City Council - 09/15/1987 - Special Meeting M I N U T E S
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 15, 1987 4:00 P.M. , COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY OFFICES
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Gary Peterson, Richard Anderson,
George Bentley, Jean Harris, and. Patricia
Pidcock
CITY COUNCIL STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Carl J. Jullie, Assistant to
the City Manager Craig Dawson, Director of
Public Safety Keith Wall , Police Captain
Jim Clark, City Attorney Roger Pauly, and
Assistant City Attorney Ric Rosow
i . CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL
Mayor Peterson called the meeting to order at 4:05 P.M. All Council -
members were present.
II . DISCUSSION OF CITY'S EMERGENCY PROCEDURES
Peterson said that the purpose of discussion on this item was to
reconcile apparent conflicts between the Emergency Operations Plan (EOP)
and City Code. These inconsistencies were observed following the severe
thunderstorm of July 23-24, 1987.
City Attorney Pauly distributed and reviewed a memorandum he had prepared
regarding emergency operations as contained in the EOP and the City Code. r
He said that the pertinent section of the Ordinance Code had been adopted
pursuant to State enabling legislation. The history of this section was
to adopt the provisions of the statute. In his memorandum, the City
Attorney recommended several revisions to bring the City Code in
agreement with statutes and the EOP.
One particular subdiviso n d which Councilmembers had found
o f the Code
troubling was Section 2.09 relating to "Succession to Local Offices,"
in which Councilmembers and the City Manager must be notified of a
disaster and meet forthwith at the Emergency Operations Center (EOC).
The City Attorney advised that this whole section was titled "Interim
Emergency Succession", and should be interpreted and revised to be
in accordance with provisions in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 12.
The succession issue does not come into question unless neither the 5
Mayor, Acting Mayor, nor quorum of the Council is available. He said a
that State law dispenses with the requirement to make notices of
special meetings in emergencies, but that good faith efforts need to
be made to contact information media.
Discussion turned toward the declaration of emergencies. State law
says that only the Mayor may declare an emergency, and this emergency
may last no longer than three days unless Council authorizes its
extension. Councilmember Bentley asked if the State mandate should be
the one followed in the EOP or the Code. The City Attorney responded
that MSA 12.29 would prevail , and that the City' s documents should be
revised to reflect that only the Mayor may declare an emergency.
r
2 -
The memorandum addressed several other apparent inconsistencies,
" particulary the responsibilities of the Mayor and City Manager. The
City Attorney recommended that the Council clarify how it would give
direction to the City Manager so that he/she could direct operations.
Bentley said there were two types of emergencies to be discussed.
One was extreme emergency such as nucleur war where succession (and
temporary emergency appointments) would come into play because of
the absence or incapacitation of Counciimembers. The other type of
emergency is one which could be anticipated better, such as weather
or toxic spills. He wished to limit discussion to the latter case.
Peterson asked what conditions would necessitate declaring an
emergency. There is a formal declaration pursuant to MSA 12.29, and
less official statements about the existence of an emergency situation.
Councilmember Harris stated her preference to have one procedure for
any emergency.
Councilmember Anderson stated he was unsure of the procedure or
responsibility of the City Council . He pointed out that City Code
Sec. 2.09 subd. 2 related to natural disasters, and recited
language requiring notification and quick assemblage for a meeting of x
the Council . The City Attorney said that this procedure should be
followed only if the Mayor, Acting Mayor, or quorum of the Council
could not be assembled. This section is not as clear as it should
be, and should be clarified to relate only to "interim emergency
successions".
w
Bentley related the history of the discussion among Councilmembers
during the adoption of this section of the Code. They wished to
have one plan for any emergency. The idea was to have a Council x
meeting so that a plan of action could be decided upon and begun, and
to assure that one person did not assume undue control of the response
efforts.
e
It was suggested that the memorandum prepared by City Manager Jullie
be followed in analyzing the chronology of actions during an emergency
situation.
x
Anderson said that once an emergency has been declared, the Council
should be notified immediately. s
Bentley noted a gap between Step 2 (Notification) and Step 3 (Direction
and Control during reponse) . He wondered how the Council would be
brought into a policy-making role after being notified of an
emergency.
Peterson noted that this is where there needs to be a distinction between
the determination of an emergency, and a declaration of emergency. A
declaration can be made by the Mayor, Acting Mayor, or quorum of the
Council - this is a formality. The issue is the role of the Council once
the Chief of Police determines that an emergency exists. The City
Manager said that the Council would be called into the EOC building
between Steps 2 and 3.
I
- 3 -
Director of Public Safety Wall said that the prototype EOP developed by
the State has decision-making responsibilities asigned to the Mayor;
the State wished to have a uniform designation. County, officials who,
along with State and Federal agencies, must approve the City' s EOP, said
that the EOP should be set up to mirror the system of administration
that operates day-to-day, and that in Eden Prairie's case the City
Manager should be so designated.
Bentley said that while Statute says that only the Mayor can declare
an emergency, the City' s EOP and Code should incorporate the
Acting Mayor or quorum of the Council in the succession of authority.
The City Attorney said that if the Mayor and Acting Mayor are
unavailable, then the quorum of the Council would meet and decide who
to appoint to fulfill these functions.
Councilmembers Pidcock, Harris, and Anderson expressed concern about
when the Council needs to meet, and when it is told by whom. The
City Manager said that as soon as the Public Safety Director determines
an emergency, notification begins and the Mayor talks to the other
Councilmembers. The City Attorney said the Mayor or any two Council-
members can request a Council meeting. Harris stated that Council needs
a briefing either, on the telephone during notification or at a meeting.
Bentley suggested that there be a period of time, e.g, 12 hours, after
determination of an emergency that Council would assemble. The Public
Safety Director, City Manager, and Mayor together would determine
when and if within that period of time a meeting should be held.
Harris suggested conference calling as an alternative to meeting.
Anderson wanted to have as much information as possible in a reasonable
amount of time, and this desire would require a briefing. Harris
suggested a 24-hour period, because time was needed to assess damage, w
contain damage, and gather useful information.
Peterson wished to identify a process by which Council could decide w
to get together without physically meeting. They could then decide when
to meet. A back-up process would be needed in case phone service was
interrupted. Bentley wanted to identify when a meeting must be called.
That is why a period of time should be identified.
The consensus was for having a meeting within 24 hours at the EOC
building or other designated place.
Bentley said Council should not finish this matter by acting as a
committee this evening. Peterson believed that a consensus had been
given to staff for changes in language for the City' s documents.
Bentley underscored the need to gain consistency with the EOP and Code.
He concluded that Council needs to be notified, kept notified, and
involved in the policy-making process.
Anderson said a policy needs to be developed about what the Council
and community should expect during emergencies. He stated he was
unhappy with the response of the City in following procedures, and that
policies in specific instances were handled poorly. He was concerned
with how residents fit into emergency plans with regard to what they
should expect from the City. I
t
- 4 -
Bentley said Anderson's discussion was not germane to the focus of the
Council 's discussion at this meeting. He did not believe a policy
could be devised on how and to what extent to respond to each
emergency.
Anderson said the EOP should include such matters as whether sand and
sandbags will be stored and identifying where they will be located.
Bentley believed distinctions needed to be made on the type and
severity of emergencies (e.g. , flood vs. fire), and how many resources
will be dedicated.
The City Manager said 60 to 90 days would be needed for the changes
to the Code and EOP to be formally made. In the interim, his
memorandum would serve as the document setting out the process to be
followed.
The Council recessed at 5:20 P.M.
III , DISCUSSION ON LANDFILL LITIGATION AND CONTESTS
The Council convened a closed session at 5:35 P.M. to discuss landfill
litigation and contests.
IV. AJOURNMENT
The Council adjourned its special meeting at 6:10 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Craig W. Dawson
Recording Secretary