Loading...
2018-11-20 Council minutesCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held Tuesday, November 20, 2018 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the regular meeting of the City Council, City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota was held at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Garlock called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Councilors Duggan, Paper, Miller, and Petschel were also present. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Council, the audience, and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance. AGENDA ADOPTION Mayor Garlock presented the agenda for adoption. Councilor Petschel moved adoption of the agenda. Councilor Duggan seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Garlock presented the consent calendar and explained the procedure for discussion and approval. Councilor Petschel moved approval of the consent calendar as presented and authorization for execution of any necessary documents contained therein, pulling items k.) Approval of Claims List. a. Approval of November 7, 2018 City Council Minutes b. Approval of November 7, 2018 City Council Workshop Minutes c. Approval of November 13, 2018 Canvassing Board Minutes d. Approval of November 13, 2018 Joint City Council and Parks and Recreation Commission Work Session Minutes e. Accept Wetland Delineation Report for Somerset Elementary School f. Approve Purchase Order for City Hall HVAC Modifications g. Approval of Resolution 2018-89 Certifying Delinquent Sewer Accounts h. Approval of Resolution 2018-90 Certifying Delinquent Water Accounts i. Approval of the Building Activity Report j. Approval of October 2018 Treasurer's Report k. Approval of Claims List 1. Approval of the Fire Synopsis Report Councilor Miller seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 PULLED CONSENT AGENDA ITEM K) APPROVAL OF CLAIMS LIST Councilor Duggan asked for an explanation of a bill for the Marie Park basketball court for $13,000. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek explained that this was for the expansion of the basketball court, which had been a half basketball court. The City Council approved an expansion of that to a full court with two new basketball hoops. This was funded through the Special Parks Fund. Councilor Duggan asked for information regarding the payment to the City of West St. Paul for Recycling Coordinator expenses. Mr. Ruzek replied that Mendota Heights hires a recycling coordinator (Ms. Cassandra Schuler) for approximately 12 hours a week. Ms. Schuler is a shared position between the cities of South St. Paul, West St. Paul, and Sunfish Lake. She is actually a West St. Paul employee and this was our city's share of her services. This is a quarterly payment to West St. Paul. Councilor Duggan moved to approve the list of claims for November 20, 2018. Councilor Miller seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 No comments were received. No items scheduled. PUBLIC COMMENTS PUBLIC HEARING NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS A) ORDINANCE NO. 536 TOBACCO SALES Assistant City Administrator Cheryl Jacobson explained that last May the City Council unanimously approved Ordinance 522 amending City Code to prohibit the sale of certain flavored tobacco in Mendota Heights. At a work session in early October, the Council discussed additional changes to the city code and provided staff with direction to prepare an ordinance that would prohibit the sale of all tobacco products and nicotine delivery devices to individuals under 21 years of age, and also to prohibit the sale of all flavored tobacco products, including menthol, mint, and wintergreen flavors. Staff worked with City Attorney Andrew Pratt to prepare Ordinance 536, which would support the points noted above, along with other minor corrections. Staff sent notifications to the licensed tobacco retailers and held a meeting on October 23, 2018 to discuss the proposed changes and answer questions from the licensees. She noted for the record that staff received no comments at that time and no one attended that meeting. November 20, 2018 Mendota Heights City Council Page 2 of 12 City Attorney Pratt reviewed the proposed ordinance with the Council. Mayor Garlock noted that he believed this ordinance to be very thorough. Councilor Miller stated that he believed this to be the right decision and it would have a positive impact on the community now and going forward. Even the producers of these products are starting to comprehend the gravity of the situation. This speaks volumes about what they are coming to understand about the importance of taking this opportunity away from kids that previously have had it so easily accessible to them. Councilor Paper asked for confirmation of his understanding that if a retailer sells tobacco to someone who is 22 years of age; however, if the clerk did not ask to see an ID to confirm their age, then they would be in violation of the City Code. He asked if there was an age that someone had to appear to be, before a cleric is not required to ask for ID. City Attorney Pratt read from the ordinance the following, "Licensees must verify by means of government -issued photographic identification that the purchaser is at least 21 years of age. Verification is not required for a person over the age of 30. That the person appeared to be 30 years of age or older does not constitute a defense to a violation of this subsection." The question is if the city really wants to impose liability on that. The other side of the coin is, does the fact that the purchaser is actually over the age of 21 negate the violation of the code requiring ID check. Chief of Police Kelly McCarthy replied that state law does not list that an ID has to be checked. If the code says the purchaser must be 21 years of age or older, the verification process and safeguards for the employees is on the retail owner. Councilor Duggan noted that it's a question of not being onerous on the businesses but still protect the public. Councilor Petschel wished to address a couple of letters received prior to this meeting in opposition to the ordinance. One said for the Council to take care of the infrastructure of the city and leave tobacco sales to the retailers. This is a fair observation, however, she did not believe that the letter writers were aware of the dynamic in the schools right now. With legal tobacco sales at age 18, that allows possibly juniors and seniors in high school to obtain tobacco products and vaping products and to sell them to middle school children and underclassmen. There is no question that this is a rampant problem in all high schools. By changing the legal age to 21, the Council is trying to address this problem. She also believed that JUUL is changing their practices in anticipation of a crackdown by the federal government. The city is doing what they are doing tonight; however, there is a greater move afoot in the state and nationally to address this issue. Councilor Miller added that smoking or vaping is a far more discrete endeavor than it used to be. In 2008, it was easy to see that something was going on in the bathrooms because you could see and smell it. In 2018, it is a far different game. Now students can walk down the hallway holding something that looks like a pen and be vaping. The smell dissipates within seconds and does not necessarily smell like a cigarette; it can smell like bubble gum or candy. To the school staff, this is very hard thing to determine. November 20, 2018 Mendota Heights City Council Page 3 of 12 Mayor Garlock noted that the city has received many emails, text messages, and letters over the last couple of weeks and only two negative ones. People have been reaching out stating that there is a great need for this ordinance and they support it. Councilor Petschel stated that she appreciated the passion, intelligence, and civility of the residents who have spoken, written letters, and sent messages to the Council. This has been a great civic lesson for the young people who have come forward to make a difference. Ms. Mary Grant, Park Place neighborhood, stated she is the program manager for the Minnesota Public Health Association. She wished to express her appreciation for all of the hard work that has gone into this ordinance. She expressed her thanks to the Council for being a leader in taking this important step in tobacco prevention. Local tobacco prevention policies protect youth from becoming addicted to these products and are needed in light of the 2018 national youth tobacco survey results released just last week. According to these findings, e -cigarette use among middle school and high school students increased an alarming amount between 2017 and 2018. All factors, including menthol and mint flavored e -cigarette use, significantly contributed to this increase. E -cigarette use in Minnesota has increased over 50% in the last three years. Mr. Xavier Forte, student at Henry Sibley High School and a member of Anglos Latinos Motivated to Succeed (ALMAS), expressed his appreciation to the Council for listening and for restricting some flavored tobacco in Mendota Heights last May. Unfortunately, the work does not end here. Menthol tobacco is one of the most dangerous flavors of all. The tobacco industry markets menthol products to youth and other targeted populations. The community must do all that they can to prevent young people from becoming addicted. Raising the age to 21 and restricting menthol flavored tobacco will make the community healthier. Ms. Azu Sparsa, student at Henry Sibley High School and president of ALMAS, stated she strongly supports raising the tobacco purchase age to 21 and restricting menthol flavored tobacco. Vape Pens, or e-cigs, are a big problem in her high school. These new products are perceived differently. The newest vaping devices come in many shapes, sizes, and colors. There are even sweat shirts designed with special compartments to hide e-cigs while vaping. The ordinance under consideration is important to keep our youth healthy and to keep them from becoming addicted to tobacco products. Ms. Brittany Meza, student at Henry Sibley High School and vice-president of ALMAS, asked the Council to raise the age to purchase tobacco to 21 and to restrict the sale of menthol flavored tobacco. As a high school student, she sees how easy it is to get tobacco products from those who can legally purchase. Once students are hooked on tobacco, it is likely they will be distracted in class and in other activities. Smoking and vaping end up taking an immediate toll on kid's futures, long before serious health problems start to show up. Raising the tobacco legal age to 21 will help to prevent young people from getting hooked. She shared a list of 280 signatures ALMAS received from students at the high school who support this ordinance, to show how much this tobacco prevention matters to them. Mr. Damone Presley, youth program director at Aurora/St. Anthony Neighborhood Development Corporation, was one of the leaders on the tobacco ordinance that was passed in St. Paul and went into effect on November 1, 2018. He stated he supports the ordinance under consideration to increase the tobacco sales from 18 to 21 and to treat menthol tobacco the same. The tobacco industry uses menthol, November 20, 2018 Mendota Heights City Council Page 4 of 12 candy, and fruit flavored tobacco products to attract the next generation of smokers; disproportionally targeting young people, African-Americans, LGBTQ communities that use tobacco at higher rates. This is unacceptable. He knows that menthol tobacco is enticing to young people. The tobacco industry has manipulated levels of menthol in cigarettes, making it easier to start and harder to quit. To them, each new smoker and each current smoker who cannot quit means more profit. For the community, the price is high. For young people who deserve to grow up with a fair shake at a healthy lifestyle, free from tobacco, addiction, and disease, he encouraged the Council to protect our community over the tobacco industry's profits. Ms. Reese Bergeron, Ms. Claire Omit, and Ms. Grace Conroy, students at the Visitation School, expressed their appreciation to the Council for considering this ordinance. They are aware that tobacco is a big part of life of many young people. It is hard for young people to escape this. Social media is filled with teens posting selfies of themselves using vapes. Many kids get hooked on tobacco using these products. This ordinance change will make a dramatic difference in the lives of young people. Dr. Alex Feng, 2484 Bridgeview Court, stated he is all too familiar with the deadly impact of tobacco use. It causes lung cancer, emphysema, leads to heart attacks and strokes. Smoking makes chronic conditions like asthma and diabetes worse. By preventing youth from beginning to use tobacco products, this will save lives. E-cigs are not safe for young people given that they have huge amounts of nicotine. No amount of nicotine is safe for developing youth. Teens are more likely to begin smoking conventional cigarettes once they have started using e -cigarettes. Decreasing the accessibility is one of the most effective ways to address these products. He expressed his thanks for treating menthol the same as all other flavored tobacco products. Menthol flavor hides the harsh flavor of tobacco, making it easier for adolescents to get started. Because it is less irritating, it gives the false impression that it is healthier. It is not. Adolescent cognitive reasoning is not fully developed. This makes them more susceptible to starting and there is evidence that menthol cigarettes may be even more addictive than regular cigarettes; making them even harder to quit. These tobacco prevention policies compliment each other. Tobacco 21 reduces access, while restricting all flavors reduces the appeal. Together, this will have an enormous impact in helping to decrease the number of youth who start using tobacco. Counsel Pratt suggested adding language to Section 3-2-6: "A licensee or license holder is not liable, under this chapter, for failing to verify the age of an individual who is of valid age to purchase tobacco, tobacco products, etc. if the licensee has reasonably verified the age of the individual through another available process." This leaves it to the retailer to have the responsibility to make that determination. Chief McCarthy suggested that since the original ordinance only stated that the sale of tobacco products to anyone under the age of 18 was prohibited and did not stipulate how that age was determined, that this ordinance only prohibit the sales of tobacco products to anyone under the of 21 and NOT include any language on how the retailer would determine that age. It is up to the retailer to follow the law no matter the age limit. Counsel Pratt suggested that paragraph 3-2-6: A. 1. a. i. Age Verification, which requires licensees to verify the age of a buyer, could be deleted. Councilor Petschel recommended the paragraph about verifying the age of a buyer be taken out. She also recommended not addressing a license revocation penalty at this time. The ordinance could be reviewed at a future date and amended as necessary. November 20, 2018 Alendota Heights City Council Page 5 of 12 Councilor Miller and Paper concurred with Councilor Petschel. Councilor Duggan moved to adopt ORDINANCE NO. 536 AMENDING CITY CODE SECTION 3-2 TOBACCO SALES and to approve the summary publication, with the changes as suggested by Councilor Petschel, Chief McCarthy, and City Attorney Pratt. Councilor Miller seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 B) RESOLUTION 2018-91 AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT BETWEEN CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS AND THE HEIGHTS OF MENDOTA NORTH, LLC (MICHAEL DEVELOPMENT) Community Development Director Tim Benetti explained a resolution for a Contract for Private Development, commonly referred to as a Tax Increment Financing Development Agreement, for the Phase II of the Michael Development — Mendota Heights Apartments. This would be an agreement between The Heights of Mendota North, LLC, a subsidiary of Michael Development, and the City of Mendota Heights. In June 2017, City Council adopted Resolution 2017-48 establishing a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District No. 2 and a separate contract for Development Agreement under Phase I. This was for a 70 -unit market rate apartment building on the former Mendota Motel site for a $634,000 TIF Note for a maximum of a 9 -year term. Under Phase II, Council was being asked to approve a $700,000 TIF Note with an 11 -year term. This would be for a 62 -unit senior market rate apartment facility. The number of units decreased from the original 68 units because the units themselves will be a little bit larger in size. The building footprint did not change. Ms. Stacie Kvilvang from Ehlers and Associates, shared highlights from the agreement. The Tax Increment Note is on a pay-as-you-go basis. The note amount is for $700,000 and paid at the lesser 5.25% for his actual financing that he has for the development of the project and is for an 11 -year term. They have the ability to petition their taxes, or assessed valuation; however, if they choose to do that they must notify the city in writing. Once the city is notified in writing, the city would hold the TIF payments, without interest, until the tax petition is settled or dismissed. The developer is required to record a Minimum Assessment Agreement. The developer pays for all costs associated with drafting and negotiations of the sizing of the assistance and creation of the Tax Increment Agreement. Councilor Miller asked why the Phase II TIF note is at a higher amount than Phase I, when the number of units is lower, at 62 units. Ms. Kvilvang replied that the development costs, even for lesser units, is more. With lesser units, it takes longer to generate the same amount of money. Councilor Duggan noted that when the Phase I TIF was presented and approved, the Council received detailed maps and measurements of the proposed project. Mr. Benetti confirmed. Now Phase II has since changed. Referencing Article 2 REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES, 2.1 Representations and Warranties of the City, (3) that reads "The Project is in conformance with the development objectives set forth in the Development Program. Separately from this Agreement, any land use permits required as a part of the Project shall be governed by City land use ordinances, specific land use approvals and other November 20, 2018 Mendota Heights City Council Page 6 of 12 agreements"; and (6) that reads "The City has received no notice or communication from any local, State or federal official that the activities of the Developer or the City in the Development District or the TIF District may be or will be in violation of any law or regulation. The City is aware of no facts the existence of which would cause it to be in violation of any local, State or federal law, regulation or review procedure", Councilor Duggan recalled that there were variances required for this to work; that the project was more building than the site could accommodate in relation to front yard, rear yard, and side yard setbacks, impervious surface, etc. City Attorney Andrew Pratt replied that his initial thought, on number (6) that was read, whether or not it needs a variance — and that has not come before anyone — as far as this assigned today or tomorrow, or whatever, that would be a true statement of the city. There is no lawsuit or anything on this item; same as number (3). The fact that there was on Phase I is different than the agreement for Phase II; it would stand on its own. As of right now, he would be comfortable with that covenant being made on behalf of the city because Section 2.1 are the city covenants. Councilor Duggan referenced the proposed buildings, stating they are still greater than the setbacks. The cures did not bring it into the requirements of the city ordinances. He would be challenged with how the city, with lawsuits sitting out there, could approve this. He stated he feels the Council should wait for this to be resolved. Councilor Duggan referenced Article 2 REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES, 2.2 Representations and Warranties of the Developer, (6) that reads "So long as the Developer owns the Development Property, the Developer shall promptly advise the City in writing of all litigation or claims affecting any part of the Project, which may delay or require changes in construction of the Project, and all written complaints and charges made by any governmental authority materially affecting the Project or materially affecting the Developer or its business, which may delay or require changes in construction of the Project" and noted that some of those changes have been made from the original proposal. Even if these are two separate items, they still go under the same chapter, book, or code. He questioned if number (6) under 2.1 and number (6) under 2.2 were two separate things. Counselor Pratt replied that the term "Project" is defined as "the acquisition of the Development Property, and the construction of a market -rate apartment building thereon, totaling approximately 62 units, with surface and underground parking"; so the very definition of project in Article 1 is 62 units. That definition would be carried through to the covenants as well. As of right now, it is a clean slate. Councilor Miller asked if he was correct in assuming the two separate TIF Development Agreements were covering two different projects. This was confirmed. Councilor Duggan stated he felt the overall project was originally presented as one single project; then it was separated into two phases. He expressed his concern that the city is allowing, with lawsuits, a development that is subject to a lot more scrutiny than is being provided. He expressed his concern that the Council has not looked into what the ramifications would be if this is approved as presented. Mayor Garlock replied in regards to the lawsuit on Phase I of this project. Judge Baxter dismissed the lawsuit. When the city created this TIF district initially, the city has the right to change that plan. He November 20, 2018 Mendota Heights City Council Page 7 of 12 believed that what was under consideration this evening was independent from the first TIF; and there is no pending litigation on this. He did not see any reason that this could not move forward. Councilor Petschel stated that, in regards to the first development, before the judge ruled the city received his findings of fact, of which there were nine. Every one of them was in favor of the city. And then he ruled in summary judgment against the people who were litigating against the city. They are appealing that ruling. This is a second project, it is a fresh TIF, and that is all that the Council is being asked to approve. This was discussed at a workshop with Ehlers and is a very modest TIF. Councilor Duggan stated that the challenge the city would face going forward is, does it meet the requirements of law. Councilor Duggan expressed his belief that they are still in violation of the city's ordinances and the city was setting themselves up for more violations in the future. Councilor Petschel noted that there was no question that when this was presented originally, it was definitely going to be in two phases. In fact, there was initially going to be a longer waiting time on the second phase. Councilor Duggan, referencing Article 4 EVENTS OF DEFAULT; INDEMNIFICATION, 4.1 Events of Default Defined, (3) that reads "Failure of the Developer to observe or perform any other covenant, condition, obligation or agreement on its part to be observed or performed under this Agreement", asked City Attorney Andre Pratt to explain the implications or ramifications. Counsel Pratt replied that one example of a default would be if the developer failed to adhere to the part of the covenant that reads "the developer shall promptly advise the city of all litigation or claims affecting a project"; if the developer failed to do that, then that failure would constitute a default. Section 4.1 is sort of a catch-all default provision that would allow the city to undertake the various default remedies as described under section 4.2 Remedies on Default. There is a large checklist that the developer needs to meet now, and continue to meet, during the course of the project. If they do not, then the city — if they decide to enforce this — would provide notice of an opportunity to cure and then go ahead and declare a default under this agreement and take the various enforcement actions. Councilor Duggan asked if it would be reasonable for the city to request designs, drawings, and maps for setbacks on side yards and front yards, building heights, etc. from the developer in relation to this before moving forward. Community Development Director Tim Benetti replied that the building plans have not changed under the PUD that was approved back in March 2018. The only thing that has changed is the number of units, which still fit in the footprint of the Phase II building; the parking, landscaping, surface water management, and everything else remains the same. This agreement under consideration is just on Phase II TIF assistance. Councilor Paper asked City Attorney Pratt if the city was meeting its obligations. Attorney Pratt replied that in his view the city is meeting its obligations. The only risk is that this would be drafted, approved, and then put away; he was sure that city staff would make sure that the various check boxes were met in this case as an ongoing concern. Councilor Paper then asked for confirmation that this is a stand alone project— Phase II stands by itself. Attorney Pratt confirmed. November 20, 2018 Mendota Heights City Council Page 8 of 12 Councilor Paper moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2018-91 AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT (MENDOTA HEIGHTS APARTMENTS — MICHAEL DEVELOPMENT). Councilor Petschel seconded the motion. Ayes: 3 Nays: 2 (Duggan, Miller) C) APPROVAL OF AMENDED FIELD AND FACILITY USE POLICY AND SPECIAL EVENT POLICY Recreation Program Coordinator Meredith Lawrence explained that the City Council was being asked to approve the revised Field and Facility Use Policy and revised Special Event Policy. The city issues permits for city owned fields and facilities. A field use and allocation policy has been in place since the early 1990's and over time, the policy has evolved. The policy was last amended in May 2018. Ms. Lawrence highlighted the proposed changes, which include providing for the issuance of permits two times per year. Permit requests for use January through July would be accepted beginning the first business day in January. Permit requests for August through December would be due the first business day in May. Priority user group categories were clarified in response to staff experience with the number of groups and individuals requesting use of city fields. Additionally, selection criteria was clarified for priority user groups 3-7 in the event of competing requests. Field and facility use fees are approved under the City's Fee Schedule each year. The application and collection of fees over a number of past seasons and across users has been inconsistent. Language regarding the collection of use fees was added. Use fee rates will be presented for consideration at the first council meeting in December. The policy addresses the non-use of city permitted fields by a user. When permits are issued, a specific field is reserved for the user, to the exclusion of others. Recognizing this exclusivity, clarifying language regarding the reissuance of permits in non-use situations was added. Insurance coverage requirements were added. Athletic special event requirements were added to the policy including the user's responsibility for facility capacity including parking, traffic and conduct of participants and spectators. The second part of the policy amendment under consideration was the city's Special Event Policy, which covers events that rise to a higher usage level than what would be covered under the Field and Facility Use Policy. The proposed changes include language to address multiple day events, limiting the duration of the event to not more than 14 days in length. A user may submit a request for a second 14 day event, which may run consecutively to the original application. A minimum of ninety (90) days must elapse before any additional (third or more) similar event from the same applicant will be considered. Insurance coverage requirements were also added. November 20, 2018 Mendota Heights City Council Page 9 of 12 Councilor Miller asked for clarification on the last sentence in paragraph F. Non -Use of Fields, Field Exchange, or Sublease, that reads "A pattern of continued non-use of a rented, permitted field may result in the revocation of the user permit" and asked what constitutes a pattern. Ms. Lawrence replied the goal would be the user would be in communication with the city when they are not going to use a facility. Past experiences could be drawn on as well. Councilor Miller noted that having a conversation with a group when they come in for the permit — being proactive — would be helpful. Councilor Miller, referencing H. Maintenance; Infield dragging, asked if the language under that heading hinders a team's ability to rake their own fields. Ms. Lawrence replied that staff felt comfortable with it. One thing staff was trying to get away from is allowing associations to drag and bring equipment onto the city's facilities and modify them. The intent is to limit it so staff is the one doing maintenance on the fields. Councilor Miller then asked if this would apply to hand raking. Ms. Lawrence replied that this would apply only to motorized vehicles on the fields; hand raking would be allowed. Councilor Paper asked if the city is adding a full-time parks employee, would they be scheduled to work weekend hours. Ms. Lawrence replied that currently staff would be dragging and prepping Monday through Friday. They are looking at having another staff person work Tuesday through Saturday. Councilor Paper asked if applicants would need to sign the agreement indicating that they have read, understand, and agree to the terms. Ms. Lawrence replied in the affirmative. Councilor Paper, referencing Priority #3: Recognized Youth Athletic Associations, that reads "In addition to the characteristics of an association defined herein, recognized Youth Athletic Associations must submit the following to the City, annually:...", asked if the word `annually' could be changed to `upon request'. Councilor Petschel stated that she believed this change would be worthwhile. Ms. Lawrence replied that staff would make that change. Councilor Miller, referencing J. Concession Sales, asked why food trucks would be prohibited. Ms. Lawrence replied that it is a space and parking issue. It is believed that having food trucks may be a draw to both the people attending the tournament and others from the community. It was asked if they could limit the prohibition of food trucks to only Kensington; or have it be a permitted use only. Councilor Petschel asked if the city issues food truck permits for the Industrial Park; and if so, could it apply in this area as well. City Clerk Lorri Smith replied that the city does have a food truck permit that they issue. It is meant for the Industrial Park; however, the city does allow it for special events in other parts of the city. In the situation noted by Ms. Lawrence, that food truck at Kensington did have a permit. Councilor Miller stated he believed that if the city were to completely exclude food trucks, then the city may be limiting themselves to future opportunities (i.e. Parks Celebration). The Special Event Policy currently does prohibit food trucks; however, that could be amended if Council wished. Councilor Petschel suggested that food truck applications be considered on their own merit; depending on the park, the type of celebration, and space available. November 20, 2018 Mendota Heights City Council Page 10 of 12 Councilor Duggan suggested there be a way of trying to estimate the number of participants and spectators coming to an event, and then let the Police Department know so they could be aware of the additional traffic. Ms. Lawrence replied that a tournament organizer would have to fill out a form that provides an estimated number and staff would then work with the Police Department. Councilor Petschel suggested that the parks be identified as only being able to accommodate a set number of participants. Councilor Paper moved to APPROVE THE REVISED FIELD AND FACILITY USE POLICY AND REVISED SPECIAL EVENT POLICY including the suggested change to Priority #3: Recognized Youth Athletic Associations from `annually' to `as requested' and to J. Concession Sales language regarding food trucks to be considered on a case-by-case basis. Mayor Garlock seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 COMMUNITY ANNOUNCEMENTS Assistant City Administrator Cheryl Jacobson announced the upcoming recreation programs. She stated the Recreation Department is hiring warming housing rink attendants and an ice skating instructor. The first Super Hero Masquerade took place on November 11, 2018; there were 30 kids in attendance. COUNCIL COMMENTS Mayor Garlock congratulated the St. Thomas Academy football team; who are now moving on to the championship game. Councilor Petschel pointed out that many residents received the Mendota Heights Living, a new magazine being published with input from individuals who live in the city (i.e. Mayor Garlock and former councilmember Steve Norton). It was a fun magazine and she looks forward to receiving it in the future. She also congratulated Visitation School on winning the state championship in swimming. She observed that the road striping of Dodd Road was underway and she noticed that, when heading south on Dodd Road, one cannot turn left onto Pagel. There is a double yellow line in that area. She requested that staff look into this, as the city was not informed on this change in traffic flow. Councilor Duggan moved to direct staff to seek reversal of the traffic change made on Dodd Road at Pagel Road. Councilor Paper seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Councilor Petschel asked for clarification on what is taking place at the Bourne property. Public Works Director Ryan Ruzek explained that fill from a new housing development was moved to the site. The topsoil would be replaced to enable vegetation to grow again. November 20, 2018 Mendota Heights City Council Page 11 of 12 Councilor Miller wished everyone a Happy Thanksgiving. He looks forward to another two years on the Council. Being able to agree to disagree in a respectful manner is important. Councilor Paper wished everyone a Happy Thanksgiving. He also congratulated St. Thomas Academy and wished them luck at the championship game. He expressed his appreciation to ALMAS for bringing forward the Tobacco 21. He was proud of the fact that the city was able to do this. Councilor Duggan noted that the new Tobacco Code changes provided the students an opportunity to participate in democracy. He congratulated to all who participated in the recent election. He congratulated all of the winners. He wished everyone a blessed, happy, and very safe Thanksgiving. ADJOURN Councilor Paper moved to adjourn. Councilor Duggan seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Mayor Garlock adjourned the meeting at 9:02 p.m. f Neil Garlock Mayor ATTE� / Lorri Smith City Clerk November 20, 2018 Mendota Heights City Council Page 12 of 12