Loading...
061107 CC Reg MinCITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, JUNE 11, 2007 MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. Mayor Lizee called the meeting to order at 7:04 P.M. A. Roll Call Present. Mayor Lizee; Councilmembers Callies, Turgeon, Wellens and Woodruff; Administrator Dawson; Attorney Keane; Planning Director Nielsen; Director of Public Works Brown; and Engineer Landini Absent: None B. Review Agenda Administrator Dawson asked that Item 9.C, Work Sessions - Cablecasting, be added to the Agenda for the evening under General/New Business. Director Nielsen asked that Item 8.B be removed from the Agenda for the evening; Blair Bury, the applicant, had withdrawn his application for a text amendment to the City's Zoning Code. Wellens moved, Turgeon seconded, Approving the Agenda as Amended. Motion passed 5/0. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, May 29, 2007 Callies moved, Wellens seconded, Approving the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of May 29, 2007, as presented. Motion passed 5/0. B. City Council Work Session Minutes, May 29, 2007 Turgeon moved, Callies seconded, Approving the City Council Work Session Minutes of May 29, 2007, as presented. Motion passed 5/0. 3. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Lizee reviewed the items on the Consent Agenda. Woodruff moved, Wellens seconded, Approving the Motions Contained on the Consent Agenda and Adopting the Resolutions Therein. A. Approval of the Verified Claims List B. Staffing - No action required SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING June 11, 2007 Page 2 of 12 C. Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 07-039, "A Resolution Approving Plans, Specifications and Estimates and Authorizing Advertisement for Bids for the Rehabilitation of Lift Station No. 12, City Project No. 06-01." Motion passed 5/0. 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor presented this evening. 5. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS A. Mr. Steve Fenlon to Request Public Hearing regarding Tax-Exempt Revenue Note for Excelsior Covenant Church School Administrator Dawson stated Steve Fenlon, on behalf of Excelsior Covenant Church, was requesting a public hearing regarding tax-exempt financing for the Excelsior Covenant Church School. The City of Deephaven agreed to issue the tax-exempt note. Because the Church School was located in Shorewood, the Shorewood City Council must hold a public hearing. He stated Mr. Fenlon was present this evening to review the technicality of the process. Mr. Fenlon, a principal with Midwest Health Care Capital, stated he was engaged by Excelsior Covenant Church to arrange tax-exempt financing for the Excelsior Covenant Church School, a school located in Shorewood. He explained the City of Shorewood had issued $10 million in bonds in 2007; therefore, the any additional bonds the City would issue in 2008 would not be bank-qualified and they would incur a higher interest rate. He stated Klein Bank, which was located in Chanhassen would hold the note and bank qualification would be essential. Mr. Fenlon stated when the determination was made that Shorewood could not issue bank-qualified bonds, Excelsior Covenant Church decided to approach Deephaven as a large number of the students attending the Church School resided in Deephaven. Deephaven did not have the jurisdiction or authority to issue atax-exempt note for a property that was located in Shorewood without the permission of Shorewood, and Shorewood could only grant permission once it held a public hearing on the matter. He noted that the public hearing must be noticed no less than fifteen days before and no more than thirty days before the hearing. Woodruff moved, Callies seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 07-041, "A Resolution Calling for a Public Hearing on July 9, 2007, on the Issuance of an Educational Facilities Revenue Note and Authorizing the Publication of a Notice of the Hearing for the Excelsior Covenant Church Project." Motion passed 5/0. S. Report on Minnetonka Community Education (MCE) activities by Tad Shaw, MCE Representative Tad Shaw, Shorewood's Representative on the Minnetonka Community Education (MCE) Advisory Council, provided an update on MCE matters. SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING June 11, 2007 Page 3 of 12 Mr. Shaw stated that Shorewood had been represented on the MCE Advisory Council (formerly Minnetonka Community Education Services, MCES) by four different residents over a 30-plus-year period, noting he had been the City's representative for a very long time. He stated the MCE organization had exceptionally fine teachers and quality individuals involved with the organization. Mr. Shaw stated his experience with the MCE had evolved in a negative manner over the last few years. He stated that from his vantage point, the MCE Advisory Council had evolved to a "public relations board", more of a communications vehicle. He could bring forth information to the Advisory Council from the City Council, but that did not mean he could take any action on that information. The MCE program had moved from having focus on the member cities' needs to being strictly a school program. In the last two and one-half years the only action he had been given was the opportunity to vote on two items (items that were not very significant). The MCE Advisory Council used to have 22 members and a minimum of 18 of those members used to attend the meetings. Today there are 40 members on the Advisory Council, and I2 members regularly attend the meetings; the majority of individuals attending are school board members. Mr. Shaw stated there had been positive changes in MCE, MCE Advisory Council and the Superintendent interactions after MCE Executive Director Litfin had been hired. He was encouraged by the fact that the members had received a copy of the MCE 2007 budget for review. He was also encouraged by the actions taken by Mr. Liftin to improve communications. Mr. Shaw stated the MCE program was one of the best communication programs in the State, and the State had one of the best community education programs in the United States. Mr. Shaw explained an advisory council was mandated by State law for community education. He commented the City was not required to have a representative on the Advisory Council. There was a State law requirement that the Advisory Council meet a minimum of four times a year. Administrator Dawson clarified that Council appointed a representative to the MCE Advisory Council in response to a request from the Minnetonka School District to have a City representative on the Advisory Council; even if the City did not appoint a representative to the Advisory Council, it was considered to be a member it. Mr. Shaw explained that the City had no financial obligation to MCE except for services that are provided to the City under contract. In response to various comments from Council, Mr. Shaw stated he thought it was important to have a representative on the MCE Advisory Council He also stated he attended the meetings on a regular basis. He clarified that MCE conducted a phone study to determine what the communities' needs; the Advisory Council reviewed the questions for appropriateness in advance. Mr. Shaw commented that the MCE was projecting a $100,000 loss for 2007 year-end operating budget. Councilmember Callies stated slle would like to review a copy of the Advisory Council's by-laws. C. Report on Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission (LMCC) activities by Patrick Hodapp, LMCC Representative Patrick Hodapp, Shorewood's representative to the Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission (LMCC), provided a summary update on LMCC activities. SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING June 11, 2007 Page 4 of 12 • The LMCC was working with Mediacom to reduce the average call response time for cable related calls to no more than the required maximum of 30 seconds specified by the Federal Communications Commission. The LMCC Executive Committee will tour Meadiacom's call center on June 19, 2007. • Mediacom was continuing its negotiations with CBS for HDTV retransmission rights. • New LMCC officers were elected at the May 2007 full Commission meeting. He retained his position as a member on the Executive Committee and as Treasurer. • The transition to the new accounting software was completed. • The first full audit of the LMCC was in progress; the audit was being conducted. by Abdo, Eick, and Meyers. In the past, year-end financial reviews had been conducted the accounting firm the LMCC used on a day-to-day basis. The LMCC changed accounting firms in 2006; therefore, it was appropriate to have a full audit conducted at that time. • The LMCC Joint Powers Agreement was under review. The proposed changes to the JPA were anticipated to be relatively minor. The plan was to submit the revised JPA (which would be done in a current/proposed format) to member cities along with the LMCC's 2008 budget for approval. • Once the revised JPA was approved, the by-laws and other internal procedures would be reviewed to ensure they were consistent with the requirements specified in the revised JPA. Mr. Hodapp stated one of the changes to the JPA could be the automatic approval of the LMCC's budget within a to-be-determined time period unless a specified number of cities reject the budget. In the past it had taken months to receive approval from some of the member cities, and there had been instances where the budget was not approved until the year the budget was in effect. Mr. Hodapp explained what he thought the single point of contention would be with regard to the JPA. Some of the Commission members thought the Commission already had authority to use the LMCC's reserve funds as needed, and. others wanted to clarify that authority in the revised JPA. He thought the LMCC needed a legal opinion on the JPA prior to submitting a revised JPA to the member cities for their approval. He stated the JPA required the LMCC to obtain approval of its budget from the member cities, and it had no authority to exceed the budget. Past practice had been to use the reserves as needed without member cities' approval. He listed three options that could be considered with regard to use of reserve funds: 1) the LMCC would have no authority to use reserve funds without member cities' approval; 2) the LMCC would have the authority to use reserve funds as needed; or, 3) the LMCC could use reserve funds up to a percentage of the budget. He stated reserve fiords had been accumulated by either spending less than was budgeted or by exceeding budgeted revenues. There was ensuing discussion with regard to the use of reserve funds for a budget overage. There was also discussion of including a contingency in future budgets that could be used to fund a budget overage. Another option was suggested for authorizing the use of reserve funds -the Executive Committee could make a recommendation to the full Commission, and the full Commission could decide whether or not to authorize the use. The caveat would be the member cities' councils would (lave to be informed if the reserves fell below a certain amount. Mr. Hodapp stated video on demand consisted of two components - a web live stream feature, and the ability to view meetings on cable TV at a scheduled time. He explained the bulk of the cost for video on SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING June 11, 2007 Page 5 of 12 demand was for the live stream feature which was not frequently used. He stated that from his vantage point a technology capability was purchased that may not have been needed. Council thanked Mr. Hodapp for his continued involvement with the LMCC and for assuming a leadership role. 6. PUBLIC HEARING None. 7. PARKS Director Brown stated there was a Parks tour scheduled for 5:45 P.M. June 12, 2007. 8. PLANNING -Report by Representative Commissioner Gniffke reported on matters considered and actions taken at the June 5, 2007, Planning Commission meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). A. Conditional Use Permit Amendment Applicant:Excelsior Covenant Church Location:19955 Excelsior Blvd Director Nielsen explained there were two accessory structures located on the northeast corner of the Excelsior Covenant Church property, located at 19955 Excelsior Boulevard. The smaller of the two structures (a 10-foot by 12-foot utility shed) was in need of replacement, and Jim Turnquist, representing Excelsior Covenant Church, proposed to replace it with a somewhat larger one (10-foot by 18-foot). The properly was zoned R-2A, Single and Two-Family Residential. Accessory structures for churches were conditional uses in residential districts, and Mr. Turnquist had requested a conditional use permit (C.U.P.), pursuant to Section 1201.14 Subd. 4. of the City's Zoning Code. Nielsen went on to explain the subject property was located between Excelsior Boulevard and Highway 7 and contained nearly 7.6 acres of land. The replacement building would be located in the same spot as the structure being replaced. The style and materials of the building would be similar to the existing two- car garage it would be located next to. Nielsen explained how the proposed structure complied with requirements set forth in Zoning Code. a. The proposed building would be 20 feet from the east side of the property, in compliance with the setback requirement. b. Despite being somewhat larger than the existing structure, the replacement structure should fit into the same space with very little site alteration. c. The proposed building neither takes up existing parking spaces nor necessitates additional parking. Nielsen then stated that the Planning Commission had unanimously recommended approval of the conditional use permit as requested. SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING June 11, 2007 Page 6 of 12 Woodruff moved, Wellens seconded, Approving a Conditional Use Permit for Accessory Building for Excelsior Covenant Church, 1995 Excelsior Boulevard. Motion passed 5/0. B. Zoning Text Amendment Regarding Pool Fences Applicant:Blair and Sharon Bury Location:28160 Boulder Bridge Drive Director Nielsen's stated Blair Bury, the applicant, had withdrawn his application for a text amendment to the City's Zoning Code. 9. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS A. 2007-2028 CIP for Excelsior Fire District Administrator Dawson stated that at its April 23, 2007 meeting, Council approved the proposed Excelsior Fire District (EFD) 2007 - 2028 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) with the deletion of $35,000 for technology in 2008 and with a reduction of the capital transfers from $170,000 to $ 155,000 in 2008. At that same meeting there was Council consensus to reconsider technology fimding at a later date provided it was provided with a plan that justified the funding. Dawson then stated that following the above actions, the EFD Board authorized the use of consultants to conduct a needs assessment-type study to identify technology and imaging needs, probable costs, and a schedule for improvements. Brand Networking (for computer equipment) and Advanced Imaging Solutions (for imaging equipment) provided analysis and a proposed schedule for improvements. Brand networking identified $37,800 in computer improvements through the end of 2008. AIS identified alternatives ranging from $7,900 - $12,600 for the purchase ofmulti-function print/copy/fax equipment. Dawson went on to state the EFD Board discussed the two reports at its May 30, 2007, meeting. During the discussion Boardmembers commented that several key decisions needed to be made (e.g., the use of notebook computers versus desktop computers, the timing of acquisitions, and whether the multi-function imaging equipment should be leased or purchased). Although the combined amount for the improvements identified in the two reports was greater than the proposed $35,000 amount in the CIP for 2008, the Boardmembers thought that the $35,000 was appropriate, reasonable and justified. They noted the challenge for EFD staff and themselves would be to refine the improvements identified for optimal effectiveness within that amount. Dawson related that the Board requested that the Shorewood and Deephaven city councils consider their actions again on the proposed 2007 - 2028 CIP, and to approve it as proposed wit11 $35,000 for technology and $170,000 in capital transfers for 2008. Councilmember Woodruff stated he found the costs identified in the Brand Networking report to be excessive, and he thought the improvements should be spread out over several years. He commented there were numerous operational items that must be fixed that were identified in the report; the changes could be done for a small cost and would yield great benefits. He stated the costs were astounding for multi-function print/copy/fax equipment alternatives identified in the AIS report. He then stated he would not support the CIP that was originally proposed. SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING June 11, 2007 Page 7 of 12 Councilmember Callies questioned Councilmember Woodruff if he had attended the EFD Board meeting to present his concerns. Woodruff stated he had documented his concerns and submitted them to Administrator Dawson to present on his behalf. Dawson noted he submitted Woodruff's document to Chief Gerber. Councilmember Wellens commented that Administrator Dawson's cover memo stated "There was no evaluation of the proper fit of imaging equipment and computer equipment." He then stated that from his vantage point the reason for hiring a consultant was to "get a proper fit". He went on to state that Dawson's cover memo also indicated a decision would need to be made with regard to the use of notebook computers versus desktop computers, yet the Brand Networking report stated that notebook computers were not good substitutes for desktop computers on a long-term basis. Dawson explained the EFD Board discussed the need for and the benefits of notebook computers (notebook computers could be used in the emergency operations center). Dawson commented that the two reports had not been combined due to time constraints. Councilmember Wellens questioned why the firefighters needed twelve laptop computers. Mayor Lizee explained that four of the seven laptop computers were MDT notebooks for the trucks which had not been installed yet. Mayor Lizee stated the most immediate question Cotmcil must answer was if it was willing to support funding for technology improvements. She then stated the EFD JPA established the EFD Board as the policy body for the EFD, and the Fire Chief's was responsible for EFD day-to-day operations with input from the Operating Committee and oversight by the Board. She questioned if Council was willing to place trust in the Fire Chief, the Operating Committee, and the Board to appropriately invest in the necessary technology. She stated it was not appropriate for the member cities' councils to act as mini- boards. She went on to state no decisions had been made with regard to specific technology improvements; those detailed decisions would be made at a future date. Councilmember Turgeon stated she still had not been provided with enough information to understand who used the computers anal for what purposes. She then stated she did not understand why the EFD and the SLMPD could not share a server; current firewall technology should allow a server to be shared while maintaining restricted access to information. Mayor Lizee stated that in a document prepared by Chief Gerber and distributed to Council, Gerber addressed the reasons certain technology could not be shared with the SLMPD. Turgeon stated the Brand Networking report did not address any of the issues identified with regard to using various technology components, disaster recovery plans, data backup needs, a web site, etc. She also stated future maintenance needs were not addressed. She went on to state the AIS report identified alternative solutions that would be suitable for the volume of copies made by the City and she did not think the EFD produced that many copies. Councilmember Callies stated it was her understanding that the Councilmembers were not opposed to including some amount of funding for technology improvements. In fact, based on some of the comments made the technology costs could be greater to fund the cost for on-site IT support. She questioned if the some Councilmembers thought $35,000 was too much, then what was the right amount? She stated the EFD Board had reviewed and discussed the reports, and again recommended the original proposed 2007 - 2028 CIP for approval. She commented that the CIP was a planning budget; comprehensive plans would be prepared as part of the justification for purchase process. Callies moved, Approving the Excelsior Fire District 2007 - 2008 Capital Equipment Plan as Amended to Include $25,000 for Technology in 2008. SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING June 11, 2007 Page 8 of 12 Motion failed for lack of a second. Councilmember Wellens stated it was not the amount of money requested for technology that was the issue for him. He did not understand why the firefighters' would need remote access to their email via a remote web page; the firefighters' were out of the building nearly all of the time; and they were volunteers. Mayor Lizee stated the firefighters are on-site doing follow-up work on calls, training, research, etc. They periodically do their personal work on site, but do so because they can provide a benefit of quicker response and improved service to the District. Mayor Lizee suggested that the Councilmembers attend an EFD budget work session scheduled for 6:30 P.M, on June 27, 2007, where they could ask for responses to their specific budget questions. Councilmember Callies again questioned what amount Council thought was appropriate to include in the CIP for technology in 2008. If $35,000 was unreasonable, including nothing would also be unreasonable. Councilmember Woodruff suggested $15,000 be included in the CIP for technology in 2008; he thought that amount would be adequate for 2008, and it should be revisited for subsequent years. He also thought that the $3,000 included in the draft 2008 operating budget for computer services was not enough; that would equate to approximately three hours of IT support each month. Councilmember Wellens stated he would send Chief Gerber his specific questions. There was ensuing discussion with regard to the approval status of the proposed 2007 - 2028 CIP. Three member cities' councils approved the plans as presented. Two member cities' councils approved the CIP with the deletion of $35,000 for technology in 2008 and with a reduction of the capital transfers from $170,000 to $155,000 in 2008. It was suggested that there was a need for legal opinion by the EFD's legal counsel. If was clarified that if the CIP was not approved, the 2008 CIP would be the same as the 2006 - 2027 CIP which was approved in 2006. Councilmember Callies stated this CIP approval process had highlighted the issue of what was the EFD Board's role in the process, and what was the role of the member cities' councils. Wellens moved, Woodruff seconded, Continuing the Approval of the Excelsior Fire District 2007 - 2008 Capital Equipment Plan as Originally Proposed to the July 9, 2007, Council Meeting. Mayor Lizee recommended the motion be amended to require the City's Councilmembers to attend the June 27, 2006, EFD Board work session meeting to address their concerns regarding the inclusion of technology funding in the CIP for 2008. Without objection of the seconder, the maker of the motion amended the motion to require the Shorewood City Councilmembers attend the June 27, 2007, EFD Board work session. Motion passed 5/0. B. Noise Regulations Director Nielsen stated Councilmember Callies had asked staff to address the City's current regulations relative to the control of noise; the impetus for the request was a resident's complaint regarding noises SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING Jnne 11, 2007 Page 9 of 12 emanating from the use of landscape equipment on the golf course at the Minnetonka Country Club at 6:00 A.M. on a Sunday morning. Nielsen explained that noise was regulated under two sections of the City Code -Section 501.05 Subd. 6. (Nuisances) and Section 1201.03 Subd. 2.m. (Zoning). Both of those sections refer to Minnesota Code of Rules 7030, which are the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) noise regulations. The MPCA regulations deal primarily with decibel levels, and they set forth standards for daytime and nighttime activity. The City applied the MPCA regulations when it receives complaints involving sustained levels of noise. Nielsen then explained that the City attempted to control noise generated by property development and construction activities through the land use and building permit processes. The City's standard development agreement states that constructions hours are limited to the following hours: Monday -Friday; 7:00 A.M. to 7:00 P.M. Saturday: 8:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M. Sunday: No construction without prior approval of City Engineer Nielsen also explained there was no written code setting forth those hours; the restrictions were a City policy. As a policy, enforcement had been an issue on occasion; the SLMPD did not issue tickets if an ordinance was not violated. Nevertheless, the policy had worked reasonably well. The City had an agreement with the SLMPD such that it would investigate complaints and advise the City of problems. Often times the police stopping by was enough for contractors to adjust their activities. In other cases, contractors concerned about delayed permit processing or inspections because Staff was spending time responding to the complaint were generally cooperative. Nielsen went on to explain the City's Zoning Code and policy did not address "untimely" noises (e.g. lawn mowers, leaf blowers, loud music, power tools, etc.) or types of noises. In a recent complaint Staff determined the subject property to be in compliance with decibel levels, even though the noise being generated had a very annoying pitch. Nielsen stated noise regulations had been discussed in the past, and Council decided not to codify the current policies. A significant reason for not doing so was that whatever regulations were adopted would also apply to residents as well as contractors or businesses. Councilmember Callies stated she thought the topic of noise regulations warranted more discussion in general. She thought it may be appropriate to place noise regulations and time restrictions on residents as well as contractors and businesses. Administrator Dawson stated it could be more appropriate to regulate "untimely" noises by type of noise versus its decibel level. There was ensuing discussion with regard to codifying noise regulations, and enforcement of the regulations. Councilmember Woodruff suggested the Planning Commission could consider this matter. Councilmember Callies agreed with that suggestion. She commented that it was the repetitive situations that were problematic. SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING June 11, 2007 Page 10 of 12 Councilmember Wellens suggested a request be published in the Shore Report asking residents to voluntarily avoid doing activities that generate annoying noises on certain days of the week and during specific times during summer hours. Mayor Lizee suggested that construction hours also be published as a reminder. There was consensus to publish a request in the Shore Report before requesting the Planning Commission to consider this matter. C. Work Sessions -Cablecasting Administrator Dawson stated in a Council work session held prior to this meeting Council discussed the possibility of cablecasting Council work sessions. At that time there was Council consensus to take action on the item at this particular meeting. Councilmember Callies stated she was not in favor of cablecasting work sessions; she thought it was appropriate to maintain some informality of discussion among Councilmembers. She then stated Council work sessions were noticed and the public was welcome to attend. She commented no formal action was taken at a work session. She also commented there was no requirement to cablecast regular Council meetings or work sessions. She stated the expense for cablecasting work sessions would probably not be warranted based on the probable number of viewers. Administrator Dawson explained the cost for the LMCC to cablecast work sessions would be the same as the cost for regular Council meetings if it were to be done by the same individuals doing the regular meetings. Councilmember Turgeon stated she did not think there was a distinction between regular meetings and work sessions. She stated she thought Council should take what ever actions it could to provide residents with better access to what occurred at City Hall and it was worth the cost. Cablecasting was another way of getting information to the residents. Mayor Lizee stated the City had always had an open-door policy with regard to the public having access to Council work sessions. Work sessions had historically been informal discussions, with the participants seated around a table. She appreciated the spontaneity and candidness of discussions that would likely be lost if the work sessions were to be cablecast. She did not think the City needed to incur the additional costs for cablecasting of work sessions. Councilmember Woodruff stated cablecasting of work sessions was one way to use technology to better communicate what Council was considering. He stated a couple of individuals had asked why the work sessions were not cablecast. He stated that from his vantage point had individuals been able to view work session discussions with regard to Capital Improvement Plan discussions, residents may not have attended the last Council work session to express concern with regard to the Amlee Road / Manitou Lane / Glen Road Street Rehabilitation Project that was being considered. He stated he thought it would be beneficial to cablecast the work sessions for a minimal cost; it would minimize the inconvenience on residents to have to attend the work sessions. Councilmember Wellens stated residents could download the work session minutes off the City's web site. Councilmember Wellens stated the minutes lose the interchange, and there was a timing issue for their availability. Woodruff t11en stated leaving an audio and video of a discussion was much better than having a summary of the discussion. SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING June 11, 2007 Page 11 of 12 Councilmember Wellens stated at the Council work session held prior to this meeting he questioned if the work sessions were video recorded would there continue to be a need for minutes. Attorney Keane stated State Statute required that meeting minutes be kept and a video record was not a substitute. Wellens then stated the cablecasting cost would be an additional expense for the benefit of a few residents; it would not replace the need for a recording secretary. Councilmember Callies stated she wanted to clarify that this discussion was not about access or lack of access to Council discussions. The Council work sessions were open to the public, and the minutes were placed on the City's web site. Slle then stated people were less spontaneous and candid in discussions if they were being video recorded for future viewing. Woodruff moved, Turgeon seconded, Approving the cablecasting of Council Work Sessions. Motion failed 2/3, with Callies, Lizee and Wellens dissenting. 10. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS A. Authorization for Surcharge by Xcel Energy for Undergrounding Electrical Facilities as part of the County Road 19 Project Administrator Dawson stated this item was discussed at a Council work session meeting earlier in the evening and there was Council consensus to continue this item to a firture meeting. Woodruff moved, Wellens seconded, Continuing the Authorization for Surcharge by Xcel Energy for Undergrounding Electrical Facilities to a June 25, 2007, City Council meeting. Motion passed 5/0. 11. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS A. Administrator & Staff Administrator Dawson stated there was an EFD Board work session tentatively scheduled for June 13, 2006, to discuss the 2008 EFD Operating Budget. There was an SLMPD Coordinating Meeting scheduled for June 19, 2007, at 4:00 P.M. to discuss the draft 2008 Operating Budget. There was an EFD Board work session scheduled for June 27, 2007, to discuss the EFD 2008 budget with member cities' councilmembers. Administrator Dawson also stated attempts were being made to schedule a meeting of representatives from the Friends Board and the city administrators sometime during the next two weeks. Engineer Landini stated that Staff would like to schedule another public information meeting with residents to discuss the Amlee Road / Manitou Lane /Glen Road Street Rehabilitation Project that was under co-lsideration. He suggested July 16, 2007, or July 18, 2007, as possible dates for the meeting. There was Council consensus that Engineer Landini could select the date for the meeting. B. Mayor & City Council Mayor Lizee stated she had been co-chair for the Art on the Lake Event held the past weekend. She then stated the event was a tremendous success. SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING June 11, 2007 Page 12 of 12 Mayor Lizee recessed the meeting to an Executive Meeting at 8:55 P.M. 12. RECESS TO EXECUTIVE SESSION A. 5795 Country Club Road Mayor Lizee convened the executive session at 9:00 P.M. The City Council, the City Attorney, and the City staff were present for the executive session. The purpose of the executive session was to consider legal actions available regarding the former lessee of the City-owned property at 5795 Country Club Road. The Executive Session was concluded at 9:12 P.M. 13. RECONVENE TO REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING The City Council reconvened in regular session at 9:12 P.M. Mayor Lizee announced that the City Council decided to direct the City Attorney to pursue claims against the former lessee of the City-owned property at 5795 Country Club Road. 14. ADJOURN Turgeon moved, Wellens seconded, Adjourning the City Council Regular Meeting of June 11, 2007, at 9:13 P.M. Motion passed 5/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Christine Freeman, Recorder Christine Lizee, Mayor ATTEST: Craig~V~."~$awson, City~Aministrator/Clerk