Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 10/21/2014 APPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY, OCTOBER 21, 2014 7:00 PM, CITY CENTER Council Chamber 8080 Mitchell Road CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Council Members Brad Aho, Sherry Butcher Wickstrom, Ron Case, and Kathy Nelson CITY STAFF: City Manager Rick Getschow, Public Works Director Robert Ellis, Community Development Director Janet Jeremiah, Parks and Recreation Director Jay Lotthammer, City Attorney Ric Rosow, and Council Recorder Jan Curielli I. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER Mayor Tyra-Lukens called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. OPEN PODIUM INVITATION IV. PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS A. JAN CALLISON—HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMISSIONER Hennepin County Commissioner Jan Callison provided handouts and gave an update on the current status of Hennepin County. She noted there is a proposed 2.75%increase in the County's portion of the property tax this year, partly due to the renegotiating of contracts and an increase in staffing levels in certain areas. She reviewed the new initiatives planned for the coming year. V. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS Getschow added Item VIII.L. Case added Item XIV.A.1 and 2. MOTION: Butcher Wickstrom moved, seconded by Case, to approve the agenda as amended. Motion carried 5-0. VI. MINUTES A. COUNCIL WORKSHOP HELD TUESDAY, OCTOBER 7, 2014 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 21, 2014 Page 2 MOTION: Butcher Wickstrom moved, seconded by Aho, to approve the minutes of the Council workshop held Tuesday, October 7, 2014, as published. Motion carried 5-0. B. CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY, OCTOBER 7, 2014 MOTION: Nelson moved, seconded by Case, to approve the minutes of the City Council meeting held Tuesday, October 7, 2014, as published. Motion carried 5- 0. VII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS & COMMISSIONS VIII. CONSENT CALENDAR A. CLERK'S LICENSE LIST B. MACP by Margaret A. Cargill Philanthropies. Second Reading of the Ordinance for Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 5.04 acres; Zoning District Amendment within the Office Zoning District on 5.04 acres and Site Plan Review on 5.04 acres. Location: 6889 Rowland Road (Ordinance No. 21-2014-PUD-2-2014 for PUD District Review with waivers and Zoning District Amendment; Resolution No. 2014-100 for Site Plan) C. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2014-101 AMENDING TELECOMMUNICATION LICENSE AGREEMENT BETWEEN T- MOBILE AND CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE AT THE DELL ROAD WATER TANK D. APPROVE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH BLUESTEM HERITAGE GROUP FOR PRODUCTION OF INTERPRETIVE SIGNS AND KIOSK E. APPROVE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH WHITE BUFFALO INC. FOR DEER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM F. APPROVE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH HTPO FOR DESIGN PHASE SERVICES FOR CEDAR HILLS PARK G. APPROVE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT AND BUSINESS ASSOCIATE AGREEMENT WITH ARTHUR J. GALLAGHER & CO. FOR EMPLOYEE BENEFIT CONSULTING SERVICES H. APPROVE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH CLIFTONLARSONALLEN FOR AUDITING SERVICES FOR 2014 - 2016 I. APPROVE PURCHASE OF "MICROSOFT SOL SERVER" LICENSES THROUGH STATE OF MINNESOTA AGREEMENT 01E61724 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 21, 2014 Page 3 J. DECLARE OBSOLETE COMPUTER EQUIPMENT AS SURPLUS AND AUTHORIZE DISPOSAL K. DECLARE USED VEHICLES AS SURPLUS AND AUTHORIZE DISPOSAL L. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2014-104 SUPPORTING ARCSERVE'S APPLICATION FOR JOB CREATION FUND MOTION: Nelson moved, seconded by Case, to approve Items A-L of the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 5-0. IX. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS A. 2014 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS (RESOLUTION NO. 2014-102) Getschow said each year the City Council holds a public hearing to consider levying the special assessments that have been identified over the previous 12 months. This year the Council will address a list of projects and supplemental assessments for such things as trunk utility assessments and contracted removal assessments. Staff recommends Council approve the list of assessments. He noted the assessments will be sent to the county for levy at the end of November. Official notice of this public hearing was published in the October 2, 2014, Eden Prairie News and sent to 24 property owners. David Zoll, an attorney representing Pat and Wendy Gallagher, distributed copies of a letter from the Gallagher's with written objections to the special assessment. He noted the proposed special assessment against the Gallagher's property is not a typical special assessment. The underlying project was undertaken to stabilize the hillside in order to stop a decade-long failure of the slope. He said the Gallagher's now have a $225,000 assessment for the correction of a slope failure that began on City property. Pat Gallagher, 11157 Bluestem Lane,reviewed the history of the house. He said he bought the house in 1999. At that time there was a small bit of erosion around the creek which increased over the years but remained on City property. By 2005 the erosion had gone up the hill dramatically. A City engineer came out at that time to inspect the erosion and take pictures. In 2008 an entire stand of trees collapsed, and the erosion continued up the slope to his property. In 2009-2010 Braun Engineering came in and gave several options to repair the damage. They continued to work with City staff,but in 2012 the whole hill collapsed, all of the trees slid down to Purgatory Creek, and a sink hole developed next to his house. He said he wants to work with the City to do what is fair. Tyra-Lukens asked what Mr. Gallagher wants the Council to do about the assessment. Mr. Gallagher said he would like to have Council Members come out to the house to look at the damage to the property and treat them fairly and equitably. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 21, 2014 Page 4 Case asked about the report done in 2012. Mr. Gallagher said the finding was that there was no water coming down. They were looking to see if the sewers were leaking. He noted the house has been there since 1906 with nothing done to it until all the construction began around it. The topography of the area around the house is now much different from the original property. Aho asked if the cause of the erosion was ever determined. Mr. Gallagher said the engineering studies were looking at how to stop it more than what started it. There was erosion of the bank. The efforts to stabilize it included dropping over 2000 tons of rock in the backyard. The creek makes a right turn and that is what undercuts the property. Aho asked if there was a determination of what would fix the issue. Mr. Gallagher said it has been fully remedied. Tyra-Lukens asked if this was erosion that started from City property and moved up or if there were two different erosion sites. Ellis displayed a cross section of the property from the Braun Intertec report that showed the slope failure area. The Braun report said the cause of the slope failure was groundwater that could not penetrate the granite till layer causing the soils to saturate. He said the City hired Wenck Associates to review the Braun report, to do a site inspection and to make recommendations. Wenck Associates agreed with most of the Braun report. A number of trees removed from the property may have been a contributing factor. They looked at the creek to see if there was scour or erosion along the creek bed and found none. They agreed with the solution to stabilize the slope as recommended by Braun. Tyra-Lukens asked if there were two sites of erosion. Ellis said the Wenck report said there was no erosion by the creek, and that the erosion was entirely caused by groundwater being forced out of the hillside under the Gallagher property. Tyra-Lukens noted the glacial till layer has been there for thousands of years. While there have been some weather-related issues, she asked what could have changed to cause this erosion and if some other properties drain into this area. Ellis said the roof drains may have caused the failure. Mr. Gallagher said the roof drains had two underground egresses down the hill. There was a major erosion at the bottom of the hill along the creek so the erosion started on City property. Ellis said there was a retaining wall installed to create a backyard for the property. Groundwater coming out of the side of the hill is common in the riverside areas and can change with environmental factors. Nelson asked if the trees that came down on the bluff were on City property. Ellis said they ended up on City property but were close to the property line originally. Nelson asked what expectations came out of the meeting with the Gallagher's in 2012 as to who was going to help put the slope back together. Ellis said Braun Intertec had just finished their report, and at that point the slope failure wasn't as severe as it became in 2013. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 21, 2014 Page 5 Rosow said Gene Dietz, the previous Director of Public Works, and the Gallagher's reached an agreement to fund the study done by Braun Intertec. The City became more and more concerned about the stability of the slope and the danger it posed to the property and to the Gallagher's. They decided to go ahead with the solution and to determine the cause at a later date. Both the Braun and Wenck reports indicated it was a responsibility of the property owners. The City had the resources and could hire a contractor to go in and do the work and then special assess the costs for the work in order to save the property. The City went through a process to declare a hazardous condition. The Gallagher's gave consent for the City to come onto their property and work with them to solve the problem. The fix to the property was agreed upon and was executed. The City waited until now before bringing it to the Council to be sure the project was complete and all the costs known. City staff believe this was not a condition that was caused by City action or inaction, was not caused by failure of the City storm sewer and was not caused by development of surrounding areas. He said last week the Gallagher's attorney said they wanted to adjourn the hearing to a later date in order to bring testimony to the Council. That process would not be an advantage to either party because the court would conduct a brand new trial. The challenge to the special assessment will be to determine who was responsible for the work. He said we informed Mr. Zoll earlier today we did not intend to adjourn the hearing to a later date. Case asked if staff has walked down to the creek and witnessed there is no erosion. Ellis said he oversaw the construction and staff performed two inspections this summer. The solution appears to have worked. Case asked if we have the pictures from 2005 of the City-owned property near the creek that would show there is no erosion. Ellis said there was no indication of anything down there that was causing the erosion up the hill. Case said he had trouble understanding that there is no relation to erosion down at the creek. We know the creek is eating into slopes in other areas so it seemed highly coincidental we are now having this erosion. He felt we are responsible to help fix it,but paying for it may or may not be a portion of our responsibility. Ellis said there was no erosion down at the creek. The City has reinforced the slope down to the creek. Whenever he was on the site,he could watch the water coming out of the side of the hill. As the water saturated the soil, it would slough off and the bluff could not handle it. Mr. Gallagher said the hill was very gradual. The house is now on an artificial ridge where the road was constructed. The prairie land was much flatter and more gradual up the hill. The trees went all the way to the creek bed. Butcher Wickstrom asked if it was clear to the Gallagher's what the scope of the project would be when the solution was agreed upon. Mr. Gallagher said they received some initial financials, and it was always around $100,000. Nelson said she was not clear about the assumption that the Gallagher's would assume all the costs. She asked if the houses around the property are on the same CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 21, 2014 Page 6 bed of rock. Ellis said they would need to do a geo-technical exploration to determine that. There are a lot of sandy soils there that don't have the glacial till area. Nelson asked if there was anything new that happened to the property in recent years. Mr. Gallagher said the Brown family sold the property to a developer in 1987. The developer built very large houses on either side of his house. The street itself was dug out, and the houses are on an artificial ridge. Bennett Place was paved and was shaped in at a steeper incline. Nelson asked when the problems started. Mr. Gallagher said in 1998 there was minor erosion near the creek bed. It was 2005 when the trees started going down. Nelson said she was a little unclear about the whole situation. It may be good to postpone this piece of the assessment for a little more background information. Butcher Wickstrom said none of the Council Members are experts about this, so she didn't feel confident dividing responsibility. She said it is interesting there were two companies that seemed to corroborate the same conclusion. Clearly there has been some kind of a progression, and there appears to have been a couple of episodes on the site. Rosow said in May of 2013 staff presented to the City Council a resolution ordering the repair and removal of the hazardous condition. The resolution was filed with the court. Mr. Zoll filed an answer in which they consented to the City coming onto the property but maintained the condition was not caused by them. The conditions of the slope were identified in the report and they reserved their right to object to the assessment. It is not typical for the City to come in and make repairs of this type when we have two reports that say it was not caused by actions of the City. The City wanted to be responsible and responsive to the residents so it was more expedient for the City to go in and do the fix. The ultimate repair may have been more expensive but it was what was necessary. Tyra-Lukens asked if all the repair work has been done on the Gallagher property. Ellis said it has been done all the way down to the creek bed. Aho said he didn't believe that the erosion from the base of the slope went up, so he agreed with the engineering report on the cause. What he did not understand is why there was a change now when the house had been stable for a number of years. He asked if anything in the report addressed whether any development of the surrounding property could cause more water to infiltrate and cause the failure of the slope. Ellis said there is nothing that addresses that. He did not know that anyone would come to a conclusion that any development in the area would cause an increase in the groundwater. Case asked if any of the work was done on City property. Ellis said the City had to re-establish the slope on City property. Case asked if any of that work would help the neighbors at some point. Ellis said it would stabilize the bank on the city's side of the creek. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 21, 2014 Page 7 Aho asked if the cost of this project includes the City portion. Ellis said the assessment is for 100% of the total construction cost and engineering. Case said he did not feel competent to say that the two firms were wrong in their determination, but he did wonder if they looked at other factors. He would feel comfortable to send this back to staff to see if there could be any cost sharing for this. Nelson said she agreed this piece should come back with more information about the overall cost on the City's land portion. She agreed it was appropriate to put this off. Getschow said there is one more City Council meeting on November 18 to take action. We could also assess at any time after that, but it would not appear until the 2016 tax statement. Tyra-Lukens suggested a postponement doesn't get us anywhere. She would still not feel comfortable with an allocation of percentages because that needs to be determined by experts in the field. She wanted to be very careful about setting precedent and did not want to come to a decision that is arbitrary and not based on fact. Ellis said this started out as a small problem that would have been more affordable to fix. There was a long discussion about who was going to do the repairs so this could have been solved for a much smaller dollar amount if done earlier. While he did not believe his position would change, staff could look at the unit bid prices and estimate how it could be split along property lines. Rosow said if there was concern about precedent, there would be more flexibility if it were to be resolved inside a litigation. We have time between tonight's meeting and whenever they would have to file their appeal to engage in the kind of discussions suggested. There is more flexibility and reason inside litigation to arrive at settlements. He suggested we could also make a specific request for mediation and dispute resolution. We could levy the assessment, and, if we arrive at a solution that would be less than 100% of the costs, the City would be allowed to change it. Butcher Wickstrom said she would support doing that. That would be a better forum and a better conclusion than something that was arbitrarily placed. Mr. Zoll said at the time of the reports both Braun and Wenck weren't asked the question of causation. They identified the existing risk to the property and possible solutions. It did not make sense for the Gallagher's to determine what caused this. He noted page 13 of the Braun report stated that scouring of the slope from the creek could have also contributed to the erosion underneath the slope. The profile of the slope showed the creek with the slope going up to the house. The photo of the corrective action shows new rock placed at the base of the hill to prevent the creek from further eroding. He said they received estimates of the project from the City, CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 21, 2014 Page 8 one for$95,000 and one for$144,000. He disagreed with the City Attorney about proceeding to litigation and believed the role of the City Council is to decide whether the entire cost should be assessed to the Gallagher's or if the City should pay for a portion of the cost. The City's restoring of the bank prevented further erosion of the creek so that is a benefit to the community and to the neighbors. He asked the City Council to adjourn the hearing for this assessment and gather more information, but there is no need to go to the court for resolution. The Gallagher's are willing to meet any time to negotiate with the Council, the City Attorney or staff. Tyra-Lukens said Mr. Zoll's comments underscore how complex this issue is. It is difficult for the City Council to decide to bear some of the costs because any money the City puts in has to come from the other taxpayers in the City. She takes that responsibility very seriously and wants as much information and discussion as possible. Aho said going to court is a fair way to resolve issues but it does add a lot of cost to the process. They have indicated they would be open to having discussions with City staff and working on a resolution. He suggested we have a first round of meeting with the Gallagher's and City staff to see if we could come up with a mutually agreeable solution. If it is not resolved by November 18, we could make the assessment and then go on to the court system. He would like to give them an opportunity for dialogue and mediation with the City before going to the court system. Tyra-Lukens asked how long the Gallagher's have known the amount of the assessment. Ellis replied it would have been when the assessments were mailed out, so it is fairly recent. Case said he liked Council Member Aho's idea as a compromise that allows both sides to be heard and gives one more opportunity for conversation. Nelson said she also liked Council Member Aho's suggestion. She also would like a policy discussion about when the City would go in to do this kind of thing on a property. Getschow said it is very rare and this was taken by resolution of the Council. This project happened to be very expensive. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher Wickstrom, to close the public hearing for the approval of the 2014 Special Assessments. Motion carried 5-0. Case said he would like the first item regarding the United Health Services assessment to be pulled for separate action. MOTION: Aho moved, seconded by Nelson, to adopt Part 1 of Resolution No. 2014-12 approving the special assessment for United Healthcare Services, Inc. Motion carried 4-0-1, with Case abstaining. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 21, 2014 Page 9 MOTION: Aho moved, seconded by Butcher Wickstrom, to adopt Part 2 of Resolution No. 2014-12 approving the remainder of the special assessments presented in the fall of 2014 with the exception of the assessment for the Gallagher property, and to direct that the assessment to the Gallagher property come back to the Council on November 18 for further review and consideration. Motion carried 5-0. B. SOUTHWEST TRANSIT BUS GARAGE ADDITION 2 by LSA Design Inc. for Southwest Transit. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review Amendment on 10.1 acres; Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 10.1 acres; Zoning District Amendment within the I-2 Zoning District on 10.1 acres and Site Plan Review on 10.1 acres. Location: 14405 62nd Street West (Resolution No. 2014-103 for PUD Concept Review; Ordinance for PUD District Review with waivers and Zoning District Amendment within the I-2 Zoning District) Getschow said the proposal is to construct an addition of 375 square feet to the existing building and to add an 1,800 square foot fuel canopy over existing fuel pumps. As a part of the request, the proponent is seeking two waivers to City Code requirements. The first is a waiver to the front yard setback from 50 feet to 21 feet for the fuel canopy. The fuel pump location is an existing condition. The proposed canopy is necessary to help prevent rainfall from falling directly onto the fuel pad and is recommended by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). The second waiver request is to allow an increase in the shoreland impervious surface percentage. The property is in a shoreland area since it is located within 300 feet of Nine Mile Creek. The addition to the building increases the impervious surface percentage from 42.2% to 42.3%. The shoreland code requirement has a 30% impervious surface limitation. The waiver was granted because the building existed prior to the adoption of the shoreland code, a majority of the site is located outside of the 300 foot shoreland area, and a stormwater pond was constructed as mitigation. The Planning Commission voted 8-0 to recommend approval of the project at the September 22, 2014 meeting. Nelson asked if the pond they put on the property is adequate to take the additional runoff from the addition. Joanne Olson, LSA Design, said the pond has the capacity for the addition. There were no comments from the audience. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher Wickstrom, to close the public hearing; to adopt Resolution No. 2014-103 for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 10.1 acres; to approve 1st reading of the ordinance for Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers, and Zoning District Amendment within the I-2 Zoning District on 10.1 acres; and to direct staff to prepare a Development Agreement incorporating staff and commission recommendations and Council conditions. Motion carried 5-0. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 21, 2014 Page 10 X. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Nelson, to approve the payment of claims as submitted. Motion was approved on a roll call vote, with Aho, Butcher Wickstrom, Case, Nelson, and Tyra-Lukens voting "aye." XI. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS XII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS XIII. APPOINTMENTS XIV. REPORTS A. REPORTS OF COUNCIL MEMBERS 1. Implication of Vacant Homes--Council Member Case Case said he had questions regarding the larger implication of vacant homes in the City. He asked for a report back from staff that would address the following questions: 1) Do we have a mechanism in place that would flag these properties,bring them to someone's attention and then track them; 2) Who collates the data; 3) How many foreclosures are there and how many banks are involved; 4) How many homes have been empty for more than a year and is there technology for departments to talk to each other about the vacant homes. Getschow said he would have to come back with the number of foreclosures, but we do have a code enforcement team made up of individuals who cross departments. They keep a database on the intranet site for properties of concern so we could see the history of concerns and comments. The group sometimes meets to discuss concerns about a property. We do receive information on specific foreclosures and do go out to check each home. He said staff could come back at the next meeting with more details about the program and about foreclosure trends. Nelson wanted to make it clear we aren't talking about properties that are vacant for only a few months. 2. Rulemakins!Potential of Watershed Districts--Council Member Case Case believed Council Members agree that rules that keep our water clean and help preserve Eden Prairie are good. This discussion is more about what kind of rules and who is ultimately responsible. He said Mr. Tyler's report quotes a State statute that states the watershed districts' rules don't apply if a County or City ordinance applies. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 21, 2014 Page 11 Rosow said the statement by Mr. Tyler was read correctly but it is a very complicated statute. That particular statement applies to watershed districts outside the metropolitan area. Another portion of the statute specifically applies to those watershed districts wholly within the metro area and gives those watershed districts the power to make regulations except that the districts' rules apply only when: 1) the City does not have an approved water plan; 2) the City is presented with a request for a waiver of one of our rules; or 3) there has been an agreement that we will enforce their rules. Those are the circumstances under which the watershed districts'rules apply within the City of Eden Prairie. However, the analysis doesn't end there because Eden Prairie has an approved water plan. As the watershed districts amend their plans, we are given a statutory amount of time to bring our plan into agreement with theirs. If we don't bring our plan into agreement with theirs, then they can enforce their rules. The statute gives the watershed district the right to determine if our local water plan is in compliance with theirs. There is no specific guidance in the statute as to what our remedy is as a city if we disagree with the watershed district's determination that our plan is not in compliance. He reviewed two provisions in the statute whereby the City can challenge a rule. Rosow said it is his opinion that the watershed district is required to have a water management plan. We are waiting to finalize our plan until the watershed districts' amended plans are finalized. A watershed district has the right to adopt rules,has the right to levy taxes, and is not advisory to the City Council. Once the watershed district adopts their plan, we will continue to work to finalize our plan. Mr. Ellis and staff are trying to make sure the rules the watershed districts adopt are acceptable to the City. The watershed district has the responsibility to review our plans and make that determination. We could challenge that if we believe their decision is not founded in facts. A number of public hearings have been held by the watershed district, so our citizens could have spoken at the watershed district's public hearings. It is not the City's role to hold public hearings on the watershed district rules. Case said he has listened to this subject over the past few months and he does feel better after having several meetings with staff in the last week. There is a process in place that will protect the lake owners and others. That process includes the fact our staff has two years after the watershed district completes their rules to interact with those rules. There will be a public hearing to align ourselves with the watershed district rules. He was comfortable we have a process to protect our rights and responsibilities. B. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER 1. Set Date for Canvass of 2014 General Election Results CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 21, 2014 Page 12 Getschow said we need to set the date for the canvass of the 2014 general election results. MOTION: Butcher Wickstrom moved, seconded by Aho, to set a date of November 10, 2014 at 5:00 p.m. for the canvass of the local election results. Motion carried 5-0. C. REPORT OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR D. REPORT OF PARKS AND RECREATION DIRECTOR E. REPORT OF PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR F. REPORT OF POLICE CHIEF G. REPORT OF FIRE CHIEF 1. Community EMT Program Fire Chief Esbensen said the Affordable Care Act includes many things that relate to the health care system, such as incentives for hospitals to keep people in their homes and penalties to the health care system when people get re-admitted within 30 days for the same malady. Five city fire departments approached Park Nicollet with a plan to have firefighters check on recently released patients within the first 24 hours of discharge. He reviewed the process and details developed for the program. In order to get help with reimbursement there needs to be a State statute that addressed the Community EMT. A proposed bill is now being considered by the League of Minnesota Cities for their support. He asked the Council for support of their letter to the League encouraging them to give this their final legislative support. Butcher Wickstrom said Council Member Aho and she heard about this idea at a PROP meeting. The data and information are very interesting and the program provides a holistic approach. It would involve a small amount of time that could have a big impact on the quality of a person's life. She asked if the Fire Department has the capacity in terms of numbers as word gets out about this and as our population ages. Esbensen replied they do, depending on what the game-sharing looks like. If we receive funding from the hospital to do this, then it becomes a math equation. Butcher Wickstrom noted it is hard to capture all the other things the firefighters would check on to make the home safe. She commended Chief Esbensen on the innovation of this program. Tyra-Lukens asked if the pilot program is collaboration with the firefighters and Park Nicollet so that everyone is donating time. Esbensen said it is. Tyra-Lukens asked how long the pilot program runs. Esbensen said it was CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 21, 2014 Page 13 90 days, and was extended another 90 days through the end of December. Tyra-Lukens asked who is eligible for this program. Esbensen said it is people who have been admitted to the hospital and who were not discharged to a care facility. They also have to opt in. A nurse at Park Nicollet visits with them and describes the program. Tyra-Lukens asked if this is a unique program. Esbensen said other parts of the country have this, and other jurisdictions have shown a decrease in emergency calls. H. REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY XV. OTHER BUSINESS XVI. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher Wickstrom, to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 5-0. Mayor Tyra-Lukens adjourned the meeting at 9:05 PM.