Skip Navigation

Blog

Council Meeting - Tuesday, March 16, 2010, 7:00 p.m.

March 19, 2010 at 12:06 pm
By admin

Jane McWilliams, LWV Observer

All councilors were present.

Review Disbursements: At the request of several councilors, 4 items were removed from the 16 item consent agenda for consideration on the regular agenda. Among these was approval on the monthly expenditure report, an item about which Councilor Jon Denison had concerns. This was approval of over $21,000 to pay for the cost of document search and copying in conjunction with the court case against Former Mayor Lee Lansing. Councilor Denison, while not disputing the expenditure, said that regardless how the case is concluded, the “true victims are the citizens.”  Whether it happens during this council’s tenure or the next “the citizens should bring a victim statement to the court demanding restitution for the losses” created by payments related to the Lansing proceeding. He requested that the mayor or the council move in that direction.  Councilor Jim Pokorney said while he understood Councilor Denison’s concern, this a court matter where a citizen is asking for information as a part of due process.

In public comments on the issue, Kiffi Summa said that there are three seated council members who chose to pursue this issue and that "it isn’t necessarily taxpayers who are being victimized.  It is  . . . been so disruptive to this community that it should be put behind us until it is settled.”

Approval of the City Administrator’s Contract was also removed from the consent agenda. Councilors agreed that the process needed to be revised in the future to allow more time for discussion, and that there needed to be periodic review between contract renewal decisions. City Attorney Chris hood advised the council that if they want to alter the performance review process, the contract would need to be amended. Following discussion, City Administrator Joel Walinski suggested that there be an informal discussion in July and then in November.

The council approved the withdrawn items.

4th Street and adjacent blocks project: At their March 2, 2010 meeting, the council directed staff to move forward on completion of the design of the project, which did not include replacing trees in the section between Division and Washington Streets. Staff had reported that trees couldn’t flourish in the area because of bedrock and the proximity of shading buildings.

Several members of the public spoke. Griff Wigley circulated photographs of the area which he said show that the trees “have actually done pretty well for 30 years” in that block.  Leif Knecht, Bridgewater resident and owner of a local nursery for whom “trees are his passion,” said that there are many varieties which can survive in that location and that the city should have them on the boulevards for ambience. Former mayor Keith Covey agreed with Knecht and urged the council to reconsider deleting the trees from this block and to ask the staff to come back with another proposal.  The council had a hard time figuring out how to make the change in the decision they had passed earlier without having to go back to square one. Mayor Mary Rossing explained a rescission motion, one was made and withdrawn. There was a long discussion about the various design options, American Disabilities Act requirements, and discrepancies between allocation of sidewalk for this project compared with that in the sidewalk dining ordinance, how many trees to install, and where.  Council Rhonda Pownell suggested that the council direct the staff to put trees back in the block, and that the matter doesn’t need to come back to the council.  Following voting to authorize bid advertisement, the council directed the staff to work with foresters to decide how to put some trees back in the sidewalk area, and that there be no “bump-outs” or planters as had been suggested by the StreetScape Task Force earlier.

Northwest Utilities Extension: Council authorized staff to enter into a contract with SRF Consulting Group to design the utilities in the newly annexed property west of Northfield City Hospital.  The wastewater enterprise funds will cover the cost (not to exceed $27,800), which Administrator Walinski said was much cheaper than it would be in a different economic climate. According to Walinski, the design should be valid until such a time as the property is developed, and utilities need to be constructed.

Legislative Update: The two local legislators, Representative David Bly and Senator Kevin Dahle, reviewed current activities of the 2010 Legislative session. Capital items for Northfield (trails, Safety Center) were line item vetoed by the governor. They acknowledged that the cuts in Local Government Aid “are killing you.”  Representative Bly said a tax on clothing to produce more revenue is being discussed. For the past 8 years, there has been no revenue increase and a series of cutbacks in response. Cuts to the bone during this half of the biennium don’t address the next one. “We really haven’t faced up to the long term, “ Representative Bly said. We’ve run out of options,” according to Senator Dahle. Administrator Walinski asked about the possibility of a local sales tax and of lifting levy limits.  Dahle said they are being talked about.

The two legislators are working on undoing 2002 legislation, which prohibits money being spent at any level to study the reinstitution of the Dan Patch railroad, which would run between Northfield and Minneapolis, a project which was a high priority of a previous Transportation Department Study. The council approved a letter supporting the legislators’ efforts to lift the gag order.

Approach for 2010 Budget Reductions: the staff sought direction for adjusting the 2010 budget in light of the significant cuts in state aid anticipated for this year and the next. Staff suggested questions like: Should the council identify core and/or essential services? Are there services which are not typical for a city our size? Should the council rank-order services and what kind of information would be necessary for this? Shall we look for opportunities for sharing services? Consolidating them? How will services be delivered should they  be reduced?  What fees and charges would be acceptable? What new revenues? What kind of public input would be advisable and useful? What will be the impact of a further contracted property tax base on taxpayers? Finance Director Kathleen McBride provided charts showing revenues and expenditures over time, and including anticipated revenue reductions. (  http://www.ci.northfield.mn.us/assets/p/Packet-Section-3-Items-17-to-22.pdf - scroll down to Item 21). Council Erica Zweifel suggested that the League of Minnesota Cities has workshops available for helping prioritize which she suggested would be better than paying for a formal survey of citizens’ views. Administrator suggested a survey of boards and commissions might be helpful. Mayor Rossing said the question we need to ask is what are core services – “We don’t want staff to chase down numbers and have us say no.”  For a half hour, individuals put forward many suggestions, and Administrator Walinski said he’d come back with recommendations on what he has heard tonight, including public participation, format for providing information, talking points and some budget options.

Council Goals: Councilors Betsey Buckheit and Jim Pokorney provided a new version of the council goals and action steps. Mayor Rossing raised concerns about reference to Minnesota GreenStep Cities, a program under development for supporting sustainable development.  Councilor Zweifel distributed some information about the program which had been mentioned in the Strategic Planning sessions and which she believes contains many of the Northfield goals and  could serve as a framework for implementing them.  A committee consisting of Councilors Rhonda Pownell, Jim Pokorney and Betsey Buckheit will revise the 2010 Goals once more; distribute them for the council to rank. The committee will collate the responses and distribute another draft the last week of March.

Following brief council member updates, the meeting was adjourned at 11:05.

Comments

  • March 19 2010 at 12:34 pm
    kiffisumma

    Another good report , Jane ,on a long and sometimes contentious council meeting.

    The council, after a calm first year, now seems to be sorting out some differing personal operational styles; I find this healthy, and supportive of their desire for "openness".

    I also believe that the narrative style of reporting that you have been using in recent reports is a good solution to the 'style' questions that we have struggled with in a time when much of the basic factual info is on line.

Add a comment

Name:*
Comment:*
The following fields are not to be filled out. Skip to Submit Button.
Not Comment:
(This is here to trap robots. Don't put any text here.)
Not URL:
(This is here to trap robots. Don't put any text here.)
Avoid:
(This is here to trap robots. Don't put any text here.)