Loading...
City Council Agenda Packet 11-13-1984AGENDA FOR THE MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL �Tuesday, November 13, 1984 - 7:30 P.M. Mayor: Arve A. Grimsmo Council Members: Fran Fair, Ken Maus, Jack Maxwell, Dan Blonigen 1. Call to Order. 2. Approval of Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held October 22, 1984, and the Special Meeting Held November 7, 1984. 3. Citizens Comments/Potations, Requests and Complaints. Public Hearings 4. Consideration of Vacating a Portion of River Street. ^� 5. Public Hearing - Consideration of Adopting Assessment Roll for Delinquent Sewer and water Bills. Old Business 6. Consideration of a Planned Unit Dovolopmont - Applicants, Jim Powaro/Kent Kjollborg. 7. Consideration of Granting Final Approval to the Jay Miller Rapist. Now Business 8. Consideration of Adopting a Resolution Authorizing tho Certification of a Spacial Levy with tho County Auditor. 9. Consideration of Authorizing the Firm of TKDA to Commanco work on Phase II (Plano and Specifications) for the Proposed Monticello Fire Hall. 10. Consideration of Making an Offor for the Purchase of Block 13 as tho Proposed Site for tho Now Piro Hall. 11. Consideration of Replacement of a 1972 Snowplow Truck, Approval of Specifications, and Bid Advortisomont. 12. Consideration of a Resolution Authorizing Payment to the Minnesota Coalition of Outotato Cities to be used for Logiolativo Representation Services. 13. Adjournment. C NOTE: Tho Council mooting will be hold on Tuooday duo to Votorano Day on Monday. MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICE LIq CITY COUNCIL h-f October 22, 1984 - 7:30 P.M. Members Present: Fran Fair, Ken Maus, Jack Maxwell, Dan Blonigen Members Absent: Mayor Arve Grimsmo Acting Mayor, Ken'Maus, presided. 1. Call to Order. 2. Approval of Minutes. Motion was made by Maxwell, seconded by Fair, and unanimously carried to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held October 9 and the special meeting hold October 15, 1984. 4. Public Hearing - Consideration of Request to Vacate Utility Easement - Applicant, Fulfillment Systems, Inc. and 5. Public Hearing - Consideration of Request to Vacate Utility Easement - Applicant, Burger Kinq Corporation. Burger King Corporation recently purchased Lots 1 and 2. Block 2, Lauring Hillside Terrace, and wishes to develop the two lots as a single parcel. Fulfillments Systema, Inc., also purchased Lots 6 and 7. Block 2, Lauring Hillside Terrace, and aro currently building a largo structure right over the lot lino between Lots 6 and 7. At the time the Lauring Hillside Terrace plat was recorded, the City retained casements around the perimeter of each lot for drainage and utility purposes. The above two firma requested that the City vacate the casements located between each lot, as they would no longer bo necessary since both parties plan to develop them as a single parcel. Motion woo made by Fair, seconded by Maxwell, and unanimously carried to vacate the utility and drainage easements lying on the south line of Lot I and the north lino of Lot 2, Block 2, Louring 11illoido Terrace for Burger King Corporation. Motion van also made by Maxwell, seconded by Blonigon, and unanimously carried to vacato the utility and drainage easements that lie on the east lot line of Lot 7 and the wont lot lino of Lot 0, Block 2, Lauring Hillaldo Torraco, for Fulfillmont Syatoma, ( Inc. (� f -1- u Council Minutes - 10/22/84 F7-'1 6. Consideration of Ordinance Amendment - Liquor Sales on Election Days. i During the 1983 Legislative Session, Minnesota Statutes pertaining to sales of non -intoxicating and intoxicating liquor on election days were amended to allow for liquor sales during statewide elections. City of Monticello's ordinances pertaining to non -intoxicating beer sales and Municipal Liquor Store off -sales specifically state that no sales shall occur during the hours of 1 a.m. and 8 p.m. on any election day. In order for the City to allow beer and a municipal store to sell, the City ordinances would have to be amended to coincide with the revised State Statutes. Motion was made by Fair, seconded by Blonigen, and unanimously carried to adopt Ordinance Amendment 1984 1143 deleting the sentences that prohibit sales on election days for non -intoxicating Liquor and sales at a municipal liquor store. 7. Consideration of Authorizing the Publication of a Summary of the Cablo Franchising Ordinance. In September, 1984, the City Council adopted a Cable Franchising Ordinance. State Statutes allow for this ordinance to be published O in a summary form. A 10 -page summary document woo prepared by Mr. Tom Creighton, Legal Counsel for the Cable Commission. At this point during the meeting, Mayor Grimsmo arrived and began to chair the meeting. Motion was made by Maus, seconded by Fair, and unanimously carried to authorize a 10 -page summary of the recently adopted Cable Franchising Ordinance to be published as allowed by Minnesota State Statutes. Sao Exhibit 01 for Ordinance summary. 0. Consideration of Giving Final Approval to the Concept Plan and the Development Stage Plan for Plata Partners, a Planned Unit Development. The Planning Commission, at its last meeting, gave final approval to the Concept Plan and final approval to the Davolopmont Stage Plan for the Plaza Partnere PUD contingent upon a final sign off by the City's Consulting Engineer regarding the design of the public utility Improvements and drainage plan. The dovolopere were informed that no final action would be considered by the Council unless the entire package was in acceptable, recordable form and approved by the City Enginoor. Mr. Brad Larson, attorney representing the dovolopere, indicated that not all of the documents would be completed by Monday's -2- 0—IL-1 Council Minutes - 10/22/84 - meeting; and as a result, it was recommended by the staff that no action be taken for final approval on the Development Stage Plan or the Concept Plan. In regards to the public utility improvements, it was recommended by the City Administrator that approval be granted on this item so the developers could begin construction yet this fall. Consulting Engineer, John Badalich, indicated that he is working out the final details with the developers- engineer and is agreeable with approval being granted for the public utilities portion only. Motion was made by Maxwell, seconded by Blonigen, and unanimously carried to allow the developers to start construction of the public sever and water utilities prior to the final Concept Plan and Development Stage Plan being approved. The balance of the approvals will be postponed until the November 13, 1984, meeting. 9. Review of the Amended Comprehensive Plan and Consideration of Adoption. The City staff, along with Consulting Planners and Engineers, have been revising the Comprehensive Plan saction3 that refer to goals and policies. These sections were reviewed by the HRA, Planning Commission, end City Council previously. A revision of tho Guido Plan section as recently completed incorporating the comments and suggestions that resulted from the amended Goals and Policies sections. The revised Guido Plan did have some sections totally removed from it ouch no references to a ring road oy3tam through the downtown. Councilmembor Fair questioned why the ring road terminology was eliminated, an she felt the City should be encouraging commercial construction on the ring roads such an walnut Street and Coder Street connecting the downtown area to the Interstate. It was noted that the reason for eliminating the ring road terminology in the downtown area wan that both Walnut Street and Codar Street have been opened across the railroad tracks and aro currently being developed, thus the Guido Plan did not have to address ring rondo anymore. Questions were also raised concerning transportation policies and the statement that the City shall pursue a cooperative airport between the cities of Elk River, Big Lake, and Monticello. It was suggested that the wording be changed to indicate that the City would be receptive in the future if a need arcoo to study a possible cooperative airport with surrounding adjacent communities. After further review, motion wan made by Fair, seconded by Maus, and unanimously carried to adopt the 1984 Revised Comprehensive �1 Plan Land Use Guido as amended. �3- 0 Council Minutes - 10/22/84 t 1 ii 10. Consideration of Setting a Special Meeting to Canvass Election L` Returns and Declare the Results of the Election. By consensus of the Council, a special meeting will be held on Wednesday at 5:00 P.M., November 7, for the purpose of canvassing the election returns. 11. Consideration of Bills for the Month of October. Motion was made by Blonigen, seconded by Maxwell, and unanimously carried to approve the bills for the month of October as presented. See Exhibit 02. 12. Discussion on Future Fire Hall Building Site. Councilmembor Maxwell informed the Council that he has been in contact with Mr. Robert Americk, owner of the property being proposed for the now Piro Hall location. Mr. Maxwell noted that Mr. Americk appears willing to sell the property in the future, although a final negotiated price has not yet been firmly established. Councilman Maxwell recommended to the Council that no action bo taken on the actual purchase of Block 15 for the Fire Hall site until the election is hold regarding the bond sale for a new Fire Hall. Rick Wolfstalld� Assistant AdmiKiotrator J C MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING - MONTICELIA CITY COUNCIL November 7, 1984 - 5:00 P.M. Members Present: Mayor Arve Grimsmo, Fran Fair, Ken Maus, Jack Maxwell, Dan Blonigen Members Absent: None A special meeting was held at 5:00 p.m. Wednesday, November 7, 1984, in the City Hell fo- the express purpose of canvassing election rosults and declaring the winners of the election. The Mayor called the meeting to order. Tom Eidam, City Administra itor, provided summary shoots to all members of the Council for their review. Upon review, motion by Blonigen, second by Maus, and carried unanimously to adopt the following resolution. (Seo Resolution 1984 146 Canvassing the Election and Declaring the Results.) There being no further business for the special mooting, the mooting was adjourned. Thomas A. EiBom City Administrator lJ ° Council Agenda - 11/13/84 r 4. Consideration of Vacating a Portion of River Street. (T.E.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: under the provisions of State law, the Council must hold a public hearing prior to the vacating of any public street. The portion of River Street in question begins at the dead and of River Street and includes the entire portion until River Street disappears into the river. The impetus for the request to vacate comes from the Monticello -Big Lake Hospital and Nursing Home complex and was originated from the notion that part of the building would end up lying in the City right-of-way. Their plans as of this time do show a portion of the building extending into approximately 20 feet of City right-of-way. My understanding is that the design of the building has changed somewhat so that it will not be essential to relocate the sewer main that lies within that portion of the street. My initial discussions with Barb Schwientak of the hospital centered around the notion of the City vacating a portion of River Street in exchange for the rededication of some land for City street realignment from the hospital. City staff had originally considered giving up the southerly portion of River Street right-of-way in exchange for land on the northerly aide so that we could maintain the full width of right-of-way. I even approached the subject of the hospital donating the river frontage to the City in exchange for the right-of-way portion that they needed based on the concept that in the far future that river front may become a logical extension of Ellison Park and could be maintained and kept as a City park rather than hospital land. My understanding is that the expense factors involved made that an unattractive deal to the hospital. Upon the petitioning for the vacation of River Street, the signatures compiled included not only the hospital but all of the property owners fronting on River Street up to the point where it does enter the River. I should note at this time my philosophical opposition to vacating unions it is found to be absolutely essential. I support the notion that once vacated and gone from City control, it is forever gone. The City may, in fact, never develop the property, but I think it is unfair for us to make decisions that will procludo development that in deemed essential by future citizens. The hospital -o position is, of course, that they want to eliminate the possibility of a road over developing down there. The notion that they simply need more land for their building could easily be accommodated by a property exchange, but they aro concerned that future development might eventually create a roadway that they dont find desirable at the roar of their property. 1 wish to further emphasize that I have no opposition to the hospital's project in any way but simply am opposed to vacations that can create dead ends for the City regardless of the proposer. Council Agenda - 11/13/84 I also have some concerns about the property the City owns under that street right-of-way. In all other vacations we have had no trouble at all selling the land to the party affected by the vacation. Clearly, I think it would be to everyone's benefit if we vacate to provide the land to the Hospital District for a dollar and other good and valuable consideration. The remainder of the street, however, runs through private ownership and by rights should be sold to those property owners. However, the land is currently being used by those property owners, and there would be no incentive whatsoever for them to purchase that land from the City. They would simply be gaining the additional property free of charge. One final consideration with respect to the vacation was brought up by John Simola in that this major sewer line that lies in the street is easily accessible by virtue of the 60 -foot roadway. Should we vacate the street and in return receive an casement, those are generally 30 feet. With the size of line that we have running out there, I am not sure it is to the City's benefit to restrict ouraolves to a 30 -foot construction easement when, in fact, we already have a full 60 fact available to us. I talked briefly with John Dadalich on Thursday and asked him to consider the possibilities on this particular street vacation as well. I do not find any objection whatsoever with the proposed development, only my objection in a general sense to lose by vacation. The public interest will clearly be served with respect to the portion of vacation that servos the hospital. It simply strikes me that since other land is available which is owned by the hospital, a trade off of land could be executed, thus serving both the hospitals needs and protecting the City's rights of way for future use. D. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Grant the vacation and authorize conveyance of property to the adjacent property owners - thin would remove the street from our plot map and would move the land into private holdings, thus facilitating the construction of the nursing home. 2. Deny the vacation of the street but extend an invitation to enter negotiations for a land exchange, thus facilitating the excavation and oubsequant construction. This alternative, to me, would protect the full width of City right-of-way but would move it to ouch a location that it would not hinder the hospital's conotruction plane. 3. Deny the vacation outright - this would noconaitate the nursing home rodosigning its entire facility to avoid encroachment In the right-of-way, and I seo no benefit gained by anyone in this alternative. -2- Council Agenda - 11/13/84 C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff gives a qualified recommendation in favor of alternative 02. I would like to see the City protect its rights of way for potential use rather than close the door on potential development. I think an exchange of land would facilitate the rights and privileges of both bodies. Hopefully, John Badalich will have more comments on this matter and can shed some additional light which may help the decision making process. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of a map shoving the section of River Street to be vacated. -3- Council Agenda - 11/13/84 5. Public Hearing -Consideration of Adopting Assessment Roll for Delinquent Sewer and Water Bills. (R.W.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Purpose: To place on assessment rolls those accounts which are delinquent (amount is over 60 days past due) on the assessment roll to be certified to the County Auditor for collection. Minnesota Statutes 429.101 and 444.075, Subdivision 3, allow for special assessments to be collected for various types of current services that are delinquent. Those people whose accounts are delinquent have been notified of the public hearing and are given an opportunity to present input if they so desire. The following are delinquent accounts that are over 60 days past due and unpaid as of the date this agenda was prepared: Mr. Dick Hickman Mr. Tom Cloud ✓ Mr. John Cochran Balance - $100.14 Balance - $45.38 Balance - $50.54 Mr. Michael Dahmen Mr. James Collette Christopher Maas Balance - $95.28 Balance - $65.25 Balance - $122.72 James Johnson Ivan Wolter Mrs. Lorna Kneen Balance - $47.65 Balance - $102.64 Balance - $56.45 Burnotto Christopherson Mr. David Munson Tracey Foss Balance - $46.87 Balance - $246.60 Balance - $53.81 Mrs. Richard Colo Gerald Foley ✓ Bareness Drug ✓ Balance - $86.12 Balance - $112.19 Balance - $67.60 Kra. Donna Allan Mr. Dan Koch Joyce Lawson Balance - $11G.13 Balance - $104.31 Balance - $25G.80 ✓Cory Larvineon Mr. Michael Brower Balance - $67.48 Balance - $55.60 All of the above arc charges for sower and water accounts, except Baroness Drug, which in for a water motor, and Joyce Lawson, which is for (2) Dutch Elm tress removed. It should be noted that those people have boon notified in the past about their delinquent accounts and various attempts have boon made to collect those amounts. It is recommandod that those delinquent accounts be put on the assessment roll for collection in 1985 at the interest rate of 8!. It should be pointed out that 8% is the highest interest rate allowablo for aaassamanto that have not boon financed through bonds. If any of the above accounts aro paid by Tuesdays meeting, they can Cbe eliminated from the assessment roll. -4- Council Agenda - 11/13/84 6. Consideration of a Planned Unit Development - Applicants, Jim Powers/Kent Kjellberg. (T.E.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: There is little new information to provide to you at this time. This item was postponed at your last meeting because all documents had not yet been prepared. As of this writing (Thursday morning), we have not received the final copies of all of the documents. We are assuming that all of this information will be forthcoming by later today or tomorrow so that it can be reviewed in its total form on Tuesday night. The work on Wendys is progressing steadily, but the actual platting work Is apparently stalling along the way. Consequently, I am recommending that the Council, if it does not have the complete package, continue the matter to still another meeting. I find it to be highly unreasonable to expect the City to grant final approval to a major development without the proper documentation in order. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: Alternative actions have not changed since the last agenda supplement. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommendation isto postpone action if the materials are not in. If all materia Is aro In, and the final plan has not changed substantially from what was approved at the Planning Commission level, staff recommends final approval. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Nona. -5- Council Agenda - 11/13/84 7. Consideration of Granting Final Approval to the Jay Miller Replat. (T.E.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND On August 27, 1984, the Council granted approval to a variance of approximately a foot -and -a -half on the west end of Jay Miller's 8 -unit townhome replat. A condition was attached that it go back to the Planning Commission for their review and a moratorium was declared on anymore 10 -foot setbacks in that subdivision. At the September Planning Commission meeting, the Planning Commission granted approval for that variance and the building placement. What happened, however, is that the formal record did not show granting of final approval to the plat. After talking with Jim Ridgeway, Chair of the Planning Commission, he indicated that in his conversation with other Planning Commission members the motion to approve the variance carried the intent of giving final approval to the overall layout. We discussed this matter in that the final approval wan not formally given but the final approval is implicitly given if you're allowing a specific building placement by virtue of granting a variance. Jim Ridgeway was agreeable that that was the Planning Commisslon'e intent, but he was very upset with the way Jay Miller has handled this entire matter. While we were in agreement that we would have the right to force Jay to go through the Planning Commission for final approval and not come before the City Council until November 26, we agreed also that inaisting on ouch a process was mainly being stubborn to a developer who has abused the system. We really would not be gaining anything by doing it except perhaps some personal satisfaction. As a result, we aro bringing it to the City Council for final approval rather than go through the extra meetings with no concrete results. Thio townhomo project is now virtually complete, and the Toto have boon defined according to the actual building lines. The common area will be jointly owned by all 8 tenants. There will be a several page list of restrictive covenants and the formation of a neighborhood association. Those documents have boon given preliminary review and will be given final review prior to the meeting. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: Alternative actions aro limited hers as they are with any zero lot line roplat. It is not uncommon to allow conotructior. to begin before the lot lines are platted in order to achieve a match up of building lino and lot line. Consoqusntly, the final approval given to a roplat of this sort is largely a formality, since the granting of preliminary approval is what, in fact, initiated the construction. Thus, the only real alternative is to grant approval, since denial would have virtually no affect because the buildings aro already there. There is no staff recommendation, nor supporting data at this time. I can make copies of the neighborhood association covenants available prior to the meeting if you wish to review them. -6- C Council Agenda - 11/13/84 8. Consideration of Adopting a Resolution Authorizing the Certification of a Special Levy with the County Auditor. (T.E.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: As you noted at the special meeting to canvass election results, the Fire Hall referendum passed by a resounding majority. I have discussed the matter of the bond issuance with Jerry Shannon of Springsted at length, and the following information has been supplied him with his recommendation to proceed. He recommends that the Council adopt a resolution authorizing the certification to the County Auditor of a special levy in anticipation of 1985 debt service on potential Fire Hall bonds. Mr. Shannon is recommending that we proceed in the following way. At this meeting, we authorize the levy to the County. On November 26,we would adopt the resolution setting the Fire Hall bond sale. Springsted would be attending that meeting and provide the necessary resolutions. On January 14, we would make the formal bond sale after opening the bids. A bond sale of this size definitely would be competitive and not nagotiablo. We would then receive the actual cash in hand on February 14 ready to be invested until we need it. Mr. Shannon recommends that we avoid a late 1984 sale because there very likely will be a tremendous volume of business in the bond market as a result of all the IRB'o that have to moot the December 31 deadline.With this kind of volume, the competition Is not so intense and the interest rates not too attractive. With respect to the bond issue itself, Mr. Shannon sees the sale having a 15 -year debt retirement schedule and today's estimate having an average coupon rate of 9.45. The Question that must be addressed by the City Council is the amount that the City will authorize for issuance. This, of course, must be decided at this meeting if we are to certify the levy. The amount of $863,000 is the voted authorized amount to be expanded on the improvement of the Fire Hall. Minnesota Statutes 475.56 allows for the addition of an amount not to exceed 29 for discount bidding. The 29 is $17,000 and when added to the authorized amount would allow an issue of $880,000. If this amount were to be sold, than the levy would be $116,000 or 1.62 mills. The advantages of this system aro that the bettor interest rate will be provided if the City provides bidding discounts and consequently, the money is more than made up over the term of the retirement in interest savings. The disadvantage to this is it creates the appearance that the Council is selling more than that which is authorized. It is perfectly legal to add this 2% for discount bidding, but it does give the appearance that we voted for $863,000 and you aro now selling $880,000. The counter to that statement is the voters approved S863,000 for Piro Ball improvements and by issuing the extra 2% wa can, in fact, dedicate the full $863,000 to Piro Hall improvements. -7- Council Agenda - 11/13/84 i The counter to the $880,000 sale is to sell $860,000 and pay the bidding discount out of that amount. In order to do that, one have to be relatively comfortable that enough cushion has been built into the figures that the building project itself will not suddenly be short of funds near the end. If we select to sell the lesser amount, the levy would be $115,028 with an estimated millage of 1.6. Also, with respect to selling the lesser amount, we can address the bidding discount through interest earnings. Assuming that we receive the actual bond proceeds on February 14 and invest them immediately, we could earn approximately 6 months' interest before first construction payment would be required. The $17,000 bidding discount could be picked up in about 25 months of investment. This 6 months' investment is assuming that the City receives construction bids in April, commences construction work in May, and is not faced with its first payment until sometime in July. The advantage to this system is that the Council issues exactly what was authorized for Fire Hall improvements. The disadvantage to this option is that at least S17,000 of our interest earnings has to be utilized to pay bidding discount to secure the better interest rate as opposed to using the entire interest amount for construction contingencies or other sources or even be kept in reserve for eventual debt retirement. Both options aro entirely legal. Both have financial and public relations advantages and disadvantages. The most important factor to be addressed at thio time is whether or not to certify the levy to the Auditor. The County Auditor has indicated that he will accept a late special lovy from the City until November 15. I do wish to stress that the real financial advantage to certifying this levy this year is that we will then receive :ax proceeds to make our first bond payments, thus avoiding having to bond for capitalized interest and having to pay interact on interest. By certifying now, we will begin collecting tax levy in the very first year of the debt retirement schedule, which is to our advantage. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Adopt a resolution certifying a special levy for debt retirement in tho amount of Sl16,000 - this reflects a bond solo of $880,000 which includes the 2% allowed by Statute for bidding discount. 2. Adopt a r000lution authorizing a special levy of 5115,028 - this reflects a bond solo of exactly the $863,000 with no excess built in for the 2% bidding discount. 3. Do not authorize a levy for collection in 1985, rather waiting until aftor the bonds aro actually cold - this producco C little advantage for tho City in that we will bo facod with paying capitalized into rant or making our first yaar's bond -6- Council Agenda - 11/13/84 ti- �- payment out of reserve funds. If we postpone the certification of the levy, we will not make our first collections until 1986, which will be the second year of the debt retirement schedule. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff definitely recommends that the levy be certified this year. For me, it's a toss up as to which amount to levy. with respect to the pro's and con's of each system, I tend to favor not including the 28 for discount bidding. This, however, is not a strong inclination because the added investment dollars would be beneficial to the City. At the came time, I am concerned with issuing a bond in excess of the number that appeared on the ballot, even though we have full and legal authorization by Statute. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of the resolution to be adopted. I have left the number open, and that can be inserted after the actual bond amount has been determined. C C -9- RESOLUTION 1984 0 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND SETTING A SUPPLEMENTAL SPECIAL TAX LEVY IN ANTICIPATION OF DEBT RETIREMENT OF 1985 FIRE HALL GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS WHEREAS, a special election on the question of whether or not the City should issue its general obligation bonds in an amount not exceeding $863,000 for the purposes of Fire Hall improvements was duly hold on November 6, 1984, and; WHEREAS, the results of said election have been declared valid and final pursuant to Resolution 1984 046, and those results are as follows: Yea 1,179 No 308 WHEREAS, pursuant to the results of said election, the City Council shall proceed with the solo of General Obligation Bonds in the amount of (;/ o, nor, -" in order to make cold improvements to the Fire Department. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA THAT there be and hereby is levied upon the taxable property of the City of Monticello for the fiscal year commencing on January 1, 1985, the amount of //.T. e7-8 for the purpose of debt retirement with respect to tho 1985 Gonoral Obligation Fire Hall Bonds. The City Administrator is hereby instructed to transmit a certified copy of this resolution to the County Auditor of Wright County, Minnesota. Adopted this 13th day of November, 1984. Arve A. Grimsmo, Mayor Thomas A. Eidem City Administrator Council Agenda - 11/13/84 �. 9. Consideration of Authorizing the Firm of TKDA to Commence work on Phase II (Plans and Specifications) for the Proposed Monticello Fire Hall. (T.E.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: I am presuming at this time that the work performed by TKDA under Phase I has been found satisfactory by staff and Council. Up to this point, I have received no reports of negligence or uncooperative behavior. I realize there is some question as to the cost estimations on site preparation, and I hope to resolve that question by the time of the meeting. Presuming that there is an acceptable answer, I am further assuming that we wish to commence work on the proposal at this time. Consequently, it is appropriate for the City Council to make a motion authorizing TKDA to begin work on detailed plans and specifications and authorizing the execution of an architectural contract. The alternative actions are limited to continuing with TKDA or beginning a new architectural search. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that we exocuto the contract and commence work with TKDA. There is no supporting data for this item. The contract, which has already boon reviewed by the City Attorney under Phase I. will be re-roviewed and presented for eignaturoo. -10- Council Agenda - 11/13/84 �l 10. Consideration of Making an Offer for the Purchase of Block 13 as the Proposed Site for the New Fire Hall. (T.E.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Councilmember Maxwell brought you up to current status at the last regular Council meeting. If I recall Correctly, he indicated that Mr. Americk had come around to the position of being a willing seller but that the price of the land had not been agreed to. The Council decided at that time to make no further overtures to Mr. Americk until after the referendum. Having received a clear and overwhelming vote of confidence for this construction, I think it is an appropriate time to make a move for the land now. I know that prior to the special election canvassing meeting convening, there was some informal conversation about an offer for free land out near Malones. While I have absolutely nothing against the possibility of getting some free land, I do have concerns with the particular site. For obvious response reasons, a central location for the main Fire Hall is generally desirable, which is why I think the Amorick site Is most suitable. I also wish to note that considerable effort went into the site analysis and site selection process using certain criteria. It was my understanding that as we kept that criteria in mind and reviewed Qindividual sitoo, it was by consensus that the Americk property was the moat desirable and mot the greatest number of the criteria satisfactorily. I am also aware that there is substantial concern over the projected cost of site preparation. The architects, as you aro aware, have done for the bond referendum a preliminary estimate of $96,000.00 in site preparation. I talked with Wee Hendrickson this morning (Friday) about the $96,000.00 figure. I indicated to him that that seemed awfully high for fill and compacting, and he explained that the fill compacting and grading is only a portion of that overall expense. He said site preparation oleo includes the complete parking lot construction with bituminous surface, all of the concrete curb and gutter work that is required, complete sodding, the troo plantings, as wall an the fill, compacting, grading, and readying for construction. He noted that there was some small amount, though it was not broken out, included for grooming the wast and whore we will not be building. He also wished to emphasize again that the estimate is intentionally built high so that we aro not caught by surprise when the bids coma in. In an attempt to further break down thin figure, I have asked John to try and secure estimates from local contractors on what the actual fill, compacting, and grading cents would be. Those numborn can than be separated from the $96,000.00, which will allow us to batter judge the value of the land. Mr. Hendrickson C Council Agenda - 11/13/84 C) N. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Select Jack as our Sand negotiator and authorize a specific sum to be offered for land acquisition. 2. Accept a recommendation from Jack on the selection of a roaltor to represent the City and authorize a specific amount as an offer for land acquisition. 3. Select a non-roaLtor party to negotiate with Mr. Amorick on the sale of the land, and authorize a specific sum to be made ao an offor. -12- vi also went on to say that he found this site to be very desirable for a Fire Nall location, and that if it weren't, he would have suggested investigation into alternate sites right from the beginning. While I do not wish to turn into a person who is so rigid in my ideas that I allow good ideas to pass by, I do think the evidence pointing toward development of this site is very strong. The site is centrally located; it does provide easy and quick access to Highway 25 for variable direction access; while it may be within the heart of the commercial area, it is less prime than other sites because it is only half block in size and secondly, it is adjacent to the railroad right -o£ -way, which limits development; it already has a full complement of sewer and water and has finished City streets on two sides; it is large enough to accommodato expansion if necessary but to allow open green area grooming in the interim; considering the attractive design of the building, it will be complementary to commercial development in the area. I think if this site is finally agreed upon, it would be appropriate to authorize Jack to negotiate the final sale with Mr. Americk. Perhaps Jack can give a more accurate prediction on the time and effort it would take to negotiate such a deal, and whether or not it could be determined to be a conflict of interest. Clearly, if a great deal of time and effort has to go into negotiating the land sale, Jack should be paid for his services. The question ` then is if we are paying for services, should we be paying a Council member? If it is found to be a conflict of interest. then perhaps Jack could recommend what realtor we should ask to act in our behalf. The advantage in having Jack do it is that he has alroady made successful contacts with Mr. Amorick and has worked with him up to this point. Mr. Amorick apparently has bocomo more agreeable, and I suspect that's largely duo to Jack's efforts. Still another advantage of having Jack do the work for us is that clearly the best interests of the City will be kept in mind at all times. The only real disadvantage is the appoaranco of a conflict of intorost, but this can be a delicate matter when exposed to the public eye. C) N. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Select Jack as our Sand negotiator and authorize a specific sum to be offered for land acquisition. 2. Accept a recommendation from Jack on the selection of a roaltor to represent the City and authorize a specific amount as an offer for land acquisition. 3. Select a non-roaLtor party to negotiate with Mr. Amorick on the sale of the land, and authorize a specific sum to be made ao an offor. -12- Council Agenda - 11/13/84 r_ 4. Abandon acquisition plane of this site, and authorize a new site selection process. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Again, on this item staff recommendation is difficult. I think Jack has done such excellent work up to this point. I favor leaving him in our negotiating position, even with paying for his services; but I do recognize the conflict of interest difficulty. I think Jack could better recommend the process we go through. I recall that Ken dealt with Security Federal on the land acquisition process, and by being introduced to Mr. Americk through Jack could perhaps carry the ball for us again. This, of course, would eliminate the conflict of interest aspect since Ken would not be paid for his services (other than expenses); but it could conceivably compromise the effectiveness of having a professional realtor involved. Lastly, I still think it would be extremely beneficial to sand the City Administrator to Florida for 6-6 months to try and close this difficult land purchase. D. SUPPORTING DATA: None. C -13- Council Agenda - 11/13/84 V_ 11. Consideration of Replacement of a 1972 Snowplow Truck, Approval of Specifications, and Bid Advertisement. (J.S.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: This item was discussed with the Council on Saturday. October 6, at the budget workshop meeting. The Council voted to include an amount of $67,600 in the 1985 Budget so that the replacement of the 1972 Chevrolet could be considered for 1985. Thin amount included a tandem axle truck and box with applicable plow, wing, and sander. Since the budget meeting, we have had time to prepare a more detailed cost analysis of the possible savings in utilizing a tandem axle truck over a single axle truck. In addition, Roger Mack and myself had the opportunity to discuss the maneuverability loss with Councilman Dan Blonigen after the October 26 Council meeting. The tandem axle truck would be most valuable in hauling materials such as snow, fill material, Class V, black dirt, rip rap, blacktop, wood chips, and the like. In computing the actual savings, we estimate a savings from S1, 000 to 51,200 per year through the utilization of a tandem axle truck. The actual coat of a tandem over a single axle truck is approximately 58,000. In addition, the maintenance coat on a tandem axle truck can run 308 higher than a single axle truck duo mainly (� to the additional tiros and second differential and drive linea. In this particular instance, it would take approximately 8-10 years for the tandem axle truck to pay for itoolf. This data, as wall as the reduced mobility of a tandem axle truck in clearing dead and streets, intersections, and cul -do -sacs, indicates it would not be beneficial to replace the existing single axle truck with a tandem axle unit. I believe Councilman Blonigen is of the came opinion that if the truck is to be replaced, it should not be replaced with a tandem. Getting back to the question at hand of whether or not to replace the 1972 Chevrolet, we provide the following information. The 1972 Chevrolet is a C60 Modal purchased from Could Brotharo Chevrolet in 1972 with a 5 -yard box and hoist for $9,033. The one-way plow was removed from the old City Diamond T truck and modified to fit the 1972 Chevrolet. A small fan bolt driven pump was added to the truck to lower and lift thin 10 -foot, ono -way plow. The truck has approximately 50,000 miles on it. The truck had an enormous amount of use in the early and middle 701o; and as newer and factor trucks were added to the floot, it became more of a standby unit. The truck currently is in fair condition. The body and box have boon patched up many times and oro showing signs of runt and wear. The hydraulic system on the unit is extremely weak, and frequently loads have to be partially shoveled off the truck by hand. The engine -14- Council Agenda - 11/13/64 and transmission are worn but in serviceable condition. The clutch is near needing replacement, and the truck needs six new tires. The brakes on the truck have given us a lot of problems over the past few years but seem to be holding now. The truck would soon be due, however, for all new lining and possibly some drum work. Since the truck is equipped with only a narrow, one-way plow and is in deteriorating condition, the truck has been used mainly in the winter for snow hauling only and aces very little plowing duty. In the summer, the truck aces extensive use in the tree program and on miscellaneous Public Works jobs. We feel it is time to replace this unit with a newer model, single axle truck equipped with reversible plow, wing, and sander. We would then move the 1975 International into the duties taken by the old Chevrolet. The now truck would then take over the route and duties that the 1975 International has currently been doing. Replacing these unite as they near their useful life provides for a more affective equipment management program. Planned replacement of equipment is always more cost effective than emergency purchasing during times of shortages for a particular piece of equipment. In preparation for the replacement, the Public Works staff has contacted several truck and equipment dealers to obtain product and cost information. We have also discussed our needs with several other communities, counties, and state agencies and looked at the equipment being used to handle similar needs in other cities, etc. Ono of the things that we were looking for when we talked to these other communities and counties was a problem of intersection cleanup. We found an overwhelming number of trucks equipped with a front or bumper mounted wing. This attachment of the wing to the front area of the truck gives the operator better control over the wing at intersections and allows him to make the corner without leaving a trail of snow between the wing and plow and more easily match the radius curve of the intersection. Thorn is not a significant coat increase of this typo of wing over the mid -mount wing or door post typo of wing, but it does require that the truck have an integral front framo extension. All those people that we talked to regarding this typo of unit praised it. They also cautioned us against the use of any typo of bolt on front frame extension. Many of the owners of this typo of equipment also cautioned us against purchasing a unit with too light a front axle and/or springs. A cure-all to any typo of front axle problem appears to be the specifying of the 16,000 pound front axle with springs in excess of 16,000 pounds per pair at the pada. -15- Council Agenda - 11/13/84 Another of the problems or items we looked at was the hydraulic system for the truck. The existing hydraulic systems on the City -s vehicles all leave somewhat to be desired_ None of the units that we have will provide power to any of the devices upon operator demand. Both of our trucks equipped with sanders and wings are also equipped with a flow divider valve that must be carefully adjusted each time one changes from the sander to the hoist. The hydraulic pump system that appears to have solved the problems of flow control is a closed system. This system only circulates a small amount of oil when not in use, but upon demand will vary the stroke of the pistons in the pump to supply an adequate amount of oil to run any of the attachments at a given time. The cities of Elk River, New Nope, and Red Wing are currently utilizing this type of hydraulic system and have much praise for it. This system allows the pump to be driven directly off the crank shaft without the use of a gear reducing PTO. Due to the savings of this piece of equipment, this system is very competitively priced with the conventional system and can often be purchased for less. one other problem that we looked into is the operation of the control levels for the valve bodies. Ono of our trucks, the 1981 Chevrolet, has a ontrol body mounted in the cab. This (�1 control valva bank takoca up a significant amount of room and always appears to be looking and it dissipates a significant amount of hoot during the summor months. This unit, however, was salvaged from the 1972 International when we roused all of the existing hydraulic equipment on the now Chevrolet. The 1978 International has a valve bank located behind the cab between the framo rails. This is connected by heavy steal rode to the valve control inside the cab. These lovers aro extremely difficult to push and create operator fatigue after a short period of time. A now system utilized by the majority of now unit purchasers is the Morris Cable Control. This cable system allows for case of operation from the cab but keeps the valve bank located outside between the framo rails. The coat of this system is only slightly more than the old conventional heavy lovas system. Ono other consideration in the purchase of a now vehicle is the trend to switch to diosal power. There aro several advantages of the diesel over the gas. The dioaol engines aro not susceptible to misfire duo to moisture caused by molting snow and ico during snowplowing. Vary often a gasoline engine ignition system will become wot during plowing operations. When this happens, the engines misfire and losoapowor until such time they dry themselves off by hoot or the operator pulls into the shop and drios off the ignition system with compraosod air and/or solvents specifically ouitod for drying out ignition systems. Another advantage of -16- Council Agenda - 11/13/84 the diesel is that diesel fuel does not poison the air through the induction of significant amounts of lead to the atmosphere. In addition, diesel engines make better mileage than gasoline engines. They are often 50-704 more efficient. Add this to the fact that diesel fuel costs less than gasoline, and significant savings are realized. There are also considerable savings in maintenance. The International Team Data Base, which provides the information on such items, indicates a savings of 9.86 per mile with diesel versus gasoline power. This savings can add up quickly. The approximate additional cost for a diesel engine when purchased over a gasoline engine is $5,000. The annual savings on 'a diesel engine computed at the mileage rates for the City of Monticello is $1,362.73 per year. It would take 3.67 years to pay for the diesel engine. As a general rule of thumb for motor vehicles, if the item will pay for itself in less than 5 years, it is considered cost saving and would benefit the owner. It would, therefore, be wise to consider specifying the diesel engine with the now vehicle. We have prepared a set of specifications for a typical snowplow truck based upon the above information and other requirements of the City of Monticello. These specifications are available under separate cover at the City Hall. Should the Council favor the replacement of the 1972 Chevrolet snowplow unit, there are two other things that should be considered. Ono is the typo of snowplow for the now unit. Another is how to dispose of the old unit. As for the snowplow, the City of Monticello is currently tooting a Scandinavian Transport Products plow with a trippablo cutting edge. We will not have had time to toot a plow thoroughly until we use it through a variety of snowfalls. We have talked to operators for the State of Minnesota who have used thin plow and also operators for several communities who have used the Frink Trippablo Cutting Edge Plows, and their response has boon vary positive. At this time the staff fools that a combination utilizing the trippablo cutting edge, a reversible plow, and a high and design such as a V -plow, would be the moot advantageous plow for the City of Monticello. There currently in only one manufacturer that has all three of those available on a plow, and that is Frink. The second boat alternative would be a combination of the rovoroibla plow with the high and wings. Thorn is currently only one manufacturer of this typo of plow that we know of, and that is the Wausau Company in Wisconsin. We fool we have enough information to recommend the Frink plow. There would, however, be time to finish our experiments this winter and gain additional information on the typo of plow we have proposed. The oparo Honky plow which we have as a result of the addition of the STP plow could be easily mounted on the now truck temporarily until a decision in made later this year as to the plow. -17- Council Agenda - 11/13/84 v� As for the demise of the 1972 Chevrolet, it would be the proposal that the staff, upon learning the trade-in value of the unit, advertise for private bids and accept a bid from a private party if it is higher than the bid of the dealer. This procedure has worked well for us in the past. This report, again, is asking for the Council to consider the replacement of the 1972 Chevrolet with another single axle dump truck, snowplow unit and consideration of the specifications for same. We bring this before you in hopes that it be approved and the unit could be delivered for the tail end of the 1984-85 snow season. If the unit does not arrive in time for snowplowing this year, it would be used next summer, and we would have ample time to got the bugs out, so to speak, prior to the 1985-66 snow season. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. The first alternative would be not to replace the 1972 Chevrolet but to upgrade it and repair it as best is possible and put off its replacement for another year or two. The staff fools that this is not cost effective and would not be in the City's best interest. 2. This alternative would be to replace the 1972 Chevrolet with a single axla dump truck plow unit as specified utilizing either the Frink or the Wausau plow. 3. Thin alternative would be to replace the 1972 Chevrolet with a now single axis dump truck without the plow but only with the box, wing, and sander. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director and the Street Superintendent that the Council authorize replacement of the 1972 Chevrolet and approve the specifications of the truck as prepared without the plow no outlined in Alternative q3. The plows will take the least amount of load time of any of the equipment or the cab and chassis. If we have made a final decision on the plow by the and of January, the plow could be delivered at the came time as the now truck. If the Council no authorizoo the advertisement for bids, tho bide would be returned on Monday afternoon, Novambor 26, for review at the regularly scheduled meeting. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Truck and equipment specifications available at City Hall. C- ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUESTED GASOLINE ENGINE VS. DIESEL POWER City Truck Usaqe Unit Make Year Ave. Miles Per Yr. Ave. MPG 001 Chev 61 2,907 2.9 002 Int 75 3,994 2.3 603 Chev 72 4,255 3.7 011 Int 78 1,673 2.3 Ave. MPG 2.6 The now truck will replace Unit 103 at 4,255 miles per year and take over the duties of Unit 002 at 3,994 miles per year. It in safe to assume a minimum usage of 4,000 miles per year for the new truck. Fuel Savings 4,000 miles divided by 2.8 MPG - 1,429 Gal. Gas x 51.159/Gal a $1,656.21/Yr. 4,000 miles divided by 6.25• MPG - 640 Gal. Diaeol x 5.969/Gal - $620.16/Yr. Fuel Savings: $1,656.21 - $620.16 - $1,036.05 (does not include savings from less fill ups) l •Note: Verified average miloago of LN 8000 Ford with 3208 Cat Diesel. Verified by 4 communities/countics: Sherburne County, Red Wing, Now Hope, Elk River. The International Team Data Boge indicates a cost savings on maintenance of a diesel over gas of 5.098 par mile. This would be 4,000 x 5.098 or $392.00. If we say this organisation -a figures are off 100%. we will use $196.00/Yr. Total Savingo Fuol $1,036.05 Maintenance 9 196.00 01,232.05 per year This figure does not take into account any down time for a vat engine. Diesel Cents If we use a figure of 05,000• for the coat of a diesel over a largo gasoline V8, this would indicate a payback of 4.06 years, MC Gasoline Engine vs. Diesel Power which is more than the figure indicated in the Agenda Supplement. If we take into consideration the increased trade in value of $3,000-54,000 (Boyer Ford 6 Hoglund Bus estimate on 7 or 8 year old vehicle), this would make the payback period from 0.81 years to 1.62 years. -Note: Will vary from brand to brand. Consideration of Lost Investment Interest The question of lost interest was raised. If the City taxed the public $5,000 purely as an investment and did not use the money but put it in the bank for 8 years and compounded the interest at 101, that sum could be expected to grow to at least $10,700. It has been suggested that this figure, possibly less the increase in trade in value of 53,000-54,000 or $6,700-S7,700, in the actual cost of the diesol. Using this coat, the payback would be 5.44 to 6.25 years. There is, however, no precedent for using lost interest in budgeting for City purchases. The International City Management Association makes no reference to this procedure in the management information service report on vehicle replacement. The City has not used this procedure in the past. If we used this in determining the actual cost of the Piro Hall, for example, it would be a multi-million dollar purchase cost for its 25 year life expectancy. The City does not raise money for investment, and it is my opinion that the cost of lost investment interest should not be used. These costa are also somewhat offset by inflation costs as values of buildings, utilities, and equipment increase. If a decision is made to go with a gas engine, it will be necessary to rodefine what we want for a snowplow truck. International does not offer gasoline power on any trucks over 27,000 0 G.V.N. Ford doss not offer gasoline power in the LN 8000 series, and we would have to go to the lighter P series truck and beef it up to the required G.V.W. At this time. Chev and CMC do not offer a H.D. snowplow unit with the integral front frame extension. Depending upon the decision, we may have to go back to the mid -mount wing on a lighter truck, and this would not benefit the intorosction onow work or summor hauling. Ma �1 Council Agenda - 11/13/84 12. Consideration of a Resolution Authorizing Payment to the Minnesota Coalition of Outstate Cities to be Used for Legislative Representation Services. (T.E.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: The Minnesota Coalition of Outstate Cities, of which we are a member, is pursuing the idea of engaging a lobbyist for the express purpose of working on the Local Government Aids formula in the upcoming Legislative Session. with respect to the ongoing battle of Local Government Aida, several sides have developed which are promoting special interests and engaging in intense lobbying. Minneapolis and St. Paul, as cities of the first class, have their own benefits to identify and to work for in the Legislature. The benefits for these major cities rarely provide benefit to those of us who are substantially smaller and are outstate. There is also a lobbying group called the Metro Losers who are made up of the first and second ring suburbs. The Local Government Aid formula as it currently exists hurts them somewhat due to their being in the metro area and are part of a parity program. They, too, have a formula that they are lobbying for that could have a severe affect on us. This year, for the first time, the Coalition of Outstato Cities fools it is necessary for we who are outstate and smaller to throw professional lobbyists into the Legislative ring in order to protect what wo have. The Coalition is proposing to hire the firm of Holmes 6 Graven to act as lobbyists with Mr. Tim Flaherty, the attorney acting on our behalf. Mr. Flaherty formerly worked in the Government Aida Division for the City of Minneapolis and is very familiar with the formulae and the workings of the system. A couple of months ago, the Coalition began pursuing this and fools it is essential that all cities contribute to the effort. There has been some concern about the rate charges and considerable debate in terms of each city -o contribution. The final agreed upon rato hoe dropped from 1/10 of 18 of total levy and Local Government Aid, which was nearly $1,500.00 to us, down to 20Q par capita, which in $584.00. For the 1985 Budget, we are anticipating receiving $174,500.00 In combined Local Govornmont Aid. In 1984, we anticipate receiving approximately $161,000.00 in combined Local Government Aida, and that figura is up from $154,000.00 in 1983. Of the other formulas that were lobbied for during the 1984 Legislative Session, two would have had affects of loan than $5,000.00 on our projected aide, while one would have reduced our Local Government Aid by $51,000.00. That wan the Metro Losers group, which is again rostrangthoning their lobbying efforts for tho upcoming session. To further complicate this matter, tho Governor is discussing a proposal to altar the entire Local Government Aida formula by shifting all government aids to the schools but granting I+L Council Agenda - 11/13/84 the 23 mills that schools are currently allowed to local governments. Cc.nsequently, both jurisdictions would end up with a similar amount of money as in the past, but the effect would be that schools no longer have to tax for their services while cities become the villains and cause all of the taxation. This is another proposal that the Coalition is working very hard to defeat. I think that the investment in lobbying is worth the risk. Any lobbying effort is, of course, a risk at any time because legislation may pass contrary to what you've lobbied for. It strikes me, however, that $584 is not a major investment in an attempt to protect the Local Government Aid we already have. We may not be able to increase our aids, but hopefully our efforts would be successful enough to protect what we already have. Not counting special grants for particular projects, Local Government Aid is our highest source of intergovernmental revenues. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Adopt the resolution authorizing payment to the Coalition of Outstate Cities for lobbying efforts - this would put us in with the overall group that is making a lobbying effort to protect the financial resources we already have to work with. 2. Do not adopt the resolution - if we choose not to adopt the resolution but the majority of cities do, then we will be forced to make a decision as to whether or not we wish to retain our membership in the Coalition. The Coalition being based on tho Sarno Democratic process as the Council, if the majority of citiaa vote to go with it, than all cities are expected to comply. If we do not wish to spend the money for lobbying, then we should withdraw from the Coalition. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Going back to what I said above, I think the amount of money is minimal compared to tho savings that could be gained with succosaful lobbying efforts. I recommand that the Council adopt the resolution and authorize the expenditure of $584.00. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of tho resolution to be adopted; Copies of letters and information from tha Coalition of Outatato Cities. -20- RESOLUTION 1984 Y RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PAYMENT TO MINNESOTA COALITION OF OUTSTATE CITIES TO BE USED FOR LEGISLATIVE REPRESENTATION SERVICES WHEREAS, major changes to the property tax and state aid systems will be considered in the 1985 State legislative session; and WHEREAS, changes to the property tax andState aid system could have a major impact on the financial health of the City and affect the ability of the City to provide essential services to its residents; and WHEREAS, changes to the property tax and State aid system could substantially increase the property tax burden on taxpayers within the City; and WHEREAS, the City of Monticello can more effectively promote and protect its interest and the interest of its property taxpayers at the State legislature by joining with other cities to develop and lobby a joint legislative program; and WHEREAS, the City of Monticello is a member of the Minnesota Coalition of Outstate Cities ("Coalition"); and WHEREAS, the Coalition at its meeting on October 5, 1984, asked member cities to indicate whether or not they ware willing to contribute to the Coalition so that the Coalition could retain professional logialative representation services, including computer, research and analysis services; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Coalitions Articles of Incorporation, a majority vote of its members is required to approve an assessment above membership duos; and WHEREAS, effective legislative representation on property tax and State aid issues requires professional services, including computer, research and analysis services; and WHEREAS, other cities and governmental units have retained professional services to assist with legislative representation; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA, THAT: 1. The City of Monticello hereby consents to the Coalition retaining professional legislative services for the 1985 legislative session and agrees to pay an aaeaoamant for Cthose services of an amount not to exceed 5.20 par capita. ICD- Resolution 1981 1 Page 2 2. The President of the Coalition shall notify each city in the Coalition of the amount of its assessment. The assessment shall be payable within one month after notice of the assessment is received by the member city. 3. No assessment shall be made unless a majority of the member cities of the Coalition adopt a resolution similar to this resolution on or before November 13, 1984. Adopted this 13th day of November, 1984. Arve A. Grimemo, Mayor Thomas A. 61dem City Administrator J Prux<t a. Rene Wrry Rrf.DW H. SOW. CMmrJI PIUMM rw i Wnr~ City Aamhertirto AWArl J. PNOiCe Car Anwn" Lane of LWberph DATE: October 9, 1994 Iil t ' ap cittylealittlefalls Gtv Oftkat IOO Northeast Seventh Avenue U1118 Far$. M-0'010 50345 612/632.2341 TO: Minnesota Coalition of Outstate Cities FROM: Thomas J. Manninen, Secretary, MCOOC 17*1 SUBJECT: Minnesota Coalition of Outstate Cities Joint Lobbying Efforts At the October S. 1984 140000 meeting in St. Cloud, there was concern over whether the Coalition of Outstate Cities has any authority to lobby or should lobby on a Local Government Aid formula, as an affiliate of the LMC. Enclosed for your review is correspondence from Tim Flaherty of Holmes i Graven with four additional enclosures from Mr. Flaherty. Excerpts from the MCOOC By -Lava establish clear intent: . STATEMENT OF PURPOSE. "Theup rpoee of the Minnesota Coalition of Outstate Cities is to rp Ovide a vehicle for voluntary eine action co meet clp problem w of mutual concern to the member cities... MCOOC will lobby on specific issues of im�rtance co the membership.'• . APPEARANCE BEFORE LEGISLATIVE BODIES. The President, or representative or representatives, may address legislative bodies on matters of concern to the organisation expressing the ma orit view. The president may select a committee of sufficient siso to adequately present an issue to the legislative body so designated. . AFFILIATION WITH LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES. The Minnesota Coalition of Outstate Cities shall be affiliated with the League of Minnesota Cities and shall participate in their programs as far as practical. The. MCOOC will "supplement and compliment the Leagun of Minnesota Cities lobbying when "ppropriato" The MCOOC By -Laws seem permissive on retaining lobbying oxpertisa, individually or through joint agreements to lobby for Local Government Aida, annexation or any other issues without violating MCOOC incorporation or By - Laws or affiliation with the League of Minnesota Cities. Therefore, a proposed enabling resolution for action at an October meeting is enclosed to each MCOOC member city and will be reported on at the MCOOCrs next regular meeting at the Holidsy inn -Capitol, St. Paul, at 10:00 a.m. October 26, 1984. At this October 26, 1984 meeting, the Coalition will decide whothor to: 11 jointly lobby for Local Government Aid revisions as a group, 21 individually lobby or enter into other joint powers agreenwfnto, or 11 to rely on the League of Minnesota Cities to do all lobbying and negotiating Local Government Aida. Timing is important to organise and act quickly bacause of the need to develop e program and begin lobbying right awayl PLEASE R.S.V.P. TO MY OFFICE ON YOUR ATTENDANCE AT THE 10/26 MCOOC MEETING. AN EOUAI OPPOetUFMly rMMOtf e �tl October 12, 1984 The Honorable Edward C. Gamradt President Minnesota Coalition of Outstate Cities City Hall Little Falls, MN Dear Mr. Gamradt: Thank you for inviting Holmes s Graven to participate in the October 5 meeting of the Minnesota Coalition of Outstate Cities. We enjoyed visiting with you and other representatives of Coalition cities. Many of the Coalition cities have expressed an interest in retaining Holmes b Graven to provide legislative representation on issues related to property taxation and local governmieve ties in developent andaid beginGlobbyingbalcommonipositionthe on thesetion issueseto in November. Holmes i Graven to prepared to assist the Coalition in its lobbying effort by providing professional lobbying services, including computer, research and analysis services. The cost of these services is estimated to be between $100,000 and $125,000. Aeeat t . resolution which authorizes cities to iSs� contribut coal -ft Dying activity an amount nat to exceed 5.25 r capita, o .109 f each city's LGA plus levy, whichever greater. However, o individual city shall be Ozp/�•t required to contribute more than $10,000. Attachment 2 is a form f resolution for those cities that want to lobby and retain pro- fessional lobbying services jointly with other cities even though the Coalition decides it does not want to retain professional lobbying services. Attachment 2 authorizes cities to enter into a joint powers agreement which establishes a *Joint Board of Outstats Cities" to lobby in the 1985 legislative session. The Board is authorized to collect contributions from member cities in an amount not to exceed $.50 per capita or .208 of each city's LGA plus levy, whichever is greater. However, no city shall be required to contribute more than $20,000. HOLMES a GRAVEN CHARTERED AU-0s7L a Lav, alp t.t6lwgCmn Miewe+*,Ib. x/X JSapJ RTC"A y R, a A,%D 04[ RIfSlff.111 JAM[R S. H*Lmt1 te1J17141117 Nt ALU[BOK! 11 D-111.IR.—N S01 DA.ni R.. CQ.I DAvtb ` QtAvtX L. F'"I o Rost'e Rosa 1ONN jl.IAeSON C„NAaxt7R. W NRnOrrimt Fur,n.l Cau+r. BbommpRA. MV 77411 L A. LI'r IN:al. A. L11 DAVIDSON17'OD Rosta7 J...KD.L O RotN XnALL {atJJ tt}a+,m L ,, LAw A R. K+IA.[t Che m. cunt M. Le JONX M.. , G. Dom's nt.+r G. Dom's Wtv1M1.Je. (.Haar M. W[xrxuN Jan«C. Vi[ty STA, LIT K[NL Of Caumd: J OXAr HAN {•. SCOLL K A1N[RI.[ M. Hoiuis October 12, 1984 The Honorable Edward C. Gamradt President Minnesota Coalition of Outstate Cities City Hall Little Falls, MN Dear Mr. Gamradt: Thank you for inviting Holmes s Graven to participate in the October 5 meeting of the Minnesota Coalition of Outstate Cities. We enjoyed visiting with you and other representatives of Coalition cities. Many of the Coalition cities have expressed an interest in retaining Holmes b Graven to provide legislative representation on issues related to property taxation and local governmieve ties in developent andaid beginGlobbyingbalcommonipositionthe on thesetion issueseto in November. Holmes i Graven to prepared to assist the Coalition in its lobbying effort by providing professional lobbying services, including computer, research and analysis services. The cost of these services is estimated to be between $100,000 and $125,000. Aeeat t . resolution which authorizes cities to iSs� contribut coal -ft Dying activity an amount nat to exceed 5.25 r capita, o .109 f each city's LGA plus levy, whichever greater. However, o individual city shall be Ozp/�•t required to contribute more than $10,000. Attachment 2 is a form f resolution for those cities that want to lobby and retain pro- fessional lobbying services jointly with other cities even though the Coalition decides it does not want to retain professional lobbying services. Attachment 2 authorizes cities to enter into a joint powers agreement which establishes a *Joint Board of Outstats Cities" to lobby in the 1985 legislative session. The Board is authorized to collect contributions from member cities in an amount not to exceed $.50 per capita or .208 of each city's LGA plus levy, whichever is greater. However, no city shall be required to contribute more than $20,000. The Honorable Edward C. Gamradt October 12, 1984 Page 2 Attachment 3 provides each city with an estimate of its maximum contribution authorized by the Attachment 1 resolution. The maximum cost to each city under the Attachment 2 resolution is the maximum amount shown on Attachment 3 doubled. Attachment 4 contains our views on questions raised at the October S meeting. We look forward to working with the Coalition cities on these property tax and LGA issues. Please share this letter with other Coalition cities and let them know that they can call me for more information prior to their City Council meetings if they think that would be helpful. very truly yours, Timothy. Flaherty TPFtjes Enclosures cci Don Slater Executive Director League of Minnesota Cities Attachment 4 M S M O R A N D O M TO: Honorable Edward C. Gamradt President Minnesota Coalition of Outstate Cities FROM: Timothy P. Flaherty -(F Attorney Holmes a Graven, Chartered DATE: October 11, 1984 RE: Our Views on Questions Raised at October 5 Coalition Meeting This memorandum provides you with our views on the questions raised at the October 5 meeting and recommends a course of action for those cities that want to retain Holmes b Graven. A. Need for Independent and Professional Leqislative Represent- ation. We believe the cities in the Coalition need to develop and begin lobbying a common position related to property taxa- tion and LGA in November. Coalition cities can lobby together because they have relatively similar fiscal characteristics (low taxable value, high municipal property tax burdens and high LGA) compared to other organizations and cities actively lobbying on these issues. Changes to the property tax and aid system are likely to have a similar u impact on Coalition cities. Effective legislative representation is more critical for Coalition cities in the 1985 session than other sessions for the following reasons: 1. Governor's proposal to change property tax system. The Governor has announced that he will seek major legisla- tive changes in the state aid and property tax system. The proposal may be detrimental to Coalition cities but beneficial to other cities and other organizations. we expect that the Governor's proposal will be supported by the Kindergarten through grade 12 education community, townships, counties, and the Municipal Legislative Commission (a joint powers organization consisting of cities with fiscal characteristics substantially different than characteristics of the Coalition cities). These groups all have active lobbying programs and are assisted by professional lobbyists. 1 B. 2. LGA formula proposals. The Local Government Aid Study Commission was established in the 1984 legislative session and is composed of legislators from the House and Senate. The Commission is studying new LGA formulas for presentation to the 1985 legislative session. 3. Legislative Representation by Leaque of Minnesota Cities. The League will not have a position on the Governor's proposal or the LGA formula proposals being debated by the LGA Study Commission until at least January 28, 1985. There is a possibility that the League will never take a position or take a very general position on the Governor's proposal or LGA proposals made by others. Without concensus on a specific position, the League will not be able to lobby and protect or promote the interest of any cities on these issues. 4. Protection of Coalition Cities by the City of Minneapolis. Minneapolis has, many other issues to lobby in the 1985 session and it may be unreasonable to expect Minneapolis to protect the interests of Coalition cities. Potential Conflict Between Coalition and Leaque of Minnesota Cities. Some Coalition cities have expressed a concern that the legislative efforts of the Coalition may eventually be in conflict with League policy or hurt the chances for the League to develop a League policy. We believe it is unlikely that a conflict will develop between the Coalition and the League over the property tax or local government aid issues and that developing and lobbying a program on these issues will not affect the potential for the League to develop a policy on these issues. We hold this view for the following reasonso 1. The Coalition would not be in conflict with League policy in November, December and January because the League will have no policy until January 28. These three months are a critical time for Coalition cities to have input into the Governor's proposal and various -legislative formula proposals. It is unlikely that the League will reach concensus on a specific position related to the Governor's proposal or local government aid formulas. However, if the League is able to reach concensus on a specific position, the Coalition can decide at that time whether to support or oppose the League's position. In the unlikely event the Coalition wants to lobby a position In conflict with the position adopted by the League, it may do so and still remain an affiliate of the League provided certain conditions contained in the League Constitution are met. 3. Other organizations and cities that have developed positions and that are assisted by professional lobby- ists (League of Small Cities, Municipal Legislative Commission, Minneapolis and St. Paul) will lobby on the Governor's proposal and legislative formula proposals at the same time that they participate in the League process to develop a concensus policy. The Coalition could develop and lobby a. position related to the Governor's proposal and legislative formula proposals while it participates on the League Revenue Sources Committee and the Technical Committee. C. Proposal to Provide Professional Leqislative Representation Services to Coalition Cities. We believe that a coordinated legislative program which relies on computer analysis, professional lobbying services and dire6t lobbying by local officials will result in effec- tive representation that will protect and promote the interests of Coalition cities. Holmes a Graven has pro- fessional lobbyists, experienced in local government aid and property tax issues, available to assist the Coalition in developing and presenting its position. Holmes b Graven is prepared to offer the following legislative services beginning in November, 1984: 1. Coordinate the Coalition's lobbying on property tax and LGA issues, including drafting and lobbying bills and amendments that have been approved by the Coalition. Z. Provide computer analysis to determine the impact of proposals on Coalition cities. 3. Assist the Coalition in developing policy positions related to proposed changes in the property tax system, Including the Governor's proposal and LGA formula pro- posals. 1. Assist the Coalition in presenting its position to interested parties and negotiating common positions with those other parties (State Department of Finance, Governor, League of Minnesota Cities, League of Small Cities, Municipal Legislative Commission, Range Associa- tion, Minneapolis, St. Paul, Duluth, etc.). 5. Assist Coalition cities by providing policy analysis and technical services to Coalition cities that serve on the League Revenue Sources Committee and Technical Committee. 31�)_ We estimate the cost of representation, including research and computer services, to be between $100,000 and $125,000. These costs would have to be contributed by participating cities in November or December, 1984. D. Formal Action By Coalition Cities. The Articles of Incorporation or Bylaws of the Coalition (see attached document) authorize the Coalition to establish and lobby positions approved by a majority of the Coalition membership. A majority vote of the member cities is required to approve an assessment above membership dues. A quick phone check at the Secretary of State's office indi- cated that the Coalition's Articles may have not been filed as required by law. The Coalition should take steps to confirm that it is properly incorporated before collecting assessments for legislative services.' Cities that want to participate in a joint lobbying effort with other cities and retain professional lobbying services with the financial support of those other cities should adopt the revolution contained in Attachment 1 or 2 as soon as possible. AtmIMp n Lar J .e.ess. Not Mts p to L. GRet i+ Jor.+R. LARSD+ CMA.tta R. W1.16 Rostov ostal L. U+alDSD+ Rostov J. L"W1 JON, M. LtFn'sLJs. Lwast M. Wtasstr Jun+C.'", $tw+u1 E. xtnt JO•atNw�P. $tWi September 26, 1984 HOLMES & GRAVEN CNARTFRED Jena+ R, es rrt'nte 470 /41,Yar7 C.— Mimr4R.W M1' 27492 RD 1.11 a+D 811011 {a12i J.W417i Snt r+lt N. Gent 0.+n1 R. Stt.Se, IRIL. PDR I'DOD Uro N—s N,Nt.a Ft—tof C—.. st..mr -. Ma $5431 RD.1 . t J. Utla Mata A. 010"',1% 1612FS934I110 t.au.. R. Kenu 11 Cnrt+n+t M. - Maar G. Does,- u++ of CDU."I! K.t x4 *+ M. Not wI, Tom Manninen City Administrator P.O. 244 Little Palls, Minnesota 56 345 Dear Tom: Thank you for arranging the meeting last Friday to explore the potential for Holmes b Graven to represent the Minnesota Coali- tion of out -State Cities in the 1985 Legislative Session. we enjoyed visiting with the Mayor and Council Members from Little Falls and look forward to representing Little Falls and other Coalition cities in the 1985 Legislative Session. During our meeting we were asked to provide an estimate of the amount needed to represent the Coalition on local government aid and property tax issues in the 1985 Legislative Seosion. Based on the following scope*of services, we estimate the cost of representation to be between $100,000 and $125,000: 1. Research and analyze LGA formula proposals made by others to determine the impact on Coalition cities and formula adjustments needed to improve formula proposals. To provide this service, an independent computer capability will be established at Holmes 6 Graven, 2. Research and analyze proposals related to the property tax system to determine the impact on property taxpayers in Coalition cities. 3. Promote and protect the Coalition's interest before and during the 1985 Legislative Session on issues related to local government aid and property taxation. 4. Assist the Coalition in developing a legislative program and strategy for implementing the legislative program with respect to local government aid and property taxation. Tom Manninen September 25, 1984 Page 2 S. Coordinate the Coalition's legislative program related to local government aid and property taxation. Draft bills or amendments related to local government aid and property taxation. After further discussion with the Coalition related to the scope of services, we would estimate the cost of our services and guarantee a firm price. This will allow the Coalition to establish each city's share of the cost 'and provide each city with enough time and certainty to plan for and budget its cost. We have enclosed tables illustrating two methods for collecting money from Coalition member cities to pay the cost of legislative representation. One is based on population ($.20 or $.25 per capita for each city) and the other method is based on each city's local government aid plus levy (.088 or .10%). We would like to emphasize that our legislative services do not reduce the need for active lobbying by elected officials. A coordinated legislative strategy which relies on computer analysis, professional lobbying services and direct lobbying by local officials will produce the most favorable results at the legislature. Assuming that a mutually beneficial arrangement is agreed upon, we would propose that the Minnesota Coalition of Out -State Cities and Holmes a Graven enter into a contract for legislative services. A form contract is enclosed for your review. Because of the significant activity occurring on LGA and property tax issues at the present time and the need to establish a computer program for LGA analysis, we would like to enter into a contract soon after the October 5 meeting. We look forward to meeting with representatives of the Coalition cities on October 5th. I will call you later in the week to discuss our participation in the October 5th meeting. Thank you again for your assistance in this matter. very truly yours, /r /.�"'A/ 1 Timothy P. Flah6fty TPF:jos Enclosure