Jane B McWilliams, LWV Observer
Kris Vohs was absent.
The special meeting was called to approve an outdoor dining permit for the Hideaway Coffee House, expanding their liquor license to allow service of alcohol in a designated area on the sidewalk in front of the business this summer. The other item on the agenda was approval of the application by the city’s Environmental Quality Commission’s Energy Subcommittee for a grant of $595,000 from the Legislative Citizen Commission on Minnesota Resources. (These are funds derived from the newly enacted Legacy Amendment, a designation of a portion of the sales tax for environmental issues.) The intent of the grant is to fund a City Energy Coordinator position for 3 years; rehabbing an existing Northfield-area house as a demonstration of energy efficient cost saving; and to finance a feasibility study to determine the funding mechanism for a sustainable clean energy program.
Development of a skateboard plaza was the topic of the major portion of the work session. The council had discussed this matter earlier this month, and had asked the Park and Recreation Advisory Board to give them a list of pros and cons of each for locating a skateboard plaza in Ames Park or in Riverside Park. PRAB members Grace Clark and Nate Knutson, distributed and reviewed arguments pro and con, generated during a 3-hour meeting of the board on April 21. The topics under consideration were: location; aesthetics; noise; size; utilities; water control; staff access; public access, parking; security; safety (access to and from the park); injury in the park; cost; and best use of the site. After analyzing the pros and cons, the PRAB stood by their original recommendation: that Ames Park is their choice for a site of the skateboard park.
Staff provided cost estimates for 3 possible plans in Ames Park – for not only the plaza but for improving the entire park. Because of safety concerns, the staff had consulted the Minnesota Department of Transportation about possible ways to provide access to the park and reported that MNDOT would not allow certain solutions. City Administrator Joel Walinski distributed a chart showing a 10-year projection of the “Community Enhancements Capital Budget for Recreation”. If the city budgets $210,000 this year for the skate park only (not including other improvements at Ames Park) it would leave a negative ending balance in the Parks Fund of $9,377. He noted that Ames Park might be considered a portion of the city’s Greenway Plan which is eligible for the Master Development Funds, but that “would be a larger discussion.”
Councilors seemed ambivalent about the location of the skateboard plaza, not only because of the logistical problems with both sites, but, finally, because of the cost. They had a wide-ranging discussion lasting over an hour and a half. Finally, Walinski noted that at a regular meeting, the council would need to vote up or down on the PRAB recommendation. Mayor Mary Rossing suggested that once the council makes a decision, the question could go back to the PRAB to determine what their spending priorities are.
The council discussed allowing the city to administer administrative citations and penalties, as an alternative to criminal prosecution for code violations. This would require an amendment to the City Charter, which could be initiated by the council submitting the change to the Charter Commission.
The council received a letter from the Northfield Downtown Development Corporation calling attention to problems downtown with graffiti and other vandalism. NDDC asked for increased police surveillance and enforcement and that the council adopt a “Community Expectations” policy, addressing cleanliness, respect, safety and pedestrian friendliness. The council seemed receptive to the policy idea, and discussed a number of ways it could be distributed and become an educational tool.
The meeting adjourned at 9:50.
Comments
The discussion of administrative penalties was 'short-changed' because of the length of the Ames Park discussion , but this is an important issue , and one that should be of interest to LWV on a policy level.
Basically the idea was presented as one of improving efficiency, and it would do that considering the crowded court schedules , but it is also looked upon as a way to garner cash.
There was a bill in the MN house on this subject; it failed, and there is a senate vote upcoming. The pragmatic vote for legislatures is that passing administrative citations would lose some money for the state. Administrative citations are used in some cases in MPLS, and there it seems to work well.
Here's the policy concern: I would think it preferable to have the cities in Rice County who are finding the slow court process to be a frustration, band together and urge the county to provide an administrative hearing officer for these cases, rather than a Northfield ad hoc group of local lawyers.
I think there is potential for personalities to get involved in a small town setting where many people know each other, thereby potentially diminishing the impartiality.