HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 12/04/2001 APPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY,DECEMBER 4,2001 7:00 PM, CITY CENTER
Council Chamber
8080 Mitchell Road
CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Jean Harris, Councilmembers Sherry Butcher,Ron Case, Jan
Mosman, and Nancy Tyra-Lukens
CITY STAFF: City Manager Carl Jullie,Parks &Recreation Services Director Bob Lambert,
Public Works Services Director Eugene Dietz, Community Development and Financial Services
Director Don Uram, City Planner Michael Franzen, City Attorney Ric Rosow and Council
Recorder Peggy Rasmussen
I. ROLL CALL/CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER
Mayor Harris called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m.
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III. COUNCIL FORUM INVITATION
Council Forum will be held the first and third Tuesday of the month from 6:30 to 7:00
p.m. in the Council Chamber. Please note that this portion of the meeting is off-camera.
The Council Forum will consist of two parts: scheduled and unscheduled appearances.
6:30 to 6:50 p.m. is reserved for scheduled participants. If you wish to schedule time to
visit with the City Council and Service Area Directors, please notify the City Manager's
office by noon of the meeting date with your request. The last 10 minutes of the Forum,
from 6:50 to 7:00 p.m., is set aside for impromptu, unscheduled appearances by
individuals or organizations that wish to speak to the Council.
IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS
Butcher added Item XIII.A.I. Metropolitan Council's New Growth Plan for the Seven
County Metro Region, and Item XM.A.2. Homeland Security in Eden Prairie Disaster
Preparedness. Mayor Harris added an addendum to Item I. under VI. Consent Calendar.
Jullie added XIII.D.1. Redesign of the City's Web Site. Mayor Harris moved Item X.A.
ahead of Item VII.
MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Mosman, to approve the agenda as published
and amended. Motion carried 5-0.
V. MINUTES
A. CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY,NOVEMBER 20,2001
Mosman made a correction on page 11, paragraph 5, the second sentence, which
should read" . . . amount of negative feedback she received from individuals."
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
December 4,2001
Page 2
Rosow made a correction on page 15,paragraph four. The last sentence should be
deleted and replaced with the following. "The relationship between the two
entities has been strained in the past, and through discussions they are trying to
overcome those obstacles as well as deal with Ordinance 5 L"
MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher, to approve the minutes of the
City Council Meeting held Tuesday, November 20, 2001, as published and
amended. Motion carried 5-0.
VI. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. CLERK'S LICENSE LIST
B. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-178 APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF
GRAY FOX BLUFF
C. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-179 APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF
BLUFFS EAST If"ADDITION
D. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-180 AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE AND
SALE OF UP TO $890,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION EQUIPMENT
CERTIFICATES OF INDEBTEDNESS, SERIES 2002 FOR THE
PURCHASE OF PUBLIC SAFETY VEHICLES
E. AWARD BID FOR MID-MOUNT AERIAL PLATFORM TRUCK TO E-
ONE MANUFACTURING
F. AUTHORIZE PURCHASE OF A MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS
COMMAND POST FROM LYNCH DIVERSIFIED VEHICLES
G. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-181 GRANTING 24-MONTH
EXTENSION TO DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT BETWEEN POST
CONSTRUCTION COMPANY AND THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, FOR
PROPERTY AT 12420 SUNNYBROOK ROAD
H. APPROVE DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT FOR GRAY FOX BLUFF
I. APPROVE PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR APPROXIMATELY 28.625
ACRES REFERRED TO AS TRACK A OF BIRCH ISLAND WOODS FOR
$600,000 TO BE PAID OVER FIVE YEARS
J. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-182 AUTHORIZING CALL OF
CERTAIN OUTSTANDING GENERAL OBLIGATION WATER AND
SEWER REVENUE BONDS SERIES 1991C AND 1991F
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
December 4,2001
Page 3
K. APPROVE AMENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENT WITH SEH, INC., FOR LAYOUT DEVELOPMENT AND
PRELIMINARY DESIGN OF THE TH 212/VALLEY VIEW ROAD
INTERCHANGE AREA IMPROVEMENTS
L. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-183 GIVING PRELIMINARY
APPROVAL TO THE ISSUANCE OF TAX-EXEMPT BONDS AND
AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR ALLOCATION OF BONDING
AUTHORITY
M. AWARD BID TO METRO FIRE FOR FIRE DEPARTMENT SCBA
EQUIPMENT
Mayor Harris referenced Item I, and invited Jeff Strate, the organizer of Friends of Birch
Island Woods,to speak.
Jeff Strate, 15021 Summerhill Drive, said people from Minnetonka, Hopkins and Eden
Prairie came to the meeting to thank City staff, particularly Bob Lambert, for working
with them over the past two-and-a-half years to save this lovely part of Eden Prairie for
recreational and human services. He also thanked Councilmembers Ron Case and Jan
Mosman, as well as Mayor Harris, for their help in bringing about this purchase. It will
become an area that preserves the City's natural and historic heritage. Without the City's
support this might not have happened. He promised to work with the City to raise money
from the private sector to develop Birch Island Woods and other park areas. The Sierra
Club plans to explore legislation to make it easier for cities and counties to trade land
when it serves a public purpose.
MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Case, to approve Items A-M on the
Consent Calendar. Motion carried 5-0.
X. PETITIONS,REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
A. MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING CONCERNING FLYING
CLOUD AIRPORT
Rosow said the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was being presented to
the Council for approval. Ordinance 51 was adopted in 1978. In 1988 the
Council went on record in opposition to the expansion of the airport, and in 1999
considerable discussions resulted in proposed amendments to Ordinance 51 that
the Flying Cloud Citizens Advisory Commission had put together and took to
Washington to seek approval of the amendments from the FAA. In September
and October 2000 and January 2001, the FAA responded to those proposed
amendments. The agency told MAC to submit a plan for repeal of Ordinance 51
or it would suffer loss of funding from the federal government. Eleven months
ago, the Council determined to hold a public meeting to get input from citizens in
opposition to expansion and solicit suggestions. One strong suggestion was the
need to hire special legal counsel with expertise in airport law and development,
in order to inform the City of its rights and power in this situation.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
December 4,2001
Page 4
The Council, at a public meeting on February 10, 2001, undertook a review of
appropriate firms and in March hired the Aiken-Gump law firm, represented by
Peter Kirsch and Dan Reimer. After being directed by the Council to detail out
what the City could do to prevent airport expansion, Peter Kirsch made a public
presentation to the Council in May. He outlined five important points: (1) the
City's authority is extremely limited; (2) federal law controls air space and
aircraft; (3) the airport owner controls development; (4) operational restrictions
are regulated extensively by the FAA and (5) legal system favors airport
development.
In August, Peter Kirsch presented a briefing book and an action plan. Part of the
action plan set the policy that was subsequently adopted by the City. As part of
the policy, the Council determined: (1) decisions concerning the airport must not
change the fundamental character of the airport; (2) adequate protections from an
increase in noise exposure must be provided; (3) only expansion that is justified
by compelling need and containing adequate mitigation will be acceptable. MAC
had not at that time shown compelling need. (4) Current operations at the airport
impose impacts on the community that must be mitigated; (5) the airport must not
be a economic drain on the community; (6) the airport must compensate the City
for lost revenue.
The MOU basically addresses Ordinance 51. The City and MAC will continue
discussing other issues, such as payment for providing sewer and water services
to the airport. The Council determined that the only acceptable solution is a
comprehensive one. The MOU is not the comprehensive solution. However,
MAC and the City are still committed to address a variety of issues and continue
discussions.
Dan Reimer reviewed the key features of the Memorandum of Understanding
(MOU) and identify the key issues that lie ahead. Commissioner Houle made a
presentation to MAC's Planning and Environmental Committee, and said the
MOU is only a first step but an extremely important one. Ordinance No. 51, as it
is currently written, provides that jet aircraft that weigh more than 20,000 pounds
are prohibited from flying into and out of the airport. The environmental
document for the proposed expansion is still open for comment.
In September, after the public hearing, letters showed the City and MAC shared a
common interest in participating in meetings. Mayor Harris and Councilmember
Case met twice with their counterparts at MAC, Coral Houle and Dan Fortier.
They agreed that Ordinance 51 was a critical issue and must be a priority in any
discussions. The group of four asked staff to meet and explore amendments to
Ordinance 51. Staff met at least once a week over the last six weeks, in cordial
discussions with key staff members.
The MOU contains signatures of the four participants and the recommendation of
the four signatories. It does not constitute a binding agreement between the City
and MAC. However, it is contemplated that a binding document will be drawn up
in the future. The role of the FAA is not to review and approve the MOU or a
CITY COUNCIL MIWTES
December 4,2001
Page 5
final agreement, or specific restrictions or commitments. All commitments and
restrictions can be executed unilaterally by MAC. However, the FAA can make
the determination that an action taken by an airport proprietor constitutes a
violation of federal law or a violation of grant agreements that the airport's
proprietor maintains with the federal government. If so, the FAA and can
terminate an airport proprietor's eligibility for federal grant funding for the
airport. As a result of that important role, the FAA is a necessary part of any final
agreement. The MOU will be delivered to the FAA by the City and MAC in
order to receive their concurrence and consent to the terms of the MOU and the
final agreement.
The MOU sets out specific commitments and restrictions and a method to obtain
them. The following are amendments to Ordinance 51 MAC intends to make as
part of a final agreement. (1) Restriction of Stage 2 aircraft, which is the noisiest
aircraft. (2) MAC will ban aircraft that weighs more than 60,000 pounds. That is
the maximum weight-bearing capacity of runways at Flying Cloud airport. (3)
MAC will ban maintenance run-ups between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. unless it
materially affects the plane's departure time. (4) A schedule of sanctions will be
created as part of the Ordinance delineating the progressive penalties to be
assessed for Ordinance violations.
Other commitments set out in the MOU are the following. (1) MAC would agree
to not apply for certification to provide facilities for air carrier operations. (2)
MAC will implement a program of voluntary restraints on aircraft operations
between 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m., and will work to reduce noise of departures
between 6:00 a.m. and 7:00 a.m. (3) MAC agreed that major air cargo operations
would not be able to use the airport. (4) MAC will make commitments on sound
insulation in the final agreement.
Eden Prairie's commitments are the following. (1) The City will support the
proposed amendments to Ordinance 51. (2) The City will not challenge the
proposed airport expansion project. (3) The City will retain the right to ask for
additional disclosure. (4) The City will promote compatible land use within areas
surrounding the airport.
Reimer said the restrictions would have a beneficial effect now because they will
prohibit the noisiest jets from operating at the airport and the heaviest jets. They
will reduce nighttime noise, both by a curfew on maintenance run-ups and early
morning departures. This package of restrictions will protect against further
expansion and associated increase in noise. They provide some protection from
further degradation in the noise surrounding the airport. They will help to assure
the airport will retain the same fundamental character it has now. It is also
important to understand these restrictions will be added to the protections that
exist today prohibiting runway extension beyond the limits of 5,000 feet identified
in their environmental document. A key benefit in the MOU is a clear process to
implement restrictions and to address challenges that may come up in the future.
The MOU makes it clear that the City will be able to go to court to demand that
MAC live up to the commitments it is making.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
December 4,2001
Page 6
Reimer said MAC's Planning and Environmental committee unanimously voted
in favor of the MOU at a meeting earlier that day. The Council was being asked
for its approval that night. After the City approves the document, the MOU will
be delivered to the FAA for their consent and concurrence. If that is received, the
MOU will be turned into a final agreement. Then MAC will amend Ordinance
51, undertake a noise study,begin contacting users about restrictions, and start the
process of enforcing the restrictions and commitments.
Reimer said there are some obstacles ahead. (1) FAA concurrence is critical. (2)
Final agreement may not be possible because of an inability to reach closure on
items identified in the MOU. The final document may look somewhat different
from the MOU. (3) Continuing risk of challenge from the FAA and airport users,
who may oppose use restrictions. (4) Stage 2 ban will be difficult to implement.
(5) The restrictions are subject to challenge at any time.
Case said he has been involved in the airport expansion issue for a long time. He
itemized some assumptions. (1) He believed one of the best actions the Council
took was to hire Peter Kirsch and Dan Reimer, and that the Council was getting
the best legal advice available. (2) In studying the City's case, legal counsel led
the City to believe it was unlikely it would be successful if it carried out an
expensive and lengthy legal challenge. (3) He believed an unextended runway
without restrictions was worse than an extended runway where the City could
obtain restrictions and limitations. MAC was serious about its commitment to
address issues the City most believed in, such as maintaining the character of the
airport, obtaining meaningful noise restrictions and, most important,
enforceability. He believed the negotiations would improve the quality of life in
the community over what it could have been if the City had not gone through this
and achieved these results. This will guard against Flying Cloud becoming a full-
fledged jetport. This is the best the City could have achieved.
Case said because of where he lives, he is in a good situation to speak up for
many people who live in close proximity to airport noise. Case said he felt
confident he could inform the citizens he represents that he can live with this
settlement.
Tyra-Lukens thanked Mayor Harris, Councilmember Case,Ric Rosow, Carl Julhe
and Scott Kipp for putting so much time into this and taking the time to get up to
date on all the issues involved.
Mosman said she would like to have reassurance from Dan Reimer and Ric
Rosow that they believed the City has done the best it can legally do with the
limitations the City had. Flying Cloud has some different restrictions on it that
other airports don't have and the City is concerned about what it can do to protect
the public. She asked if there is anything else regarding toxic emissions,
strictures,runway lights, and residents desiring additional information that should
be included in the continued study.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
December 4, 2001
Page 7
Reimer responded that in the course of their lengthy discussions they did discuss
all the issues Mosman mentioned. The product of their discussions is in the
MOU. The City is not foreclosed from submitting comments on the
environmental documentation in order to protect citizens. With regard to whether
or not the MOU is the best agreement the City could get,Reimer said he would let
the Council decide if it is in the best interests of the City. The legal counsel was
given policy direction from the Council, and the MOU is a significant step to
achieve protections that will carry out the policy directions they received from the
Council.
Rosow said these were very lengthy and difficult discussions, although always
cordial and extremely professional. It was the right decision to stay at the table
and continue to negotiate the terms of the MOU. It would have been difficult to
get substantially greater protections than there is in the MOU. If they had tried to
stay at the table another month or more, staff at MAC would have stopped
discussions and gone ahead with their project without any agreement. This MOU
meets the goals the City set out.
Rosow explained that it is a myth that MAC committed to vigorously defend
Ordinance 51. This is not true. An Ad Hoc Committee presented to the MAC
recommendations on Ordinance 51 and one was that MAC vigorously defend
Ordinance 51. There was no action taken by MAC on that recommendation.
Enforceability of Ordinance 51 is not supported in the record of MAC's meetings.
The City is not prohibited by the agreement from sharing any information with
the public that is public information under the Data Practices Act. They have
looked at the noise contours and of taking Stage 2 aircraft out of the mix. Even
though there are not many in the fleet,they have a large impact on the numbers of
homes impacted, and therefore numbers of people, because of the noise they
create.
Regarding enforceability, the City will not sign an agreement that is not
enforceable. The City can go to court and get a judge to order MAC to carry out
the commitments in the agreement.
The City and MAC will go to the FAA as partners and tell them this is a good
document. The Stage 2 ban is likely to draw close scrutiny. If the FAA rejects
the study, MAC said they would go back and do another study based on those
concerns. If it is accepted by the FAA, MAC has pledged to go ahead. MAC is
definitely interested in reaching an accord with the City and they want to be good
neighbors. Their mission is to run an airport, but they want to do it in a way that
meets the City's needs as well.
MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Case, to receive and support the terms
of the Memorandum of Understanding dated November 29, 2001, concerning
Flying Cloud Airport and MAC Ordinance 51; and direct staff to proceed in
accordance with said Memorandum of Understanding. Motion carried 5-0.
CITY COUNCIL NIINUTES
December 4,2001
Page 8
VH. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS
A. 2002 PROPOSED BUDGET AND TAX LEVY (RESOLUTION
NO. 2001-184)
Jullie said official notice of this public hearing was published in the November
29, 2001,Eden Prairie News.
Uram said there have been prior five meetings to discuss the 2002-2003 biennial
budget, the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for 2002-2007, and the
Enterprise Funds. He gave a power-point presentation outlining each one.
Uram explained that the tax bill passed by the State Legislature in 2001 was one
of the most significant tax bills in the history of the Legislature. It lowered tax
capacity but allowed a higher tax rate. Caps on levy limits were increased.
HACA, which is essentially state aid, was eliminated and means a transfer to the
local levy. The State takeover of general education funding resulted in a
reduction of overall taxes.
The tax capacity drops significantly in 2002. In 2001, the tax capacity was
$85,185,647 versus the tax rate of 24.099 percent. The tax capacity in 2002 is
$63,727,231, versus a tax rate of 37.53 percent. The City is proposing a 25.3
percent tax rate, and a levy limit of$2.7 million.
The State determined an overall levy limit for Eden Prairie of$22,753,367. The
inflation rate over the last five years is 7.6 percent. In order to maintain the level
of services, growth needs to be taken into consideration. The City had
approximately a nine-percent increase in households over the last two years. The
market value of new commercial construction was 1.35 percent.
Elimination of HACA results in transfer to the local levy and is included in the
levy limit calculation. In 2001, the amount received from HACA was $690,295.
With regard to the property tax levy, one of the items to be considered is the
impact on the median-value home. For 2002, the median-value home is
$230,600. For all taxing jurisdictions, the net tax on the median-value home is
expected to decrease from $3,686 to $2,816, or 23.89 percent. The City's portion
of the tax is expected to increase from $751 to $836, or 11.3 percent. For every
one-percent change in the City's portion of the tax on the median-value home, the
budget is impacted by about $215,000. The net tax on the median-value home is
only impacted by$7.
Total property taxes:
Residential(based on median-value home) $2,816, a decrease of 23.6%
Apartments, a decrease of 19.4%
Commercial, a decrease of 9%
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
December 4,2001
Page 9
Property tax distribution on a median-value home.
County received 39%, Eden Prairie 29.7%, school district 22.8%, and other taxing
jurisdictions 8.5%
City yprope . taxes:
Residential(on median value home)— 11.3%increase
Apartments—30% increase
Commercial—4.5% decrease
Sources of General Fund Revenues for 2002:
Property Taxes $24,543,000 12.7%increase over 2001
Licenses/Permit fees 2,600,000 7%decrease
Intergovernment Revenue 808,000 6%increase
Charges for Services 2,176,000 6%increase
Operating Transfer in 70,000 87% decrease
Other Revenue 1,033,000 2% increase
Operating budget in 2001 included$450,000 transferred to the General Fund from
the Liquor Enterprise Fund. The Council made a determination to put this money
directly into the CIP, and not pass through the General Fund. This relates to why
taxes increase in 2002 is higher than in the past. That decision adds
approximately 3.5 to 4 percent onto the tax levy.
General Fund Expenditures for 2002: There was no significant increase or
decrease. An increase in funding for legal services accounts for the 22% increase
in the expenditures under the City Manager. The total General Fund Expenditures
for 2002 are expected to be$31,230,000, or an increase of 8%
Debt Service: The City will be issuing debt for a new fire truck and, at the next
City Council meeting the Council will be asked to issue general obligation bonds
to fund the City's portion of the joint public safety training facility.
Capital Improvement Program:
2002-2007 $23,903,895
Beyond 2007 4,145,000
$28,048,895
CIP sources:
Revolving Fund. $700,000 annually transferred from the Liquor Enterprise Fund.
General Fund. $500,000 annually transferred to the CIP.
Park Improvement Fund (consists of cash park fees). Bonding
Bonding: Lease Revenue and General Obligation
The 2002-2007 CIP funds all CIP projects through 2007. It provides $3.15
million for "A" priority transportation projects, funds $2.5 million in capital
expenditures for 2008-2012, requires new debt for a joint public safety training
facility and replacement vehicles.
CITY COUNCIL MENUTES
December 4,2001
Page 10
Project Summary: $7.6 million of revenue goes to Parks and Recreation; $1.2
million to Technology; $4 million for Public Safety; $7 million for Public Works;
$1.5 million for Historical Properties; $2.5 million for facilities and other.
Funding Sources: $14 million CIP; $3 million debt service; $5 million Parks and
Recreation; $1 MCA construction fund; $86,000 other.
There are a number of unfunded projects,totaling$30 million to $41 million.
Transportation:
Golden Triangle Area- $3 million to $9 million
Unfunded transportation projects - $10 million
Southwest area fire station- $2 million
Parks and Recreation:
Water Park/Community Center-$4 million
Third Sheet of Ice- $3 to $4 million
Youth Athletic Fields - $1 to $4 million
Purgatory Creek Recreation Area Entry- $3 million
Golf Course- $4 to $5 million
Utility Fund Budget
No rate increases are planned for 2002.
Operating Revenue- $7,634,000 or 0%change
Expenditures - 6,877,000 or 3%increase
Liquor Fund Budget
The goal for 2002 is for sales of$8,378,000 or 10% increase
Tyra-Lukens asked what impact transferring liquor profits directly into the CIP
rather than going through the General Fund would have on the overall revenues.
Uram replied the impact would be about 3.7 percent. The way it was done
previously, the money would have gone into the General Fund. The 3.7 percent
has to be made up through property taxes.
Dietz said by levying to the limit, the City generates about $500,000 toward
funding the CIP for next year. When added to the transfer of$700,000 from the
liquor enterprise fund, that is almost $6 million over the seven years of the CIP.
One example is improvements to the interchange at I-494 and T.H. 169. The
layout plan will allow local access to the Major Center Area. However, out of
that plan comes the need to widen Valley View Road and Prairie Center Drive to
four lanes. The cost of those improvements is not in the CIP at this time.
MnDOT will probably implement the improvements in the next five years. There
are always going to be capital projects that come along, and if the City has the
money to invest in infrastructure, the citizens have said the transportation system
needs to be improved. Eden Prairie is young, but as it ages the cost to maintain
the system will increase.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
December 4,2001
Page 11
Lambert explained there are two parcels of land the Council should consider
purchasing. One is a parcel in Birch Island Woods owned by Hennepin County.
The City has just purchased Parcel A. Parcel B adjoins Indian Chief Road. The
City had both parcels appraised and Parcel B was appraised at $380,000 because
it is guided for industrial. It could be purchased through a contract for deed with
the County, as was Parcel A. It would not be used for park purposes, however. It
should be purchased if the City is interested in having control over how that
parcel is developed in the future. The asphalt plant located next to it and the
owners would likely purchase Parcel B if the City does not. The County is
expecting a prompt decision by the City, as the County will want to subdivide this
parcel and put it up for sale. It would probably be purchased immediately.
The second parcel of land is along Venture Lane, which is now a frontage road
along Highway 5/212. It is owned by the state and will be put up for sale if the
City is not interested. It is close to a piece of property the City acquired through
tax forfeiture, which the City would like to develop. Lambert urged the Council
to approve buying it to provide access from the east to the City-owned property.
The asking price is $500,000 for 2.87 acres. Lambert recommended letting this
parcel go on the market, and purchase Parcel A of Birch Island Woods.
Mosman asked how the City would gain access to the City-owned property if that
property is sold to someone else. Lambert said the only way would be to
negotiate with whomever acquires that property to have access from it. A parking
lot would probably face the road, and the City could ask to extend an access road
from the owner's parking lot into the City site.
Tyra-Lukens said she understood Parcel B in Birch Island Woods would be
purchased so that the City could have control over it. If it is not developed as
park property, she asked if the City could sell to a private parry in the future.
Lambert replied that is correct, but the City would specifically want to have a
separate purchase agreement for this parcel. It would be sold for redevelopment
and the City would get its investment back in the future when it is sold.
Butcher said the City has established a precedent for making that type of
purchase.
Case said he believed the hill on the property could be preserved and that would
help to control the appearance from the park. Lambert said they could try to keep
a natural corridor between the two properties.
Tyra-Lukens asked if the City would be precluded from making any zoning
changes that would increase its value. Uram replied the City would have to keep
it zoned industrial.
Rosow said the City could rezone it. The more difficult question is whether or not
they should. In the past the City has held property for development within a
development district. If the City is not specifically buying it for municipal
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
December 4,2001
Page 12
purposes, it is necessary to make sure the City has structure in place to legally
purchase the property for resale.
MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher, to instruct staff to pursue the
purchase of Parcel B of Birch Island Woods,under advisement of counsel.
Discussion followed.
Tyra-Lukens reminded them that this is a set-up for future Councils. If the
property does not sell for redevelopment in the near future this Council has to
recognize the fact it will be lobbied hard in the future to keep that property.
Mayor Harris added that might happen just by this parcel's proximity to the Birch
Island property.
Case stated the City carries a certain surplus each year and wondered if it
shouldn't dip into that rather than tax to the levy limit.
Tyra-Lukens said if the Council regards this purchase as an investment, why not
use money invested elsewhere to acquire the property.
Uram replied the City purchased property on Singletree Lane in 1992 or 1993 and
hopes to sell it next year. There is an ongoing business on this property that will
be profitable. In the case of the business next to Parcel B, Midwest Asphalt could
be in place for the next 20 years, so the timing for selling it may be 20 years out.
Tyra-Lukens inquired if the parcel could be developed without this piece.
Lambert replied because of the configuration of it and with Midwest Asphalt next
to it, a setback would be required. Midwest will buy this parcel and will encroach
out to the road and will be an eyesore. The City wants to have a buffer for
development of the property in the future.
Case recommended purchasing Parcel B and putting conservation easements on it
so when developed some day it would be there.
Mayor Harris said she believed the City should purchase the property, and asked
what the others wanted to do.
Case said he agreed the City should purchase it, but questioned the way it should
be funded. If the City purchased it for $380,000, over 5-years, that would be
$70,000 per year, plus interest. He would prefer that to taxing now for the total
amount. The City would get the money back when the property is sold.
Uram said the budget being presented at that time is at the levy limit cap. That
includes $1 million transfer to the C1P. He suggested the City use $500,000 from
that for the purchase. It is important to levy$500,000 from the CIP,but he didn't
expect to have the additional$500,000 every year.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
December 4,2001
Page 13
Butcher said it would be a good investment because there will be further emphasis
in the future on development.
Case said he was depending on staff to say it is important to purchase this land to
preserve the options in the future, because there is a long list of things the money
could be used for. He agreed this is important and he would vote for it.
Butcher said this is an investment and the City will be able to sell it later. It is
important to identify what the City's needs and wants are and follow what truly is
in the CIP.
Uram said the public hearing on the budget relates specifically to the budget and
levy. In the early 1990s, the City went through an economic downturn and didn't
have the guarantees for the future that there is now. Hard decisions have been
made to determine what needs to be done with the money available from an
operations standpoint. The state has said it will face a significant deficit in the
budget. The City needs to ensure its future so it doesn't have to go back to the
taxpayers and say it needs $10 million to repair buildings, roads, etc. This change
to the budget would be part of that.
Motion carried 5-0.
Mosman said she understood that $215,000 in the City's budget equates to $7 to
the owner of a median-value home. Uram said that is correct. Every year they try
to determine what a one-percent increase means to the median-value home, which
is $230,600. Every one-percent increase means $7 to the homeowner and
$215,000 to the City's budget. Mosman said that makes raising the money
palatable.
Mayor Harris asked if anyone wished to address the Council on the 2002-2003
budget. No one did.
MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Mosman, to close the public
hearing and adopt Resolution No. 2001-184 certifying the 2002 Property Tax levy
to be$24, 527,284; and approve the 2002 Budget of$31,230,431.
Case said he had a problem with the concept that the City is simply taxing to the
maximum possible. Any time the Council decides how much to tax there is never
enough money to meet everyone's needs and wants, so they have to ask what is
the appropriate amount to raise taxes. However, he knew there are projects the
City would like to do, so he believed they need to have a referendum for those
projects. With the economic environment in the late 1990s, the City was raising
taxes at the six-percent level to make up for loss of revenues from the early 1990s,
when the City was raising taxes only one or two percent.
Uram was asked what other cities are doing. He said all cities are raising money
to replace HACA.
CITY COUNCIL NUNUTES
December 4,2001
Page 14
Case said there are things we decide to do, such as hiring legal counsel to fight
Flying Cloud Airport expansion. He calculated a 10-percent increase in the
property tax levy for the City's portion of the tax bill. To fund the CIP requires
$1.2 million a year, $500,000 of which is programmed, but $530,000 is not. To
raise that amount, they are proposing to levy the maximum amount it can. He
said that made him uncomfortable. Perhaps they could forego $500,000 and go
back to the taxpayers for a referendum to fund those projects. The City is only
proposing a 12.9-percent levy increase,rather than 10 percent,because it can.
Mayor Harris said just because the City levies it does not mean it will necessarily
be spetlt. It is good to have it there and it has potential for the City to use it.
Butcher said if we don't do it the City will have a predicament in the future to be
able to do things that are basically essential. The State hasn't put enough money
aside for transportation funding, for example. The extra money the City gets can
be put in a savings account to earn interest. This year, when our property taxes
decreased because of the shift in funding, it would be a good way to raise money
for the City.
Case said he agreed with that but his discomfort is how much to raise it. Moving
$700,000 from the Liquor Fund over to the CIP, and then program $500,000 of it
and then levy another$500,000 just to spend did not seem right to him.
Mosman said philosophically a lot of people would agree. The school referendum
being turned down indicates people are concerned about spending taxpayers'
money. She wondered if the City is getting carried away.
Tyra-Lukens said people are concerned about how money is spent but also after
looking at years of capital improvement needs, these are hard and fast needs. The
purchase of Birch Island Woods makes clear the Council is looking at more
creative ways to make the kind of community it wants. That is an example of the
kind of stewardship it is implementing.
Case said there is a disconnect being made by citizens in the survey conducted
early this year, between wanting lower taxes and presenting a list of things they
want done. The number one most desired amenity was a golf course, but the
number one direction was to lower taxes, so that is the disconnect.
Butcher said that is the leadership part of being on a Council. We have talked
about what the City's needs are. It may be hard to take 12 percent now,but it will
be positioning the City for future purchases.
Motion carried 4-1,with Case voting nay.
B. AMENDED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT AREA NO. 5 AND AMENDED PLAN FOR TAX INCREMENT
FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 13 (RESOLUTION NO. 2001-185)
CITY COUNCIL NHNUTES
December 4,2001
Page 15
Mayor Harris convened a meeting of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority
(HRA) at 9:05 p.m. and opened the joint public hearing of the City Council and
HRA.
Jullie said official notice of this public hearing was published in the November
22, 2001 Eden Prairie News. The purpose of the joint public hearing is to clarify
the estimated public improvement costs with respect to Tax Increment Financing
District No. 13 (Eden Prairie Center) by amending and modifying the Plan. Staff
has worked with bond counsel, the City attorney and financial advisor to develop
the appropriate documentation to affect that change. Staff recommended approval
of those changes.
Mayor Harris asked if anyone present wished to speak to this issue. No one did.
MOTION: Mosman moved, seconded by Tyra-Lukens, to close the joint public
hearing of the HRA and City Council. Motion carried 5-0.
HRA MOTION: Mosman moved, seconded by Butcher, to adopt HRA
Resolution 2001-03 relating to the amendment and modification of the
Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 5 including Tax Increment
Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No.13. Motion carried 5-0.
COUNCIL MOTION: Mosman moved, seconded by Case, to adopt Resolution
No. 2001-185 relating to the amendment and modification of the redevelopment
plan for Redevelopment Project No. 5 including Tax Increment Financing Plan
for Tax Increment Financing District No. 13. Motion carried 5-0.
MOTION: Mosman moved, seconded by Butcher, to adjourn the HRA. Motion
carried 5-0. The HRA adjourned at 9:10 p.m.
VIII. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS
MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Tyra-Lukens,to approve Payment of Claims. The
motion was approved on a roll call vote,with Butcher, Case, Mosman, Tyra-Lukens
and Harris voting"aye."
IX. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS
XI. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
XII. APPOINTMENTS
XIII. REPORTS OF OFFICERS
A. REPORTS OF COUNCILMEMBERS
1. Metropolitan Council's New Growth Plan for Seven-County Metro
Region,Blueprint 2030—Councilmember Butcher
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
December 4,2001
Page 16
Butcher reported the new plan will be very different from the former plan,
which had an agricultural ring around the metro area. One difference is
less emphasis on the MUSA Line and more emphasis on protecting quality
resources as cities grow within the seven-county area. The plan
encourages better integration of land use with transportation, protection of
natural resources, and housing. There is more emphasis on redevelopment
and in-fill. The new model is based on the "smart growth" initiative.
Each city will be asked to locate its natural and cultural resources. Eden
Prairie will identify these and place these on the seven-county map.
The Metropolitan Council will figure out areas available for development
and what are available for redevelopment and in-fill. Part of the rationale
behind the new model is the 2000 Census determined the population
projections for the seven-county area are not correct. The Metropolitan
Council said a population projection of 650,000 was conservative. The
new plan is a way to reconsider using and reusing the metro area rather
than preserving a green ring around the metro.
Butcher said she will be serving on a committee of the AML as these
issues are discussed and will see what is going on in terms of land use and
natural and cultural resources.
2. Homeland Security and Eden Prairie Disaster Priorities —
Councilmember Butcher
Butcher reported that the tragic events have impacted every citizen in the
nation and Eden Prairie is responding to this. All cities have been placed
on high alert status. All levels of government must be prepared to
respond, especially on the local level. All levels are working together on
an overall security network to prepare cities for disaster.
Butcher said she and Mayor Harris participated with representatives from
a number of other cities in discussions with Congressman Ramsted, an
FBI agent Ray Morrow, Sheriff McGowan and epidemiologist Michael
Osterholm. Several important decisions came out of this meeting. Each
city is to review its preparedness plan. This review is in process by Eden
Prairie's staff. Another decision was creation of a command center to
facilitate communication. Cities must be prepared to respond
immediately.
Council has just approved is the purchase of a mobile communications
van. The City is very fortunate to have such a vehicle. The City needs to
continue active cooperation with the cities in the region to develop
coordination with other agencies. Many discussions are taking place with
members of Congress who want to help to fund some of this necessary
safety equipment and services that are being identified as essential to
prepare the region for possible emergencies. There are limits to these
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
December 4,2001
Page 17
resources. Also communities should share resources and not duplicate
services and equipment when they can be shared. Cities are asked to be
actively engaged in sustained vigilance. It is important the cities remain
watchful and stay alert. It is important for citizens to report to police any
unusual circumstances they observe. There are things citizens and
employers can do to remain proactive. A list is available from the League
of Minnesota Cities for review and can be posted on the City's web site.
The City of Eden Prairie is taking this high alert status seriously and many
kudos are in order because of Police Chief Jim Clark and Molly
Koivumaki.
Butcher said she and Molly will be attending future sessions. It may be
reasonable to have an open house on how residents and business owners
can respond and can show the communications van, etc. to show how we
can make our homeland secure.
Case said it sounds like the Mayor and Councilmember Butcher were sent
with Council authorization to this high-level meeting and had asked for a
report on it. This report contains valuable information for the public. He
would have preferred that Jim Clark give it.
Mayor Harris said all Councilmembers attend meetings that are open to
the public, and which have importance to the City. Not everybody can go
to these meetings. She didn't believe any members of the Council should
be reticent about returning a report. She did not share Councilmember
Case's concern. The above two reports are high on the agenda of two
agencies and should be shared,whether by e-mail or some other way. The
process is not important, but rather it is the content that is important to the
Council.
Mosman said this specific type of topic would be of interest at a town hall
meeting. Rather than taking the time of the City Council, she suggested
having an open meeting where there could be a written report.
Butcher said she was hoping to have an open house so they can respond to
questions. About 350 people were at the meeting they attended.
Mosman suggested Councilmembers have guidelines on what they would
report on, how to summarize a report and how much time to take, what
would be most useful to the public and what other avenues they can use to
present the information.
Tyra-Lukens said the way the report was given, it sounded as if it was a
meeting for just five people. That should be clearer in the future.
CITY COUNCIL MFiTMS
December 4,2001
Page 18
B. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER
C. REPORT OF PARKS AND RECREATION SERVICES DIRECTOR
D. REPORT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND FINANCIAL
SERVICES DIRECTOR
1. Redesign of the City's Web Site
Uram reported on an E-Government initiative, which is redesigning of the
City's web site. It is a two-phased process. An interim web site will be
put up in the next two or three weeks. Behind this a new web site is being
designed that will involve the newest technology. It will be developed and
laid out internally so staffs requests can be met next. It will also be
presented to the Council. They hope to have the design done and in place
by the end of March.
E. REPORT OF PUBLIC WORKS SERVICES DIRECTOR
F. REPORT OF PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES DIRECTOR
G. REPORT OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR
H. REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY
XIV. OTHER BUSINESS
XV. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Case, to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried
5-0. Mayor Harris adjourned the meeting at 9:25 p.m.