League of Women Voters of Northfield

Kiffi Summa, LWV Observer

All councilors were present.

There were three items on this Work Session Agenda; all scheduled for 30 minutes of discussion.
1. Review Draft Land Development Code: Downtown and Highway Commercial Districts
2. Enterprise Revenue Study
3. Review of Information from Budget Forum

Item #1 - This review of the Land development Code draft covered the regulations for the C1-B  Downtown Commercial District, and the C2-B  Highway Commercial Districts. The Council had previously been asked to comment on the C1-B Downtown draft regulations and now these were brought back for confirmation/ further comment by the Council.
Six of the Planning Commissioners were present for this discussion. Alice Thomas of the PC said that this meeting was to ensure that the Council was  all “on board” with the PC’s understanding of guiding policy, primarily derived from the City’s  Comprehensive Plan.
This newly configured Downtown District now includes the commercial area just west of the historic downtown and across Highway 3 , as well as the area to the immediate south of the core downtown,i.e., what used to be referred to as “downtown fringe”.
Although these areas are all named as one district now, there are some differing standards for the two types: the historic core, and the bordering areas.
Although the bordering areas are encouraged to follow a zero lot line model, with no parking in front of buildings, there are more requirements for parking to be provided, as opposed to the historic core where there is no requirement for each building to provide parking.
There was quite a bit of discussion on the stringency of the requirements as to set backs, etc., and the idea of a two-step approval process  in order to allow for more design flexibility was revived. For instance , if the project can conform to all the stated requirements for the district, then it is a quicker, more easily approved process for the builder; if a more complex, ‘creative’ design is wanted, then a slightly more complicated review process will be necessary.

The Council next reviewed and commented on the proposed regulations for the C2-B Highway district which is everything south of the river bridge at approximately 6th Street, south along  Highway 3 to County Road 1/Dundas.
There was a long discussion of the regulations and how they restricted, or did not restrict, commercial highway development; and what balance to strike with the Council’s ultimate goal, which is how to relate the highway development in an integrated way, to the rest of the community.
The previous day, some commercial property owners/ developers had met with representatives of the Chamber, City Staff, Council and Planning Commission to comment on these proposed Highway regulations. Brian O’Connell, Community Development Director, reported that there was a degree of frustration expressed by the developers. Their concerns centered most heavily on building placement, setbacks, parking etc. The builders felt strongly that they were knowledgeable about how to be successful in fulfilling the prevailing market needs, and should be allowed more discretion in their development choices.
A Planning Commissioner commented that he felt the PC was in a very hard place; that the Council was closer to the position of the Chamber/developers than to the Planning Commission, and yet they (PC) are tasked with fulfilling the goals of the Comprehensive Plan.
The resolve was agreed to lie in the same sort of two-step approval process, as was agreed to for the C1-B District, i.e., to provide flexibility where ‘needed’.
This discussion ended at 8:55.
*** NOTE:  The issue of adhering to the ordinance regulations, or providing “flexibility” through a two-step review process is bound to be problematic, considered arbitrary by some, but seems to be the only practical solution for the time being.

Item #2 – The Enterprise Revenue Study was presented by Katy Gehler, City Engineer and centered on  4 scenarios for revising the rates for water usage.  It is very important that the city’s fixed costs of water delivery to households and businesses be covered more thoroughly by the base rate charges. The Enterprise Funds must not only cover the day to day delivery of water, but must build a revenue reserve for the rebuilding of water infrastructure delivery and treatment.
The rate structure is based upon a base volume of water being included with the account charge, with price tiers for additional levels of water usage.
The Council was being asked for comment on which of the four scenarios to implement, a timeline, and some guidance for future escalation of rates.
Issues discussed were the problem of escalating rates at a bad economic time, and the need for building reserves for  water plant improvements which will be needed by 2020. Some improvements will be mandated by legislation requiring improved water treatment and discharge.
It was decided that the presented scenario #2 will be implemented early in 2011, with the goal of building adequate reserves  toward the predicted infrastructure replacement time.
Scenario #2 will increase the base  residential rate from $4.00 to $12.93, with a  tiered volume usage charge to figure any additional charges. The base charge will cover the initial 500 Cubic Feet of water consumption; it is estimated that 35% of residential users fall into that category.
This discussion ended at 9:35.

Item #3 – The review of the previous evening’s Public Budget Forum took only about 15 minutes of the Council’s time, as they hit some highlights of citizen comments, focusing on the need to continue making additional cuts, having a plan for a scenario if Local Government Aid was NOT withdrawn to the level expected, and the importance of volunteerism.
*** NOTE: There was not a large attendance at the Budget hearing which may have been somewhat frustrating for the Mayor who had expressed the need to hear from a “broader/ deeper” representation of resident’s opinions. This may have resulted in the return of the idea of a city wide survey, which the Mayor and Councilor Denison support, and which some Councilors find too expensive for the quality of information gained by such a process.
The one area of citizen comment not noted in the  Council’s discussion was the  request for large salaries of inactive departments (Economic Development, Community Development) to be curtailed for the time being, until the activities of those departments are once again needed.

Additional Item Added – Kathleen McBride, City  Finance Director, asked to add a discussion of the  Tax Levy rate to be set in early September. Previously it has been suggested/recommended that the levy be set to its highest limit, a  6.5% increase,  in the preliminary September budget presentation, as the state allows it to be reduced for the final December presentation, but does not allow an increase after the preliminary  rate setting.
The Council’s practice has often been to set the rate high in September and then work to reduce it as further information comes in throughout the fall.
Ms. Mc Bride presented a strong case for following a different procedure this year, setting a  more acceptable goal of a 3.5% increase in September, and made the case for that being adequate through the cautious use of reserves, as well as some cost savings through planned reorganization of City Hall Operations.
The council agreed, acknowledging that some of the reserve fund dollars come from slightly “over-levied” tax amounts which allowed those reserve funds to accumulate; i.e. tax payer’s dollars previously paid being used to keep the tax levy increase lower this year.
The meeting closed after Councilor Buckheit noted that the Council needed guidelines as to what were were appropriate fund balances to keep; when those balances should be used, and under what circumstances.

Adjourned at 10:20 PM.

Kiffi Summa,  LWV Observer

All Councilors were present; the Agenda was approved.
This was the second Special Council Meeting of the day, the 8 AM version being the interviews for the position of Interim City Administrator, with tonight’s follow-up meeting being the Council’s decision process and selection of their preferred candidate.

The two Agenda items were: 1.  Select Interim City Administrator,  and   2.  Approve contract for Interim City Administrator.

Mayor Rossing began the meeting by stating the two agenda items; Councilor Pokorney then asked for clarification on the structure of the discussion, i.e., “may we speak with ‘freedom’ now, use names, etc.?”
Elizabeth Wheeler, Human Resources Director, assured the councilor that the discussion could be more informal, now that the names were public and the interviews concluded.

Mayor Rossing then asked for “general comments” from the councilors.
After many such ‘general comments’ about the four candidates, their qualifications and how they ‘fit the bill’, Councilor Buckheit focussed the conversation by asking that they think about the ‘bill’ that was needed to be filled.
Two candidates rose to the top in the more specific discussion, and the Council all seemed to prefer Tim Madigan, the former City Administrator in Faribault.
Councilor Pownell made a Motion to approve Mr. Madigan, Councilor Vohs seconded the motion, and the Vote was unanimous to approve his selection for the position of Interim City Administrator.

The discussion then moved to the employment contract, which has been reviewed by City Attorney Chris Hood, with Ms. Wheeler informing the Council that during the application and interview process she had discussed contract parameters with all the  candidates, as the timeline was pressing.   The Council wants the interim person to have an overlap of at least two weeks with departing City Administrator, Joel Walinski.
All of  the candidates fell into a close range as far as desired salary; one who had preferred a higher salary  becoming more closely aligned through his not wanting the city’s offered family health benefits, which Ms. Wheeler stated would amount to about 14K. The selected candidate would qualify for a Step 8 position in the City’s state mandated Pay Plan System, which allows pay of $104,212. 00 for an interim administrator.

A motion was made and seconded to approve the form of the employment contract; approved by unanimous vote.

Ms. Wheeler then informed the Council that after a resolution at the 8/17 Council meeting to finalize the  hiring by the signing of the employment contract,  this process would be completed.

Mayor Rossing suggested that any Councilors who had reports might wish to give them as that was not done at the end of the very lengthy previous 8/3. meeting.
A few reports were given,and then the Mayor  reminded everyone to vote, and  wanted to “wish our councilors  good luck!”.

The meeting adjourned at 7:59 PM.

***NOTE:  At the 8.09 morning session,  the observer found it unusual that there was no audio, no video, no live-streamed broadcast, and no minutes taker, as well as no separate packet for that meeting. All of these seemed to leave a ‘hole’ in the Public Record.
When asking that question at the evening session, it was said that Ms. Wheeler, the Human Resources Director who was taking notes on the interviews, would be the official note taker for that meeting. Within Ms.  Wheeler’s job requirements  for a series of employment  interviews, that would seem to be a very different focus, but it was stated that her notes would provide minutes for that meeting.

Kiffi Summa, LWV Observer

The sole purpose of this early morning Special Council Meeting was to interview the four finalists for the position of Interim City Administrator. With the recent announcement by Joel Walinski, current City Administrator, of his leaving to take a like position In Leavenworth, Washington, the process of hiring an interim administrator has been on a  fast track. The Council convened at 7:40 this morning to go over last minute details of the interview process with Human Resources Director, Elizabeth Wheeler; the interviews then began at 8:00 AM. Each interview was scheduled for 45 minutes, and each councilor had a question to ask. The Councilors were careful to ask their questions in the same wording and manner to each of the interviewees, and also with regard to any ‘ follow-ups’ they may have asked.

The four interviewees, in the order they were interviewed were: Ronald Moorse, Tim Madigan, Craig Dawson, and Gregory Andrews.
All made a good impression, and  had strong expertise with varying degrees of strength within the various areas of expertise  the Council seemed to be most interested in pursuing. All have seemed to center their careers in Central Minnesota.

Councilors were asked to make notes/do some evaluating on each candidate’s interview sheet; there was some discussion with Ms. Wheeler as to whether they could take those sheets and the backup materials, resumes, etc., home with them for consideration this afternoon, as the Councilors will be returning this evening , at another Special Meeting at 7 PM, to make their decision/selection on filling the interim city administrator position.   It was decided that they could take copies of their notes, as well as the backup materials, with the  caveat of  “for their eyes only”.
It is hoped that the person selected will be able to start virtually immediately, so as to have some overlap with departing Administrator Walinski.

After the interviews, and a very brief discussion of the next process this evening, the meeting adjourned at 11:53.