Loading...
CC 2004 10 25 CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 25, 2004 Mayor Furlong called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was opened with the Pledge to the Flag. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Furlong, Councilman Ayotte, Councilman Labatt, Councilman Lundquist and Councilman Peterson STAFF PRESENT: Todd Gerhardt, Roger Knutson, Justin Miller, Paul Oehme, Kate Aanenson, Lori Haak, Matt Saam, Kelly Janes, and Bruce Dejong PUBLIC PRESENT FOR ALL ITEMS: Courtney Eck Ross McMeen Melissa Gilman Steph Saltzman Steven Lillehaug 2510 Bridle Creek Trail 9391 F oxford Road Chanhassen Villager 1800 Valley Ridge Trail South Planning Commission Mayor Furlong: Thank you and good evening to everyone here and those watching at home tonight. Appreciate you joining us. At this point I would ask if there are any modifications or additions or changes to the agenda. If not, we will follow the agenda as published, without objection. [Item l(d). Final Plat Approval for Paws, Claws and Hooves was tabled per the applicant's request.] PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENTS: Mayor Furlong: We do have one public announcement, which is this coming Saturday, October 30th will be the annual Halloween Party at the Chanhassen Rec Center. This is one of the events that the city, in cooperation with our local business community sponsors. It's a fun time. Children ages 2 to 10 are invited to participate and family and friends are certainly welcome as well. The event runs from 5:30 to 7:30 p.m.. Again that's this Saturday, October 30th. The fee is $4.00 for children and I know that that can be pre-paid. Registration with payment is requested by Friday at either city hall or Chanhassen. The other public announcement that I'll add is that one week from tomorrow on Tuesday, November 2nd is our general election. Polls will open from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.. I encourage everybody to go out and vote. Exercise their right and accept the responsibility to vote. City web site has election information on polling places, registration and other data so I encourage everybody to vote a week from tomorrow. We'll move now to the consent agenda. City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Labatt seconded to approve the following consent agenda items pursuant to the City Manager's recommendations: a. Approval of Minutes: -City Council Work Session Minutes dated October 11, 2004 -City Council Summary & Verbatim Minutes dated October 11, 2004 Receive Commission Minutes: -Planning Commission Summary & Verbatim Minutes dated October 5, 2004 b. Resolution #2004-75: Accept Street & Utility Improvements in Vasserman Ridge 2nd Addition, Project 03-03. c. Approve Construction Contract for Lift Station #2 Improvements, Project 01-11C. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to O. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: UPDATE FROM SOUTHWEST METRO TRANSIT COMMISSION. Dave Simeno: My name's Dave Simeno and I'm the Operations Director for Southwest Metro Transit. Unfortunately Len Simich was detained elsewhere, and I'll get into that in a moment. So Brooke Brown and I were sent to represent him. I live in Chaska and Brooke lives in St. Paul. With your indulgence I'll read a letter from Len that he sent to represent his feelings. Mayor Furlong: Please. Dave Simeno: Mayor Furlong, members of the council. Thank you very much for the opportunity to address you and the council this evening. I'm sorry I'm not available to be there in person, but I had a prior commitment to chaperone the Chaska Middle School East 3 day journey into the north woods of Minnesota. Being from the north woods I know what I'm in for in late October. Weighing the option of spending 3 days in the cold with a bunch of sixth graders or attending a city council meeting, I can honestly say I'd rather be in front of you this evening. This past year has been productive for Southwest Metro Transit. We're setting record ridership levels. We've established a new State Fair ridership record providing nearly 43,000 rides. Our customer satisfaction and performance reliability is at an all time high level. We have initiated a number of new services, including service to uptown, Normandale College and special events like the Twins and the Timberwolves games. Our southwest station development in Eden Prairie is nearly completion and from all accounts will be a benefit to our customers and success to our overall operation. And finally we have begun the process of developing two new transit facilities in the city ofChanhassen, Market Street and Highway 212 and 101, which will provide ample park and ride stalls, comfortable waiting areas and multiple transit commuting options to area residents. As you know both the agency and I, Len, 2 City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 have recently had the honor to be recognized for our achievements. Southwest Metro Transit was chosen as one of four national outstanding systems of the year for 2004 by the American Public Transit Association, and will soon receive an award from the Federal Highway Administration for Southwest Transit oriented development. I also was honored to be chosen as the Transit Professional of the Year by the Minnesota Public Transit Association. Each award is a testament to the commitment and dedication that each of our staff displays day in and day out. Without everybody working together and doing their job to the fullest, none of the recognition would have been possible. Again, thank you for the opportunity to address the council this evening. We at Southwest Metro Transit value your support and look forward to serving you even better in the future. Sincerely, Len Simich. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Good. Dave Simeno: Any comments or questions? Mayor Furlong: Comments or questions? Councilman Ayotte: I just have one. Are the fifth graders and your director, have they been gone for longer than 3 days? Dave Simeno: No, but they're all glad the sixth graders are gone. Councilman Peterson: And Mr. Mayor, I think I'd just, I'd certainly re-emphasize what Brooke and Dave have shared and what Len said. I have the privilege of serving on the Southwest Metro Transit and this is a truly significant award. APT A is the association to be belong to and there are thousands of members and it really is a privilege to have been selected. And as Len offered, it's a testament to staff. It's also a testament I think to this council and the councils that have gone before us of both Chanhassen, Chaska and Eden Prairie because it was the insight of 3 cities to make Southwest Transit a dream of sorts that came through. This truly is an honor to have participated in a small way to receive this award so it's the staff and insight and foresight of a lot of people before us too. Thank you. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Very well said. When I learned about this award being bestowed upon Southwest Metro I wanted to make sure that we brought it to a council meeting to emphasize it for our residents. I know demand for our park and ride at Market Street Station is increasing fast. There was a lot of interest and our staff was working with Southwest Metro for the new park and ride that will be built down at Lyman and 101. That was a process that went very well this last summer, so there's a lot of interest. A lot of demand for services and the statement, when they talk about NPT A, N-P- T-A which gave the award, the statement that I really hit home for me was that they've been representing the transit industry for over 100 years, since 1882 and in that time only two other transit systems have received the award from Minnesota. St. Cloud and Duluth both received it in 1990, so Southwest Metro Transit is now the third organization within the State of Minnesota ever to receive this award so congratulations and clearly it's to 3 City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 everybody associated with the organization, that we really appreciate all their efforts and thank them. Dave Simeno: Thank you very much. Mayor Furlong: Good, thank you. We're still at visitor presentations. If anybody else would like to come forward and address any issues. Ifnot, we'll close visitor presentations and move on with our agenda. LAW ENFORCEMENT/FIRE DEPARTMENT UPDATE. Sgt. Jim Olson: Mayor and council, good evening. I would like to introduce Detective John Bramwell. There he is. Detective John Bramwell to the council. John is replacing Detective Roger Whoeroach who retired. His going away party was actually the day that President Bush visited so there wasn't a good turn out from the sheriff s office... but Roger has retired. Has gone onto the private sector and is enjoying that greatly. John's been with the sheriff s office since 1988 and has been a detective for about 4 years. He's been assigned to Chanhassen since oh, right around Labor Day as a detective for the city here. I've heard positive things from a variety of citizens and also surrounding agencies about John and his ability to network and the job he does. I wanted to bring John in and introduce him to the council this evening and I'll let John say a few words and if you have any questions. Detective John Bramwell: Thank you. Mr. Mayor, council members. I've been with the sheriffs office now since 1988 and I worked in the jail division, patrol division and now in the investigation division. Worked 2 years patrolling Chanhassen in 1999 and 2000 and looking forward to coming back to the city and working as an investigator. Any questions? Mayor Furlong: No. Councilman Peterson: Welcome. Mayor Furlong: Welcome, yep. Appreciate your service, thank you. Councilman Ayotte: Thanks a lot. Sgt. Jim Olson: Just real quick also I wanted to point out John was heavily involved in the robbery that occurred at the American Legion a few years ago, as far as bringing those people to justice. And also was the burglary at the Legion that we had a couple years ago, he was also involved in. And that is actually coming to trial here hopefully the first part of November I think John had said earlier so, he has been on a number of cases here in Chanhassen already. As far as the reports, I've included in my report the report for the month of September. The monthly report. Also the area citation list. Community service officer report and then I'll have a couple miscellaneous items for council also. Monthly numbers. Our total calls for service were down 32 for the month, and I can 4 City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 honestly say I don't know ifI've said that before here, but the calls for service were down for the month which was a good thing. For the year, they are up by about 376. Criminal calls were down by 4 for the month, and then the criminal calls were down by 56 compared to year to date, compared to last year so that certainly is a good thing. Thefts were down 13 for the month. From 41 this year compared to 54 in last year, and for the year they're up by 8 so those are pretty static compared to last year. We have had a number of campaign signs that have been stolen, both in September and October and something we're continuing to work on so. Damage to property was the same for the month compared to last year and is down 46 for the year compared, year to date compared to last year. That's a good thing. Alarms were up by 23 for the month. Disturbing the peace was up by 20 for the month. Medicals were down by 20 for the month and that again is compared to, for the month last year. Special traffic details were up by 27 for the month, and they're up by 52 for the year. Traffic stops were down 84 for the month compared to last year. We've had more traffic details in neighborhoods and we've been hitting that real hard. When you're in neighborhoods, you're not on the highways quite as much where a lot of the traffic is at. So that's what I would attribute that to. And citations were 155 for the month of September. Any questions on the monthly numbers themselves at all? Mayor Furlong: Just a quick question Sergeant. Given the numbers, and we get a monthly and year to date in comparison purposes. Is there anything, obviously there's some seasonality to some of these components. Probably campaign signs could be a seasonal issues. Is there anything, are there any trends that you're seeing that this council needs to be aware of or negative trends or anything that we need to be concerned about given the numbers that you see and watch on a regular basis? Sgt. Jim Olson: From a criminal standpoint, no. I am not seeing any major shifts or big trends in anyone crime category at all. You know the calls for service, the quality of life types of calls, we certainly see going up along with population. The criminal calls themselves seem to be staying pretty static which is wonderful. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Sgt. Jim Olson: I want to give the council an update on speeding on Frontier Trail that we talked about a couple weeks ago. We used tubes down so that we did not use the speed trailer for this study. There was a total of 73 7 cars that were recorded on that. The average speed for those cars was 25. The 85th percentile speed, and what that means is that 85 percent of the cars were going less than, 29 or less. And the 95th percentile speed was 32. So 95 percent of the cars were going less than 32 miles an hour. There was a total of81 cars out of the 737 that were over 30 miles an hour. Of those, 81. 76 of those were between 31 and 35 so the numbers were still low. 4 cars were between 36 and 40, and then there was one car that was between 41 to 45 miles per hour. And that's what our study showed. We still have some cars that have been parking along there occasionally, so any questions on the study? 5 City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 Councilman Labatt: What was the time frame? How many hours or what, was it one day? Sgt. Jim Olson: It was a 2 day. 48 hours. Councilman Labatt: 2 day period. Sgt. Jim Olson: About 48 hours, yes. And it was during the week. To get a good feel for rush hours, for both morning and afternoon. Councilman Labatt: And where were the tubes placed? On what part of Frontier? Sgt. Jim Olson: The 70, almost the 7200 block of Frontier Trail. Councilman Lundquist: That curve? Mayor Furlong: Is that near the curve? Sgt. Jim Olson: Yes. Any other questions at all on the speed? Councilman Ayotte: Has anyone closed the loop with the community leadership there to share with them the specifics of what you discovered? Sgt. Jim Olson: Beth has made some, attempted to make some contact with some of the people that were there along Frontier Trail and I did that evening and have not had any further feedback from them or discussion. This has not been passed to them as of yet however. I wanted to present to the council first before we brought it forward to. Councilman Ayotte: I would ask maybe get with the city manager to see whether or not a formal letter, formal response so we have, excuse the term, a mark in the sand to say we've taken a look at it and at this point this is the measurable assessment. What do you think? Mayor Furlong: Yeah, I think feedback to, again continuing to try to contact the residents and get that information back to them. Sgt. Jim Olson: Certainly can do that. I also wanted to talk about Halloween briefly. Halloween is next week and just a couple of tricks for Trick or Treaters and of course your parents as well. Wear clothing with reflective tape if you're going to be out that evening of the 31 st. And make sure that you can see where you're going. Some of those masks that they sell, the eye holes are very small and it's easy to trip and not be able to see where you're at. And make sure that you can walk without tripping on your costume as well. And parents, check the candy when the kids get home. And for the younger ones, make sure that you go out with your brother or sister. Older brother or sister or parent, and the Mayor has already invited everybody to the Halloween Party on the 30th and I encourage kids to go there and have an excellent time and that is a lot of fun. I've 6 City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 heard some good things about that. I wanted to touch briefly on the CSO highlights for the month also. Calls for service for the month of September was 91, and that compares to 83 for last year, and for year to date this year they're at 1,046 and that compares to 826 for last year. Any other questions or anything for me? Mayor Furlong: Any questions? Sgt. Jim Olson: Thank you. Todd Gerhardt: Just to Bob's comment. We'll be preparing a response to send out to the neighborhood on our findings. We can sit down with staff and work out a nice letter. Councilman Ayotte: Thank you. Sgt. Jim Olson: Have a nice evening. Mayor Furlong: Good, thank you Sergeant. Is there anyone from the fire department here tonight? Todd Gerhardt: Fire department gave an update at our last City Council meeting so I just had them prepare the report so there won't be a formal presentation. Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Okay, let's move on then to the next item on our agenda. CERTIFICA TION OF DELINQUENT UTILITY ACCOUNTS. Bruce DeJong: Mayor Furlong and Council members, good evening. Tonight what we need to do is a process that we follow each year for collecting the delinquent water and sewer accounts that are owed to the city utility departments. The state statute allows us to certify these to property taxes along with an administrative fee for accounts that have been, in this case, at least 3 months delinquent. So we follow a procedure whereby we notify people prior to July 1 each year that if not paid these accounts will be certified to their property taxes. And give them sufficient time to come forward and pay them or, if they don't, they will be collected with the property taxes next year. In this case we have actually increased the number of accounts over last year by about 20 percent, but oddly enough the dollar amount is actually down, and typically we collect about 1/3 of these before they're certified. I know that we had several payments come in today from people who were concerned about it. But we generally do end up certifying someplace in the neighborhood of 85 to 100 accounts onto the property taxes for the following year. Each person has been notified of this several times, both on the utility bill and through personal letters that have been mailed out with notices. I do not believe that there is anyone here tonight, but if there is, please offer them an opportunity to be heard if they need some dispensation on their particular account and I will work with them. But that is it. We have about $60,000 worth that we're certifying to the property taxes and ask you to approve the roll as presented. 7 City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Is there any questions for staff? If not. Councilman Labatt: I had a quick one. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Councilman Labatt: District 3. Just for my own information. There's probably a dozen and a half homes or units or something is at $31.37. See that group there. Is that, you don't have to identify where it is. Is that like an apartment complex or is that? Bruce DeJong: To be honest with you I don't recall which one that was. I don't know. I can get you that information. Councilman Labatt: Okay. I just wondered, maybe something like that where there was that many at that low of a price, maybe it was something that we didn't communicate or something. Yeah, that's all. Todd Gerhardt: That's got to be our minimum bill too on that. And probably a few homes or townhomes that kind of fell in the gap there that somebody hadn't paid the bill. Mayor Furlong: Okay. There was one property on Lake Lucy Road Mr. DeJong that was included in our packet. A letter was sent to myself and the council. Just to confirm, that situation has been handled, settled to the property owner's satisfaction? Bruce DeJong: Yes. That situation has been settled to the property owner's satisfaction. In this case it was someone who purchased a property that had a delinquent account that was to be levied against it. We've made some adjustments of some of the penalties on there, and the homeowner is willing to pay that and still going to pursue any recourse that he has against either the title company or the previous owner. Mayor Furlong: Great, okay. Thank you. Is there any other questions for staff? Councilman Ayotte: One for legal counsel. If an individual has a hefty bill were to make an attempt to pay some portion of that bill, would we become then a function of a collection agency? Because I believe that if somebody shows the intent to resolve a large bill and begins to pay something on a reasonable basis, we have an obligation to respond to that. Is that true or not true in this case? Roger Knutson: We certainly can work with them if we feel they're acting in good faith and trying to payoff the bill. We can work with them. Councilman Ayotte: Okay. And the position that the city's taking that these people, minus the one that the mayor has pointed out, have not responded in good faith or tried to make arrangements to deal with what might be considered a pretty sizable bill, is that true? 8 City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 Bruce DeJong: That is correct. Councilman Ayotte: Okay. Bruce DeJong: And we have certainly worked out payment schedules with people on a number of occasions and removed them from the certification list when they've made that effort. Mayor Furlong: Okay. If there are no other questions, I will certainly, if anybody would like to come forward and address a particular bill on this, that's included here, I would certainly open up the floor for that at this time. If nobody would like to come forward, then I'll bring it back to council for discussion. Is there any discussion on this matter? If there is none, is there a motion? Councilman Peterson: Motion to approve as submitted. Councilman Labatt: Second. Mayor Furlong: Made and seconded. Any discussion on the motion? Resolution #2004-76: Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Labatt seconded to approve the Certification of Delinquent Water and Sewer Accounts as presented. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to O. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE AMENDMENT CHAPTER 20. ARTICLE XXIII. GENERAL SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS. DESIGN STANDARDS FOR MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENTS. Kate Aanenson: Thank you. As the city moves towards anticipated development, not only in the 2005, the Bluff Creek lowlands and inside the current MUSA with significant amount of more multi-family, the Planning Commission and the staff wanted to work through to ensure that we had high quality designs for multi-family. As you recall a number of years ago when we undertook the design standards, we had an overlay district just along Highway 5. We applied that city wide and what we wanted to do is to take that same kind of theme and move it to multi-family projects. So over the, a few months the Planning Commission, cameras in hand and touring some other cities, worked to develop some design standards and looked at what are the things that are important to the city of Chanhassen reflect what we believe is high quality design. And had a number of work sessions and also held a public hearing on the draft that's before you tonight. Again there are prescriptive standards in the multi-family district and those include setbacks... but what this is intended to do, the design standards is kind of take it to the next level. One, to educate people that are coming forward. Developers of what the anticipated expectation is. Again there was a concern that we have a lot of the same look of product type and materials. That we move from that. And then also to give a little bit more prescriptive in some areas regarding materials. The Planning Commission did hold a 9 City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 public hearing on October 5th. As a part of that public hearing there was a request from one resident that thought that maybe the requirements should be more prescriptive and we did spend a lot of time, the Planning Commission and staff discussing that and part of staff s response to that, and I think the Planning Commission concurred is that most of the projects that we get, that are multi-family, come in under a PUD. As a part of that PUD the design standards are part of the development contract, so there are specific unique to each project, design standards that spell out materials. Colors, those sort of things so we get that variety. So this kind of bridges between the normal setback requirements and then going from a PUD, and being something kind of inbetween. Again, putting out there what our expectation is for design, and as the Planning Commission has already looked at Town and Country is coming forward. I think we're moving in the right direction to give that kind of expectation of what that is. With that I'll just share a couple of comments I did receive on the draft and had a chance to talk with the city attorney about. There was a question on what would apply to this. This is all single family. All developed, multi-family developments except single family... single family but also included twin homes because the twin home is, while they're attached they are single family lots, so our code called that a single family, so it would apply to any other attached type product. And that's on page 2. On page 3 of the ordinance, it talks about the use ofEFIS shall not be on any first story, and it probably should read something more clearly. EFIS shall not be used on any first story or any building on one story in height. That doesn't mean it can't be used as an accent on the top, but that was the intent of that, and that goes back to the durability issue. And then on page 4 there was a comment regarding percentage affordable units. That is covered in another section of the comprehensive plan. That's always discussed. Maybe that could be removed from this section and just so this is more specifically talking about design, and then also on page 4, I think the intent of this again is to give some movement and some direction but not every product has to meet everyone of these issues in here. Again, they have the intent and the purpose of the ordinance as required by city code. The district applications, and we talk about architectural style. Making committees. How do these developments, especially when we're looking at the Bluff Creek, how do they connect to each other? Whether it's trails or landscaping, how do you make those transitions, and then we move into a specific site design. Again, when you talk about site design or the curb appeal, what makes a project good or bad. It's not the intent that every project's going to have, for example it may not a trail, internal or external or. . . but they try to meet a lot of these so I think if we look on page 4, and we change that, the wording on that where it says to encourage good curb appeal. Instead of saying all projects shall incorporate the following, instead all projects shall incorporate some of the design elements. So we're giving clear direction of these are the things that we're anticipating you're going to come forward with. When we look at a PUD and these are the things that were to be incorporated. The orientation. The variety of product. So with that, it was the recommendation of the Planning Commission at their public hearing and with staff with those changes that the staff just went through that, that you recommend adoption of the design standards. I'd be happy to answer any questions that you have. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Questions for staff. 10 City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 Councilman Peterson: Kate, I didn't compare the other architectural standards as it relates to the PUD to this. I mean is it pretty much the same? Kate Aanenson: No. Actually in a PUD we get pretty specific. We actually do what we call a story book and with that you would call out the product has to be, you know this product will probably be this color, this type of material. Will actually have a shingle specified. Brick and material samples, and you see a lot of that when we give you the boards when we do a commercial project. We actually keep those internally and they're put into a kind of a booklet format so when they come in with each project, we go to a check list so it's a little bit more specific. Especially if you've got 3 or 4 different types of product. Councilman Peterson: Do you think this gives you more autonomy to act as staff or less? There's. Kate Aanenson: Yeah, you know I think what the goal is, and with the Planning Commission too is that it's always good to communicate what your value is and what's your goal and what your intent is and that's what this is about. So when developers come in and say you know this is our expectation, and that's what this is intended to do. As we develop more of a story book or get more detail, but it's the intent to what we have. Actually an intent and statement and then the architectural style to say this is where our expectation is to be here. We want variety. We expect things to look different and connect to each other. We don't turn our backs on our neighbors and how we incorporate the trails and that sort of thing so. It's a little bit more detailed than what we have right now but it's not as detailed as the PUD so again it's that bridge. Councilman Peterson: And that's really the reason for my question is that I want you guys to be able to say no, that's not what I mean. And then I don't want them picking up this and going well, this is what you said and then you going well that's what, that's not what I meant. You know and get into that horse race. Kate Aanenson: Correct. And I think again, you start with the zoning code. You give them that and then we also give them examples of other PUD' s and this, and it's kind of like as each project evolves, and I think we've moved too with the Planning Commission. The developers meeting with the Planning Commission. Giving them this. The ones that we're moving now, the 3 or 4 that are kind of in the gate and we're trying to communicate that better so we don't spend a lot of time at the Planning Commission redesigning, redesigning, redesigning. We have that first initial meeting. Set the bar and then kind of get the marching orders so I think it will be helpful and I think the Planning Commission felt that way too because it was a very inclusive process for them to be a part of. Councilman Peterson: Okay, thank you. Mayor Furlong: Councilman Labatt. I think Councilman Peterson's done now so why don't you go ahead. 11 City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 Councilman Labatt: Okay. On page 3, Section 3. And you talk about the EFIS limited to first, or shall not be used on the first story. I wonder if, when the first story, do you consider that on apartment buildings let's say with underground parking. So that may have then a grade, an elevation of earth that covers up the first half that story. Should we define it more carefully to say like the first 22 feet above grade? Kate Aanenson: Actually our code defines what a story is and it takes that average grade into consideration so that's already defined in the code, what's a story. A first story. So first story again is defined by code so I don't think that would fit into a lower level or basement. Councilman Labatt: No, I'm just trying to think how someone. . . come in and say well, this is where you're confusing now because in one document it says this. Kate Aanenson: Sure, sure. Councilman Labatt: I'm just trying to. Kate Aanenson: Right. Well this wouldn't be spelled out anywhere else except in here. I mean there's a definition of story. I can cross check that to make sure what our definition, that it doesn't but I'm pretty confident that's covered but that's a good. Councilman Labatt: Good, that's it. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Councilman Lundquist? I guess I have an overall question and in terms of the, you said on page 4 under curb appeal. All projects shall incorporate some of the following design elements. And whatever we count for language here, obviously we'd put under the transportation section and architecture. I guess my question, and maybe this is for Mr. Knutson is, as I understand it, since this is part of the code, if a property owner came in seeing a development for non-single family, non twin home, and they didn't do it under a PUD, they could do the process under our zoning and ordinance. This would be our ordinance with regard to design standards. You know do we under site plan approval, generally we have limited flexibility as a legislative body as to whether it meets the requirements or not. If it does, you approve it. If it doesn't. Can we build in the judgment element here when we say some, a certain amount. I mean we're not expecting, as you said all these things everywhere and sometimes you know they might have a bunch of flower pots but they really missed it on trails and traffic patterns and other things. How do we protect ourselves so we're not, somebody doesn't come back, as Councilman Peterson says and start using this against us. But these are recommendations. They're standards. It's a hurdle we're looking for but we don't want, we need some judgment. All this says, you have to look at the whole picture I think and the whole plan. How do we do that? Roger Knutson: We don't put recommendations in ordinances. We put requirements in ordinances. Recommendations are not appropriate. And this is appropriate as part of a 12 City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 site plan review, to determine whether, if you want to go to that. To determine whether these requirements of the ordinance have been satisfied. And for all multi-family I believe you have site plan review, don't you? Kate Aanenson: Correct. Roger Knutson: So you could catch it there. As far as the wording, it's hard to get it just right. I think you've done a good attempt here to make, set the right balance. Will this prevent anyone from working with you? No. It certainly will not. If you want to be more prescriptive, you are in the sense if you say it has to be A, Band C and not allow any latitude the easier it is to enforce. But I think you have some discretion in here. I think this probably should work pretty well for you, as far as getting what you want. Most the time anyway. Mayor Furlong: I guess, and if that's the case, if we don't put recommendations in ordinances, we put requirements. Roger Knutson: Right. Mayor Furlong: Then the requirement is they shall include some. That leaves discretion then to the governing bodies as to what some is. Maybe there's a legal definition for some but. Roger Knutson: More than one. Mayor Furlong: Okay. So a flower box and a porch. I guess that's my challenge. Is this, I like what we're trying to do here, which is to let our developers know and our property owners know what's going to work and what we're looking for and how we're trying, how we see our city growing. I'm wondering if the ordinance is a way to do that, or if it is more through recommendations and such through a practice. I don't know, there's something that might be a little bit more flexible, that we can modify and grow as the marketplace comes along. I'm not necessarily opposed to doing this. I'mjust wondering if the ordinance is the right way because if it' s in an ordinance and somebody comes through here without a PUD process, and they're not meeting what's required, then we'd be looking at variances I assume, correct? Roger Knutson: That's correct. Mayor Furlong: So then we'd have to be looking at hardship is one of the tests on why they're not doing these. And if they pick out two, does that meet the criteria? I'm throwing that out and maybe it's something that we need to look at and consider and talk about, but I'm wondering if, I like what we're trying to do. I'm wondering if the ordinance is the process to do it or. Roger Knutson: I'd just point out also, as you know, when we write an ordinance, a zoning ordinance, it's construed strictly against regulation and for what the land owner 13 City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 wants to do. So if it isn't clear, we can't require it. So to the extent it isn't clear here, then they argue with us, they'll win the argument. But I think it's a starting point and you know as all of our ordinances are, they're a work in progress. We march it out. Try it. See how it works and with some history, whether, you determine whether it's working well for you or not and if it' s not, you change it. Mayor Furlong: Any other questions? We kind of went from questions into a little bit of commentary there discussion but any other questions for staff? If not I'll bring it back to council for discussion. Thoughts. Councilman Ayotte: I don't think there's a great deal of risk in having the document as it is, I really don't. Ifwe get down the road and we have difficulty with it, the outcome will be not necessarily a worst product. So I don't see this as being, if it' s difficult to enforce, we'll find out shortly and I don't think there's much risk in terms of a problem surfacing in our efforts. I just don't. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Other discussion. Councilman Peterson: Move ahead. Councilman Lundquist: Yep. I'm comfortable with the changes that Kate recommended. Councilman Labatt: Yeah. Mayor Furlong: Alright. Kate Aanenson: Can I just add one other thing? Just to be clear of the comments. While there wasn't a lot of people at the public hearing, we had, staff has given it to everybody that we know working currently in the community to get feedback. See if they have problems of working it, because we concur. We want it to be a workable document and as Roger stated, there's always going to be things that we're going to find out maybe have been too prescriptive or not prescriptive enough and we'll kind of work through those that we have other design standards, but we haven't had feedback saying oh my gosh, I can't live with that because we wanted to work with, again they want to understand where that bar is too so they can move through the process. Mayor Furlong: Alright. Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, I have a question on page 4 under curb appeal. It says all projects shall incorporate the following design elements. Kate Aanenson: Right, we modified that to say some. Todd Gerhardt: Oh okay. Alright. Mayor Furlong: So all project shall incorporate some of the following design elements. 14 City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 Kate Aanenson: Correct. Mayor Furlong: And you would include that as well under the transportation portion? Kate Aanenson: Correct. Mayor Furlong: Including some of the following elements? Kate Aanenson: Right. On page 7. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Do we want, I mean we can certainly go forward with this tonight if we're comfortable with the language. Do we want to make sure that we get the language and get it back? Clean the language. Kate Aanenson: That's fine if you want. We can put it back on the consent next time around. Mayor Furlong: I mean is there a preference from the council? Councilman Labatt: I think for clarification. Mayor Furlong: Just to clarify what we're doing. Councilman Lundquist: Yep, so everybody's on the same page with the amendments. Mayor Furlong: If that's okay with everybody. Todd Gerhardt: No problem. Mayor, one other comment. Ijust want to recognize the Planning Commission. Their efforts, Kate and her staff. They took special time out of their regular agendas to go out to different communities. Photograph these and put a working document together here so they went beyond the call of duty on this and I appreciate their efforts in doing so. Mayor Furlong: Yep. Todd Gerhardt: I just wanted to recognize that. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Thank you for saying that. The council appreciates their efforts as well so, well said. Do we need an action to table this or? Roger Knutson: That'd be appropriate. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Councilman Lundquist: Motion to table. 15 City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 Mayor Furlong: Is there a second? Councilman Ayotte: Second. Mayor Furlong: Any discussion? Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded to table the ordinance amending Chapter 20, Article XXIII, General Supplemental Regulations, Design Standards for Multi-Family Developments. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to O. Councilman Ayotte: Mayor? Mayor Furlong: Sir. Councilman Ayotte: Councilman Lundquist had mentioned to me that he's a little warm. I was wondering if I could ask if anyone else is, could we turn the AC up. Is that possible? On behalf of Councilman Lundquist. Okay Brian. Councilman Peterson: I'm a little cold. Mayor Furlong: May I continue now. CONSIDER AWARDING CONTRACT FOR 2004 SWMP UPDATE. Lori Haak: Good evening Mayor Furlong, council members. I apologize in advance for the brevity of my comments but as you may be able to tell, I'm under the weather so I figure I'd save my voice for your questions as opposed to my ramblings so. Councilman Ayotte: Was that just a crack on my request to put the AC on? Lori Haak: No it's not actually. It predates that so I wouldn't do that. The 2000, as you're aware the 2004 update of the Surface Water Management Plan was discussed at both a City Council work sessions on September 2ih and October 11th. A number of issues were brought up by council at these work sessions and were addressed in the memos completed in those work session packets. There were several outstanding issues related to project phasing and the alternate selected and a discussion of those items was included in the packet. I guess to keep this real brief, city staff does recommend the City Council adopt the attached resolution awarding the contract for the 2004 Surface Water Management Plan update to Short-Elliott-Hendrickson in the amount of$300,300.00 minus costs incurred under advance authorization. With that I'm more than happy to take any questions you might have. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Any questions for staff? Councilman Ayotte? Councilman Lundquist? 16 City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 Councilman Lundquist: Lori, as we've been working through this, I think some of the questions I've challenged the staffwith is the payback on some of the alternates versus what the bare bones, minimum legal requirement is and you've put some examples in here. The Country Oaks one for example, I think that's, I guess from my perspective that one is kind of the one that's still up in the air that the whole three dimensional elevation type thing and guess if you can give me more of a feel for, that's an example but I think we're talking an additional $55,000 right? $55,000. Lori Haak: That's correct. Councilman Lundquist: So for that $55,000 let's say Country Oaks, if we had to go back out, if we don't do this, that alternate, and something comes up, another Country Oaks comes up, what, any feel for what the cost might be to send someone out and do that survey work after, I guess what I'm looking for is what's the payback if we do, you know do we do 2 or 3 of these a year and you know is there going to be like 10 or 15 of these to get that $55,000 back or any feel for that at all? Paul Oehme: Sure. Thank you Councilman Lundquist. I think there's mobilization costs associated with sending crews out on an annual basis. There's you know administrative costs associated with doing that on an incremental basis. From staff s perspective I think it's a good idea just to get all that information at once. We have, once we have that information we can better model our existing water, storm water system. It gives us better analysis so in the future we don't have issues with new developments and drainage problems. Back yard drainage problems so. Todd Gerhardt: Mayor. Paul, how many drainage issues would we use this information on in a year? Would you say somewhere between 5 and 10 or 10 or 15? Is where I think Brian's going on this. Ifwe can get a dollar cost average out that $55,000 over a period of time. Lori Haak: Sure. Well certainly there are the larger projects like the Country Oaks project. But this actually would be a very valuable at the staff level, which is something that the council really won't see. The engineering technicians and myself get a lot of calls every year, probably I would say maybe 2 dozen persistent calls, if you will, and then maybe upwards of 50 other residential drainage complaints where this information would be helpful. Sometimes it's as easy as where can I tie in my drain tile. Is this catch basin an appropriate elevation so I can bring my drain tile from my private house out to the street? Will that work for me? That's one instance that staff would see but the council may not necessarily see. So in addition to these larger neighborhood projects, of which there may be, I would say maybe 3 or 4 a year that reach this level, and some kind of fall off the radar. Some don't. For whatever reason, but then the, maybe the even larger implication would be for, just the property owner who calls up and wants to hook into some of our infrastructure or just has a one lot drainage issue that we can address at the staff level. 17 City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 Councilman Lundquist: So let's say we don't have this 3D thing and you know, somebody calls up and says I want to find out if this storm drain is at the right elevation. Do we, what are the options that we have now without this information? We just tell them sorry, we can't help you or you're welcome to go do it, you know have it surveyed yourself or? Lori Haak: Either of those options, or they'd basically have to work backwards on it and try to figure out if that's going to be something that's going to work for them. Again, this works real well in these neighborhoods that are real flat and for those neighborhood projects but yeah, there are some other less sophisticated I guess alternatives for some of those private property owners. It's just with the volume of calls we get at the staff level, this is a capital expenditure that would be real helpful and help expedite that process for us. Councilman Lundquist: So do we get, do we require those property owners to go out and get that information before they hook up to that infrastructure or do something or do we just sort of wing it and hope we did it right or? Lori Haak: It really depends on the nature of the problem in the area. Usually hooking into something like that, we wouldn't require it but before they do the expenditure, they often want an assurance that it will work out properly. Councilman Lundquist: Okay, and really I guess what I'm getting to is you know, I'm trying to figure out for maybe 15 or 20 calls a year, if that's worth $50,000 to 7,000 households that we have. You know, a majority of people going to get a benefit out of this or not and is it worth that $55,000 or do we just do it spot as needed kind of things I guess is the thing that I'm still struggling with on that one alternate. Lori Haak: And if I might, really the benefit in this is going to be long term as well. This is really meant to be a 10 year plan, but this data, once we have it is there. And this is not something that we'll be needing to replicate. We'll be receiving this from new developments. As a matter of fact we are receiving this information from new developments as we speak so this is a one time deal. It's not that this data will be out dated in 10 years. This is, we're going to get this data and we'll have that for basically the future and for all of our planning efforts. Councilman Lundquist: So this is in our current as built requirements that developers give us, so now we're just, this is kind of our retro, we've got to go back and do it for what we haven't done before. Kate Aanenson: ... or because there wasn't... Councilman Lundquist: Okay. Todd Gerhardt: Mr. Mayor, we didn't require as builts up until 3 years ago and that was one of the code changes we made 3 years ago. And it's been a god send to us in getting 18 City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 that information for every drainage issue that we get now we've got the as builts right there to show it, but in the past, the mayor and I have been working on several drainage issues and you know, you're winging it like Lori said. Or we will send a staff member out there to help dig up the yard to try to find where these things are, and we spend hundreds of hours each year with Mike or Matt or Dan out there working with neighbors to try to locate these items. Councilman Labatt: Maybe I can shed some light. The lady up on, look at the rest of the development. Knob Hill that had the drainage pond in her back yard that all the time it'd fill up it would come up towards her hill. Maybe that's one of the issues you're smiling about Tom. Mayor Furlong: One of the many. Councilman Labatt: How would that, how would this study have helped that problem? That was, I remember the lady here for weeks talking about this and the emails we got. If we would have had the information you're asking here, tell me what the benefits and the time savings and justified somehow like that? Todd Gerhardt: I can take that one Lori. Lori Haak: I'm not quite so familiar with this one I think. Todd Gerhardt: Unfortunately I am. And what that would do is give us the infrastructure. It would give us the elevation at which the pipe is outletting the water from the pond. And then we can get the elevation from her on what the elevation of her basement is, and show that, if she's at a 560 and the outlet is at a 550, there's no way that that's going to go into her basement. And prove to her based on those benchmarks. Paul Oehme: The benchmarks are important but then taking it to the next step, we're also requiring the consultant to do the modeling associated with the data collection as well, so that kind of all ties in so in this instance we can model a 100 year storm. You know model it approximately how much it backs up into your property, or into the easement so we have another level of assurance that we can give the residents in the community. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Anything else? Councilman Lundquist: Yeah. As we, one of the other things we talked about was kind of the phased approach. Breaking it up rather than just putting it in, and I think you've done a good job. I'm assuming that these phases are, you know they make sense and good places to break and we can kind of call this a completed, you know have something that we can put our hands around at each one of these, which is good. Except in the resolution, in the contract doesn't reference any of the phases at all so essentially ifI read this correctly we're giving them a check for, to spend up to $300,300 time and materials but it doesn't reference any of the phases which sort of defeats the purpose of putting it all together. Unless I missed it somewhere in one of the contracts. 19 City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 Todd Gerhardt: We will definitely add that, if it's not already included. Work with Roger's office to put the appropriate language in to talk about each of those phases. Councilman Lundquist: And it's you know, some sort of a, I'm not saying it has to be a council approval by any means but some sort of staff approval before proceeding. Mayor Furlong: For beginning of phase. Councilman Lundquist: That's kind of what I'm getting to, the progress payment piece would be you know, we can't go into Phase II until we get through Phase I and you know we've got them kind of spelled out. Mayor Furlong: And I think on that issue, you know in terms of the phasing, and that was one of the things that this council was looking for is can we break this up into manageable chunks so that if, you know the assumption here is that if we're retaining this firm, we're expecting to have them do the whole job. Councilman Lundquist: Absolutely. Mayor Furlong: We're not going into this assuming that they're not going to perform. Councilman Lundquist: No. Mayor Furlong: But you know, situations change and you find out it's not working. Something we didn't expect. What we were looking for is steps that if they were 20 percent complete with the project it wasn't 20 percent of all 3 phases and then you had nothing. You'd finish the part that was portable. And as I look at these phases, we've got basically a data gathering phase, and that data obviously once gathered is portable. And then you start compiling the data. Working, developing the plan. And then at that point then you move to the finalization, the approvals and such like that so. So I guess what, you know we've got to make sure that that's in here so that we have that protection if we need to use it. Lori Haak: And I guess, and I guess Roger can confirm or differ with me on this but the way that I had interpreted this contract, under the termination clause, the agreement can be terminated by either party with 2 days written notice. And the intent really of the phasing, as I saw it from a staff level was that we could use that tool in that termination and specify that we really, we wanted, or we're requiring Phase I to be complete before we terminated it and if that's not something that we can do under this contract, then I'd rely on Roger to help us with that. Roger Knutson: Mayor, council. I think that is correct. We incorporate this into the document, as well as a number of other documents. Isn't the phasing one of the things that's incorporated Lori? 20 City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 Lori Haak: Yes. It is included on the October 13th revised schedule. Roger Knutson: That's on this? Lori Haak: Correct. Roger Knutson: So this is the phasing here which is. Lori Haak: The far right column indicates the phasing. Roger Knutson: Which is part of the document. So this is incorporated in the contract. Mayor Furlong: So the A, B, and C's are phase I, II and III? Lori Haak: Correct. Mayor Furlong: So Mr. Knutson you're saying that effectively addresses Councilman Lundquist's. Roger Knutson: Yes. This is part of the contract. Councilman Lundquist: Well that's fine but it still doesn't saying anything about that you have to complete Phase I before you go onto Phase II and Phase III. Roger Knutson: No, it does not. Councilman Lundquist: The termination, I mean that's, and Roger's the lawyer but that doesn't give me much comfort to say, I mean we've got either party may be terminated within 2 days written notice delivered to the other party. I mean that doesn't, you know if we get up on the wrong side of the bed we can just say, you know you're done. That's it. Give us what you've got and away we go so, that's not really, and maybe I'm over reacting to this but you know we've had large contracts before where we have gotten into the process and I think regretted that we didn't have a place to stop or a place to make a cut off and wish we could have gone a different direction so again, not saying, not assuming that this is going to go that way but you never go into a contract thinking that it's going to go bad or you wouldn't have gone in in the first place so I'm just looking at.. . Roger Knutson: ... if you want to say you must finish Phase I before starting Phase II. The only reason I'm hesitating there is I don't know how these are inter-related. But like information gathering. Maybe you gather all the information, you know how that changes things. But I certainly can say let's finish Phase I then you must then II then, you must take them sequentially. Provide us the information for Phase I before you start Phase II. Councilman Ayotte: But for invoicing purposes, may I? 21 City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 Mayor Furlong: Councilman Ayotte. Councilman Ayotte: For invoicing purposes you can state, and it's very typical from a contract, progress payment schedule. So you can, so that in order for the contractor to execute some portion of Phase II, or Phase I, they need to do some portion of Phase II, but from an invoicing standpoint, the invoice is delivered upon completion of the agreement in Phase I. So that when the invoice is handed, we can payoff. That doesn't mean that they can't go forward to do part of Phase II. But it's called progress payment scheduling and it's a very typical thing to do and the contractor gets his money based on the progress payment schedule, not necessarily the work performed. If they have to do some other work to get it done, that's to the risk of the contractor. Roger Knutson: I certainly, that's not in here and we can do that. Councilman Peterson: A quick question for Roger. Mayor Furlong: Go ahead. Councilman Peterson: I mean how does termination convenience that the federal government often uses, do local governments have the opportunity to terminate for convenience at all or not? Roger Knutson: Yeah, in this contract you can, as council member said, you can terminate because you just decided to terminate. You don't need any reason whatsoever. Mayor Furlong: I guess one of my questions, Lori with the different phases, Phase I, II and III. You're going to be responsible for managing the project. Lori Haak: That's right. Mayor Furlong: Staff is. Not the council. Which we don't want to get into project management. Lori Haak: Right. Mayor Furlong: So my question would be to you, how do you envision with these phases, understanding the concerns of the council, how do you envision managing the project with regard to the need to complete one phase before another's started or to manage that project from an efficiency standpoint as well as managing the concerns and minimizing risks? Lori Haak: Sure. Certainly one of the largest concerns I've heard from the council is making sure that the requirements of the law and the request of staff and the council are being met. To our satisfaction, and in order to achieve that staff envisions preparing I think a monthly report back to the council to be included in an administrative packet 22 City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 detailing the basically progress toward the goal for each phase. And certainly it will begin with things like field work and data collection and those sorts of things, but then may be more detailed in the future, talking about discussions with citizens or other units of government, those types of things. And I think through that the council would be able to see what staff is working on. What the consultant is working on and track progress, albeit at a smaller number of points than staff, but still be able to make that progress and measure those along the time line and the phases that you've been given. So that's the first thing is reporting back to council, just to have a double check that things are going as planned. And certainly staff will be managing this, as you mentioned, on really a daily basis and making sure that the consultant is up to speed on what's required and what's expected. The other thing that we've discussed in some detail at the work sessions is that an introductory opening meeting with the consultant to layout the expectations and I believe that that will be a real good tool for completing this project. As far as the individual phases are concerned, there is a clause in this agreement that talked about payment for each item. Each work item in the contract and on those invoices it needs to indicate how much of that portion of the project is complete and then the request for payment, and so that will be a third level of how staff can track progress on those individual work items. Councilman Lundquist: You're talking about two clauses. 2 and 3 Lori? Payment and method of payment? Lori Haak: Yes, I thought there was one additional. Actually I think yes, those discuss it and it's also included in the request for proposal which is incorporated by reference. In the contract. Councilman Lundquist: Okay, but I don't have a copy of that sitting in front of me so. Lori Haak: So no, I can find that right here. Councilman Ayotte: While you're looking at it, point of clarification. Termination for convenience, even though we terminate for convenience, if a vendor incurs expense we're still obliged to pay for that even though we terminate for convenience. Roger Knutson: If they incurred the expense before the termination, that's correct. Councilman Ayotte: Yeah, so. Kate Aanenson: But going back to Lori's point, again just for cross reference to answer your question. The goal of getting those reports is to show you where we are to date. Expenditures. Cross reference one by, we're trying to get Phase I done. We give you a dollar amount that way and then as Lori indicated in the contract, each specific area also has a price tag to it so you'll be seeing those totals where we are, obviously data collection is the first part so you'll be seeing that as part of that report too. Kind of the running balance. 23 City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 Councilman Lundquist: So is your hesitancy to put something around the invoicing on phases or something like that just because you feel that it would be too hard to manage that or it's not, I mean I'm sensing some hesitancy on putting that into the contract. Is there? Lori Haak: Sure. I guess primarily from a staff perspective it's wanting to assume that things will go smoothly, and that the results from the consultant that we're looking at, will be acceptable and working with that in mind. And so generally from my perspective it, certainly we can get out of the contract. We can terminate the contract at that point and request that the completion of that documentation I believe under the contract that we have written and so the fact that we could still request the finalization of those documents, I believe we have really as much control as we need but I'm not the attorney in this case so. Kate Aanenson: I'd like to say it a little bit different way. I think what we looked at and in talking to the consultant, as Lori..., there might be some areas that want to advance as we're getting the data collection that we might want to move into Phase II. And just so we understand that there's, is there a concrete line. We definitely cannot move to Phase II until all ofI, so that's why we want to have a monthly report back to you to kind of cross tabbing where we are with each specific line item and to tell you we're moving into Phase II. There's an item under there that we need to be moving, I think the consultant wants that flexibility and I think that's really where we're saying we don't want anything done in the next phase. If it makes sense, you know if we're dual tracking some of these things, that we want to be doing that but again that's through our reporting to you every month where we're at. To me that's the consultant's concern and our concern that we're not holding, adding time to the project waiting to get all of Phase I if there's things that we can be dual tracking in Phase II. There might be one or two things that we haven't anticipated that could be done at that... Mayor Furlong: And I think that's part of my question earlier about the managing the project efficiently and effectively, but minimizing risks and making sure that we don't find ourselves in a position where we've got 25 percent of everything partially done. Kate Aanenson: Right, and the consultant agrees that these could be broken into logistical phases. That could be done that way. But there might be some things that we might want to move, dual tracking and we'll inform you of those as we move forward where that whole, but yet they agree that these could be natural breaks. Councilman Lundquist: So what about the invoicing? Rather than a, let's say concrete line in the sand, as long as we're using that analogy tonight. Mayor Furlong: I think it was a mark but go ahead. Councilman Lundquist: Invoicing piece of it, and all I'm trying to do is provide a tool that we can have if we need again. You know I'm not, I don't want this thing to go bad either but we've been in a situation before and you know, if everything goes smoothly, it 24 City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 won't be a big deal. If it doesn't go smoothly, we've got a tool that we can use to say you don't get paid until we get this stuff. And then we don't have to haggle over well we're terminating your contract as long as you give us item 2, 7, 9 and 14. And then you know, back and forth and that kind of a thing and so, you know $300,000 is a lot of money to spend, it's all engineering. There's nothing tangible other than a book about, that weighs about 60 pounds that we're going to get out of this thing. It's not, we can't see a building going up saying we're 20 percent done. We're 40 percent done. We're 60 percent done. All we can say is, you know we've got stacks and stacks of paper that we've gone through and things that we've gone out and done. Kate Aanenson: Although there is a lot of value in the data. Councilman Lundquist: Oh absolutely. Yeah. Yeah, don't get me wrong but. Kate Aanenson: Right. Right, and that's, you know a lot of the value is in Phase I. I mean the data collection's the biggest chunk of the value really. I mean the permitting process, while they're providing facilitation and that sort of thing. .. the value is the data collection which we're getting really in the first part, first phase. Mayor Furlong: Okay, anything else? Any questions? Still in questions. Excuse me, we're still in questions for staff. Any other questions? Councilman Labatt? No. Okay. I'll bring it back to council for discussion then. Thoughts, comments. Councilman Peterson: I think we just had the discussion. I don't want to add anything over what I just listened to so I think it's fine. Councilman Ayotte: Okay. I'm not in favor of the way it is because progress payment schedules are a typical tool to use to keep, especially in an engineering activity, to have measurable deliverables where the risk is to the contractor. If the contractor needs to get step B in front of step A. So unless I see a progress payment schedule integrated into the relationship, I'm not in favor of it as it stands. I think this is a big improvement over where we went but I still spark over some of the in the last 4 years events that have occurred with engineering activities and the accountability associated with them and the liability being fixed for the appropriate party. Not the city. So I'm not happy with, I'm happier than I was before but I'm not smiling completely yet so unless I see a progress payment schedule to ensure there isn't liability lopsided with the city, I'm not going to favor this approach. Mayor Furlong: Let me ask a question just for, since you're more familiar with those payment schedules. How does that provide the staff the flexibility they need to efficiently run the project if the project management is different than the payment schedule that we sit here now and try to figure out how the project is going to run so we can manage the payments? Councilman Ayotte: What Lori was talking towards with the progress reports, while I agree with you to a large extent, minus it going in front of the council. The project 25 City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 manager takes a look at those progress reports and based on the progress reports makes, there's some subjectivity to it. Makes a decision as to whether or not we adhere to the schedule. To the payment schedule. Now so you have an invoice, the invoice can be a percent of performance against a schedule. A time schedule. It doesn't necessarily have to be, and you come up with a calculation as to what constitutes 20 percent, 30 percent, 40 percent, 50 percent. And then you have to have mile stones to determine whether or not those mile stones demonstrate a level, a certain level of performance. So you don't have to have, as an example, Phase I. The fact finding or data collection complete. You know these are tools to get to the end product and so the payment schedule can be separate from this phasing. All this phasing does is help you figure out what tasks have to be accomplished. Now the vendor says I need to have X number of dollars to operationally succeed what I need to do, and then you agree whether or not, what he needs for payment makes sense with respect to working for Phase I, II, III and so on. Okay? Doesn't have to manage it then. You don't have to manage a payment schedule to... Councilman Lundquist: Well as long as, I guess the way I looked at it was, I would go, your progress payments matching phases within but essentially what that means is that until we complete the majority of, or until Phase I is completed, we wouldn't be paying payments into Phase II as they're laid out and that would then be the contractor's money to float whatever dollars have been expended in that. Councilman Ayotte: Well you could have on this payment scheduler, Phase I is completed and we don't pay anything until you do some percentage of Phase II. Mayor Furlong: But again now we're. Councilman Lundquist: My vision is you know breaking in a progress payment based on phase. And that way you don't preclude them from completing items in Phase II while they're still working on Phase I. They just don't get paid for it until Phase I is completed. Councilman Peterson: Phase II is completed. They can work on Phase II but get paid for Phase II when Phase II is completed, right? Isn't that what you meant to say? Mayor Furlong: If Phase I is not completed and they're beginning Phase II because it's an efficient way to run the project, you're saying don't pay them for anything on Phase II until Phase I's completed? Councilman Lundquist: Correct. Mayor Furlong: Lori, Ms. Haak. Lori Haak: If I might, just for clarification on Councilman Lundquist's earlier question. In Section V of the request for proposals, which is terms and conditions, is included in the very first work session packet. This is how the project summaries are laid out. It says project summaries shall be submitted with each invoice during the course of the project. 26 City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 Each summary shall detail the amount billed to date, work items that need to be completed, the estimated cost to complete these tasks, and the projected time line for completion of the project. Invoices submitted to the city shall include a detailed breakdown of times, etc for that period. Councilman Lundquist: Right, and that's fine but again all that does is say we're going to pay them on time and materials based on what they show us. It doesn't give us any teeth. Mayor Furlong: Can we put prior staff approval on the different components? So if staff is managing the project and they're working on Phase I and Phase I is going well, and things are working and they're 75 percent, 80 percent done and to get the project efficient they say we need to start working on these components of Phase II. If staff approves, are we comfortable with them managing that? So that we don't have to, because I don't know what necessarily a time frame. Sometimes you have some long tails on different portions and if you have a long tail on one phase, but you need to keep the project moving forward, we don't want to stretch the project out inefficiently. I mean can we defer to management's judgment, or staff s judgment here in terms of managing not only the payment but the project? As long as. Councilman Lundquist: Well, that's what we've got and that's what we've got now. Essentially and I guess, I'm just not comfortable that we have enough tools other than staff s judgment and an engineering consultant. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Councilman Ayotte: See the payment schedule, if the contractor knows from an affordability standpoint what he has to bill when in order to take care of what he's got to do here, he knows. And he shares that schedule with a prediction of what those invoices are going to be. And it's not to the gnat's, help me. To the gnat's? Councilman Lundquist: Eyelash. Councilman Ayotte: Yeah. So to have that schedule and you can take a look at it and say that's a reasonable thing to approve and so he knows that if he does these things, he's going to invoice for these things, this is what he's going to get paid, and that's why I say you can't adhere totally to the phasing. It's a schedule of invoices. I mean it's done all the time. I don't understand why this is like a revelation. I mean it's a progress payment. Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, council members. I think where we're getting confused on this is Bob is saying you can use task 1 and 2 and bill for part of2 and Brian's saying no. You can't bill for part of 2 until Phase I is done and if I'm an engineering company, I'm not going to do any part of Phase II if my contract says I don't get paid for Phase II until Phase I is done. So that means you wouldn't do any part of Phase II until Phase I is done because you're not going to get paid for Phase II if you for some reason have problems with Phase I. 27 City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 Councilman Ayotte: But have we talked to this contractor saying in order for you to do this, what's your schedule of invoicing? You know what's your schedule of invoicing to accommodate the concern of this council that we, as a result of progress reports have a good feeling if things are going well, so that we mutually get the product we need? Because part of the discussion has to include the vendor. Has the vendor been talked to about a progress payment plan or an incremental payment schedule to accommodate Councilman Lundquist's concern, and my concern. I don't think what we're saying is unreasonable, based on the history we've had with a few other projects. Councilman Lundquist: What we have now is, the way this is laid out is they're going to bill us monthly. Based on time that they spent on tasks as laid out in this sheet with this guy costs 80 bucks an hour. He's going to take him 12 hours to do this. Yada, yada, yada, down the line. So just so everybody understands where I'm coming from. We got into water treatment for a lot of money and we got maybe half way through and we said whoa. This isn't really what we wanted, but then we said okay. We got $100,000 or more sunk into this thing. Now what do we do? We toss that in the garbage and start over. Or do we pay the rest of the money and have them complete something and that's what I'm trying to avoid. I don't want to get on a time and materials, based on this schedule, is fine if everything goes okay. But if we get through this and decide this isn't necessarily where we want to go, we're going to have lots of bits and pieces of different things laid in here because they're probably not going to work on you know all of Phase I. All of Phase II. All of Phase III in sequential order. So we're going to get part of 1, part of II, part ofIII. We're going to be halfway through it and then we're going to have a difficult decision to say, now what do we do? Do we pay them? Do we continue to pay or do we start over and now we're going to incur additional costs for somebody to go back and repeat that prior, previous engineering? So what I want is a tool that we can say we've got something tangible and we have some recourse to say, we've got something that we can put our hands around and if something goes bad, we can take it to somebody else and say, start from here and finish it. Mayor Furlong: Can we work towards or work with the engineering firm to develop a GAN chart that would layout the timing of these different components? This sheet here just lists the. Kate Aanenson: Yeah, it's in their proposal too. Roger Knutson: Mayor, if I can understand. Council members. Are we saying, this is what, there's four tasks? That's the number? Todd Gerhardt: Three. Roger Knutson: Three tasks. We won't pay anything until you finish task one. Then we'll pay for task one. So when you finish task two, we'll pay you for task two. We won't pay anything for task two until it's complete. We won't pay anything for task three until it's complete. So they have three payments, is that what I'm understanding? 28 City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 Councilman Lundquist: Well that's one way to do it. Now, the time line of this is such that they're probably not going to want to do that because you might be talking about 6 or 8 months where they wouldn't be getting paid anything. Now ifI was them, I wouldn't go that way but, somehow we've got to have some payment set up so that we ensure that we're getting something tangible and we don't get ourselves in a situation where we get halfway done and say, now we got nothing. Mayor Furlong: Yep. Kate Aanenson: We can pull out the three tasks, that's fine. Councilman Peterson: Well but, what I want to do is make it easier. If they're billing us, they're going to bill us monthly. Why don't they bill us in advance, get pre-approval in advance so that every month they say we're going to do these 10 things this month, and we'd like your approval on it before we commence on the project. And then when they get done with it, we payoff that invoice. Councilman Ayotte: If they say, these 10 things are going to be 17 hours of this sort of engineering at $80 an engineering hour and we're going to provide this product, it's hard in advance invoicing to recognize what that is. It's hard to measure. Councilman Peterson: Well it's an estimate. You can give them an estimate. A not to exceed $50,000. Councilman Ayotte: It's an estimate. I like Gerhardt's comment though that if we really we paid the contractor to help us determine how we could demonstrate that they're providing value to products that we can use throughout the project so that if something goes awry, we mitigate risk. That's I think your point you're coming to. And there's also performance base. You know where you get percent of completed project to the invoicing to some milestone. Getting back to you know the GAN chart. I think you need the vendor to help articulate a resolution to it. You just do. I did the progress payment song and dance but there's other things that can be done but we need the vendor to give us the milestones that we can say, boy. That's worth 6 bucks. And this is worth 27 bucks. And so on. Councilman Peterson: Add a comma to that. Todd Gerhardt: I think we've gotten a direction. A couple of different directions but let us have Roger sit down with SEH and come up with a proposal that I think meets everybody's wants and desires on this and see what we can come up with. Mayor Furlong: And I think the challenge from us is, we need to in that process address Councilman Ayotte's, Councilman Lundquist's concerns about protecting us from a financial standpoint. If everything goes fine, it's not going to be an issue but now's the 29 City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 time to plan it. At the same time I think we have to balance that against the efficiently completing the project. Councilman Lundquist: Oh absolutely. Mayor Furlong: That we don't get so tied up trying to protect ourselves for something that we don't think will happen, that we end up with an inefficient or cost over runs either so let's defer it back to them to, I mean they know what they're planning to do on each stage. Whether it's working together a project time line that's going to have associated fees with it that can be managed against and hopefully they can come up with better idea than what I will, in terms of addressing your concerns, and at the same time run an efficient and effective project. Councilman Lundquist: Absolutely. Mayor Furlong: Okay? Okay? Is there a motion to table? Councilman Lundquist: Motion to table. Councilman Ayotte: Second. Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded to table awarding the contract for the 2004 SWMP update. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to O. CONSIDER APPROVAL CONTRACT FOR DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION SERVICES WITH SEH. INC. FOR WATER TREATMENT PLAN. PROJECT 04-08. Paul Oehme: Thank you Mayor, City Council members. This item again for your consideration is award of a contract to SEH for the design and construction administration of the water treatment plant. As you may recall on October 11th work session staff update the council on selecting of a consultant for design and the construction administration of the water treatment plant and the philosophy behind the criteria that we used for picking a select a consultant for this project. As a review, and here is the concept drawing of the future water treatment plant. The lower left hand corner. This is the Red-E-Mix site that's currently owned, city property just north of Trunk Highway 5. East, or west of 101 and basically at the end of the cul-de-sac, the existing cul-de-sac at 79th Street. The concept drawing again was designed in this fashion to allow the site to develop in the future for, and for future sale of the largest portion of that property that's out there, and this concept drawing was included in the staff s request for proposal to the consultants. Staff did send out 7 consultant, or requests for proposal to 7 local design firms on September 1 ih. The city received 5 proposals back. The proposals were reviewed in detail and scored by staff. The scoring of the proposals were weighed heavily toward the firm's experience and the design and construction administration of water treatment plants. We also looked at personnel, experience, the 30 City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 understanding of the project by the consultant, services required and obviously the fees. The fee amount was also reviewed as well. After proposals were scored we selected 3 firms to interview. The firms were then scored again based on the interviewed information. And again the scoring was weighed toward the experience and the professional, the personnel of the firm and their experience. And again the understanding of the scope of services required. Fees are also ranked as well. We also did check references. In the background I did have a chance to visit with, who was that again? It was Coon Rapids I believe. And their references with SEH were okay as well. Staff is recommending that the city enter into a contract for design and construction administration with SEH for the water treatment plant. The review of the proposed control emphasizes the personnel that would work on the project. The firm experience and the references too all did check out. Emphasis was placed mainly on these areas because of deadline and has significant challenges. The grading, utilities, the mechanical, electrical are all very complex on this, for any water treatment plant but for this site specifically because of the tight constraints that the plant is under. The city needs, staff feels the city needs to contract with the best firm. Best available personnel available to design and construct this land. The chosen site again is challenging and will not allow for many changes in the future. SEH's team ranked first in personnel because of their key personnel that they've offered for this project. The firm's experience was ranked number one... that they have constructed in the last 5 years here in the metro area, and in out state. SEH also demonstrated the most experience with constructing water treatment plants on tight sites such as the one we're reviewing here tonight. SEH also has the most experience with pre-qualification of contractors and we had talked with, in general about maybe pre-qualifying contractors to narrow the selection approval down a little bit to, but to ensure that we have quality contractors bidding on this project. Again, based on the information that staff has gathered, it is our recommendation to enter into a contract with SEH for this project. SEH however is a little bit higher than the lowest bid firm, but again staff feels that based on their experience and the level of complexity of this project, we are recommending the contract be approved. That's all I have for tonight. I stand for questions. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Thank you. Questions for Mr. Oehme. Councilman Labatt: Do we want to bring up the confusion we had last month? How did we work that out? Paul Oehme: Well in this instance I think we do have some milestones that we can base fees on. We're going to have meetings. We can definitely pay for those. We're going to have drawings, we're going to have exhibits. We're going to have documentation that is, you know that's going to be really tangible for us to pay for on a month to month basis. So the interaction that we're going to have with the consultants I think in this situation maybe is a little bit different because the restraints that we're under. The focus and I think the scope that we've laid out here is pretty specific and I think that the progress payments are going to reflect that and I think at a staff level we will have that ability to ensure that what we get, that what we pay for, we're going to get back. So, and we can definitely look at you know the direction that we're headed in, we can easily change 31 City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 course if we don't see the information and the documentation that we're requesting specifically for this contract so. I think there is levels that we can. Todd Gerhardt: Paul, the $659,800, does that include design and construction of the two test wells? Paul Oehme: Yeah, the two test wells, the, it does include the design for the test well itself for the drift well. The city would solicit quotes for the actual drilling of that well though. The engineer would be responsible for the analysis and determining if this is an adequate site for that well. Todd Gerhardt: No, they were going to include design for wells 10 and 11. Paul Oehme: Right. Yeah, the design. The future actual well is not the test wells themselves. That's not included in here. That was negotiated out later. The contract before council tonight does not include that. That's, I think that was an amount of $68,000. That was removed from the last fee schedule that council saw. Councilman Ayotte: Which was originally free. Paul Oehme: Well, it was included. Councilman Lundquist: So their first one was 698 is what you're saying? Paul Oehme: I believe so. It's apples to apples now. Councilman Lundquist: Took those out. Paul Oehme: That's correct. Councilman Lundquist: Did we give the other contractor's a chance to go back and re- look at their numbers, at that 60 grand, if we let SEH pull that out? Paul Oehme: Well I did talk to one other consultant. Not in the pool but I just wanted to confirm that their numbers were within, in the ballpark, and they came back with about a $75,000 bill on that. Todd Gerhardt: For the two wells? Paul Oehme: For the two wells. Councilman Lundquist: And we only took out 60. Paul Oehme: We took out 60. Councilman Lundquist: Okay so, I mean. 32 City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 Paul Oehme: I didn't solicit bids for those two wells here basically. Councilman Lundquist: Right. So okay. Steve, are you, want to continue or? Councilman Labatt: I'll think of one. I'm still confused. Councilman Lundquist: Okay. So back to apples to apples. Two weeks ago, or whenever it was, 3 weeks ago when we looked at this, the original SEH as submitted proposal was $698,000. Yes or no? Paul Oehme: Yes. Councilman Lundquist: Okay. So we took out the 60 grand and made it 638 or SEH took? Paul Oehme: SEH took that 60,000 out of the original contract. Councilman Lundquist: Okay. So did we go back to Bolton and Menk and Bonestroo and say, is there anything else you guys can take out that gets you at a number that's you know, I'm just talking about you know in the spirit of fair play, we allowed one of the contractors to revise their number based on something that we didn't ask for that they provided, which is fine. But did we go back to those other two contractors, kind of in the final three there and say is there anything else that you guys put in here that we didn't ask for that you want to revisit and see if you want to take that out? Paul Oehme: No, I didn't revisit that issue with the other two consultants. Councilman Lundquist: Okay. And so that 60 grand now is off the table and we're not talking about that anymore or we're going to bring that up as a separate thing or? Paul Oehme: Yeah, that was the intent. Was to do the design and construction of the treatment plant at this time and then future, have another request for proposal for those two additional wells. Councilman Lundquist: And is there any, would there have been any benefit to having them done at the same time by the same firm? Financial synergies that can be gained there. Paul Oehme: I think that is and I think that's one of the reasons why SEH did include that bid in their proposal, so. But I think in their CIP and with the amount of work that's going out on this site, it can be done during the construction project or after. After it's built. I don't, you know from a design standpoint, I think it may be a little bit beneficial to have it done at the same time but for a cost standpoint I don't think we're gaining too much there. 33 City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 Councilman Lundquist: So you don't feel like if we went out for bids a year from now on that, that we will have, that it will be a financial penalty for us to do it a year from now rather than at the same time as this one? Paul Oehme: I don't think so. Mayor Furlong: Well 9 that we just completed, what was the comparable, or what was the cost for the comparable engineering services on Well 9? Paul Oehme: Yeah, I did put that in your background a little bit, and apologize for misleading the council a little bit on October 11th. That quote and that contract included the transmission line. It included some modifications to Well number 3. That was, it was kind of hard to deduct from that original contract. It wasn't really spelled out well how that was all broken out, so when I came to council last time and came up with a 102 number, I was giving my best estimate of what that included. Mayor Furlong: So we're thinking about $30,000 engineering for a well. Paul Oehme: For a well. Mayor Furlong: We're looking at about $30,000? Paul Oehme: Correct. Mayor Furlong: Per well? Paul Oehme: Yeah, and if we do drill two wells on this site, we would anticipate those two wells being in close proximity to one another, and it would make financial sense to do those at the same time to decrease the actual construction costs associated with those wells so. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Alright. When are those scheduled to come on, 10 and 11? Do you remember? Paul Oehme: 2006 and 2007 I believe. Mayor Furlong: 6 and 7? Paul Oehme: 6 and 7. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Alright. Other questions? Councilman Lundquist: You're asking for approval of a contract tonight? Paul Oehme: That's correct. 34 City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 Councilman Lundquist: So where's the contract? Councilman Peterson: It's a letter, it's in there. It's a letter. Paul Oehme: It's a letter. Roger Knutson: Mayor? What you did back in July is approved a master agreement for professional engineering services of SEH. The master agreement has all the detail and the master agreement says, for individual projects you have what's called a supplemental which just spells out the price. All the details are in the master agreement which you approved in July. Councilman Lundquist: So how does that affect, well the last one was tabled I guess. Okay, so how does this one differ from the one we just got done talking about? What's the time frame on this is well over a year, correct? Paul Oehme: Well correct. I means about a 15 month process to actually construct, design and construct it so it is a lengthy process. There's a lot of mile stones that the council and staff will go through. Roger Knutson: Mayor, one of the things that's different here, in this project there are definite cut points if you will. For example you prepare plans and specs, and you can't award a contract or get ahead of yourself because it has to go on these steps and that's spelled out in your master agreement. So until then, then you can't go to bid. The contracting phase and the contract administration phase and so on and those are logical cut points if you want to. Mayor Furlong: So it's the built in, the phasing that we had in the prior item is built into the master contract. Roger Knutson: Yeah, because unlike the prior one, it's by it's nature. It has to be done sequentially. You can never blend these things. Councilman Lundquist: Okay. And then our termination clause is the same as the other one? Roger Knutson: I believe you can terminate any time you want. For any reason you want. Councilman Lundquist: Alright, that's all I needed to hear. Mayor Furlong: Okay. Any other discussion? Councilman Ayotte? Or I guess we're on questions still for staff. Any questions for staff? No? Councilman Labatt, anything else? Councilman Labatt: No here. 35 City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 Mayor Furlong: Okay. Alright. Okay, I'm good for staff. Thank you. Anything, we have representatives from SEH here. Is there anything you'd like to address the council with on this matter? SEH Representative: We're looking forward to working with you on this project. Mayor Furlong: Alright, very good. With that then I'll bring it back to council for discussion. Consideration. Thoughts, comments. Councilman Lundquist: I'm happy with where we're at now. Taking the comments I think into consideration and know where we need to go. So I don't want these guys to think I hate them so I'm comfortable with where we're at now. You come highly recommended. Mayor Furlong: I think that's an important part. This is a, I guess I'll wait with my comments though. Councilman Ayotte, thoughts. Comments. On this. Councilman Ayotte: Let's go. Mayor Furlong: Let's go? Councilman Ayotte: Let's go. Mayor Furlong: We're implementing. We're implementing. We're not studying anymore. We're implementing. You get to vote for water treatment. Anything? Councilman Labatt: No. Let's get this thing going. This is exciting. Mayor Furlong: This is exciting. It's a step forward. Something that this council's been working on diligently and something that our residents have been waiting for and I think that we're now taking another step in the process to move this forward so I think this is good and I appreciate the work that the engineering department has done, staff and everybody to get us to this point. So is there any other discussion or is there a motion? Councilman Labatt: Let's let Bob make it so. Mayor Furlong: There you go. Councilman Ayotte: I move to approve contract for design and construction administrative services with SEH, Inc., for water treatment plant, Project 04-08. Mayor Furlong: Is there a second? Councilman Lundquist: Second. Mayor Furlong: It's been made and seconded. Any discussion? 36 City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 Councilman Ayotte moved, Councilman Lundquist seconded that the City Council approve the contract for design and construction administrative services with SEH, Inc., for the Water Treatment Plant, Project 04-08. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 4 to O. (Councilman Peterson was not present for the vote.) Councilman Ayotte: I do have a story about this. Councilman Labatt: Short? Councilman Ayotte: Short, yeah. Not in this city, but in another city a local politician walked into a bar. And the local politician walked up to the bartender and he said to the bartender, I think I won the election. And the bartender said honestly? And the politician said well. Councilman Labatt: And your point is? Councilman Ayotte: Well it's about water. The well. Mayor Furlong: Are there any other council presentations? That would matter. Todd Gerhardt: There's only 4 guys that got that Bob. Mayor Furlong: Okay, we will move onto council presentations at this point. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS: Councilman Lundquist: I would just echo your comments Mr. Mayor on next Tuesday, so encourage everybody, if you didn't catch the beginning of the meeting to exercise your civic duty and rights on November 2nd. Get out and vote. Mayor Furlong: Get out and vote. Check the city web site. Councilman Ayotte: Mayor, alibi? Tomorrow. Here. Who's going to talk about that? We've got, is it tomorrow that we have a forum? Councilman Lundquist: Family of Christ Church. Mayor Furlong: Candidate forum? Councilman Ayotte: Yeah. Are you going to talk towards that? Mayor Furlong: I think you just did. Councilman Ayotte: Okay, fine. 37 City Council Meeting - October 25,2004 Mayor Furlong: If you want to. Councilman Ayotte: No. Mayor Furlong: Tomorrow evening, 7:00 there's a candidate forum for, I think it's just City Council candidates. Just council at the Family of Christ Lutheran Church, is that right? Off Coulter, right by the Rec Center. Public is invited. And you're welcome to come. Any other council presentations? Matters? Mr. Gerhardt. ADMINISTRATIVE PRESENTATIONS. Todd Gerhardt: The only item I have is we have scheduled at our next City Council meeting change the term of the mayor's seat. Roger is on our work session agenda to update you on what options you have available to you. So that will be for our November 8th meeting. And other than that, that's all I have. We have budget discussions tonight after council meeting. Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Any questions for the staff? No? CORRESPONDENCE DISCUSSION. None. Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Ayotte seconded to adjourn the meeting. All voted in favor and the motion carried. The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m. Submitted by Todd Gerhardt City Manager Prepared by Nann Opheim 38