Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-25-2001 Council Minutes• MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Octuber June 25, 2001 ROLL The City Council met on the above - mentioned date with the following members present: Mayor Barbara Peterson, Council Members Richard Flint, Bob Sansevere, and Jay Nygard. Council Member Jim White arrived at 7:05 p.m. Representing Staff were City Attorney Tom Barrett, City Administrator Ron Moorse, Planning Director Michael Gaffron, Zoning Administrator Wendy Bottenberg, Public Services Director Greg Gappa, Police Chief Stephanie Good, and Recorder Jackie Young. Mayor Jabbour called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. CONSENT AGENDA ( #1) Approve /Amend Items 11, 13, 14 and 15 were added to the Consent Agenda. Mayor Peterson added Item #15A to the Agenda. Flint moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended, and to approve the Agenda with the addition of #15A, Fire Station. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. • APPROVAL OF MINUTES *( #2) REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 11, 2001 Flint moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve the minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of June 11, 2001, as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *( #3) HRA MEETING OF MAY 29, 2001 Flint moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve the minutes of the HRA meeting of May 29, 2001, as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS — Irene Silber, Representative None PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS — Sandra Smith, Representative Smith stated she would be available at tonight's meeting to answer any questions the Council may • have. PAGE 1 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING October June 25, 2001 • LMCD REPORT — Lili McMillan al( L L� McMillan stated the LMCD is in the process of finalizing their budget for the upcoming year, with the LMCD considering a levy increase in the amount of $27,000 for the Etta of Oros. McMillan stated the levy increase includes a $8,500 management plan charge, which is conducted every other year, and a $9,300 charge for milfoil reserves. McMillan stated the LMCD would like to keep 50 percent of their operating expenses in a reserve fund since the levy is their only source of revenue at this time. McMillan indicated the expenses for the milfoil removal came in overbudget last year, which necessitated an increase in the amount budgeted for this item. McMillan stated the harvesting of the milfoil will be delayed somewhat this year due to the cooler weather and rain, with the majority of the harvesting commencing the week after the 4`h of July. McMillan stated she relayed concerns to the LMCD that the levy increase was rather high and that perhaps it should be reduced somewhat. McMillan noted an e-mail was received from City Administrator Ron Moorse and from the City of Minnetonka expressing concerns regarding the 11 percent increase in the levy. The LMCD will be approving the budget at their Wednesday meeting. Sansevere inquired whether the City of Orono should say no to the 11 percent increase. Moorse stated he has sent an e-mail to the LMCD expressing concerns that the 11 percent levy increase may be too high in light of the fact_ there may be a three or four percent levy limit on cities for the year 2001. • McMillan stated in her view the City of Orono may be in the minority, with the other cities only experiencing an increase of approximately $1,000 to $2,000. McMillan stated she has discussed the possibility of the Minnehaha Watershed District contributing to the LMCD budget to help offset the costs of the milfoil harvesting. Sansevere inquired whether the LMCD has discussed the possibility of residents giving an unspecified donation for using the lake. McMillan stated she would be bringing that item up for discussion at the Save - the -Lake Committee. McMillan stated the Save - the -Lake fund consists of approximately $200,000, which is a private donation fund, and helps to fund various projects on the lake. Sansevere inquired if the LMCD approves the 11 percent increase whether the City of Orono has any recourse that they may take. McMillan stated all cities in the LMCD will be experiencing an 11 percent increase, but that to date only the Cities of Orono and Minnetonka have expressed concerns regarding the increase. Moorse stated if a majority of the LMCD Board approves the levy increase, it will become effective. White noted according to the Star and Tribune, 27 percent of all boating in the State of Minnesota occurs on Lake Minnetonka, with very few other government agencies allocating any funds towards preservation and maintenance of the lake. White stated the LMCD needs to be looking at other sources of income, such as Hennepin Parks, since a large number of residents outside this area utilize Lake Minnetonka. • PAGE 2 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING October June 25, 2001 (LMCD Report, Continued) Moorse noted the only other source of funding available to the LMCD outside of their reserves is through a tax levy. Moorse noted over the past few years the LMCD has reduced their reserve. McMillan stated one issue the LMCD should look at this fall is their fee structure for docks. Flint stated in his opinion the LMCD should not hold a large amount of money in reserve. Mayor Peterson thanked McMillan for her report. PUBLIC COMMENTS None ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT ( #4) BAYWIND CHRISTIAN CHURCH, B -4 ZONING CODE AMENDMENT — ORDINANCE NO. George Wells, Helmer Heckal, Frank Svoboda, and Greg Metz, Baywind Christian Church, were • present. Gaffron stated at the June 11`h Council meeting, the City Council voted 5 -0 to conceptually approve an amendment of the zoning code to allow "Churches" as a conditional use in the B -4 Office and Professional Business District. The application was then referred back to the Planning Commission to allow them to recommend appropriate performance standards for churches within the B -4 District. Gaffron reviewed Staffs recommended performance standards for church use in the B -4 District. The Planning Commission reviewed the standards at their June 18`h meeting and considered the recommendations of Staff as well as the comments made by representatives of the Baywind Christian Church. The Planning Commission voted 5 -2 to approve the following recommendations: All buildings shall meet a setback of 50 feet from lot lines abutting a residentially zoned property. 2. If required parking is not provided on site, an off -site parking plan satisfactory to the City Council shall be provided. If a church property abuts both a local residential street and a collector or arterial roadway, the access shall be onto the collector or arterial. 4. Parking areas in side or rear yards shall be set back 10 feet from residentially zoned property. 5. One parking space shall be provided for each four seats of capacity in the main assembly hall or sanctuary, with additional parking required per the standards of the Zoning Chapter for other • facilities such as classrooms, licensed daycare facilities or offices when such uses will overlap with the use of the main assembly hall. PAGE 3 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING October June 25, 2001 • (Baywind Church, Continued) 6. The entry in B -4 shall be termed "Religious Institutions and Facilities" rather than "Churches. Gaffron noted the Planning Commission did not want to deviate from the 10 foot side or rear yard setback just for churches in the B -4 District, but recommended that the City Council consider changing the standard for all B -4 parking, and perhaps for all church parking to 25 feet where it abuts residential zones. The Planning Commission suggested that the standard of four seats per parking space might be outdated and deserves further research. Mayor Peterson inquired whether the Council was okay with performance standard number one requiring all buildings to meet a setback of 50 feet from lot lines abutting a residentially zoned property. It was the consensus of the City Council that performance standard number one was appropriate. Sansevere stated he does have some concerns relating to the parking. Sansevere inquired whether a trail could perhaps be constructed from the bank to the church in an effort to avoid the need to cross County Road 19. Wells pointed out that it would be difficult to maintain a trail in the wintertime. • Sansevere commented he is attempting to look at options to avoid crossing County Road 19. Mayor Peterson stated they could also park in the area of the Navarre Park. Flint inquired whether the City of Orono currently maintains any of its trails during the wintertime. Gappa stated they maintain the sidewalks in Navarre but not the trails. Gappa stated they could perhaps utilize the City's sweeper to help with snow removal. Nygard stated if the police chief is in agreement with crossing County Road 19, he would not be opposed to it. White indicated he also is not opposed to crossing County Road 19 since the majority of the parking would be available on site and since traffic tends to be less on Sundays than the rest of the week. White stated the City Council does have the option to review the parking situation in the future if it is deemed necessary. Mayor Peterson stated she also is not opposed to allowing parking across County Road 19. Peterson inquired how the City Council felt regarding performance standard #3 relating to access. It was the consensus of the City Council that performance standard #3 is appropriate. Smith stated as it relates to the parking setback of 10 feet versus 25 feet, the Planning Commission was hesitant to place a different standard regarding parking for churches located in the B-4 District PAGE 4 E MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING October June 25, 2001 Baywind Church, Continued) and that perhaps the City Council should review the parking standards for all churches located within the City. Flint stated a parking lot does have an adverse impact on the neighborhood and that he would be in favor of reviewing parking requirements for all churches in the City. Flint inquired what the parking standard was for the rest of the B -4 District. Gaffron stated it is 10 feet. Flint noted some type of fencing or screening of the parking lot is required, which would lessen the negative impact. Flint noted he would be okay with the 10 foot setback as long as screening is provided. Nygard commented he would like to see natural screening as much as possible. Gaffron stated the standard in the B -4 District requires a six foot fence, hedge, or other natural barrier that is at least 50 percent opaque. White noted it would take a few years to grow a natural hedge. It was the consensus of the City Council that performance standard #4 relating to a 10 foot setback . from residentially zoned properties was appropriate. Mayor Peterson inquired what the Council thought relating to performance standard #5 allowing one parking space for each four seats of capacity. Gaffron stated the City's current code, which has been in place since 1967, allow four seats of capacity per parking space. Staff has reviewed the City of Minnetonka's standards, which allows 2.5 seats of capacity per parking space. Staff also reviewed four other cities' parking standards within this area and determined that they allowed 3 seats of capacity per parking space. Gaffron noted the average household size in Orono is 2.7 people. Gaffron stated the church representatives indicated at the Planning Commission meeting that most people who go to church tend to car pool and have three to four people per vehicle. Gaffron stated based on his review 3 seats of capacity would probably be better than 4 seats. Flint stated he would prefer the 4 seats of capacity per parking space in an effort to limit the amount of blacktop since churches typically will utilize the majority of the available parking on Sundays. Sansevere inquired how many parishioners Baywind had. Pastor Heckal stated they have a seating capacity of 200. Sansevere commented he is unsure whether 50 parking stalls could be provided on -site. Gaffron stated they would come close with their revised plans based on four seats of capacity. • PAGE 5 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING October June 25, 2001 E (Baywind Church, Continued) Flint stated he is hesitant to reduce the seats of capacity to 2.5 since it would require a great deal more of blacktop. Gaffron stated a shared parking arrangement would be the perfect solution. Gaffron stated the 4 seats of capacity applies to all churches within the City and not just the B -4 District. Gaffron stated the parking standard for other uses in the B -4 District depends on the use. Nygard stated he would like to encourage the local businesses and churches to assist each other out with parking, which would help to reduce the amount hardcover needed. Nygard stated in his view there might be times when the seating capacity at the church exceeds 200. Nygard indicated the parking issue is part of the conditional use permit and can be reviewed on an annual basis. Pastor Heckal noted the attendance at their church has declined over the past few months and that in his view the 4 seats of capacity would be appropriate. It was the consensus of the City Council that performance standard #5 requiring one parking space be provided for each 4 seats of capacity was appropriate. It was the consensus of the City Council that performance standard #6 utilizing the language "Religious Institutions and Facilities" was appropriate. Mayor Peterson noted the City Council unanimously concurs with the recommendations of the • Planning Commission and that parking will need to be addressed further as part of the conditional use permit. Wells indicated the church will be encouraging car pooling. White moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve and adopt ORDINANCE NO. 204, Second Series, an Ordinance Amending Chapter 10 of the Orono Municipal Code by Amending Section 10.43, Subdivision 4, Adding "Religious Institutions and Facilities" to the List of Allowing Conditional Uses in the B -4 Zoning District. Nygard complemented the Planning Commission on the fine job they did regarding this application. Flint requested the record to reflect that he would like the City to consider requiring some type of fencing in addition to the requirement concerning the setback for parking areas to residentially zoned properties for all areas of the City. VOTE ON THE ABOVE MOTION: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *( #5) 901 -2681 ROGER A. DAY, 1205 BRONVIN ROAD SOUTH, VARIANCE, RESOLUTION NO. 4664 Flint moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve and adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4664, a Resolution granting variances to setback to permit a kitchen addition and porch for Roger A. Day, 1205 Brown Road South. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. . PAGE 6 n LJ MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING October June 25, 2001 *( #6) #01 -2682 TIMOTHY F. OLSON, 2510 OLD BEACH ROAD, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT — RESOLUTION NO. 4665 Flint moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve and adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4665, a Resolution granting a conditional use permit to permit an "Accessory Structure on a Through Lot — Conditional Use Permit for the property located at 2510 Old Beach Road. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *( #7) #01 -2683 RICK BENSON, 776 BROWN ROAD NORTH, VARIANCE — RESOLUTION NO. 4666 Flint moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve and adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4666, a Resolution granting variances to allow encroachment into the average lakeshore setback to permit lakeside decks to be replaced for the property located at 776 Brown Road North. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *( #8) #01 -2684 THERESA KOCH, 2225 BAYVIEW PLACE, VARIANCE — RESOLUTION NO. 4667 Flint moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve and adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4667, a Resolution granting variances to lot area, lot width, and hardcover to permit residential construction on the property located at 2225 Bayview Place. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. • *( #9) #01 -2688 KIRTLAND C. WOODHOUSE, 1780 SHORELINE DRIVE — LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT — RESOLUTION NO. 4668 Flint moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve and adopt RESOLUTION NO. 4668, a Resolution approving a subdivision of a lot line rearrangement for properties located at 1780 Shoreline Drive. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. ( #10) SET DATE FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON BOAT STORAGE Gaffron stated the City Council has suggested a public hearing be scheduled to consider whether existing ordinances regulating boat storage on residential properties should be revised. Staff has reviewed the current ordinance which says that in all "R" Districts, all mobile materials and equipment shall be stored within a building or fully screened so as not to be visible from adjoining properties, except boats and unoccupied trailers less than 20 feet in length, which are not stored for commercial purposes, if stored to the rear of the house and a distance of 10 feet or more from any property line. Staff is recommending a public hearing be scheduled for July 9 at 7:00 p.m. Gaffron stated Staff will do the usual legal notice of the public hearing, with press releases in the local newspaper. Gaffron stated another option would be to notify the approximately 1,000 Lakeshore property owners or all 3,000 residents in the City. is Sansevere stated in his view legal notice is fine. PAGE 7 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING October June 25, 2001 (Public Hearing — Boat Storage, Continued) Mayor Peterson stated she would like the usual legal notice along with a press release. Moorse stated notice of the public hearing could also be put on the City's web site as well as cable TV. Mayor Peterson inquired whether the notice could be published in any other paper outside of the Pioneer. Moorse stated they could put it in one of the other local papers as well. Sansevere noted several members of the press are in attendance at tonight's meeting, and requested a copy of the notice be given to them. The City Council directed Staff to schedule a public hearing relating to a review of the City's boat storage ordinances and standards for Monday, July 9, 2001, at 7:00 p.m. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT Mayor Peterson reported last week the City Administrator and herself attended the MN League of Cities conference in Duluth where they obtained some information regarding web sites and software. Peterson stated the web software available from the MN League of Cities costs approximately $700, . with a $40 per month charge to maintain the site. Peterson noted Staff will request that a representative of the MN League of Cities do a presentation of the software at one of their upcoming Council meetings. Mayor Peterson stated a work session would need to be scheduled to discuss the Highway 12 aesthetic design review report. The City Council directed City Staff to schedule a workshop for Thursday, July 12, 2001, at 8:00 a.m. Nygard recommended that Long Lake and Orono consider collaborating on the location of cellular towers and guidelines. Nygard suggested the City also look at the possibility of turning County Road 15 into a parkway and eliminate commercial traffic from that roadway following construction of the new Highway 12 corridor. Gaffron stated the City in its Comprehensive Planning has called that road a parkway for nearly 25 years. White noted a volunteer group from a local church has been donating their time by planting various flowers at the Seven Nations Park. White commended the Park Commission for creating the Friends of the Park. White indicated the church group is also interested in donating some money to the Park Fund in order to purchase a park bench and table for the Seven Nations Park. White noted Washington Scientific has been purchased recently by a company interested in doing some type of office development. White stated the pollution issues at this site may not be as bad as once thought and that cleanup of the site is proceeding forward. 0 PAGE 8 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING October June 25, 2001 (Mayor /Council Report, Continued) Sansevere suggested that the Orono Police Chief give a warning to the various people without trailers who are double parking in the area designated for trailer parking at the Maxwell Bay Landing. Sansevere stated he has observed some arguing in the area between people with trailers and people without trailers. PUBLIC SERVICE DIRECTOR'S REPORT Greg Gappa had nothing to report. Mayor Peterson inquired whether the Park Commission was planning to install a bike rack at the Navarre Park. Gappa stated not to his knowledge. Mayor Peterson indicated she has picked up some information regarding customized bike racks and will be providing that information to the chair of the Park Commission. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT • *( #11) CITY RECORDER FEE ADJUSTMENT Flint moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve the fee schedule for the City Recorder as reflected in the June 21, 2001 City Administrator's Report, effective March 1, 2001. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. ( #12) HOME OCCUPATION DEFINITIONS AND STANDARDS Mayor Peterson suggested this item be discussed at the work session scheduled for July 12'h Moorse indicated there is a resident in attendance at tonight's meeting who would like to discuss this item with the Council. Gaffron stated "Home Occupations" has been a permitted Accessory Use in "R "Districts since 1967. The definition in the current zoning code reads as follows: "Any gainful occupation meeting all of the following requirements when engaged in only by persons residing in their dwelling, when that occupation is conducted within the principal structure only, when evidence of the occupation is not visible from the street. In 1975, the Council changed the Zoning Code to read, "any gainful occupation meeting all of the following requirements when engaged in only by persons residing in their dwelling, when there is no employed assistant, when that occupation is conducted within the principal structure only, when evidence of the occupation is not visible from the street." • Staff believes licensing of home occupations was started in 1984, with the Code reading as follows: "It is unlawful for any person to engage in, or carry on, a home occupation, as that term is PAGE 9 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING October June 25, 2001 �J (Home Occupation Definitions, Continued) defined in the Zoning Chapter of the City Code, without first having obtained a license therefor from the City. Subdivision 2 reads, "Licenses will only be issued if the specific use is permitted or otherwise allowed by the Zoning Chapter, and if all conditions set forth in said Chapter are fully complied with." In 1995, language was added requiring the applicants to renew their home occupation licenses on a yearly basis. Gaffron stated under the current language, a "Home Occupation" is an occupation that is customarily associated with the use of a dwelling. Gaffron stated there are a number of residents within Orono that are involved in a wide range of home based occupations, some of which have potential impacts on the surrounding neighborhood. Gaffron noted the attached list is not an exhaustive list of the home occupations in the City. Gaffron recommended the City continue to license home occupations that may potentially impact the neighborhood and not license home occupations that are virtually "invisible" and have no impact on the neighborhood. Gaffron stated the definition of an "employed assistant" is not included in the Zoning Code. Gaffron stated to his knowledge there are two licenses which have come under some scrutiny by the City, «ith notice being given to the two licensees that their license will not be renewed this fall because they have an employed assistant who lives outside the residence. In 1998, Staff reviewed the Home Occupation standards and recommended the following language be • adopted regarding employees: "All residents of the dwelling, but not more than one (1) nonresident shall be permitted to work on the premises in connection with the home occupation. (1) Domestic employees shall not be considered employees of the home occupation. (2) A nonresident employee may include an employee, business partner, independent contractor, or any other person associated with the home occupation who does not reside in the dwelling unit and who is regularly at the home occupation." The above language was not adopted by the Council in 1998. Gaffron stated the Council should define what an employee is and what regularly at the home occupation implies. Gaffron stated there are a number businesses in the area where an employee may arrive at the home occupation in the morning, pick up supplies and a work vehicle, and spend the majority of the day away from the site. Gaffron stated the Council should look at the impacts of various employees that might be at a home occupation. Ben Meinhardt, All -Star Electric, 3585 Sixth Avenue North, addressed the City Council regarding the notice he has received stating his license will not be renewed. Meinhardt stated his business has not changed any since he first took out his license in 1986. Meinhardt stated he purchased the propem with permission to operate All -Star Electric out of a large barn located on the property. Meinhardt inquired what grounds the City is basing its denial on. Mayor Peterson inquired whether the three individuals leave their personal vehicles at his property. Meinhardt stated he has one employee who arrives early in the morning, parks his vehicle behind the barn, which is not visible to any of the neighbors, and is gone all day. • PAGE 10 • MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING October June 25, 2001 (Home Occupation Definitions, Continued) Mayor Peterson inquired how many nonresident employees Meinhardt has. Peterson noted the City has him listed as having three employees. Meinhardt stated he has one employee. Gaffron stated the information contained in his report regarding the number of nonresident employees of All -Star Electric was taken off of the last license application submitted by Mr. Meinhardt. Meinhardt stated in approximately 1994, he did hire a woman to do household work, some minor bookkeeping, and other small tasks associated with the business. Meinhardt stated that lady has since left his employ. Moorse stated the reason Mr. Meinhardt received a notice is because he has a nonresident employee who arrives at the property everyday and the City currently does not have any specific language relating to this situation. Moorse stated Staff would like some direction from the Council on how these types of situations should be handled. Sansevere stated he personally does not have a problem with the situation described by Mr. Meinhardt White noted this is a large lot located in a rural area. White stated concerns may arise if the property were located in a more residential area where there might be employees coming to the home • occupation everyday. White stated he is not opposed to Mr. Meinhardt continuing with his business. Mayor Peterson stated one of the problems is that there are some individuals who are in blatant violation of the ordinance and are not licensed who are not present at tonight's meeting. Moorse stated there are some home occupations which are not currently licensed. 0 Gaffron noted Council has suggested that Staff look at bringing some of the non - compliant home occupations into compliance. He requested Council to advise him of specific situations of which Staff may not be aware. Sansevere commented in his view the City is entering an era where home occupations are on the increase. Meinhardt indicated his property will be taken in approximately two years as a result of the new Highway 12 corridor. Meinhardt thanked the Council for allowing his business to continue since 1986 because without the opportunity to run a home occupation, he would not have been able to afford to be in business all these years. Mayor Peterson noted this item will be discussed further in the July 12`h work session, with Mr. Meinhardt being kept informed of the status of the review by the Council. Flint stated he would like to discuss the home occupation which has six employees listed PAGE 11 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING October June 25, 2001 • (Home Occupation Definitions, Continued) Gaffron stated it is his recollection that the employees stop by the property, pick up plans or supplies that are needed for the day, go off -site to various places, and may return once or twice during the day to pick up additional supplies. Gaffron stated it is a four or five acre lot, with Council having given it some scrutiny back in the 1980s. Flint stated this is an issue the Council should review further, especially those home occupations which have the potential to be annoying or have a negative impact to the neighborhood. Flint stated in his view those types of businesses need to be licensed and monitored. Flint suggested Staff look at how other communities in the area regulate home occupations. (Recess taken from 8:33 p.m. — 8:39 p.m.). *( #13) ON -SALE SERVING OF NON - INTOXICATING MALT LIQUOR — ORDINANCE NO. 205 Flint moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve and adopt ORDINANCE NO. 205, SECOND SERIES, an Ordinance Amending Section 4.22, Subdivision 4, of the Orono Municipal Code, which will allow no person under the age of eighteen (18) to be employed to sell or serve • non - intoxicating malt liquor in any on -sale establishment. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *( #14) REPLACEMENT OF LIGHT WEIGHT BODY ARMOR Flint moved, Sansevere seconded, to authorize the purchase of nine lightweight bulletproof vests at a cost of $7,650.00, and approve the request for $1,275.00 in reimbursement funds from the Federal Government, as well as a police department budget increase in clothing and personal equipment of $6,380.00. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *( #15) CONTRACT FOR SERVICES — SQUAD CAR REPAIR Flint moved, Sansevere seconded, to award the contract for public safety vehicle maintenance and repairs to One Stop Auto Service for the period of July 1, 2001 through June 30, 2002, at the rates quoted in Chief of Police Good's memorandum dated June 21, 2001. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. ( #15A) LONG LAKE / ORONO FIRE STATION Moorse indicated Staff has been working on several agreements relating to the new fire station consisting of a settlement agreement, contract for joint ownership, and a 20 year agreement for fire protection. Moorse noted two of Orono's Council members have been with two of Long Lake Council • PAGE 12 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING October June 25, 2001 (Long Lake /Orono Fire Station, Continued) members in an effort to help resolve some issues between the two cities. Moorse stated the final version approved by the Orono City Council was forwarded to the Long Lake City Administrator on Tuesday, June 19`h. The Long Lake Council met on the 19`h and forwarded their version of the settlement agreement and the contract for joint ownership to Orono Staff, along with a memorandum identifying a number of areas where the language between the two versions do not particular agree. Moorse stated he would like the City Council to review the memorandum. Mayor Peterson stated the Council should formally approve what the Council had preliminarily approved at their work session last Tuesday. Sansevere suggested the Council formally approve Orono's version of the two agreements and then review and discuss the differences outlined in the memorandum from the Long Lake City Administrator and whether they should be incorporated into the agreements. Flint recommended the appropriate way to proceed would be to move and second the version that was preliminarily approved by the Orono City Council on the 19`h, and then take the items listed in the memorandum up as a series of amendments to the two agreements. Michael Bash, Long Lake resident, commented that in his view what the Long Lake City Council approved at their last meeting is not the document that the Orono City Council is considering approving at tonight's meeting. Bash stated it is his belief that they did not have Orono's latest is version in front of them at the time they voted on the agreement and that they approved an earlier version. Bash further indicated that the Long Lake Council had approved what they thought Orono had given preliminarily approval to. Jim Murphy, Orono resident, stated he and former mayor Gabriel Jabbour met with Long Lake's City Administrator on Thursday and verified the information contained in her memorandum. Murphy stated it was Long Lake's understanding at the time they approved the two contracts that they were voting on an agreement that Orono had approved. Murphy stated the memorandum from the Long Lake City Administrator compares the two versions and lists the differences between the two. Murphy suggested the Orono City Council compare the two versions and decide what items should or should not be included in the version that the Orono City Council will be approving tonight. Flint commented part of the confusion has resulted from the two city administrators working on two different documents. Flint inquired when Moorse forwarded the version preliminarily approved by the Orono City Council last Tuesday. Moorse stated he forwarded the two agreements at approximately 2:00 p.m. on Tuesday the 19`h Flint stated Long Lake's City Administrator probably did not have sufficient time to analyze the documents received from Orono prior to their City Council meeting. Flint stated the changes that were done in the work session were relatively minor, but that the two cities have been working on different versions of the agreements for the past month, which has resulted in some confusion. Flint recommended the Orono City Council consider the items listed in the June 20`h memorandum as . possible amendments to the agreement that Orono will be approving tonight. PAGE 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING October June 25, 2001 u (Long Lake /Orono Fire Station, Continued) Sansevere stated in his opinion the Orono City Council should be able to reach satisfactory conclusions on most, if not all, of the items contained in the June 201h memorandum. Mayor Peterson noted the Long Lake City Administrator has listed 12 issues in her memorandum that the Orono City Council should consider tonight. Bash stated it is his belief that the Long Lake City Council formally approved an agreement that they believed the Orono City Council had agreed in principal to and which will be approved tonight. Flint stated the document that the Long Lake City Council formally approved is different than the document that is before the Orono City Council tonight. Bash indicated the Long Lake City Council has formally approved twice two contracts that they thought the Orono City Council was in agreement with. Bash noted Mn/DOT has set a deadline of Friday of this week by which the two cities need to enter into an agreement or Mn/DOT will be retracting its offer. Bash inquired whether the Orono City Council can accept and approve the document that the Long Lake City Council has presented to them. Sansevere inquired if that meant as is. Bash stated yes. 40 Sansevere stated in his view it is very unlikely the Orono City Council would approve the document approved by the Long Lake City Council in its present form. Bash stated if a different agreement is approved tonight, the Long Lake City Council will need to hold a special meeting in order to approve yet another agreement. Sansevere stated the Long Lake City Administrator knew the documents being approved by the Long Lake City Council were not the final versions approved by the Orono City Council. Mayor Peterson reiterated that the Orono City Council should go through the items listed in the June 20`h memorandum one by one to see whether the Orono Council is in agreement with them. Sansevere stated it is the desire of the Orono City Council to give the document the best chance for approval. Flint noted the fire protection agreement does not need to be approved by Friday. Moorse stated the document approved by the Long Lake City Council does address or does agree with the issues that were work out in the meeting with Jim Pearson and Dave Benson. Moorse stated some of the 12 items contained in the June 20`h memorandum were either not discussed at that meeting or need some further clarification. Sansevere stated he is in agreement with making a motion and seconding it to approve the settlement agreement and then discussing each of the 12 items contained in the memorandum. PAGE 14 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING October June 25, 2001 (Long Lake /Orono Fire Station, Continued) White stated his interpretation of the June 20`h memorandum is that the Long Lake City Administrator would like the Orono City Council to discuss these items and that a final agreement has not been reached. Bash stated the memorandum compares the two versions and lists the differences between the version approved by Long Lake and the version approved by the Orono City Council. Mayor Peterson stated the Orono City Council is attempting to clarify some of these issues tonight. Sansevere moved, White seconded, to approve the settlement agreement and contract for ownership agreement dated June 19, 2001, that were finalized at the Orono City Council work session held on June 19'2001. Flint stated the Council should now discuss the 12 items listed in the June 20`h memorandum and then move to amend the motion. Soil Correction Mayor Peterson inquired whether the language proposed by Long Lake was acceptable. Sansevere indicated he does not have a problem with the language and would be in favor of including • it in the settlement agreement. Flint inquired where this language would be inserted. Moorse stated it would fall under Item #5 on Page 5, and should say, "upon receipt from Mn/DOT, those sums will be deposited into an escrow account held jointly by Long Lake and Orono and used to pay for site correction and preparation." Moorse stated the proposed language by Long Lake would follow that sentence. White moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve the following language for inclusion in the Settlement Agreement under Item #5, Page 5, between Long Lake and Orono: "In the event that the full amount of the $200,000.00 for soil correction and site preparation of the Replacement Fire Station is not used, the difference shall be owned 50 percent by Long Lake and 50 percent by Orono, and shall be used to fund the construction of the Replacement Fire Station or shall be used to fund future capital requirements of the building or major equipment purchases. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Rent Mayor Peterson inquired what the City Council felt about the "Rental Administration Fee" language. Sansevere stated in his view Orono should not be required to continue to pay a $3,000 administration fee when in fact the administration fee has been raised by $6,500. Sansevere stated in his opinion . Orono should no longer be paying rent on a facility that they will eventually own 50 percent of. PAGE 15 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING October June 25, 2001 • (Long Lake /Orono Fire Station, Continued) Sansevere stated this item has been discussed at previous meetings. Sansevere noted the fees being charged to Medina have not changed, and suggested that perhaps the other cities being provided fire protection could pick up this cost. , Bash commented the City of Long Lake pays to the City of Orono rent for the police department in addition to a 10 percent administration fee. Flint stated the City of Long Lake does not pay 72 percent of the expenses associated with the police department. Nygard pointed out Long Lake does not own any portion of the police department. Bash stated from Long Lake's perspective is adequate cash flow. Long Lake's current fire department generates cash flow, which includes the $13,200 and $3,000. Bash indicated those amounts are currently being split between Medina, Long Lake, and Orono. Bash stated the $3,000 charge is simply another line item in the budget and perhaps was incorrectly labeled. Bash stated the City of Long Lake would like to maintain the same cash flow. Sansevere stated this is a budget issue and that it is not the responsibility of the Orono residents to maintain a proper cash flow for the Long Lake Fire Station. Sansevere stated this amount could escalate each year. • Bash stated the City of Orono could control that escalation in the fire protection agreement. Sansevere stated since Orono will no longer be paying rent, that item should be removed. Flint stated there are several ways to deal with this issue, and that it is mainly one of an accounting nature. Flint stated Item #6 basically talks about the fire protection agreement. Flint stated Orono has suggested the amount be capped at $13,200. Flint stated the Council could either delete this item and deal with it in the fire protection agreement or attempt to work it out tonight. Flint noted there are several Council members who are opposed to paying rent on the new fire station and feel that the total administration fee should not exceed $13,200. Bash reiterated that Long Lake is trying to maintain the same cash flow that exists today. Sansevere stated the City of Orono is paying an extra $6,500 in administration fees under this agreement. Bash stated the two cities need to work together in order to resolve these issues. Tom Barrett, City Attorney, stated it is his understanding the administration costs today are actually borne by the City of Long Lake, with Orono's portion being $3,000. Barrett stated one can reasonably expect that amount to increase over the years. Barrett stated it appears the dispute is whether or not Orono will continue to contribute $13,200 for an indefinite period of time. 0 PAGE 16 • MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING October June 25, 2001 (Long Lake /Orono Fire Station, Continued) Bash stated Orono would contribute $9,500, with Medina and Long Lake contributing some for a total of $13,200. Bash stated this amount goes into Long Lake's general fund. Nygard stated he has to justify these costs to the residents of Orono. Barrett stated as part of the agreement the City of Orono is being requested to make certain capital contributions and to make another contribution over a period of time. Barrett stated the dispute is whether the City of Orono wants to make another contribution to the fire station regardless of what it is called. Murphy stated at the beginning of the negotiations Orono indicated they do not want to pay rent or have depreciation. Murphy suggested this piece of the agreement be pulled out of the settlement agreement and included in the fire protection agreement. Sansevere stated he does not have a problem including it in the fire protection agreement, but that he is not in agreement with the $3,000 going into Long Lake's general fund. Bash stated the value of the building at six percent for 20 years amounts to $109,000 Barrett inquired whether Bash is considering this to be a capital contribution. • Bash stated in order to value buildings, you capitalize the rent. Bash stated $9,500 at six percent for 20 years is $109,000. Bash stated that amount is needed in order to maintain a proper cash flow. Nygard stated in his view any amount of money that the City of Orono gives to the City of Long that winds up in their general fund is wrong. Nygard stated the City of Orono has agreed to a $9,500 administration fee, which is an increase from what Orono is currently paying. U Mayor Peterson stated the Orono City Council would simply like to move this language to the fire protection agreement. Nygard stated he is more than willing to work on the agreements to make them better than what they are, but that he has issue with some of the items contained in the agreements. Bash commented both Councils need to work together to make the new fire station work. Sansevere stated if Orono's administration fee is to be increased, in his view Medina's administration fee should also be increased, which would more than cover this item that is currently being discussed. Sansevere noted the City of Orono is willing to pay $9,500 in administration fees, with Orono currently paying $3,000. Bash stated Medina pays 10 percent of the $13,200. Bash stated any monies that are currently in the budget that are not picked up under the new agreement would require the residents of Long Lake to incur those costs. PAGE 17 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING October June 25, 2001 • (Long Lake /Orono Fire Station, Continued) Sansevere stated the taxpayers of Orono would also be picking up some of the expenses associated with the new fire station. Bash noted he is not here tonight to negotiate this agreement on behalf of Long Lake. Bash in his view the City of Long Lake views the $13,200 and the $3,000 as two separate items. Bash stated Long Lake may have a concern if the $13,200 is removed from the settlement agreement and whether it will be included in the budget. Sansevere suggested the Orono City Council vote on whether to approve the $13,200 administration fee and then vote separately on the $3,000. Mayor Peterson stated it is her and Council Member Flint's feeling that the $3,000 item should not be included in the Settlement Agreement. Sansevere stated he would be in agreement with that as well. Flint stated he has a problem with the language being proposed by Long Lake since it says the administration fee will be negotiated later. Flint stated he was agreeable with the S13,200 as long as the City of Orono did not have to negotiate that amount every year. Flint stated in his vie,,-%- the $3,000 charge is a double administration fee. Sansevere commented it was a mistake to use the word rental in the agreement. • Flint stated this item could be discussed at the time the fire protection agreement is being, considered. Moorse indicated the administration fee is really more of an administration overhead fee that is incurred by the City of Long Lake. Moorse stated this fee would cover costs incurred by the Long Lake Staff in computing payroll and working on other issues related to the fire station. Bash stated the City of Long Lake incurs costs related to the fire station. Nygard stated that fee should be called an administration fee to cover those costs rather than rent. Bash stated the 10 percent administrative fee that Orono charges to all of its contract cities goes into the general fund. Murphy agreed it should not be called rent. Bash commented it appears that Orono is not opposed to the $3,000 fee but is rather opposed to it being called rent. Mayor Peterson stated that is correct and suggested the word rent be removed from the agreement. Nygard stated in order to construct a new fire station, which will be an improvement over the existing one, all the cities involved will need to incur some additional costs. 0 PAGE 18 • MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING October June 25, 2001 (Long Lake /Orono Fire Station, Continued) Persian also suggested the word rent be removed from the agreement, and in his opinion it is simply a matter of semantics. Persian stated his understanding of the meeting was that Long Lake felt that these two line items would be combined not to exceed $13,200. Sansevere stated that was discussed at the meeting and that Long Lake appeared to be satisfied with getting the $13,200 rather than losing the $3,000. Sansevere moved, White seconded, to approve the following language to be included in the Settlement Agreement under Item #6, "The Rental and Administration Fee for the property which includes Long Lake's administrative overhead expenses, and other expenses for Long Lake employees related to the operation of the Long Lake Fire Department, including the operation and maintenance of the fire station, shall be no more than $13,200.00 per year as set forth in the current operating budget of the Agreement and Contract for Fire Protection. The cost sharing formula for the payment of rent and administrative expenses shall be as set out in the Agreement and Contract for Fire Protection. Also, the Fire Protection Agreement shall be amended to provide that Long Lake shall be responsible for the ongoing needs to operate and maintain the Replacement Fire Station. Bash stated if Long Lake's administration fees exceed $13,200, they would be unable to increase that fee. • Flint stated that cost could be out - sourced and that there are a number of ways around that limit. Moorse stated if administration fees exceed the $13,200, that item could be discussed at the time the budget is being prepared. Flint stated he would not be in favor of approving an automatic increase in the administration fee. Sansevere noted the City of Orono is agreeable to paying the $13,200. VOTE ON THE ABOVE MOTION: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Interest on $680,000 Mayor Peterson requested the Council discuss Item #3, Interest on the $680,000. Sansevere stated in his view the City should not bond for this money and would request that within a month of Mn/DOT putting the money into an escrow account, that Orono deposit the $680,000 into the account. White stated due to Orono's budget cycle, they would need until February 1, 2002. Mayor Peterson agreed that Orono should have until February 2, 2002, to deposit the money into the joint escrow account. PAGE 19 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING October June 25, 2001 0 (Long Lake /Orono Fire Station, Continued) Flint inquired whether Orono could borrow the $680,000 out of their reserves. Moorse stated if the City does not bond for the money, they could get a loan from the Community Investment Fund and pay that money back over a period of time. Moorse indicated currently the interest on the money in the Community Investment Fund goes to pay the debt service on the Public Utilities Fund, with the City lacking the money to make up that difference. Sansevere reiterated he would prefer not to bond for this money. Moorse stated if the Council wishes to wait to pay the $680,000, the City would be able to plan for this money in their 2002 budget and just add the interest that would be due. White commented he would be willing to wait until February 2, 2002, to deposit the money into the joint escrow account and then add whatever interest would be due from the time Mn/DOT deposits their money into this escrow account. Moorse reiterated the City currently uses the interest earned from the Community Investment Fund to pay off the debt service on the Public Utilities revenue bond. Flint moved, Nygard seconded, to deposit the $680,000 at or approximately the same time that Mn/DOT deposits their money into the joint escrow account. is Sansevere requested that Flint define what he means by approximately. Moorse indicated the City will need to hold a public hearing if funds are used from the Community Investment Fund. Moorse stated the City would lose the interest money the Community Investment Fund earns at the present time if they withdraw the money before the end of the year. Bash stated what Long Lake is proposing would allow Orono some flexibility as to when they deposit the $680,000. Flint amended his motion, Nygard seconded, to accept the following language for inclusion in the Settlement Agreement: "Orono agrees that upon receipt of evidence that the Mn/DOT check has been deposited into the joint escrow account that it shall forthwith deposit an additional S680,000.00 into the same joint escrow account. In lieu thereof, Orono may defer depositing its 5680,000.00 to a subsequent date which is on or before February 2, 2002, so long as it also deposits the additional interest that would have accrued on that amount had it been deposited on the same date as the Mn/DOT check. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 2, Peterson and Sansevere Opposed. Sansevere stated he is opposed to paying the interest on the $680,000. • PAGE 20 • MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING October June 25, 2001 (Long Lake /Orono Fire Station, Continued) Escrow Account Balance Sansevere moved, Peterson seconded, to accept the following language for inclusion into the Settlement Agreement: "The escrow account balance shall be used in its entirety to provide for the costs of the design and the construction of the Replacement Fire Station for the Long Lake Fire Department. In the event that the entire amount of the escrow account balance is not required for the Replacement Fire Station, the balance shall be owned 50 percent by Long Lake and 50 percent by Orono, and shall be used to fund future capital requirements of the building or major equipment purchases. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Cost Over -Runs White recommended that any provision relating to cost over -runs be deleted from the agreement and that the budget be adhered to. Flint moved, Peterson seconded, to accept the following language for inclusion in the Settlement Agreement: "In the event that the cost of the Replacement Fire Station should exceed the Mn/DOT settlement, the Orono contribution of $680,000.00, the $200,000.00 reimbursement for soil correction and site preparation, and the $200,000.00 reimbursement for the cost of the Replacement Land, and all accrued interest, the Long Lake and Orono shall share equally in the • cost of any additional shortfall for the cost to design and construct the Replacement Fire Station. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Termination of Fire Services Agreement Tom Barrett, City Attorney, stated to his understanding the definition of good cause has not been included in the documents. Barrett stated the agreement allows either City to terminate for good cause but does not define what good cause is. Barrett stated the proposal for good cause as suggested in the amended fire services agreement would be A) A pattern of inadequate service quality, including inadequate response to calls, inadequate training, inadequate handling of calls; or B), A pattern of budget overruns. Barrett stated that would help to define good cause. Barrett stated since the City is entering into a 20 year agreement for fire protection services, the Cit. will want to include a provision that provides the citizens are getting quality service. Barrett reiterated the definition of good cause should be included in the agreement. Murphy questioned whether the notice required should be 36 months or 12 months. Bash stated in his view the 36 months would be preferable since it gives both cities enough time to try to resolve whatever differences have arisen and in a sense acts as a cooling off period. • Flint stated he does not see the proposed language by Long Lake anywhere in the agreement. PAGE 21 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING October June 25, 2001 • (Long Lake /Orono Fire Station, Continued) Moorse stated the definition of good cause would be included under Item F on page nine and includes the proposed language proposed by Orono. Flint suggested they go with 24 months as kind of a compromise, with the definition of good cause being included in the agreement. Persian commented in his view 24 months is really not that long of a period of time to resolve any disputes. Murphy stated should the City ever decide to cancel this agreement and have their own fire station, it would take them longer than two years to create a fire department. Sansevere stated he does not have a problem with the language proposed by Long Lake. Flint moved, Peterson seconded, to amend Clause F on Page Nine of the Settlement Agreement to read as follows: 1) For good cause by any city that desires to terminate its participation in the new fire services agreement, provided that such termination is preceded by a minimum of 24 months notice. Nygard stated he has a concern that the 24 months may not be sufficient. Barrett stated either city would need to demonstrate good cause for terminating the agreement, with all is cities reaching a mutual agreement. The City Council tabled any action on this motion. (Recess taken from 10:26 p.m. —10:32 p.m.). Contract for Joint Ownership Section 5.d — Joint Committee Barrett stated in his opinion the cities should avoid creating partnerships and other committees to make final decisions and that the final decisions should be made by the two cities. Barrett stated included in the Fire Protection Agreement there is language regarding a committee which is set up for reviewing the budget. Section 5.d as proposed by Long Lake establishes a joint committee to oversee the operations and maintenance of the Replacement Fire Station. Barrett stated this committee would have ultimate responsibility for these items. Barrett recommended the City Council continue to have final authority on these items. Moorse stated it is his understanding the joint committee that is being addressed in this provision is the joint construction committee, with that same committee continuing to operate after the building is constructed. Moorse stated there would be a joint advisory committee composed of representatives • PAGE 22 • • MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING October June 25, 2001 (Long Lake /Orono Fire Station, Continued) from each city who will handle budgeting and operations, and questioned whether the joint construction committee needs to continue. White moved, Sansevere seconded, to delete Section 5.d — Joint Committee, from the Contract for Joint Ownership. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Persian stated in his understanding the joint committee this section is referring to would bring items for consideration to the joint advisory committee. Persian stated once the construction of the building is complete, the joint committee would be dissolved. Bash stated Section 5.d would go under Item #5, page five, which is the joint fire station construction committee. Persian stated to his understanding if there is an item that exceeds $10,000, the joint construction committee needs to go to the cities for approval. Barrett stated the language reads that the joint committee shall be responsible to oversee the operation and maintenance of the Replacement Fire Station. Persian stated the intent of this paragraph was that as construction proceeded forward, if a certain item exceeded $10,000, they must get the approval of the cities before proceeding forward. Mayor Peterson suggested that Long Lake clarify that language. Flint commented that perhaps what they intended to say was any expenditure of funds shall be subject to approval of the two city councils. Bash commented in his view they are not able to spend more than what has been budgeted. Mayor Peterson inquired whether this language should be deleted at this time until further the language is clarified. Barrett recommended the two city administrators work out some language regarding that the joint construction committee functions during the construction of the replacement fire station, and once completed, that committee would cease functioning, and all items go through the joint advisory committee. Flint moved, Peterson seconded, to request the Long Lake and Orono City Administrators work out some appropriate language relating to the dissolution of the joint construction committee following completion of the Replacement Fire Station and language relating to the responsibilities of the joint advisory committee following construction. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. PAGE 23 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING October June 25, 2001 • (Long Lake /Orono Fire Station, Continued) Operation and Maintenance of Land and Building Barrett stated he would prefer Orono's proposed language. (Long Lake /Orono Fire Station, Continued) Sansevere moved, Nygard seconded, to approve the following language for inclusion in the Contract for Joint Ownership: "Long Lake shall have the overall responsibility to oversee the operation and maintenance of the land and building upon which the Long Lake Fire Station is to be relocated. However, expenditures will require the approval through the budgeting process set forth in the Amended Fire Protection Agreements. Liability and casualty insurance shall be carried on the Replacement Land and Replacement Fire Station, naming both Orono and Long Lake as insureds, in an amount determined to be sufficient by both cities based on the recommendations of the insurance agents of both cities; the costs of which insurance are to be shared in the same way as other operating costs under the Fire Service Agreement. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Term Barrett stated the main difference between the two is that Long Lake's language requires that both cities give notice of termination while Orono's language only requires that one city give notice of termination. Flint requested this item be set aside until some of the other items have been discussed. The City Council tabled any action on this item. Encumbrance of Property Flint recommended Orono's language be changed to read neither party can encumber. White moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve the following language for inclusion in the Contract for Joint Ownership: No city may sell, assign, transfer or encumber its interest in the Replacement Land or Replacement Fire Station or seek to condemn the interest of the other city by eminent domain without the express consent of the other city. Further, no sale, transfer, or encumbrance may occur except as expressly provided in this Agreement. The following language is to be deleted from the Contract for Joint Ownership: The City of Orono may encumber the Replacement Land and Replacement Fire Station as may be required for the sale of bonds to fund Orono's purchase of the Replacement Property and Orono's $680,000 contribution to the Replacement Fire Station. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. • PAGE 24 • C� MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING October June 25, 2001 (Long Lake /Orono Fire Station, Continued) Sale of Property Flint stated in his view this section goes to the term of the contract. Flint stated apparently the two cities are unable to agree on what happens to the property in the event of a sale. Long Lake's proposed language gives Long Lake the first right to purchase the property, with the sale price being determined by an appraisal, and payment terms be on terms which are commercially reasonable. Flint stated Orono had concerns regarding that language because in their view they feel it will be very difficult to determine what the appropriate value of the building and land will be in the event of a sale, and if one party does purchase it from the other, the purchasing city will need to pay cash for the facility in order to help fund a new fire station. Flint stated he and Council Member Sansevere have discussed this provision prior to tonight's council meeting, with the thought being that perhaps this section should be eliminated entirely. Flint stated an additional factor is that Orono has a provision in its current code that does not allow another city to own land in Orono. Flint stated it was the intent to amend that code to provide for the new fire station, with ownership by another city being limited to 50 percent. White stated in his view that is a major issue Flint susgested that provision be eliminated all together and that joint 50150 ownership would continue. Flint moved, White seconded, to delete any language relating to the Sale of the Property from the Contract for Joint Ownership. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Term Flint moved, White seconded, to delete any language relating to the term of the Contract for Joint Ownership. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Attorneys' Fees Flint stated he would prefer the section on attorney fees be deleted from the agreement since it might encourage people to sue. Flint moved, Peterson seconded, to delete any language relating to attorney fees from the Contract for Joint Ownership. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. PAGE 25 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING October June 25, 2001 (Long Lake /Orono Fire Station, Continued) Termination of Fire Services Agreement Bash stated in his view the 36 months does not benefit one city over the other and merely gives both cities a sufficient time in which to resolve their differences. Sansevere stated he does not have a problem with the 36 months as long as the definition of good cause is included in the agreement. Peterson moved, Nygard seconded, to amend Section F of the Settlement Agreement to read as follows: The amended agreement and Contract for Fire Protection shall be for a 20 -year term and shall be terminable during such period only as follows: 1) For good cause by any city that desires to terminate its participation in the new fire sen ices agreement, provided that such termination is preceded by a minimum of 36 months notice; 2) For breach of contract. 3) By mutual agreement of all cities covered by the agreement. Further, that a definition of good cause by included under Section F. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Term Flint recommended the language be amended to read notice of termination not less than three (3). ears before the original termination date to make it conform with the section relating to termination of fire protection services. Flint stated Item B would also need to be changed to three years. Flint moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve the following language for inclusion in the Contract for Joint Ownership: "This agreement shall be effective as of the date it is executed and extend through December 31, 2020. It shall automatically extend for successive five (5) year extensions unless one of the cities covered by this Agreement serves notice of termination three (3) years before the original termination date or the termination date of any subsequent extension. This Agreement may otherwise not be terminated except for the following reasons: 1. The express agreement of both cities to terminate the Agreement; or 2. The expiration of the term of the Agreement provided that the one -year notice of termination preceding the expiration of the term is given; or 3. An event that makes it unlawful for all or substantially all of the purpose of the Agreement; i.e. joint ownership of the land and building to be continued; or PAGE 26 • C� • MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING October June 25, 2001 • (Long Lake /Orono Fire Station, Continued) 4. For good cause as defined below: a) a pattern of inadequate service quality, including inadequate response to calls, inadequate training, inadequate handling of calls; b) a pattern of budget overruns. 5. For material breach of this Agreement provided that the city seeking termination first provides the other city written notice and thirty (30) days to cure. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Settlement Agreement and Contract for Joint Ownership Flint moved, White seconded, to approve the Settlement Agreement and Contract for Joint Ownership as amended. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 2, Nygard and Peterson Opposed. Bash inquired what options the two cities would have if the two agreements are not formally approved by Long Lake by Friday, June 30`h • Flint sugg s P Murphy ested if Long Lake is unable to approve the agreements by Friday, that perhaps Mu h and Jabbour meet with Mn/DOT and request a two week extension. Barrett stated to his understanding Long Lake would not be able to vote by proxy. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT City Attorney Tom Barrett had nothing to report. *( #30) LICENSES Flint moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve the following licenses. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Special Events: Tim Jaynes Thank You Party 1121 Elmwood Avenue July 21, 2001 12:00 p.m. Noon — 8:00 p.m. 0 PAGE 27 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING October June 25, 2001 *( #31) BILLS Flint moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve payment of the All Funds Account. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0. 4" 0111119%110-L Y 11 Sansevere moved, Nygard seconded, to adjourn the meeting at 11:28 p.m. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 11:28 p.m. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara Peterson. Mayor PAGE 28 • 0