Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP September 13, 1979 ~ o¡ ANDOVER SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING - SEPTEMBER 13, 1979 A Special Meeting of the Andover City Council was called to order by Mayor Jerry Windschitl on September 13, 1979, 7:37 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Anoka, Minnesota, for the purpose of discussing problems and assessment procedure in the Stenquist Addition Street and Storm Sewer Improvement Project and the proposed 1980 Budget for the City. Councilmen present: Lachinski, Orttel, Peach Councilmen absent: Jacobson Also present: City Clerk, P. K. Lindquist; and others Stenquist Addition Improvement Project Mayor Windschitl reported he has talked with the contractor of this project and with TKDA this week. At the last Council meeting Engineer Davidson reported that the contractor would be on the job the next day. The contractor had part of his equipment on the jOb last Thursday, but the roads still were not staked. The Mayor has since found out that the roads were not staked last week but were finished being staked this morning. He expressed frustration over the events occuring with this project, but the contractor has assured the Mayor that construction will begin tomorrow morning. Apparently the contractor will be putting in three full crews on this project and has ordered blacktopping of the roads for October 3. It is the contractor's intention to complete the Stenquist Addition project this year. Mayor Windschitl also stated that there is a new TKDA Engineer on this project who is an Engineer in Training. The Mayor was told by TKDA that the Engineer is Mr. Schumacher's understudy. Council discussion was on the concerns over the work done by TKDA; on the suggestion to have a committee look into the possibility of hiring another engineering firm or a City engineer to do the work for the City or to look at some other alternatives; on the amount of money spent for engineering work in the City; and on the percentage of engineering fees for projects. It was generally agreed to meet with the Engineer on September 20 as scheduled hoping to get answers to questions and to clear up some of the problems. Due to personal conflicts of some Councilmembers, general consensus was to meet at 8 o'clock on September 20 rather than 7:30 p.m. as scheduled. Any further decisions on the engineering question will be made after that meeting with TKDA. Stenquist Addition Assessment Policy and Hearing Discussion was on whether to assess the Stenquist Addition project under the old assessment policy (sideyard credit of 200 feet) as was presented to the people at the public hearings or to go with the new assessment policy, which has been determined by TKDA to be a 224-foot sideyard credit and would increase the assessable front foot assessment for everyone by approximately 60 cents, and on how the change affects individual lots in the project. Councilman Peach reported the Finance Committee has recommended assessing under the old assessment policy because that is the way it was presented to the residents at the public hearings and that it might be upsetting to some residents to change the assessment method in the middle of a project. Approximately 2/3 of the affected residents do not have corner lots. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Orttel, that the City Council assess the Stenquist Addition and lS9th Avenue under the policy previously used establishing 200 feet as the average lot depth as was the policy that was in effect and presented at the Stenquist Public Hearing. Motion carried unanimously. The Clerk explained that if the assessment hearing is held and assessment roll adopted this year to get the assessment roll to the County by October 10, it will be on the tax rolls to be collected in 1980. Statute 429 requires that interest starts on assessments Special City Council Meeting September 13, 1979 - Minutes Page 2 (Stenquist Addition Assessment Policy and Hearing, Continued) the date the assessment roll is adopted. If it is not put on the tax rolls until 1981, they will actually be showing 2~-years' interest on it. The first interest payment of approximately $22,000 on the bond is due next August, with principal and interest payment due the following February. If the hearing is delayed, the people will be paying off the bond issue one year after the bond is retired. By doing it this way, at some point in time there is the possibility of borrowing funds from other improvement funds for a maximum of six months. The Fiscal Agent has told her that this method would be acceptable. Discussion was on whether the assessment hearing should be delayed since the project has not yet begun (as was moved at the September 4, 1979, Regular City Council Meeting) or to hold the assessment hearing prior to October 10 when the assessment roll must be at the County for next year's taxes (going on the assumption that the contractor wi11 complete the project in the next three to four weeks as he has promised or at least the project would be substantially started prior to that date). MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that the Assessment Hearing for lS9th Avenue and Stenquist Addition be held at 7:30 p.m., at the City Hall on October 8. Motion carried unanimously. 1980 Proposed Budget Councilman Lachinski reported the Capital Improvement Committee received the following requests for capital expenditures in 1980: * Park Department and Road Improvement Committee requested a used water tanker estimated to be $15,000. Discussion: Council felt that was a lot of money for a used tanker; wondered whether a tanker from the Fire Department could be used to flood skating rinks and felt this possibility should be investigated. The tanker would also be used for flushing sewers. * The Park Department requested a tractor with blower and sweeper for $22,000. Parks would pay 70 percent; it could be purchased with equipment bonds; Parks felt a more powerful tractor is needed to mow some of the parks. Discussion: Council debated the necessity for an additiona1 tractor at this time; wondered if this was a duplication of equipment. * Four-wheel drive pick-up requested by the Park Board as a replacement for the current truck, to be used for transportation, and because another truck is needed; cost is $10,000; Parks would pay 35 percent; can be purchased with equipment bonds. Discussion: was on why a four-wheel truck would be needed for running errands. The Clerk reported the Fiscal Agent has stated that equipment bonds cannot be used on anything relating to parks because they don't feel parks are a necessity. * Park Board requested $20,000 for park acquisition. * Park Board requested $45,000 for park development. Last year the Park Department had approximately $23,000 for capital. Assuming $4 per capita for park development results in about $33,000. * Fire Department has asked for $6,000 for acquiring approximately three acres of land in the area of the crossover from Roun&;Lake to Seventh Avenue. * Project List No.1 from the Fire Department lists approximately $16,000 which they felt has been cut out of the building. CIP felt that the $5,000 left from the bond issue could be used by the AVFD for some of this. Discussion: Ms. Lindquist estimated there would only be another $2,000 from the bond. * Project List No.2 from the Fire Department is the remaining equipment which they feel they need to run the Fire Department for $20,000. Special City Council Meeting September 13, 1979 - Minutes Page 3 (1980 Proposed Budget, Continued) * Project Number 3 for the Fire Department is $14,300 for rescue equipment, which is basically for the rescue truck. Discussion: Councilman Peach stated the five- year plan for the Fire Department called for the rescue truck in the fifth year. It was never intended to be an ambulance service but an emergency rescue truck to go to fires. * Fire Department also requested $5,000 for a cistern well system with the first one being done in 1980. Discussion: Felt the price quoted was very high and that it could be done more economically by the City itself (Fire Department, Burton Kraabel, etc.). There was a lengthy Council discussion relative to the capital improvement requests as the funding of all requests would require a mill increase beyond the City's levy limit; that sealcoating, gravel for road maintenance, and street lighting have been included in the proposed 1980 budget; discussion on the new state law on computing the allocation of State Aid and how it affects the City; that it is estimated the City will receive $107,660 of State Aid; that the City's levy limit is approximately $400,000; that the 20 percent limitation in the State Aid bill also refers to population increase; that the total mill levy for 1979 including the overlevy for the GO bond was 9.61 (6.83 plus 2.78 mills for over levy); that the 1980 GO overlevy will be reduced to 2 mills; and that the Clerk estimated each mill will generate approximately $30,000 of income for the City. According to the proposed budget, maintaing the same mill levy for 1980 would result in a $227,449 deficit. Council then deliberated on where to reduce spending in the budget, suggesting reducing Park Board requests by approximately $90,000; renting a tanker or using the Fire Department truck if possible rather than purchasing a used one at this time; that to purchase a tractor, truck and snow plow on equipment bonds would require approximately $18,000 to $20,000 next year to pay the interest; that acquiring land for the Fire Department would not be necessary as possibly that could be obtained through platting and that only one acre would probably be needed for the Department; that the Project Lists No.1 and 2 from the Fire Department be spread over a three- to four-year period suggesting allowing the Fire Department to utilize whatever money is left over from the GO bond and allocate them a flat amount each year to be used for capital expenditures at their discretion; and suggesting eliminating the street lighting from the budget although there are some intersections that are dangereous. Caution was expressed by some relative to the extensive use of equipment bonds; it was noted an extra parks person has been accounted for in the proposed budget; and the maximum the City can levy is an additional five or six mills -- slightly more with the equipment bonds. After discussion on the capital expenditure requests, it was determined that to fund these expenditures plus those expenses in the proposed budget would require somewhere around a four- to five-mill increase. Councilmen Orttel and Peach indicated they would not be willing to increase the mill levy by more than two mills. It was determined that to raise the total mill levy to 11.61 mills (of which 2 mills would be) for GO bonds) would result in approximately $292,527.60 of revenue for the City, excluding the GO overlevy. Recess at 9:25; reconvene at 9:29 p.m. Councilman Lachinski stated he wanted to see some projects started in the City and also felt that if large purchasesof equipment are going to be made, they are never going to be any cheaper than now. He felt that by raising the mill levy now, the residents will be getting the most for their dollar. The Clerk indicated that an additional two mill is only a normal inflationary increase. Any increase that might be expected by increased valuation has been offset by the additional homestead credit allowed by the State. Special City Council Meeting September 13, 1979 - Minutes Page 4 (1980 Proposed Budget, Continued) Discussion continued on the City's mill levy; that increased services of the Fire Department and roads plus sealcoating necessitates an increase in the mill levy; and on determining how to balance the proposed budget to reduce expenditures to be within an 11.61 mill rate. Council deliberated whether or not to hire another person to work in the parks. If so, more equipment is needed; if not, additional equipment may not be needed at this time. Discussion was on the Park Board budget. It was suggested that some thought be given to asking the Athletic Association to get involved with the hockey rink to help with maintenance, etc., as is done in other cities. Some felt that the previous priority has been the Fire Department and now it is roads. The Clerk stated of all complaints coming to the City Hall, approximately 90 percent of them are about the roads. Discussion continued on the proposed budget expenditures as a whole and where items can be cut back. Page 33, 455.101, Park/Recreation, Salaries -- includes an additional employee. After deliberation, Council agreed that rather than a full-time person, part-time help should be utilized. Clerk was directed to reduce the over-all personnel by $11,000 to reflect part-time help for the Parks Department. 455.30, Professional Services -- Agreed to reduce to $200. 455.401, Summer School Program -- It was reported that summer school attendance is quite low. Council questioned the high cost; Council will be receiving a report on the summer school program. 455.52 and 455.53, Capital outlays Improvement and Equipment -- Council agreed to reduce Improvements to $13,000 and Equipment to $10,000. Suggested more softball fields be provided as they are the most used recreational facility. Page 21, Fire Protection, 412.10, Salaries -- The Clerk explained the first $10,000 is for salaries to firefighters on the point system including Fire Chief and Fire Marshall. The $3,000 for 412.101 is the five percent allocation for City employees for fighting fires. The budget does not reflect any contribution toward a Relief Association for the firefighters. It was agreed to reduce the figure in 412.10 to $5,000, roughly figuring $3,125 for firefighters (approximately $125 per firefighter), $1,200 for Chief ($100 a month), and $500 for Fire Marshall. Council also agreed to add $3,000 to be paid toward the Department's Relief Association 412.211, Gas and Oil, $2,500 -- Discussion on whether or not that was a reasonable figure. Agreed to leave it as is. 412.35, Insurance -- Council felt the $7,225 budgeted was very high and suggested going out for competitive bids for insurance to see if better rates could be obtained. 412.23, Small Tools -- Council discussion was on what types of tools are still needed; that almost $5,000 has been spent on small tools to date for the Fire Department; expressed concern that duplicate tools for the Fire Department and Public Works not be purchased and that some procedure or system of sharing between the two Departments be worked out to avoid duplication. Council also questioned proposed budgets for schools and subscriptions. It was felt that some of these items should be justified by the Fire Department. 412.50, Capital Outlay -- It was again suggested that the lists presented to the CIP be spread over three or four years; that there is still approximately $2,000 left from the GO Bond that the Department will be allowed to use for capital expenditures; recommended allocating $8,000 for capital outlay. Special City Council Meeting September 13, 1979 - Minutes Page 5 (1980 Proposed Budget, Continued) Page 3, 4023, Engineer/Administrator -- Council discussed the possibility of hiring a City Engineer on a part-time basis and possibly sharing with another City. It was the feeling of some that an in-house Engineer would reduce the overall engineering budget for the City. Discussion was over the engineering services the City has been receiving; on the suggestion of hiring a registered engineer as a City Engineer; on some of the advantages of having an in-house engineer; on what savings might be realized by an in-house engineer; and that some professional help is going to be needed to revise Ordinances 8 and 10. Council agreed that no action regarding this item be taken until after the meeting with TKDA on September 20. If it is determined that an in-house Engineer is desired, it was felt that such a person should be hired as soon as feasible; therefore, the budget for this item was left at $20,000 for the time being. Page 8, 4055.30, Auditing, Professional Services -- Council felt this item was high. The Clerk was directed to interview auditors or to receive estimates from other auditing firms. This item will be reviewed after other prices are determined. Page 13, 4094.401, Government Building, Pop -- Clerk noted the revenues for this item are accounted for under Miscellaneous Revenues. 4094.53, Capital Outlay, Machinery -- $1,000 is shown as 50 percent of a riding lawn- mower with Parks contributing the other $1,000. Mr. Sowada explained that the present lawnmower is in very poor condition. The intent was to acquire a small riding lawn- mower to be used for cutting grass. After discussion, Council felt that a riding lawn- mower could not be purchased for $2,000; agreed to increase this item to $2,000. Page 14, 4095, Fire Department -- The Clerk noted there is an error in the Total Figure. It should be $7,830. Page 17, 4096.53, Public Works Building, Capital Outlay -- Mr. Sowada explained that $5,000 is required to put a 74x74-foot fence with gate outside the Public Works Building to store items such as culverts, fence posts, etc., and $5,000 is requested for tools for Public Works. Council questioned whether the fence needs to be that size at this time or even needed at this time; and that salt sand, etc., should probably be stored outside a fenced area. Council generally agreed to reduce the budget for the fence to $2,500. Discussion was on the list of tools that Mr. Sowada requested for Public Works. Council again emphasized that duplicate tools for the Fire Department and Public Works not be purchased, but that some system of sharing be developed. Council agreed to reduce the budget for tools to $2,000. It was also suggested that a coordinated list of tools of the Fire Department and Public Works be made for the Council and that some system of sharing be established between the two Departments. Page 26, 421.38, Street and Highways, Rentals -- Mr. Sowada indicated that is for rental of equipment to sweep the streets, etc. 421.53, Capital Outlay -- Budget reflects 50 percent of bond payment for grader. Council agreed to change that figure so it represents two-thirds of the bond payment for the grader. Clerk will make that change. ~ Page 28, 4213.52, Snow and Ice Removal, Capital Outlay -- Budget reflects 50 percent of bond payment for grader. Council agreed to change that figure so it represents one-third of the bond payment for the grader. Clerk will make that change. ~ Page 30, 4217.40, Street Lighting, Capital Outlay -- Council agreed to reduce the item by $2,000 and leave no allocation for this item. ~ Page 31, 4224.52, Storm Sewer, Capital Outlay -- Mayor Windschitl noted that one item the Council will have to address soon is that the collection for sanitary sewers is not generating enough money to pay Metropolitan Waste Control and to maintain the system. After further discussion, it was noted that there is monies budgeted under rentals and contractural; therefore, it was determined that no monies would be allocated for Capital Outlay. Special City Council Meeting September 13, 1979 - Minutes Page 6 (1980 Proposed Budget, Continued) The Clerk indicated that there has been no contingency factor built into the budget. Council agreed to add $5,000 to the expenditures for contingencies. Because proposed expenditures were still approximately $40,000 more than revenues, discussion was on determining whether more cuts should be made in the budget or the mill levy raised to meet the proposed espenses. Further cuts suggested were reductions on insurance, the summer school program, possibly asking the Fire Department to reduce their budget by $2,000; possibly decreasing the allocation for City Engineer/Administrator, and possibly reducing a percentage of various other items to balance the budget with an 11.61 mill levy. The Clerk determined that an increase to 11.61 mills would give the City an additional 2.78 operating mill levy over the 1979 budget and should generate $353,408.40 in revenues using the County's estimated market value, of which $60,881 will be used for the GO Bond payment. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Peach, that the City set its revenues from property taxes at $356,000 for the year 1980. (See Resolution R80-9) Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Windschitl - The additional mill levies are for 1) $27,000 in sealcoating; 2) $15,000 on the cost of the road grader; and 3) $3,000 for the new truck for next year. The Budget will be discussed again at the Regular Council Meeting on September 17. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Orttel, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 11:57 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~~~L Recording Secretary