HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-26-04 WSIn attendance: Mayor Robert Johnson and Council Members David Luick, Laurie Rieb,
Mark Bellows, and Wendy Wulff.
Also in attendance: City Administrator Steve Mielke, Assistant to City Administrator
Brian J. Anderson, Captain John Arvidson, Human Resource Manager Ginny Zarras, Parks
and Recreation Director Steve Michaud, and City Engineer Keith Nelson.
Item #1
Review -Drug Paraphernalia Ordinance & Tobacco Compliance
Captain Arvidson informed the City Council some local businesses that have recently
opened in Lakeville are selling drug related paraphernalia in their tobacco stores,
which concerns the Police Department and Community. However, it is legal for
businesses to sell these items so long as they sell them for tobacco use only. The
• Police Department is proposing an ordinance that would help regulate the sale of
these types of items, which would help control the use of illegal substances used in
these. items. In addition, it may deter the sale of these items within the City
altogether. However, in order for the Police Department to issue a petty
misdemeanor for the sale of these items, the Police Department must show that the
owner knowingly sold it with the sole intent of illegal purposes. This may prove to be
nearly impossible, thus leaving the intent of the ordinance ineffective.
Mayor Johnson inquired if such an enforcement ordinance is worth approving being
it lacks the enforcement aspect? Captain Arvidson stated that is a concern; however,
one of the real benefits of the ordinance would be the desire of deterring businesses
from opening and/or selling those types of items. Mayor Johnson then inquired
which of our neighboring cities have this type of ordinance? Captain Arvidson stated
he would need to research that answer. Council Member Luick stated he would be
interested in knowing if the City has any authority in regulating the location of these
items within a store.
Direction: City Council directed staff to research which other cities have adopted a
similar ordinance and the success they've had with it prior to bringing it forward for
approval. In addition, Council would like to know if they have any authority as to the
location of these products within a store.
•
~ n }.
y' 3~ /tifr~4
Captain Arvidson distributed the new proposed tobacco ordinance to the Council and stated
• that Dakota County is currently in charge of issuing tobacco permits and performing routine
tobacco compliance checks once a year at all locations. The Lakeville Police Department
would like to take over the issuance of tobacco permits and perform all annual compliance
checks as they feel the City would get more favorable results in eliminating sales to underage
tobacco users.
The City currently performs all the liquor compliance checks with great success and feels
their best practice training approach would receive the same results. Captain Arvidson
stated the City would like to strongly educate businesses on the sale of tobacco and alcohol in
order to eliminate underage sales from occurring. Issuing the two-year permits would not
require much additional administrative work and the $55o received for each permit would
help off-set the permit and compliance expenses. For the past three years Eagan has
performed their own tobacco compliance checks and has had no failures due to their similar
training approach.
Direction: City Council directed staff to bring forth the proposed tobacco ordinance at an
upcoming Council Meeting.
Item #2
Discuss - PERA Military Leave Buy-back
Ms. Zarras briefed the Council on the recent history of the PERA Military Leave Buy-back
issue by stating that at the June 2°d Council Work Session City Council discussed the
potential costs associated with the proposal. The decision was then made to conduct
• additional research on how both public and private organizations handle this policy. She
then addressed the table containing policy information gathered from cities as well as local
private firms and stated there are many ways this issue is covered, leaving no clear choice.
However, if policy changes such as putting additional dollars toward PERA contributions are
going to be made to the Military Leave policy, other policies such as FMLA should be
reviewed to ensure the City's leave policies are handled consistently. Mayor Johnson stated
that it would have the potential to create a proliferation of issues with other City policies.
Likewise, Council Member Wulff stated this would be an item they could negotiate into their
contract at the appropriate time and felt it would disrupt the past practice and future
negotiations between the City and collective bargaining units if they incorporate items at this
time. The City Council agreed.
Direction: City Council directed staff not to change the PERA Military Leave Buy-back and
leave it as previously written.
Item #3
Update -Veteran's Memorial
Mr. Michaud informed the City Council that Joe Miller had purchased the Studer property
but gave the City permission to house the plane on the premises until next spring/summer.
Mr. Studer has repeatedly asked the City to take ownership of the plane. However, Mr.
Michaud has refused to take ownership of the plane until a detailed plan has been approved
by Council. The City Council agreed.
•
-2-
Mr. Michaud has received a preliminary plan and construction estimate from engineering
• firm SRF who quoted the plan costing $25,000 while the construction would cost an
estimated $50,000, which seemed unusually high for this type of project. In addition, the
City would have to bear additional costs of hiring an engineering firm to mount the i8,ooo-
pound plane on a 12-foot pedestal. However, Mr. Michaud stated that for an estimated
$2,000 engineering firm HTPO would be able to produce a detailed site plan that would
allow the project to move forward.
Mr. Michaud has received verbal sponsorships for various construction elements of the
veteran's memorial from community business leaders. Also, both the VFW and American
Legion have voiced interest in participating in the memorial; however, funds are limited.
Mayor Johnson stated that the City would have trouble justifying spending $20,000 on such
a memorial. Council Member Wendy Wulff felt that with the strong community patriotism,
the City should seek donations to assist in the memorial. Mr. Michaud stated he felt
comfortable about the overall direction of the veteran's memorial and feels the goal can be
accomplished. Council Member Bellows stated that he would like to see a veteran's memorial
with or without a plane.
Direction: City Council directed staff to pursue seeking cost estimates associated with the
design and construction of the veteran's memorial. The Council also directed staff not to
accept ownership of the plane at this time.
Item #4
Discuss -Elko/New Market Interceptor Extension
Mr. Nelson outlined the exhibits showing alternative plans for extending interceptor sewer
• from Lakeville to Elko/New Market and to provide sanitary sewer service to Lakeville's
Urban Reserve District along Cedar Avenue. Options A-F cover the westerly portion of the
project, which includes sanitary sewer extension from Lakeville to Elko/New Market. The
preferred .option to provide sewer service to Elko/New Market would be Option F.
Option F would involve year 2oio construction of gravity interceptor sanitary sewer sized. for
ultimate development of 7.3 million gallons per day (mgd) from Elko/New Market through
Eureka Township to 230th Street and Dodd Boulevard. A temporary lift station forcemain
would then be constructed and sized fora 2030 flow of 3.3 mgd, which would pump into a
gravity interceptor sewer to be constructed through Lakeville following a southern alignment
as identified in our Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan. In the year 2030, this lift station
would be abandoned and a new interceptor sewer would be constructed through Eureka
Township along 225th Street and extending easterly to Biscayne Avenue, then north to the
Empire Wastewater Treatment Plant. The limiting flow to Elko/New Market if the new
interceptor is not constructed in the year 2030 would be the 3.3 mgd through the City of
Lakeville. According to MCES staff, there would be no capacity restraints to Lakeville if the
2030 pipe is not built due to the. 3.3 mgd restriction to Elko/New Market.
City Council agreed that Option F was in the best interest of Lakeville for the reasons
mentioned above.
On the east side, options 1-6 include the 2030 pipe to the Empire Wastewater Treatment
Plant, as identified in green, plus a 2oio option for servicing Lakeville's Farmington Outlet.
Although Lakeville's Farmington Outlet meets the criteria for interceptor sewer service,
MCES feels Lakeville is already provided interceptor service with capacity for full build-out
• and current policy of limiting multiple connections for interceptor service would preclude
-3-
._ v~.... Judy 2( ,
this connection from being a MCES facility. The project construction cost analysis identifies
. Option 5 as the most cost-effective option. This is a lift station to .serve Lakeville's
Farmington Outlet with a forcemain connecting to the existing Farmington interceptor. In
the past, the Metropolitan Council has indicated this is a local facility due to the fact that
Lakeville is already providing service
Option 6 is a little more expensive than Option 5, but it provides gravity sanitary sewer
service to portions of Farmington along Flagstaff Avenue (which could also provide service
for a potential ISD #i92 high school site) and the lift station would be sized a little larger to
accommodate additional flow for higher density development in Farmington. Option 6 could
arguably be considered a MCES interceptor facility rather than a local. trunk sewer; however,
that is a policy decision, which is open for further discussion. It was indicated that for this to
happen, substantial cost share between the cities of Lakeville and Farmington would likely be
requested.
City Council agreed that Option 6 was in the best interest of Lakeville being it provides
gravity sanitary sewer service to portions of Farmington along Falgstaff Avenue and a larger.
lift station to accommodate additional flow.
Mr. Nelson then noted that the 2oio construction cost for Option 6 to serve our Farmington
Outlet is $5.~8 million and would provide 3.1 mgd to accommodate growth in the cities of
Lakeville and Farmington. Option F to Elko/New Market has a 2oio construction cost of
$23.92 million and would provide 3.3 mgd to Elko/New Market and i.i mgd to the City of
Lakeville. An additional $8.g~ million in the year 203o for Option F and an additional
$20.58 million in the year 203o for Option 6 would be required to expand the ultimate
• capacity for Elko/New Market to 7.4 mgd plus provide an additional i2.3 mgd capacity for
the long range in Castle Rock and Eureka Township. Staff feels the Farmington Outlet is a
much more cost effective means to serve approximately the same population.
Direction: City Council directed staff to continue working towards Options F and 6 with
MCES, Elko/New Market, Farmington, Scott County ,and other affected agencies.
Item #5
Other Business
Mayor Johnson briefly informed the City Council that the No-Smoking Ban appears to be a
hot and sensitive issue in local governments and that Lakeville may be faced with making
some sort of decision in the near future. In addition, he had mentioned that it should be the
state's responsibility to pass a uniform state wide No-Smoking Ban being cities are headed
this way. No direction was given to staff regarding the No-Smoking Ban at this time.
Mr. Mielke informed the City Council that a group of residents who live along Jacquard
Avenue oppose the construction taking place on their road and state they have not been
informed about the construction. Mr. Mielke stated that neighborhood meetings, work
sessions, Council Meetings and other various public communication activities have taken
place for the past two years regarding this issue. He then stated that Mr. Nelson has been out
to talk to one of the residents and they will go out on Thursday, July. 29~ to hear the citizen
comments in that neighborhood. The City Council agreed that this construction project has
been widely publicized for the past two years and complemented Mr. Mielke's effort to
resolve any last minute issues with the residents.
•
-4-
~ ,
.iil~- C;ouneil Work Session ~ r:.
Mr. Mielke informed the City Council that their wages haven't been increased since 1999
• ($8og per month in 1998 and $833 per month in 1999) and inquired if they were interested
in increasing their wages. In order to increase their wages, it would have to be approved
prior to the November election this fall in order to take place January 1St, 2005. Mr. Mielke
handed out a spreadsheet that compared neighboring City Council's wages. The City Council
felt their overall wages were lower and directed staff to itemize the neighboring city council's
per-diems in order to receive an accurate comparison.
Adjourn
The meeting adjourned at 6:35 p.m.
Re/s~pectively mitted,
v'"vim- _
Brian J. Berson
Assistant to City Administrator
•
•
-5-