Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Minutes 07-10-1996Minutes Regular Council Meeting July 10, 1996 The regular meeting of the Ply;nouth City Council was called to order by Mayor Tierney at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 3400 Plymouth Blvd., on July 10, 1996. COUNCIL PRESENT: Mayor Tierney; Councilmembers, Lymangood, Preus, Black, Anderson, and Wold. ABSENT: Councilmember Granath. STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Johnson, Assistant City Manager Lueckert, Public Works Director Moore, Community Development Director Hurlburt, Finance Director Hahn, Park Director Blank, City Attorney Knutson, and City Clerk Ahrens. Item 3 Plymouth Forum No one appeared for the Forum. Item 4 Award of Excellence for Arbor Day Celebration Mayor Tierney announced that this item will appear on a future agenda. Item 5 Approve Agenda Councilmembers re -jested that the following items be added to the agenda: Report on action of Plymouth Charter Commission, Discussion on meeting between Plymouth Subcommittee and Medicine Lake City Council on July 11, Music in Plymouth, Report on City's Surface Water Management Plan, and the City's New Homepage on the Internet. Motion was made by Councilmember Lymangood, seconded by Councilmember Anderson, to approve the agenda, with the addition of the five items noted above. Motion carried, six ayes. Item 6 Consent Agenda Item 6-A was removed from the Consent Agenda. Motion was made by Councilmember Preus, seconded by Councilmember Black, to approve the consent agenda as amended. Motion carried, six ayes. Item 6-B Approve Disbursements Motion was made by Councilmember Preus, seconded by Councilmember Black, to adopt RESOLUTION 96-369 APPROVING DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIL .) ENDING JUNE 28, 1996. Motion carried, six ayes. Regular Council Meeting July 10, 1996 Page 2 Item 6-C Roger Schlussel. PUD Amendment and Conditional Use Permit Amendment (96074) Motion was made by Councilmember Preus, seconded by Councilmember Black, to adopt RESOLUTION 96-370 APPROVING RESIDENTIAL PLANNED USE AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT FOR ROGER SCHLUSSEL FOR PROPERTY AT 11400 39TH AVENUE (RPUD 75-2) (96074). Motion carried, six ayes. Item 6-D Zoning Ordinance Amendment to Establish Antenna Regulations Motion was made by Councilmember Preus, seconded by Councilmember Black, to adopt ORDINANCE 96-16 AMENDING ORDINANCE N0.80- 9, THE PLYMOUTH ZONING ORDINANCE, BY ESTABLISHING ANTENNA REGULATIONS. Motion carried, six ayes. Item 6-E On -Belay of Minnesota, Inc. Approve Conditional Use Permit Amendment (96079) Motion was made by Councilmember Preus, seconded by Councilmember Black, to adopt RESOLUTION 96-371 APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT FOR ON -BELAY OF MINNESOTA, INC. FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 115 FORESTVIEW LANE 96079). Motion carried, six ayes. Item 6-F Site Improvement Performance Agreements Motion was made by Councilmember Preus, seconded by Councilmember Black, to adopt RESOLUTION 96-372 REDUCING SITE IMPROVEMENT PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE, CALIBER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION/BASS LAKE BUSINESS CENTRE 95102). Motion carried, six ayes. Motion was made by Councilmember Preus, seconded by Councilmember Black, to adopt RESOLUTION 96-373 RELEASING SITE IMPROVEMENT PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE, OPUS CORPORATION/SELECT COMFORT (93045). Motion carried, six ayes. Motion was made by Councilmember Preus, seconded by Councilmember Black, to adopt RESOLUTION 96-374 RELEASING SITE IMPROVEMENT PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE, OPUS CORPORATION/SELECT COMFORT (95033). Motion carried, six ayes. Motion was made by Councilmember Preus, seconded by Councilmember Black, to adopt RESOLUTION 96-375 RELEASING SITE IMPROVEMENT PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE, TURCK, INCORPORATED/3000 CAMPUS DRIVE (94146). Motion carried, six ayes. Regular Council Meeting July 10, 1996 Page 3 Motion was made 1 v Councilmember Preus, seconded by Councilmember Black, to adopt RESOLUTION 96-376 RELEASING SITE IMPROVEMENT PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE, HEDBERG AGGREGATES, INCORPORATED (95006). Motion carried, six ayes. Item 6-G Reduction of Financial Guarantee, Hunters Bluff Addition Motion was made by Councilmember Preus, seconded by Councilmember Black„ to adopt RESOLUTION 96-377 REDUCING REQUIRED FINANCIAL GUARANTEE, HUNTERS BLUFF ADDITION (94145). Motion carried, six ayes. Item 6-H Approve Payment of Insurance Deductible to the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust Motion was made by Councilmember Preus, seconded by Councilmember Black, to adopt RESOLUTION 96-378 AUTHORIZATION OF PAYNIENT OF INSURANCE DEDUCTIBLE TO LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES INSURANCE TRUST. Motion carried, six ayes. Item 6-I Proposal from School District 281 for Use of Ice Arena and Athletic Field Facilities Motion was made by Councilmember Preus, seconded by Councilmember Black, to adopt RESOLUTION 96-379 APPROVING THE PROPOSAL FROM SCHOOL DISTRICT 281 FOR USE OF THE PLYMOUTH ICE ARENA FACILITIES FOR 1996-1997 THROUGH THE 1998-1999 SEASON AND TO REFER THE REQUESTED CHANGES IN THE POSSIBLE USE OF THE ARMSTRONG ATHLETIC FIELD TO STAFF FOR A REPORT TO COUNCIL BY AUGUST 21,1996. Motion carried, six ayes. Item 8-A Approve Amendment to Courtesy Bench Ordinance Assistant City Manager Lueckert presented the staff report on the courtesy bench ordinance. In 1989, the Council adopted an ordinance which regulated bus benches in the City and allowed a maximum of 50 benches. In early 1996, Courtesy Bench Company attempted to submit applications to install courtesy benches in Plymouth. Staff did not accept the applications or fees because the maximum 50 permits had already been issued to U.S. Bench Corporation. She explained that staff has several concerns with the current ordinance, including inconsistency with respect to advertising sign regulations between the City Code and the Zoni. Ordinance and no mechanism to allow staff to provide bench permits on a fair and equitable basis among companies. Also, several new mid-day routes will be added to the transit system later this year with no available bus benches to serve these routes. Regular Council Meeting July 10, 1996 Page 4 Assistant Manager Lueckert recommended that the City Council repeal Section 815 of the City Code relating to courtesy bus benches. The existing benches in the City would become nonconforming uses. The proposed ordinance would also require removal of existing benches that are no longer located on a bus route. Ten such existing benches have been identified, and removal would be directed within 90 days. Staff has agreed with the request of U. S. Bench Corporation that the advertising signage from the ten benches to be removed could be placed on other existing nonconforming benches in the City. Courtesy benches and the accompanying advertising signage would then be considered in conjunction with the Zoning Ordinance revisions in 1997. Councilmember Wold asked why a repeal of the ordinance is recommended, rather than a moratorium. Assistant Manager Lueckert responded that moratoriums are generally used for zoning -related issues. The City Attorney has advised that the best means of dealing with this issue is to repeal the ordinance and then come back with a new ordinance if needed. Leonard J. Thiel, 5643 Green Circle Drive, Minnetonka, represented U.S. Bench Corporation. He said that Mr. Danielson, President of U.S. Bench Corporation, was unable to attend the meeting. Mr. Thiel stated that this is the 50th anniversary of U.S. Bench Corporation, and the company has served Plymouth for 33 years. U.S. Bench Corporation currently serves 96 communities. He explained that it is the policy of U.S. Bench Corporation to establish rules and guidelines without government regulation, such as no advertising of tobacco or liquor, no political advertising, and to place benches only at bus stops. The company also supplies a $3 million insurance policy naming Plymouth as an additional insured in the event of accident relating to a bench. He stated that U.S. Bench works closely with transit authorities. If there is a route change, the company would remove and relocate a bench to a location suitable to the City. Bench maintenance is done year around. It is his understanding that the existing U.S. Bench locations would not be disrupted, with the exception that 10 benches no longer on bus routes would have to be removed. Assistant Manager Lueckert stated that the advertising from the 10 benches to be removed could be transferred to other existing benches. Hank Moss, 12105 41st Avenue North, represented Courtesy Bench Company. He has been in the bench business since last fall and has noticed that there are areas in the City that could use a bench. He attempted to submit applications for several courtesy bench permits, but staff would not accept the applications because all available permits had been issued to one company. He clarified that Regular Council Meeting July 10, 1996 Page 5 he is not saying that the existing ordinance is unfair competition, but he believes that the City could be accused of endorsing a situation that appears to be unfair competition and monopoly. Mr. Moss said that other communities are considering allocation of benches through a lottery or by designating that not more than 40 percent of sites in the city could be issued to any one company. Councilmember Lymangood thanked Mr. Moss for bringing the issue to the attention of the Council. He stated the first step is to repeal the ordinance and require removal of the 10 benches no longer serving bus routes. Then a new ordinance could be considered to address issues of bench allocation. Councilmember Wold agreed that some sort of allocation formula would be reasonable. Motion was made by Councilmember Lymangood, seconded by Councilmember Wold, to adopt ORDINANCE 96-17 REPEALING SECTION 815 OF THE PLYMOUTH CITY CODE CONCERNING BUS COURTESY BENCHES. Motion carried, six ayes. Mr. Thiel explained that some cities in the metro area have established a limit on the number of courtesy benches in a community, while others have not. He stated that U.S. Bench has been in business for 50 years. Although they do not want a monopoly, he believes that some recognition for the length and type of service should be given to U.S. Bench Corporation. Item 8-B Consider Amendment to Council Rules of Procedure Motion was made by Councilmember Anderson, seconded by Councilmember Wold, to adopt ORDINANCE 96-18 AMENDING CHAPTER H OF THE PLYMOUTH CITY CODE CONCERNING CITY COUNCIL RULES OF PROCEDURE. Councilmember Anderson explained that this ordinance would amend the Council rules of procedure to provide that when an item removed from the consent agenda or added to the agenda is brought up for consideration, the presiding officer shall immediately, without discussion or comment, recognize the Councilmember who removed the item from the consent agenda or who added it to the agenda. He said that the intent of this action is to focus on the agenda item and ensure that discussion is properly followed by referral to the person initiating the issue, as well as to avoid opinions and rhetoric not directly related to the issue. Regular Council Meeting July 10, 1996 Page 6 Motion to amend was made by Councilmember Wold, seconded by Councilmember Anderson, to delete the words " and shall be repealed effective December 31, 1996." Councilmember Wold stated that the City Council follows Roberts Rules of Order, but it is appropriate to develop an additional specific set of rules particular to this body. He referenced the Council procedures currently in Section 200 of the City Code, and stated that this ordinance would be a good permanent addition to those rules. Mayor Tierney stat -0 that items on the consent agenda do not necessarily belong to any single councilmember. Councilmember Wold raised a point of order that the discussion should focus on the amendment currently before the Council. Motion to amend carried: five ayes; Tierney nay. Mayor Tierney stated that agenda items do not necessarily belong to any one councilmember. There are times when several councilmembers want an item removed from the consent agenda, or when an audience member removes an item. She does not believe that the proposed rule of procedure is an important item and stated that it would add unnecessary language to the City Code. Councilmember Lymangood stated that it may be good to differentiate when a councilmember removes an item from the consent agenda and when a member of the public removes an item. Motion to amend was made by Councilmember Lymangood, seconded by Councilmember Wild, to clarify the language to read items removed from the consent agenda " by a councilmember." Councilmember Lymangood agreed that agenda items do not belong to individual councilmembers. This is not an issue of ownership, but an issue of proper procedure. He would like a smooth transition from the presiding officer calling the item for consideration to recognition of the individual who expressed interest in the item by removing it from the consent agenda or adding it to the agenda. The presiding officer would direct the item to the councilmember. The councilmember could either speak to the issue or, if clarification is needed, could request a staff report. He stated that the purpose of this action is to address an issue quickly and properly by referral to the individual who removed the item from the consent agenda or added it to the agenda. Regular Council Meeting July 10, 1996 Page 7 Mayor Tierney questioned whether this ordinance is necessary. Councilmember Preus agreed with the amendment. He suggested deleting the words " that was not on the printed agenda" as it is redundant. Motion to substitute was made by Councilmember Lymangood, seconded by Councilmember Wold, to amend the paragraph to read: " If an item is removed from the consent agenda or is added to the agenda at the Council meeting by a Council member, when the item is brought up for consideration the presiding officer shall immediately, without discussion or comment, recognize the Council member who removed the item from the consent agenda or who added it to the agenda." Motion to substitute carried, six ayes. Motion to amend carried, six ayes. Councilmember Wold stated that it has been disconcerting to him that the flow of debate is awkwE~a at times. There have been situations when he or others have removed items from the Consent Agenda and there was no need for a staff report on the item. Sometimes an item is removed from the Consent Agenda so that a brief comment can be made or a Councilmember can vote no" on the item. He believes that giving the floor to the Councilmember who removed the item from the Consent Agenda would improve efficiency and that there is need for such a change. Main motion as twice amended carried, six ayes. Item 8-C (6-A) Approve Minutes Motion was made by Councilmember Wold, seconded by Councilmember Preus, to approve the minutes of the Regular Council meetings of June 19 and June 26, 1996. Motion to amend was made by Councilmember Wold, seconded by Councilmember Lymangood, that the fourth paragraph of Item 9-A on Page 12 of the June 26 minutes which currently reads: " Mayor Tierney declined. Councilmember Lymangood challenged the ruling of the Chair and requested that the item be put :o a vote" be deleted and the following language be substituted: "Mayor Tierney ruled Councilmember Lymangood's motion out of order because it interrupted the speaker. Councilmember Wold stated that a point of order can interrupt the speaker. Councilmember Lymangood challenged the ruling of the Chair and requested that the item be put to a vote. The presiding officer did not call for a second and the motion did not receive one." Regular Council Meeting July 10, 1996 Page 8 Councilmember Wold stated that a parliamentary problem occurred at the last meeting. Councilmember Lymangood put a motion before the Council that perhaps was improperly worded. It is incumbent on the presiding officer to have a full understanding of Roberts Rules of Order and to help the flow of debate. He stated that when a member is having trouble properly making a motion, it is good form for the presiding officer to assist the member with the appropriate wording of the motion. Councilmember Wold clarified that Councilmember Lymangood intended to make a motion " to appeal the ruling of the Chair." However, the presiding officer did not ask for a second. An additional parliamentary issue relates to whether a member has the right to make a point of order when another member has the floor. Councilmember Wold referenced Roberts Rules of Order which indicates that a point of order may interrupt the speaker who has the floor. Mayor Tierney stated that she felt her comments were needed at the time as there was not adequate communication with the Medicine Lake City Council. She believes that the public is entitled to a full debate of the issues and that common courtesy should be given each member. Mayor Tierney stated that she has been criticized by Councilmember Wold for speaking on the Medicine Lake/South Shore Drive issue, but also for not speaking on the recent supermajority vote issue when it was on the Report and Staff Recommendation portion of the agenda. Mayor Tierney stated that there seems to be a. considerable amount of time that the Council is not fully debating issues. As the presiding officer, she has allowed comments on items in the Reports section of the agenda. She stated that when she has the floor, other members interrupt her. She believed Councilmember Lymangood was out of order because he attempted to take over the floor while she was speaking. Mayor Tierney asked Councilmember Wold why he told the public that the supermajority vote item would be a public hearing. Councilmember Wold stated that his role in running for office was to ensure that the Council follow a process and procedure. He stated that there was clearly a breach of Roberts Rules because a point of order is a valid motion that can interrupt the speaker. It is his opinion that at the last meeting, had the presiding officer called for and received a second to Councilmember Lymangood's motion, the appeal would have stood. It is also his belief that the presiding officer is bound to call for a second to any motion. He referenced Plymouth City Code Section 200.07, Subd. 2, which states in part that " The Presiding Officer shall state every question coming before the Council, announce the decision of the Council on all subjects and decide without debate all questions of procedure, subject, however, to the final decision of the Council on appeal." He stated that Roberts Rules of Order is the adopted Regular Council Meeting July 10, 1996 Page 9 rules for the proceedings of the City Council, and it is in violation of City ordinance to ignore Roberts Rules. Councilmember Lymangood thanked Councilmember Wold for bringing forward the proposed language. He stated that he was not " attempting to take over the floor" when he made the point of order, as Mayor Tierney indicated. His intent was to clarify that the item on South Shore Drive issues was specifically added to the agenda as an update of events that had occurred since the last Council meeting. He did not feel that it was in order for the Mayor to take the opportunity to discuss events that occurred prior to that time. If the Mayor had wanted to discuss items related to the subject prior to the time specified, then the item could have been added to the agenda. He stated that his point of order was an attempt to get the floor to state this. Mayor Tierney stated that anything she commented on relating to that item had transpired since the previous Council meeting. She stated that she will continue to allow ;;n7 member to speak on items and will not cut off a person's opportunity to speak just because the item is on the Reports section of the agenda. She stated that the City's contact with Medicine Lake is an important issue, as well as how the Council conducts itself with its colleagues and the public. Councilmember Preus stated that the Council's adoption of Roberts Rules of Order is the Council's common courtesy. When Roberts Rules of Order is not followed, common courtesy is breached. He hoped that the Council is either going to follow Roberts Rules of Order or establish another set of rules and procedures for the conduct of meetings. Councilmember Anderson stated he feels that when an item is introduced, commentary is often made by the Chairperson. He stated that it is inappropriate under Roberts Rules of Order for the Chairperson to make comment at that time because it has the appearance that the Chairperson is making comment for the body. He said that the proposed rules are not an attempt to limit debate, but rather to help the flow of debate. He stated that the Chairperson is free to speak on any item at the appropriate time, as are other Councilmembers. Motion to amend was made by Councilmember Lymangood, seconded by Councilmember Anderson, to change the third paragraph of Item 9-A to read: Councilmember Lymangood asked for a point of order, as this item was added to the agenda for only a status report and the items raised by the Chair are past history and occurred prior to the June 5 meeting." Regular Council Meeting July 10, 1996 Page 10 Councilmember Lymangood stated that he was not the Councilmember who added this item to the agenda. Councilmember Granath had asked for an update. Councilmember Lymangood was attempting to get the discussion to Councilmember Granath for his questions or comment. Mayor Tierney stated that Councilmember Wold had an opportunity to speak. Councilmember Wold had viewed the videotape and stated that Councilmember Granath had no opportunity to get the floor because a member cannot interrupt the speaker to attain the floor under Roberts Rules. Until Councilmember Lymangood's point of order, there was no opportunity for Councilmember Granath to get the floor because of the comments of the Chairperson. Mayor Tierney stated that Councilmember Granath asked Manager Johnson for an update on the issue. Motion was made by Councilmember Preus, seconded by Councilmember Black, to close debate and call the question on the amendment and main question. Mayor Tierney questioned whether the motion was appropriate. Councilmember Wold raised a point of information that the motion is proper under Roberts Rules of Order.. Motion to call the question carried, six ayes. Motion to amend the main motion carried, six ayes. Main motion as amended carried, six ayes. Item 9-A Report on Action of Charter Commission Councilmember Preus reported on the July 9 Charter Commission meeting which he had attended. The Charter Commission adopted a resolution to take an additional 90 days to consider the proposed charter amendment which was proposed by the City Council relating to requiring a supermajority vote for an increase in the tax rate. In his view, there was little new information discussed by the Charter Commission that the Council had not already considered. He explained that the Charter Commission's reason for taking an additional 90 days is to get information and study the issue further. He is unsure whether this means that the Charter Commission will take the full 90 days or only a portion thereof. If the full 90 days is taken, the issue cannot get on the ballot this November. Regular Council Meeting July 10, 1996 Page 11 Mayor Tierney stated that there is some complexity in what occurs if the Council and Charter Commission disagree on the proposed Charter language. The City Attorney is planning to attend the next Charter Commission meeting to discuss the process. She invited anyone interested to attend the Charter Commission meeting. Councilmember Preus explained that the procedure used by the City Council is specified by statute whereby the Council adopts the proposed language, and the language is sent to the Charter Commission for review. The Charter Commission has the options of agreeing or not agreeing with the language, or adopting alternate language. This comes back to the City Council, and the City Council decides which language goes on the ballot and to the voters. There is not conflicting language going to the voters. Attorney Knutson stated that the process was correctly described. He added that under another section of the statutes, the Charter Commission can propose their own Charter amendment independent of what the City Council does. Councilmember Anderson asked if the City Attorney could ensure that the City Council get the issue in time to place it on the November ballot. He is concerned about the Charter Commission keeping the issue from the voters this fall. Attorney Knutson stated that he has no control over the time schedule, but will relay the Council's desire to the Charter Commission. Councilmember Wold thanked Councilmember Preus for representing the Council's position at this meeting. Mayor Tierney stated there was not an official vote to have Councilmember Preus represent the City Council at the Charter Commission meeting. She said that Councilmember Preus represented only himself at the meeting. Councilmember Preus raised a point of order that the speaker should not be interrupted. Councilmember Wold stated that his opinions had been represented by Councilmember Preus at the Charter Commission meeting. Councilmembers Black and Anderson also thanked Councilmember Preus for attending the meeting and representing their views on the topic. Regular Council Meeting July 10, 1996 Page 12 Mayor Tierney stated that this item was discussed at a council meeting, but no action was taken by the Council to designate anyone as a designee of the Counc-l. Councilmember Preus stated that prior to being elected, he had spoken with Councilmember Wold about the supermajority vote issue, and he recently discussed the issue i.rith Councilmember Black. He noted this information in order to avoid any appearance of serial discussions between Councilmembers about the issue. Councilmember Lymangood stated that Page 13 of the June 26 minutes indicate that Councilmember Black suggested that Councilmember Preus represent the City Council at the Charter Commission and there were no objections from the Council. Mayor Tierney stated there was no official vote of the Council. She stated that it is inappropriate for the City Council to feel that the Charter Commission is working against the Council. She believes that the City Council should be respectful of the Charter Commission. She stated that the City Council now has seven members, rather than five, at the initiative of the Charter Commission. Motion was made by Councilmember Wold, seconded by Councilmember Anderson, to close discussion on Item 9-A and move to Item 9-B. Mayor Tierney did not recognize the motion. Item 9-B Council Subcommittee Meeting with Medicine Lake Council Councilmember Preus noted that the City Council Subcommittee on South Shore Drive safety issues is scheduled to meet tomorrow night with the Medicine Lake City Council. He asked if that subcommittee meeting has been noticed as an official meeting. Manager Johnson stated that staff posted notice of the meeting as soon as it was learned that four members of the City Council may be present at the meeting. However, sufficient advance notice was not made to meet the open meeting law notice requirements for an official meeting. City Attorney Knutson recommended that official notice is advisable when a subcommittee of the Council meets and four members are present, but he stated that the issue is debatable. Councilmember Wold stated that he intended to make a motion relating to Council attendance at the subcommittee meeting. Regular Council Meeting July 10, 1996 Page 13 Mayor Tierney ruled the motion out of order as a motion cannot be made on a report item. Councilmember Lymangood raised a point of order, stating that the Council has made motions a number of times on agenda report items. Motion was made by Councilmember Wold, seconded by Councilmember Lymangood, that the City Council officially go on record as having heard the City Attorney advise the Council against having more than three council members in attendance at the subcommittee meeting, and that the City convey to the City of Medicine Lake the Council's apologies that other council members who may have wished to attend the subcommittee meeting cannot do so, and further advise them that Plymouth will be represented at the meeting solely by the subcommittee previously appointed by the Council. Mayor Tierney stated that she believes a directive on this issue is fine and ruled the motion out of order. Motion was made by Councilmember Wold, seconded by Councilmember Lymangood, to appeal the ruling of the Chair to the full body. Councilmember Wold stated that Plymouth City Code Section 200.07, Subd. 3, states that when there is an appeal, the presiding officer will hand the floor over to the member making the appeal. Motion carried, five ayes; Tierney nay. Councilmember Lymangood stated that he believes this issue is sufficiently important to take as an official action of the Council. Councilmember Wold stated that Mayor Tierney has been encouraging as many Councilmembers as possible to meet with the Medicine Lake City Council. He said that this will show all possible respect to the Medicine Lake officials by letting them know that additional Plymouth council members are not in attendance because of the City Attorney's advice -- not because they don't care. Motion carried, six ayes. Regular Council Meeting July 10, 1996 Page 14 Item 9-C Music in Plymouth Park Director Blank stated that Music in Plymouth was successful. He estimated that over 10,000 people were in attendance. This year 3,800 pounds of garbage were collected following the event, compared to 1,800 pounds a year ago. There were no major problems identified with the new amphitheater location, other than permanent lights are needed on the site as it was quite dark after the fireworks. Mayor Tierney asked about parking problems. Park Director Blank responded that there was some difficulty with sufficient handicapped parking. City employees will be asked to vacate the parking lot next year at noon. Councilmember Anderson thanked city employes and the Civic League for a wonderful event. He said that people are attending Music in Plymouth from around the metro area. Mayor Tierney asked that staff prepare a letter to the Civic League thanking them for the event. Councilmember Black thanked the Civic League. She asked about recycling efforts for the event and why staff thought more garbage was generated this year. Park Director Blank attributed the additional garbage simply to more sales than previous years. The park department handled recycling and had recycling containers interspersed with garbage containers on the site. Item 9-1) Surface Water Management Plan Councilmember Black announced that the Environmental Quality Committee has reviewed the initial draft of the Surface Water Management Plan. It appears that the Council will consider the proposed plan in late September or October. She asked whether Councilmembers want to receive drafts of the plan or only the final proposed document. Councilmembers Wold and Lymangood indicated that they would be interested in receiving draft documents. Item 9-E Plymouth Home Page Councilmember Wold announced that the City's homepage can now be located on the internet. He suggested that this address be scrolled during council meetings. Assistant Manager Lueckert said the address is www.ci.plymouth.mn.us. Regular Council Meeting July 10, 1996 Page 15 Mayor Tierney stated that she received one call from a person who was disappointed that the City was putting money into this effort. Councilmember Wold said that this technology is the future, and it is a crucial first step in moving to a " paper less Council." Motion was made by Councilmember Anderson, seconded by Councilmember Black, to adjourn the meeting at 8:35 p.m. Motion carried, six ayes. cit,ce Laurie Ahrens City Clerk