City Council Work Session – Monday, December 14, 2009, 7:00 p.m.

Jane McWilliams, LWV Observer

All council members were present.

Highway 3/Highway 19 Final Report

At their September 2009 meeting, the council approved application for funding from the American Recovery and Reauthorization Act (ARRA), Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) programs.  If funded, the money would be applied to an underpass at Greenvale Avenue and Highway 3, correcting downtown/Water Street pedestrian safety issues, completion of the transit hub, and a grade separation near the Malt-o-Meal plant at Orchard Street and Highway 19.  Tonight, City Engineer, Katy Gehler-Hess and Bolton and Menk consultant engineer Chris Chromy suggested some short-term improvements to address pedestrian and bicycling safety. The Non-Motorized Task Force evaluated the safety of crossings at Highways 19 and 3, at 5TH and at 2nd streets and recommended seven possible improvements. The council agreed to a new walk speed of 3.5 feet per second (from 4.0, the current one), which would give pedestrians more time to cross; countdown signals which inform pedestrians how much time they have to safely cross would need to be funded by the city and would cost approximately $15,000; and installation of bicycle sensors which would trigger the signals just like vehicles do at the intersections, also costing $15,000 for further study and installation.  Staff will bring the final report to the council later for adoption.

Safe Routes to School Study
Using a Safe Routes to School grant, a steering committee of city and school district staff and members from the Non-Motorized Task Force, working with a consultant, evaluated the routes to the 3 elementary and middle schools. Gehler Hess reviewed the process and presented the recommended phased approach aimed to reduce safety concerns in order to encourage increased pedestrian traffic. Increased enforcement at the intersection of Highway 256 and Jefferson Parkway, “walking school buses” run by parent organizations (adult supervision) and education of students, parents and drivers are in the first phase. Later, engineering solutions will be considered, following evaluation of phase one strategies.  Councilors Rhonda Pownell and Jim Pokorney volunteered to meet with city staff, school board and staff representatives to pursue defining roles and responsibilities for these measures.

Budget Wrap-UP – Final Levy Decisions
Finance Director Kathleen McBride, to prepare for final action on the 2010 budget and pay 2010 property tax levy at the December 21, 2009 council meeting, presented information and recommendations. The General Fund levy increase, with reductions for the two bonded debt levies and the General Fund is reduced from $325,120 to $125,043. The proposed Economic Development levy is $249,250, an increase of $10,760, or 4.5% over 2009. Councilor Jon Denison said he could not support this, as he believes the EDA has not taken a long-range view of their expenditures.  Pokorney disagreed, saying that in bad economic times, the EDA plays an important role and needs the increase.  The Housing Redevelopment Authority proposed levy is $216,043, an increase of $22,163. Councilors all agreed the increase, to help blighted and/or foreclosed properties,  was merited.

There will be an unreserved and undesignated balance in the General Fund of $166,972 which McBride recommended retaining for “preparing for the future” – addressing the deficit in the Insurance fund preparing for additional aid cuts and to handle unanticipated needs and expenses.

Discussion on Boards and Commissions Structure

In pursuit of the council’s goal #1, “Council will implement effective methods of communication with citizen advisory groups and community,” the council viewed a power point presentation led by Councilor Erica Zweifel.  She reviewed accomplishments and ongoing action steps toward the goal. The discussion focused on how to make the work of boards and commissions consistent with council goals, how to evaluate their work and leadership, and possibly provide training opportunities for board leadership, and create structured “work sheet” for boards and commissions to communicate with the council. This matter will be a subject of the council’s 2010 goal setting – probably a 4-5 hour meeting in early 2010.

Chamber of Commerce meeting
City Administrator Joel Walinski noted that there would be a meeting Tuesday, December 15, 8:00 a.m. at the Community Resource Bank with the Chamber of Commerce, with council members attending. He will discuss facilities projects, and McBride will discuss the budget. There will be time afterward for questions and answers for staff and councilors. Through an oversight, there was no public notice of this meeting in the usual places, the Work Session Packet or the city’s web site.

The meeting ended at 9:20 p.m.

3 Comments

  1. kiffisumma
    Posted December 16, 2009 at 6:42 am | Permalink

    I cannot see from your report, Jane, that there was anything new in the council discussion on Boards and Commissions…Am I missing something? I personally would prefer that the Council leave the B/Cs structure alone, but they have been talking about this for a year now.

    As for the “non-noticed” Chamber meeting this morning, that same “oversight” resulted in no public notification of the Annexation consultant’s design charette days, and tonight the Planning Commission was asking why they had not been notified of this Thursday’s meeting with that same consultant to go over the results from the charette.

    Is Staff not following Council’s goals of improved information delivery? or are they simply overtaxed with work loads?

  2. Jane McWiliams
    Posted December 16, 2009 at 8:01 pm | Permalink

    Maybe I missed something, Kiffi, but as I said above, the boards and commissions structure discussion didn’t seem to me very substantial. the number and composition of the b and c (as was suggested in the sub-committee recommendations in February) wasn’t mentioned. You watched the tape since posting this. What is your impression of the discussion?

    Who is the consultant meeting with on Thursday? Jody Gunderson along with members of the EDA? Didn’t the EDA contract with the Koegler firm? Of course, the PC members have a vested interest in the outcome of the charette, too, so it is strange if no one was notified.

  3. kiffisumma
    Posted December 17, 2009 at 4:21 am | Permalink

    Since watching the meeting disc… and that’s a whole ‘nother subject as to the city’s new rules on that!… I would agree that the discussion, although quite long was simply a ‘rehash’ of former positions taken.
    C. Zweifel did say, however that the council had not done all the work on this subject that they had projected to do… and that’s fine, if you would prefer the Boards and Commissions to stay as they currently exist.

    Thursday at 6 PM, Hoisington Koegler, consultant for the
    development of the “business Patk” on the NW 530 Ac. annexation will be holding a meeting in the council chamber for the Steering Committee. Mr. Koegler has emphasized all along that these meetings are public, that the public may attend and watch/listen, but there will not always be segments of the meeting where the public may interact.
    However … once again… the meeting is NOT noticed on the City’s calendar, as the Design Charette was not.

    It has happened too often to be once again an “oversight”.

Post a Comment

Your email is never shared. Required fields are marked *

*
*