Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP November 23, 1982 ~ o¿ ANDOVER SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING - NOVEMBER 23, 1982 MINUTES A Special Meeting of the AndJver City Council was called to order by Mayor Jerry Windschitl on November 23, 1982, 7:30 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, for the purpose of discussing the 1983 Enterprise Budgets, City Staff Salaries, Fire Department Salaries, Relief Association Request, and the Hanson Boulevard Feasibility/82-l6. Councilmen present: Jacobson, Lachinski, Orttel, Peach (arrived at 7:50 p.m.) Councilmen absent: None Also present: City Engineer, James Schrantz; City Clerk/A. Administrator, P. I. Lindquist; and others 1983 ENTERPRISE BUDGETS Council first discussed the 1983 proposed Water Fund Budget. Ms. Lindquist explained the water rates and water connection charges will be increased the first of the year by a percentage of the ENR, but that is not reflected in the budget. The connection charge will be raised to $710 and the usage rate will be increased by two cents to 79 cents per 1,000 gallons. Mr. Schrantz noted the index has increased by 7~ percent over the past year. Discussion noted the figures in the budget could change if the Northglen II Addition or the Thompson property is developed in 1983. Mayor Windschitl questioned the highest expenditure in the water budget, that being the increase from, $7,200 in the 1983 proposal for salaries to $13,744 in salaries as the Administrative Recommendation, Distributions, Code 101. Ms. Lindquist explained she removed a substantial amount from Administration, Code 101, salaries. Before most of the work done on the system was shown as administration, such as connecting the water meters, checking them, etc.; but it actually should be under distribution. All she left under administration for salaries is the clerical work for billing. Mayor Windschitl still felt it was out of line for the water system to be costing approximately three-fourths of an employee. Discussion noted that an employee is paid standby for weekend duty and holidays because the water system must be checked every day and someone must be available to be called for emergencies. The duty and standby pay amounts to two hours duty pay plus two hours standby pay at time and a half of Mr. Stone's salary. Council discussed various ways to reduce that amount, noting when it was first established there were only two people qualified for the duty/standby pay, which created quite a hardship on those two employees. But now there are four people who are being used for duty/standby pay, which reduces the hardship to those employees. There was a 1 so concern on the part of the COLJnc il that as much as poss i b le be put toward Debt Service Fund Reimbursement (Administration, Code 720) so it doesn't qet '0 far behind. Mr. Schrantz also not~d trat under source and storage, he was budgeting 1/7th the cost of pulling up the pump and maintaining it, which should be done approximately once every seven years. By not budgeting that amount, that item is not being dealt with in a timely fashion. (Councilman Peach arrived at this time, 7:50 p.m.) A lengthy discussion continued on various suggestions to reduce the expenditures, particularly the salaries. It was determined that the duty/standby pay for weekends and holidays amounts to $58.74 per day or almost 16 hours a weekend of straight pay. Suggestions were to contract with another city to handle emergency calls, to hire someone else to do it, or to reduce the total amount for the duty/standby pay for those days since there are now four people able to do it. - ~- -- -. Special City Council Meeting November 23, 1982 - Minutes Page 2 (1983 Enterprise Budgets, Continued) It was finally agreed that the duty/standby pay for weekends and holidays would be changed to one and a half times Frank Stone's salary (as he is the highest paid individual in utilities) for two hours a day. Should there be an emergency call for either streets, utilities, etc., those employees responding would be paid l~ times their salary for the actual time spent working over and above the duty/standby pay, which is what has been done in the past. This would reduce the salaries for Distribution by approximately $3,249 per year. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Lachinski, that we make the rate ly. times the hourly rate for two hours to be paid for checking the well pump and chemicals, etc., per day on the weekend based upon the highest salary paid of public works for those who check it; that fee also includes the total price including standby. Motion carried unanimously. ' It was agreed to change Distribution, Code 101, Salaries to $10,744 and Administration, Code 720, D.S. Fund Reimbursement to $7,500. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Jacobson, that we reduce the salaries by $3,OOD and move that amount to Debt Service line item and approve the Water Fund Enterprise Budget. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Orttel, that we increase the Connection Charge for the City water service area to $710 per Connection Charge and change the Usage Rate to 79 cents per 1,000 gallons effective January 1, 1983. DISCUSSION: was on the use of a connection charge in future projects, with some feeling that it doesn't work very well because the funds do not come into the City to coincide with the City's expenditures. It was also generally felt that the General Fund should not have to subsidize the water fund, which it may have to do if the debt service reimbursement account cannot be paid off. Mayor Windschitl felt this should be looked into, especially since there is a possibility of having that line run up to the area south of South Coon Creek Drive. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, that we have the City Engineer look at the Water Ordinance in terms of its applicability to commercial establishments and have him recommend whether we should establish separate rates for commercial use of water within the City. Motion carried unanimously. Discussion was then on Sewer Fund A and Sewer Fund B. The budget as proposed is to increase sewer usage of $1 per month to $7 per month in Sewer Fund A, which would allow for a small surplus in the fund; and to increase the sewer usage of $2 per month to $8 per month in Sewer Fund B, which would still result in a $3,378 shortage in the fund. Council generally agreed a budget should not be approved with a deficit, and there was a lengthy discussion as to why Sewer Fund B is in arrears and how to balance the budgets. As with the Water Fund, it was noted that should there be developmentDf the Good Value or the Thompson property, the figures for Sewer Fund B wou ld change. It was a 1 so noted that most of the money is passed through to the NWCC; and since Sewer Fund B is such a small fund, any minor change makes a big difference in the figures. Ms. Lindquist explained the way the Resolutions are written establishing the funds, the two funds cannot be combined, though one fund can borrow from the other. Ms. Lindquist also figured raising the sewer user fee for Fund B by another 50 cents to $8.50 per month would bring in an additional $1,584. There was also discussion on the salaries, Collection, Code 101, being raised from $750 in the 1983 proposal to $2,227 as Administrative Recommendation. Council also noted the salaries have been increased considerably for Collection and Administration of Sewer Fund A. Ms. Lindquist explained her revisions are based on actual hours Special City Council Meeting November 23, 1982 - Minutes Page 3 (1983 Enterprise Budgets, Continued) spent on the two funds rather than on percentages estimated in the past, because the staff has been keeping closer records of time spent in these areas. She also reduced salaries for Administration, Code 101, in Sewer Fund B, and put it under Collection, Code 101, to show more accurately where the time is being spent. Mr. Schrantz noted a lot more time was spent in sewers this year and that Sewer Fund A would naturally take more maintenance because it is the older system and because the trunk is so deep. The Clerk stated that as of October 15 in Sewer Fund A, salaries for Collection and Administration were $5,200. Mayor Windschitl argued that the original 1983 proposal of $7,400 for salaries for Collection and Administration would then be in line, but the Administrative Recommendation of almost $14,000 for salaries does not. seem correct. If the salaries were proposed for $7,400, there would not be a need to raise the sewer user fees for Sewer Fund A. The Clerk then noted a mistake has been made in the figures, and the Council recessed while she refigured the totals. Recess at 9:05; reconvene at 9:18 p.m. Because Ms. Lindquist had not completed the recalculations, it was agreed to continue the item to later in the meeting. FIRE DEPARTMENT SALARIES (Councilman Peach did not participate in the discussion because he is a member of the Fire Department.) Assistant Fire Chief Bill Bush reviewed the Department's proposal for salaries from November 1, 1982, through October 31, 1983: Fire Chief, increase from $1,200 to $1,500. Assistant Fire Chief, new item of $600. Fire Marshall, $540. However, a mistake was made in this year's salary and Fire Marshall actually received $600 for the past pay period. Therefore, the suggestion was for a salary of $660 for Fire Marshall. Assistant Fire Marshall, new item of $216, which was originally figured at one-half the Fire Marshall's salary. With the change in the Fire Marshall's salary, it is recommended this be changed to $330. $11,000 in fire-call points at $5.50 per point, up from $5 per point. $7,280 for weekly drills remaining at $4 per point. Additional pay for officers on fire scenes: $2 per point for Chief and Assistant Chief, the same as last year. $1.75 for Captains, up from $1.50. $1.25 for Lieutenants, up from $1 per point last year. Total budget shown in the General Fund is $22,398. Council discussion on the proposal t-was with the amount per point remaining the same for weekly drills, the total increase for points to the firefighters is approximately 5~ percent. It was also noted the General Fund Budget has been approved with these salary suggestions reflected in that line item. The concern was with the overall General Budget, noting that because of the State's financial problems at this time it is possible the City will not be receiving all the State Aids shown in the budget. If this is the case, it should be recognized that cuts will have to be made; and in that event, there is a possibility cuts will have to be made from the Fire Department salaries as well as from other areas. Special City Council Meeting November 23, 1982 - Minutes Page 4 (Fire Department Salaries, Continued) MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, that we adopt the salary level and the dollars for pOints as recommended by the Fire Department for 1983 with the under- standing that should State Aids and funds be cut back, that at that time the Fire Department, as well as the rest of the City Budget, will be looked at for reductions to meet that shortfall. DISCUSSION: Councilman Jacobson clarified the motion is for the recommendation of $660 for Fire Marshall and $330 for Assistant Fire Marshall. VOTE ON MOT! ON: YES-Jacobson, Lachinski, Orttel, Windschitl; ABSTAIN-Peach Motion carried. ENTERPRISE BUDGET - SEWER FUNDS, CONTINUED The Clerk noted 1982's amounts will end up being greater than what was estimated because Good Value did more than what was anticipated. She again emphasized that on salaries, the 1983 Administrative Recommendation is based on actual hours tabulated in recent months; whereas the previous budget and estimates were simply estimates of time. That accounts for the increases in salaries for the sewer funds. She also explained with her recalculations, Sewer Fund A would have a surplus of $4,049. The Council generally felt that if the two funds were combined, there would be an overall balance between revenues and expenditures.' MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Jacobson, that those sewer users in the area designated as Area A have a $1 a month increase in the amount~ of those user fees; and those users in B have a $2 increase in their fee for the year effective January 1, 1983. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, that we adopt the funds for Sewer Fund A in the amount of Revenues, $75,690, Expenditure~ $71,641, and amount of the Surplus, $4,049, for 1983. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, approval of Sewer Fund B for the year 1983 as presented in the Enterprise Budget. Motion carried unanimously. (Revenues, $25,884; Expenditures, $29,222; and Shortage, $3,378) FIRE DEPARTMENT - RELIEF ASSOCIATION Tom May explained when they made their calculations for the 1981 Relief Association, three members who were eligible -- Bob Palmer, Ron Keller, and Mark Kruetter -- were mi ssed. The City's contribution to the Relief Association is $250 per person to be added to their accounts; however, this now amounts to a deficit in the line item in the budget of $250. He requested the $250 be added to the budget. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that the Fire Department's budget for the City's contribution to the Retirement Fund be increased $250 for the year 1982. Motion carried unanimous ly. Fire Department members explained their calendar year goes from November 1 to October 31 of the following year; whereas the City's fiscal budget is from January through the end of December. Council stated that though the officers are paid on a monthly basis, the increase in the salary should not be paid until 1983, as the funds for that increase are all in the 1983 budget. Those officers paid monthly wi 11 get the "old" salary for November and December, but in January they wi 11 begi n the "new" salary rate plus receive the lump sum difference between the rates for November and December. Special City Council Meeting November 23, 1982 - Minutes Page 5 CITY STAFF SALARIES There was a lengthy discussion on salary increases for City Staff and on the reports prepared by the City Clerk/A. Administrator on various proposals for salary increases and salary ranges. Councilmen Jacobson and Lachinski first suggested that a 5 percent across-the-board increase be given to all employees and 2 percent be used for merit increases. They also felt that Mr. Schrantz and Ms. Lindquist were deserving of a merit increase this year because of their exceptional performance and cooperation. Ms. Lindquist explained her proposals were based on actual earnings for the year, as some employees were not employed the entire year or have had probationary increases during the year. She stated this has been the practice in the City, rather than basing the increase on year-end salaries. Discussion was on where in the ranges the employees were at this time and on the effect of the proposed increases. Some noted that an additional increase for Mr. Schrantz and Ms. Lindquist in effect widens the gap between them and the others because they are the highest paid employees. And because they are the highest paid, a percentage increase to them amounts to considerably more than that same percentage to the lowest paid employees. It was also stated that other municipalities are not granting large salary increases this year unless it is for contracts negotiated a year or two ago. Mr. Schrantz recommending salary increases be based on annual salaries rather than actual earnings, especially feeling Mr. Mashuga is deserving of an additional increase because of the duties he performs and because the hourly rate is, in Mr. Schrantz's opinion, low. Mr. Schrantz also stated the Department structure he presented the Council was a recommendation to inform the Council how the Department has been operating, acknowledging the supervisory positions of Mr. Sowada and Mr. Stone. He didn't feel additional compensation was merited for this. Ms. Lindquist did not recommend a merit increase for the office personnel at this time, but suggested the Council keep that in mind for next year. Mr. Schrantz also proposed rather than an additional merit increase for himself, that he be allowed to take the City vehicle home so he can respond directly to City problems. Mayor Windschitl felt taking a City vehicle out of the City would create problems. Mr. Schrantz then suggested that those employees on weekend duty/standby be allowed to take a City vehicle home, especially since that compensation has been substantially reduced. No decision was made on that suggestion, though some Councilmen indicated agreement with the suggestion. Discussion continued on various suggestions for salary increases, noting there is no reason to use all the funds allocated, especially because the City may not be receiving all the State Aids allocated for 1983. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Lachinski, that~e set salary ranges for 1983 at an lncrease of 5.5 percent across the board based upon the employee's current earning capacity; and in addition, we give to Mrs. Lindquist and Mr. Schrantz each an additional flat $1,000. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that the meeting rate for Recording Secretary be lncreased to $63, with amount for after 11 o'clock from $15 to $16 per hour. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Jacobson, Lachinski, Orttel, Windschitl; PRESENT-Peach Motion carried. MOTION by Peach that in recognition of Pat's certification by the National Municipal Clerk's Association that her title be designated as Administrator. Motion dies for 1 ack of a Second. Discussion was that further research should be done on this suggestion first to determine the duties and responsibil ities involved. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Jacobson, that the Personnel Committee be directed to look at advancing the Clerk/Treasurer position to Administrator rather than Acting Administrator. Motion carried unanimously. Special City Council Meeting November 23, 1982 - Minutes Page 6 HANSON BOULEVARD/82-l6 Mr. Schrantz reviewed the feasibility study for the construction of Hanson Boulevard, Project 82-16, explaining the results based upon various assessment methods of front footage, acres opened up, and acres opened up with commercial/industrial paying twice as much as residential property. He stated he arrived at the last proposal by noting the amount paid for the right-of-way in the commercial/industrial areas were about twice as much as that paid for residential property. He stated in calculating the land as being opened up by the road, he removed the low areas, the portions along both sides of the creek, and the triangular piece of the William Hupp property that is south of the creek but not bordering on Hanson Boulevard. Council discussion was again on whether or not acquisition of right-of-way on MSAH roads should be assessed and on determining an equitable and justifable assessment. It was also questioned whether UPA should be assessed when they donated the right-of way along their property, but it was argued that the road now provides better access to their lines and is a definite benefit to them. It was also noted that approximately $12,000 of the costs for acquiring the right-of-way for this project came from the General Fund because they were not eligible for MSA funding. It was generally agreed that the last policy, assessing commercial/industrial property twice as much as residential on an acreage basis, was the most equitable, noting a formal assessment policy should be adopted prior to the December 7 Public Hearing on the project. RITEWAY AUTO PARTS/SETTLEMENT STIPULATION Discussion was on the settlement stipulation worked out by the attorney requiring the owner of Riteway Auto Parts to comply with the city's ordinances within 60 days. They have a Special Use permit; however, they do not have a valid operating license at this time. There was some question as to whether the yard will be brought into compliance within that time period. Councilman Lachinski was opposed to approving the settlement stipulation, as the ordinances do not allow any new junkyards to be established in the City. He felt since this yard has not complied with the ordinances, the business is no longer valid. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Orttel, that the Council agree to the Tenth Judicial District Settlement Stipulation, File Number B-48l34, between the City of Andover and John Imre, doing business as Riteway Auto Parts. VOTE ON MOT! ON: YES-Jacobson, Orttel, Peach, Windschitl; NO-Lachinski Motion carried. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 11:03 p.m. Respectfully submitted, -, ~~ ,.~"- ~ \ \ l,^~~ 0... ¿G Mar 11 a A. Peach ' Recor ing Secretary -