City Council Agenda Packet 10-13-2003 Special
.
.
.
AGENDA
SPECIAL MEETING - MONTICF:LLO CITY COUNCIL
Monday, October 13, 2003 - 5 p.m.
Mayor:
Brucc Thielen
Council Members:
Roger Carlson, Glen Posusta, Robbie Smith and Brian Stumpf
1. Call the special meeting to order.
2. Consideration of Resolution Petitioning the Minnesota Department of Administration for
the Annexation of Certain Portions of Monticello Township to the City of Monticello
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 414.031
3. Adjourn.
.
.
.
2.
Consideration of resolution Petitioning: the Minnesota Department of
Administration for the Annexation of Certain Portions of Monticello Township to
the City of Monticello Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 414.031.
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
The City Council is asked to meet during a workshop session at 5 :00 PM on October 13
to discuss the potential adoption of the proposed resolution. The discussion at the
workshop will be led by Bruce Thielen, Steve Grittman and Rick Wolfsteller and will
include a review of annexation process history, current annexation process, review of
planning related problems resulting from the current situation. Council is asked to define
the proposed annexation boundaries at the workshop, then at the regular meeting
consider adopting the resolution and associated contested case annexation boundary.
Please review the following presentation outline along with the proposed resolution. At
the workshop, map information will be available to assist the City Council in establishing
a contested case annexation area if it so desires.
Also included in the packet supplemental information relating to Decision Standards for
Contested Annexations along with Statutory Criteria for Contested Annexations. finally,
a flow chart is provided that identifies the contested case annexation process.
Finally, a proposed list of guiding principals is provided which identifies the impact of
annexation on Township parcels.
H.
AL TERNA TIVE ACTIONS:
I. Motion to adopt said resolution including a boundary description as defined by the
City Council at the meeting. Council also adopts guiding principals relating to
treatment of area in the Township proposed for annexation to the City.
2. Motion to deny adoption of said resolution.
Council should select this alternative if it prefers to annex land in 60 acre
segments or less. Under this alternative the City Council provides stall with
direction to initiate the contested case annexation process.
c.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
As noted in the outline, the City Council has met with the 'rownship Supervisors and
requested that the Township join the City in establishing a new orderly annexation area
agreement so that the City could plan infrastructure and land uses accordingly. The
Township has not responded atlirmatively towards efforts to work together so the City
may be left with no alternative but to annex a defined planning area in order to obtain
.
.
.
land use control necessary for infrastructure planning. The City Administrator, therefore
recommends alternative 1. It is impossible to properly plan for inevitable growth without
establishment of a certain city growth area. Annexation of the area proposed will provide
the City with assurance that investments made in oversizing to accommodate growth will
be utilized at some point in the future and the potential problems associated with
conflicting land uses can be avoided.
D.
SUPPORTING DATA:
Presentation outline, Area maps provided at meeting, Resolution, proposed guiding
principals affecting lands annexed to the city. Contested Case Annexation Criteria, Flow
Chart.
City Council Workshop "- Annexation Presentation Outline -- October 9, 2003
History
.
1) MOM Agreement - 1972-2003
Establishment of Urbanization Area
Joint Planning Board.
Allows Confident Extension of Utilities.
Annexation battles occured over the years.
Very time consuming annexation process. Room full of files.
Old MOAA areais now near "build-out"
2) State Statutes. Current process for annexatation
60 acre rule
Annexation is easier - but there is no control over land development around City.
Council appoints Stump and Thielen to explore options - meet with Township officials.
3) Joint Meeting with Township - Ideas Proposed by City.
Reinstate MOM
Discuss Consolidation
Township indicates that they are initiating a planning effort - large lot development is a possibility.
No response from Township regarding orderly annexation planning
Township willing to follow State Statutes indefinitely at this point.
II Current Situation/Options
1) Review Maps
Current City Boundary
Identify recent annexation proposals Pauman, Koch Family, Dane, Schluender
Review long Range land Use Planning Area Boundary established in 2002.
Growth rate projections - land absorbtion - timing of request relative to growth projections.
. 2) Options for Establishing Planning Area -- 30 years after initial expansion boundary was determined.
Stump, Thielen met with Chris Hood/Staff.
MOAA - Not viable without Township participation.
Consolidation plan - Not viable without Township participation.
Annexations - via contested case. Establish new city boundaries that allow for a planned extension of utilities,ro
III Why is it Necessary for the City to Have ability to Control Development Outside Borders?
1) land Use Planning.
Avoid land use conflicts - preserve land for planned use.
Industrial land - preserve until market demand develops.
Avoid undesireable mix of land uses.
Gravel Pit
Cell Tower
Feed lots
Preserve Natural Resources for long term enjoyment by entire community
Trail corridors
Park areas
Woodland Preservation
Ag ricu Itu ra I
.
2)
Wastewater Treatment Plant/Sanitary Sewer System.
.
Ensure ability to apply capacity of existing $15.000,000 sewer plant and potential expansions to a specific area.
Protect investment in oversizing thus ensuring ability to apply capacity of trunk sanitary sewer systems now in
Enable planning for trunk system - pipe size and routes.
Allow development of financial model supporting construction, utilization and funding of trunk system.
Enable analysis of long term sewer plant expansions or secondary locations.
Provision of options for serving existing non-sewered Township developments- Environmental protection.
3)
Watermain
Same issues as Sanitary Sewer system.
Well field identification options
Identification of routes for looping system.
Proper location of Water Towers - assure full utilization in the future.
4) Streets
Preservation of Land Needed for Future Interchange.
Sufficient Right of Way needs to be identified to accomodate access to interchange and arterial roads to and fro
Example: Fallon Avenue, 106th street.
Proper planning of collector routes connecting and through developing areas.
Establish ability to designate State Aid routes and collectors.
5) Storm Sewer
Resolve jurisdictional conflicts regarding stormwater management/authority. Ditch 33. Solve flooding problem.
New development south - Stormwater flowing away from river. City controls rate and volume.
IV
.
Proposed Solution
1) Adoption of Resolution requesting contested case annexation.
Establish planning control over logical expansion area
Encourage Township to negtiate revised MOAA agreement.
2) Identify potential contested case area.. Council input
Guiding principals
Use realistic land absorbtion projections in establishing planning boundaries.
Minimize financial impact on those affected --- Special taxing jurisdication - no tax base grab.
Allow residential developments at proposed City edge to remain in Township.
Solve problems - do not create problems with boundary adjustment.
Update Planning Goals for growth area. Subdivision design goals to be determined.
Transition to City should be seamless for rural areas.
3) City Councilmember response
V Items needed that are associated with resolution
.
Legal description of proposed annexation area
Population of City
Population of Township.
Estimated population of area proposed for annexation.
Boundary Map
City area
Area proposed for annexation
Identification of governing utins having jurisdiction over area proposed for annexation.
Plat maps of annexation area.
Filing fee
Affidavit of service
.
.
.
DRAFT #2 - October 3, 2003
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF MONTICELLO PETITIONING THE
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION FOR ANNEXATION
OF CERTAIN PORTIONS OF MONTICELLO TOWNSHIP TO THE CITY OF
MONTICELLO PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES, SECTION 414.031
WHEREAS, the City of Monticello (the "City"), Wright County, Minnesota, abuts and is
surrounded on three sides (west, south, and east) by Monticello Township (the "Township"),
Wright County, Minnesota, and by the Mississippi River (north); and
WHEREAS, the City and Township are located in a growth corridor along Minnesota
Interstate Highway 94; and
WHEREAS, the City and Township have and will likely continue to see significant urban
or suburban growth pressure from both the Twin Cities and St. Cloud metropolitan areas; and
WHEREAS, certain portions of the Township have been developed in an urban or
suburban manner and other portions are expected to develop for residential, commercial,
industrial, institutional or governmental purposes in close proximity to or abutting the City of
Monticello; and
WHEREAS, urban or suburban development pressure in the Township necessitates long-
term planning to ensure that urban or suburban growth is controlled, planning and zoning are
consistent with growth patterns, and available infrastructure is used efficiently and services are
provided cost-effectively to Township areas surrounding the City as such areas grow; and
WHEREAS, the City has made a substantial public investment in infrastructure to
accommodate future growth around the City and seeks to use such investment for the betterment
of the community and the protection of the environment as areas surrounding the City grow; and
WHEREAS, the City has the professional staff and the capacity to provide municipal
services to Township areas in need of such services; and
WHEREAS, the area of the Township proposed to be annexed as described herein is
urban or suburban in character or about to become so based on existing and anticipated
residential, commercial and industrial development; and
WHEREAS, extension of municipal sanitary sewer service, water service and other
municipal services from the City to developed and developing areas, and the inclusion of a
growth area with consistent planning and zoning to accommodate future growth, is necessary for
the public, health, safety, and welfare of the residents of the Township and the City; and
WHEREAS, extension of municipal sanitary sewer service, water service and other
municipal services from the City and the annexation of the City's expected growth area is in the
.
.
.
best interests of the City, Township, and the property owners in the area proposed for
annexation; and
WHEREAS, the City has attempted to resolve the long-term growth and annexation
issues with the Township by suggesting cooperative discussions regarding development of an
orderly annexation agreement which would provide for planned growth, planned services, and
planned annexations, but such suggestions have been met with opposition or without
commitment from the Township; and
WHEREAS, it is the intent and desire of the City to resolve these long-term growth,
annexation and service issues for the betterment of the City/Township community by initiating
proceedings for the annexation of certain areas of the Township, legally described herein, with
the Minnesota Department of Administration Municipal Boundary Adjustments Office; and
WHEREAS, the City Council ofthe City of Monticello fully supports the filing of this
Resolution with the above-mentioned state agency for a hearing regarding the annexation of the
areas of Monticello Township described herein to the City of Monticello.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF MONTICELLO, WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA, THAT;
1.
The Minnesota Department of Administration Municipal Boundary Adjustments Office,
is hereby requested to hold a public hearing pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section
414.09, on the question of annexation of certain portions of Monticello Township, Wright
County, Minnesota, legally described herein, to the City of Monticello, Wright County,
Minnesota, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 414.031.
2.
The subject area of the Township proposed for annexation to the City (hereinafter
referred to as the "Subject Area") is legally described in Exhibit A, which is attached
hereto and incorporated herein by reference. A map showing the Subject Area is attached
hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by reference. Plat maps for the Subject Area
are attached hereto as Exhibit C.
3.
The Subject Area is unincorporated and abuts the City on the City's westerly, southerly
and easterly boundaries and none of the Subject Area is presently a part of any
incorporated city or an area designated for orderly annexation.
4.
The total acreage of the Subject Area is ~ acres.
5.
The population of the City is~, and the population of the Township is
6.
The following parties are entitled to notice pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section
414.09;
2
.
.
.
a.
Monticello Township, as the township presently governing the area to be annexed
and served.
b. Wright County, as the county in which the area to be annexed and served is
located.
c. The Wright County Planning Commission and Monticello Township Planning
Commission, as planning agencies with jurisdiction over the affected area.
7. City staff is hereby directed to file this Resolution with the Minnesota Department of
Administration Municipal Boundary Adjustments Office for annexation of the Subject
Area pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 414.031. City staff is further directed to
submit a copy of this resolution/petition to Monticello Township.
Passed, adopted, and approved by the City Council of the City of Monticello, this _
day of ,2003.
Attest:
Approved:
Rick Wolfsteller, City Administrator
Bruce Thielen, Mayor
3
.
EXHIBIT A
Legal Description of Subject Area Proposed for Annexation to the City of Monticello
.
.
4
.
EXHIBIT B
Boundary Map Showing the Subject Area Proposed for Annexation to the City of
Monticello
.
.
5
.
.
.
EXHIBIT C
Plat Maps for the Subject Area Proposed for Annexation to the City of Monticello
6
.
.
.
Guiding Principals For Lands Annexed to The City
1. Establish special rural area tax rates to match service level provided. Rural resident tax
rate to rei1eet service level provided so the rural resident tax rate should be similar to
current Township rate.
2. Existing Agricultural uses allowed to continue under the City Agricultural Zoning District
Regulations..
3. No extension of sewer and water service to township subdivisions unless to solve
environmental problems or unless requested by residents.
4. Land use planning/subdivision design in low density residential annexation area to be
determined via future planning efforts.
Que:> '" I 0,"" \
G..r Ie. ~<<
( 0 \ \ e c... ~ i c",,\ -:
70...... of S ( . i:' A I'f!.. 0...
p~,t 6' ;;'1'""<' $""
L
.
Decision Standards for Contested Annexations
Section 414.031
Approval standards Based upon the statutory factors listed in section 414.031, subd. 4, the
Department of Administration or its designated decision-maker (ALJ), after hearing testimony, may
order an annexation if:
1. It finds that the subject area is now, or is about to become, urban or suburban in character; or
2. It finds that municipal government in the area proposed for annexation is required to protect the
public health, safety, and welfare; or
3. It finds that annexation would be in the best interest of the subject area.
Denial standards The decision-maker must also apply the following additional standards when
considering a contested annexation request:
1. The decision-maker shall deny the annexation if the increase in revenues for the annexing
municipality bears no reasonable relation to the monetary value of benefits conferred upon the
annexed area.
2. The decision-maker may deny the annexation if:
a. Annexation to an adjacent municipality would better serve the interests of the residents
of the property; or
b. The remainder of the township would suffer undue hardship.
. Statutory Criteria for Contested Annexations
Section 414.031
Annexation criteria The Department of Administration or its designated decision-maker must
consider evidence regarding the following criteria:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
.
14.
Population, households, and growth of area;
Quantity of land and natural physical features;
Degree of contiguity of boundaries;
Pattern of development, planning, and land uses and impact of proposed action;
Present transportation network and potential transportation issues;
Land use controls and comprehensive planning;
Level of services and impact of proposed action on delivery;
Existing or potential environmental problems and impact on those problems;
Plans for providing needed government services;
Fiscal impacts (including tax capacity, debt, and local tax rates);
Effect of proposed action on adjacent school districts and communities;
Adequacy of town government to deliver services to subject area;
Analysis of whether government services can best be provided through the proposed action or
another process; and
In cases of partial township annexation, ability of remainder of town to continue or feasibility
of another boundary adjustment procedure.
.
Annexation by
Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Order
414.031
Proceeding initiated by submitting any of the following to Dept. of Admin.:
. Resolution of annexing city;
. Resolution of annexing town;
. Petition of 20% of property owners; or
. Joint resolution of city and town
Upon receipt of resolution, Dept. of Admin. sets a hearing date
.
If mediation fails to resolve dispute, ALl hears evidence and considers statutory criteria
Approve
ALJ may approve if:
. area is urban or suburban;
. annexation is necessary to protect
public health, safety, and welfare; or
. annexation is in best interest of area
ALJ shall deny if:
. the increase in
revenues for the city
bear no reasonable re-
lationship to the value
of benefits conferred
upon the town
ALl orders annexation
.
, ALJ may deny if:
. annexation to an-
other municipality
would better serve
the area; or
. remainder of town
would suffer undue
hardship
If city annexes an entire township, election of new municipal officers is required. If less
than entire township annexed, ALl can require an election of municipal officers, if equitable.
Prepared by Flaherty & Hood. PA . 444 Cedar Street. Suite 1200. Saint Paul. MN 15101 . 651-225-8840
.
.
.
CONTESTED CASE ANNEXATION PROCESS
Section 414.031
1) Initiating Process- City files petition with Department of Administration. The
process is initiated by tiling a resolution/petition, adopted at a city council meeting,
with the Minnesota Department of Administration.
2) Department of Administration sets matter on for hearing (30 to 60 days). Within 30
to 60 days after filing the City's resolution/petition, the Department of Administration
will set the matter on for hearing and continue the matter indefinitely pending the
outcome of voluntary settlement discussions and/or mediation.
3) Voluntary meetings with Township (60 days). After setting the matter on for hearing,
the Department may order the parties to meet 3 times over the next 60 days
voluntarily to see if the parties can reach an agreement on their own. The Department
can also alternatively order the matter go right to mediation and forego the voluntary
meetings.
4) Mediation (60 to 120 days). After setting the matter on for hearing, the Department
of Administration will give the parties a list of mediators to select. Shortly thereafter,
the parties will select a mediator, make contact with the mediator, and set a date f()r
the first mediation session. Mediation is facilitated settlement discussions between
the City and Township. The mediator, however, cannot force a settlement. The
length of mediation will depend on whether progress is being made towards
settlement. If progress is not being made, mediation will be terminated and the matter
will be transferred to the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAll) for trial.
5) Contested-case hearing (3 to 5 days). If mediation fails to result in settlement, the
matter will be transferred to the OAH for a trial-type hearing before an Administrative
Law Judge (ALl). The ALl will hold a trial in accordance with the law, hear
testimony, and accept evidence from both parties.
6) ALJ decision (90 days). After the hearing and the submission of closing briers by the
parties, the ALl will weigh the evidence presented and make a decision on the
question of annexation. The ALl has 90 days from the last day of hearing to render a
decision on the matter. The ALl's decision is binding.
7) Contested annexation process now chart and ALl decision criteria. Handouts
showing the annexation process as a !low chart and describing the factors the ALJ
will consider and the standards the ALJ will apply in deciding a case are attached.
8) Appeal. Either party may appeal the final decision ofthe ALl.
l'n:p"red by Flaherty & flood, PA . 444 Cedar Street Suite 1200, Saint Paul, MN 5510 I . (651) 225-8840
. Decision Standards for Contested Annexations - Section 414.031
Approval standards Based upon the statutory factors listed in section 414.031, subd. 4, the
Department of Administration or its designated decision-maker (AU), after hearing testimony, may
order an annexation if:
1. It finds that the subject area is now, or is about to become, urban or suburban in character; or
2. It finds that municipal government in the area proposed for annexation is required to protect the
public health, safety, and welfare; or
3. It finds that annexation would be in the best interest of the subject area.
Denial standards The decision-maker must also apply the following additional standards when
considering a contested annexation request:
I. The decision-maker shall deny the annexation if the increase in revenues for the annexing
municipality bears no reasonable relation to the monetary value of benefits conferred upon the
annexed area.
2. The decision-maker may deny the annexation if:
a. Annexation to an adjacent municipality would better serve the interests of the residents
of the property; or
b. The remainder of the township would sutTer undue hardship.
. Statutory Criteria for Contested Annexations - Section 414.031
Annexation criteria The Department of Administration or its designated decision-maker must
consider evidence regarding the following criteria:
1. Population, households, and growth of area;
2. Quantity of land and natural physicalleatures;
3. Degree of contiguity of boundaries;
4. Pattern of development, planning, and land uses and impact of proposed action;
5. Present transportation network and potential transportation issues;
6. Land use controls and comprehensive planning;
7. Level of services and impact of proposed action on deli very;
8. Existing or potential environmental problems and impact on those problems;
9. Plans for providing needed government services;
10. Fiscal impacts (including tax capacity, debt, and local tax rates);
II. Effect of proposed action on adjacent school districts and communities;
12. Adequacy of town government to deliver services to subject area;
13. Analysis ofwhcther government services can best be provided through the proposed action or
another process; and
14. In cases of partial township annexation, ability of remainder of town to continue or feasibility
of another boundary adjustment procedure.
.
Prepared by Haherty & Hood. PA. .444 Cedar Street, Suite 1200. Saint Paul. MN 5510 I . (651) 225.XX40