05/10/1983 - City Council Special
0(: I 2
MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE EAGAN CITY COUNCIL
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
MAY 10, 1983
A special meeting of the Eagan City Council was held on Tuesday, May 10,
1983 at 7:00 p.m. at the Eagan City Hall. Present were Mayor Blomquist and
City Councilmembers Smith, Thomas, Egan and Wachter. Also present were City
Administrator Hedges, City Engineer Rosene, Public Works Director Colbert and
City Attorney Hauge.
Mayor Blomquist convened the meeting and stated the principal purpose of
the meeting was to hold the continued public hearing regarding the special
assessments proposed to be levied against the James and Arvella Horne and the
Horne Development Corporation property, located in the Northeast Quarter of
Section 21, lying west of Pilot Knob Road.
JAMES HORNE STORM SEWER ASSESSMENT - PROJECT #297R
The Mayor convened the continued assessment hearing and Tom Hedges
briefly introduced the subject. City Attorney Paul Hauge read a detailed
statement into the record being taken by a Court Reporter, and stated that the
purpose of the hearing was to attempt to avoid assessment appeals and second,
if any appeal is taken, to avoid much of the duplication of the hearing
process before the District Court. He noted that the City Council had con-
vened the hearing to make a determination as to whether the benefits to the
Horne property exceed the total amount of the special assessments.
Bruce Malkerson of the firm of Popham, Haik, Schnobrich, Kaufman & Doty
appeared on behalf of the property owner and Mr. and Mrs. James Horne were
also present. Mr. Malkerson objected to the hearing and indicated that he had
again requested a continuance that had been made by a telephone call to the
City Attorney's office on May 3, 1983. Councilmembers indicated that because
of the many delays in the hearing, which had last been held on November 9,
1982 and continued to December 21, 1982 with four continuances since that
date, that the hearing should proceed. Mr. Malkerson asked that the Hornes
be permitted to present their appraiser to the City Council at a later date to
testify concerning the benefits to the property in relation to the proposed
assessments. Mr. Hauge objected to the continuance but stated that the City
Council had the right to authorize a continuance for the submission of either
a written appraisal or allow the appraiser to personally appear before the
City Council at a later date.
Councilmembers each expressed their views on the continuance and Council-
man Egan referred to a letter dated May 5, 1983 addressed and mailed directly
to each of the City Councilmembers from Mr. Malkerson. Councilman Egan re-
ferred to several statements in the letter that in effect threatened the
Councilmembers with a potential action for punitive damages in the event that
1
0Special Council Minutes
May 10, 1983
the Council acted on the assessments which, according to Mr. Malkerson's
letter, would deprive the land owners of their constitutional rights. After
considerable discussion and following a recess, Mr. Malkerson stated that he
intended to withdraw as counsel for the Homes and Horne Development Corpora-
tion because of a potential claim of conflict of interest in that his firm is
representing two councilmembers and one former councilmember regarding an
alleged open meeting law violation matter. Mr. Horne indicated that he would
not waive his right to potentially bring an action for punitive damages
against the City or the individual councilmemebers. Mr. Malkerson stated that
it was his opinion that he should withdraw as counsel for the objecting
property owners. Mr. Malkerson further asked for a continuance on behalf of
the Hornes. At 8:30 p.m., Smith moved, Wachter seconded the motion to con-
tinue the hearing until May 17, 1983 at 7:00 p.m. at the City Hall to again
review the assessments and allow the Hornes to acquire new legal counsel if
desired. All members voted yes.
WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Tom Noyes and Bob Rosene of the Bonestroo, Rosene & Anderlik consulting
engineering firm appeared as did Tom Colbert regarding the letter from Knutson
Construction Co., one of the bidders on the water treatment plant. The Knut-
son letter indicated that the bids submitted for the construction were unfair
and that one base bid supplier of equipment did not provide mechanical con-
tractors with quotations until 17 minutes before the bid opening. Mr. Colbert
further went on to state that if there had been enough time, there would have
been reductions in the bid by certain bidders. Mr. Colbert stated that the
base bids are comparable but that not all bidders had a chance to get sup-
pliers bids to bid the alternates. Provisions are laid out in the specifica-
tions to allow bids for alternates. Staff recommended the award of the con-
tract on the basis of the base bids and that the staff then be instructed to
review the proposed deducts and make recommendations to the City Council. It
was noted that the City had appeared to follow the proper procedure and that
only one equipment supplier was named who did not split out the prices for
equipment, and therefore certain bidders cannot review specific bids from the
equipment suppliers. It appears however, that all of the prime contractors
have an equal opportunity to bid and therefore, the City should not be respon-
sible for having to rebid the entire project. Thomas moved, Wachter seconded
the motion to accept the recommendation of the staff and award the contract to
the low bidder, Barbarossa & Sons, Inc. in the sum of $3,539,500.00 in that
the low bidder is a responsible bidder and that there is no showing of irregu-
larity on behalf of the City in the bidding process; further, that the City
Council will consider proposed deducts to the contract after recommendation by
the staff; further, it was noted that all bidders had an equal opportunity to
submit timely bids. All members voted in favor.
2
Special Council Minutes
May 10, 1983
$6,000,000 G.O. BOND ISSUE RESOLUTION
City Administrator Tom Hedges submitted a proposed Resolution amending
the Resolution authorizing the sale of the $6,000,000 General Obligation Water
Revenue Bonds of 1983 to provide for $5,500,000 in the principal amount of
bonds. He stated that the cost of the bid for the water treatment facility
being approximately $500,000 less than the estimate, it was not necessary to
issue bonds in the amount of $6,000,000. He also stated that one alternate
would be for the City to proceed with the issuance of the $6,000,000 bonds and
that $500,000 could then be invested or applied toward another project. If
invested and not applied toward another non-assessable project, the City could
receive no greater rate of interest than received on the bonds, according to
arbitrage laws. After discussion, upon motion by Smith, seconded Egan, it was
resolved that the Resolution amending Resolution to Issue and Sell $6,000,000
General Obligation Water Revenue Bonds in 1983 shall be amended to provide for
$5,500,000 in principal amount of bonds, and that the City Clerk be authorized
to execute the necessary documents to implement the amended Resolution and all
accompanying bond documents. All voted in favor.
SEE BOND FILE
STREET MAINTENANCE
Tom Colbert explained to the Council that the City streets have incurred
excessive break-up, causing many street pothole problems during the spring of
1983. He stated that he does not, at the present time, have sufficient
personnel to do the patching and pothole fixing, due to the excessive street
break-up and estimated that 15,000 to 20,000 square yards of patching will be
required to be done in 1983, which would cost an estimated $64,000.00. He
discussed the $9,600.00 quote for the tailgate paver equipment that the
Council had reviewed at an earlier time and recommended that the Council
authorize the purchase of the paver, which would utilize City crews for the
paving, and ultimately should result in considerable savings to the City. He
stated two temporary street maintenance persons will be hired approximately
June 1.
Mr. Colbert also discussed with the Council the recommendation that the
Council authorize a professional transportation study be done concerning
street needs for the impact of traffic, particularly on County Roads, and the
needs for signalization throughout the City due to the extremely rapid in-
crease of traffic on roads within the City. Colbert was instructed to acquire
estimates for such a study and to report to the Council.
There was also discussion concerning the proposed turnback of County
Roads by Dakota County to the local cities, for reasons including the roads
are not for County purposes, that some roads are located too close to one
another, and that the County could then give better maintenance to the more
important county roads.
3
0C I25
Special Council Minutes
May 10, 1983
There was also discussion concerning the potential for issuing equipment
certificates for financing the tailgate paver, and further, the employment of
additional temporary street maintenance persons during the summer season of
1983. Smith moved, Wachter seconded the motion to approve the purchase of the
tailgate paver in the approximate sum of $9,600.00, through the issuance of
equipment certificates. Councilmembers also discussed the possible authoriza-
tion of two additional temporary employees to operate the paver and directed
Mr. Colbert to return to the Council with a proposal for the additional
employees. All voted in favor.
CONTRACTORS ORDINANCE
Mayor Blomquist and Mr. Hedges indicated that the Mayor and staff members
have received complaints from property owners who are required, under the
recently adopted Contractor's Ordinance, to submit a $5,000.00 Bond in the
event that the homeowner proceeds to make an improvement to his home, with a
value in excess of $5,000.00. There was a question as to whether the City
should continue to require homeowners to post such a surety bond, and it was
noted that the purpose of the bond is to protect the homeowner from unscrupu-
lous contractors. Blomquist moved, Thomas seconded the motion to authorize
the City Attorney to amend the Contractor's Ordinance at page 161 of the Eagan
Code book to provide that private owners will not be required to post the
surety bond if the property owner performs his own work and other recommended
changes, and further that the revisions be submitted to the City Council at
its next regular meeting. All voted in favor.
CEDAR GROVE STREET CONSTRUCTION PROJECT
The Councilmembers discussed the merits between the installation of
concrete curb and gutter as opposed to bituminous curb and gutter which had
been reviewed by the Council at earlier meetings. There were no affected
property owners present and no action was taken by the City Council.
ADJOURNMENT
Upon motion duly made and seconded, the meeting adjourned at approxi-
mately 10:00 p.m.
PHH
City erk
4