility account. Teresa Burgess: And just for council information, we are not proposing to eliminate an FTE at this point. We would simply be eliminating a future FTE expansion. Councilman Ayotte: But that's a cost avoidance. Teresa Burgess: It's a cost avoidance. Councilman Kroskin: I guess I'd like to see more of a detailed breakdown of all the costs. And I would like to see some aggressive pursuit of, I don't know what the break is on bids but I'd like to see some aggressive pursuit of other companies to provide this service and the product. Teresa Burgess: What we would do is we would, if the council is interested in us doing it, we would go out to bid. We would publish. We would do a specification for the replacement. However I would like to caution council, we will probably only get one or two bids because as I said, there is only one supplier currently in the metro area. And then there's also the manufacturer that may come in and bid. But we would be open to anyone that is capable of doing the project. Councilman Ayotte: Could you include in the bid, and it would be appropriate, and I got this at Fort Sheridan, you know the big deal where we reduce water reduction. Same type of concept. But we do a lot of trend analysis from data that was fed in so there was a software application that came with it. Now are you looking at the software application so you can see where... Teresa Burgess: We're looking at using our existing software. Our current, our finance department has told us they are not at this time interested in going to a monthly billing. However, we in the utility department, and I don't know is Bruce shaking his head, no I've changed his mind? At this point they're not interested in switching to that. However we would be interested in doing a monthly read just so that we can track our usage. Get better idea on trends. It would give us a better idea for future expansion, when we're talking about new wells and new towers, are they really necessary or should we be going to conservation methods? If we're seeing a spike during certain times of the year, we may be able to address those by carving off the spikes instead of a new well and new tower, something like that. So we view this information as very useful not only for, just the ability to bill people but from an operational standpoint. Our ability to do the trending. To give us an idea when is water actually used and right now we do it once every 3 months so a property owner that comes into us and says, why is my bill so high. We go back and say well, because the meter says so. Where if we could go back and say, well in July you had a spike. Did you have something going on? Did you have 20 extra people at your home for some reason? And try to answer some of those questions. It would also help us with pinpointing things like leakage control. 31 City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 Mayor Jansen: Well and I guess again one of my hesitations as I'm hearing you express that you're anticipating that this is a meter loss issue. If we move the next well out 2 years, and I'm assuming that that was projected as need. If it's in fact not a water loss so we're not actually recouping supply, have we now shifted a well out that we're going to end up needing to bring back on line as you substantiate that it is in fact a meter issue. Teresa Burgess: Our problem is not a well problem. Our capacity issue is, at this point the city of Chanhassen's capacity is governed by it's tanks. By it's storage. Mayor Jansen: I understand that but I assume that the well was scheduled according to. Teresa Burgess: The well was scheduled based on a study that was done in 1998. It is based on anticipated growth of the city, but it's also, and in keeping that in mind, we have not grown at the same rate that was originally anticipated by that study. Before we would initiate that well we would do a feasibility report to see if it's actually necessary, but at this point we are capable of supplying the water demands of the city. We are not seeing any problems with that. Our capacity issues up until now have been tank related. They have not been well related. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Kelley Janes: Madam Mayor, could I add to that point real quickly. We learned a lot from the taking down of the reservoir about our ability to produce water. You know meeting demands and at that point Teresa and I discussed that about the well. That it showed us with some good conservation methods we could handle what people were using as long as they played by the rules so. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Scott Botcher: We also learned to build more than one big tower. Mayor Jansen: So if I can maybe try to bring this to a wrap. I'm hearing our needing to get more detailed financial information so that at least we can see the impacts and on this particular account that we're talking about pulling it out of. And if at the same time we're going to be impacting that same account with the reconstruction costs. Teresa Burgess: And that would definitely require us to do a rate study. Councilman Ayotte: Require you to do what? Teresa Burgess: Reconstruction costs will definitely require us to do a rate study. There is no way around that. Regardless of whether we do the meter replacement or not, we'll have to do a rate study. Mayor Jansen: Okay. So if we can get a better breakdown of the cost analysis on this it would be appreciated. Councilman Kroskin: Maybe we should, before they go to work on that, have them kick back to us what's going to be incorporated in that rate study and then we could maybe add some things that we may want to see. 32 City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 Mayor Jansen: I don't think we're talking about the rate study tonight. Councilman Kroskin: I mean not the rate study, I'm sorry. About the cost. Scott Botcher: Yep, we can do that. We can just give you our topical things and you guys can fill in any gaps that you want to have filled. Councilman Kroskin: Yeah, that'd be great. Councilman Ayotte: Would it be appropriate too that that feedback would also include costs avoidance versus cost reduction and a little bit more explanation of scope, because I think you're really onto something with respect to, you have a trend analysis opportunity. A recommendation as to whether or not we increase the monthly billing process for that trend analysis. Whether or not we should tie a rate structure in tandem with the meter program, or if it should be totally separate? I think you've got a number of excellent points that really have to be tied together. And I don't want to just see numbers. I hate numbers. But I think we need a little bit more scope to it too. Mayor Jansen: Well I think if we're going to move forward with the project we need to take a look at the cost, but whatever you can get pulled together for us. The financials are probably the key to getting the decision made and I'm assuming you'd like to have this done while you're still with us. Before you go out on your leave. Scott Botcher: She's not going anywhere. Mayor Jansen: We're not going to let you have this baby. Teresa Burgess: I don't think you get to have a say. We would like to get this initiated just because we have such significant losses and also because of the issues with the wells. We need to take care of our loss problem so that we can address the well issues. Councilman Ayotte: And we're not going to get a well unless we show where the losses are. Mayor Jansen: So can we move this to the next agenda then? Would you be able to get back to us that quickly with the numbers or? Teresa Burgess: Certainly. Mayor Jansen: How soon do you need it? I don't know that you want to go to the 26th. Teresa Burgess: ... need to discuss it. Does the council need to discuss it again or should we put it, we can get it back on the next agenda on consent if that's acceptable. Mayor Jansen: I think we'll need discussion. Yeah. Yeah, we'll need discussion on it. Teresa Burgess: I've seen the agenda for the next meeting. Just asking. Mayor Jansen: Yes. It's a long one. 33 City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 Councilman Kroskin: We're putting it on the 12th? Scott Botcher: The mayor has the right to ask me to take it off if it's too full so. Councilman Ayotte: Let's give it a shot. We've got to move forward. Mayor Jansen: Okay, are we clear? Scott Botcher: Yep, thank you. Yeah the issue Bob, quite simply on the pumping is that they just say you're pumping x amount of water out of the ground, where the heck is it going? You know use that first. APPOINTMENTS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. Mayor Jansen: We conducted interviews earlier this evening. Councilman Labatt had to leave us so we can still take care of this agenda item. If council has a motion for appointing a planning commissioner. May I have a motion please. Councilman Kroskin: Motion to appoint Rich Slagle. Councilman Ayotte: Second. Mayor Jansen: I have a second for appointing Rich Slagle. Any discussion? Councilman Kroskin moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded to appoint Rich Slagle to the Planning Commission to fill the vacancy created by Councilman Craig Peterson. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 3 to 0. Mayor Jansen: We in fact will be conducting the second round of interviews at the March 26th, I believe council meeting, which will then take care of the two re-appointment positions so candidates that were in fact not interviewed this evening, will be interviewed at that point and we'll also then have the results from the two we interviewed this evening. Councilman Kroskin: Will the candidates that were here this evening be allowed to. Mayor Jansen: We won't re-interview them but they're certainly part of the discussion. CITY MANAGER'S TASK PLAN. Scott Botcher: This is, and I don't want to make a big lengthy memo so really what this is, and the mayor and I have met on this a couple times. To lay this before, especially the new members, to show what previous councils have used to identify for me what they want me to accomplish over the year. And this is the task plan that was developed and implemented by the council and I. I guess what needs to happen is you all need to review this, and I guess built into that statement, is the assumption that you want to continue to do this methodology. You know the whole issue of performance measurement and human resources is a debate that we could fill up a whole meeting with. But assuming this is what you want to use as your template, you need to go through and identify that these strategies are the strategies you want to stick with. These are tied to the strategic plan that we haven't really touched yet. But we're going to get to it. There's no rule obviously that the strategies that are in the task plan necessarily have to tie to the 34 City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 strategic plan. You could tie them to whatever you wanted to. I mean you know it's a subjective analysis of the employee's performance. But I think previous councils have, you know this is the strategic plan. This is what we've publicly committed to our constituents we wish to achieve, and so they just laid this template then on this as a task plan so. Really that's my objective tonight. If, I'm sort of seeking your direction on how you want to re-put this together or if this is not what you want to use, to give me direction, then you need to come up with some sort of alternative methodology. And frankly this is, and I know Linda's heard this before. Sometimes some of the stuff that we did, certainly in the last 2 years, has been painfully convoluted. Probably a nice way to put it, but there's nothing wrong with it. It works. I know, there's all sorts of different ways to evaluate employees, but again this is before you because I don't think you two gentlemen maybe haven't seen this before. Is that in fairness to the story? Mayor Jansen: Yep. That's exactly what we talked about. Knowing that this is the document that eventually generates Scott's evaluation form, I wanted to make sure that council was for one, aware of this document. And the tasks that were approved for first quarter at least, as council reviewed this in December I think was our last review. So what I would like to encourage the new council to do is to take a look at this list and as Scott was just saying, is this the type of a format we want to go forward with. This is how we will get our quarterly updates from Mr. Botcher as to where he is on our tasks that he's been assigned. We also then can work the priorities of those tasks according to this plan. That way everyone at least has a good feel for what exactly is being worked on and what the priorities are and what the expectations are so we're all on the same page. Councilman Kroskin: Is the content, is what it is? Set in stone or can the content change? Mayor Jansen: It is what it is right now, and that's why. Councilman Kroskin: Can it change? Scott Botcher: Absolutely. Mayor Jansen: Yes. We all need to take a look at it. There will be the strategic planning conversation that will occur in our retreat. Because that's not going to occur until probably April at this point because of timing. You at least need to take a look at some of these projects and see if there are some that just simply aren't valid. That we shouldn't be having Scott necessarily work on, and I would have to express that if anything Scott's had an assortment of other projects and tasks that aren't even on here. Councilman Kroskin: How do we communicate that then once we do then? Mayor Jansen: We will have to come back together as a council and review the priorities. Now I wouldn't, I'm not suggesting that we get into any depth at all at this point until we've had our strategic plan discussion because council needs to reach. Councilman Kroskin: Which would be in April? Mayor Jansen: Yes. Council needs to reach a consensus of what our strategies and focuses will be, so maybe instead what you're doing is looking at this list and getting a feel for if there are projects that are currently on the list that we need to be re-focusing from. We can do that. 35 City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 Scott Botcher: Yeah, I think the communication and it goes two ways and what Linda said is accurate. If you looked at for example the first quarter, 2001 stuff. I mean a lot of my first quarter 2001 stuff has been spent on organizational contemplation. How's that? That sort of stuff. Where are we going? Where do we want to go to shifting and paradigms from what we had before to what we have now. I mean and the mayor will tell you. She comes in every Wednesday and we always say we're going to be out of there in 45 minutes and we're out of there in 3 hours. Because you have to have, as the paradigm shifts, some of these very lengthy discussions and there's times where we think we've reached an understanding on something. I'll say okay, let me play devil's advocate and say this, it screws it all up again for another 30 minutes, but that's the kind of stuff you have to do. You've got to do that, especially when you've got a new mayor new in office and a new council. What are the rules of engagement? How are we going to govern? And that's why this is important. That's why the community survey's important. This is why that retreat's important. If you don't do it now, you're hosed. And so that's sort of my first quarter, obviously that's not, it doesn't say on here, think about the re-organization because. Councilman Kroskin: So when will we get back on this? Give us what, a couple weeks to look at it? Mayor Jansen: Yeah, if you've got key concerns, why don't we look at the 26th because the 12th sure won't work. So it'd be March 26th and we're going into the retreat shortly thereafter so if this at least starts everyone thinking. Scott Botcher: And we will have identified the retreat date certainly by then. Mayor Jansen: Yes. Okay. Thank you. That's all we wanted to accomplish there. COMMUNITY SURVEY REPORT. Scott Botcher: The memo was, I think it was fairly self explanatory. I've spent a sizeable amount of time on the phone with these individuals. They do a vast majority of I guess I would call the public sector research work in the metropolitan area. The partners involved here, Mr. Morris primarily, is on the faculty at Augsburg and has done some work at the University of Minnesota. Also this firm did our park and rec survey and we were involved in that. I won't read to you what's in the letter but I guess the bottom line is this. This is something that I've understood to be a priority. I think it ought to be a priority. If you notice, well maybe you didn't know, but he has come down on his price from what originally was quoted to a number that is, I think a substantial cut in his rate to us. I don't know if that's because he believes there's an understanding on statistical procedures or not, but at least he got a rate to be reduced somewhat. If this is accepted by you all, the next month or so, again reporting back on the 26th, would be spent with myself, Mr. Gerhardt, maybe miscellaneous other department heads and the mayor, representing the council, in developing a draft set of questions that we can consider to be valid and representative of the issues that you all want to seek information on. Again, they're a draft because the council as a body is the final arbitrator of what they want to accept as their base of questions and the methodology. But again that goes to that March 26th meeting and it seems to dovetail fairly well with the other stuff we're doing. Councilman Kroskin: How are the questions from the council generated then? Scott Botcher: If council members have thoughts or concerns or just want to talk about the questions, I would just recommend they just call me or e-mail me. That would be good. 36 City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 Mayor Jansen: Keep them general so that we're doing a blend of everyone's issues coming up with the specifics generated by. Scott Botcher: You may wish to have topics addressed that other people haven't thought about, so as a topical category that we'll say okay, well that's a great topic. We'll then develop a series of questions on that. Councilman Kroskin: I have a question. Just pulling out my stats book I was looking at, are you saying the sampling is going to remain the same? 400? Scott Botcher: Yes. In fact I ran that formula. Councilman Kroskin: I read it too and I came up with closer to 1,000. Scott Botcher: No, in fact if you look at the Gallop pole and those folks, they do nationwide surveys of about 1,100-1,200. So 400 is in fact an accurate number. I can run that for you too if you want. Councilman Kroskin: I guess. Scott Botcher: I guess the issue is, to back up I guess. On the 26th I would expect we'd have Mr. Morris here and we can put that question to him because you can approve it at that point, the sample size. But Todd was there, and I pulled the book. We got them on the phone because I thought it was too small as well. Mayor Jansen: And if the two of you want to have that conversation so that. Scott Botcher: ... bore you with statistical V score discussion but, yeah I hated it but. But the 400 was the number I got. Councilman Ayotte: What's the mm? Can we ask questions? Mayor Jansen: Sure. Councilman Ayotte: What's the mm time on getting the study in and out? How long do you think the survey would take? We're certainly not going to have anything ready for our retreat. Mayor Jansen: No. Scott Botcher: You will not. Mayor Jansen: We're talking about getting it back probably in May I think was the date. Scott Botcher: Yeah, I've been telling people June 1. Just to be safe. Councilman Ayotte: I'm just wondering, when we go on the retreat and do our strategies, we'd want an opportunity to kind of have a survey possibly influence the strategies, right? 37 City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 Mayor Jansen: In fact that would be the ideal but it's certainly not going to occur. And we need to get out as a group and get ourselves focused on what our issues are going to be or we will lose the entire first year of our term. Councilman Ayotte: ... what I'm saying is, that once we do the strategies and we get our plan put together, how are we going to use that survey to validate what we're doing or to identify? Mayor Jansen: It's always a changing document because we can always go back to the strategy after we have that and yep. Absolutely. Scott Botcher: Part of it I think depends on what you use your retreat to do. I mean again, starting at the base level. Organizationally, at the retreat level, especially the initial retreat, and I don't hold any illusion that you have one retreat and then you're done and you don't ever have to have one. I think there's a regular check-in process be it every 6 months or on an annual basis where bodies should get together, step away from the everyday grind of what you guys do here, and check in on certain things. Given again that we're starting anew, and it will be up to you all, but you may wish to start at an initial meeting focusing more again on issues of governance. How you do it. How you relate. What are the rules of engagement. Those types of discussions. Again at the higher 30,000 foot level, as opposed to this is our strategic plan. Do we want to do trails or not? That being said, you can do that. Come back with your report with the survey report, say it's June 1. You look at that and it gives you an opportunity to do two things. One is that you can apply it to your budget deliberations later in the summer. And then secondly, if the council moves, wants to go ahead and do another retreat maybe in the fall or in the first part of the year hence, you have that data. It's still fairly fresh. It's not dated. It's not stale. Again, that's up to you all. Mayor Jansen: And in the initial conversation with the consultant that we may bring forward for consideration by council for the retreat was that we split the 4 hours. 2 in more the governance mode that Scott was speaking to. And two, just getting to that high level on the strategic plan because I do think that we all need to make sure that we're all going in the same direction so that we keep ourselves consistent and the priorities, as far as what staff's working on so. Councilman Kroskin: Bill Morris will be here on the 26th you said? Scott Botcher: I'll ask him to be here. And probably what I'll do is on the calculations, since I hate running them. You and I and he will just have a conference call and walk through the calculations. I had the same question you did. Exact same question. Mayor Jansen: And as you start getting suggestions in from council as to topics that we'd like to cover, if you can maybe pull those all together and shoot them all out to us at a proper time when you think you've got most of them. Scott Botcher: I'll try to hit the forward button so you have them in as real time as I get them. But I'll do that as well. Mayor Jansen: That'd be great. Councilman Kroskin: Thank you Scott. Scott Botcher: You bet. 38 City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 Mayor Jansen: Any other questions? Councilman Ayotte: No ma'am. COMMISSION LIAISON RECOMMENDATION, CITY MANAGER. Scott Botcher: In your packet you have a memo dated February. Mayor Jansen: Shorter than your memo. Councilman Kroskin: Much shorter. Scott Botcher: In here it says I'm paid by the word. Mayor Jansen: That's you. You thought so on this memo. Scott Botcher: Well I'm sorry. I was venting. Bottom line is this. One of the things that Linda and I have been discussing, and quite honestly this is an issue that's not new to Chanhassen because I used to try to poke the previous mayor and previous council members saying is this the best way to do this? Mayor Jansen: Steve and I tried for 2 years. Scott Botcher: Okay, well. Haven't had a chance to poke you yet but here you go. You know there have been issues that have come up, and again I don't want to over state them, that it indicates some communication difficukies between the governing body being the council, and the advisory commission that you all establish. And that's not the fault of the people that obviously graciously give their time to serve on the committees, nor is it your fault. It's almost more structural in it's nature. And I guess in an attempt to address this, when Linda and I have been having our discussions I said geez you know, this is just what I've had in my experience and it worked really well. Hence my treatise and this was, you know Linda asked me to put this together I think primarily just to get a response from you all. Not knowing what you all would think. Mayor Jansen: It's definitely a change from the way that we've been doing things. It's certainly isn't an unusual practice. Other communities do this. As far as the capacity in which councilors would actually serve on the commissions, I think that needs to be maybe a lengthier discussion. There are communities in which the council representative does serve as a member on the commission and does fill a voting role on the commissions, which could be significant and something that we'd want to consider on the Planning Commission, possibly the Parks and Rec Commission in that those are both advisory bodies that are moving issues forward to the council. As far as the time commitment, I zipped everybody out a copy of the meeting schedules as to when the commissions do get together. Obviously it's the two that I just mentioned that are the biggest time commitments. I do think it will in fact streamline the communication which is a key issue. Making sure that again everyone is on the same page and making sure that we've got a consistency in the philosophy between the council and the commission so that they are feeling as though they are being listened to and that they're not spinning their wheels because they in fact have that direct guidance being provided for them on the spot. Now the trick is, the council member does need to make sure that what's being expressed is a consensus from the council. And that this role is strictly advisory in capacity. We're not sitting on the commissions to move any issues forward that we're interested in. It's 39 City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 simply providing that guidance and input on the issues that are being reviewed. And I know from experience over the last 2 years, that often times if you're in the minority, as much as it hurts, you have to express this is the consensus of the council. You can certainly provide your own opinion, but you need to represent the group and make it very clear and that's one of the issues that we spent some time discussing as far as making sure that everyone could serve on the commissions in that capacity. Any comments? Councilman Ayotte: I think it's got to be totally advisory initially. I think council involvement on the commission level is the right way to go. I don't think council should be voting members of any commission, at least from the get go, and have a period of time to evaluate how it works. And then have an opportunity to re-visit, after we've gone to it for a period of time, to see whether or not it's beneficial. We need to measure it. Mayor Jansen: Well, and heaven knows we know you like to measure things but I think you've got to be able to look at this somewhat subjectively as issues are moving up from the commission. And this is going to be more of an impact on the communication that's happening between the two bodies. So I don't know if you're referring to statistically. Councilman Ayotte: No, no, no. What I'm saying is let's do it, and at a point evaluate the pros and cons of doing it. That's what I'm saying. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Councilman Ayotte: I'm not suggesting that we study it. Mayor Jansen: I'm used to your numerical analysis so. Councilman Ayotte: I want to make sure that we have a feedback group so that once we do it, we taste it and we say ummm, that's good. Councilman Kroskin: I like the idea. I would like to have further discussion on it. I'm not sure if I'm willing to dismiss up front whether or not council members should be allowed to vote or not. I would like to have a discussion amongst ourselves and with some more direct input from Scott on this. Just to go through it and see how it would work. I'd like to hear Scott's thoughts, even after reading this more, detail. Scott Botcher: You can formulate your thoughts. Councilman Kroskin: Yeah, I would love to have some very specific conversations on how it would work and I wouldn't like to, I don't want to rule out anything, or rule in anything upfront. I think I would like to have Councilman Peterson and Labatt here to discuss and hear their viewpoints. And again get some more feedback from Scott. Mayor Jansen: Absolutely. Though Councilman Labatt had to leave, he did express to me before he left the table that he's definitely in favor of doing the commission liaison positions. He thought that was a good idea, even with his time commitment being what it is. What we thought we could do with the timing this evening is, now that we've discussed this, we can bring it up with the commissions as we're sitting down and meeting with them in our joint meetings on March 5th. So they're at least getting from us the information that this is something that we're discussing and looking at moving forward with. And maybe 40 City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 coming back on March 12th, there's that date again. March 12th or the 26th and actually voting on it. Anything else to add? Scott Botcher: No. No, there obviously are just all sorts of organizational dynamic issues that, I think it's something that can help strengthen your organization. Can I ask one favor before you go? We never did take a motion on retaining these folks for the survey. Can we do that? Mayor Jansen: Sorry. Scott Botcher: That's okay. I forgot it too. Mayor Jansen: Especially if we're going to have him come back in again. Is council comfortable? Can I hear a motion to retain Decision Resources for the community survey? Councilman Kroskin: How many firms have we looked at? Scott Botcher: Looked at two. Because again, these guys are the 900 pound piranha. Mayor Jansen: They do the majority of the metropolitan communities. They just did Chaska is the most recently so they've got a lot of good comparisons. Scott Botcher: The other one was the University of Minnesota. Councilman Kroskin: Okay. Mayor Jansen: Do I have a motion? Councilman Ayotte: If I can remember their names I'll make the motion. I make a motion to have Decision Resources as the vendor to conduct the survey and that we invite the people in on March 26th to give us a presentation on their methodology. Councilman Kroskin: Second. Mayor Jansen: Thank you. And I have a second. Any more discussion? Councilman Ayotte moved, Councilman Kroskin seconded to authorize the retention of Decision Resources for the performance of the community wide survey and invite them to the City Council meeting March 26, 2001 to make a presentation of their methodology. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 3 to 0. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: None. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS: Scott Botcher: I received a copy in the mail today, and I haven't had a chance to do anything with it but the State of the, what do they call it? State of the Region Report. The Met Council's got that little band on it. Did you all get one? 41 City Council Meeting - February 26, 2001 Mayor Jansen: State of the Region? Scott Botcher: It's the Met Council's annual report. Councilman Kroskin: No. Councilman Ayotte: No. Mayor Jansen: No. Scott Botcher: I'll have to look at it. I haven't even broken the seal on it. It's got like you know, a cutesy little band around it that, but I don't know how easy that will copy. We'll give it a shot but I just, if you got it then I wouldn't screw around with it. I guess if you get it in the next couple days, let me know because I'll wait. Give it a couple days. And if you don't, then I guess I'll run copies of it. Mayor Jansen: Okay. Any discussion of anything in the correspondence packet? Scott Botcher: No. The library has a meeting on March l0th, which is between our meetings. Between now and our March 12th meeting. Public meeting I think is in this room, 9:00 to 12:00 a.m. on Saturday morning so I would encourage all those who are watching live at home to please come if you can. Seriously. We need the input. Mayor Jansen: Great. Motion to adjourn. Councilman Kroskin moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9:27 p.m. Submitted by Scott Botcher City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim 42