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