Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP September 13, 1983 ~ 01 ANDOVER SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING - SEPTEMBER 13, 1983 MINUTES A Special Meeting of the Andover City Council was called to order by Mayor Jerry Windschitl on September 13, 1983, 7:34 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, for the purpose of discussing the Shriptek Request, the 1984 Proposed Budget, and several engineering matters. Councilmen present: Elling, Knight (arrived at 8:13 p.m.), Lachinski, Orttel Councilmen absent: None A 1 so present: City Engineer, James Schrantz; City Clerk/A. Administrator, P. K. Lindquist; Fire Chief, Frank Stone; Park Commissioner, Bill LeFebvre; Building Inspector, Dave Almgren; Public Works, Ray Sowada SHRIPTEK RECOVERY SYSTEMS REQUEST Ray Slaback of Shriptek Recovery Systems asked to be allowed to work this Sunday and possibly next Sunday because they are falling behind. They have had a breakdown of machinery which lost about four days, each day it gets dark earlier, and they have lost time because of the rain and encountering the hazardous waste. Chief Stone stated he has viewed the premises and progress is being made on opening the fire lanes. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that we authorize the Shriptek Recovery Systems to operate on the two Sundays, September 18 and 25, between the hours of 8 o'clock a.m.. and 5 o'clock p.m. Motion CARRIED on a 4-Yes, l-Absent (Knight) vote. 1984 PROPOSED GENERAL FUND OPERATING BUDGET Mayor Windschitl explained the effect of the last legislative action on the City and its residents. Because Andover assesses all its improvement projects, its mill levy is low; and that was ignored in the last legislative bill. That bill also had the effect of lowering the City's total assessed valuation for 1984 even though the City grew, all of which could have a significant impact on the homeowners' taxes for 1984. Most of the evening was spent discussing the legislative bill, the impact to the City, and how it relates to the 1984 proposed budget. It was noted that the 1983 mill levy was 11.65 with the Area Wide Fiscal Disparities Credit, compared to the proposed 14.2 mills, a 22 percent difference. It was also noted that the problem is compounded because the same problem is faced by the County and school district, both of which can also be expected to raise the mill levy to offset the lowered assessed valuation, thereby creating a significant tax increase to the residents. And there is no way of knowing what the effect the homestead credit will have. The net loss of assessed valuation from 1982 to 1983 is $216,740; however, the gross loss is approximately $2 million because of the new homes constructed in the City. Council then determined that the increase in the 1984 budget as proposed by the Administrator is only 5.3 percent over the approved 1983 budget, or approximately $70,000 more; and they questioned why a 2.5 mill increase is needed. It was also determined that a mill brings in approximately $44,034 of revenue to the City.. (Councilman Knight arrived at this time. 8:13 p.m.) Discussion continued on the question of why the difference between the 1983 and 1984 budgets is only $70,000 but the proposed mill levy increase is 2.55 mills, or approximately $114,317 in levy dollars. It was noted the amount brought in last year was less than what was asked for because of the delinquencies. Also, approximately $65,000 of the overlevy does not come back into the general fund. The overlevy for new equipment purchased in 1983 amounts to $59,lOO, or approximately 1.35 mills, and those amounts are included in the proposed 1984 budget. The Council then interpreted it as leaving $11,000 as the increase in the remainder of the budget for everything else, feeling that was totally out of line. Special City Council Meeting September 13, 1983 - Minutes Page 2 (1984 Proposed General Fund Operating Budget) Recess at 9:18; reconvene at 9:39 p.m. Discussion conti hued on the question of the difference between the 1983 and 1984 budgets. It was noted that the recommended levy is $684,000, but the budget is showing only revenues of $590,000. Assuming $61,000 of that goes to another fund for the GO bond payment, there still remains a difference of approximately $33,000 between what is proposed to be levied and what is being shown as revenues in the budget. The Clerk explained in reviewing the 1983 budget, she found that she made an error in calculating the levy amount shown for revenues. In calculating the percentages for the current ad valorem and the homestead credit, she took the percentages of the total levy of $570,000 . instead of deducting the $61,000 from that amount for the GO bond payment. And the reason the budget is not in the deficit is because the expenditure side of the 1983 budget showed a $44,000 payment for the new fire truck, which was not made in 1983. That affects the 1984 budget because that difference must now be made up. Council then debated the amount of mill levy increase the majority would be willing to vote for. It was calculated that a 2.55 mill increase as suggested amounted to a 22 percent increase and would bring in approximately $114,000 more in revenues. Of that amount, approximately $59,000 is an overlevy for equipment purchases made in 1983. A 1.5 mill increase would bring in approximately $66,000 in revenues and would be about a 12 percent increase. Council questioned if there will be monies available to meet the payment for the Kelsey Park acquisition in 1984 and if all expenses are estimated in the budget. It was noted no monies are set aside for any expenses that may occur as a result of the establishment of the Rum River Watershed and hazardous wastes. Suggestions varied from not levying more than 1.5 mills over last year, to levying for the entire 22 percent. but setting aside a certain amount to build up a surplus for capital expenditures, to attempting to balance the budget prior to setting the levy limit, to wanting to see the effect of any increase on the homeowners in the City prior to deciding on an increase. MOTION by Knight, Seconded by Orttel, to increase the mill levy by 1.75 mills. DISCUSSION: Councilman Lachinski wanted to see the real numbers for the 1983 budget and how it is affecting the 1984 budget and generally in what areas the increase is in the 1984 budget over last year's budget. He also wanted verification that the funds are available to make the 1984 Kelsey Park payment. Councilmen Orttel and Knight WITHDREW the Second and the Motion to allow the Clerk to research and to write a memo on the matter. Mr. Schrantz then addressed the Council concerning his recommendations on the salary increases for public works employees. He reviewed salaries for comparable classifi- cations in neighboring cities, stating overall, Andover's wages are generally lower than in other cities. His recommendation for two. of the public works employees was to raise their salary to $8.55 an hour and to reclassify them because they do a variety of work and also drive equipment. His intent is to gradually raise them to a higher position, with a salary commensurate to the work they are doing. Mayor Windschitl stated other cities use part-time and CETA help in many of the areas that do not appear on the comparison sheet, feeling Andover's wages were in line with other cities. He was also concerned that when the last public works person was hired, it was with the expressed purpose of hiring a laborer only. If a light equipment operator is what is needed, he felt it should be so stated and someone with the experience be hired for the position. He was concerned with hiring inexperienced people and then rapidaly promoting them within the Department to a pay scale equal to what someone with years of experience would be getting. He felt the two were not comparable. Special City Council Meeting September 13, 1983 - Minutes Page 3 (1984 Proposed General Fund Operating Budget) Mr. Schrantz explained there are only four people in public works, and all four of them do everything. Those employees are expected to do the same functions and have the same abilities, but they are not paid even close to what is paid in other communities. His recommendation is to accelerate the two lowest-paid employees toward that pay level through gradual pay increases. Glen Rogers, P & Z Commissioner and employee in Coon Rapids, explained they have three classification of works, the labor scale, light equipment operator, and maintenance. But they move back and forth between categories, exeept those with special licenses receive an additional reimbursement for that. Mr. Stone stated all of them are able to run every piece of machinery the City has. They are all certified in water and sewer. They have received the experience necessary. Mayor Windschitl stated there should be some logical progression when hiring someone at entry-level positions. Mr. Schrantz stated that is what he is proposing, a Maintenance IV position. The City keeps growing every year, and that is why they are depending on these guys more and more. And what has happened is people were hired, we're happy with their work, and now he is asking that they be paid what they are worth. Mr. Schrantz also noted the part-time and CETA help they have had this summer in public works and the work they have done, and he explained the structure he is trying to establish in pUblic works. Council discussion was on the question of finding the funds for the wage increases, on the suggestion that Mr. Schrantz apply for temporary help from the jobs program for next summer, and on the rate of increase to advance the two newest public works emp loyees. Because the agenda for the September 20 meeting is relatively short, it was agreed to discuss the 1984 budget further on September 20. ENGINEER'S REPORT Mr. Schrantz stated the Park Board asked that he determine the amount it would take to set up a sprinkler system, and he determined it would be $22,330 to cover the new ball field, the new soccer field, and in front of the public works building with capabilities of expanding to the rest of the park. They also wanted to look at finishing the City Hall site, which will be another $35,000. Mayor Windschitl suggested the possibility of using the money from selling the City-owned lots in Nodeen's Addition to pay for finishing the park at the City Hall site. Mr. Schrantz also reported that they will be starting in Nordeen's Addition and will be clearing the first two City-owned lots at the end of 156th. He estimated it will cost about $1,000 to clear the lot and remove the peat, which is not a part of the project. This Friday he has to send out the notices for assessments, and he asked how the cost for clearing the City lots should be handled. Council discussion was that the City lot that is not buildable shouldnll)t be assessed, and the cost for improving the two City lots should be charged to those two lots. Mr. Schrantz stated on the Prairie Road project, Doug Steele wants the road paved in front of his house. He has not given a letter to that effect, but he stated he is willing to pay for that portion. There would be curb and gutter on his side of the street, but not on the other side. The other side is also a side lot and would not be assessed, and Mr. Steele has agreed to pay for it. Mr. Schrantz asked how the situation should be handled. Special City Council Meeting September 13, 1983 - Minutes Page 4 (Engineer's Report, Continued) MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Lachinski, that we approve the construction of 140th Lane 1n tront of Doug Steele's property, providing that the property owner makes payment to the City by way of certified check prior to the construction for the full amount of construction cost of the street, both sides. Motion carried unanimously. The Clerk was also asked to research if any of the assessments being paid by the Park Board have a surplus in the fund where the payment of those assessments could be discontinued. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Orttel, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 11 :54 p.m. Respectfu lly submitted, \'^ ~/\ . \ ~v,~L~ U, \---?:('~ Marc lla A. Peach Recor ing Secretary