Loading...
City Council Agenda Packet 12-12-1988AGENDA FOR THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL i Monday, December 12, 1988 - 6:30 p.m. Mayor: Arve A. Grimsmo Council Members: Fran Fair, Bill Fair, warren Smith, Dan Blonigen 1. Call to order. Consideration of establishing 1989 salary adjustments for non-union personnel and consideration of health insurance benefit for employees. Adjournment. Special Council Agenda - 12/12/83 y 2. Consideration of establishing 1989 salary adjustmento for non-union personnel and consideration of health insurance benefit for employees. (R.i9. ) A. REFERENCE APD BACKGROUND: As a result of the discussion at the special meeting November 28, I have spent considerable time researching the health insurance cost proposed for the City of Monticello and how surrounding communities are handling the increases in insurance premiums. First of all, this has been a very difficult topic to present in a summary form. I have spent a number of days reviewing health insurance coverage options with our present insurance company (Principal Mutual) and also other insurance companies who have indicated a willingness to cover the City employees. Each co-.pany has at least five or more plans available depending on the type of coverage, the amount of deductibles, and the dollars available to spend. The bottom line is, our cost cannot be maintained at last year's level without a substantial sacrifice in coverage. One of the questions Council members had at the special meeting was how do surrounding communities handle their insurance benefits. I have talked to a number of corrwnities, including Big Lake, Buffalo, Howard Lake, Annandale, Hutchinson, Elk River, and Litchfield. Except for the City of Elk River, the employer has picked up 100 percent of both the employee and dependent coverages. I also contacted the School District in Monticello to find out the type of program they provide. The �= nine-month perscnnel (teachers) currently have an allowanc3 of approximately $295 per month for all coverages and currently are required to only contribute $4.45 per month for this coverage. In addition, the administrative staff (12 -month employees) do not contribute toward their coverage, as they have approximately $390 per month allowance, which is sufficient at this time. The City of Annandale had the same company (Principal Mutual) and policy as we currently have and experienced a similar premium increase. The City is continuing to cover 100 percent of the cost for employee and dependent, except they have changed to a $200 deductible policy versus a $100 deductible. Although there are certainly cities which require scorn contribution from the employee for dependent coverage, it still seems that the na',ority do provide 100 percent payment for health insurance and related coverages. As part of my research into health insurance, I met with a majority of the City employees to explain the Council's concern over the high cost of health insurance. Although I reviewed a number of options regarding different health insurance plans and contribution amounts that may be required, the general consensus of the employees was that they certainly understood the City Council's concern over the large incretse and appeared willing to contribute a monthly dollar amount to the cost provided ths- contribution was not excessive, with that in mind, I began again analyzing the insurance options with the idea of arriving at a fE Special Council Agenda - 12/12/88 recommendation to the Council that would have both the employer and employee sharing in the increased cost. Based on the research I collected from surrounding communities, my first thought was that the City should continue to contribute 100 percent of the coverage. Realizing that the approximate 50 percent increase in the premiums would affect future salary adjustments, the general consensus of the employees was towards a contribution for dependent coverage in the area of $30 per month per family assuming the benefit level of our insurance plan remained fairly similar to what we have now. The only other insurance company that offered to cover the City employees was Guardian. They offered a number of plans with different deductibles, etc., and averaged 6 percent to 8 percent cheaper than Principal Mutual's similar plans. Some of this lower premium cost can be attributable to differences in coverage also. Although I don't have any firm reasons myself, Mr. Dan Carlson of Foster, Franzen, Carlson Agency was reluctant to recommend changing insurance companies strictly on the premise of saving 10 percent or so in premium. Depending on the amount of contribution that may be required of the employees toward their health insurance plan, I believe the majority of the employees would prefer to stay with Principal Mutual. One of the benefits the City may realize by requiring a contribution for dependent coverage is that if any current employee already has coverage through another health.plan, i.e. through a spouse's employer for example, the employee may decide to drop dependent coverage to save the monthly deduction. This would directly benefit the City in the long run by also reducing its share of the insurance cost each month. Another factor that has to be kept in mind concerning non-union employee contribution amounts would be that the union contract currently stipulates that the City will pick up $1O of any increase plus 50 percent of the balance. In addition, the contract specifies the level of coverage that should be provided. The union employees are also concerned about a large monthly contribution being required and would be certainly agreeable to reopening their contract negotiations if a lower monthly contribution amount was established. I see this anecial meeting covering two topics: 1) resolving the health Insurance quJstion, and 2) salary adjustments for next year for non-union personnel. ,although the salary adjustment and insurance premiums are somewhat releted, I believe they should be separate Council decisions without one directly influencing the other. If it's the Council's determination that for every $1 increase in insurance coat the employee will receive $1 less in salary adjustment, I feel I have certainly wasted a lot of time reviewing health insurance options and also investigating other communities, as the decision was quite evident. One last note in regards to the possible employee contribution for dependent coverage concerns the dollar amount that my be decided upon. If a large contribution is required from the employee to maintain its present covernge, I telieve the employees should to u.utultod as a group and -2- Special Council Agenda - 12/12/88 �►- given the option to change insurance plans or companies to lower their cost and the cost to the City. The general feedback I have been receiving is that if an employee has to contribute $500, $600, $700 per year to keep its present insurance coverage, it may be more beneficial to limit the contribution to a small amount or nothing and change to a higher deductible plan with less benefits. I have analyzed seven or eight different proposals and the effects each would have on the level of benefits and amount of contribution required. At this point, I have not included them as an agenda supplement, as I felt it nay be more confusing than helpful for the Council. If the Council desires, we can certainly discuss the options I have looked at on Monday evening. I have also looked at the option of converting our present policy to a higher deductible or a higher deductible with Guardian Insurance Company and the City getting involved with co-insurance reimbursements to cover the higher deductible. This has worked in other communities and may be a possible way of keeping the cost down. In regards to the second topic, salary adjustments, I do not have any additional information at this time. I will enclose a copy of the agenda aupplement from the last special meeting again for your review. As I indicated, I have spent many hours analyzing the different insurance options available and the cost for the employee versus the City. Although I have not included this data at this time, I urge any Council member to contact me in advance of the meeting if they would like to Ger some of the figures and options that may be available. It is extremely hard to firmly recommend one particular plan and option not knowing whether the Council will expect all of the increase in insurance to be absorbed by the employee versus some type of cost ~haring arrangement. -3. REFERENCE-UNIPLES RECENT SCHOOL DISTRICT SALARY ADJUSTMENTS C For the 1986-87 & 1981-88 school year, all administration personnel received increases of $2,000 or $2,400 annually depending on education or experience plus additional $900/yr. for those with 13 years or more of service. For the 1988-89 5 1989-90 school year, the salary increases for administration and clerical were between a range of $1,900/yr. to $5,000/yr. as follows: Annual Increase 86-87 87-88 Superintendent $3,300 Annual Amt. rat Athletic Director $2,900 7.7% 7.13 Business Manager $2,900 n 7.81 7,28 Teachers Aides 6.2 8.18 5.63% Admin. Secretary $1,768 a 9.88 8.98 Other Secretarial Staff $1,352 a 7.90 7.38 For the 1988-89 5 1989-90 school year, the salary increases for administration and clerical were between a range of $1,900/yr. to $5,000/yr. as follows: 1988-89 1989-90 Annual Amt. % Annual Amt. B Superintendent $5,000 8.3 $5,000 T7r Asst. Superintendent $3,400 6.2 $3,400 5.9 Business t1gr. $3,600 8.4-., $4,500 9.7 B.S. Principal s2,900 5.5 $2,900 5.2 Asst. Principal $2,000 3.9 $2,900 5.4 Athletic Director $1,900' 4.4. $2,600 6.2 Secretarial Staff Approx. 7.0 Approx. 7.0 If the City's health insurance premiums had increased by a normal inflationary r percentage (i.e., 5-8%) like everything else, I don',t believe "health v_ insurance" would be the major topic it is today. Using this assumption, Total Premium Increase $27,000 Less: Normal inflation % (68) (3,650) SUBTOTAL $23,350 Less: proposed employee contribution for dep. coverage @ $30.50 per family (6,850) NET INCREASE This net increase in premiums above normal inflation percentages is approximately 38 of total payroll - NOT 78 as discussed at the last meeting. Although I am not trying to downplay the increase in health insurance, it is only a small part of the total City Budget for 1989 (1/4 of 1%). The total increase was included in the 1989 Budget (see budget memo of October 1988 attached). There is certainly merit in asking the employees to help share in the increase; but hopefully the Council is not taking the position that all benefit increases should be passed on to the eirployee dollar for dollar. I so, every benefit probably costs the City more each year; a sick day or vacation day is worth more, so are holidays. workmen's Compensation Insurance increases annually. These are all benefits which increase annually, and if a value was established and required to be paid by the employee, suddenly the benefit package is really decreasing each year for an employee. 7 ,11C ?'lice 01 me AC•nm:#e10t city o/ Monticello ADDITIONAL MEW ro: Mayor and City Council n, 1y p FROM: Rick Wolfsteiler, City Administrator PJ I;IziJ DATE: f)ove(rber 22, 1988 Prone' (612) 2952711 metro: (612) 3339739 Although I am not necessarily seeking any action by the Council on the following topic at this sleeting, I thought it would be an ) appropriate time to get your feedback and opinions as long as salary adjustments were the subject of this special meeting. As you know, Jeff O'Neill started with the City approximately March 1 as Assistant Administrator, and I had discussed with the Council whether you wished to have a six-rx)nth review of his position or wait until salary negotiations at the end of the year. It was the consensus to review Jeff's position at the same time all of the salaries were a reviewed for 1989; and I thought it might be appropriate to give you a little background on how I feel he has been working out. 1 Overall, I feel Jeff has been doing an excellent Job as Assistant Administrator. He has been very enthusiastic about taking on additional duties and responsibilities such as working on the Logo Committee, the Celebrate Minnesota Project, along with getting involved in the HRA meetings, Industrial Development Committee meetings, and Planning Commission agendas. Especially ing)ortant to ll recently has been his involvement in the supervision of the date 1 processing ir,.plementation. As I'm sure you are aware, we have had so,x problems in getting our software packages up and running, and we've had to sort out problems with packages that have not yet been { d_veloped by I*WI. Jeff has been working hard on corresponding with WIDI and has taken over the responsibility for scheduling implementation of the accounting package, sewer and water utility billing package, and has been working as the contact parson on ironing out the details for the street inventory systen package. It has been a great relief to me to have Jeff he the primiry liaison person with D)1DI, as my time did not permit the involvement I would have liked to have had. Jeff has always been more than willing to take on new projects and duties and responsibility. When we were originally looking for an Assistant Administrator, I believe it was the consensus of the Council that this position would also gat more heavily involved in the Planning and Zoning Department, i 250 East Broadway • Monticello. MN 55362.9245 N Me= mayor and Council tlovember 22, 1988 Page 2 along with overseeing economic development activities. I know that Jeff is very enthusiastic about assuming this role, and he has not been as active in this as he would have liked to be. Again, this is primarily because of my priority in getting the data processing activities on line; but I would estimate that at the beginning of 1989, 1 intend to have him take over the primary responsibility of the Planning Commission supervision. Although I still see mr. Anderson handling some of the variance requests and doing some of the agenda items, I will be caking Jeff the responsible party to make sure the agendas and the Planning Commission are promptly informed. normally, this type of responsibility also supervises the Economic Development Department. Actually, a Comanunity Development Director is a better title for what I anticipate Jeff's position to evolve into. Although title is not important, I'm sure some of you are wondering why Jeff had not assumed this role earlier. The primary reasoning on bringing this subject up at this time is that I feel an adjustment in his salary may be warranted above the cost of living percentage you may establish. I feel the Council could show their support for Jeff's enthusiastic behavior by adjusting his salary in addition to a normal raise. Although I certainly don't look at this being an every year occurrence, I think Jeff has shown a willingness to get involved in committees and take acnignnents��pr nal projects; and it would be the City's way of shaiai�g ecia on. Although we can discuss this more at the =9,11ing if y would like, Jeff currently makes $32,000 per year; awould lik the Council to think about an adjustment to S35,000 r 536,000 per year. If time perm s at the eking, I would like to get your feedback and thoughts on su justment. in the long run, I feel it's important that Jeff feels he's appreciated for the extra hours and the commitment he's made to Monticello, as I certainly would not want him to be discouraged and start looking for other positions. I do not want to leave the impression that if he doesn't get a substantial raise, he would be looking; but that's always a possibility with an ermployee. SALARY HISTORY v: 1985 Base ;:are Title Salary 1986 Rick 4;olf Steller C.A. $32,538 $34,530 John Simola PW Director $31,475 $33,470 Jeff O'Neill Asst. Admin. ------ ------- 011ie Aoropchak Econ. Devel. Director $22,900 $22,900 ^oger [tack Sts/pks Supt. $25,010 $26,550 u:2ry ;,nderson Zoning/Bldg/ Assessing $25,205 $26,755 :;alt Mack Water/Sewer Supt. $24,729 $26,250 i:att Theisen 14ater/Sewer Supt. ----- ------- Joe Partrian Lig. St. Mgr. $25,500 $25,500 L,nnea Gillham Recept/Sec. $17,409 $19,885 Marlene Eellcan Bkkpr/See. $16,224 $18,970 Diane Jacobson Dep. Reg. $16,910 $19,385 Baran Doty Exec. Sec. $15,121 $18,512 Cirdie Erickson Liq. St. Clerk $12,480 $13,278 ,.om Schumacher Grounds maint. $12,833 $13,353 Karen canson Sen. Cies. Ctr. $13,280 $14,300 °:10 19B7 or 1988 culary adjustment gado at this tire. 1 1987 1388 $43,000 $45'000 y'% $35,155 65 ------- $32,00035,�;'�� $24,800 $25,288 y $27,830 $29,500 $27,825 $29,216 $27,355 $28,723 ------- $27,000 $26,570 $28,031 $20,800 $21,965 $19,885 $21,050 $20,300 $21,465 $19,427 $20,592 $14,435 $15,163 $14,019 $14,726 $14,300* $14,300' TOTAL 1988 STAFF PAYROLL (Non -Union) (Excluding Administratorand and Senior Citizen Position) ,f AND PART-TIME LIQUOR - $324,261 �_ 38 48 4-1/28 5% 5-1/28 6% S 9,727.83 $12,970.44 $14,591.74 $16,213.05 $17,834.35 $19,455.66 6-1/28 78 $21,076.96 $22,698.27 r ADMINISTRATOR'S SALARY - $45,000 38 48 4-1/28 58 5-1/2B 6% S 1,350.00 $ 1,800.00 S 2,025.00 $ 2,250.00 S 2,475.00 $ 2,700.00 6-1/29 7% $ 2,925.00 S 3,150.00 TOTAL 1988 PAYROLL (including Administrator, Union, b Sr. Citizen Position) $501,325 (Part-time liquor excluded) 4-1/2B 58 5-1/28 6% 6-1/28 7% $22,560.00 $25,066.00 $27,573.00 $30,080.00 $32,586.00 $35,093.00 Health Insurance Options Page 2 'Explanation: The increase in deductible from $100 to $200 would be 50% reimbursement by City. If 48 out of 67 potential employees, spouses, and children would have to incur $200 eligible medical bills before City would realize an additional 48 increase, 48 + 188 - 228 (1/2 of 44+8 original increase). "Explanation: With the "Guardian" Plan, City could co-insure 808 of the extra $150 deductible. Every ernployee, spouse, and child covered would have to incur a $250 eligible bill before the City would realize an additional 138 increase. Even if this happened, 138 + 108 - 238, or 1/2 of original 44+8 increase. Under either of these options, employees are assuming 1/2 of the original increase by accepting reduced benefits and also contributions from their salaries. IL `7 Previous Premium New Premium INCREASE Premium (mo.) Employee Share @ $30 per family City Share HEALTH INSURANCE OPTIONS ` (If City/Employee Split Increase) $,07 \ 7,32320 1 2,250 (448) Jl' j1 $2 ` Principal Mutual Guardian 200/deductible 250/deductible 80/20 thereafter 80/20 thereafter $6,546 $ 570 (116) $ 906 (188) 'If City reimb. employee for 1/2 of the extra deductible between $100-$200 6 assume $ 202 (49) that 48 of 67 people collect $50 each I **If City reimb, employee for 809 of extra deductible between 5100-$250 6 all collect $120 each '- Either option cuts City at 1 is technically picking up 1/2 either in �y1l contribution for dependents or reduction in benefits �J.Vr`l`'��(i,� TO: Rick and City Council NOVEMBER 2B, 1988 FROM: Jeff RE: LIST OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS/TASKS COMPLETED DURING FIRST 9 MONTHS CN JCB PLANNING Researched and wrote memo on Infectious waste Facility. Responed to an assortment of variance or conditional use requests. Evergrsers subdivision site plan review. Wrote Evergreens subdivision developer agreement. Researched housing mix/population studies associated with Hornig Oevelcpnaxnt. Don Heickes mobile hone park developer agreement. OAA - Attended monthly mtngs - Land use plan, water tower, other Don Heickes mobile home park site plan review. Did background on area assemen; policy development. Developing landscaping, building standards, ordinance amendments. Organized subdivision process/developed flow chars and Design criteria. ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT Celebrate Minn. Organize, prepare plan, enlist volunteers, write grant application. Streetscape Project - Contact person - negotiate payments for services LOGO Advisory Committee/promontional material dev. - organize and manage process Citizen survey, manage project, covwnicate results. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT �- Managed negotiations involving recent deal with NSP. Assisted Econ Dev director in preparation of dovelopment proposals. Developed concept for Economic Development Authority, Vehicle for admin loan pgm. Took steps to improve City potential for use of TIF, combine districts, add applications. COMPUTER DEVELOPMENT Implement Payroll, financial system utility billing, sort out problems. Refined Computer Request For Proposal, efforts to fully utilize computer on-going. Prepared correspondence associated with Bridge Development site -line preblems. Developed electronic sprsadshest which tax impact caused by imprvment protect. ACMIN.ISTRATION Organized, implemented succaszfull Junk Amnesty Cay. Asisted Rick in researching Health insurance siccation. worked with Oenn/Simola in developing plan for maint of Jointly owned roa.s. Organized and prepared three Agendas in Rick's absence Resconded to numerous public inquiries regarding assorted topics. Completed various minor research projects in supoort of Rick or Council. C, mpleted all City Council meeting minutes. Respond to inquiries f -gym press. installed more efficient dictaohone equipment. Mana�,ed hiring Process associated with three positions. Completac City "progress" section of Times. Assisted with cordinating efforts of IOC/HRA/Planninr. Commission. 1t Cevelcrrd time-zircat- fcr all F--1ryp". PERz'0NAL/OTHER Generated 91 hours in "tomo time' since July 1, 1980. Kim left Position in New Brighton - family MOVED TO MONTICELLO! Personal productivity has improved, gaining familiarity with City, now living in town. October 4, 1986 (+.V 0 - BUDGET T0: Mayor and City Ccuncil merrbe:o PAGE 3 Staff on a relocation of their maintenance facility presently located on Golf Course Road to somewhere within our*Industrial Park. If MS? proceeds with their plans for a new facility, their present facility would be available for er-ansion of our present maintenance site. Included in the budget was $75,000 for this possible acquisition. In regards to the Celebrate Minnesota Project being promoted by the State of Minnesota, the committee has co=e up with a few ideas for possible improve-ents including a clean up and trail system on the island ad,acent to hast Bridge ?m:k, �n: ulandscaping, conit entrances noes into n mcrticello, and a City contrituticto theLethers Playstructu:ebeing proposed on school property. These iters are retching grant p:ocrars except for the Lecher's playst:uctu:e and 550,:50 has been budgeted for these possible -t: c ve:'.ents . In regards to --concmic Develc.rent and the promotion of Monticello, $20,000 has been budgeted for the development of a loco, new brochures and fact sheets, and a video tate update. Although many of these : ems are needed for Star City mce:_'fication rec;Limmentz, the Irdnst.ial Develotuent Committee and Economic Cevelop-ent Departments feel they are necessary updates for 'continued prorotion and industrial presentations. //Arlothc: item that should to noted :elates to the increased coats for health ins :s.^.ce 'or cit, employees. Cur health incurance carrier, principal mutual has again :sit tho city with a m:b=tantial increase in p:emiu.:s for 1989. The �f trend indust:7 wise has teen for substantial increases for insurance preniurs nd :on-yicella a4a ratified that it,, no-thly p:eaiun would rice a-zroxirstely C2,300.In _.qnt of this, the City Staff has been working with Dan Carlson of Foster, Franzen, and Carlton A;encl to Geek quotes f:em other insurance carriers for health and benefit coverage. Based on M:. Carizon's recn^nendaticn, we actually applied to Blue Cross and Blue Shield of minnerota for coverage, but after they co,-pleted their analysis of the city employees they have declined coverage at the present time. As a result, we do not have a lot of choices for health insurance coverage unless we are willing to cut benefits. The previeu: roithly rates will be increasing from $5,084 to $7,320. It should be noted that there are other companies that Dan Carlson could find for the city er?lcjees, but it is his recar.-endation that it is not a good r:)licy to cene:tlly charge inzu:ance carriers too often. Although this increase does not rcflect a":_ctly cn one deca:tzert fund, the inc:taae is a --,the a nor-ral inflation fact:r within the entire city budget. :.s the crrunity g:cws and new p:ogrsrs o: needs are identified, our city budget will naturally have to increase. %pile this budget dies nct srecifically earmark any surplus funds for future needs such as a con -unity cerate:/civic cents: or other city faczlity expansion in the ".utu:e, it ray be appropriate to have another session to discuss a capital irrrovament program for a five year period of tine. :n crdsr to build up a surplus for future needs rather than financing all expenditures throcgh a bond issue or re!ererdun, a 1e,ry increase &cove what is being ptcpcsed would have to occur. N AGENDA FOR TRE MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL Monday, December 12, 1988 - 7:30 p.m. Mayor: Ane A. Grimsmo Council Miers: Fran Fair, Bill Fair, Dan Blonigen, Warren Smith 1. Call to order. 2. Approval of minutes of the special meeting held November 28, 1988, and the regular meeting held November 28, 1988. 3. Citizens comments/petitions, requests, and complaints. 4. Consideration of amending union contract to provide for City payment of all or a portion of increases in health insurance premiums. 5. Consideration of extending probation period/residency requirement - Tony Strande. 6. Consideration of subdivision request - City of Monticello. 7. Consideration of authorizing development of demolition plans and specifications for demolition of Jones Manufacturing, Stelton's Laundry, !� and the O'Connor Garage. 8. Consideration of amending franchise agreement and joint powers agreement - SWC4 Cable Commission. 9. Consideration of issuance of gambling license application - Celebrity Bowl. 10. Consideration of awarding bids on 1 -ton truck, body,'and snowplow equipment, and sale of GMC pickup. 11. Consideration of approving 1989 contract for police protection with Wright County Sheriff. 12. Consideration of authorizing Joint Fire Department Board to prepare a separate agreement with Monticello Township for use of new aerial ladder truck. 13. Consideration of intor-fund transfer. 14. Consideration of bills for the month of November. 15. Adjournment. 4 `- MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL Monday, November 28, 1988 - 6:30 p.m. Members Present: Arve A. Grimsmo, Bill Fair, Fran Fair, Warren Smith, Dan Blonigen Members Absent: None 1. Call to Order. The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. 2. Consideration of Establishing a Pool for 1989 Salaries and Wages for Non -Onion Personnei. - City Administrator Wolfsteller outlined potential methods by which Council could establish salaries for 1989. Wolfsteller reviewed the topic as follows: "For the past four or five years, Council has met in a special session to create a pool of money based on a percentage of the current year's total payroll for non-union personnel. That pool of money has than been available for the Administrator to use'in.negotiatincj and _-� setting salary proposals for the upcoming year with Che'staff. - Previously, the Administrator's salary has been excluded fioin the initial ' pool and considered separately by the Council. As a reference and guideline for the Council, predictions and/or forecast of*the'upcoining year's inflation has been used in establishing a'cost of living adjustment percentage. In addition, an additional percentage usually has been allowed as part of the pool that could be used.as an'additional adjustment for performance/merit, increases. The'purpose of.a... performance/merit increase is to reward or recognize employees that -. exceed or provide exceptional work habits. StraighE salary adjustments that do no more than match the inflation expected in the upcoming year do nothing for an employee in improving hie buying power or living conditions but merely keep him equal to where he was at the beginning of the year". Wolfsteller noted that the recent Riplinger Letters published in Washington have estimated the 1989 CPI should run around 5 to 5-1/2 percent. The Riplinger Letter also estimates that the average pay raise for ran -union personnel is expected to average approximately 5 percent. Assuming the Council continues the practice of using next year's forecasted inflation factor as a guideline in establishing the amount of the adjustment that should be granted. Wolfateller also stated that "based on discussions at last year's salary meeting, I believe moot Council members are favorable to the idea of performance/merit seniority increases in addition to across the board inflation adjustments. Some of the concerno of the Council last year c6terad on what standards or guidelines have been used by the administration in determining who qualifies for a performance or merit increase. A few years back, employee evaluationa were performed on an annual basis by the Administrator and Department Heads for all employees; special Council Minutes - 11/28/88 and I propose that this again be instituted and used as a guideline for making merit/performance adjustments in the future. Although this has not been accomplished for 1988, my goal is to have performance evaluations completed in the near future using this format so that each employee has an idea of the areas that need improvement during the year. Then then the performance evaluations are completed near the end of 1989, they can be used as the guideline for any merit or performance increases allowed in the following year (1990)." Plans for development of an employee evaluation system received favorable support from Council. The concept of using the evaluation system as a tool in establishing merit pay increases received support as well; however, no pre -established percent increase was established to be used -- =- for merit increases for 1989 or beyond. Council directed staff to begin=_:.• irplesentation of the evaluation system for use in conjunction with 1990 salary negotiations. . - Further discussion of pay increases for 1989 was tabled pending further- = =— research into health insurance options for city employees. It was the - general consensus of Council to incorporate recent increases in insurance =_' into the discussion of salary increases. This item to be discussed at a - - special meeting scheduled for 6:70 p.m., December 12, 1988. _ Respectfully submitted, -" Jeff O'Neill -- — - — Assistant Administrator - - - --=- -2- MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTILMELLO CITY COUNCIL Monday, November 28, 1988 - 7:30 p.m. Members Present: Arve A. Grimsmo, Fran Fair, Bill Fair, Dan Blonigen, Warren Smith Members Absent: None 2. Approval of minutes. Councilmember Fran Fair noted that the Council member making the original motion on agenda item }5 was not noted in the minutes. The meeting minutes should be altered to reflect that Bill Fair made said motion. Fran Fair also noted that the vote regarding acceptance of Chelsea Road _ as recorded in the minutes needs correction, as it was not aunanimous vote. Voting in favor of Fran Fair's motion to accept Chelsea Road and - request that the School Board address the problem of subcontractor not being paid for their work included Warren Smith and Arve Grimsmo. _Voting -7.­.- against the motion, Bill Fair_and Dan Blonigen. Motion by Fran Pair to approve meeting minutes as amended,•sec_o_nde_d by Dan Blonigen, motion passed unanimously. - 3. Citizens comments/petitions, requests, and complaints. Jerry James of the Monticello Hockey Association was present to request,,.;_:_ City assistance with hockey rink snow removal prior, to the -flooding,of..' the rink. He also informed Council of the desire of the Hockey - - Association to properly manage the facility and provide skating---- - •• _ opportunities to hockey players and the general public. • Mayor •Grimarm• -_ requested that City staff assist the Hockey Association with snow remova; =-: at the hockey rink and to meet with the Hockey Association to discuss• ; :�- other hockey rink maintenance matters. 4. Consider amendinq union contract to provide for City payment of all or a portion of increases In health insurance premiums...; City Administrator wolfsteller noted that union employees are asking for an amendment to the contract pertaining to payment of increases in health insurance policies due to the drastic increase in health insurance premiums. wolfsteller explained that according to contract, union employees must pay the total increase in health insurance up through April 1, 1989. After that date, union employees must pay 50% of any increase of a $10 base increase. This contract language equates to an average increase of $120 per month for each employee. Wolfmteller inforxied Council that unless directed otherwise, staff will follow the existing contract and make the appropriate deductions from union e:ployee paychecks. n Council Minutes - 11128/88 A general discussion regarding insurance coverage and the impact of increased premiums on salary increases ensued. Bill Fair noted that we need bo look at alternatives to the present health insurance program and consider a program with a higher deductible. Reopening the contract is a reasonable request by the union employees. Dan Slonigen noted that "a contract is a contract" and did not support reopening the contract. Blonigen also noted that we should continue to withhold the appropriate amount from the union paycheck until the matter is resolved. Arve Grimsmo stated he realizes we have a contract but to preserve good will, maybe we should pay premiums for all through December 15, 1988. Motion by Bill Fair and seconded by Arve Grimstno to pay total premium until January 1, 1988, with payback being discussed after further research on the matter. voting in favor: Bill Fair, Arve Grimsmo. Opposed: Warren Smith, Dan Blonigen and Fran Fair. Fran Pair suggested that it would be better to deduct now with the possibility of a rebate later. Staff was directed to research health insurance options for presentation at the next meeting of the city Council. 5, consideration of approval of plans and specifications and_consi&r autnornzing transter ana replacement or one -ton truck. Public Works Director, John Simola, requested that•council- consider- - approval of specifications for the new truck and allow the advertisement--- for bids, with the expected sale of the GMC pickup and.tianafer of=the-'= 1 -ton Dodge to the treatment plant and the value of the Dodge transferred-' " from the sewer fund to the general fund. 8e noted -that since'the=Mon = Dodge bas a plow on it, this would enable PSG to do their•own yard..,--- cleanop and save time for City employees which currently do the 1.-. snowplowing at the treatment plant. Simola also noted that'the` effectiveness of the unit will be enhanced by attaching a plow wing and'a sander to the unit. Dan Blonigen noted his uneasiness about putting a; sander on the unit. Simola noted that a rough estimate for the sander is $1,500 to $2,000. So went on to explain that the presence of the sander on this unit allows the truck operator to sand an icy spot as he comes across such areas. If the truck did not have a sander, then another ' truck would be required to make a special trip to sand the trouble spot. After discussion, motion by Fran Fair to approve said pians and specifications and fund transfer, specifications to include a plow wing and sander. Motion seconded by Dan Dlonigen. Motion passed unanimously. Tom Moores of the Public Works Department suggested that the used Dodge truck should not be transferred to PSG as part of the proposal. Council asked what the contract with PSG states regarding supply of equipment. John almola noted that the contract does not cover supply of equipment. Council Minutes - 11/28/88 PSG is responsible for maintaining the equipment and documenting such. .he City is responsible for paying for equipment replacement. Arve Grimsmo noted that if the Dodge truck is needed by the City, it can be recalled. Grimsmo also asked for an outline which lists the costs and benefits associated with the sewer plan operation contract. 6. Consideration of final payment, Project 88-048, water Supply Line. After discussion, motion by Fran Fair and seconded by Dan Blonigen to make said payment to Latour Construction in the amount of $4,776.25 for completion of Project 88-04B. Motion passed unanimously. 7. Review first draft of Orderly Annexation Area Land Use Plan. Assistant Administrator O'Neill reviewed the first draft of the Land Use Plan for the Orderly Annexation Area and asked Council to comment. Be noted that Council input will be used to further refine the plan into a document that the City and the Township can accept. _ O'Neill explained that the proposed development plan was initiated by the MOAA at the direction of the Municipal Board, which made its- recommendation in response to the recent annexation struggle.... It. is the .:. _.. goal of the MORA to create an annexation plan and associated -annexation . . process that both units of government can embrace. After outlining the potential benefits of establishing and maintaining a- -- plan for annexation, O'Neill outlined the policy planning districts and noted that the plan proposes four separate planning areas._: Properties ..•_.. _. are evaluated in terms of district standards or criteria and placed _:::, accordingly in planning districts. The goal at this time is to establish the proper criteria for each district and then indicate in which -district each property should be placed. Following are proposed criteria or . standards associated with each planning district. At this time the planning districts are as follows: URBAN SERVICE AREA -(Areas suitable for "automatic" annexation upon petition by land owner): EXISTING PLATS (Developed areas such as "the Dunes")r TRANSITION AREAS (Land suitable for development of one hone per 2-5 acres); AGRICULTURAL AREA (Areas to remain agricultural until development reaches the agricultural area). After reviewing the policy implications for each area and after reviewing the proposed boundaries of each planning district, the Council suggested the following amendment to the first draft. It was proposed that both the City and the Township be bound to approving annexation if a property meets all the criteria for annexation as defined in the plan. Council approved concept of a Transition Area only if the City has authority to review subdivision plans so as to assure practical extension of city utilities some time in the future. If such rights to review are council Minutes - 11/28/88 not feasible, then the city does not support existence of the Transition Area as it pertains to the property located north and west of the intersection of CO. RD. 37 and Interstate 94. Council suggested an amendment to the proposed map which would place a portim of the area identified as Transition Area located east of Meadow Oaks inr`the Urban Service Area. O'Neill recommended this change because city utilities neighbor this area. It was also suggested that the property south of the "Balliger Tree Farm" be considered as Urban Service Area because it can be serviced by city utilities economically in the future. It was also proposed that the remaining area identified as Transition Area in the southeast quadrant of the map be placed in the Agricultural Planning District. 8. Consideration of bids for Project 88-05, Standpipe - Water Reservoir. - City lugineer, John Badalich, recommended that Caldwell Tanks, Inc., be , v awarded said project bid in the amount of $324,000. Be noted that Caldwell provided the lowest responsive bid, has a track record, and the bid amount is $25,000 less than the engineer's estimate. Motion made by Fran Fair to award project 88-05, Standpipe - Water Reservior to Caldwell Tanks, Inc. Motion seconded by Dan Blonigen. Motion passed unanimously. 9. Consideration of bids for Project 88-06, water Mein. The City Engineer noted that the City received 22 bids on this project. Bids ranged from a low of $224,808.79 to a high of $317,118. The engineer's estimate was $250,000. The low bid is within the project budget and wears responsive. Be, therefore, recommended award of the project to Richard Knutson, Inc., in the amount of $224,808. Motion by Warren Smith, seconded by Fran Fair, to award said project to Richard Knutson, Inc., for the bid amount of $224,808. Motion passed unanimously. 10. Consideration of bills for the month of November. Motion by Warren Smith and seconded by Dan Blonigen to approve payment of said bills. Motion passed unanimously. 11. There being no further business, meeting was adjourned. Repectfully submitted, Jett O'Neill Assistant Administrator C Council Agenda - 12/12/88 4. Consideration of amending union contract to provide for City payment of all or a portion of increases in health insurance premiums. (R.W.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Based on the discussion at the last Council meeting, I believe a lot of the information needed for this item will be covered under the special meeting agenda concerning health insurance coverage for all City employees. As I indicated at the last meeting, both the City and the union negotiated in good faith on the two-year contract for the union employees, and neither party expected the health insurance premiums to rise as much as they did. I believe if the Council has arrived at a reasonable solution for the non-union employees concerning health coverage, it certainly would be appropriate to apply the same type of rationale to the union membership. Although they do have a contract, I believe the City should' try to be fair with both the union and non-union employees and treat them fairly equal. If specific action has not been clarified by the special meeting concerning the union personnel, a decision can be made under this agenda item if necessary. When I met with the City employees concerning the health insurance coverage, I also included the union personnel in the discussion. Although they would also like to see the City pick up 100 percent of the insurance coverage, their main comments concerned being treated equal or fairly close to what the non-union personnel receive. As a result, I have no recommendation on this agenda item pending outcome of the special meeting. 'SZ Council Agenda - 12/12/88 S. Consideration of extending probation period/residency requirement - Tony Strande. W.S.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: As you may recall, the City of Monticello hired Tony Strande on June 10, 1988, to work in the Water Department. The current union contract requires a six-month probation period at 80 percent of the prevailing wage for the first six months, then 90 percent of prevailing wage for the next year. Because Tony Strande had been a past City employee, we started him at 90 percent of the prevailing union wage and made an agreement with him that at the end of his probation period, it would go to 100 percent of the prevailing union wage. In addition, however, because of the time factor in answering emergency calls in the water and sewer collection system, we made an agreement with Tony Strande that he would move from Palmer, Minnesota into the Monticello area within six months so that he could answer an emergency call within ten minutes. Currently, it takes Tony 20 to 25 minutes to reach the City after being notified of an emergency. The probation period is due to end December 10. Tony has his home in Palmer listed with a realtor but at this time does not have an offer. Consequently, it is not practical for him to relocate to the Monticello area without selling his existing home. It is impossible to tell how long the sale may take. Tony is and has been a good employee and is an asset to the City of Monticello. There is rationale for ending his probation period and increasing his wage to 100 percent of the prevailing union scale. There is also rationale, however, to keep him at the 90 percent level by extending his probation period until he moves to the Monticello area. Because of our agreement with Tony, I believe you also have the right to dismiss him at this time for failure to fulfill his employment agreement. This, however, would be a loss to the City. Tony Strande and hie supervisor, Matt Theisen, will be at Monday evening's meeting should you have any questions for them. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. The first alternative would be to end Tony Strande'e probation period and increase his wages to 100 percent of union scale. 2. The second alternative would be to extend Tony's probation period for another six months or until he has relocated to the Monticello area and end the probation at the time he relocates. 3. The third alternative would be to dismiss Tony Strands at this time for not meeting the conditions of his employment agreement. -2- Council Agenda - 12/12/88 C. STAPP RECOMMENDATION: While there certainly is merit for the opting of alternative il, I see the need to have someone closer to answer emergency calls. On the last three emergencies during which Matt Theisen was out of town, it took Tony 20 to 25 minutes to respond to the calls. In two of those cases, the supervisors were already at the site with the situation in control prior to Tony's arrival. As public Works Director, I therefore have to ask you to consider alternative ;2 if it would cause Tony to relocate sooner. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of probation section of union contract; Copy of employment agreement with Tony Strande. -3- Agreement • 8 ARTICLE XIII. Discipline i 13.01 The Employer will discipline eoployass only for what it considers to be just cause. ARTICLE XIV. Seniority 14.01 Seniority shall be the determining criterion for transfers, promotions to other bargaining unit positions, and layoffs only when all other qualification factors are equal. ARTICLE XV. Probationary Periods (5-015.01 All newly hired or rehired employees will serve a six (6) months probationary period. Time worked pursuant to any governmental program shall not count toward. the probationary time required. ARTICLE XVI. .. Safety _ 16.01 The Employer and the Union agree to jointly promote safe and healthful working conditions, to cooperate in safety matters and to encourage employees to work in a safe manner. 16.02 Whore items of safety equipment,are required :y tyderal, state or local rola and regulations, it shall be a condition of employment_ that such equipment will, be worn or ut_'lized by the employee. Employees may provide personal items only , if approved by the employer in advance. ARTICLE XVII. Job Postinq 17.01 The Employer and the Union agree that permanent job vacancies within the designated bargaining unit shall be filled based on the concept of promotion from within provided that applicants: (a) Have necessary qualifications to man the standards of the job vacancy; and (b) Have the ability to perform the duties and responsibilties of the job vacancy. 17.02 Employees filling a higher job class basad on the provisions of this Article shall be subject Lathe conditions of Article XV (Probationary Periods). 17.03 The Employer has the right of final decision in the selection of employees to fill posted jobs based on qualifications, abilities and acperience. 17.04 Job vacancies within the designated bargaining unit will be posted for five (5) r( working days so that cambers of the bargaining unit can be considered for such `rt vacancies. EMPLOYME'a AGREEMENT WATER SYSTEMS/WASIPLUATER COLLECTION SYSTEM OPERATOR POSITION , I, �tr.. __ , hereby acknowledge that I have received a copy qE the lob description for the Water System/Wastewater Collection System Operatot and understand that the general requirement of this position with the City of Monticello is to be able to respond to emergency needs of the community in regards to the water and sewer systems and understand that as a condition of employment within this position for the City of Monticello that I must be able to respond to an emergency call within a 10 -minute period of time after being notified at my residence. Because the response time to an emergency is a bona fide condition of employment, I understand that 1) although residency within the corporate city limits is not a requirement, a condition of employment with the City requires the ability to respond to any emergency within the city within a 10 -minute period of time; 2) I understand that if I am not presently residing in the city or within an area within a 10-minuto response tine, I agree to relocate my residency within a 6 -month period of time; 3) failure to do so will result in termination of my employment with the City of Monticello. Employee TY PMO! ICELLO v7L� 'John Simola, Public Works Director � [�C ck Wo fate lee— Administratoc DATED: n ,f Council Agenda - 12/12/88 6. Consideration of subdivision request - City of Monticello. (G.A.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: The City of Monticello is proposing to subdivide an existing 1-2 (heavy industrial) lot into two lots. The existing lot is one of the lots which the City purchased from the Oakwood Industrial Park Partnership. The proposed lot, as noted in the enclosed certificate of survey, would meet or exceed the minimum lot width requirement, which is 100 feet, and would also exceed the minimum lot square footage, which is 30,000 square feet. The newly proposed lot line dividing this heavy industrial lot would show the placement of the existing well $4 and also the small test well which was put in. The locations of these wells are within the minimum setback requirement from the newly created lot line. B.- ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Approve the simple subdivision request to subdivide an existing I-2 (heavy industrial) lot into two lots. 2. Deny the simple subdivision request to subdivide an existing I-2 (heavy industrial) lot into two lots. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The proposed heavy industrial lot to be subdivided does meet or exceed the minimum lot width and the minimum lot square footage requirements. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of the location of the proposed simple subdivision request; Copy of the certificate of survey; Copy of the area and lot width ordinance requirements. -4- Simple subdivision request to r ,� . f ' ` •• '4 •w R subdivide an existing I-2 ( heavy 1' dustriai) Sot into two Sots. l ,�C�ts9`•../„'•.I �'r�%aj ;,, City* Monticello. .Y„\VJ !'fl '/ •r .t /rir ,/ / /l• .t - ': "i./,•��..'r,�. '!r/Ir ti%r rr:i '%•r, •t•p`t`.'•, t;(�% `�r �''`• rr.j��*. ,�`,w> ,r�l � ,f fr, fir/_. \-,✓"'�. �•r •/./• `°"` '� r ,/^ $ i 4�.. �:7 `~'1•/!Ir . /C %r�s/.1�� o 1z'// Y. � r, •t' "e, : \:�I '� 0(7 ,.._..i V•`.`.�� "V:..^ '' �'�r7r • '�' r�•� r J . 1. 1���r'ti ' ��. nCAW Im 6. --VIP , i� � � ' 1 • ! '12.1«-� • � rasm': i F` v oe•✓aro �ni•.rc � q ` u �l ..+►.i,r /-rcc...lo •�+ooine.✓ 1 ''1 ..._. _...- -. P4 'f .,_� ... __ .. r� e•\o.. • I C rir sr .r.. r,. �. - � r1'• 1 � \ r»If•7 r•�drlr cis^ws ao r CwrA.oc � \, l � 3 1 � aAAcefc ,v o •• �.�.eaafc d � � j y • :1 p ••w'iy V/'r/ .✓ /irt�J...�li •- -�cll rii• i•'✓ liC s.,ry,� 0 In addition, each condominium unit shall have the minimum lot area for she type of housing unit and usable open space as specified in the Area and Building Size Regulations of this Ordinance. Such lot areas may be controlled by an individual or joint Ownership. (F) In residential districts, where the adjacent a t-uctures exceed the minimum setbacks • established in Subsection (C) above, the minimum setback shall be thirty (30) feet plus two-thirds (2/3) of the difference. betweenthirty (30) feet and the setback or average setback of adjacent structures within the same block. 3-4: S -"E REG"LaT1_ON*• - (A) pORYoSE: This section identifies minimum ares and building size requirements to be provided in each zoning district as listed in the table below. DISTRICT LOT AREA LOT WIDTH BUILDING HEIGHT - -•- ,,i A-0 2 ecrez 200 N/A R-1 12.000 80 212 _ R-2 12,000 8o 21 R-3 10,000 Bo 2 R-4 48,000 200 1 Y2 -A 12,000 8o 2% PZ -M 12,000 BO 2 8-1 8.000 8o 2 8-2 N/A too 2 8-3 N/A 100 2 8-4 NIA N/A 2 1-1 20 000 too 2 CM 0 00 �M:Q 2 1. The building height limitation in an R -3, P2 -M, 0-1, 8-2, 8-3, 8-4, I-1, and 2-2 zoning districts shall be two (2) stories. 2. In zoning districts R-3. PZ -M, 8-1, 8-2, 3-3, 8-4, 1-1, end I-2, a 13) three story building may be ailowod 1• conditional we contingent upon iCt application of a requlresent that fire -extinguishing systems be installed throughout the building. (Requ,iata a condiUona4 uee pe4mit baAcd upon p4ocedune• W d04.th in and 4eguLtud by Chagvt YY o6 tUd 0kdi.nanct) . u Council Agenda - 12/12/88 7. Consideration of authorizing development of demolition plans and specifications for demolition of Jones' Manufacturing, Steiton's Laundry, and O'Connor Garage. (J.O.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Staff requests authorization to expend funds necessary to design plans and specifications for demolition of said structures. The City now possesses a general set of specifications which will be used in conjunction with necessary additional instructions pertaining to the proposed demolition. It is proposed that a structural engineer employed by OSM be hired to survey the structures and devise and implement a demolition plan that will assure the City and the HILA that the demolition of said structures will not create a negative impact on adjoining properties. The cost to survey the structures slated for demolition and to develop a plan for their safe removal is estimated at $300. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Authorize development of demolition plans and specifications for demolition of Jones' Manufacturing, Stelton's Laundry, and the O'Connor Garage at an estimated cost of $300. 2. Deny authorization of development of said demolition plans. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative !1. The existing general demolition plan/specification does not address demolition problems that may be peculiar to this project. Therefore, it is staff's opinion that an expert - .- should be called upon to assist in surveying the situation and provide a demolition plan that will assure the safe removal of said structures. D. SUPPORTING DATA: None. -5- Council Agenda - 12/12/88 8. Consideration of amending franchise agreement and joint powers agreement - SWC4 Cable Commission. (R.W.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: The Cable Commission recently approved the proposed amendments to the franchise ordinance and joint powers agreement that are intended to change the voting structure of the Commission and increase the franchise fees from 3 percent to 5 percent. The amendment would also change the procedures for payment of franchise fees from the cable company to the Cable Commission rather than to each individual city. The action required by the Council would be two -fold, 1) to adopt a resolution amending the joint powers agreement, and 2) to adopt an ordinance which would increase the franchise fees payable from the cable company from 3 percent to 5 percent. In the past, the voting structure of the joint powers agreement established the voting rights of each member city on the basis of the number of dwelling units in each city. The original agreement provided for this to be changed to represent a more accurate vote structure based on subscribers. Accordingly, the Commission looked at alternative methods of structuring the voting provisions of the agreement and recommended that each city be entitled to votes on the Commission in proportion to the percent of annual revenues attributable to the city. In Monticello's case, our total franchise fee contribution to the Commission for 1987 was $4,280, which would relate to 14 percent of the total. As a result, Monticello would have 14 votes out of 100 total votes, or 14 percent. This revised voting structure more accurately reflects each member city's contribution to the entire Commission. In addition, the Commission has reviewed and is recommending that each city adopt an ordinance amendment that increases the franchise fee charged to the cable company from 3 percent to 5 percent. In the long run, the City of Monticello will stand to hopefully see its share of the franchise fees become a revenue item for the City. At the present time, the franchise fees are approximately sufficient to fund the Cable Commission for its administrative expenditures. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Adopt the resolution and ordinance amendments as presented. 2. Do not adopt the ordinance amendment. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: As noted in the supplemental data included with the agenda, the Commission as a whole has recommended that each member city adopt the amendment to the joint powers agreement relating to the voting structure and the ordinance amendment increasing the franchise fee. Before either of these amendments/recolutiona can become effective, each city must receive approval from its city council. I, being the City of Monticello's representative on the Cable Commission Board, recommend that the above two -6- C A Council Agenda - 12/12/88 ordinances/resolutions be adopted. I believe the voting structure amendment will become a truer indication of each community's involvement within the Commission and also recommend the franchise fees be adjusted to 5 percent in order for the Commission to continue operations for administrating the Cable Commission duties. D. SUPPOMNG DATA: Copy of memo from Commission Attorney; Copy of resolution; Copy of ordinance amendment proposed. -7- vote per director based upon subscribers, provided that each director has at least one vote. Accordingly, the Commission undertook to study alternative methods of structuring the voting provisions of the Agreement based upon subscribers, while at the same time maintaining an equivalent proportion to the current voting structure. Attached is a table depicting the Co=ission's recommended revision to the voting structure. As can be seen, each director will be entitled to vote in oronortion to the percent of annual revenues attributable to the municinal;ty represented by the director to the total annual revenues of tae system for the prior Year, rounded to the nearest wnole numoer. Additionally, each director shall have at least one vote. Since the financial contributions of the Member Cities in support of the Commission are specified in the Agreement as'proportional to the Members' votes on the Commission, the Commission has also recommended an amendment to this section of the Agreement. To tie the change in the voting structure to the provision on financial contributions*, *the Commission " has recommended that Member Cities' contributions be in direct proportion to the percent of annual revenues of each Member , to the total annual revenues of the system for the prior year. _ multiplied by the Commission `s approved 'annual budget. In this wav, each Citv will onlv contribute to the Commission in an _- amount ecual to that Citv's share of the total franchise fee- ---=-� revenue. ,Th2.s was viewed by the Commission as -the most equitable method of contribution (i.e., City's proportion bf'the Commission's " budget is equal to that City's proportion of total franchise fees received). Enclosed is the proposed 1969 budget of the'- " Commission which delineates each City's ,contribution based an .. the new voting structure. B. Franchise Fees, Amount At the time of the adoption of your franchise Ordinance, the Federal Communications Commission allowed franchising author- ities such as yourself to charge a 31 Franchise Fee on the gross revenues of the Cable Company. A 51 fee could be charged if the Commission or its Member Cities could justify the expenditure of those fees for the administration of the Franchise. Your cities chose to charge only the 31 Franchise Fee. Subsequently, the federal law has changed to allow cities to charge up to St. The Franchise Ordinances clearly contemplate that all administrative expenses should be covered by the Franchise Fee. However, in recent years the Commission has found it difficult to administer the Franchise and provide adequate service to Member Cities at the 31 fee. The Franchise provides at Article XZ, Section 5 that should applicable laws change, and: D. If City determines that any provision of this Franchise is effected by such law, ordinance or regu- lation, City shall have the right to amend, modify, alter or repeal any of the provisions of this Franchise to such reasonable extent as may be necessary to carry out the intent and purpose of this Franchise, and Grantee hereby agrees to such amendment, modification, alteration or repeal of this Franchise. The Cable Commission has determined that a 56 Franchise Fee is required for the administration of the Franchise and the pro- vision of services to its Member Cities. Therefore the Commission recommends that the Franchise be amended to require a 5% Franchise Fee of .the Cable Company. C. Procedures for Payment of Franchise Fee Throughout the term of the Franchise, prior to the present owner, the Franchise Fees were paid to the Commission and distrib- uted to the Member Cities. The new owner, however, in a•literal in- - terpretation of the Franchise, has determined to pay the Franchise Fees directly to the city. Since the Joint Powers Agreement requires that the Franchise Fees be utilized for cable related purposes, and in order to fund the Commission, the current'payment schedule has required a confusing and cumbersome exchange of checks. First the fees are paid to the cities, .the -cities send : a separate check to the Cable Commission', and the Cable"Commiesian sends a check back to the Member Cities.= :The Cable Commission- . proposes that the Franchise and the Joint Powers Agreement be - -- amended to provide that the Franchise Fees be_ paid directly to the Cable Commission. Please note that this will not effect the city's ability to control their Franchise Fees or the budget of the Commission: -Eich' Member Citi will still have its yearly review of the Commission's budget with all Franchise Fees not utilized to fund that budget being returned to each Member City in proportion to the gross revenues attributable to each Member City. Enclosed are draft ordinance amendments and a resolution which would effectuate these amendments. I would ask that you schedule this matter at your next Council's meeting for their consideration. If you would like a representative of the Cable Commission to be present, please contact Barb Guffey, Cable Administrator, at (612) 295-2611. I would ask that upon your Council's adoption of the ordinance amendments and resolution, you undertake to file a copy of the executed amendments and resolution with our ot�"ce. The amendments nF will not take effect until all Member Cities have aooroved the changes. Please feel free to contact me if you should have any immediate questions is this matter. Thank you for your cooperation. TDC/be cc: Barb Gaffey ILI 1989 SWC4 Votino Structure Comparison 1988 Total '81 General % Actual $ % Gen 6 Act S Actual t 1989 Votes CitV Franchise Fe -s of 529.772.16 of $29.772.16 Difference Rounded Votes 2 Big Lake $ 3,510.01 12% S 3,572.66 « S 62.65 12% 12 3 Buffalo S 6,563.06 22% S 6.549.88 - S 13.18 22% 22 2 Cokato $ 1,598.15 51 S 1,488.61 - $109.54 5% 5 1 Dassel $ 960.74 3% S 893.16 - S 67.58 3% 3 2 Delano $ 2,494.80 8% S 2,381.77. - $113.03 9% •9 4 Elk River S 4,836.89 16% S 4,763.55' - $ 73.74 161 16 1 ..Maple Lake 5 1,172.64 4% $ 11190.89 + $ 18.25 ' 4% 4 . Monticello S 4,280.07 141' $ 4.168.10 - $111.97 141 14 2 Rockford S 1,563.12 5% -" ,7: 5 1,488.61 - $ 74.51 S% 5 2 Watertown S 2,792.68 9% $ 2,679.49 - - $113.19 10% 10 TOTALS $ 29,772.16 98% $29.176%72 - $595.44 ' "' 100% 100 votes I Zjp b RESOLUTION NO. CITY OF STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION AMENDING BY SUBSTITUTION ARTICLE VI, SECTION 1 AND ARTICLE X, SECTION 3 OF THE SAERBURNE/WRIGRT COUNTY.CABLE COMMISSION JOINT AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF A CABLE COM_%1UNICATIONS SYSTEM. WHEREiS, The City of , (hereinafter "City") is an existing member of the Sherburne/Wright County Cable Commission (hereinafter "Commission"); and WHERESS, the Commission has made recommended amendments to the Join` and Cooperative Agreement for the Administration of a Cable Communications System (hereinafter "Agreement") re- lating to the voting structure of the Commission and the finan- cial contributions of the Members; and WHEREAS, the City believes it to be in its 'best interest to amend the Agreement as recommended by Commission; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of amends by substitution the existing ` Agreement as follows: 1. Article VI, Section 1, is amended in its entirety -- - as follows: Section 1. Each Member shall be entitled to one (1) ` director to represent it on the Commission. Each director is entitled to vote in direct proportion to the percent -•• ==_= of antual revenues attributable in the municipality repro= sented by the director to the total annual revenues of the system for the prior year rounded to the nearest whol` - number; provided, however, that each director shall have at least one vote. For purposes of this section, the annual revenues for each Member and the total annual system revenues as of December 31 of each year shall be determined by the records of the cable operator filed with the Commission with the annual Franchise Fee. Prior to the first Commission meeting in March of each year, the Secretary of the Commission shall determine the number of votes for each Member in accordance with this section and certify the results to the Chair. 2. Article X. Section 3 is amended in its entirety as follows: U 29 k Section 3. The financial contributions of the Members in support of the Commission shall be in direct proportion to the percent of annual revenues of each Member to the total annual revenues of the system for the prior year multiplied by the Commission's annual budget. The annual budget shall establish the contribution of each Member for the ensuing year. The Commission is hereby designated as tate entity to whom the Member's Franchise Fee shall be paid by the Grantee. Any Franchise Fee paid to the Commission by the Grantee in excess of the Commission budget shall be returned to the Members in the same proportion as each Member's contribution to the Commission budget. The Members agree to use excess Franchise Fees for cable-• related expenses. The above -listed resolution was moved by Council Member and duly seconded by Council Member The following Council Members voted in the affirmative: - The following Council Members voted in the negative: The above resolution was duly adopted 1488. ATTEST: Mayor City Official 1 ORDINANCE AAEN:)MZ':T NO. CITY OF STATE OF .- %1NESOTA Amendment to the Cable Communications Ordinance for the City t, of amending by substitution Article Section 1.A.12). and Article V!, Section 4.3. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AuENDS BY SUSS=4:0111 THZ CABLE COj.L4UNTCAT-0;S ORDINANCE AS 1. Article 11, Section I A. (2) .. At the same time as delivery of the executed Franchise, Grantee shall deposit with City its nonrefundable acceptance fee in a sum to be determined by City for the purpose of deferring the costs and- ex:Denses of developing this Franchise- and for •the enforcement and adminis- tration costs to be incurred uncur:ed until Franchise Fees may be realized. After the- itial payment of the acceptance fees, should costs in excess of the acceptance fee be incurred by City or its desicnee, City or its desicnee may charge such excees, costs to Grantee and Grantee shall pay them on demand by City or its desicnee, as an advance on the payment of Franchise Fees. 2. Article VI, Section 4.8. (1) Throughout the term of this Franchise, Grantee 'shall: pay to City or its desicnee, within sixty (60) days after the end of each fiscal year of Grantee, an annual Franchise Fee of ttwee �.a:—A-z 1.39.1 live vercent (58) of all Gross Revenues. No payment will be allowed of any Franchise Fee that is different fromti-r--- 444 -4 -five nercent (59), other than the filing— fee and payment required of the successful applicant as established by City to recover the cost of franchising and any other additional payments which are required by the terms of this Franchise. jcm --e-6 4 (2) Payment will be made to City or its desionee with an itemization of the Gross Revenues. U .a c•. cae•.• ..-....c �.�rw.a INC"""' TaC FOAnCR rim- m<INMS. 6 C -M M OiRECT DIAL NUMBER wa•+�an..w .. •....cw.rv. ••-,•+ m MEMORANDUM - TO: City Administrators, City Managers and City Clerks of the Sherburne/Wright Cable Commissio.f FROM: Thomas D. Creighton, Legal Counsel - DATE: November 16, 1988 RE: Amendments to Joint Powers Agreement The Sherburne/Wright Cable Commission t"Co6mission"7 has _ adopted a revolution recommending certain amendments to -the - Franchise Ordinance and the Joint and Cooperative Agreement for the Administration of a Cable Communications System., to which your City is currently a member. The -proposed amendments to the Agreement relate to the voting structure•of the Commission, the amount and method of payment of the Franchise Fee by the Cable Company, and the financial contributions to the Commission of each Member City. A. Votino Structure The existing Agreement established the voting rights of each Member City on the basis of the number of dwellino units in the municipality represented by a director. The Agreement provides that three years after the inception of the Commission, or after the second annual report of the number of subscribers to the cable system, whichever occurred sooner, the voting struc- ture of the Commission may be reconstituted to represent one O'CONNOR & HANNAN � ATTORNEYS AT LAW " ... 3800 JOS CENTER — 80 SOUTH EIGHTH STREET s .. _ — MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 5j4C2'2254 — -J.. .• 18121341-3900 •> .,� " w.... •�... TELE% 29•C3e4 ....e. .e.a. a a,•.w-- ...a.. •awr TELECOPIER 14121 343,1258 .a c•. cae•.• ..-....c �.�rw.a INC"""' TaC FOAnCR rim- m<INMS. 6 C -M M OiRECT DIAL NUMBER wa•+�an..w .. •....cw.rv. ••-,•+ m MEMORANDUM - TO: City Administrators, City Managers and City Clerks of the Sherburne/Wright Cable Commissio.f FROM: Thomas D. Creighton, Legal Counsel - DATE: November 16, 1988 RE: Amendments to Joint Powers Agreement The Sherburne/Wright Cable Commission t"Co6mission"7 has _ adopted a revolution recommending certain amendments to -the - Franchise Ordinance and the Joint and Cooperative Agreement for the Administration of a Cable Communications System., to which your City is currently a member. The -proposed amendments to the Agreement relate to the voting structure•of the Commission, the amount and method of payment of the Franchise Fee by the Cable Company, and the financial contributions to the Commission of each Member City. A. Votino Structure The existing Agreement established the voting rights of each Member City on the basis of the number of dwellino units in the municipality represented by a director. The Agreement provides that three years after the inception of the Commission, or after the second annual report of the number of subscribers to the cable system, whichever occurred sooner, the voting struc- ture of the Commission may be reconstituted to represent one SHERBURNEIWRIGHT COUNTY CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Morrucello City Hall, 250 East Broaaway, Monticello, Minnesota 55362 BARBARA GUFFEY Pnone (612) 295-2611 Cave AC -m ae[ar Metro 1612) 333.5739 MLMORAND" DATE: November 21, 1988 T0: SWC4 Commissioners FROM: Barb Guf RE: City Council Action Required Enclosed please find information, on the action required by your City Council to amend the Franchise Ordinance and Joint Powers Agreement. - All -of the proposed amendments have been approved by the Commission; however, all' ten cities must _ adopt the recommended ordinance amendments and resolution in ocder:for the " amendments to take effect. Please read the enclosed letter from Tom Creighton-tare£ully; as:ve11"as the recommended resolution and ordinance amendment, and present [hem td youc City• Council for approval as soon as possible. please then file a -copy with Tom _ Creighton's office, and let me know the date your City adopted'them. I will be available to answer any questions or appear -at your City -Council meatin$ if you feel it is necessary. If I don't hear from you, I will assumetthat:=you have no questions regarding the amendments, and that your Council "ll -take them under consideration at their next meeting. • -- ' - Thank youl SWC4: Big Lake • Buffalo • Cokato Dassei • Delano • Elk Ftiver Maole fake • Monticello • Rockfora • Watertown ���,,,��y//"' Council Agenda - 12/12/88 9. Consideration of gambling license application - Celebrity Bowl. (R.W.) A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND: Celebrity Bowl Charities, Inc., has applied for a gambling license for operating a pull -tab facility at Joyners Bowling Lanes. Previously, the Wright County Historical Society had operated a pull -tab at Joyners, but they have recently terminated their license: and Mr. Al Joyner is now interested in leasing space to Celebrity Bowl Charities for this purpose. Mr. Jerry Brightbill, representing David Sovoie and Associates, Gambling Consultants, will be in attendance at the meeting to answer any questions you may have regarding Celebrity Bowl and its charitable activities. The consultants are operators of all the pull -tab operations in bowling alleys for Celebrity Bowl Charities. In my conversations with Mr. Brightbill, other than 10 percent of the profits that are kept by Celebrity Bowl Charities for their own activities, the balance of the profits are used from the pull -tab operation for local charities and requests only. It is my understanding that Mr. Al Joyner can indicate to Celebrity Bowl Charities where contributions should be made within the local community. B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: 1. Recommend approval of a license to the State Gambling Control Board. 2. Pass a resolution disallowing the issuance of the license. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Since it has been the policy of the Council in the past to approve all gambling license requests, the staff has no problem with this license being issued. Normally, the question of not approving a license may only arise if more than one charity is competing for a license at a specific establishment. In that case, the Council may grant preference to a local charitable organization over an outside concern; but in this case, it is my understanding that Celebrity Bowl and Al Joyner decide where the contributions are made only locally. D. SUPPORTING DATA: Copy of gambling license application; Copy of rental agreements Copy of letter from Celebrity Bowl. -B- -, -; F"" • W t^, Charitable GamblingControl Board RoomN-475 Griggs -Midway Building 1621 University Avenue«+a.»ume.r St. Paul, Minnesota 55104`3383 1161 21 64 2-05 5 5 FOR BOARD USE ONLY PAID AMT C:kECK+' DATA GAMBLING LICENSE APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS: A. Type or print in ink. B. Take completed application to local governing body, obtain signature and date on of) copies, and leave I copy. Applicant keeps 1 copy and send* original taint above address with a check. C. Incomplete applications will be returned. Type of Application: OCIa9a A — Fee $100.00 (Bingo. Raffles. Paddlewhsels. Tipboards. Pull -tabs) '30ass B — Fee s 50.00 (Raffles, Paddlewheels, Tipboords. Pull -tabs) � kiru � e oevaeM �= C Class C — Fee s 50.00 (Bingo only) M m asap Cwhme d•mteq eymu e w a ❑Class D — Feet 25.00 (Raffles only) CYsiCNO 1. Is this sophcotion for a renewal? 11 yes. give complete license number {� • r �� • („_,.J twYes 0No 2. It this is not an application for a renewal. has organization been licensed by the Board before? If Vas, give base license number (middle five digital I �'- CG. 61,:5-1" I )WYes❑No 3. Have Internal Controls bean submitted previously? If no, please arisen copy. 4. Applicant ($Hfieial, legal name, of organizationt S. BAiness, Address of Organizatign S .� i"f r . •Y ih•e %• , ✓ r`,: r !, .. cZ _ rv�a/I . r !, r..t 8, Stats, Zia 7. County 8. Business Phone Number Q. Typi of orgifmzation: Ciratarnsl CiV*tetsns ORNiglous jB Other nonprofit' `II orpanuauon n an "other renprofn" orpenhzaten, enrwer auntlom 110through 13.11 not. po to auesdon 14, "Other nonprofit•' organ@atlons must dacumarn Its tar4x4rpL status. , )s;V*x=No 10. Is organhzafon incoyorsted as nonprofit organization? Il yes, give (umbar assigned to Articles or papa and booknumber: /'�"� I Attach copy of certificate - IFYesCNO 11. Are articles fled with the Secretary of State? CYes^LJNo 12. AtoormIts filed withthe County? "fiYasONo 13. Is organization exempt from Minnesota or Federal income tax? If yes, please attach letter from IRS at Dopantrient of. Revenue declaring exernation or copy of 990 or BOOT, OYes;No /4. Has ltcroseairerbeen denied, suspended or revoked? ifyes J check What apply: ` CDenisd CSusnanded CRsvoked Givedats: I - I 15. Number of acbvo members 116, Number of years in existence I Note: If last than lour years, attach evidence of tMes years J existence. 17- Nsm*ot Chits ExacuuveotAcer 16. Name of tressunt Or person who accounts for other revenues Tale Business Phone Number (r/L I A/. i7. 2( 19. Nam* of establishment where gambling will be conducted.//+ ,r t V •f tt rr%rP f<{%i- r City, State Zip v Y Zr CO.0001.02 (*ttit wLvuCep i-seard of Mthe organization, v ti .tit'... j-, i� r'= ♦/T" ..1 Title Business Phone Number 20. Street address that P.O. Sox Number) q t r 22. County (when gambling premises U located$ L.. •lid r •moi .+ l Canary.Apkeant Pink4WAI governing May