Jane McWilliams, LWV Observer
All members of the council were present.
There were 12 items on the consent agenda, 2 public hearings and 3 items on the regular agenda. Two discussion items, the scheduling of the 2010 council meetings and of the next steps in facility planning took up the major portion of the regular agenda.
Of note in the consent agenda was commitment of staff time to assist the Cannon River Watershed Partnership in applying for two grants to construct a rain garden in Way Park. Councilor Erica Zweifel spoke in favor of this collaboration, which will create an alternative method of dealing with surface water, and which as a demonstration project which will provide educational opportunities to the neighborhood and community at large.
The city is required to hold a hearing on the 2010 budget and the 2009/payable 2010 property tax levy. Finance Director Kathleen McBride provided a power point overview explaining where tax dollars go and what changes in the proposed 2010 levy will be. She also illustrated the effect on a homestead and a commercial property. (To see this information: http://www.ci.northfield.mn.us/meetings/council/2009/12/07/city_council_meeting97.) At their work session next week, the council will look at options for lowering the levy before making the final decision on December 21. Victor Summa and David Delong asked questions about the levy for the Economic Development Authority which McBride said they would research for the work session next week. Vern Rippley suggested that instead of charging fees, the council should just raise the necessary funds in city taxes. McBride replied that during these economic conditions “we cannot increase property taxes to make up for state aid losses.”
Mark Ruff and David Callister, of Ehlers and Associates, the city’s bond advisors, reported that the bond ratings have been brought up to AA, recognizing the stable employment base, local wealth and income, and the city’s low debt burden. Other factors include not dipping into the fund balance to support the budget, having an investment policy and a capital improvement plan. Ruff presented Mayor Mary Rossing a plaque recognizing the city’s good financial management. The council approved issuance and sale of bonds to finance several infrastructure projects.
Following their November 16 decisions on the safety center, the council took up the discussion of next steps: proposed timelines, police station site selection and criteria, and the process for selecting an architectural firm for the facilities. Councilor Jon Denison, who had voted against the safety center decisions, expressed concern about unanswered questions for using the present site for the fire department. Mayor Rossing replied that this is a good reason for having the architect work on both facilities – it “will help us make a decision on a site.” City Administrator Joel Walinski noted that decision would be made in May or June. Rossing responded to Council Jim Pokorney’s concern about funding, noting that in February they will establish a plan for this. Staff provided a chart for establishing criteria for the site selection, which the staff would then use to prepare to provide the council the top three potential sites. A second chart for reviewing and ranking proposals from architectural firms came next. Walinski said a review team of 2 staff, 2 councilors, and 2 contractors and/or facility people would recommend a firm to the council, using the criteria. Councilor Betsey Buckheit said they should make sure all local firms apply. Although local is “not the highest on my list” there was severe public criticism of the attorney decision process. There then was a discussion about what “local” means. Councilor Rhonda Pownell suggested that if all else is equal, “local” should be given preference. Credentials assuring energy-efficient design were mentioned. Zweifel warned that rather than seeking LEED certification, use of those standards in constructing facilities would have a similar result. Facility planning will come up again on December 21.
In anticipation of the new year, the council talked about changing meeting dates from Monday to some other day in the week, partly to accommodate the flow of decisions for approving building projects in the community. As she had suggested at a previous meeting, Pownell suggested “listening sessions” as “a good opportunity to build relationships” and for all councilors to hear the same message. Pokorney noted that “we do it now” with presentations like that of the former Energy Task Force tonight. He warned about going down a “slippery slope” and that it would be hard for the council to limit the input. They discussed Pownell’s suggestion of a monthly dinner prior to the meeting as is done in Rochester, although Rossing responded she would not be comfortable spending city money on meals. Following the brainstorming of both meeting dates and public involvement, Rossing said she and staff would bring “something in the form of a motion to consider” at their next regular meeting.
Earlier in the meeting, George Kinney and Pat Allen, of the former Energy Task Force, asked the council to consider pursuing the grant resources recommended by the task force, monitor progress on the carbon free goal, and establish an action plan which they distributed to the council. Rossing said the council will be taking up the matter of boards and commissions on December 14, and the discussion of council goals after the new year.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:16.
Comments
I was simply appalled to hear the council, even for a moment, entertain the idea of a meal meeting... especially after the all the comments made by Mark Anfinson about the Hospital Board, as well as the history of the Rice County Commissioners.
Councilor Pownell works very hard at her job, and I was amazed that she had so little understanding of the possible problems with a 'social' meeting.
There is a tendency to be a bit sloppy about where the public business is done, and where decisions are made,
with this council ; a not-too-serious example being that council meetings WILL shift nights although no action was taken on that discussion. Boards and commissions have been notified to look at rescheduling, so it's either an accepted fact after the discussion, or else a lot of preparatory hoo-ha.
Regardless, the practice of not making formal decisions will at some point be on a potentially serious matter, e.g. the reason to adhere to Best Management Practices.