Loading...
City Council Minutes 04-27-2009Council Minutes: Apri127, 2009 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL Monday Apri127, 2009 - 7 p.m. Mayor: Clint Herbst Council Members: Tom Perrault, Glen Posusta, Brian Stumpf and Susie Wojchouski 1. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance. Mayor Herbst called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. and declared a quorum present. The Pledge of Allegiance was said. 2A. Approve minutes of Apri18, 2009 Board of Review Brian Stumpf requested that the comments he made at the conclusion of the Board of Review meeting regarding input from the full Council be added to the minutes. BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE APRIL 8, 2009 BOARD OF REVIEW WITH THE ADDITION NOTED. TOM PERRAULT SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2B Approve minutes of April 13, 2009 Special Meeting -Capital Improvements Program SUSIE WOJCHOUSKI MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE APRIL 13, 2009 SPECIAL MEETING RELATING TO THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM. TOM PERRAULT SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2C. Approve minutes of Apri113, 2009 Regular Meeting GLEN POSUSTA MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE APRIL 13, 2009 REGULAR MEETING. BRIAN STUMPF SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. Consideration of adding items to the agenda. Glen Posusta asked if agenda item #8 could be added to the consent agenda as #SF however Tom Perrault indicated he wanted the item up for discussion. Clint Herbst added discussion on painting the crosswalks at School Boulevard and Deegan Avenue. Glen Posusta added Cargill Kitchen Earth Day efforts. 4. Citizen comments, petitions, requests and concerns. a. Public Service Announcements, if any. Community Development Director Angela Schumann indicated that the City Administrator had asked her to explain to the Council the public service announcement portion of citizens input that is being initiated with this meeting. This is an opportunity to update the residents on community events. 1 Council Minutes: Apri127, 2009 Tom Moores, Street Superintendent, took the opportunity to recognize Cargill Kitchens for their clean up activities for Earth Day on April 22, 2009. Cargill Kitchens had contacted the Public Works Department and together they came up with a plan to clean up several areas of the city. Cargill Kitchens provided 169 volunteers who worked 312 hours. Tom Moores thanked Cargill Kitchens on behalf of the City and the Public Works Department. Dan Lemm, 113 Cameron Avenue asked if the agenda could be posted on the bulletin board ahead of the meeting. 5. Consent Agenda: A. Consideration of ratifying hires and departures MCC. Recommendation: Ratify the hires and departures for the MCC as identified. B. Consideration of review and acceptance of first quarter financial reports. Recommendation: Accept the 2009 1St quarter financial status report. C. Consideration of accepting improvements and authorizing final payment for the WWTP Vehicle Storage Building, City Project No. 2007-19C. Recommendation: Accept the work and approve the final payment to KUE Contractors in the amount of $12,682.00 for Project No. 2007-19C, WWTP Vehicle Storage Building. D. Consideration of approval of resolution for the Redemption of Telecommunications Revenue Bonds. Recommendation: Approve the resolution for redemption of Telecommunications Revenue Bonds. Res. #2009-21 E. Consideration of adopting a resolution to include the City of Monticello within the borders of the Wright County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan. Recommendation: Approve the resolution to include the City of Monticello within the borders of the Wright County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan. Res #2009-20 BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. TOM PERRAULT SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6. Consideration of items removed from the consent agenda for discussion. None. 7. Public Hearing -Consideration of a resolution adopting proposed assessment roll for delinquent utility bills and certification of assessment roll to County Auditor. Tom Kelly provided the Council with information on the delinquent utility assessment noting the dollar amount is about $3001ess than for the same quarter last year. This assessment roll covers the fourth quarter of 2008 which was billed in January. Tom Kelly explained that unpaid bills from the billing that goes out in April will rollover to the July billing and that will be the basis for the second certification hearing for the year. 2 Council Minutes: Apri127, 2009 Mayor Herbst opened the public hearing. There was no one present who spoke for or against the proposed assessment. Mayor Herbst then closed the public hearing. SUSIE WOJCHOUSKI MOVED TO ADOPT THE ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR THE DELINQUENT UTILITY CHARGES AS PRESENTED. TOM PERRAULT SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Res. #2009-19 8. Consideration of adopting Outstanding Citizen Recognition Award. City Engineer, Bruce Westby explained this is an effort to recognize citizens who demonstrate exemplary and/or extraordinary behavior. A nomination form will be on the City's website so citizens can recommend individuals who they feel are deserving of recognition. The recommendations will be forwarded to the Police Commission for their review. If approved, a certificate of recognition signed by the Mayor, Wright County Sheriff and the Police Commission Chairman will be presented to the individual at a Council meeting. Susie Wojchouski asked how this award is different from the RiverFest's Outstanding Citizen Award. The RiverFest nomination is brought forward by the Chamber of Commerce, the Rotary and the Lions Club while this award will come from public nominations. RiverFest gives out only one award a year and the Outstanding Citizen Recognition Award could be given out more often. Brad Fyle, Police Commission Chairman said this award is more in recognition of actions or behavior in emergency situations such as fire, police action or other emergency situations. SUSIE WOJCHOUSKI MOVED TO ADOPT THE OUTSTANDING CITIZEN RECOGNITION AWARD AS OUTLINED IN THE COUNCIL REPORT OF APRIL 27, 2009. TOM PERRAULT SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 9. Consideration of approving an amendment of Chapter 3 of the Monticello Zoning Ordinance relating to signs. Community Development Director, Angela Schumann explained the process that was followed in drafting the revised sign ordinance that was being presented for approval at this meeting. The City's present sign ordinance was revised for a number of reasons including confusing format and lack of consistency. Because the ordinance has had numerous amendments there is conflicting language and because the ordinance has not been updated some of the language and provisions maybe outdated. When the Planning Commission began their review of the ordinance they did so with specific goals in mind. These goals included making the ordinance user friendly; clarifying sign designs; provide consistency for basic sign types and eliminate content based regulations. Angela Schumann reviewed the public input process followed by the Planning Commission. There were two public workshops as well as some direct mailings. The Planning Commission reviewed the revised ordinance over the course of three public Planning Commission meetings and a public hearing was conducted by the Planning Commission on the final document. Brian Stumpf asked about the number of people who had attended the meetings. Staff indicated there were 7-8 individuals present. Based on their review and discussion of the ordinance the Planning Commission recommended two changes. Removing restrictions on window signage was one recommended change and the other 3 Council Minutes: Apri127, 2009 change was that the provisions for dynamic display would be subject to a six month comment period. It was noted that the Council had received two letters speaking to the proposed sign ordinance. One letter spoke to applying the provisions of the sign ordinance in a consistent and equitable manner and the other dealt with electronic message centers. The Planning Commission approved the revised ordinance 4-0. Angela Schumann pointed out some of the changes in the revised sign ordinance noting that the definitions, use of diagrams and simplification of the language made the document more user friendly. The process for sign permits was simplified and the language outlining the enforcement process was clarified. Staff also reviewed the changes in the ordinance relating to permitted signs, temporary signs and non-profit signs. Glen Posusta asked about the changes to sign dimensions being based on the speed of the street they are located on. Staff indicated that provision was removed from the ordinance. Glen Posusta also clarified that for the temporary signs the 40 days is per building and not per parcel so if he has seven buildings he could have a temporary sign up for 280 days. Steve Grittman replied that technically that was a correct reading of the ordinance. Among the regulations established for electronic or dynamic signs was the time element for changing the message. The ordinance has it set at 2 minutes which the Council questioned. Brian Stumpf wanted to know how many signs would be affected by this provision. Staff indicated there are 12-15 signs and most of those signs are located along TH 25. The consensus of the Council was that 2 minutes was too long, Susie Wojchouski noted that in many of the sign ordinances she had researched on the Internet the message time was more like five second. Council members felt that 4- 5seconds was more appropriate. Consulting Planner, Steve Grittman explained how the Planning Commission came up with the five minute time frame. He emphasized that the Planning Commission was trying for a balance between getting the drivers attention to focus on the message without creating a safety hazard. Glen Posusta felt that at normal driving speed an individual would be through the area before the sign display changes. The Council also questioned the six month trial period and whether it was necessary to have that. They felt if the ordinance wasn't working the Council could amend it to reflect whatever change they felt necessary and if the ordinance was working up to expectations they didn't want to have to bring it back to Council after six months. The Council had other questions on flashing signs, scrolling, marquee signs and shimmering signs. Brian Stumpf asked about the River City Extreme sign and was informed by staff that it is a dynamic sign with animation that shimmers. A shimmering sign contains reflective material that moves in the wind. Tom Perrault questioned the liability insurance requirement in Section 3A-5 #7a and wondered how much that costs the applicant. It was noted that this requirement only affects signs in the public right-of--way in the CCD (Central Community District). GLEN POSUSTA MOVED TO ADOPT AN AMENDMENT TO THE MONTICELLO ZONING ORDINANCE CHAPTER 3 REGARDING SIGNS BASED ON A FINDING THAT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE PROVIDES ADEQUATE MEANS OF EXPRESSION AND PROMOTION OF THE ECONOMIC VIABILITY OF THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY WHILE PROTECTING THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY WITH ITEMS AS NOTED BY THE COMMISSION INCLUDING: A) STRIKE LANGUAGE PERTAINING TO THE REGULATION OF WINDOW SIGNAGE AS NOTED; B) DELETE THE SIX-MONTH REVIEW PERIOD FOR THE DYNAMIC DISPLAY MESSAGE DURATION INCLUDING BUSINESS NOTIFICTION AND SOLICITATION FOR INPUT AND C) AND CHANGE THE 4 Council Minutes: Apri127, 2009 TIMING FOR DYNAMIC SIGNS FROM 2 MINUTES TO 5 SECOND INTERVALS. SUSIE WOJHCOUSKI SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Tom Perrault asked about the City going in and disconnecting a sign and whether the City could enter onto private property in this instance. Brian Stumpf felt one year was too long for an abandoned sign to remain up and suggested it be changed to six months. Steve Grittman responded the one year time frame is consistent with the language of the statutes and the ordinance. Building Official Gary Anderson asked for clarification on enforcement of garage sales signs. Steve Grittman replied that you can't create a class of signs based on content, such as garage sales, so this ordinance does not address garage sale signs. The ordinance does say you cannot have signs in the public right of way. Steve Grittman commented that many cities handle garage signs by allowing them to be up over the weekend of the event as long as they are removed in a timely fashion. As far as off-site signs, the individual has to get permission from the property owner before the sign can be erected. Gary Anderson also asked about portable signs and if the allowable footage was 32 square feet. He said most portable signs are larger than that. Angela Schumann responded that the sigs come in multiple sizes such as 4'x6' and 4'x8'. Susie Wojchouski asked when individuals come in for sign permits does Gary Anderson remind them that signs are not to be placed in the right-of--way. 10. Consideration of authorizing ureparation and submittal of FHWA Interchange Warrant Report. City Engineer, Bruce Westby stated that a meeting had been held with representatives from FHWA and MnDOT regarding the eastbound ramp of I-94. The FHWA has a new process which requires less modeling than in their previous application process. An application for the FHWA would cost about $5,500 to prepare. The FHWA was informed that the Council thought that the old ramp alignment was a safer route. The FHWA representatives said the odds were probably not good that the request would be approved but they didn't want to discourage the City from applying. If the FHWA approves the request MnDOT would review it. Staff is asking if the Council wants to move forward with the application request. Bruce Westby said the I-94 bridge replacement project will start on July 13, 2009. As part of this project the east bound bridge will have a dedicated acceleration lane. City staff recommendation is that the City might be better served by tabling this item until the City can see how the merge lane works on I-94. Bruce Westby indicated that the cost for the MnDOT report that is required as part of this process would cost approximately $30,000-$40,000 and would take about nine months to complete. Bruce Westby brought up to the Council several other issues relating to this project and the request to re-open the old freeway ramp. He indicated that the owner of the property east of CSAH 18 and lying between Meadow Oak Avenue and the CSAH 18 interchange ramp felt the re-opening of the freeway ramp could affect the marketability of their property. In addition having the old freeway ramp open would violate conditions of the development agreement on the interchange project. Another issue is the concern of residents from the Meadow Oaks development about the ramp being used for cut through traffic. The old ramp will re-open for this project and at the end of the project the old ramp will be obliterated. Brian Stumpf said it was not clear from the agenda report that both 5 Council Minutes: Apri127, 2009 the old freeway ramp and the new ramp will be open during the project. Brian Stumpf stated he sat in on the meeting with the FHWA. He felt that if the FHWA could not guarantee that the ramp would be opened it would be a waste of city effort to do the application. Brian Stumpf indicated that he had received a number of a-mails and telephone calls on this subject. He suggested that the City do a traffic study in the Meadow Oaks area where the potential cut through would be. The traffic counts should be done in that area to see what the volume of traffic is now and done again when the ramp is open. He also suggested putting the City's speed trailer out there. Based on the information from the study the City could then decide what they want to do. Brian Stumpf said leaving the old ramp open would cater to the people who just want to get through town. On the other hand the ramp is there and has been paid and if the City allows the ramp to be closed it is gone forever. Glen Posusta expressed his concern about deviating from the terms of the development agreement. Susie Wojchouski said the development agreement stated that the City would close the access upon completion of the interchange. Bruce Westby noted this condition was in both the development agreement and the agreement with MnDOT. Glen Posusta noted he is also concerned about the cost of getting approval for the ramp to remain open. Brian Stumpf reiterated that the only reason he brought the issue up initially is because he didn't want to lose what was already in place. GLEN POSUSTA MOVED TO TABLE THE INTERCHANGE WARRANT REPORT BUT DIRECT STAFF TO CONDUCT TRAFFIC COUNTS IN THE AREA. Bruce Westby said staff is in the process of working on the speed trailer to get it adjusted to accurately count and once that is done City staff could do most of the work on the traffic counts. There was further discussion on the information on the traffic counts. GLEN POSUSTA RESCINDED HIS MOTION AND BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO TABLE ANY ACTION ON AUTHORIZING THE PREPARATION OF THE INTERCHANGE WARRANT REPORT AND DIRECT STAFF TO COMPLETE THE WORK NECESSARY ON THE SPEED TRAILER AND TAKE IT OUT 1N THE PROJECT AREA FOR A TWO WEEK PERIOD NOW AND BRING THOSE RESULTS BACK TO THE COUNCIL AND DO ANOTHER COUNT 1N THE AREA A YEAR FROM NOW WHEN THE OLD FREEWAY RAMP IS OPEN AGAIN. GLEN POSUTA SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED WITH TOM PERRAULT VOTING IN OPPOSITION. Clint Herbst asked about tabling the project instead of denying it. Brian Stumpf responded his motion was to table because he didn't want to close the door on the option to make the request to the FHWA. He said they have a year to deal with it and closing the door on this option without having any data at all would be inappropriate. Bruce Westby asked if the City wanted the traffic counts on both Broadway and the local streets. The Council indicated the counts should just be done on Broadway. Charlie Pfeffer spoke regarding the agreement on the construction of the interchange which specifically referenced the MnDOT project and the MnDOT project specified that the ramps would be closed. Diverting traffic would be a violation of the agreement. He suggested that if the Council goes forward with the traffic counts that they do counts in the Meadow Oak area as well. 6 Council Minutes: Apri127, 2009 11. Consideration of authorizing preparation of signal justification report for School Boulevard and Cedar Street intersection. Brian Stumpf asked if the City could construct the signal with the money that has been promised to the City and just not activate the system until it is needed. Bruce Westby explained that under agreements with Wal-Mart and Monticello Business Center 3~ Addition the parties agreed to an assessment for the cost of a signal system at School Boulevard and Cedar Street. The agreement also stated that if the signal system was not constructed within five years the provisions of the assessment would be null and void. Bruce Westby stated at this point they have not made direct contact with Wal-Mart to see what their position is on extending the agreement on the signal. Glen Posusta said he doesn't believe that intersection will be ready for a signal for at least ten years. He questioned why the City would have made an agreement requiring the signal but suggested passing a motion to extend the time period so the City doesn't lose the cost participation by the property owners. There was some discussion on whether the property owners had paid the estimated cost up front. Shawn Weinand, one of the property owners, said Wal-Mart has not paid funds for this improvement. If the signal is not constructed Wal-Mart's obligation to pay a portion of the signal cost would go away as would Ocello's. Shawn Weinand indicated Ocello would support an additional five years on this provision of the agreement and if something happens sooner they would comply with the provisions of the agreement. Susie Wojchouski said Wal-Mart needs to be made aware that the City will move forward on the signal in order not to lose the commitment to funding the cost. Glen Posusta asked about the October 12, 2009 deadline and whether the City could have something going as far signal construction before that deadline. Bruce Westby said, assuming the issue could be worked out with Wal-Mart, this item would come back before the Council at either the May 11~' or May 26~' meeting. SUSIE WOJCHOUSKI MOVED TO TABLE AUTHORIZING THE FEASIBILITY REPORT ON THE SIGNAL CONSTRUCTION AND HAVE THE CITY ENGINEER WORK OUT AN EXTENSION ON THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH OCELLO AND WAL-MART. TOM PERRAULT SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The general consensus of the Council was that the signal system at this intersection would probably not be needed for at least 5-7 years. 12. Consideration of replacement of 1987, 4610 Ford ditch mowing tractor. Street Superintendent Tom Moores presented background information on the Ford tractor which was purchased about ten years ago. He explained that this piece of equipment is used primarily for mowing. With the new tractor they would equip it so it could be used for snow removal as well as mowing. Funds totaling $80,000 have been budgeted over the last two years to cover the cost of the equipment. Staff has looked at four different tractors on the state bids. Staff feels the Challenger best suits their needs and has checked out a used model. The price of the used model was about $4,000 less than a new Challenger. Clint Herbst asked why there was such a small difference in the price between a new and used Challenger. Brian Stumpf indicated that the 2007 model was pre-emission standards so that gives it 7 Council Minutes: Apri127, 2009 value. Tom Moores said if the City didn't purchase the used model, it would be sold to the DNR Glen Posusta said he had a real problem going with such an expensive piece of equipment. Brian Stumpf argued that the new equipment could be used year round. Glen Posusta responded that he didn't see anything on this tractor that would make it more useful for snowplowing than the equipment the City already has. Tom Moores said to switch the tractor over from mowing equipment to snow removal equipment would take about a day. He said plowing the cul-de-sacs with a tractor is quicker and safer as there is better visibility with a tractor. Glen Posusta reiterated that he has a problem spending that much money one a piece of equipment and Susie Wojchouski concurred with that view. Tom Moores stated he has tried to see if the mowing work could be contracted out but he had not had any success thus far. He had contacted other cities to see if they contract out mowing but he did not contact other communities about going in on the joint purchase of the equipment and sharing it like the City had done with the tar pot. Clint Herbst asked about exchanging services with another entity like the County or State and having them do the mowing in exchange for some other service such as snow removal. Glen Posusta said spending $72,000 for a piece of equipment to mow grass twice a year and possibly do some snowplowing was not appropriate. He indicated he had some contacts for the mowing work and he felt contracting the work out was a more effective use of funds. Tom Moores agreed that $72,000 is a lot of money for a piece of equipment and that is why he is trying to set it up so it can be used year round. Glen Posusta also questioned the trade in value for the old tractor. Tom Moores reminded them that the tractor was purchased in 1987 so it is over 20 years old and was a heavily used piece of equipment. He was surprised that the City got an offer of $5,000. He said the City staff is spending manhours repairing the tractor instead of mowing. Brian Stumpf felt the only decision was whether to go with the new mower or the used one. Glen Posusta felt the City could get by using the equipment they had. Tom Moores said the department looks at their equipment every year and they would not be coming before the Council if they didn't feel they needed this equipment. Glen Posusta stated that even though staff feels they need the equipment the timing of the purchase was bad. He felt the Council should hunker down and not spend money until the economy starts to pick up. Public Works Director Bob Paschke asked about using the equipment on the pathways. Tom Moores responded that it would work for mowing along the pathways but could not be used for snow removal on the pathways. Susie Wojchouski felt the purchase could be put off for a year. SUSIE WOJCHOUSKI MOVED TO NOT AUTHORIZE THE PURCHASE OF A REPLACEMENT TRACTOR FOR THE 1987 FORD TRACTOR AT THIS TIME AND TO BRING IT BACK TO THE COUNCIL IN A YEAR. GLEN POSUSTA SECONDED THE MOTION. Tom Perrault asked how much time was spent maintaining the equipment. He felt if the purchase was going to be tabled he would like to see what the cost would be for contracting it out. SUSIE WOJCHOUSKI AMENDED HER MOTION TO INCLUDE THAT STAFF RESEARCH CONTRACTING OUT OF THE MOWING WORK AND TO BRING THAT INFORMATION BACK TO THE COUNCIL. GLEN POSUSTA SECONDED THE AMENDED MOTION. MOTION CARRIED WITH BRIAN STUMPF VOTING IN OPPOSITION. Brian Stumpf stated the City is expected to maintain certain standards and if areas don't get mowed or plowed residents are upset. 8 Council Minutes: Apri127, 2009 13. Consideration of replacing the Parks Department Bobcat skid loader. Parks Superintendent Tom Pawelk brought up the replacement of the department's skid loader. It is a 2003 Bobcat A300 all-wheel steer skid loader and there is 1800 hours on the machine. The feeling of staff is that the machine, because of its condition, should be replaced before there is a major repair that is needed. The staff had received quotes from Lano Equipment and Tri State Bobcat. Both firms offer the Guaranteed Trade Price Agreement this allows the City to trade in the equipment each year for the new year model at a price of $2,000 per year. The City actually owns the equipment and is not obligated to trade in each year. The agreement includes a full warranty for the machine year. Although both firms offered the same equipment Lano Equipment provided the best deal offering a trade-in value of $18,500 and 450 hours Glen Posusta questioned getting rid of a new piece of equipment. Brian Stumpf felt there was value in getting a new machine every year. Bob Paschke stated where he worked previously they had used the guaranteed trade price program starting in 1998 and it worked well for them as they ended up each year with a new machine with a full warranty and no expense for tires. Tom Pawelk explained all the ways this piece of equipment is used and pointed out that the attachments for the existing machine will work on the new model. BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO TRADE IN THE 2003 A300 BOBCAT ALL WHEEL STEER LOADER AND PURCHASE A NEW A300 BOBCAT AND ENTER INTO A GURANTEED TRADE AGREEMENT FROM LANG EQUIPMENT, INC. SUSIE WOJCHOUSKI SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Public Works Director, Bob Paschke felt it was the right decision to proceed with the purchase of the skid loader and hold off on the purchase of the tractor. 14. Consideration of authorizing applications for High Priority Proiect (HPP) funding. City Engineer Bruce Westby explained that this funding is not tied to the stimulus package but is available through Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU). The funds become available every 4-6 years when congress re-authorizes the transportation bill. The application for these funds is due Apri130, 2009. HPP funding would cover 80% of the project and the City would fund the local match of 20%. Staff was proposing to submit applications for two projects; 1) Intersection and corridor improvements on TH 25 from I-94 to the Mississippi River. The estimated cost for this project is $4,455,000 and 2) A river study crossing which estimated to cost $200,000. Bruce Westby said the 20% local match could be shared by the entities in the project and cited the TH 25 project which could include City, County and State. Clint Herbst felt the City should go after funds for only one of the two projects. Susie Wojchouski asked if the City gets the funding how soon would the money have to be spent. Brian Stumpf asked why the City is responsible for 20% when it is a state highway. He also asked if the costs included right of way acquisition. Bruce Westby indicated that in 2010 MnDOT was proposing a mill and overlay for TH 25 so if the City could get the HPP funding and with MnDOT already involved in a project in the area, he felt the City could make this improvement for a reasonable cost. 9 Council Minutes: Apri127, 2009 Clint Herbst felt the time was right to apply for the funding and that there was still sufficient time to negotiate cost participation by the various entities. Brian Stumpf stated that $40,000 had been spent in 1995 for a river crossing study but nothing has been done on that so he questioned why do another study. Bruce Westby noted that the river crossing study done earlier was more of a regional study and this is proposed as a local river crossing. Clint Herbst felt the City should see if they can get any HPP funding and once that is known the City can work with other entities on cost sharing. Bruce Westby said if the City gets the funding they are not committed to using it. GLEN POSUSTA MOVED TO AUTHORIZE APPLICATIONS FOR HPP FUNDING FOR BOTH PROJECTS IDENTIFIED HEREIN. SUSIE WOJCHOUSKI SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Tom Perrault asked if the cost exceeds the estimate or there are project overruns is the split sti1180%- 20%. Bruce Westby said he will check into that as he wasn't sure of it. Added Item• Clint Herbst asked about painting the crosswalks particularly in the School Boulevard/Deegan Avenue area. Bruce Westby said staff will be bringing a larger scale project for School Boulevard to the Council in the near future. That project would include some striping as well as other improvements. Clint Herbst noted that in a meeting with some of the downtown business people there were some concerns about the crosswalk markings. The Council directed staff to check into this. Glen Posusta asked that the street lights along School Boulevard be put on the agenda. 15. Approve payment of bills for April. BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO APPROVE THE BILLS. TOM PERRAULT SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 16. Adiourn TOM PERRAULT MOVED TO ADJOURN AT 9:30 P.M. GLEN POSUSTA SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Recording Secretary 10