Kiffi Summa, LWV Observer
The Work Session of the Northfield City Council began promptly at 7 PM, with all Councilors present except for C. Kris Vohs.
There were five items on the agenda for discussion; all allotted 20 minutes.
1. 2009 CAFR (City audit/financial report) - Tom Olinger, a partner with the City's audit firm, Abdo, Eick, and Meyers, LLC, presented highlights of the results of fiscal operations for the fiscal year ended 12.31.2009. This was comprised of the Auditor's Management Report, and a review of the 2009 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. Kathleen McBride said these documents would be available in hard copies at the Library, and a PDF file on the City's website. A general comment by Mr. Olinger is that there is no information in this review that "stands out".
2. Charter Commission - The Charter Commission has been discussing potential Charter changes relating to Northfield's form of government, and had asked to discuss this with the Council at a work session. The materials attached to the packet were meant to bring background and context to the discussion: the commissioners feel that Northfield is operating 'out of synch' with its Charter, and not in compliance with the 2001 plebiscite on the question of form of city government wherein the change to a Council/Manager structure was rejected by the voters by a margin of about 90 votes, approximately 10% of the total votes.
However, there was a lot to read and mull over in these materials, including a full text of proposed changes by Mr. Bill Beck, a Commission member, and the Council declined to engage in any dialogue on the matter. The submitted text was simply for a proposed set of changes and had not been agreed to , or voted on, by the entire Charter Commission.
Victor Summa, another member of the commission, felt it was inappropriate to bring to the Council in this form and at this time, but asked that they try to understand the results of Ordinance 801, its relationship to current practice, why that previous council enabled and became "owners"of Ord. 801; in general: "Look at current practice with a curious eye".
Charter Chair, Jayne Hager-Dee, explained that they were also working on charter changes re: current election law, Charter applications and judicial appointments, matters of petition, recall and initiative, and also the possible development of an Ethics Board.
There was some discussion of the relationship of the Council and the Charter Commission; Mayor Rossing stated that she did not wish to have "the political" creeping into the Charter Commission's deliberative process, i.e. no joint work groups.
***NOTE: Obviously, the Council is very pressed for time right now with the Safety Center project , and Administrator's departure, so they only received the materials from the Charter Commission, and will take up the matter for discussion in the future, if so inclined.
3. Library Fundraising Feasibility Study - Margit Johnson of the Library Board presented the results of the fundraising feasibility study to the Councilors. Library Director Lynne Young, and Board member Betsy Spethman were also present. After the Library expansion was included in the 5-Year Capital Improvement Plan, the Library Board hired an appropriate consultant, Library Strategies of St. Paul. Their task was to work with the Library Board to: 1. Develop and refine a case statement, 2. Select a group of community members to act as the fundraising feasibility Study team, 3. Develop a list of interviewees, and 4. Conduct interviews with possible interviewees/donors. The resulting report was presented to the Library Board on June 9, 2010.
Some 2009 statistics: 104 items checked out, on average, every hour the Library was open; 600 visitors, on average, each day the building was open; Over two-thirds of area residents have NF library cards.
These statistics testify to the importance of the NF Library to the area's residents. However the fundraising feasibility report was not encouraging of starting a capital campaign just yet. It was felt that there was a need for the City Council to listen to residents' hopes and concerns, and provide the leadership to find a solution which addresses all perspectives, fiscal and cultural, while moving the community forward on this project.
*** NOTE: the report by Library Strategies, " Northfield Public Library Capital Campaign Feasibility Study" is available at the Library.
Since 2001, when "tight spots" were beginning to emerge in the library's operations, the Library Director, and Board, have been gathering citizen input , and planning for a future expansion. They have been through numerous planning steps, architectural speculations, evaluations of the current as opposed to other possible sites, and have worked diligently to move the process forward. After the Five-Year CIP (voted on in November, 2009) included a Library expansion scheduled for 2014 , it seemed only prudent to begin to explore fundraising capabilities, since there the city Safety Center project was holding the first place in line.
The broad 'economic downturn' has brought some budget woes to the city, and there are concerns regarding how to fund the anticipated city facility projects.
Mayor Rossing emphasized the need for a Council appointed citizen Task Force to take the process to the next step, feeling that would be most appropriate in 2012, and would need to be a broad based selection of citizen participants.
Councilor Jon Denison, spoke of his fondness for the Library, but questioned the broadness of the base of support in the community, and also stated that the 8.5 Million dollars earmarked in the CIP was "not a commitment", but "a challenge".
The Library Board Chair replied that the Library Board was committed to do all the work the Council wished; but that they also needed a commitment from the Council.
The Mayor again stated that the final planning Task Force could begin to work in 2012, but Councilor Jim Pokorney said that in order to be committed to the Library, it was necessary to understand the dollars "consumed by the Safety Center" . He reiterated: "if we want to do both Safety Center, and Library (later), they have to be budgeted together, or 'later' may never come. We're still not being honest about that."
After more back and forth between the Mayor and C. Pokorney, Library Chair Johnson summed up the Council's direction, and thanked the Council.
4. Enterprise Rate Study Update - The City Engineer, Katy Gehler, presented a review of the goals of the rate study, provided an update of the needs for these funds, and presented the proposed rate structures for the Sanitary Sewer, Water, and Stormwater funds, based on a water conservation program.
*** NOTE: a simple explanation of "enterprise funds" are those which take in revenue above the actual use fees because of the need to build a reserve for the update, expansion , or replacement of these very costly water treatment facilities.
The new rates 'tier' the residential user's rates, with the first 500 cubic feet being free, then a slight increase per unit used in the second tier, etc. There are four residential tiers of usage; most homeowners fall within the first two (lowest ) tiers.
The engineer's report was the result of a study to propose new adequate rates, and will be presented to the Council for approval in August., finalized in November, and implemented early in 2011.
5. Budget Discussion
*** NOTE: although not noted in the item title, a subheading of the budget discussion was Administrator Joel Walinski's presentation of a proposed restructuring of city departments and personnel.
Finance Director McBride presented an overview of the city's budget, stating that the "General Fund budget for 2011 is balanced, .... does include some property tax increases". She guided the Council through a power point presentation covering everything from the General Fund, projected revenues, possible budget gaps, projected tax levy and projected tax base, ending with Budget policies.
There was short discussion of the anticipated Public Budget Meeting, scheduled for August 23rd, I believe.
Administrator Walinski then handed out a new organizational chart for city operations which cuts the departments from 11 down to 5, by combining the previous 11 under 5 newly titled Directors: Public Works/City Engineer Director, Public Safety Director, EDA/HRA, Community development Director, Administration Services Director, and Community Services Director. This is expected to effect a $150,000 savings. All the newly designated Directors will report to the City Administrator, who then reports to the Mayor/Council.
Mr. Walinski feels that if implemented, this restructuring will allow significant changes to be seen in how work is done, as well as cost savings. He felt the success of the proposed system would be in the selection of the five Directors. He also felt that although it has been discussed "in-house" for 2-3 months, and not although all employees agree with the concept, it would provide some much needed efficiencies in costs (70 % of the General Fund budget is personnel related) but also would be fairly easy to achieve. With Council approval, no ordinance changes would be necessary.
As the Mayor looked to the Councilors for reactions, not all weighed in with their opinions, but those that did asked for more detail, and Administrator Walinski said he would be providing that to them.
*** NOTE: A short discussion then ensued re: how/when to schedule interviews for the interim administrator position. After discussing attempting to do the interviews and decision making all at an evening meeting scheduled for the 9th of August, it was decided to do the interviews that morning, and the decision making at the evening meeting. The councilors will have had access to resumes for viewing, at City Hall, for several days preceding the interviews. They may each privately fill out a preference matrix if they so choose.
Adjournment: 10:37 PM.
