Jane B McWilliams, LWV Observer
All councilors were present.
Safety facilities: The most anticipated item on the agenda was the decision about the site for a new police station. The council was also supposed to receive findings about whether the current site could be used for a “reconfigured or rebuilt” fire station. It also was scheduled to review the current budget projections for safety facility improvements over all.
The Steering Committee appointed to make a recommendation on the police site had met earlier in the day and received information which sent the fire facility in a new direction and postponed the police site decision. Mike Clark, one of the architectural and engineering consultants working with the council, reported that the Steering Committee recommended that the council proceed to plan for a new fire facility on a site which had not been under consideration previously.
City staff has had discussions with the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MNDOT) about the possibility of the city’s purchasing their Woodley Street maintenance site. MNDOT hopes to move that operation to Dundas. Although Northfield has the right of first refusal on the MNDOT property, there are environmental concerns, which would need to be addressed. It could be about 16 months before MNDOT could release the site to the city.
The consultants presented 4 options to the committee, along with preliminary budget analyses for each option. The committee recommended that the city support the option to build the police station and the fire station on separate sites and demolish the existing safety center and restore the site. In addition, the city should proceed to plan building a new fire station on the Woodley site, and to continue to evaluate the southern sites for the police department.
Placing the fire department on the Woodley property would keep it centrally located for maximum coverage. This permits the city to defer building a substation for coverage of the northwest part of the city in the short term. The timing of construction would be as anticipated earlier: police department in 2011 and fire department in 2010.
Councilors asked questions and eventually approved the recommendation of the Steering Committee to continue discussion with MNDOT while simultaneously moving forward with design of the police department on a southern site and of the fire department on the Woodley one. During public comments before the vote, Don McGee noted the importance of a central location for the fire department. He called attention to a recent fire in the community where because of quick response time, a building was saved from total destruction. Kiffi Summa said it “wouldn’t hurt if the council decided to wait a year to make this decision.” The “drop dead” date, June 15 for the funding decision, is entirely too controlling. “No one would blame you for taking all the time necessary to make the best decision. They will blame you for a bad decision that is controlled by time.”
The materials distributed to the Steering Committee and at the council meeting are available at: http://www.ci.northfield.mn.us/assets/p/projects/SafetyCenter_2010/files/Steering_AgendaPacket_20100518.pdf
2010 Budget Retrenchment Actions: City Administrator Joel Walinski distributed a packet of information in preparation for council decisions on the current budget as well as for 2011 and beyond. There is a chart showing reductions the state has made in the city’s local government aid (LGA) for 2008, 09, and to date in 2010. Another highlights general fund reductions the city has made during the same period. For example, in 2010, there has been a reduction of $1 million, and the prospect of an additional reduction as a result of recent legislative budget actions. Since 2008, the city has eliminated 12.5 positions and made other cuts in order to balance the budgets.
Another chart breaks down the general fund expenditures by importance: essential; important/financial; important/community; and desirable. Walinski asked each department to break down their budgets similarly. This information is provided as possible criteria for making additional reductions.
Walinski also provided reductions for consideration in the near term by June 1, 2010, totaling $357,356; middle term reductions to be completed by September 2010 and long term reductions for later consideration. Mayor Mary Rossing commended the staff for putting together this information. “Cuts will affect core services,” she said. “We want to make sure our expenditures reflect our current values.” Councilors asked questions and commented on the information in the near term proposal. There was concern that they avoid cuts which affect the most vulnerable citizens. Several mentioned the need to consider some additional revenue sources. Walinski said city has a stabilization fund which could help mitigate future revenue reductions. He suggested the council consider appointing a financial advisory committee to look at income sources for the long term.
Walinski wondered how much of the details of the reduction the council should get into. Rossing said the council should not micro- manage the decisions. She said she hoped the public would weigh in on this process by calling council members or submitting suggestions as provided for in the city’s website.
In the end, the council adopted a motion to support the direction of the proposed short-term reductions. Walinski said he would consult notes from the discussion for consideration when the council takes up mid-term reductions this summer.
To see the full Budget Retrenchment Actions document on the city website: http://www.ci.northfield.mn.us/assets/b/Budget-Retrenchment.pdf
At the beginning of the meeting, Myor Rossing spoke about her leadership of council deliberations, saying she had not facilitated them as well as she should have. She noted that the council must set an example because of their role as public officials and she will work harder to control meetings and work session so that the meetings focus.
She asked her colleagues to ask questions for clarification, not to make a political point. In order to have the best information, she asked councilors to forward questions to staff prior to meetings. If they have issues with professional performance of members of the staff, she asked that they notify the mayor privately. Similarly, if there are issues about the behavior of the council or how someone is representing the council, please address the member of the mayor individually and privately so that this can be corrected.
In the future, direction for staff should come from the council as a whole, and not from one member. She asked that councilors direct their comments to the chair so that they don’t become personal.
“I promise to try to lead meetings with a higher level of decorum, but I look to you to help. We have challenging decisions ahead.”
The mayor’s remarks may have been prompted in part by a recent incident in which several council members appeared to feel unrepresented by the point of view of one of their representatives in that person’s role in an advisory committee. (See my May 11, 2010 notes.)
