Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 07/05/1988 APPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, JULY 5, 1988 7 : 30 PM CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7600 Executive Drive COUNCIL MEMBERS : Mayor Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson, George Bentley, Jean Harris, and Patricia Pidcock CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Carl J . Jullie, Assistant to the City Manager Craig Dawson, City Attorney Roger Pauly, Director of x Planning Chris Enger, Director of t Community Services Robert Lambert, Director of Public Works Eugene A. Dietz, and Recording Secretary Deb Edlund PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE �( ROLL CALL : All members present . �A I aepnoV,&G OF AG OF H1161,NE,g,S MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Pidcock to approve the Agenda as published and amended . Additions to the Agenda: Item X .A. l, discussion regarding the light on Mitchell Road and Highway 5. Item X.A. 2, discussion regarding the drought. Item X.A. 3, discussion regarding publicity for the 4th of July fireworks . Motion carried unanimously. s I I . MINUTES III . CONgENT CALENDAR d A. Clerk ' s License List B. RegOlution Ng:. 88-125, jp. Sunoort of Correcting the ftguireMent of.. Taxati.on of State ,and Local. Government Emplgyeg Bene f its C. GLENSHIRE by Associated Investments. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No . 24-88-PUD-6-88, Planned Unit Development District Review on 17 . 3 acres with waivers and Zoning City Council Minutes 2 July 5, 1988 District Change from Rural to R1-9 . 5 on 17 . 3 acres; Approval of Developer 's Agreement for Glenshire; and Adoption of Resolution No. 88-130, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance No. 24-88-PUD-6-88 and Ordering Publication of Said Summary. 30 . 6 acres into 56 lots, 2 outlots and road right-of-way for construction of a single family development . Location : Northeast corner of Valley View Road and Edenvale Boulevard . (Ordinance No . 24-88-PUD-6- 88, Rezoning; Resolution No . 88-130, Authorizing Summary Publication. D. Final Plat Porgya_l for maven - d 2nd Addition (mated north gf Wo landv of, Edenv!slev Resolution No . 88-131 E. Einal Plat &DpxoYaj for Barth Addition ( located at 16411 H111top Roads Resolution No . 88-132 F . EInal Plat Aaorove for G1eQabIXg ( jocattd east of adenyale Boulevard and north of Valley. View Road) Resolution No . 88-133 G. Digtrict tQ Conattruct a P,arking Lot at Prairie High School ) H. $ „ Public Hearing for Street Imoroye=ents-t4_ Hamilton { ggjd, I .C. 52-131 (Resolution No . 88-134 ) I . J . Changa 9rdea kyo . 3 for Wgkter Tren:tment Plant Ex2,40sign. I ,!,R 52-072A K . BLUFFS EAST 6TH by Hustad Development Company. 2nd Reading of Ordinance No . 23-88-PUD-5-'88, Planned Unit Development District Review on 45. 16 acres and Zoning District Change from Rural to RM-6 . 5 on 6 .94 acres; Approval of Developer 's Agreement for Bluff 's East 6th; and Adoption of Resolution No. 88-129, Authorizing Summary of Ordinance No. 23-88-PUD-5-88 and Ordering Publication of Said .Summary. 45 . 16 acres into 13 lots, 5 outlots, and ' road-of-way for construction of 26 townhome units. Location: South of Franlo Road extension, south of Normandy Crest . (Ordinance No. 23-88-PUD-5-88, PUD District and Rezoning; Resolution No. 88-129, Authorizing Summary & Publication) L. Riley La} � E!ark Acquisition 3 NOTION: Harris moved, seconded by Anderson to approve the Consent Calendar as published and amended. City Council Minutes 3 July 5, 1988 Bentley asked if in addition to approving the acquisition was the Council approving the expenditure of funds . Pauly replied that if an offer was made and accepted that this would bind the City and commit the expenditure of funds . MQ' ON: Bentley moved, seconded by Harris to amend the previous motion and remove Item L from the Consent Calendar and require a Roll Call vote . Motion carried unanimously. Pidcock requested an update on Item I regarding the metropolitan sewer for this parcel by the next Council meeting. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION : Bentley moved, seconded by Harris to approve the acquisition of the Riley Lake Park as recommended by Staff . Roll Call 3 Vote : Anderson, Bentley, Harris, Pidcock, Peterson voting Pt Aye t Bentley asked Dietz if residents were aware of the grading in regard to Item I . Dietz replied the residents were informed . IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS V. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS MOTION : Harris moved, seconded by Anderson to approve Payment of Claims No . 43354 to No. 43668 . Pidcock questioned No . 43414 to Gregg Nelson Travel. Dawson replied that there was a National Award given for the City video . Rogers Cable Company was paying for one staff person to attend . There were two staff personnel involved in the proiect and it was believed to be fair that both should attend. Roll Call Vote : Anderson, Bentley, Harris, Pidcock, Peterson all voting "Aye" . VI . OORQINANCES A RESOLUTIONS A. of Regreational Vehicles Harris thanked Pauly for preparing the documents for review; however, she was uncomfortable with the three. Harris believed that possibly they could be melded City Council Minutes 4 July 5, 1988 together . Harris stated that she would like more public input and that she was not prepared to vote on any of the ordinances at this time . Pidcock stated that she would like this to be reviewed by the Planning Commission . Pauly stated that this would be an Amendment of Chapter 11, the zoning chapter and would require a Public Hearing, Planning Commission review and a Public Hearing in front of the City Council . The most that could be done tonight was to indicate what the Council would like to see in an ordinance and to make recommendations to the Planning Commission. Anderson suggested sending the information before the Council tonight to the Planning Commission. This would give the Council feedback from the Planning Commission. 1 Bentley suggested taking a different approach. Bentley stated that if the City was going to put an ordinance in effect it should accomplish something, and if the ordinance were effective additional staff could be required to enforce it . Bentley further stated that the public could be significantly impacted by the ordinance . Bentley suggested the following : 1 ) Table the issue . 2) Have Staff prepare budget information. 3 ) Allow a six- month period for comments from the public as to how strict the ordinance should be. 4 ) Send it to the Planning Commission. Pidcock questioned why extra staff would be necessary, as the City currently had water meter readers and police which covered the City. Pidcock asked why these City employees could not also handle this .. Bentley replied that it would require someone trained in proper zoning techniques for each subdivision and would require additional training. Pidcock stated that the neighborhoods would be monitoring this and filing complaints with the City Staff . Peterson stated the police vould not be the enforcers of the ordinance; it would come from City Hall Staff . Anderson stated that this issue started with a complaint and the City did not have the ability to respond . The City had grown rapidly and with the increase in population more laws are required to protect citizens rights . i Bentley stated that because funds were budgeted it does not mean that the money had to be spent . Bentley further d commented that the City had not been overwhelmed with complaints and in protecting one individual 's rights the Council must make sure it was not taking another individual 's rights away. City Council Minutes 5 July 5, 1988 Anderson stated that he was comparing Eden Prairie to the surrounding communities which all had ordinances that were stricter than Eden Prairie ' s . Anderson believed that the Council should be able to give the residents who had complained some results in a reasonable amount of time . . Pidcock stated that she had received many complaints and believed that there was a need to look at this issue . Pidcock believed that by forwarding the proposals to the Planning Commission the Council could get a better perception about how the public felt . Harris questioned what would be forwarded to the Planning Commission at this time - all three documents or a generic format . Peterson replied that he believed it would be the one that got the majority of Council support or a combination of the three that got the majority of support . Anderson stated that he believed that direction had been given to the City Attorney and that the Council should be ready to make some decisions . Anderson believed the Council was not being effective on this issue . Bentley believed that the Council was trying to adopt an 6 effective ordinance and that the ordinance should not be t based on an isolated case . Bentley did not believe that the public was aware of the significance of the type of ordinance that the Council was considering. Anderson believed that ample information had been in the paper, it had been discussed at length by the Council, and further that the issue was being pushed aside . Bentley replied that this was not the intent . Peterson stated that this was the kind of ordinance that potentially effects everyone 's perception of their own property rights . People 's perceptions vary from an absolute right to the recognition that people living in a civilized society have rights and obligations to their neighbors . Peterson further stated that he agreed that if the Council was going to pass an ordinance it should be meaningful, address the problems and be aware that there would be a cost factor . Zoning Administrator Jean Johnson stated that if there was effective publicity there would be approximately a 40% increase in reports of all zoning violations in the city. Peterson stated that the ordinance should protect against excesses. Peterson commented that he wished there was a way to get more public input . 9 City Council Minutes 6 July 5, 1988 Harris believed that as it was now the Council would be placing the Planning Commission in the same dilemma . Harris believed that the Council needed to send the Planning Commission something that the Council felt reasonably comfortable with . Anderson believed that the Council could give the Planning Commission what was presented tonight or what the Council originally started with and request a recommendation. Peterson was concerned about forwarding all this Information without a stated preference or model from the Council, and if by doing so whether this would allow the Planning Commission to enter into the formal Public Hearing process. Bentley was concerned that no absolute height restriction was stated and that there was no prohibition regarding height . Bentley believed that the Council should send something specific to the Planning Commission and suggested having Pauly make another attempt at drafting an ordinance based on the concerns stated tonight . Peterson asked Pauly what effect possible grandfathering would have on any ordinance that the Council would pass . Pauly replied that the proposal tonight would be part of the limitations on use on the zoning portion of the code . When a zoning provision was tightened the uses that were Inconsistent with the revised zoning may continue under the nonconforming use provision of the code and constitutional law. Peterson said that any ordinance passed by the Council would not directly effect the property use of any existing F situations . Pauly replied that this was correct . Bentley stated that the Council could go through the k process, but did not believe it would have any significant r impact . Harris believed that it would be appropriate to have an ordinance . Harris agreed that a period for more public input prior to imposing this ordinance was necessary. Bentley suggested requesting the City attorney to assemble a final draft for Council review and then determine where it should go. Peterson questioned exactly what the public interest was in this matter and commented that he did not believe this to be a health and safety issue and nor a significant issue to the majority of residents of the City. Peterson asked if there was another way to determine the interest . City Council Minutes 7 July 5, 1988 MOTION : Bentley moved, seconded by Harris to direct City Attorney Pauly to take our statements and prepare a final draft for review at the next Council meeting . Anderson asked Pauly if the Council had given him the proper direction. Pauly replied that he did understand the direction the Council desired . Bentley suggested that the Ordinance be combined from p . 1459 subsections B, C S D adding section C & D from. F. Peterson asked Pauly to consider the language in, 1459 subsection B referring to a truck with a topper . Peterson stated that he would be voting against the motion at this time . Peterson did not believe that the Council was close to something workable and would like the option when a more workable ordinance or an ordinance with modifications was presented. He stated he may vote in favor of an ordinance subsequently if he would receive clear indication from significant numbers of residents that they really do want and need such an ordinance and reserves the right to vote in favor of an ordinance at a later time. d Bentley stated that the motion was to refer this back to the City Attorney. Peterson understood this but wanted to make clear his deep-seated reservations that a workable ordinance was possible and that reflects the values of the majority of the residents of Eden Prairie . Peterson wished to reserve the right to change his mind . Motion carried 4-1 with Peterson voting "No" . VII . PETITIONS, BEQUEaTS & COMMUNICATIONS A. GivingAMendment Allowing Motion Signg Other ge y1ce Information � Dawson reported that The Hank Eden Prairie was requesting a Sign Code Amendment to allow approximately 35% of sign time to carry business advertising. This amendment would apply to all moving illuminated signs in the City. The Bank. Eden Prairie had requested a variance for its specific sign last year; this request was denied by the Board of Appeals and Adjustments . Jack Lawrance of sign Crafters stated that the bank had received positive response to the -sign . The proposal would be to -advertise The Bank 's features products and services . Lawrance said there would not be flashing • a City Council Minutes 8 July 5, 1988 AV Tights, the sign would scroll . Currently the sign runs 100% public service . Lawrance estimated 11 business messages per hour with the remainder public service . Bentley stated that he was not aware that the City had restrictions that prohibited business uses . Bentley believed that the Council should be looking at the ordinance that would put controls on how signs would be done in the future. Bentley did not see a problem with The Bank ' s request. Anderson stated that this sign was originally requested with a specific purpose in mind when it was installed . Anderson was concerned about allowing an exception for The Bank because this would require the Council to allow this type of advertising on all similar type signs; this was not a direction that Anderson would like to see the City take . Bentley asked how many signs of this type are there currently. Jean Johnson replied promotional signs were at The Bank and TCF, and a time and temperature sign was at the Minnesota Protective Life building . Johnson reported that requests had been made by Burger King and SuperAmerica for promotional signs . a Pidcock believed that the sign was good advertising as it was and should create goodwill for The Bank. Lawrance commented that the electronic message centers start at approximately $21, 000 . The Bank was happy to run the civic messages, but would like now to progress to some business messages . Harris shared Anderson's concern about the precedent being set . Harris believed The Bank to be a goad neighbor . Harris asked if there was anything to document that such advertising would increase bank business . Lawrance replied that this was a proven factor . Harris stated that she was not comfortable passing the request tonight, but did support review of the ordinance . Peterson stated that the City does have a carefully crafted sign ordinance that relates to building size . This request opens up a new category. Peterson commented that this was a new form of advertising medium and believed that the City had an obligation to look at this and decide how to permit and manage this type of advertising media . Peterson also did not favor taking action on the request tonight, but to review the ordinance . City Council Minutes 9 July 5, 1988 Bentley stated that the request was only for approximately 20% of the time to be for business advertising . Public service was desirable, but he did not believe the Council should be in a position to mandate that businesses have to provide only public service and refuse to allow advertising on a legitimate medium. Peterson questioned if this were a legitimate medium according to the current sign codes of Eden Prairie . Harris stated that because the ordinance stated one standard, she was not willing at this time to move from that ordinance until the Council had had time to look at it and decide if the ordinance should be upheld or that it should be changed because the times had changed . Harris commented that she was not adverse to advertisement in good taste . Bob Wise, President of The Bank Eden Prairie stated that the bank was a good corporate citizen. Wise said that after hearing the Council ' s comments tonight that he wished to withdraw the request and participate in a review of the ordinance if The Bank could be of assistance . The Bank respectfully requested that the Council look at the current ordinance and would resubmit its request at a later time . Peterson acknowledged the withdrawal of the request . Dawson stated that the Staff had recommended changes in the code regardless of this item and suggested that the f. Planning Commission look at the signage issue. NQTi oil Anderson moved and Harris seconded that no action be taken upon the request as it had been withdrawn . Motion carried unanimously. i MOTI ON: Harris moved, seconded by Pidcock to request the Planning Commission to review the ordinance and have Staff work with The Bank to address its concerns . Bentley asked if the Council was going to offer any suggestions as to what the Council would like to see in the ordinance . Pidcock stated that she was not opposed to business advertising . The Bank was a service industry as was most industry in this country today. Pidcock believed it was appropriate -that the Council look at the ordinance in light of what had transpired . City Council Minutes 10 July 5, 1988 Bentley suggested that the ordinance state the size of the sign in ratio to the size of the building, have a restriction on the amount of time allowed for pure advertising. Peterson suggested consistency of color of the lighting to the rest of the signage on the building and the sign itself . Motion carried unanimously. I X .APPOINTMENTS X. REPORTS OF QFEICERS, BOARDS & COMMISSION$ A. i is of Coungl:�[t embers 1 . Discussion of the traffic signal on Mitchell Road and Highway 5. Pidcock stated that there was a backup of traffic in the mornings and nights to make a left turn to Mitchell Road from Highway 5 . Only seven cars could get through per signal . Dietz stated that he would talk to HrDOT, but not to D expect any results . At the time of completion the road would have two lanes on each side . d Peterson asked Dietz to also review the sequence of signals at Highway 169 and Anderson Lake Parkway to see what could be improved . Dietz stated that a split-phase light was present there . Peterson said that another lane would help . Dietz replied that these things would take place with Highway 169 improvements which were intended for 1986, but were not scheduled for karch 1989 . 2. Discussion on the drought . Anderson commented that a fire had broken out today from children playing with fireworks . Everything was tinder dry because of the drought. Anderson believed that the Council needed to take whatever action necessary to alert residents to the severity of the situation . Anderson suggested all City Staff take any preventive measures possible . Peterson suggested asking the news media to help get the message out . Lambert stated that the Staff was .. struggling just to try to save the new trees . Lambert said that he took seriously Anderson 's comments, but the best he could hope City Council Minutes 11 July 5, 1988 was that the residents used common sense as there was Just too much area to cover . Anderson commented that the young trees were being stressed and believed that residents needed to be informed that the grass would grow back, but the trees would not . Peterson suggested asking the City Forester to write an article for the newspaper about effective tree watering. Lambert replied that this was a good idea and believed it would be well received . Bentley stated that the developers also needed to be informed that plantings required by the City for screening, etc . would be inspected next spring . These requirements for screening could not be ignored because of the drought this summer . Bentley believed the developers should be informed now to avoid the pcssibility of a larger loss . 3. Discussion of advertising for 4th of July fireworks . Pidcock asked Lambert if it were an oversight or was it not deemed necessary to have the 4th of July fireworks advertised in the Stax and Tribune with all the other communities . Lambert replied that this was an oversight, this should have been on WCCO or in the Star and Tribune . Harris complimented Lambert and the Parks and Recreation staff on the fireworks display. Peterson suggested that Staff add a thank you from the City Council to contributors . Doug Tenpas, suggested more satellites be available next year . } t B. Report of City Manager i 1 . Sot Date for hid-Year Strategic E!lanning ae&sLon MOT t ON: Pidcock moved, seconded by Peterson to set July 300 1988 from 10 AM to 2 PM for the Strategic Planning Session. Motion carried unanimously. C. Report of CLy Attorney 1 . Campaign ReportInc Pauly reviewed the statutory changes regarding candidate campaign reporting . Pauly stated .that as of July 1, 1988 there was both a state law and a city ordinance regulating candidate campaign reporting and that there were City Council Minutes 12 July 5, 1988 differences and duplications between the two laws . Pauly suggested that with the existence of the State Law the City ordinance could be repealed . Peterson asked Pauly regarding Section 3 [ 211A . 031 Final Report, if a candidate of committee had in excess of $100 after the campaign and wished to save and use it in the futures, when would the final report be filed . Pauly replied that the final report would not be necessary under those circumstances . Peterson said then that every January 31st there would be a filing report . Peterson asked Pauly where did it state filing 10 days after the election, as Article 2 did not state this . Pauly replied that he had misquoted this and it should be 10 days before the primary and general election and every January 31st . Bentley asked Pauly about the $500 limit, because according to figures it was a $750 limit . Pauly replied that the $750 was the trigger to require filing and the $500 limit only refers to naming donors or contributors . Peterson asked Pauly about Section 7 [ 211A.071 Bills When Rendered and Paid, regarding the purpose of the statement " A bill , charge, or claim that was not presented within 60 days after the material or service was provided must not be paid" . Pauly replied that the intent was to have candidates avoid large amounts of indebtedness . Peterson asked Pauly regarding Section 1 I211B.011 Definitions, subdivision 4 . Committee, if a subcommittee of a committee consisting of two or more people does this constitute a committee . Pauly replied that a committee would include all members whether acting as a subcommittee or a portion of a committee . Peterson asked Pauly what was meant by Article 3, ti Subdivision 10, Meeting Facilities . Pauly replied that a a corporation could make its facilities available to all political parties or candidates, but could not make it available to just one party or one candidate . Peterson asked Pauly what was meant by Article 30 Section 20, Subdivision 1, Prohibition, workers accompanied by the candidate . Pauly replied that the implication was that campaign workers would have to be accompanied by the candidate to gain access to the buildings . Bentley asked Pauly if it was his opinion that the Council should drop the ordinance, otherwise a candidate would have to operate under both sets of rules . Bentley stated that the only difference was the dollar figure requirement for filing. City Council Minutes 13 July 5, 1988 Harris asked if there was any benefit to maintain the City ordinance because the State law would take precedence anyway. MOTION : Harris moved, seconded by Bentley to repeal Ordinance 53- 87 . Pauly stated that the proper form would be to prepare an ordinance to repeal the current ordinance . Motion carried unanimously. D . Ltepor of Director of Planjaina E . Reoort of Director of Parks Rec eat on & Natural ResourCr.& 1 . meter dated June 9 . 1288 from Donazager concerning High. dater Levels in Puraa o y Creelk Elood2lain Stor Area MOTION: Bentley moved, seconded by Harris to approve Staff recommended plan of action. y Peterson asked Lambert about the conflicting statements of Item 1, having the Judicial ditch abandoned and Item 3 .b, 4 the City complete the dredging of the judicial ditch. Lambert replied that Dietz would attend the Watershed District meeting tomorrow night and it would be discussed which was the easiest way. one process requires more action. It was hoped that approval would be granted to remove everything that came into the ditch in 1985. Dietz reported that this item was on the Watershed District 's agenda . This issue may require a public hearing. The timing would be determined tomorrow night. Peterson asked Dietz to keep the Council informed. Peterson asked Lambert what was meant by the statement regarding lowering the flood elevation from 824 to the 823 contour and later stating that the City could also maintain a higher water level in the floodplain. Lambert replied that it was the height of the dike that controls the water level and the overflow could be stored in one of two locations . Anderson was concerned about what was the beat elevation to be maintained for the City. Was it an advantage to have the land filled in? Lambert replied that this memo City Council Minutes 14 July S, 1988 suggests that these questions be answered before any action was taken. Lambert commented that Ducks Unlimited was looking for an area and might accept this as a project and may pay for a portion of the project . Lambert said again that there were a number of questions to be answered . Motion carried unanimously. F . Resort of Director gf Public Works 1 . Status Report on Water Restrictions Dietz reported that City Attorney Pauly had drafted an ordinance . Dietz said there were two possible alternatives to enforcement of the water ban: 1 ) To issue a ticket, which Staff believed would be difficult . 2 ) Impose a penalty on water bills for a second violation of the restrictions . r Dietz commented that St . Louis Park had a $10 surcharge f while Plymouth had a $100 surcharge . The question was how much of a penalty would the Council like to see imposed . Pidcock asked Dietz about the $100 fine already stated on warning tags being issued by Eden Prairie. Dietz replied yes, but it would not allow the surcharge to be placed on the water bill as this ordinance was proposing. Under the current ordinance, the violation was considered a misdemeanor and $100 was the maximum fine for a petty misdemeanor . Pauly replied that judges determine the actual fine with $100 being the maximum. Dietz replied that even though it states $100 on the tag the actual amount would probably be around $20 to $25. Harris stated that she would not have any difficulty attaching a penalty to the water bill, but believed that $10 would not get the message across and that $100 would get attention, but Harris did not wish to go this extreme . Harris suggested the penalty be between $10 and $1000 probably 025 to $30 . Bentley stated that since the draft ordinance had a reference to section 8 stating the fee could be amended from time to time, the Council would not specify a fee in the ordinance but rather do so in a fee resolution. Peterson stated that the enforcement of the ban needed to be equitable and believed that to do so a significant fine needed to be imposed . Peterson also believed this would let residents know that this was not a aesthetic or cosmetic exercise that the Council goes through in dry summers, but that this was a health and safety issue . City Council Minutes 15 July 5, 1988 Anderson stated that $25 to a corporation was nothing . Bentley questioned if a Public Hearing process was necessary. Pauly replied no, that this was not a Chapter 11 amendment and the Council could act on the 1st Reading tonight. Dietz stated that the draft provides for a fine and continues to state that if violations continue the water could be shut off . Dietz agreed that the same rates could not apply to homeowners and corporations, but there were levels of things which could be done. Dietz believed that in the majority of cases compliance would be met. Peterson recommended a rate of $50 . Pauly suggested imposing the fine for 3-4 months . Dietz suggested 6 months because the watering season could run from April to September . MQT I ON. Bentley moved, Seconded by Harris to approve 1st Reading of Ordinance No. 27-88 and that the period after a warning in which a violation occurred would result in a surcharge be 6 months. Pidcock stated that she found this difficult to support because Eden Prairie was one of the highest-taxed cities in the State . The City had paid for the best watering plant and she was frustrated that the Council had to impose restrictions because of the drought . Pidcock believed this was hurting people by not allowing them to k water when they were paying taxes for this . Bentley stated that this ordinance would possibly be less restrictive than the existing system. Peterson stated that none of the Council was pleased to have to impose this surcharge. Dietz commented that none of the water systems was supported by taxes, the system was user-supported . Motion carried . MOTION : Bentley moved, seconded by Anderson to direct Staff to prepare an amendment to the existing fee resolution imposing a surcharge for water service of $25 Motion carried unanimously. I City Council Minutes 16 July 5, 1988 G. Report of Finance Director XI . NEW BUSINESS XII . migu NMENT Meeting adjourned at 10: 05 PM. a i �1 t