League of Women Voters

Kiffi Summa, LWV Observer

At 6:30 PM , the Council convened, and then made a motion to adjourn to a Closed Session, for the purpose of negotiating with the Northfield  Union of Youth, The Key, for the sale of their building to the City, with a quorum of 5 of the 7 members.

At 7:15, the council convened their regular meeting; 6 of the 7 members present; Councilor Zweifel arriving shortly. I did not hear a report of the closed session portion of the meeting , if it was given. There were a lot of DJJD committee members gathering in the Council Chambers, in the first few minutes of roll call, etc.

When it came time to approve the Agenda, Councilor Buckheit asked for an item to be added; she wished to make a motion to reconsider the  previous action taken by Council with regard to the in-kind services and grant allotments for community events. Her request was honored, followed by a discussion of where to place it on the agenda.  Mayor  Rossing and Councilor Denison wanted it to become the last item  (# 13), but it was argued that there were so many interested parties present (DJJD) that it should be placed earlier, for their convenience. It was established as item # 13, at the end of the agenda. (Obviously, no packet information)

After approving  three sets of Minutes, the council heard a Special Presentation from Andy Yurek and Kathleen Meier on the successful application for, and implementation of, a MN Rural Hospital Flex Grant.  The grant allowed health providers and many organizations within the  City and County to join together in a campaign of education, training, prevention, and recapture of unused prescription drugs through the very successful Take it to the Box program. The collaboration of all relevant parties was impressive, as reported, and there are two information pieces of literature that may be obtained at the NF Hospital: "Heroin: Northfield's  Rapid Response"  by Ellen Tichich, clinical nurse educator, NF Hospital, and a brochure, "Heroin and  Opiate Usage  in Northern Rice County, MN: A Community Responds".

*** NOTE: for anyone interested , these print materials are both good ways to gain additional insight to a much discussed community problem. All the community partners are listed on the brochure, allowing you access to any information you might want to further investigate.

The Consent Agenda passed; within it were three appointments to Boards and Commissions: Mr. Mark Mohlke to the Mayor's Taskforce on Youth Alcohol and Drug Use, Mr. Ivan Imm to the Planning Commission/Zoning Board of Appeals, and Ms. Leslie Schultz to the Arts and Culture Commission.

(There remains a six-month vacancy on the  Economic Development Authority to be filled)

In the Open Public Comments, Mr. Jim Finholt urged the Council to establish a site for a permanent skateboard park, and asking that it be at Old Memorial Park. He also urged the Park and Recreation Board to dedicate that  park to  "active"  outdoor activities, rather than an emphasis on more passive activities.

The Regular  Agenda was comprised of 4  important items, as well as the newly added "reconsideration":

Item #9. Safety Center Projects Update - City Administrator Joel Walinski  gave the Council an overview of the  recent activities of  the  Steering and Design Committees, reported on discussion with MNDOT re: the proposed Fire Station site at Woodley/Hwy. 3, reported that  soil borings were being done on two of the three proposed Police facility  sites, and replied to C.  Pownell's question regarding progress on'partner' (Rural Fire Dept, Colleges) discussions.

Community  'questions' came up, and C. Buckheit voiced some concerns, summarized as: speed of  the process, budget, library expansion inclusion, $8.5 million  increased to $14.4 million bonding request ... and then questioned: "How do WE affect the process?"

Mayor  Rossing replied "WE are in charge".

After more discussion on process, it was agreed that it was extremely important for the community's questions to be answered.

Chris Hood, City Attorney, gave advice to councilors on their legal obligations regarding advocating for referendum.

Mayor Rossing's 'bottom line' was that much more public information was needed: "we need to educate"; and that there must be active engagement in answering questions.

Mr.  Walinski's stated schedule:

July 15 - site information brought back to steering committee

July 20 - site information to Council

August 3  -  Council begin  ballot language discussion

August 17  - Council finalize language

August 20- Final allot  language  to county (deadline)

Item #10 - Approve Budget Policy Direction -  The Council's  goal in having an overriding Budget Policy is to provide guiding principles for developing the 2011  Budget  which reflect their discussions, and incorporates their goals  and directions.

This passed as written with one minor, and one major addition: C. Denison wanted the word "potential" inserted  before "... formation of a Financial Advisory  Workgroup..."; C.  Pokorney added language: considering  "impact of Capital Improvement Debt on the General Fund  must  be  incorporated into Policy".

Kathleen McBride, City Finance  Director, voiced her agreement with C. Pokorney.

Item #11 - Consider City Residential Survey -  Staff was seeking direction  as to whether to proceed with a city-wide survey that would gauge residents' opinions on services and priorities in light of limited  resources.

Mr. Walinski  felt that  it would have the potential of reaching a wide array of residents, but it was hard to justify the cost. He felt that it would be most beneficial if done on a regular basis to show trends.

The Council was very divided as to the usefulness; mostly feeling that the costs were not supportable at this time, that the fall election and referendum were a 'survey' in themselves, and that at a less politically charged time, establishing a pattern of regular surveying  would be profitable.

Even the age-old controversy of  students came up, with C.Denison opining that students  were not  property owners, nor taxpayers.

Mayor Rossing was interested in getting a statistically relevant  evaluation, ie., going deeper into community opinion, to have enough citizen opinion at decision making points in the Council's process.

All three options presented in the packet  were  voted on: the final 4-3 vote directing staff to NOT move forward with a residential survey in  2010.

*** NOTE: It is unusual for all three options to be voted on; it almost seemed as if there was a desire for a subject on which there could be a clear-cut, definitive decision made, even though by a closely split vote.

Item #12  - Municipal District #4 Decertification - Kathleen McBride gave an explanatory  background presentation, first clarifying that this is the  renamed Downtown TIF District, and  is scheduled to close in 2013.

*** NOTE:  Please read the packet information, if interested, as any brief explanation here would raise more questions than it answered. There  has been a lot  of  public  discussion of this issue, and a  lot  of understandable  confusion as to whether or not the early decertifiication of this district would  actually return $$ to the taxpayers, city wide. According to Ms. McBride, it would not; it is more of an 'internal' readjustment of the  tax levy than an actual dollar return. Again, see the  packet for her information.

Mr. Walinski made a very  strong recommendation that did NOT approve early decertification, and that was supported by Ms. McBride;  both feeling that since the district could not be decertified before the end of 2011, due to contractual obligations with state offices re: the proposed Transit  Hub, it was better to capture the additional tax increments for  the  last few years, and be very judicial in how  those funds are spent, returning any remainder to the taxing units after 2013.

Most of the Council was in agreement; Mayor Rossing's 'bottom line' was  to take advantage of the leveraging  possibilities these dollars offered, keeping all options  open, while being wise in how the money is spent.

The final  vote was 6-1, NOT to decertify.

Item #13 -   C. Buckheit's proposed Reconsideration of former action taken on in-kind services and grants for community events - C. Buckheit stated her reason for wanting to reconsider this action  was based on feeling the Council had been not adequately informed, and the  process as implemented,  came in the middle or even past the budget planning stage of some event managers, therefore  causing some  problems.

***NOTE: during  this  discussion there was a question  of procedure raised by C. Denison;  C. Denison felt that the calling of the question by another councilor  during the  previous discussion of this matter had limited the discussion. Attny. Hood gave his opinion that  the previous vote would stand, but he would be glad to look into C. Denison's issue further.

C. Buckheit reiterated that  she  did not  wish  to change  tonight any decision previously made, but was asking for the matter to be reconsidered at a future meeting. When the vote  was taken it was 3-3, until the Mayor cast the 4th deciding vote to approve the reconsideration.

It  will be taken up at a Special Meeting before next week's Work Session.

General Statement:  In the observer's  opinion, this has not been an easy  time for this Council.  There seem to be large philosophical differences within the group, and yet they  have worked at  solving  the  many complex and difficult  issues they have been presented with, and all those issues are further  complicated by the general economic  downturn, as well as Northfield's  own  budget  crisis.