HomeMy WebLinkAboutCCAgenda_03Jan8 CITY OF FALCONHEIGHTS
!~ Regular Meeting of the City Council -
City Hall
2077 W. Larpenteur Ave.
AGENDA
January 8, 2003
A. CALL TO ORDER: 7 p.m.
B. ROLL CALL: GEHRZ KUETTEL LAMB
LINDSTROM TALBOT
WORTHIl~tGTON KODLUBOY
ATTORNEY ENGINEER
C. COMMUNITY FORUM:
D. APPROVAL OF MINZTTES: December 18, 2002
E. PUBLIC HEARING: None
• F. CONSENT AGENDA:
1. General disbursements through 12/30/02,.$161,830.64
Payroll, 12/15/02 to 12/30/02, $14,134.13
2. License Renewals
3. Review and adopt Council Standing Rules
4. Resolution designating official depositories for 2003
5. Designation of official newspaper for .2003
G. POLICY AGENDA:
1. Appointment of Barbara Lukermann and re-appointment of Barb Heideman to
the Planning Commission.
2. Request for action on the option to waive the statutory tort lis~its under the
LMCIT.insurance plan
3. 2003 Council Liaison Assignments
H. `REPORTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS:
I. INFORMATION AND ANNOUNCEMENTS:
• J. ADJOURN
~~ ~:` 6
~a ~ '~
City of Falcon Heights
• Council Minutes
December 18, 2002
Mayor Gehrz opened the meeting at 7 p.m.
PRESENT: Gehrz, Kuettel, Lamb, Lindstrom, Talbot. Also present: Heather Worthington,
City Administrator, Pat Phillips, Deputy Clerk
COMMUNITY FORUM: Lynnanne Warren of 1426 W. California Ave. stepped forward to
express concern about the size (particularly height) of some of the
garages that have been built in her neighborhood. She presented a
letter addressing this concern and was told by Mayor Gehrz that the
lot coverage issue would be given to the Planning Commission and
discussed at their January meeting. Gehrz encouraged Ms. Warren
to attend.
MINUTES: The minutes of November 27, 2002 were approved with one correction.
The minutes of Decemer 9, 2002 were approved as written.
At this point, Mayor Gehrz asked Administrator Worthington to introduce Mary Shea Kodluboy
who was present in the audience. Worthington asked the council to welcome her as the new
• deputy clerk who will be starting work on December 30, 2002.
CONSENT
After brief questions from councilmembers to Administrator Worthington on some of the
consent items, Councilmember Kuettel made a motion to approve the following consent agenda:
General disbursements and payroll
2. Licenses
3. Step pay increase to Colin Callahan, Public Works Maintenance Worker
4. Variance request fora 15 foot encroachment into rear setback for an addition to the
residence at 2190 Folwell Ave.
POLICY
Increase in Storm Sewer Rates for 2003
Administrator Worthington explained that the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) Phase II permit is an unfunded mandate from the federal government requiring cities to
file the permit in 2003 and conduct certain activities, monitoring and education to residents about
storm water in the five years of the permit, through 2008. The approximate cost of the Phase II
permit will be $50,000 in 2003 and $10 to $15,000 each year thereafter. Worthington is asking
council to approve a rate increase of 15% per billing cycle for 2003 and for each year thereafter,
Page 2
Council Minutes
December 18, 2002
through the end of 2008. The rate increase woThebncrea~would amount toe$t49 perequarter fo
billing statement from St. Paul Water Utility.
residents, a $4.88 quarterly increase for apartment binned t aridht o council olapprovesan or
commercial property. Councilmember Lamb ques g
increase through 2008 since that is beyond the te~i-mosewer fiend t co~r his expenset Mayor
possibility of using some of the reserves in the stn future council but after
Gehrz said anything the council approves now can be changed by any
brief discussion with other councilmembers, it was decided that this should P erove tthe 15% per
year by year basis. A motion was then made by Councilmember Lamb to a p
quarter rate increase only for the year 2003. The motion passed unanimously.
INFORMATION AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
Councilmember Lamb said the Curtiss Field Development Plan is nearing completion.
Councilmember Lindstrom reminded everyone to get the survey in that was included with the
• last newsletter.
Councilmember Talbot said there were Christmas trees still available at the Lion's Club lot on
Roselawn and Cleveland.
The mayor and councilmembers had very kind w O~ o en househbeing h ed n Pat'slhonora It
Mayor Gehrz invited everyone to the December 3 p
will be at city hall from 4:30 to 6:30 p.m.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 7:50 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Pat Phillips, Deputy Clerk
C,
•
C
CONSENT 1
Meeting Date: 1/8/03
ITEM DESCRIPTION: Disbursements and Payroll
SUBMITTED BY: Roland Olson, Finance Director
EXPLANATION/SUMMARY:
1. General disbursements through 12/30/02, $161,830.64 (previously delivered to
you December 30, 2002)
2. Payroll, 12/15/02 to 12/30/02, $14,134.13
ACTION REQUESTED: Approval
• DATE 12/29/02 TIME 08:35 CITY OF FALCON NEIGH COUNCIL REPORT PAGE
APPROVAL OF BILLS
PERIOD ENDING: 12-30-02
CHECK# VENDOR-NAME-------------- DESCRIPTION DEPT. AMOUNT
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL JAN/03 SANITARY SEWR EXP -------- 51,085.67
MINNESOTA GFOA 2003 MEMBERSHIP -------- 40.00
ST ANTHONY VILLAGE JAN/03 POLICE SVCS -------- 37,012.75
*** TOTAL FOR DEPT 00 88,138.42
•
•
41851 US BANCORP COUNCIL WORKSHOP EXP LEGISLAT 46.70
41851 US BANCORP MEETING W COUNCIL MEMBER LEGISLAT 33.31
LEAGUE OF MN CITIES STATE OF CITIES LEG CONF LEGISLAT 65.00
LILLIE SUBURBAN NEWSPAPER TNT NOTICE:ROSEVILLEREVI LEGISLAT 72.63
*** TOTAL FOR DEPT 11 21 7.64
AMERICAN OFFICE PRODUCTS TONER CARTRIDGES/FILES ADMINIST 95.74
AMERICAN OFFICE PRODUCTS TONER FOR COPIER ADMINIST 138.02
41851 US BANCORP STAFF WORKSHOP EXPS ADMINIST 23.97
ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST 457 DEC/02 WORTHINGTON ADMINIST 200.00
ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST 457 DEC/02 PHILLIPS ADMINIST 10,800.00,
MATT PARROTT 8 SONS W-2 FORMS ADMINIST 118.58
LEAGUE OF MN CITIES STATE OF CITIES LEG CONF ADMINIST 65.00
41850 PERA DEC 1-15 PERA ADMINIST 1,312.63
PERA DEC 16-31 PERA WITHHOLDG ADMINIST 1,420.10
PRINTER GATE HP4 PRINTER REPAIR ADMINIST 79.00
*** TOTAL FOR DEPT 12 14,25 3.04
NORTH SUBURBAN ACCESS CO. REIMB MAUREEN CABLE WORK COMMUNIC 99.00
*** TOTAL FOR DEPT 16 99.00
CASTLE INSPECTION SVC 4TH QTR BLDG PERMIT FEES PLANNING 7,381.35
CASTLE INSPECTION SVC 4TH QTR PLAN REVIEW FEES PLANNING 4,177.92
CASTLE INSPECTION SVC 4TH ATR PLUMBING FEES PLANNING 116.40
CASTLE INSPECTION SVC SPRINKLER REVIEW(HERMES) PLANNING 75.00
CASTLE INSPECTION SVC BLDG CODE EFFECT GRADING PLANNING 141.00
41853 PAKOY, GENE 4TH QTR MECHANICAL INSPC PLANNING 1,705.88
*** TOTAL FOR DEPT 17 13,537.55
XCEL ENERGY ELECT 12/18 EMERGENC 12.56
*** TOTAL FOR DEPT 21 12.56
AMERIPRIDE LINEN&APPAREL LINEN CLEANING FIRE FIG 43.88
AMERICAN OFFICE PRODUCTS INK CARTRIDES FIRE FIG 259.68
EMERGENCY APPARATUS MAINT OIL AND LOBE 752 FIRE FIG 186.75
EMERGENCY APPARATUS MAINT PUMP&GENERATOR SVC FIRE FIG 533.31
EMERGENCY APPARATUS MAINT OIL 8 LOBE 753 FIRE FIG 150.85
EMERGENCY APPARATUS MAINT PUMP & GENERATOR SVC FIRE FIG 477.79
EMERGENCY APPARATUS MAINT INSTLL 12 VOLT OUTLET752 FIRE FIG 129.51
EMERGENCY APPARATUS MAINT OIL & LOBE 757 FIRE FIG 272.83
EMERGENCY APPARATUS MAINT PUMP & GENERATOR SVC FIRE FIG 1,070.13
KINGS TRUE VALUE HOSE NOZZELS FIRE FIG 11.50
KINGS TRUE VALUE TRASH BAGS/CITE BULBS FIRE FIG 13.39
JERYY MALEITZKE MILEAGE REIMB FIRE INSPC FIRE FIG 76.94
HOLTZ,DAVID REIMB 2 COMPUTER PROGS FIRE FIG 761.86
HOITZ,DAVID BATTERIES AND TAPE FIRE FIG 38.32
MINNESOTA CONWAY RECHARGE FIRE EXT FIRE FIG 106.25
SUPERAMERICA FUEL FIRE FIG 76.99
S
~''~~~~.av3
~`'
t~O
P~~j.~
~ ~
DATE X2/29/02 TIME 08:35 CITY OF FALCON NEIGH COUNCIL REPORT PAGE 2
APPROVAL OF BILLS
PERIOD ENDING: 12-30-02
CHECK#
-------- VENDOR-NAME--------------
------ DESCRIPTION
------------------------ -DEPT -
- - AMOUNT
----------
REZNY,BRADLEY REIMS FIRE TNG SCHOOL FIRE FIG 610.05
VERIZON WIRELESS CELL PHONES FIRE FIG 21.45
VISIONARY SYSTEMS LTD FIREHOUSE SOFTWARE FIRE FIG 100.00
*** TOTAL FOR DEPT 24 4,341.48
BOARD OF WATER COMMISSNRS H2O CITY HAL 21.75
BOARD OF WATER COMMISSNRS SS CITY HAL 11.69
HOME DEPOT CRC/GECF POINSETTE FOR LOBBY CITY HAL 31.23
GRAINGER, W. W., INC. TOWELS/TISSUE/MOP CITY HAL 283.37
MINNESOTA CONWAY RECHARGE FIRE EXT CITY HAL 37.98
MUSKA LIGHTING REPAIR PARKING LOT LITES CITY HAL 298.40
*** TOTAL FOR DEPT 31 684.42
CITY OF ST PAUL ELECTRICITY ST LITES STREETS 402.59
MUSKA LIGHTING 2 STREET LITE BULBSD STREETS 67.10
SUPERAMERICA FULE STREETS 140.67
*** TOTAL FOR DEPT 32 610.36
PRECISION LANDSCAPE/TREE TREE TRIMING 2002 TREE PRO 13,312.50
*** TOTAL FOR DEPT 34 13,312.50
BOARD OF WATER COMMISSNRS H2O PARK & R 9.48
BOARD OF WATER COMMISSNRS SS PARK & R 23.38
HOME DEPOT CRC/GECF HOCKEY BOARDS/FASTENERS PARK & R 174.58
HOME DEPOT CRC/GECF CHAIN LINK FENCE PARK & R 85.43
• ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST 457 DEC/02 TRETSVEN PARK & R 100.00
ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST 457 DEC/02 MAERTZ PARK & R 100.00
MUSKA LIGHTING REPAIR RINK LITES CURTIS PARK & R 298.40
XCEL ENERGY ELECT 12/18 PARK & R 42.39
ON SITE SANITATION PORTABLE TOILET PARK & R 70.65
WEST TELEPHONE EXPS PARK & R 111.82
*** TOTAI FOR DEPT 41 1,01 6.13
DEBORAH JONES REIMS PAT'S RETRMENT EXP EMPLOYEE 101.43
41852 NELSON CHEESE & DELI DELI TRAYS/PAT'SRETIREMT EMPLOYEE 88.71
*** TOTAL FOR DEPT 52 190.14
RAMSEY COUNTY NEW VOTING MACHINES GENERAL 13,155.17
*** TOTAL FOR DEPT 63 13,155.17
JOHN NAGENGAST DOORS,LLC REPLACE EMERG DOOR/COUNC PUBLIC W 840.00
SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON SEPT-NOV CURTIS SITE IMP PUBLIC W 1,947.12
*** TOTAL FOR DEPT 65 2,787.12
CITY OF LAUDERDALE 4 NEW ST LITES-FULHAM INFRASTR 3,501.95
*** TOTAL FOR DEPT 71 3,501.95
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 2 SWACS FOR CHURCNCHRIST SANITARY 2,400.00
*** TOTAL FOR DEPT 75 2,400.00
CAROLE L. SMITH PROF SVC DEC `6.31 MCAD 1,213.33
*** TOTAL FOR DEPT 84 1,213.33
• COLIN CALLAHAN TUITION REIMS CONTINGE 1,359.83
DATE 12/29/02 TIME 08:35 CITY OF FALCON HEIGH COUNCIL REPORT PAGE 3
APPROVAL OF BILLS
PERIOD ENDING: 12-30-02
-HECK# VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION --- .DEPT. AMOUNT
WILLIAM MAERTZ TUITION REIMS CONTINGE 1,000.00
*** TOTAL FOR DEPT 92 2,359.83
*** TOTAL FOR BANK 01 161,830.64
*** GRAND TOTAL *** 161,830.64
C7
OF"tio°~
1- = a0 N O N
(~~ p~N 69~
• Z W ~ O N
_ = O V
_ ~ Z p 0 p n,,,
O J N "D
OWLLtn
N
LL
~ F- O
~ ~WF},.
L=U ~
6O d
c°'o o
~ N
~ ~
o
j
V Q
O O
aD OD ............
++
C ~ N v
d ~ ~~
C N ~N 'O
G ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N
~ La
o ~ C7 N ~ r"
,q a'~uia~aiy°~ ~~
~EE~ia~y~ ~~
a *+~~~ arc U~
m = ~ T C ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ C ~ ~ ~ CL ~ Y
°a (~ ~ a O y ~ ~ p ~ _
.. v V 7 0 U a~.• C N~ ~ sr N
QUUQm~aQ NF-
E
WOW OOOC~ O~+DN
~ N m 0 0 0 QJ p m C
tih 0.60960969 OO Ql
.. 69 69 ~ ~ O 69 00
N
a ~
.... ~ ~~+
Z
`Ir
,~ O
a~
1tol~~ ~ + + + +
a L
'~ G
~ ~ 7
~ Y N ~
~~ N ~
y b N ~ :o ,~ m t0
~,m t~~~N~v - d
C~o~o,y ~c0 .a
~~ (~L NLL N N C Q = C~16
W'ap m O ~ Q.V ~~m ~+ nw
Vj ~ ~'> F ~L m G~~ 3 w
~= Za`az'u.CiOZ VUzU
C
0
a
w
m
D
C
O
V
w
C
H
E
z'
U
C
d
cm
FC
m
n°. D
y a'
N
r °njmco
~r W N m
p
~ M
=o N
y
~+
U
c ` ~ nom.
N ~
•
m
t
V O
F
a ~~S
.~ a
~'
z
33
ZZ~
~~~
`J"" W
JJ
J =
S
y~0
U
U ~~ua.
°o , z
~
o ~
N
KK
~ Q
0j KCy
'-
~ Y Y ~
Z
_ m~Q
~- bd J
F
w QQ LLLLQ H
U U H
N N
a
a
d YYU
°n noo
N N ~
0 0~0
° O1
~ n o
o
~
W
}~ N t
0 I
O N
ss
n ~ N
U
~
~ ~ o~~
~ ~
°
a
~ z° (p z
z
L
„!+ ~ L o~~
co ~ > >bo
a a ZzZ
_ O
y d O O ~
~ ~ O O d
~; w O O
C L b4 69
-U
~ 4
c o o R
ad ~ ~ ~
iQ ~ r ~"
U
d A V o e
atad N N
` C G ~ N ~ .
>~a~
d
v
ye
~~
y m 609 609
Q
0
Q U
a Q
•
PERIOD END DATE 12/30/02 ****FILE UPDATED****
SYSTEM DATE 12/28/02
C H E C K R E G I S T E R
CHECK CHECK EMPLOYEE NAME
• TYPE DATE NUMBER
•
PAGE 1
CHECK CHECK
NUMBER AMOUNT
COM 12 30 02 6 SUSAN GEHRZ 32453 303.12
COM 12 30 02 12 LAURA A. KUETTEL 32454 277.05
COM 12 30 02 13 PETER C. LINDSTROM 32455 277.05
COM 12 30 02 14 RICHARD P TALBOT JR 32456 277.05
COM 12 30 02 15 ROBERT E LAMB 32457 277.05
COM 12 30 02 34 CLEMENT KURHAJETZ 32458 280.63
COM 12 30 02 35 LEO LINDIG 32459 64.64
COM 12 30 02 42 MICHAEL D CLARKIN 32460 108.52
COM 12 30 02 66 ALFRED HERNANDE2 32461 55.41
COM 12 30 02 74 MARK J ALLEN 32462 138.52
COM 12 30 02 85 DANIEL S JOHNSON-POWERS 32463 54.64
COM 12 30 02 91 RICHARD H HINRICHS 32464 64.64
COM 12 30 02 % DAVID R HOLTZ 32465 64.64
COM 12 30 02 99 ALEXANDER J. HAIGN 32466 12.93
COM 12 30 02 100 ROBERT L. WATSON 32467 12.93
COM 12 30 02 1003 HEATHER WORTHINGTON 32470 1395.72
COM 12 30 02 1007 PATRICIA PHILLIPS 32471 3285.63
COM 12 30 02 1013 WILLIAM MAERTZ 32472 1514.77
COM 12 30 02 1030 MARY A. RODLUBOY 32489 289.26
COM 12 30 02 7033 DAVE TRETSVEN 32474 1090.52
COM 12 30 02 1038 DEBORAH K JONES 32475 839.93
COM 12 30 02 1040 JEROLD A. MALEITZKE 32476 376.48
COM 12 30 02 1103 DIANE MEYER 32477 43.81
COM 12 30 02 1136 ROLAND 0 OLSON 32478 1222.04
COM 12 30 02 1143 COLIN a CALLAHAN 32479 616.24
COM 12 30 02 1173 ELIZABETH M POSTIGO 32480 145.11
COM 12 30 02 1176 MICHAEL P ECKBERG 32481 369.74
COM 12 30 02 1188 NICOLE S GRAHAM 32482 22.16
COM 12 30 02 2006 DAMON J. WICKNEM 32483 306.20
COM 12 30 02 2023 ZACH E. BRAND 32484 33.25
COM 12 30 02 2034 ELIZABETH A. NORRIS 32485 236.88
COM 12 30 02 2035 ROSS A. HERNANDE2 32486 77.57
COMPUTER CHECKS 14134.13
MANUAL CHECKS .00
NOTICES OF DEPOSIT .00
****TOTALS**** 14134.13
•
•
J
CONSENT2
Meeting Date: 1/8/03
ITEM DESCRIPTION: Licenses
SUBMITTED BY: Mary Shea Kodluboy/Deputy Clerk
REVIEWED BY: Heather Worthington, City Administrator
EXPLANATION/SUMMARY:
MUNICIPAL BUSINESS RENEWALS
Blomberg Pharmacy, 1583 N. Hamline Ave.
Full service drug store and pharmacy
Clips-N-Styles, 1555 Larpenteur Ave W
Beauty Salon
Coffee Grounds, 1579 Hamline
Coffee shop/restaurant
Curves for Women, 1553 Larpenteur Ave W
Exercise and weight loss programs
Design Modern Interiors, 1709 Snelling Ave N
Retail furniture store
Do-It-Yourself Upholstery Supply, 1558 Larpenteur Ave W
Retail sales/service of upholstery fabrics and supplies
Edward Jones & Co., 1537 Larpenteur Ave W
Stockbroker and investments
Embers Restaurant, 1700 N. Snelling Ave.
Family restaurant
Hair Designs Unlimited, 1703 Snelling Ave N
Beauty salon, therapeutic massage.
Hamline Hoyt Service, 1565 Hamline Ave N
Automotive repair
Hermes Floral Company, Inc., 1790 Larpenteur Ave W
Retailer and wholesaler of floral products and supplies
(through March 31, 2003)
• Page 2
Consent Item 2
January 8, 2003
MUNICIPAL BUSINESS RENEWALS (continued)
Insty-Prints, 1552 Larpenteur Ave W (Expires 5/31/03)
Printing, copying, binding
Karate Junction Training Ctr., 1550 Larpenteur Ave W (Expires 5/31/03)
Martial arts instruction
Kernick, James DDS, 1549 Larpenteur Ave W
Dental office
Knutson, John A. & Co.
1781 Prior Ave.
Public accounting service
One Hour Martinizing, 1407 Larpenteur Ave W
Dry cleaner
• Sleep Concepts, Inc., 1705 Snelling Ave N
Retail sale of futons, area rugs and miscellaneous home
furnishings
Source Comics & Games, 1602 Larpenteur Ave W
Sale of hobbies, games, cards and comics
Stone Fabrics, 1558 Larpenteur Ave W (Expires 5/31/03)
Fabric store
Technology and Information Education Services (TIES),
1667 Snelling Ave N -Technology training and support
services for school districts and local government
Thatcher Chiropractic Clinic, 1347 Larpenteur Ave W
Warners' Stellian Co., 1711 Snelling Ave W
Retail sales of major appliances
W. J. Tobacco, Inc., 1541 W. Larpenteur Ave.
Retail sale of tobacco and tobacco products
•
• Page 3
Consent Item 2
January 8, 2003
MECHANICAL CONTRACTORS
Air Mechanical, Inc., Ham Lake
Allan Mechanical, Inc., Eden Prairie
Automatic Garage Door and Fireplaces, Brooklyn Park
Boehm Heating Co., St. Paul
Center Point Energy Minnegasco, Anoka
Centraire Heating and Air, Prior Lake
Fireside Corner, Roseville
Hoffman Corner Heating and Air Conditioning, White Bear Lake
Home Energy Center, Plymouth
Horwitz, Inc., Brooklyn Park
Kath Heating and Air Conditioning, Little Canada
McQuillan Bros. Plumbing and Heating Co., St. Paul
Metropolitan Mechanical Contractors, Eden Prairie
Norblom Plumbing, Minneapolis
St. Paul Plumbing and Heating Co., St. Paul
• The Snelling Co., Inc., St. Paul
Standard Heating and Air Conditioning Co., Minneapolis
Tschida Bros Plumbing, St. Paul
Wenzel Heating and Air Conditioning, aka Forced Air Inc., Eagan
White Bear Mechanical, Inc., White Bear Township
REFUSE/RECYCLING HAULERS
Aspen Waste Systems, Minneapolis
BFI, Ltd., Inver Grove Heights
E-Z Recycling, Inc., St. Paul
Gene's Disposal, Hugo
Bill Horrigan, St. Paul
Keith Krupenny and Son Disposal Service, Inc., West St. Paul
Red Arrow, St. Paul
Walters Recycling & Refuse, Circle Pines
Waste Management, Blaine
GENERAL CONTRACTORS
Doug Lee and Associates, Eagan
Kraus-Anderson Construction, Minneapolis
•
Consent
1/8/03
ITEM: Resolution designating official depositories for 2003
SUBMITTED BY: Heather Worthington, City Administrator
REVIEWED BY: Roland Olson, Finance Director
EXPLANATION/SUMMARY:
• First Bank System, LMC 4M Fund (checking account)
• US Bank National Association
• Dain Bosworth Incorporated
• Solomon Smith Barney Incorporated
• Edward D. Jones
• FBS Investment Services
• Prudential Securities
• Minnesota Municipal Money Market Fund (4M Fund) and (4M Plus Fund)
• Municipal Investors Service Corporation
• U.S. Bancorp Piper Jaffrey
• Wells Fargo Brokerage Services, LLC
• Paine Webber, Inc.
All investments are made according to state law and the city's investment policy. The
Administrator or Finance Director are authorized to deposit general and other funds
therein and handle investments and transfers of funds for the City of Falcon Heights.
Collateral is furnished by the financial institutions as required by law.
ATTACHMENTS:
^ Resolution designating the city's official depositories for 2003
^ The City of Falcon Height's investment policy
ACTION REQUESTED:
Adoption of resolution 03-01 approving official depositories for 2003.
•
CITY OF FALCON HEIGHTS
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
January 8, 2003
No. 03-01
A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING THE OFFICAL DEPOSITORIES FOR THE
CITY OF FALCON HEIGHTS
BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED, by the city council of the City of Falcon Heights that the
following financial institutions be designated as depositories for funds of the City of
Falcon Heights:
US Bank System, LMC 4M Fund (checking account)
US Bank National Association
Dain Bosworth Incorporated
Solomon Smith Barney Incorporated
Edward D. Jones
• FBS Investment Services
Prudential Securities
Minnesota Municipal Money Market Fund (4M Fund and 4M Plus Fund)
Municipal Investors Service Corporation
U.S. Bancorp Piper Jaffrey
Wells Fargo Brokerage Services, LLC
Paine Webber, Inc.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Administrator or Finance Director is
authorized to deposit general and other funds therein and handle investments and
transfers of funds for the City of Falcon Heights. Collateral shall be furnished by the
financial institutions as required by law.
Moved by:
In Favor
Approved by:
Mayor
January 8, 2003
Date
Gehrz
Kuettel
Lamb
Lindstrom
• Talbot
Against
Attested by:
City Administrator
January 8, 2003
Date
FALCON HEIGHTS INVESTMENT POLICIES
A. Daily Cash Balance Cash Forecastine and Pooling of Investments
The City policy requires the pooling of all available case and investing the total cash at
the highest available rate. Efficient investment of funds starts with knowing what your
cash is on a daily basis, and what your future cash needs will be, particularly for major
bill paying times such as bond payment dates. This includes making weekly deposits of
cash receipts and maintaining small balances in checking and savings accounts.
B. Safety of Principal
Safety of principal is the first priority in investing City funds. The City is only
authorized to invest in those investments complying with the requirements of Minn. Stat.
§ § 118A.04, 118A.05 and 118A.06
C. Authorized Investments
Examples of authorized investments are as follows:
1. Direct U.S. Government obligations
a. Treasury Bills
b. U.S. Treasury Certificates
c. Treasury Notes
d. Treasury Bonds
e. Treasury Strip Coupon
f. Treasury Receipt
2. Shares in investment companies whose only investments are U.S.
Government and Agency issues.
3. Obligations of the State of Minnesota.
4. Bankers acceptances of United States banks eligible for purchase by the Federal
Reserve System
5. Commercial Paper -rated A-1, P-1 and F-1 (when available) for maturities of 270
days or less.
6. Irrevocable Letter of Credit (LOC).
7. Interest bearing deposits - (Checking Accounts, CD's, money market savings,
ordinary savings) must be collateralized at a minimum of 110% of face value.
•
• D. Collateralization
All deposits in any bank, trust company, or thrift institution over $100,000 must be
collateralized.
Collateralization may be in the form of securities, or notes on first mortgages as outlined
below.
Any collateral pledged to the City's account shall be accompanied by an assignment
thereof to the municipality from the depository.
Collateral shall be deposited with the treasurer, and shall not be deposited in the bank,
trust company, or thrift institution holding it.
Securities_,.pledged asCollateral
The total amount of collateral computed at market value must be in an amount of at least 110%
of all deposits over $100,000.
Securities pledged may be obligations which are legally authorized investment for debt service
funds under Minnesota Statutes Annotated 475.66, Subdivision 3, and qualified state and local
government obligations acceptable to the Finance Director or City Administrator.
• E. Scheduled Maturity
The City schedules a payroll twice a month and pays other claims every other week in
conjunction with Council meetings. The City makes large bond principal and/or interest
payments on February 1, March 1, June 1, August 1, and September 1 of each year. The
other large claim is the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission bill which is due the
first of each month. The City schedules its investments to mature with these dates when
possible.
F. Liquidity
The City invests approximately 10-25 percent of its available funds in liquid instruments.
These may be instruments such as Commercial Paper or collateralized Insured Savings
Accounts (Money Market Accounts). The City will maintain small balances in checking
and savings accounts. These balances will be to meet normal monthly payments, and
payroll.
Therefore, the purpose of having part of the City's investment portfolio in liquid funds is
to insure that funds could be available should unexpected large bills be presented for
payments.
2
G. Local Investments
• One hundred (100) percent of the total investment portfolio shall be invested in
certificates of deposit or other instruments through banks or other financial institutions.
These investments may be scheduled maturities, or they may be part of the investment
strategy of securing maximum interest rates for part of the investment portfolio.
H. Maximum Interest Earnings
After the liquidity needs, and scheduled maturity needs are satisfied, the balance of these
funds available for investment are placed with institutions that offer the highest rate of
return consistent with the maturities as determined by the City. Quotations are taken by
telephone for all investments, whether they are short or long term. These investments
must be in authorized investments.
•
3
APPENDIX
• 1. ~ecific Types of Investments
Instruments issued by the United States Government may be direct Treasury Obligations, or they
may be obligations of a federal agency or federal instrumentality. All government issues are
now in book entry form and are not registered to the owner. Principal and interest is credited
directly to the bank and the owner of record. Some Examples are as follows:
United States Government Investments
Direct United States Treasury Obligations:
Treasury Bills
Treasury Bonds
Treasury Notes
Certificates of Indebtedness
Zero Coupon Treasuries
Federal Agencies and Instrumentalities:
Federal Home Loan Banks
Federal National Mortgage Association
Federal Farm Credit System
Federal Land Banks (No New Issues)
Federal Intermediate Credit Bank (No New Issues)
. Banks for Cooperatives (No New Issues)
Investments purchased at a discount & maturing at nar
FNMA Discount Notes
Federal Farm Credit Bank, Discount Notes
Federal Home Loan Bank, Discount Notes
Commercial Paper
Banker's Acceptance
Treasury Bills
Treasury Strip Coupon ($1,000 denomination)
Treasury Receipt (Larger Denomination)
Investments issued at par with interest coupons
Treasury Bonds
Treasury Notes
Commercial Notes (GMAC)
FNMA Debenture or Bond
Federal Home Loan Bank Bond
Federal Farm Credit System Wide Bonds
4
Further information on vazious types of United States Government Investments are as follows:
TREASURY ISSUES
United States Treasury Certificates -These are coupon issues. They are issued at par and usually
carry two coupons. They mature no more than one yeaz after issue.
Treasury Bills -Offered each week by the Treasury Department with 90 to 182 day maturities.
Monthly Treasury Bills aze offered with a maturing of one yeaz. Widely traded and offered at a
discount and maturing at paz. May be purchased through dealer banks and bond brokers and sold
to them.
Bills may be purchased directly from the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, in which case
there is no service charge.
Treasur~Notes -Issued with maturities of from two to ten yeazs, minimum denomination is
$5,000. They carry coupons redeemable every six months.
Treasur~Bonds -All new issues issued for periods often years or longer in denomination of
$1,000 to $1,000.000. They carry semi-annual interest coupons. Some treasury bonds aze
callable by the government before maturity, and others have fixed maturities.
FEDERAL AGENCY ISSUES
Federal Agency Issues aze not guaranteed by the United States Government and therefore
produce somewhat higher yields than Treasuries. The previous experience of the agency is
important when investing in agencies.
Federal Home Loan Bank Notes -Issued by the Federal Home Loan Bank system, which are
instrumentalities of the United States and aze under the supervision of the Home Loan Bank
Boazd.
Federal National Mortgase Association Debentures - (FNMAI -
Payment of certificates are guazanteed by FNMA. Three types of securities are available,
debentures, short-term notes, and participation certificates.
Federal Land Bank Notes and Bonds -Twelve Federal Land Banks were organized under the
Federal Farm Loan Act to provide long term farm mortgages at reasonable cost. The banks
operated under the general supervision of the Farm Credit Administration and the Secretary of
Agriculture. (No new issues being issued.)
•
5
Federal Intermediate Credit Bank Debentures -The Federal Intermediate Credit Bank debentures
• ranged in maturity from 1-9 months, and were issued every month. They usually were not as
marketable as Treasury Bills, but usually carried a little higher interest rate. Twelve Federal
Intermediate Credit Banks were created under the Federal Farm Loan Act of 1923 and provide
funds for seasonal production processing, etc. The banks are under the supervision of the Farm
Credit Association, which is under the direction of the Secretary of Agriculture (No new issues
being issued.)
Banks for Cooperatives -Debentures are issued for a maximum six month period. There are
fewer of these types of issues than the other agency issues mentioned above. (No new issues
being issued.)
Federal Farm Credit System Wide Bonds -These new investments replace Federal Land Bank
Notes and Bonds, Federal Intermediate Credit Bank debentures, and Banks for Cooperatives.
Because of market conditions, the majority are used for short term periods, but may go up to
three years.
OTHER INVESTMENTS
Shares in Investment Companies Whose Only Investments are United States Government and
Agency Issues -Company must be registered under the Securities Act of 1933, whose shares are
• registered under the Securities Act of 1940 (Mutual Funds) if the only investments of the
Company are in obligations of the United States, or fully guaranteed by the United States or in
obligations of Instrumentalities of the United States, such as those listed in Minnesota Statues
475.66.
Funds Which the State Auditors Office has Indicated Meet State Investment Criteria -
Franklin Custodian Funds, Inc., United States Government Security Series Lord Abbett,
United States Government Securities Fund (Lord Abbett), State Bond United States
Government Securities,Inc. Capital Alliance Bond Fund United States Government
Portfolio, Fidelity Institutional Cash United States Government Portfolio.
There may be additional funds which meet the State Auditor's criteria, which I do not have
information on. If in doubt, contact the State Auditor's Office.
Obligations of the State of Minnesota or Minnesota Municipalities -Obligations of the State of
other Municipalities are rarely used, as the yield is usually less than on United States
Government obligations, because of tax considerations.
A City may invest idle funds in its own obligations, particularly in temporary improvement
bonds authorized under the local improvement code Minnesota Statutes 429.091. These
obligations must mature within three years.
•
6
Bankers Acceptances -Cities can invest in bankers acceptances of United States Banks eligible
• for purchase by the Federal Reserve System. These instruments typically are created from a
letter of credit issued in a foreign trade transaction. Maturities on Bankers Acceptances run from
30 to 180 days, which the 90-day acceptance the standard. Historically, Bankers Acceptances
have been a very safe investment vehicle.
Commercial Paper -Cities are authorized to invest in Commercial Paper issued by United States
Corporations or their Canadian Subsidiary, if it is of the highest quality (Al .P 1 or better), and
matures in 270 days or less. Commercial Paper is a short term unsecured promissory note.
Commercial Paper is issued at a discount, and matures at par. One of the most important factors
in determining whether an issuer's commercial paper is worthy, is the nature of the underlying
bank line of credit. These credit lines are of four kinds:
1. Standard Line Agreements (when activated, converts to a standard bank note at a
specific date.)
2. Swing Line (issuer may borrow one day and repay the next.)
3. Revolving Line (long term flexible line of credit virtually guaranteeing a bank loan at
any time upon request by the issuer.)
4. Irrevocable Letter of Credit (a Financial institution guarantees unequivocally that
funds will be available to redeem the commercial paper upon maturity. This is the most secure
• of the four.)
Interest Bearin~Deposits (CDs etc. May be interest bearing checking accounts, money market
savings account, CDs, and ordinary savings account. Bank or Savings & Loan must be neamed
as a depository by the City, and all deposits over the $100,000 Federal insurance must be
collateralized.
(See separate section on collateralization.)
League of Cities -Money Market Fund - An alternative is to use the League of Cities program
for the investment of your City's idle funds. An advantage is that you have the benefit of
professional management. The League program offers a money market fund as well as the
availability of Certificates of Deposit. For more information call 1-800-333-6000, ext. 6423, or
(612) 342-6423.
Repurchase Agreements -Short term transactions involving the simultaneous sale of securities
by the seller to the investor and the agreement by the seller to repurchase at a later date.
Overnight Repo -refers to those transactions whereby the repurchase occurs the next day. If
properly handled, Repos offer an investment alternative.
7
Government National Mortgage Association G.N.M.A. - a government guaranteed security. A
certificate represents a share in a pool of FHA or VA mortgages. A problem associated with
GNMAs, is that they are along-term investment, and therefore subject to market fluctuations.
2. Support for Persons Doing the Investing
Financial institutions can exert tremendous pressure on the persons in smaller
communities to place all of the City's funds with them. However, even a small fraction
of one percent difference in interest earnings can make a substantial difference in the
amount of interest earnings the City realizes.
It is, therefore, important that the person doing the investing be given the support from
City Attorney, City Adnvnistrator, and Council, so that they can do the investment job in
the most professional way. This means placing investment funds with the institution that
gives the City the best return on its investment.
•
8
• Consent 4
1/8/03
ITEM: Review and adopt Council standing rules
SUBMITTED BY: Heather Worthington, City Administrator
EXPLANATION/SUMMARY:
Each year at the first council meeting, the city council reviews the operating procedures it
intends to use, and decides whether changes are warranted.
Staff has no recommendations for changes in the standing rules at this time.
ATTACHMENT:
City Council Standing Rules, last amended 1/11/95
• ACTION REQUESTED:
Adopt standing rules as amended 1 /11 /95 for 2002.
•
Amended 1/11/95
•
B. CITY COUNCIL STANDING RULES
INTRODUCTION
In the belief that the best decisions are made by the best
informed decision makers and that the public decision process is
best served when the public has every opportunity to present views,
the following rules are established to govern regular and special
council meetings as well as formal public hearings. There are
several goals behind these rules.
1. In general, free and open discussion by all interested
parties should be an essential part of the decision-making
process.
2. The council process should have as little procedural
overhead as possible.
3. Time is better spent on substantial matters rather than
proforma matters.
MEMBERSHIP
The formal council membership consists of the four
councilmembers and the mayor. All five have one vote each and all
five can introduce motions. For purposes of leading the meeting,
the mayor, or in the absence of the mayor the acting mayor, will be
considered the chairperson.
RULES
Agenda
1. To be considered, an item must be on the agenda and the agenda
must be distributed to all the council members and any other
persons having responsibility for an item at least three working
days prior to the meeting. An agenda can be modified with addenda
by a majority vote but this should be used only for minor items or
items with extreme time constraints.
2. An item can be moved from the consent agenda to the action
agenda at the request of any council member.
3. Since there will be audience and cable TV viewers not familiar
with each item, the chair will give a brief explanation of each
item as it is addressed.
•
Page 2
4. The order of items on the agenda need not be followed
absolutely. The chair may adjust the order in the interest of:
a. Filling in time before a scheduled item, i.e. a public
hearing.
b. Grouping several items to best make use of consultant
time.
c. Accommodating individuals who have attended the meeting
specifically to provide .input on an item.
Process - Regular and Special Council Meetings
1. For these proceedings the council will use the 'open
discussion' procedure. That is, discussion is open to any member
before or after a motion is made. This privilege is also extended
to the city administrator, city clerk and any of the consultants
who may have an interest in or can contribute to the item at hand.
2. At the discretion of the chair, this privilege is also extended
to those members of the audience who wish to provide input. The
chair may also rule out of order any input felt to be redundant,
superfluous or irrelevant.
3. The chair can make liberal use of .the "unanimous consent"
procedure. That is, items that in the judgment of the chair are
likely to be unanimously approved, can be introduced for approval
with the statement "If there are no objections, stands
approved (or denied) ." If any council member has an objection, the
item reverts to the standard motion procedure. This "unanimous
consent" procedure cannot be used for items requiring formal votes,
i.e. resolutions or for approval of the consent agenda.
4. The standard motion procedure is changed to not require a
second. A motion need only be made to be considered. This also
applies to amendments.
5. To eliminate confusion, only one amendment will be considered
at a time and that amendment must be germane to the motion. An
amendment cannot itself be amended. If a change to an amendment is
deemed appropriate, the amendment should be withdrawn and
reintroduced accordingly.
6. The general mode of voting will be by acclamation but. with
enough clarity that the individual votes can be recorded in the
minutes. If in doubt the city clerk can request a clarification.
•
Page 3
•
7. The meeting will be video taped and the video tape will be
retained for 3 months following approval of the minutes for that
meeting. The standard retention can be extended if in the judgment
of the mayor, city administrator, city clerk or any councilmember
such action is warranted.
8. If the council action is the result of a resident request and
that request is denied in whole or in part, reasons of fact
supporting the denial will be made part of the public record.
9. No council meeting will extend beyond 10:30 P.M. except by
unanimous vote. This rule is not subject to the modification or
suspension provisions of the Standing Rules.
Process - Public Hearincrs
Since a public hearing is a more formal procedure and often
requires certain procedures and actions to be legal, the meeting
rules are changed accordingly.
1. The primary aim of a public hearing is to take input from the
public. To accomplish this in the most effective manner the chair
will introduce the hearing with an explanation of the issues. This
explanation will be given by the chair or a person designated by
the chair. The use of explanatory visual aids is encouraged.
2. Following the explanation, input from the public will be taken.
Prior to accepting input, though, the chair will state the areas
where input will be appropriate, the maximum time to be allotted to
any individual presenter and any other procedural rules deemed
appropriate to guarantee that all concerned parties have a fair and
adequate opportunity to be heard.
3. All individuals wishing to speak. must fill out and submit an
identification form and speak into a recording microphone.
Individuals not wishing to speak in public may provide a written
statement. The council may take up to 15 minutes to review written
statements presented at the meeting. If the council decides to not
act on the issue at the public hearing meeting, it may by majority
vote extend the time where written input will be taken to a day no
later than 1 week before the next meeting where a deciding vote is
planned.
4. All speakers are expected to be business-like, to-the-point and
courteous. Anyone not abiding by these rules will be considered
out of order.
•
Page 4
•
5. The council will refrain from initiating a discussion during
the public input phase of the hearing except to clarify points
brought up. These .'point of information' requests should be held
to a minimum.
6. Once the public testimony phase is complete the chair will
announce the public hearing to be closed and the council will
revert back to its open discussion mode of operation. From this
point on public input will only be appropriate when solicited by
the council.
7. It shall be the intent of the council to vote on the issue at
the same meeting as the public hearing and as close in time to the
public hearing as possible. Should it be necessary to defer voting
until a later date, that procedure will be clearly explained to the.
audience.
8. No public hearing will extend beyond 10 P.M.
9. If the motion contains conditions, as may occur in conditional
use or variance requests, those conditions will be conveyed in
writing to the requestor.
10. If the public hearing is the result of a resident request and
that request is denied in whole or in part, reasons of fact
supporting the denial will be made part of the public record.
11. If the public hearing is to set an assessment rate, the
assessment formula(s) under discussion cannot be altered. This
implies that the council has fully discussed any formulas prior to
the hearing and that the appropriate legal, fiscal and engineering
consultants have passed on formula(s) viability, legality and
feasibility.
12. If the hearing is to set an assessment, it cannot be scheduled
later than the first meeting in September. This is to allow time
to correct any errors prior to the time needed to certify the rolls
to the county.
•
Page 5
ADOPTION/MODIFICATION/SUSPENSION
These rules with the exception of the mandatory 10:30 P.M.
adjournment can be adopted, modified or suspended in whole or in
part by a 3/4 vote of the council. If suspended,. they are
automatically reinstated at the next meeting. Should they be
suspended or a situation occurs that is not covered by the standing
rules, Sikkink's Seven Motion System (attached) will apply.
ANNUAL REVIEW .
These rules will be reviewed annually at the first meeting in
February.
INTERPRETATION
The chair will interpret the rules. However, the chair's
interpretation can be appealed by any council member and can be
overruled by a majority vote.
•
•
SIKKINK'S SEVEN MOTION SYSTEM
General Rules for a Simplified System of Parliamentary Procedure
1. The purpose of this decision-making system is to allow efficient decision
making that represents a majority position. Any motion, request, discussion or
proposal which seems to have as its purpose unreasonable delay, manipulation,
or the goal of serving individual ends rather than group ends can be ruled out
of order by the chair. Such a ruling by the chair will be subject to the motion
called appeal.
2. Free and open discussions are valued in this decision-snaking system. For that
reason most motions are discussable and the motion to restrict discussion
requires a Z3 vote in order to pass. In recognizing persons for discussion, the
chair first recognizes the person who made the motion, next recognizes other
persons and always recognizes a person who has not spoken, over a person
who has already participated in the discussion. As far as possbie the chair
should try to aitemately recognize persons representing d'rffierent viewpoints.
3. In examining the chart orr the #~llowing page,-you mill-note that five of the
seven motions are amendable.: However, only one amendment at a time may
be considered. As soon as that amendment is passed or defeated, another
amendment may be proposed.
4. The number in front of the motion listed indicates the rank of each motion.
Thus, #1 -General motions are lowest in rank and #7 -Restrict Debate motions
are highest in rank. Two rules apply: (1) You usually cannot consider two
motions of the same rank at the same time, and (21 If a motion of one rank is
being considered, a motion of the same rank or lower rank is usually out of
order but a motion of higher rank is in order. While these rules generally apply,
the chair may allow some fiexibiIity in certain circumstances. These situations
almost always occur with motions #5, 6, and 7. For example, if #7 - "Restrict
Discussion" is being discussed and a member wants a secret ballot vote on the
matter. Request. while lower in rank, could be used to accomplish this purpose.
The chair is allowed to make ail decisions on exceptions but all such decisions
are subject to appeal.
•
Acoties Needs Can be Vote
To What Recov_ Needs Dis- Amend- Re-
Motion Purpose Situ= nition Second cussed able ua fired
To stop or AI( dis-
1. Restrict limit cussable Yes Y~ Yes Yes Z/3
Discussion discussion motions
2. Appeal To~ let the To decision
group vote of the chair- No Yes Yes No Majority .
on a chair's person "
decision
3. Request Not a motion ~ Chair de=
but away to
Any apps tides sub-
question,
priors
No
Na
Na
No jest to
appeal
chailen e,or siwatian
seek he p
4. Postpone To deia
action n General
any ge ral motions Y~ Yes Yes Yes Majority
motion o a
future me
5. Refer To hav a
general General
motion motions Yes Yes Yes Yes Majority
studied by
a cam ittes
6. Meeting To n3cess
Terming- during a Made to
lion meeting or recess or Yes. Yes Yes Yes Majority
to end a adjaum
meeting
7. General To bring up
business For doing
for majority business Yes ~ Yes Yes Yes Majority
decisions
by the group
•
•
Consent g
1/8/03
ITEM: Designation of official newspaper for 2003
SUBMITTED BY: Heather Worthington, City Administrator
REVIEWED BY: Pat Phillips, Deputy Clerk
EXPLANATION/SUMMARY:
State statute requires that the city designate a legal newspaper of general circulation in
the city. This newspaper is used when the city is required to publish legal notification
regarding public hearings, elections, and city financial matters. There are three local
papers in Falcon Heights: Focus News, Roseville Review and the Park Bugle.
Staff recommends that they city designate the Roseville Review as its legal newspaper in
2002 for the following reasons:
• The Roseville Review circulates to most households in Falcon Heights. The Focus
News is not delivered door-to-door currently.
• Unlike the Park Bugle, the Roseville Review is a weekly publication. A monthly
publication such as the Park Bugle would not suit the city's needs, as the city council
meets twice monthly, and legal notices often must be published on a more timely
schedule.
• Staff also finds that the Roseville Review's rates are competitive. The Roseville
Review will charge $2.79 per column inch, whereas the Sun Focus rate is $4.95 per
column inch.
ATTACHMENTS:
Letter dated December 20, 2002 from Jeffery Enright, co-publisher of the Roseville
Review.
Letter dated December 6, 2002 from Jeffrey Coolman, VP of Sales and General
Manager, Focus News.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Designate the Roseville Review as legal newspaper for the City of Falcon Heights for
2003.
L' 'e Suburban Newspapers, Inc.
DEC 2 3 2002
2515 E. Seventh Avenue
North St. Paul, MN 55109
(651)777-8800
December 20, 2002
Heather Worthington, City Administrator
Falcon Heights City Hall
2077 W. Larpenteur Ave.
Falcon Heights, MN 55113
Dear Ms. Worthington:
Thank you for the opportunity to bid on public notice publication services for the City of Falcon
Heights. Lillie Suburban Newspapers has -been serving the needs of the Falcon Heights area for 29
years, and is pleased to provide ongoing coverage of city government and school issues and
community events.
Lillie Suburban Newspapers is the oldest weekly newspaper -company in the St. Paul area. It was
founded in 1938 by the late T. R. Lillie. His son, N. Theodore .Lillie, and grandson, Jeffery Enright,
are continuing the family tradition of publishing award-winning community newspapers in the St.
Paul suburbs.
It is our sincere desire to provide the best possible local news coverage in the Roseville-Falcon
Heights-Little Canada area. Our. experienced news staff provides readers with awell-balanced, lively
and .informative product each week. We realize that Falcon Heights area residents look to the
Roseville Review as one of their primary sources of information about city activities and meetings, as
well as local events throughout the community; and we will continue to .publish the city's press
releases and photos.
The Roseville Review is distributed to homes in Falcon Heights by paper carriers and through the
mail. The newspaper has the official designation of .the neighboring communities of St. Anthony and
Maplewood, and the Mounds View School District.
Noon Thursday is the deadline each week for submitting public notices to our office. Late public
notices are accepted up to 10 a.m. Friday for the Tuesday newspaper. Public notices should be
directed to Brenda Boogren, Lillie Suburban Newspapers, 2515 E. Seventh Ave., North St. Paul, MN
55109. Our fax number is 651/777-8288. Notices may also be sent via a-mail to lllienews@aol.com
Legal publication. rates for minutes, advertisements for. bids and other notices are as follows:
$2.79 per column inch for aone-time publication
$2.49 .per column inch for each .additional publication
Thank you for considering the Roseville Review as the official legal newspaper for the City of
Falcon Heights for 2003. If you have any further questions, don't hesitate to call us.
Sincerely,
fery Enright
o-Publisher
Ramsey County Review • Maplewood Review •3 Oakdale-Lake Elmo Review • Review Perspectives
~I~IiE New Brighton Bulletin • Shoreview Bulletin • St. Anthony Bulletin • South-West Review
NEws
Roseville-Little Canada Review • Woodbury-South Maplewood Review • East Side Review
~.~ -~-
~ a ers
ne~sp p
December 6, 2002
City of Falcon Heights - ~~
Heather Worthington, City Administrator ,
2077 W. Larper~teur Ave. '~ " ~
Falcon Heights, MN 55113
flY ~r f~~~ 1~1/r,r±hinr7t~,n,;
~~
~~~
~,~.>~
~~ ~~~
~~v ~
DEC 9 2002
The Sun-Focus would like to be considered for designation as the legal newspaper for the City of
Falcon Heights. Sun-Newspapers bought the Focus Newpapers last January and we are still imple-
menting many exciting changes. We are CAC Audited and the Ramsey County Sun-Focus has a cir-
culation of 2,500 readers.
The rates are as follows:
1 column ~rJidt"~:
.45 pGr Gnu: -per' insertion 04.95 per col. inch)
Ail I_~ublished lecla+ ;E«tic:~:~ ~irc: ~,csted on nur website (wwti~~.r~r-,Sur~~.com) at no additional charge.
. This is an enhrncement to thy: local news coverage already available on the Internet and will broad-
en t`r~r; readership of yorar legal notices.
Two notarized affidavits on each of your publications will be provided with no additional charge.
The deadline for regular length notices is 11:00 am the Monday prior to publication. E-mailing the
legal notices is an efficient and accurate way of getting the notices to us. The e-mail address for the
legal department is legals@mnsunpub.com. We still accept notices on disk, faxed or through the
mail. If you require more information to make your decision, please contact me or Jana McCormick,
our Legal Representative, at 952-392-6829.
Thank you for considering the Sun-Focus as the official newspaper for your community.
Sincerely,
Jeffrey Coolman
Vice President of Sales and General Manager
•
10917 VALLEY Vow ROAD ®ED~N PRnixrE ®MINNESOTA 553 ®952-829-0797 ®FAx: 952-9~1-3588
Policy 1
1/8/03
ITEM: Appointment of Barbara Lukermann and re-appointment of Barb
Heideman to the Planning Commission
SUBMITTED BY: Susan Gehrz, Mayor
REVIEWED BY: Heather Worthington, City Administrator
EXPLANATION:
Summary: Ms. Lukermann has applied to serve on the Planning Commission. Residents
of Falcon Heights are eligible to serve on the Commissions for up to two consecutive,
three-year terms. Commissions meet monthly to discuss business related to their specific
area of interest, and make recommendations to the City Council. Ms. Heideman has
served one three-year term on the Commission, and currently chairs that group.
Commissioners will serve athree-year term, commencing on January 1, 2003.
• ATTACHMENT:
Commission Application from Barbara Lukermann
ACTION REQUESTED:
Approval of the appointment of Barbara Lukerman and re-appointment of Barb
Heideman to the Planning Commission for three-year terms.
•
CITY OF FALCON HEIGHTS
COMMISSION/COUNCIL APPLICATION
~ °E~ r 7 200
z
DATE: ' '~~.. , 1 ~ . O ~
NAME: avh~V~ w~~,~ w`~v~
ADDRESS: Z ~ L~ ~ ~ ~ e=y` ~~
PHONE: (I~ (~l ~ h'~~r-Z~.L~r ('W) ~Oi ~- --- ~,2 ~ ` ~ 3 ~ ~
HOW LONG AT ABOVE ADDRESS? L~ ~ `F
IN WHAT CAPACITY DO YOU WISH TO SERVE?
~ ~~ ~ ,~~ ~~be
~~
REASON YOU WISH TO SERVE ON ABOVE: (. ~ o~ c~vl /c ~ T~
rr
PRIOR PUBLIC (OR RELATED) SERVICE: ~~.: ~v , ~ ~ a~.~~l~ l.o ~~~1
` 1Me w..
OTHER RELEVANT BACKGROUND (OR C011~IlviENTS):
~~-~--c~- ~a ~-~ :a.~ ~ ~ ~ vim. ~ ~~ l~ . i
~ ~_ ~
~J
• Policy 2
1/8/03
ITEM: Request for action on the option to waive the statutory tort limits under the
LMCIT insurance plan
SUBMITTED BY: Heather Worthington, City Administrator
REVIEWED BY: Roland Olson, Finance Director
EXPLANATION:
Summary: The League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT) is requesting that
cities determine if they wish to waive the statutory tort limits of $1,000,000. Under these
limits an individual can settle for no more than $300,000 for a single claim and a single
claim for all parties cannot exceed $1,000,000. In 1998, our attorney, Joel Jamnik of
Campbell Knutson, reviewed this proposal and recommended not waiving the statutory
limits. Under certain circumstances the LMCIT, which represents the city in these
claims, may negotiate above the legal liability limit if necessary because some claims like
employment are exempt from the cap. The general counsel from the LMCIT said that
• cities made different choices depending upon their circumstances. However, he
perceived that maintaining the limit was prudent in many cases. The city has had no
claims with settlements for several years.
In 1998, 1999 and 2000, 2001, and 2002 the city council voted not to waive the statutory
tort limits. Staff also consulted with city attorney, Roger Knutson, to determine if the
situation had changed, and he recommended that the city not waive the statutory tort limit
again this year.
• Goal 4: To provide a responsive and effective city government.
• Strategy 6: To effectively manage the city's financial resources.
ATTACHMENTS:
Letter from Joel Jamnik dated January 23, 1998
Waiver form
ACTION REQUESTED:
^ Discussion
^ Motion not to waive the city's statutory tort limit of $1,000,000.
•
LMCIT LIABILITY COVERAGE -WAIVER FORM
Cities obtaining liability coverage from the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust must decide
whether or not to waive the statutory tort liability limits to the extent of the coverage purchased. The
decision to waive or not to waive the statutory limits has the following effects:
If the city does not waive the statutory tort limits, an individual claimant would be able to recover no
more than $300,000.on any claim to which the statutory tort limits apply. The total which all claimants
would be able to recover for a single occurrence to which the statutory tort limits apply would be limited
to $1,000,000. These statutory tort limits would apply regardless of whether or not the city purchases
the optional excess liability coverage. .
If the city waives the statutory tort limits and does notpurchase excess liability coverage, a single
claimant could potentially recover up to $1,000,000. on a single occurrence. The total which all
claimants would be able to recover for a single occurrence to which the statutory tort limits apply would
also be limited to $1,000,000., regardless of the number of claimants.
If the city waives the statutory tort limits and purchases excess liability coverage, a single claimant
could potentially recover an amount up to the limit of the coverage purchased. The total which all
claimants would be able to recover for a single occurrence to which the statutory tort limits apply would
also be limited to the amount of coverage purchased, regardless of the number of claimants.
Claims to which the statutory municipal tort limits do not apply are not affected by this decision.
• This- decision must be made by the city council. Cities purchasing coverage must complete and return
this form to LMCIT before the effective date of the coverage. For further information, contact LMCIT.
You may also wish to discuss these issues with your city attorney..
•
The City of 6~L~ (7Y1 ! ~cepts liability coverage limits of $
Minnesota Cities Insurance-Trust (LMCIT).
from the League of
Check one:
The city DOES NOT NAIVE the monetary limits on municipal tort liability established
by Minnesota Statutes 466.04.
The city WAIVES the monetary limits on tort liability established by Minnesota Statutes
466.04, to the extent of the limits of the liability coverage obtained from LMCIT.
Date of city council meeting
Signature
Position
Return this completed form to LMCIT, 145 University Ave. W., St. Paul, MN. SS103-2044
Page 1 of 1
• ~~~~~E~,T ~~~~~N
Profe~.iional A~ciacion
Arrorz1eps at Law .
. Thomas ). Gampbcll (612) 4SZ-7Q00 Jrie] ). ):unnik
lZn~'e71V. [uwc3<~n 1 A-xtrri ~ltt~uwei( f~nh•r
i numas yS. S«~~L Fa.~C (61Z~ 45..-5?SC ~ta;;!~.r~ K. Finrict•
E1Nna ? ?Cr~s~ch J<~hn F. KallY
Susan Lta Pocc Mautaur J. h~Ii
Msr~u~tiro M. ytctracron
Santl3rY ~, 199$ fsrucRc T. SsxptuR~~e
VIA FACSIlViII.E TZtANSMISSION -.~:.~~..,~~~~~~,
AND U. S. 31~A1'L W°""`''
G+rx G. Fuchs
Ms. Susan Hoyt
City Administrator
City of Falcon Heights
2077 West Larpenteur
Falcon Hezehts, Minnesota 5~i13
Dear Susan:
You asked for our advice/opinion regarding the option provided to the Ciry ta
waive the monetary limits oa municipal tort liabi7,ity as part of obtaining liability
coverage from the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trost.
• '
The gaestion posed is prhnazily a policy mauer having few practical legal
ramifications. The reason for this is that contrary ~ PoP~r P~~~ fe~v damage
claims approach $300,000 per claimant If the limits are waived there is• the potential,
however slight or remote, that I.~'YICTT will pay more for a claim than it would have if
the City did not waive the ciazm. Conversely, if the limits are oat waived, there is the
poss bility that i.MCIT will pay less on a pazticuiar claim.
One's perspective of the issue is a primary detriment {taxpayer, dafP~an
Plaintiff}, as is one's goiiticai ghiiosophy. In my opinion, the Ciry that waives the
limits at the time of obtaining coverage uzznecessarily sacrifices a settlement point or
statutory protecrion too early in the process. i am enclosing a more detailed
discussion of the pros and cons of waiving the limits which was prepared by Pete
Tritz, the Director of I.~1~tCIT. Please note that the waiver endorsemem issued by
L11~SCTT would result in a higher premium for the City. It may be helpfu.i to find out
from I.1viCIT the cast of the waiver. Two additional points map be of interest First,
about half of all LMCTT members have clwscn against waiving tine limits. Second,
because most of Falcon Heights' neighbors or large institutional citizens are self- -
insured, they do not have, the option to waive their statutory limiu except as rases are
sealed or derided_ It may be easier to mana;e multiple party litigarion imTolving these
other entities and the City if ~ a1i the parties share the same risk.
• Suite 317 F:igandale Office Ccnccr • 1380 Cc~r~~rate Center Curve Eatian, ~ 3~ 1? 1
01!33198 FRI 11:16 Fib 612 -152 5550 Cd3tPBELL 0003
•
Ms. Susan. Hoyt
January 23 , 1998
Page 2
I hope this information assists tIle Councal in making its decision.
very truly yours,
CAMPBELL KNt]'TSON
Professioturl Association
By:
Ioei J.
777, cjh .
Enclosure
i•
i•
59023
Policy 3
1/8/03
ITEM: 2003 Council Liaison Assignments
SUBMITTED BY: Mayor Gehrz
EXPLANATION:
Summary: Councilmembers are each assigned to serve as a liaison between the City
Council and the various Commissions each year. Assignments for 2003 are as follows:
Planning Commission -Peter Lindstrom
Parks & Recreation Commission -Laura Kuettel
Solid Waste Commission -Bob Lamb
Neighborhood Commission -Sue Gehrz
• Human Rights Commission -Rick Talbot
Cable Commission -Rick Talbot
Cable Commission Alternate -Bob Lamb
Northwest Youth & Family Services Joint Powers Board -Peter Lindstrom
Ramsey County League of Local Governments -Rick Talbot
Campus/Community Task Force -Sue Gehrz & Heather Worthington
ACTION REQUESTED:
• Discussion
• Motion to approve 2003 Council Liaison Assignments
C,~~'2'C'~000/
~ ~
145 University Avenue West, zul, ~IIV'~~~ 03-2044
League of Mir:nesota Cities Phone: (651) 281-1200 (800) 925-1122
CiEies promoting exceJ~ence Fax: (651) 281-1299 TDD (651) 281-1290
Web Site: http://www.lmnc.org
January 2, 2003
TO: Mayors, Managers, Administrators or Clerks
FROM: James F. Miller, Executive Director
SUBJECT: National League of Cities (NLC) Congressional Cities Conference
March 7-11, 2003 -Washington, DC
Registration -Complete Immediately
A brochure outlining the conference program and registration information for the 2003 NLC
Congressional Cities Conference is enclosed. It is extremely important that hotel reservations
be made as soon as possible. The earlier your city returns registration forms and requests for
hotel accommodations, the more likely you will receive your first choice. In order to receive
the advance registration fee, registrations must be postmarked by February 7, 2002. You can
register three different ways, online at www.nlc.ors;, by mail or by faxing your registration to
703-631-6288.
Conference Program Highlights
A redesigned Congressional City Conference will offer delegates a unique opportunity to
make a difference in Washington when the new Congress convenes.
This year's conference will be built around the top advocacy priorities for America's cities
and towns and include a major "city lobby day" event on Capitol Hill on Tuesday, March 11.
The Congressional City Conference program will offer general sessions and workshops on
Sunday, March 9, and Monday, March 10, focusing on the local priorities for federal action
and featuring Congressional leaders, cabinet members and other high level representatives
of the Bush Administration. President Bush has been invited to address the delegates.
The conference will also include a special closing general session on Monday afternoon,
March 10, featuring a high profile political leader as a keynote speaker followed by action
planning for city lobby day on Tuesday morning. The traditional opening reception and
Capitol Steps performance have been shifted from Sunday to Monday night, March 10, to
maximize delegate participation on Tuesday.
- over -
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER
a
•
Leadership Training Institute Seminars: These special institute seminars are offered to
conference delegates for a separate registration fee. Space is limited and available on a first
come first served basis. The Institute promotes excellence in municipal leadership through
high quality education and training seminars for local elected officials. Through the Institute,
local leaders learn practical leadership skills, abilities and strategies to lead change and
innovation in their cities and towns. If you are interested in enrolling in the Certificate of
Achievement in Leadership Program, contact Dwight Horkheimer at horkheimer(a,nlc.or~ for
further details. However, you do not have to be enrolled in the Certificate Program to attend
the Leadership Seminars being offered at the conference in March.
For further information about the conference, please visit NLC's website at www.nlc.or~ and
select Congressional Cities Conference.
Details regarding Minnesota activities being held at the conference will be forthcoming. If the
League can be of any assistance to you, please contact us.
Enc.
C7
~~
•
Laague of Mi~tnasota Cifias
CiEies yromoting excel~¢nc¢
~,
145 University Ave~aue West, ul, .~~ 03-2044
Phone: (651) 281-1200 (800) 925-1122
Fax: (6S1) 281-1299 TDD (651) 281-1290
Web Site: http: //ww~/. Zmnc. org
January 2, 2003
TO: Mayors, Managers, Administrators or Clerks
FROM: James F. Miller, Executive Director
SUBJECT: National League of Cities (NLC) Congressional Cities Conference
March 7-11, 2003 -Washington, DC
Registration -Complete Immediately
A brochure outlining the conference program and registration information for the 2003 NLC
• Congressional Cities Conference is enclosed. It is extremely important that hotel reservations
be made as soon as possible. The earlier your city returns registration forms and requests for
hotel accommodations, the more likely you will receive your first choice. In order to receive
the advance registration fee, registrations must be postmarked by February 7, 2002. You can
register three different ways, online at wvv~~v.nlc.ora, by mail or by faxing your registration to
703-631-6288.
Conference Program Highlights
A redesigned Congressional City Conference will offer delegates a unique opportunity to
make a difference in Washington when the new Congress convenes.
This year's conference will be built around the top advocacy priorities for America's cities
and towns and include a maj or "city lobby day" event on Capitol Hill on Tuesday, March 11
The Congressional City Conference program will offer general sessions and workshops on
Sunday, March 9, and Monday, March 10, focusing on the local priorities for federal action
and featuring Congressional leaders, cabinet members and other. high level representatives
of the Bush Administration. President Bush has been invited to address the delegates.
The conference will also include a special closing general session on Monday afternoon,
March 10, featuuring a high profile political leader as a keynote speaker followed by action
• planni7g for city lobby day on Tuesday morning. The traditional opeiung reception and
Capitol Steps performance have been shifted fiom Sunday to Monday night, March 10, to
maximize delegate participation on Tuesday.
- over -
A w1 T^.l~T IAT /1PTll1DTTThTTTV/~L`pTpTRATTT/L' A(`TT(IT.i BTRDI'l1VIID
• Leadership Trainin Institute Seminars: Theses ec'
g p ial institute seminars are offered to
conference delegates for a separate registration fee. Space is limited and available on a first
come first served basis. The Institute promotes excellence in municipal leadership through
high quality education and training seminars for Iocal elected officials. T'hraugh the Institute,
local leaders learn practical leadership skills, abilities and strategies to lead change and
innovation in their cities and towns. If you are interested in enrolling in the Certificate of
Achievement in Leadership Program, contact Dwight Horkheimer at horkheimer(c~.nlc.or~ for
further details. However, you do not have to be enrolled in the Certificate Program to attend
the Leadership Seminars being offered at the conference in March.
For further information about the conference, please visit NLC's website at www.nlc.orQ and
select Congressional Cities Conference.
Details regarding Minnesota activities being held at the conference will be forthcoming. If the
League can be of any assistance to you, please contact us.
Enc.
:7
•
T and T~wers~beginning.o:
to prepare for'this 7naj
The annum
Congressional City
Conference has been.
redesigned this year. to
max;mi~p the impact
of more than 3,000
local officials in
Washington, DC,
working together to cre-
ate a federal-local part-
nership that is built on
trust, collaboration, and
information sharing.
It's a new year, a new Congress, and a new strategy for c~~rying the message
~ from America.'s cities and towns to the le who make decisions on federal rioriti .
IMP p es
Here's a snapshot of the advocacy action plan:
Saturday, March 8
City officials gather at the Washington Hilton and Towers for leadership
meetings, policy committee discussions, and legislative briefings to learn about
current federal issues and priorities for America's cities and towns.
Sunday, March 9
NLC leaders and invited speakers set the stage for the action to come by
describing the environment in Washington in the wake of the
mid-term elections and examining how local priorities intersect with national
political agendas.
Monday, March 10
Congressional leaders, President Bush, and other administration
representatives are invited to discuss their priorities and their reactions to
the local agenda. The program will wrap up-with a closing general session to
review the agenda and confirm plans for the city lobby day on Capitol Hill.
And, the ever-popular Capitol Steps wiL1 end the day by providing then unique
perspective on the Washington scene as city leaders prepare to converge on
Capitol Hill.
he Washington Hilton Tu~Y- ~'~ 11
`h'ziday'2vlarch':7, _ ; , Buses take all conference delegates to the Capitol for a national rally followed
or national event. by strategic meetings with Congressional leaders to talk about NLC's pri-
- orities for federal action and expectations of Congress and the Administration.
~.uedraie lirversiry nreaKrast
8:30 am. -10:00 a.m.
Fee: $35 ($50 on site)
•
•
Friday, March 7
9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. Leadership Training Institute Seminars
5:15 p,m. - 6:30 p.m. Orientation Session for First Time Attendees
5:30 p.m. - 7:00 p.m. Constituency and Special Group Meetings
Saturday, March 8
9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. NLC Boazd of Directors Meeting
NLC Advisory Council Meeting
Leadership Training Institute Seminars
10:00 a.m. -Noon Legislative Briefmg and Priorities Update
1:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. Policy Committee Meetings
* Energy, Environment and Natural Resources (EENR)
* Finance, Administration, and Intergovernmental Relations (FAIR)
~r Human Development (HD)
3:15 p.m. - 5:15 p.m, Policy Committee Meetings
~k Community and Economic Development (CED)
~* Information Technology and Communications (ITC)
~k Public Safety and Crime Prevention (PSCP)
~ Transportation Infrastructure and Services (TIS)
5:15 p,m. - 7:00 p.m. Constituenty and Special Group Meetings
Sunday, March 9
7:30 a.m.- 8:30 a.m. Steering Committee Meetings
~r Information Technology and Communications (ITC)
* Energy, Environment and Natural Resources (EENR)
~t Human Development (HD)
8:30 a.m. -10:00 a.m. Celebrate Diversity Breakfast
10:15 a.m. - 11:45 a.m. Opening General Session
Noon - 1:1 S p,m, Roundtable Networking and Lunch
Noon - 1:00 p.m. Steering Committee Meetings
~k Community and Economic Development (CED)
~' Finance, Administration, and Intergovernmental Relations (FAIR)
~' Public Safety and Crone Prevention (PSCP)
~ Transportation Infrastructure and Services (TIS)
1:30 p.m. - 2:30 p.m. General Session
2:45 p.m - 4:15 p.m. Workshops on Lobbying Priorities
4:30 p.m. - 6:30 p.m. State League Caucuses and Receptions
Constituency and Special Group Meetings/Events
Monday, March 10
9:00 a.m. - 10:30 a.m. General Session on Congressional Priorities
10:45 a.m. -Noon General Session on Administration Priorities
12:15 p.m. - 1:30 p.m. Roundtable Networking and Lunch
1:45 p.m. - 3;30 p.m. Workshops on Lobbying Priorities
4:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m. Closing General Session
5:15 p.m. - 6:30 p.m. State League Caucuses and Receptions
6:30 p.m. - 8:00 p.m. Reception and The Capitol Steps
Tuesday, March 11
9:00 a.m. -Noon City Lobby Day on Capitol Hill
The 17th annual Celebrate Diversity Breakfast will
feature a keynote speaker who will provide a
perspective on "diversity" issues facing America's
aties and towns. The breakfast is sponsored by
five NLC constituency groups.
Monday, March 10
The Capitol Steps
7:00 p.m. - 8: 00 p.m.
The Capitol Steps will perform on Monday this yeaz
(instead of Sunday) as part of a conference wrap up tc
energize the delegates for City Lobby Day on
Tuesday morning. This troupe of Congressional
employees provides bi-partisan fun for everyone.
Dates to Remember
February 7, 2003 Deadline for advance registration
and housing requests. All requests must be
postmarked by this date. After this date, all delegates
must register onsite at higher rates.
February 7, 2003 Deadline for Cancellations.
Cancellation letters. must be postmarked b this date
and aze subject to a $50 cancellation fee. ere aze
no refunds ~or cancellations after this date.
How to Register
To register for the 2003 Congressional City
Conference, fill out the registration form and return it
with your check, city purchase order, or credit card
information to the NLC Meeting Services,
postmazked by February 7, 2003 or register
online at www nlc.org
~t Each delegate, guest, speaker, member of the press,
and any other conference participant must register.
There is a $50 youth delegates fee. There is no
charge for press registrations with proper press
credentials.
~k No telephone registrations or cancellations will be
accepted.
* Payment (check, city purchase order, or credit card)
must be included with advance registrations.
*People unable to meet the February 7 deadline will
have to register onsite at the meeting and make
their own hotel reservations.
Refunds will be made for cancellations received by
February 7, 2003, subject to a $50 cancellation charge.
Cancellation letters must be postmazked by this date.
No telephone cancellations will be accepted,
No partial refunds will be made if you decide not to
attend particulaz functions.
Hotels
* If you need hotel accommodations, please check
the appropriate box on the registration form,
~ NLC will make a hotel reservation for you when
you register for the conference.
~k Rooms will be assigned on a first come, first served
basis.
~1rAll conference sessions will be held at the
Washington Hilton Hotel.
The 2003 Congressional City Conference will offer all the traditional events -Leadership
Training Institute seminars, the Celebrate Diversity Breakfast, policy and steering committee
meetings, state municipal league caucuses, and constituency group events - as well as the major
new plan for high visibility lobbying on the NLC federal advocacy priorities.
'These
;registr
can
ane; e~
~.at the
The sess
~. • L~stitute
KSt F
i sheet en
j ~. s,
~ffeCt7
r .Sttate!
serving a m
conshtuenf_
message tha
policing`ane
making, evaluation and oversight
. ~ ~ .
~
~ • Learn to promote visionary leadership
' while at the same time being true to
your responsibilities to your con-
stituents. Discover the'balance.for liemg
'
a
governor' of your community and
representative of your constituents:,,
`~ LTT Luncheam'
~ ~ , , : 11 Saturday, March 8
20(13
,
Leadership Trainirig Institute
nl.institute seminars are offered to conferencedelegates for a~separate ~ ~
fee
S
i
li
t
d
d ems. _~
~~~ PartiCipant.8t Recognition
L
.
pace
s
ttu
e
an available on a first come first served basis. uncheon
y 5~11!]arg
Becoming a Change Leader ~,~ L Q
`~~ `~ ~ Noon -1:30 pm
Registration Fee: $30
A~--y
tvidii~ ~
~3 ~ 9:00 am- 5:00 pm ' : , The Call of Leadership An excellent opportunity to network
- Registration Fee $150 9:00 am- 5:00 pm and shaze information wrth your col-
menf Competency: Catalyst '_ ,.. Registration Fee: $150 leagues. Bronze, Silver and Gold
~p Institute
~ engaging program designed to help .Competency: Cornerstone Certificate level reapients in the
DO prrl '` ";
la'ee $I50
elected officials serve as changs agents ,
~nd Become mere effective readers m`;
. Creativel lore our own
Y exp Y deepest
drives and ralh'ng to leadership, .Uncover Certificate of Achievement in
~ ` ro
P P ~ avill be recognized.
,~ Cbrrpetent
r °~ ;
~ " _
theu~communitii~ ~Leazn~new and ~ :.
empowering Id
as to bnngLabout
~ what u most want to contribute, gain a
S'0 .
more umde-out understanding of moti- Facilitators::
%LeadersIu Trainin
p g Council
~
. effective use of tev
olo
: e
,
change Become ~aLhange leader as you - vation and model of irate alon wi
gntY, _ g th
....
;
reeds of your constituents
ove atygovernment " leazshow to make ch e both roduc- '
~ P
"' rive and ~~m~or±able a greater degree of responsiveness -both
pdersonally and professionally. This
namic
a
d h
d
o ~ ~~rr~____~~~~~~
t7rlilli7il,IS
~y Q
~~itlr~afocus onmid~siie
thegSuiilic pokey cq~c sL
~ y
,
n
an
s-
n seminar uses
self-reflection venting; dyad and small f W
Nj~terin Power
g
~etand technology „~.,
dl beheld'
t
the IBM
4~}~,~,~„f, ~~,7: ~ group work to explore.yourpersonal
dnve and calling as a'leader ~
Politics and Influence
a
.
;4,
~ecfromc: Goverriinent on ~ f
Building a High Performance
_ • ~ ~ ~
~' S
'
' 1:30 pm- 5:00 pm
Registration Fee: $95
will leave Hilton Hotel , .
at ~ ,~A,11 ~
Council
30
'
~II]ai
S
,
~i ~~ 8 P ~,.
Com eten Cornerstone
Pourer, politics and influence aze three
:ornrriurucation 1:
pm .
5:OO:pm
RegistratronFee. $95 ,
leadership in a realities not only within business and
industry
but also within commu
iti
or~a'Culturall~'
Con
tit
'.
Competency: Competent
Practitioner :
~ `
'
:Diverse Comtruruty ,
n
es
and government. Understand the
s
uenev
D
m
Yti ,
.
p
c 9:00 am=Noon - ° ~ nature of politics beyond the concept of
`
p
,;
z ,.
` Fa
an
l your understanding and knowl Registration Fee: $95 ~ who gets what and when as you explore
ee::$130.
~ ~ edge of the group dynamics of councils: Competency:. Collaborator how your efforts to persuade and lead
Co:lll7lunt~.atnr Leas your own:;personality;,style ana_.
~ ,; :Expand your awareness of thefactors individuals within these contexts can be
iii, ac2^ .social'an~eco- t ~,ploie what makes
an effective group: ~ ' that influence human. perceptions and more easily accomplished by under-
Enhance your umderstuiding and
,~ l :iowledge of the Toles and responsibili- examine how those perceptions influence
behavior and actions when interacting standing the basic concepts of leader-
ship and Pow ~~ an organization.
n rx of't}re mayor,'. council and staff. in, with people who. are different -ethnic, If Aristotle Were Mayor:
;,ow you can.contribute to making your
,r _ city council a high performance council. ,gender, age, culture,.raee religion, abili-
ties and disabilities. Develop your lead-
The New Soul of Governance
'~ Powerful Peo le Skills
P ership awareness and skills necessary for 1:30 pm - 5:00 pm
Registration Fee: $95
..
for Effective Leadership ~ -grawmg v0ii-win interdependent rela-
' tionships in a diverse community Competency: Collaborator
liberties. 1.:30 pm - 5:00 pm ~ ' ' ~ Examine some of the greatest, most
. - . _, RegistrationFee: $95 S)?~ ~ They Will Listen Practical wisdom we have for improving
CERTIFICATE OF
ACHIEVEMENT IN
LEADERSHIP
PROGRAM...
allows local elected officials to
organize their professional devel-
opment azound critical skills
necessary for effective leadership.
The program is built azound five
core leadership competencies:
(1) Cornerstone;
(2) Competent Practitioner;
(3) Communicator;
(4) Collaborator;
(5) Catalyst.
To obtain more information or
enroll in the Certificate of
Achievement in Leadership
program, contact the Leadership
Training Institute hotline at
(202)626-3170.
Competency: Collaborator 9i0D.arr~Noon processes in all matters of local gover-
Leazn how to stand out as a leader ~
.function as an organitational entre
re=>; IZegistiation Fee: $95
Competency: Communicator Hance and community building, The
Four Foundations of Human Excellence
T
p
neur, and address our flail -tasks and' .
Y Y
'
Leazn'how preparation, presentation and
persuasion can expand your leadershi -
ruth, Beauty, Goodness and Unity-
provide us with a wealth of directionfor
responsibilities ,headton. intake the shift
from workin alone and solvin rob- .
g g P p
and help you set positive change in
ti
i
hi
fulfilling Aristotle's claim that a aty is a
„
`Partnership for living well
A uni
ue
' lems to effectively focus on and unpact'
those around ou, As a a official, it is
Y ~` mo
on w
t
n your communty. Learn
and practice presenturg from an audience
i
i
L
h .
q
and engaging seminaz that will inspire
You with fresh insight for buildin
-Your 'people skills' tharwill equip you v
ewpo
nt.
earn
ow to improve your
pizserrtation abilities and realize how cleaz g
stronger collaborative partner-ships in
to interact and communicate more
effectively with your constituents and
ll
s
e
communication serves your constituents
to better understand your leadership. your community.
Teri Hablts of Hi
hl
co
e
gu
s. g
y
Testtfyuig With Impact
Balancing Governance
and Representation on Effective Govenvn
g Bodies
.1:30 pm - 5:00 pm
1:30 pm - 5:00 pm
Registratton Fee:..$95
CI COUnC11S
~' Registration Fee: $95
-Core Competency: Catalyst
Coro eten Communicator
P ~' 9:00 am-Noon
Registration Fee: $95
Explore how governance effectiveness
Leazn how to relax, how to 'talk your Competency: Competent comes from dedicated leaders applying
testimony', how to 'think on your feet' Practitioner productive disciplined processes in ful-
and make policy makers or legislators
want to listen. Leazn winning ways to
The ultimate success of council mein- filling their purpose and vision. Learn
the ten habits that are proven techniques
deliver your message, sell your ideas and
yourself. Discover the formula for sue- ~ depends upon your effectiveness as
governors' of your community. essential to better governance and highly
effective governing bodies. Understand
cess in even the most hostile climates as
you leazn the tools necessary to deliver Broaden your understanding of the
nature of council roles and the potential how to achieve leadership effectiveness
by anticipating changes and being
your message. conflict between them. Learn to devel-
op better skills for goal setting, policy vision-driven in the leadership that you
bring to your local government role.
i.g26 ~~~
" $ 4,486;~~
~ 4o7,b64 ~"~~, g~56.p'11
$1
r_
^y g1 ~,. ' ,~:. 2525
~~,: ~°
1 ~ a'
_ ~ '~ ~'.
Homeland Security
The White House and the Republican Congress will
be under enormous pressure to move quickly on
launching the Department of Homeland Security,
appropriating long overdue funding to cities
and towns, and providing broad guidance on how
to protect the homeland.
The Federal Budget
The budget and appropriations process is the foun-
dationfor the federal-local relationship. The
process will get underway in February when the
President submits his budget request. For cities
and towns, the focus will be on protecting
funding for critical programs like the
Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS),
Local Law Enforcement Block Grant (LLEBG),
and Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) programs.
Transportation
Reauthorization of several key transportation
laws -the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st
entury (TEA-21) and the Aviation Investment
Reform Act for the 21st Century (AIR-21} -
e scheduled in 2003. These laws authorize pro-
grams and federal funding for roads, bridges, tran-
sit systems, bike paths, and aviation. Continued
federal support for the nation's passenger rail sys-
tem including Amtrak and high-speed rail will also
be on the federal agenda.
The 2003 Congressional City Conference will feature general sessions,
workshops, and strategy meetings built around NLC's lobbying priorities
for the year. The NLC Officers will define the lobbying priorities at their
early January leadership meeting. Watch for updates on the NLC web site
and in Nation's Cities Weekly to learn about the specific issues that will be
covered once the priorities are set. Among the topics that are important to
cities and towns that are likely to be on federal agenda in 2003 are:
Affordable Housing
Debate about how to increase the availability of
affordable housing and homeownership will contin-
ue in 2003. City leaders have supported a trust
fund to provide a dedicated source of federal
money for affordable housing. President Bush
has proposed a Blueprint for the American Dream
which focuses on closing the homeownership gap.
Public Safety
In 2002, funding proposals merged support for tra-
ditional public safety with new homeland security
responsibilities. And, as plans for the necessary
emphasis on new homeland security roles for the
FBI developed, federal attention to supporting
cities and towns in crime prevention and traditional
law enforcement activities seemed to wane. While
there are new responsibilities at the federal and
local level, those new responsibilities don't replace
traditional law enforcement roles. Can we ensure
the right balance?
Water Infrastructure
The 107th Congress began work on legislation to
authorize significant new resources for municipal
wastewater and drinking water infrastructure needs.
Keeping this on the agenda of the 108th Congress
will be important to ensure long-term attention to
bridging the funding gap between resources avail-
able at the local level and the need to maintain,
repair, and replace critical water infrastructure,
Electronic Commerce
With aty and state governments feeling the
squeeze of a soft economy, protecting local
revenue streams remains an essential goal.
While Congress isn't likely to take up the debate
about whether online vendors should be required to
collect state and local sales taxes, making sure
Congress doesn't do anything to interfere with local
revenue authority will be important.
Telecommunications
The crash of the telecommunications industry has
exacerbated the tension between making money
and protecting public rights of way. The battles
get played out in Congress, in the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC), and in the
courts. The newest challenges have come over
how to provide high-speed Internet service
while protecting local autonomy.
Visit the Congressional City Conference
section of the NLC web site at
www.nlc.org for regular updates on key
issues and specific NLC advocacy priori-
ties. And come to Washington prepazed
to be part of a unified voice calling for
action on clearly defined priorities on
behalf of all of America's cities and towns.
using or registration unTl be processed v:ithout accompanying payment in full
ou a newly elected official? Population? _
Name $ex
Title
City/Organization
Mailing Address
Crty_
Phone
Fax _
Email
State Zip
Spouse/Paztner Name* ($25 fee)
•Spouse/Partner not a&gibk for a separate hotel room
Child Name (14 and under, no fee) Age
Youth Delegate*'s (15-18, $75 fee) Age
*"`Local officials are encouraged to register youth as active partiapants in this conference to con-
tribute to NLC's youth agenda. If the youth delegate hotel accommodations separate from
h
h
i
d
yours, attac
t
e reg
stration form with your complete
Youth Chaperone Name ($50 fee)
Special Conference Rates
Il $25 5pouse/Guest (non-refundable) $
GI $75 Youth Delegate $
Hl $75 Youth Chaperone (not applicable to elected o,~"iciais) $
Advance Relation Fees
(Postinazked by ebrvary 7, 2003)
$325 .First Time Attendee
C2 $385 NLC/SML Member (Onsite rate is $435 after 2/7/03) $
D2 $385 Associate Member (Onsite rate is $435 after 2/7/03) $
$495 SML Member (Onsite rate is $555 offs 2/7/03) $
$585 Non-Member/Other (Onsite rate is $625 after 2/7/03) $
e~s~tron for Leadership Training Institute
(Fri yda ,March 7, 2003)
You must be re isdered
for the conference in order to attend.
LI $150
t L
d
hi
I
i
a
e- en
ea
ers
p
nst
tute $
L2 $150 Effective Communication Strategies for a Culturally
Constitu
L3 $150 Becoming a Change Leader $
L4 $95 Building a High Performance Council $
L5 $95 Powerful People Skills for Eff~.tive Leadership $
L6 $95 Testifying With Impact $
Registration for Leadership Training Institute Seminars
(Saturday, March $, 2003)
You must be registered for the conference in order to attend
L7 $150 The Call of Leadership $
L8 $95 Leadership in a Diverse Community $
L9 $95 Speak So They Will Listen $
L10 $95 Balancing Govanazrce and Representation oa City Covnals $
Ll l $30 Leadership Training Institute PParticipant &
Rewgnition Luncheon $
L12 $95 Mastering Power, Politics and Influence $
L13 $95 If Aristotle Were Mayor: The New Soul of Governance $
L14 $95 Ten Habits of Highly Effective Governing Bodies $
Spetaal Events
You must be registered for the conference in order to attend.
AI $35 Sunday Celebrate Diversity Breakfast
(Onsite rate is $50 after 2/7/03) $
Constituency Group Dues and Events
You must be regrstered for the conference in order to attend
Bl $25 APAMO Activity Fee $
Cl $2S GLBLO Activity Fee $
Dl $40 HELD Activity Fee $
$45 NBC-LEO Reception $
$50 WIMG Luncheon $
Registration Fee: $
Registration Cancellation Policy:
All requests must be received in writing, postmarked by February 7, 2003, and are subject to
a $50 cancellation fee. No partial refunds will be made if you decide not to attend particular
functions. No registrations or cancellations vriU be accepted by telephone. No cancellations
will be accepted after February 7, 2003.
n}Firn veo rvntn. Pmrmon} (:h<r43! Amnnn}
Hotel Reservations:
. You must be registered to reserve a hotel room. To guarantee your room, all hotels require one
night's deposit plus tax, per room 14 days prior to your arrival. This is required even if you plan to
amve before 6:00 p.m. If accommodations are not guaranteed 14 days m advance, the reservation
will be canceled
^ Please make my hotel reservation as indicated below
^ I do not require hotel accommodations at any of the hotels listed below
^ Please contact me regarding suite information.
Room Dates: Arrival Date: _/_/_ Depamue Date: _/_/_
Room Type: D Singlee (2pason/1 b~)) ^^ S ~1~ ~
^ Double/Double (2 people/2 beds)
Sharing My Room With:
IStpe~'al Housing Request (e.~., u+heekhair accessible rooms, etc.):
you have speaal housing or transportatron needs, please contact NLC Meeting Services.
Hotel Choices:
Hotel Choices: Indicate your first-choice hotel with the number
"1' . Number the other hotels from " 2" to "13" in order of your preference.
Sgl/Dbl SgUDbI
_ Capitol Hilton $179/199 _ Omni Shoreham $182/182
_ Churchill Hotel $169/189 _ Radisson Bazcelo $146/146
_ Courtyard by Marriott $156/156 _ Renaissance Mayflower $200/200
_ Hilton Wash Embassy Row $173/173 _ St. Gregory Hotel $175/175
_ Jurys Normandy Inn $149/149 _ Hilton Washington $177/199
_ Jurys Washington Hotel $166/166 _ and Towers (Club Level) $270/290
Hotel DCpOS1t Information:
All major aed"it cazds with expiration date of 03/03 or later are aaepted at the conference hotels.
All checks, government purchase orders, vouchers or claims must be submitted to the hotel with
wnfirmation number FOUR WEEKS prior to your arrival, and are subject to hotel approval.
R tron Fee Payment Information
^e~ my REGISTRATION FEES to VISA or MasterCard listed below
^ Check for REGISTRATION FEES made payable to National League of Cities
^ Purchase order for REGISTRATIONFEES - cnpy must be enclosed & payment
must be received by Mazch 3, 2003.
Hotel Deposit Payment Information
^ Charge my HOTEL DEPOSIT to the alit card listed below
^ Check for HOTEL DEPOSIT - please submit to hotel address noted on confirmation
FOUR WEEKS prior to your amval - subject to hotel approval
^ Purchase Order for HOTEL DEPOSIT -submit to hotel address noted on confirmation
FOUR WEEKS prior to your arrival - subject to hotel approval
Credit Card Authorization:
NLC Meeting Services is authorized to use the card below to pay all applicable registration fees and
guarantee my hotel reservation. I understand that one night's room chazge will be billed through this
card if I fail to show up for my assigned housing on the confirmed date unless I have canceled my
reservation with the hotel at least 72 hours in advance.
Visa/MasterCardNucober Exp. Date
Cazd Holder Name
Card Holder Signature
Additional Credit Card Authorization:
For hotel deposit only if different than the aedit card number listed above. (Expiration date must
be 03/03 or later, per hotel requirement.)
Credit Card Number ~ ~~
Cazd Holder Name
Cazd Holder Signature
Return Conference Registration and Housing Form to:
Fax: 703-631-6288 (Credit Card and Purchase Orders Only - No Checks)
Masi: NLC Meeting services, c/n J. spargo & Associates, Ins.
11212 Waples Mill Road, Suite 104, Fairfax, VA 22030
For more information:
Phone: 1-888-319-3864 or 703-449-6418
Email; nlccccregistration(t~jspargo.com or nlcccchousingQjspazgo.com
Office use only: Hotel Subblk Cate Rate
•
b000Z '~'Q 'uo~un
•
m•N 'anuany emeni~isuuad
a~ryRsui saRt~ 3o an~ea7 Zeal
• 2002 City Survey
Falcon Heights, Minnesota
Survey Results
1. The City currently uses the following tools to keep people informed about issues,
events, plans, and needs. Please check each of those that members of your
household have used:
City Newsletter 223
Cable TV 46
Website 46
Flyers 199
Other 10
(local newspaper, letters, conversations with neighbors, phone)
Comments:
"Sound is usually very poor on cable TV"
2. The city has been asked to consider allowing a weekly farmer's market at 2025
Larpenteur Avenue (Twin Cities Co-op Federal Credit Union). This would replace
• the one currently held at Har Mar. Would you or someone in your household be
likely to shop at a Farmer's Market in Falcon Heights?
Yes 196
No 13
Unsure 3 5
i•
3. New Businesses
Type of business
Bakery
Breadsmith
Deli
Convenience store
Non-chain type restaurant
Breakfast restaurant
Green grocers/food coop
Drug store/pharmacy
Coffee houses
"White Castle"
Dairy store
Sporting goods
Bank
Vietnamese food
Number of requests
11
3
5
11
15
1
10
4
12
3
1
1
1
Sushi/Indian/Korean/Turk 1
Hardware-plumb/elec. 7 •
"Culvers" 1
Subway 1
Gift Shops 4
Book store 1
Laundromat 1
"Cheers Bar" 1
Wine Bar/Tavern/Pub 3
Post Office 2
Cellphone store 1
Auto supply store 1
Auto repair 1
Health 1
Running shoe store 1
Mailbox on Larp/Snell 1
Poker room 1
Any non-polluting business 1
No more businesses 2
"Chipotle" 1
football stadium 1
barber shop 1
alternative care clinic 1
Tax prep 1 •
"good" fast food 1 .
"Zantigos Mexican" 1
indoor tennis 1
Chinese food 1
"Creative Kids Stuff' 1
4. Currently, the city and school board hold elections on odd years. Would you
support or oppose switching the city elections to even years to coincide with
County, State, and National elections? (School Board elections would not be
affected).
Support 131
Oppose 25
No Opinion 66
Unsure 16
why:
Supporting Comments Number of times heard
More efficient/cost savings 22
Better voter turn-out 42
"Keeps city issues separate from state/national issues"
Simplifies ballot 1
• "Include school board and eliminate odd-year elections"
"Intuition"
"Don't know the pros and cons"
Opposing Comments Number of times heard
Too long ballot 2
"Would encourage big ticket campaigns and spending/too .much politicking"
Issues not served 2
5. On a scale from 1 (not at all important) to 5 (extremely important), how
important is each of the following to you?
Issue: Overall Rank (1=most important, 5=least important)
Cost of rubbish/recycling services 3
1 13
2 24
3 59
4 59
• 5 66
Environmental Impact 1
1 18
2 17
3 30
4 68
5 89
Number/size of trucks in streets/alleys 4
1 41
2 29
3 44
4 44
5 63
Choice of hauler
2
1 55
2 35
3 33
•
4 27
5 68
Additional services/choice of services 5
1 23
2 35
3 65
4 52
5 36
6. Would you be willing to have the Falcon Heights City Council negotiate a
contract with a single garbage hauler if the contract could guarantee lower
prices and high quality service?
Yes 172
No 59
7. Would you be willing to pay a little more if your hauler guaranteed to dispose of
your garbage at a recovery facility instead of a landfill?
•
Yes 145 .
Yes, if increase is not more than
Number of responses
1 1
3 2
4 1
5 20
8 1
10 26
15 3
20 5
25 1
50 2
5-10 7
No 55
Comments:
Only if lower price and high-quality are guaranteed
Only MN company
We can make our own decisions 2
Competition keeps prices down •
"If hauler is committed to resource recovery" -"never"
"Why? Recovery facilities use landfills for excess"
I wish that we had a rule that all rubbish containers were hidden "out of sight" by evening
of same day -(garage, backyard, etc) and "up-scale" neighborhood should look like one.
8. What Falcon Heights park facilities do members of your household use?
Community 113
Curtiss 51
FH School 60
Grove 26
Walking paths 94
None 60
9. How do you find out about City recreation programs?
Rec bulletin 73
Newsletter 167
Newspaper 69
Other 11
Cable TV 5
School flyer/
• newsletter 34
Website 12
10. Would you be willing to support higher user fees for recreation programs in
order to maintain current service levels?
Yes 87
Yes, if increase is not more than
No 13
"No Opinion" 113
(this was written-in)
Comments:
"Unfair for residents [of Falcon Heights] to have to pay non-resident fees to Roseville
Community Ed".
11. What recreational activities do members of your household participate in?
Walking 188
Softball/baseball 19
Golf 52
Frisbee 10
Cross Country skiing 54
• Hockey/skating 35
Biking
Community events 111
56 •
Skateboarding 8
Basketball 26
Volleyball 9
Soccer 22
Rugby 1
Playground play 58
Running 7
Tennis 43
Other
12. Park facilities/rec activities need to be added?
Something similar to Shoreview facility
Rollerblade park
Dog walking path with adequate trash cans (and baggies would be nice!)
Greater use of Fairgrounds
Kids Programs
Auto race track
Cross country skiing
Allow dogs in park, and make owners responsible (2)
Groomed ski trail
Please keep Saturday morning youth soccer •
Current is adequate
Pets should be allowed in the parks
Ice I could play broomball on
Indoor tennis
Biking or walking club
Moor outdoor volleyball courts
Swimming pool
Shorter hoops at Curtiss
Program to encourage walking/socializing among city residents
Community center with pooUshare with Roseville
Indoor golf driving range batting cages
Update Curtiss Field
More walking paths
More tennis courts with lights
Swimming (2)
Disc Golf Course
Outdoor racquetball courts
Have city set and groom cross-country ski on U of M golf course
Bridge
Dog Park (2)
Improve tennis courts
Warming house at FH School •
Indoor swimming pool
Upgrade playground at FH School
Need more programs for single adults
We need a real community center with a pool
Fairview Community Center-more open swim times, times for family gym time
13. Areas for new walking paths?
Over Snelling at Roselawn and Larpenteur
Blacktop paths in Community Park
East of Snelling on Roselawn
Fairview between Larpenteur and Roselawn (2)
"Don't use them"
Roseville
Fulham along U of M Golf Course between Larpenteur and Roselawn (2)
East side of Snelling
Would like to see a safer method of crossing Snelling for bikers and hikers-also walk
path on Roselawn
East side of Fairview on University land right of way
Need sidewalks on Tatum and other Falcon Heights schools
Roselawn-Snelling to Hamline
On campus property
• No (2)
Wherever possible
Along Larpenteur (2)
Any place lacking sidewalks
Along Gortner Avenue from Larpenteur to Campus
Roselawn from Hamline to Snelling (easier to cross Snelling on West side of Cleveland
between U of M tennis and Laxpenteur).
Cleveland south of Lapenteur
Roselawn Snelling to Hamline
In front of Gibbs Farm and Rose B&B
Along Golf Course on Larpenteur
West side of Snelling between Roselawn and Garden
Sidewalks in Residential neighborhoods
14. Do park and recreation facilities and programs adequately serve your
neighborhood?
Yes 169
No 16
15. Where do you live?
Northome 51
. Northeast 72
University Grove 30
Falcon Woods 54
St. Mary's/Maple Knoll 22
CTC 0
Hollywood Court 6
Additional comments:
"Remove truck traffic from Fairview Avenue! ! Restore one aspect of the quality of life
that we've lost!"
"You should do a survey on how residents feel about the job the city counciUmayor are
doing."
"Don't need anymore businesses or apartments/rental in city."
Note:
There were two or three more "comments" that were too lengthy to include in these
results. I will make copies and have them for you on Wednesday.
•
4~ ~ Cwt-e.. C ~~ ~ ~w~' ~-~-= ~ `fih~~ c~-~~nf es~`~ C~ +~~%"-
~J
Res ' en# Survey ~ a ~- ~e ~ ~. `'~
2002 n~~~=~~n~~ I ,(( ~ ~ z I~
City of Falcon Heights ~ ~ ~ ~~
Please take a few moments"to fill out this survey and Why? ~ ~ rP ~ ~`He ~ (I ~ '
return it to us. You can fold if in half, and either drop;'. (( ~~/(,,
`- it at the city half in the drop box, or at the front desk: ~ I t ' ~~r~J'I
during regular hours (8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p:m.), or mail ~ , 1
~it back to us. e "' ~ `Gf
c~u r'
Please return this survey by ~ ~e C: ~~i ~U, u p
December 20th, 2002 at 4:30 p.m. - i rlSdek ` ~ ~3S a ~ ~ r- ~ ~
On-a scale from 1 (no t al important fo , ~ ~, h
TheCity=currently uses the following tools to keep 5 (.extremely importaht), how important is eac~i. ~ .~
people informed- about issues, events, plans, and of the fol owing to yo ? ~ ~ n ~ ei
needs. Please check;each of those that members ~~ ~Su~m~~-, ; 2 1 ~ uoc/ ~`~ ~~
of your household have used: Cost of rubbish..an~ecycl collections rv~s`
•. _ The environmental impact of what happen
City newsletter '' rubbish/recycling after it is picked up.
Cable TV -public access Chahnei 16 ~ NOmber-and size of truckson res_identia
^ City website (www.ci.falcon-heights:mn.us)~ _ streets and afJeys _.': ~ ~ -
Monthlyflyers delivered to each residence Choice of hauler
Other Additional services/choice of service om .
rubbish hauler/rec cl'irig coil s ch~s,
The -city has been asked to consider allowing a lar~~99e ite ick-u ~ a J~
=' weekly farmer's market at 2025 Larpenfeur Avenue ~~~- Y~~~Z~N~r~ '~S ~ ~ ~cl-
-ece~ i
y •(Twi'h Cifies Co-Op Federal Credit_Unio.n), This :would` ..Would you be willing to have the .Falcon,... eig~*ity
'`~ replace th'e.one,currertly held at Har Mar. Wou{d,you; Council negotiate acontract-with a single rubbish ~,.1 f
or someone ih your household be likely hauler if the cohtract.could gu. rariie lower~prrc~s~
to shop at a Farmer's Market in Falcon .Heights? and high quality service? ~ i ~¢ ;
~ / .
>~ Ye s {.: ~~ Id . ~~S ~ C.1J `~,-~, ~ J ~e-n ~ r~l'e s I ~ ( ~. ~c~tiv ~~_~ ~~ 1 ~ ~ ~'
^No ~` ~ ^No
Yb~~'~'l~ G' ei_Se ~ cNl ~ ~ ~ ~ `r~~J ~ -~-~ ~- ~ U~r~ ~ J-C:~G'
^ Unsure ~ _ 1 f
~ ~ ~-- Would ou be wiiilin to a a little more if o r ?~ `'
.
~vvs ~.u-J'~ c~'Yier'S Y 9 p Y. Y
.Are-there-businesses that we do. not currently have hauler guaranteed to dispose of ycur garbage at a
- in Falcoh Heights that you think are really needed? recovery fiacility' ihstead of a landfill?
If so, what are they?
^Yes
C~~ ~ ~ Yes, if the increase' is not more-.than
/ (Please fill in the percentage of increase that
~f ~~) ? ? would be acceptable you.)-~ j~~~:~,5~ ~' i
_ What Falcon Heig~its park facilities do membeis'of
ydur household use?
Currently, he city ahd school board hold elections ^ Community Park ^ University Grove Park
on odd years: Would you support or oppose ^ Curtiss Field Walking paths
switching the city elections to even years to coincide.. _^ Falcon Heights School ~NOne
-with County, State and National elections? (:School -
- Board elections would not be affected}. How do you, find out aboutCity recreation programs?
Support ^ Recreation bulletin ^ Cable TV
Oppose ~ ity Newsletter ^School.Flyer/Newsletter-
^ No Opinioh ^ Local newspaper. ^ City Website
" ^ Unsure ^ Other
' - _ a.- - _
~~ ~~.::.
Would you bewilling to support higher user fees Are there any areas where you believ walkrrig -paths
for recreation programs in order to maintarn current should be added? ~ ~
y ~ ~, f~
service levels? ,~°, c ~ ~ `~ `~ -J ,
^ Yes ~ ~ ~/
Yes, if increase is not more tha W~ ~ ~ {[
n
'~,~10 o p i ri ion c. r, °~ -i- ~Sl ~;C~,'~
~ ~ ~
What recreational activities do members of you ~ Do'p r and re ~ ation~'faci~it~i~s an~rogr rns
household participate in? (Check all that apply) adequately serve your neighborhood? ~~ ~~ ~I/~
alking ^ Basketball ^ Yes , jG~~~.~~~ ~ I~S~~ ~ ~ /; 1
;' ^ Softball baseball - ^ Volle ball ^ N - (,
{ (~ ` {
^ Golf - ^ Soccer Ultl^ ~>~ , 4 -
y ~ ^ ~y2t,'F-e~l,~-u mi C~ , ~ P
^ .Frisbee ^ Rugby Where dq you live?~. ~4-4-(,h ~~ ;~~
^ _Cross Country skiing ^ Playground play ~ r~
^:Hockey/Skating ^ Running: orthome (South of Larpe t`eur/Easf of Sne~lJng)
^ Biking ^ Tennis Northeast (North of Larpenteur/Easf of Snelling)
Community Events (Ice Cream Social;: ^ University Grove '
.Dead of Wihter event) - - ^ Falcon -Woods (North of Larpenteur/South of
^ Skateboarding Roselawn)
^ Other: ^ St. Mary's/Maple Kroll (West of Snelling/North of
-' Larpenteur/East of Fairview)
~: I' t re e" on r ^ CTC (Commonwealth Terrace Co-op)
' e o e '~ o, w at? ~ ^ Hollywood Court -
~` ~ ~
4 ~~ / ~ .~ _,~_
-~ ~~ ~ ,
,. ~ ~ . ' . .
~~ J ~ ~ ( ~ ~;~'_~ ~ ' "
Cify of Falcon .Heights Cc~~ `~ /y. - 1 / ~ _ ; .~~
2077 W.-Lar enteur-Avenue ~e~u.~-~`1 i~e~ h °~~~~~~c~_, c~~~.~,T~
p ~~ S Please
Falcon Heights, MN -55113 ~ ;-C ~ ~-- ~. e,~-,' ``c j ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ USA '= --`
~ J`
`~ ~~ ` -_~
i w
'i', _,
', , - ;:
E , _ -_
I
f, City of Falcon Heights
~~
2077W. Larpenteur Avenue
- ~` ~ Falcon Heights, MN 55113
•
Currently we have about 3 gazbage haulers that service our neighborhood. Yes, there are
too many, they drive too fast, they make too much noise and it seems wasteful to have
multiple haulers going into every neighborhood around the city to haul trash. I am also
concerned about what they do with the gazbage. I would like to have it handled in the
most environmentally-friendly way possible.
Regazding walking/jogging/biking paths. My greatest concern is the lack of any safe way
to get from our neighborhood to the walking path along Roselawn. There is no sidewalk
along the west frontage road of Snelling between Larpenteur and Roselawn. Given the
depth of the front yazds abutting this street it is difficult to imagine why something has not
been done about this. When cars are pazked on the east side of the west frontage road
people walking along it aze especially vulnerable. These pazked cars often have "for sale"
signs in the windows. I wonder about this practice as well. Sometimes it looks h7ce a
used car lot on the frontage road. Not an attractive view and not very safe for
pedestrians.
~;
~~~ ,;' _
~~.
- II -
~~
,~ /
. ~ ~ - ~ i
._..~_~ -.-Cra~.= ~`~.~ .~ ~ _~_
s
' + I ~I
_ __-__- - {~.r_. ~ COY' (`2,ct_ ~ ~~!.r~ G C~, ~ ~„--~~_.4^~J__°~S l~C' W~L~.~__
. , y ~ --
._ _____ ____~_._~..~_~ ~_ ___ _ T _ _ ~__ __.__ _ ~___._ ___ _ __ _ ~_____~_~__.~_._ _~. __
,; , ____ _ ~ __r__._.____ _.~_ __ ~___
. ,~
_. _ _ _
11 `11 ` .^ _ ~.._.~..
~~: 1~--
,.
.~
;, _ ( ~
1, ~~--- ~-~ ~ ~`
~f~ I 1
___ ____. _ __.-_: y,._~U c:r__ ___eG_~.I_ ~ __ _ G_c~~~ c~(.e~c-- --~.U~ L ~~ _. ~_ >_,r~ ~ `?-~'_e~ec.~ __
~tE ~ ~
~ , ~ - ~'
1 I / `~
_-~~~f ~ u 1.~5 -
f -r-~
~ . ~ ; ) ._..._ .~,... _ - _--_ .. w.
s
~.~--mss. ~ _ . ~w ~_~ .~_.~_...._~_.~<.5 ~~-~_:r.~..~~~~a ~-L
''
~-____ _
+~- i - _
~ -
____
~# _
2077 W. LARPENTEUR AVENUE FALCON HEIGHTS, MN 55113-5594 PHONE (651) 644-5050 FAX (651) 644-8675
January 10, 2003
MEMORANDUM
To: Mayor Gehrz, Councilmembers Kuettel, Lamb, Lindstrom and Talbot
From: Heather Worthington, City Administrator ~t~
Re: Waiver of tort liability limit
At the Wednesday night council meeting, Councilmember Lamb asked for further
information on the staff's request to not waive the tort liability limit. I have enclosed a
memo from the LMC regarding this issue, and it has quite a bit of detailed information in
it. On Page 4, paragraph 4, the question of the effect on cities that waive the limit is
addressed.
• In addition, Roland spoke with Rochelle, our insurance representative at the LMCIT. She
provided the following information:
• If the city chooses the waiver option, there is increased exposure in the opinion of the
LMCIT, and the premium increases 3% on the general liability premium. In addition,
the excess liability premium increases 25%.
The city carries a $1,000,000 general liability policy. We also carry a $1,000,000
excess liability policy. We carry an excess liability policy mainly to cover attorney
fees on any lawsuit (which are not covered in the general liability policy). There are
several additional reasons to carry excess liability on page 2 of the LMC memo-
such as inverse condemnation, indemnification of a second or third party in contracts,
or claims under the federal civil rights laws.
For 2002, we paid $14,602 for general liability, and a 3% increase would have added
$439 in premium cost.
For excess liability, we paid $3,035, and a 25% increase would have added $759 in
premium cost.
• 2003 rates are projected to be in-line with 2002 increases/rates.
I hope this clarifies things. Please call me at 917-1288, or e-mail if you have questions.
HOME OF THE MINNESOTA STATE FAIR AND THE U OF M ST. PAUL CAMPUS
® ~~ PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
TREE CITY USA
Leogue of Miaaasota CifiQs
GiiQa promof-ng azcwnwuo
•
LMCIT
Risk Management Information
145 University Avenue west, St. Paul, MN 55103-2044
Phone: (651) 281-1200 • (800) 925-1122
FaS: (651) 281-1298 • TDD (651) 281-1290
www.lmcit.lzanc.org
LMCiT LIABILITY COVERAGE OPTIONS
LIABILITY LIMITS, COVERAGE LIlVIITS, AND WAIVERS
LMCIT gives cities several options for structuring their liability coverage. The city can choose
either to waive or not to waive the monetary limits that the statutes provide; and the city can
select from. among several liability coverage limits. This memo discusses these options and
identifies some issues to consider in deciding which of the options best meets the city's needs.
What are the statutory limits on municipal tort liability?
The statutes limit a city's tort liability to a maximum of $300,000 per claimant and $1,000,000
per occurrence. These limits apply whether the claim is against the city, against the individual
officer or employee, or against both.
What are the coverage limits for LMCIT's basic primary liability coverage?
LMCIT's liability coverage provides a limit of $1,000,000 per occurrence, matching the per-
occutrence part of the statutory municipal tort liability limit. Under the basic coverage form the
$300,000 per claimant part of the statutory liability limit is not waived, so if the statutory limit
applies to the particular claim, LMCIT and the city would be able to use that limit as a defense.
Beside the overall coverage limit of $1,000,000 per occurrence, there are -also annual aggregate
limits (that is, limits on the total amount of coverage for the year regardless of the number of
claims), for certain specific risks. Aggregate limits apply to the following:
Products /com leted o erations $1,000,000 annuall
Failure to su 1 utilities $1,000,000 annuall
EMF $1,500,000 annuall
Limited ollution* $1,000,000 annuall
Lead and asbestos* $200,000 annuall
Land use liti ation** $1,000,000 annuall
Y2k - basic* $25,000 annuall
Y2k - ex anded* $750,000 annuall
Em to ers liabili work com) $1,000,000 annuall
U
* The limit applies to both damages and defense costs.
** Coverage is on a sliding scale percentage basis.
If the statute limits our liability to $1,OOU,000 per occurrence, why would the city purchase
higher coverage limits than that? •
There are several different reasons why cities should strongly consider carrying higher limits of
liability coverage.
1. The statutory tort limits either do not or may not apply to several types of claims.
Some examples include:
• Claims under federal civil rights laws. These include Section 1983, the Americans with
Disabilities Act, etc. .
• Claims for tort liability that the city has assumed by contract. This occurs. when a city
agrees in a contract to defend and indemnify a private parry.
• Claims for actions in another state. This might occur in border cities that have mutual
aid agreements with adjoining states, or when a city official attends a national conference
or goes to Washington to lobby, etc.
• Claims based on liquor sales. This mostly affects cities with municipal liquor stores, but
it could also arise in connection with beer sales at a fire relief association fund-raiser, for
example.
• Claims based on a "taking" theory. Suits challenging land use regulations frequently .
include an "inverse condemnation" claim, alleging that the regulation amounts to a
"taking" of the property.
2. LMCIT's primary liability coverage has annual limits on coverage for a few specific
risks. The table on page 1 lists the liability risks to which aggregate coverage limits
apply. If the city has a loss or claim in one of these azeas, there might not be enough
limits remaining to cover the city's full exposure. if there is a second loss of the same sort
during the year. Excess liability coverage gives the city additional protection against this
risk as well.
However there are a couple of important restrictions on how the excess coverage applies
to risks that are subject to aggregate limits:
• The excess coverage does not apply to three risks: lead and asbestos; failure to
supply utilities; and Y2k, and
• The excess coverage does not automatically apply to liquor liability unless the city
specifically requests it.
3. The city maybe required by contract to carry higher coverage limits. Occasionally,
a contract might include a requirement that the city carry more than $1,000,000 of
coverage limits. Carrying excess coverage is a way to meet these requirements. (There's •
2
• also another option for cities in this situation. LMCIT can issue an endorsement to
increase the city's coverage limit only for claims relating to that particular contract.
There's a small charge for these "laser" endorsements.)
4. There may be more than one political subdivision covered under the city's coverage.
An HRA, EDA, or port authority is itself a sepazate political subdivision. If the city
EDA, for example, is named as a covered party on the city's coverage and a claim were
made that involved both the city and the EDA, theoretically the claimant might be able to
recover up to $1,000,000 from the city and another $1,000,000 from the EDA, since there
are two political subdivisions involved. Excess coverage is one way to provide enough
coverage limits to address this situation. Another solution is for the HRA, EDA, or port
authority to carry separate liability coverage in its own name.
This issue of multiple covered parties can also arise is if the city has agreed by contract to
name another entity as a covered party, or to defend and indemnify another entity.
5. Cities sometimes choose to carry higher coverage limits because of a concern that
the courts might overturn the statutory liability limits. However, those limits have
now been tested and upheld several times in Minnesota. While it's always possible that a
future court might decide to throw out the statutory limits, this is now less of a concern.
What excess liability coverage limits are available?
• Excess coverage is available in $1 million increments, up to a maximum of $5 million.
We're just a small city. Isn't excess liability coverage really just something that big cities
might need?
Absolutely not. If anything, excess liability coverage is even more important to a small city.
If a city-ends up with more liability than it has coverage, the city will have to either draw on
existing funds or go to its taxpayers to pay that judgment. A large city faced with, say, a million
dollars of liability over and above what its LMCIT coverage pays might be able to spread that
$1 million cost over several thousand taxpayers. The small city by contrast might be dividing
that same $1 million cost among only a couple hundred taxpayers. $1 million divided among
5000 taxpayers is $200 apiece -annoying but probably at least manageable for most taxpayers.
$1 million divided among 200 taxpayers is $5000 apiece -enough to be a real problem for many.
How does excess coverage apply to uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage?
If the city carries excess liability coverage, the city has the option to have the excess coverage
also apply to uninsured or underinsured motorist (1:J1`~I/UIM} claims. To do so, the city must first
increase its primary UM/UIM limit from the basic $50,000 to $1,000,000. There are additional
premium charges both to increase the primary LJM/UIlVI limit and to apply the excess coverage
• to the UM/UIM exposure. The city needs to consider whether the benefit from having higher
LTlvI/UIlVI limits is worth that cost.
3
The LTM/UlM coverages are intended to assure that an injured driver will be compensated if s/he
is injured in an accident caused by an uninsured or underinsured driver. The LTM/UIM coverage •
steps into the place of the liability insurance that t$e driver should have had.
Keep in mind that in the case of city vehicles, an injury to the driver while operating a city
vehicle would in most cases be covered by workers' compensation. The amounts the individual
would be able to recover from LTM/UIlVI would be in addition to the medical, indemnity; and
other benefits paid under work comp. In many cases, it would amount to a double recovery for
the individual's injuries.
A city might decide to carry a higher limit for a couple reasons: if they believe the workers'
compensation benefits are insufficient to compensate their injured employees; or if they want to
make sure that non-employees riding in city vehicles are fully compensated in the event of an
accident with an nnins~ed or underinsured vehicle. {Note that in most cases the passenger's
own UM/UIM would also respond.)
LMCIT now gives the cities who participate in the primary liability coverage the option to
waive the 5300,000 per claimant statutory liability limit. What's the effect if we do this?
If the city chooses the "waiver" option, the city and LMCIT no longer can use the statutory limit
of $300,000 per claimant as a defense. Because. the waiver increases the exposure, the premium
is roughly 3% higher for coverage under the waiver option.
If the city waives the statutory limit, an individual claimant could therefor recover up to •
$1,000,000 in damages on a claim. Of course, the individual would still have to prove to the
.court or jury that. s/he really does have that amount of damages. Also, the statutory limit of
$1,000,000 per occurrence would still apply; that would limit the individual's recovery to a
lesser amount if there were multiple claimants.
Why would the city choose to pay more in order to get the waiver-option coverage? Does it
give the city better protection?
No.. Buying coverage under the "waiver" option doesn't protect the city any better. The benefit
is to the injured party.
The statutory liability limit only comes into play in a case where
l) the city is in fact liable; and
2) the injured party's actual proven damages are greater than the statutory limit.
Very literally, applying the statutory liability limit means that an injured party won't be fully
compensated for his/her actual, proven damages that were caused by city negligence. Some
cities as a matter of public policy may want to have more assets available to compensate their
citizens for injuries caused by the city's .negligence. Waiving the statutory liability limits is a •
way to do that.
4
• Other cities may feel that the appropriate policy is to minimize the expenditure of the taxpayers'
funds by taking full advantage of every protection the legislature has decided to provide. There's
no right or wrong answer on this point. It's a discretionary question of city policy that each city
council needs to decide for itself.
How would the waiver affect our city's coverage or risk on those claims that the statutory
tort liability limits don't apply to?
It doesn't. Waiving the statutory tort Limits has no effect on claims that the statutory limits don't
apply to.
What's the effect of waiving the statutory limits if we have excess coverage?
If the city has $1 million of excess coverage and chooses to waive the statutory tort limits, the
claimants (whether it's one claimant or several) could tnen potentially recover up to $2 million in
damages in a single occurrence. If the city carries higher excess coverage limits, the potential
maximum. recovery per occurrence is correspondingly higher.
Carrying excess coverage under the waiver option is a way to address an issue that some cities
find troubling: the case where many people aze injured in a single occurrence caused by city
negligence. Suppose, for example, that a city vehicle negligently runs into a.schooi bus full of
• kids, causing multiple serious injuries. $1,000,000 divided 50 ways may not go faz toward
compensating for those injuries. Excess coverage under the waiver option makes more funds
available to compensate the victims in that kind of situation.
The cost of the excess liability coverage is about 25% greater if the city waives the statutory tort
limits. The cost difference is proportionally greater than the cost difference at the primary level
because for a city that carries excess coverage, waiving the statutory tort Limits increases both the
per-claimant exposure and the per-occurrence exposure.
If we waive the statutory tort liability Limits, does it increase the risk that the city will end
up with liability that LMCIT doesn't cover?
No. The waiver form specifically says that the city is waiving the statutory tort liability limits
only to the extent of the city's coverage.
Of course, that's not to say that there is no risk that the city's liability could exceed its coverage
limits. We listed eazlier a number of ways that could happen to any city. But the waiver doesn't
increase that risk.
Can we waive the statutory tort limits for the primary coverage but not for the excess
coverage?
No. If the city decides to waive the statutory tort limits, that waiver applies to the full extent of
the coverage limits the city has. The city cannot partially waive the statutory limits.
I'm confused. Is there a simple way to summarize the options?
t e table on the followin a is a shorthand summary of what •
It s not necessanly simple, bu th g pag
the effect would be of the various coverage structure options in different circumstances.
I'm still confused. Who can I talk to?
Crive us a call at the League office. Pete Tritz, Tom, Grundhoefer, Doug Crronli, or any of
LMCIT's property/casualty underwriters will be glad to talk with you.
•
•
6
•
•
A
0
.~
O
a~
O
U
.~
H
a
.~
~ ~
;~ O
,
s a 3 ~ ~
Cr ~ ~° .~
~
.~ ~
co
~ o ~' ~ .
~ ~
b~~
~+, '~ ~ ~, O O O O O
~ y U
y ,^. O O O
,
~
O
O
O w
O
~-,~ ~ Q~ O O O O
.r
,';y ~ ~ O a~
O A s"' --+
b4 ~
b4 N
b4 N
C~7
.~ a ~
~~
eC ~ ~ o
_
v' ~ 3 c
0
C
,~
'
H .a
y U
>~
~~°°
~ ~~;~ o 0 0 0
,~ ~ •~~-~ ~ o ~ O o
•- a
Q .~
~
U
r ~
~ O O O O
p ~
d.i
, ,~ o ~ 00
~ ~ ,
y ..;
b4 .~
b4 ,~
b4 N
bs}
i y
..
i
'~ CQ
q ~
'
~ .-.~
~ ~ U O
",y
'.
y
V .
O .r
~
~
.;y ~
.G r.a
~
~ ~ .~ ~
U O O
.
.r .'
+
~r n~ .~
^~
O
ee O
O O
O O
O O
O
C~ C~ ~
id O y
. ~ O 0 O
A y y p U
y O 0 O O
.wy
•~
O
H ~ v o
~ ~ ~
~ N y U
U a~ ~
'_'~ a~
> ~
>
D ~
'Lr ~
~"' ~' ~
w, U ~ U
„'i
.I.r V
~ N _O
O ~ U .~
O O
v] .~+ +~+
v]
~ U c0 U
O ~ y ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N
~ ~""~ k k 0 O p 0 0
_~
O U> d~ O> O cd
U c~ •~ CC m O '~ O y
..v 3 a~
~ 0 3 o a~
w
0 0 0 ° o °
a '' ~y `~~ .
a a•
~
~ to GJ y ~
QQ Q3 xa ~3
O
b
• Kathi Donnelly-Cohen
Director -Government Relations
Phone: 651-493-5281
Fax: 651-493-5288
January 10, 2003
Heather Worthington
City of Falcon Heights
City Administrator
2077 Larpenteur Ave W
Falcoq Heights, MN 55113-5551
JAS ~ ~ X003
Re: Cable Franchise -Franchise Fees on Cable Modem Service
Dear Ms. Worthington:
Enclosed for your attention is a data request pursuant to the Minnesota Data
• Practices Act in connection with the December 12, 2002 "Notice of Violation"
issued by the North Suburban Communications Commission. For your
reference, we have also enclosed a copy of our January 10, 2003 letter to the
.North Suburban Communications Commission, which provides more background
on the issue.
Thank you very much for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Kathi Donnel
cc: City Attorney
Coralie Wilson, Executive Director,
North Suburban Cable Communications Commission
Thomas D. Creighton, Esq.
Stephen J. Guzzetta, Esq.
Jon Kruecher, Comcast
John F. Gibbs, Esq.
•
.~
,.,.= AT~T Broadband
~~
~..-
10 River Park Plaza
St Paul . MN 55107-1219
~!~ Recycled Paper
.~
_~
David G. Seykora = AT~T Broadband
Vice President -Law & Public Policy ~~
-~~
Telep one: 651-4 3-5280
Facsimile: 651-493-5288 10 River Park Plaza
St Paul , MN 55107-1219
January 10, 2003
Heather Worthington
City of Falcon Heights
City Administrator
2077 Larpenteur Ave W
Falcon Heights, MN 55113-5551
Re: January 10, 2003 Minnesota Data Practices Act Request
City of Falcon Heights (the "City")
Dear Ms. Worthington:
Pursuant to the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes
Section 13.01, et. seq., and the Minnesota Open Meeting Law, Minnesota
Statutes Section 471.705, et. seq., we request copies of all data, including
documents, tapes, or data in other form, collected, created, received, maintained
or disseminated by the City with respect to the consideration or action of the •
North Suburban Communications Commission or its member cities regarding the
payment of franchise fees on cable modem service revenues by the cable
franchise holder for the member cities, whether known as AT&T Broadband,
Comcast of Minnesota, Inc. or MediaOne North Central Communications Corp.,
and the .December 12, 2002 Notice of Violation sent by the North Suburban
Communications Commission regarding the same.
We request that the responsible authority provide the documents by no later than
January 17, 2003 to the following addressee:
John F. Gibbs, Esq.
ROBINS, I<APLAN, MILLER & CIRESI L.L.P.
2800 LaSalle Plaza
800 LaSalle Avenue
Minneapolis, MN 55410
Tel. 612 349 8500
Fax. 612 338 4181
Should there be any charges for the actual costs of making such copies, kindly
let us know.
•
Word 15041313.1
Recycled Paper
Heather Worthington
City of Falcon Heights
January 10, 2003
• Page 2
Thank you very much for your consideration.
Sincerely,
G~~G. ~
David G. Seykora
cc: City Attorney
Coralie Wilson, Executive Director,
North Suburban Cable Communications Commission
Thomas D. Creighton, Esq.
Stephen J. Guzzetta, Esq.
Jon Kruecher, Comcast
Kathi Donnelly-Cohen, Comcast
John F. Gibbs, Esq.
•
•
Word 15041313.1
David G. Seykora
Vice President -Law & Public Policy.
AT~T Broadband
~~
Facsimile: 651-493-5288
10 River Park Plaza
St Paul , MN 55107-1219
January 10, 2003
Ms. Coralie A. Wilson VIA HAND DELIVERY
Executive Director
North Suburban Communications Commission
950 Woodfiill Dr.
Roseville, MN 55t 13
Re: NOTICE OF DISPUTE AND CURE in Response to the
Notice of Franchise Violation dated December 12, 2002
-Dear Ms. Wilson:
We are writing in response to your letter dated December 12, 2002 (the "Notice"),
in which you state that the North Suburban Communications- Commission
("Commission") has found that Comcast of Minnesota, Inc. (formerly MediaOne
- North Central Communications Corp.) ("Franchisee"), the current holder of the
cable franchise (the "Franchise") in each of the Commission's member- cities, is
in violation of Sections 8.3 and 8.5 0# the Franchise. Specifically, the letter raised
a dispute under our Franchise contending that the Franchisee has violated the
Franchise by 1) .ceasing to pay franchise fees on cable modem services as a
result of .such services being deemed information services by a Declaratory
Ruling adopted by the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC") on March
14, 2002,1 and 2) failing to provide complete gross revenue reports by not
reporting revenues collected with respect to cable modem services. This letter
vvi11 serve as ,Franchisee's Notice of Dispute and Cure in response to your Notice.
CONSUMER IMPACT
While, as shown below, we are fully prepared to engage in the legal process of
confirming the status and application of federal law, we are concerned about the
subscriber impact of the presumed goal of the Commission in issuing the Notice.
As you may recall, our implementation last spring of the Declaratory Rulinq
resulted in subscribers' cost to receive cable modem service being reduced by
•
' Inauirv Concerning Hioh-Speed Access to the Internet Over Cable and Other Facilities
Internet Over Cable Declaratory Ruling and ADOropriate Regulatory Treatment for Broadband
Access to the Internet Over Cable Facilities Declaratory Ruling and Notice of Proposed
Rulemaklna In GN Docket No. 00-185 and CS Docket No 02-52, FCC 02-77 (released March 15,
2002) ("Declaratory Rulin-g").
Word 15040464.3
Recycled Paper
Ms. Coralie A. Wilson
January 10, 2003
Page 2
• 5%: The Notice is, in effect, asking that we rescind that decrease, which would
mean higher prices for all cable modem service customers. Moreover, unless
the pending challenges to the Declaratory Rulinq are successful, the fees the
Notice seeks to assess will remain unlawful,. resulting in the amounts charged to
subscribers being changed-yet again and,- quite likely, the member cities having
to refund the amounts of such fees. Given these consequences, we do not see
how subscriber interests are served by the Notice. .
OTHER PENDING ACTIONS
As you know, there are two federal court actions already addressing the matters
raised in the Notice. In the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, local governments have
challenged the Declaratory Ruling regarding the status of cable modem services
and seek to have it overturned. In the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, local
governments have challenged the applicability of the Declaratory Rulinq to
language in private franchises that would otherwise require the payment of
franchise fees on cable modem services. Given the likelihood that these actions
will dispose. of the issues raised in the Notice, and the overwhelming subscriber
confusion that would result from any interim increase in the amounts charged to
subscribers, we feel the public interest would be far better served if the status
- quo were maintained at least until the conclusion of these court proceedings. In
any event, we would .welcome the opportunity to discuss this matter and its
• impact on subscribers outside the context of a violation proceeding.
FRANCHISEE ACTED AS REQUIRED
As demonstrated below, our decision to cease paying franchise fees on cable
modem services was compelled by federal law and the Franchise.. The bases for
this conclusion. are summarized as follows:
^ The FCC's Declaratory Ruling that. cable modem services are interstate
information services and not cable services is conclusive and binding on
the Franchisee, the Commission and its member cities. Section 622 of the
Communications Act flatly prohibits the assessment of franchise fees on
anything other than cable services. Under the express terms of the
_ Communications Act, Section 622., preempts any contrary Franchise
language and cannot be waived by the Franchisee.
^ In the Franchise negotiated between the Franchisee and member cities
.(through the Commission), the parties expressly provided that all franchise
fee payments shall conform to the payments permitted under federal law.
Under the Franchise, the parties further agreed that both the City and the
Franchisee .must conform their performance to the requisites of federal law
as it becomes effective. Thus, even if the Declaratory Rulinq and Section
• 622 did not control over the Franchise language by virtue of preemption,
our Franchise negotiated in the North Suburbs would still re uire that
Ms. Coralie A. Wilson
January 10, 2003
Page 3
Franchisee cease making franchise fee payments on cable modem •
service revenues.
The Minnesota right-of-way statute flatly prohibits the City from assessing
franchise fees on providers of interstate information services. -Thus, even
if federal law did not apply, state law would still preclude the imposition of
franchise-fees on cable modem services.
Our reporting of gross revenues to accurately reflect the permissible scope of
gross revenues permitted under federal law is also consistent with the Franchise.
Nonetheless, in order to cooperate with the Commission and its member cities to
the maximum extent possible, and though reserving all rights with respect to this
and any future submissions, enclosed. are reports detailing the cable modem
service/Internet access revenues that were received during the first, second and
third quarters of 2002. These reports satisfy any requirements for cure set forth
in the Notice with respect to any violation of Section 8.5. Accordingly, there is no
existing violation of the Franchise and no basis for further enforcement action on
the part of the Commission.
PROCESS AND FINDINGS
In addition, we have some initial concerns regarding the timing and process of
the Notice. First, the Notice purports to constitute a finding of violation of each •
Franchise with each of the Commission's member cities. Yet, to the best of our
knowledge, there have been no hearings, resolutions, ordinances or other official
action on the part of the individual member cities with respect to this Notice.
Rather,- we are only aware of a Commission vote on this matter pursuant to a
summary staff recommendation. We therefore request that you forward to us all
documentation regarding the consideration or action of the member cities
regarding this matter, as well as any documents, data or any other records
relating to Commission findings or actions in this matter. To that end, attached is
a formal request for all such documentation pursuant to Minnesota Data
Practices Act, a version of which -has also been sent to each of the member
cities.
NOTICE OF DISPUTE OF SPECIFIC VIOLATIONS ALLEGED IN THE NOTICE
Franchisee disputes the Notice as unfounded, unlawful, and defective in a
number of respects, both factually and legally. For the following reasons, there is
no existing violation of the Franchise and, therefore, no basis for further action on
the Notice.
•
Ms. Coralie A. Wilson
January 10, 2003
Page 4
• A. Franchisee Disputes the Claim That It Has Violated Section 8.3:
Franchisee's Cessation of Franchise Fee Payments on Cable Modem
Service Revenues Does Not Violate the Franchise.
Contrary to the Notice, Franchisee is not required to pay. franchise fees on cable
modem service. In fact, the plain language of the Franchise required Franchisee
to cease paying franchise fees in accordance with the requirements of federal
law.
1. Federal Law Precludes the Payment of Franchise Fees on Cable
Modem Service Revenues.
In its Declaratorv Ruling, the FCC determined that cable modem services, such
as those on which the Notice seeks to impose franchise fees, are "interstate
information services" and not "cable services" (as that term is defined under
federal 1aw).2 As the FCC stated: "we conclude that cable modem service; as it
is currently offered, is properly classified as an interstate information service, not
as a cable service, and that there is no separate offering of telecommunications
service." 3
The Declaratorv Ruling is fully applicable to the Franchise, the Commission and
its member cities. Although the Declaratorv Ruling has been challenged by
• municipal and county representatives and that case is now pending in the United
States Court of Appeals for Ninth Circuit,4 the Declaratorv Ruling has not been
stayed and thus remains effective while' the appeal is pending.5 Nor does the
fact that the FCC continues #o have an open proceeding regarding the
implementation of the Declaratorv Ruling alter the effectiveness of the FCC's
designation of cable modem services. Although the FCC continues to consider
how cable modem services should be regulated in light of its Declaratory Ruling,
the designation of cable modem services as interstate information services was a
separate, conclusive ruling, made after years of inquiry and investigation and
with open acknowledgement of the effect the ruling would have on issues such
as the collection of franchise fees on cable modem services.s Accordingly, the
2 See Declaratorv Ruling at ¶ 60 ("cable modem service is not a 'cable service' under the
definition prescribed by the Act.").
3 Id. at ¶ 7. See also id. at ¶ 33.
a Brand X fnternet Services v. FCC, Docket No. 02-70518 (and consoled. cases) (9th Cir.,
filed Mar. 22, 2002).
No party has requested a stay of the FCC's order pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 18
(procedures for stay of agency orders pending appeal).
• s See. e.a., Declaratorv Ruling at ¶ 105 ("Given that we have found cable modem service
to be an information service, revenue from cable modem service would not be included in the
Ms. Coralie A. Wilson
January 10, 2003
Page 5
FCC's designation of cable modem services as interstate information services is •
federal law and binding upon all persons and entities to the same extent as a
congressional statute.'.
Because applicable federal law provides that cable modem services are not
"cable services" under the Communications Act, the assessment of franchise
fees on cable modem service revenues is expressly prohibited. Section 622(b)
of the Communications Act expressly provides that "the franchise fee paid by a
cable operator with respect to any cable system shall not exceed 5 percent of
such cable operator's gross revenues derived ... from the operation of the cable
system to provide cable services."8 Congress' intent in including the last four
words of this statute is clear and unequivocal: to clarify that "franchising
authorities may collect franchise fees under Section 622 ... solely on the basis of
- revenues derived by a cable operator from the provision. of cable service.s9 In
calculation of gross revenues from which the franchise fee ceiling is determined."); id. at ¶¶ 106-
07 (considering how. the past collection of franchise fees prior to the Declaratorv Rulino must be
resolved).
See 47 U.S.C. § 151 (authorizing the FCC to "execute and enforce the Communications
Act); Schweiker v. Grav Panthers, 453 U.S. 34, 44 (1981) (agency regulations are entitled to
"legislative effect°); Singer, SUTHERLAND STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION, vol. 3 § 65.5 p.412 (6th ed.
2001) ("Legislative rules and regulations promulgated by administrative bodies under proper
statutory authority are usually given the force and effect of statutory law."); 15 Am. Jur. 2d
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW § 54 (in the case of a conflict between the regulations of a state body and
the conflicting regulations of a federal agency or commission, "the former must yield to the latter,
since the term 'laws of the United States,' as used in the supremacy clause, encompasses both
federal statutes and statutorily authorized federal agency regulations."). We note that the
Commission, in comments filed with the FCC, has questioned whether the FCC was acting within
proper regulatory authority in designating cable modem services as interstate information
services.. See Appropriate Regulatory Treatment for Broadband Access to the Internet. over
.Cable Facilities, CS Docket No. 02-52, Initial Comments of Metropolitan Government of the City
of Nashville et al. (filed June 17, 2002). However, that the FCC's decision was fully within its
regulatory authority is conclusively confirmed by the language of the Communications Act and the
United State Supreme Court decision in Nat'I Cable & Telecomm. Assoc. v. Gulf Power Co., 534
U.S. 327, 338-9 (2002), where the Supreme Court determined that the classification of cable
modem service was precisely the type of matter that Congress intended the FCC to decide. See
also Declaratorv Ruling at ¶ 59. In any event, in the absence of any ruling by a court of
competent jurisdiction that the FCC's legislative rule is invalid, the Franchisee, the Commission,
and its member cities are duty .bound to adhere to it. See. e.o., 15 Am. Jur. 2d CONSTITUTIONAL
LAw § 53 (2d Ed. 1998) (federal laws are binding upon the authorities of each states "in the
same manner as if they were actually embodied in the Federal Constitution" and "state laws are
always subordinate, and federal laws, enacted pursuant to the .Constitution, are always
paramount.").
e 47 U.S.C. § 542(b) (emphasis added).
s H.R. Rep. No. 104-204, Part 1, 104th Cong., 1St Sess. 93 (emphasis added).
Ms. Coralie A. Wilson
January 10, 2003
Page 6
• light of this plain and clear statutory language, the FCC acknowledged that,
because its Declarator~r Rufina expressly determined that cable modem service
is not a "cable service" for purposes of the Cable Act, "revenue from cable
modem service would not be included in the calculation of gross revenues from
which the franchise fee ceiling is determined."'0 Thus, there can be no question
that Section 622 of the Communications Act prohibits the Commission or its
member cities from assessing franchise fees on cable modem service revenues.
Significantly, the prohibition established by Section 622 is not limited to express
"franchise fees" assessed as part of a Title VI franchise, but extends to any
cable-specific fee or assessment on a cable operator's non-cable service
revenues that a franchising authority may seek to impose. Specifically, Section
622 defines a "franchise fee" to include "any tax, fee, or assessment of any kind
imposed by a franchising authority or other governmental entity on the cable
operator or cable subscriber, or .both,. solely because of their status as such."
Thus, irrespective of whether a fee is assessed by a local government acting as
a "franchising authority" or as some other "governmental. entity", and irrespective
of whether such fee is characterized as a "franchise fee" or an "information
services fee", the assessment of such a fee on a cable operator's cable modem
services remains prohibited by Section 622."
Contrary to statements in the Notice, the provisions of Section 622 are binding
• upon Franchisee, the Commission and the member cities, irrespective of any
language in the Franchise to the contrary. The Communications Act expressly
preempts and supersedes "any provision of law of any state, political subdivision,
or agency thereof, or franchising authority, or any provision of any franchise
granted by such authority, which is inconsistent with this Act."12 Federal courts
have consistently confirmed that the Section 622. prohibition preempts
inconsistent franchise language or local franchising authority requirements.13 The
10 Declaratory Ruling at ¶105.
It is noteworthy that the term "franchise fee" does not include a "tax, fee or assessment
of general applicability," so long as it is not "unduly discriminatory against cable operators or
subscribers." 47 U.S.C. § 542(g)(2)(A). Thus, the Commission or the member cities could
impose a general tax or fee on cable modem service revenues, ~so long as that fee was generally
applied to all other providers of similar Internet access services or information services.
However, in addition.to being beyond the authority of the Commission and its member cities
under applicable law, .any such tax, fee or assessment may be separately prohibited under the
Internet Tax Freedom Act, which precludes the imposition of new taxes on Internet access. See
Pub.L. No. 105-277, § 1100 et seq., 112 Stat. 2681 (1998).
12 47 U.S.C. § 556(c).
13 See Cable TV Fund 14-A Ltd. v. City of Naperville, 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11511 (N.D.
• III. July 29, 1997); Time Warner Entm't Co. v. Briggs, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1196, at "'18
(D.Mass. Jan. 14, 1993); Robin Cable Svs. L.P. v. City of Sierra Vista, 842 F.Supp. 380 (D. Ariz.
Ms. Coralie A. Wilson
January 10, 2003
Page 7
ability of federal law to preempt the provisions of the Franchise is expressly .
recognized by the language of the Franchise itself, which addresses the validity
of other provisions in the event that certain Franchise provisions are preempted
by federal law.14 Thus, even if the Franchise contained language that expressly
required the payment of franchise fees regardless of federal law (which, as
explained below, it does not), such language would be preempted by the express
provisions of the Communications Act, as well as the Supremacy Clause.15
.Nor can the Franchisee and the Commission .avoid the prohibition imposed by
Section 622. by simply agreeing to allow the imposition of franchise fees on cable
modem service revenues. As a federal court found, the cap on the. imposition of
franchise fees imposed by Section -622 cannot be waived.16 This is because
Section 622, while primarily created to protecf cable operators from the
imposition of excessive fees by local governments,. also serves to protect
subscribers from such fees, as it is they who inevitably bear the burden of such
rates. We note that any attempt to collect franchise fees on cable modem
service revenues would not only violate federal law, but could also result in
subscriber lawsuits challenging the assessment and collection of such fees by
the Franchisee, the Commission and its member cities;" because such an action
would not involve the regulation of cable services (but rather intrastate
information .services), protections from such actions provided under. Title VI
would likely not apply.
1993); Birminaham Cable Communications. Inc. v. Citv of Birminaham, 1989 U.S. Dist. LEXIS
7475 (N.D. Ala. May 5, 1989).
14 See Franchise at § 13.4.
15 See also 15 Am. Jur. 2d CoNSTiTU'notvAL Law § 54 (in the case of a conflict between
the regulations of a state body and the conflicting regulations of a federal agency or commission,
"the former must yield to the latter, since the term `laws of the United States,' as used in the
supremacy clause, encompasses both federal statutes and statutorily authorized federal agency
regulations.").
16 See Cable TV Fund 14-A Ltd. v. Citv of Naperville, 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11511 at *86
("the five percent cap on franchise fees provided in Section 542(b) of the Cable At may not be
waived."). See also Report and Order in MM Docket No. 84-1296, 58 RR 2d (P & F) 1, 35 n. 91
(1985) ("neither a cable operator nor a franchising authority may waive mandatory sections of the
Cable AcY').
" See, e.a., Bova v. Cox, 2002 WL 1575738 (W.D. Va. 2002). As you may be aware,
this case involved a subscriber class action filed before the Declaratory Ruling, which challenged
the collection of franchise fees on cable modem service revenues as a violation of Section 622 of
the Communications Act. While the court eventually dismissed the- case on the basis that
subscribers did not have a private cause of action under Section 622, it expressly recognized the
intended benefit to consumers and did not expressly preclude similar actions under state law.
See id. at *4 •
Ms. Coralie A. Wilson
January 10, 2003
Page 8
As demonstrated above, federal law prohibits the assessment of franchise fees
on cable modem services revenues and any Franchise provisions to the contrary
are preempted and superseded. Accordingly, Franchisee is under no obligation
to continue paying franchise fees on cable modem revenues under the Franchise
and Franchisee's failure to do so does not provide any basis for finding of
.Franchise violation.
2. The Franchise .language requires Franchisee to cease paying
Franchise Fees on cable ,modem revenues; thus Franchisee is
currently in compliance.. -
The Notice is based on the assertion that the Franchise requires the Franchisee
to pay franchise fees on cable modem service revenues, irrespective of the
FCC's Declaratory Ruling, because according to your notice "the obligation to
pay franchise fees on cable modem service/Internet access revenues is not
dependent. on how the Federal Communications Commission or federal law
defines cable modem service." Aside. from ignoring. the preemptive effect of
federal law discussed above, this statement is simply incorrect.
The language of the .Franchise plainly provides that franchise fee payments are
limited to that allowed by federal law. The Notice correctly notes that the:
definition of Gross Revenues in the Franchise states that such revenues include
• cable modem service/Internet access revenues. However, the Notice ignores.
the specific language in the Franchise detailing the obligation to pay franchise
.fees on such, revenues. In establishing the Franchisee's obligation to pay
franchise fees, Section 8.3(b) states:
Grantee shall. pay quarterly to City or its designee a
Franchise Fee in the .amount equal to five percent
(5%) of its quarterly Gross Revenues, or such other
amounts _as ar_e subseguently permitted by federal
statute.'
Thus, the Franchise provides that Franchisee's payment obligation is limited to
that which is subsequently permitted under federal statute. This provision does
.not depend on, or~ make reference to, the definition of Gross Revenues, but
rather makes the payment of franchise fees subject to change based solely on
the future parameters of federal law. Franchisee's decision to adhere to the
requirements of Section 622 (a federal statute) and cease payment of franchise
fees on cable modem service revenues was therefore in full compliance with the
plain language of the Franchise.
• 1e Franchise at § 8.3(a) (emphasis added).
Ms. Coralie A. Wilson
January 10, 2003
Page 9
In addition to the specific language of Section 8.3 referenced above, Section 13.4
of the Franchise further provides that franchise fee payments must conform to
federal law. Section 13.4 states that "Grantee and City ...shall conform to
federal laws and regulations regarding cable as they become effective."19
Section 13.4 therefore imposes on Franchisee and the City an affirmative
obligation to automatically conform their performance under the Franchise to the
requisites of .any- future changes in federal law. In fact, the Franchise further
recognizes that this requirement may result in Franchisee having to cease
performing a service or act otherwise required under the Franchise by requiring.
Franchisee to provide prompt notice of any such conflicts.20
The Declaratorv Ruling was a federal regulatory rulemaking that was adopted on
March 14, 2002. Under the express requirements of Section 13.4, both
Franchisee and the member cities agreed and were required to conform to this
rulemaking. Franchisee's decision to stop paying franchise fees on cable
modem service was therefore in full compliance with, and in fact required by, the
Franchise.- Indeed, under the language of Section 13.4, if Franchisee had
ignored the requirements of federal law and continued to pay franchise fees on
cable modem service, it would have violated the Franchise.
As demonstrated above, the Franchise clearly provides that the Franchisee may,
and must, cease making payments on cable modem .service revenues in
accordance with the requirements of Section 622 of the Communications Act and .
the Declaratory Rulinq. Thus, under the language of the Franchise itself (and in
addition to obligation to comply with preemptive federal law. irrespective of any
franchise language), Franchisee's non-payment of franchise fees on cable
modem service revenues does not constitute a Franchise violation.
3. State Law Prohibits the Commission or its Member Cities from
Imposing Franchise Fees on Interstate Information Services.
In comments before the FCC (though not in the Notice), the Commission has
argued that local franchising authorities have additional authority to franchise or
otherwise regulate cable modem services under state law and that such authority
is not restricted by Section 622 or any of the other federal law provisions
applicable to cable franchises under Title VI of the Communications Act.2" As an
'9 Franchise at § 13.4(a)
20 Id. Pursuant to this requirement, Franchisee notified the Commission of its obligation
to conform to the Declaratory Rulin,~c by a letter dated March 28, 2002 (attached hereto}.
21 See Appropriate Regulatory Treatment for Broadband Access to the Internet over
Cable Facilities, CS Docket No. 02-52, Initial Comments of Metropolitan Government of the City
of Nashville et al. (filed June 17, 2002).
Ms. Coralie A. Wilson
January 10, 2003
Page 10
• initial matter, any. such additional authority would not apply to the obligations of
the Franchisee under the Franchise, which are the subject of the Notice, because
the Franchise clearly is a cable franchise issued pursuant to the franchising
authority of the member cities under state law and subject to Title VI.
Furthermore, in the case of the Commission and. its member cities, state law
does not .provide any additional authority that would allow the imposition of
franchise fees on interstate information services such as cable modem services.
Specifically, Section 237.163, Subd. 7 states: "no local government unit may ...
require a telecommunications right-of-way user to obtain a franchise or pay for
.the use of the right-of-way." 22 This restriction applies to all private non-cable.
entities using local rights of way for the purpose of transmitting voice or data
communications.23 Thus, even if there were a credible argument that Section
622 does not apply to the Franchise, Section 237.163 would nonetheless flatly
prohibit the .Commission and member cities from. imposing franchise fees on
Franchisee's cable modem services.
B. Franchisee Dispu#es the Claim that it has Violated Section. 8.5:
Franchisee's Exclusion of Cable Modem Service Revenues from Its
Report on Gross Revenues Does Not Violate the Franchise And, In
Any Event, Franchisee Hereby Satisfies the Requirements for Cure.
• As discussed above, Section 13.4 of the Franchise provides that both Franchisee
and the member cities must automatically conform their actions to the dictates of
federal law.. Upon the FCC's determination that cable modem service was not a
cable service, the Franchisee properly conformed the reports associated with the
Franchise Fee to the changed federal law by excluding cable modem service
revenues from the calculation of gross revenues. Franchisee's reports therefore
met the requirements of the Franchise.
- ~ Minn. Stat. § 237.163, Subd. 7. Section 237.162-163 of the Minnesota Statutes
imposes detailed restrictions on the fees and regulations a local government may impose on
.entities using local rights-of-way for purposes other than the operation of a cable system. Section
237.163 provides that any entity (other than a cable operator and certain public utilities) owning
facilities in local rights of way for the purpose of transporting telecommunications or other voice or
data information may -use local rights of way subject only to the local government's right to
"manage the public right-of-way" and recover its "right-of-way management costs." Minn. Stat. §
237.163, Subd. 2. While Section 237.163 details the local government's right to manage public
rights-of-way and recover appropriate costs as including a variety of standard construction and
engineering permit requirements, Section 237.163, Subd. 7 (quoted above) expressly provides
that such rights-of-way management does not include the right to franchise or impose franchise
fees on rights-of-way users. -
za See Minn. Stat. § 237.162, Subd. 4 (defining a telecommunications right-of-way user
as any person with a facility in the public right-of-way that is used or intended to be used for
transporting telecommunications or. other voice or data information; only cable communications
systems and certain municipal and cooperatively organized entities are excluded from this
• definition).
Ms. Coralie A. Wilson
January 10, 2003
Page 11
Nonetheless, in an effort to cooperate with the Commission, enclosed are reports
detailing the cable modem service/Internet access revenues that were received
during the first, second and third quarters of 2002. By submitting these reports,
Franchisee has met the requirements for cure set forth in the Notice with respect
to any violation of Section 8.5. However, we note that these reports are being
submitted in this instance as part of Franchisee's desire to fully address the
larger issue in dispute. Franchisee expressly does not concede that such reports
may be required under the Franchise and reserves any and all rights with respect
to future reports.
C. .Franchisee .Reserves All Rights and .Disputes Commission's or
Member Cities' Rights to Collect or Assess .Damages or Penalties
Based On the Notice.
Finally, Franchisee reserves all substantive and due process rights with respect
to the Notice and the subject matter thereof, and expressly asserts entitlement to
all such rights. Neither this letter nor any other representations or actions of
Franchisee shall constitute a waiver of any defenses to or claims or due process
rights regarding the Notice, all of which are expressly reserved. In light of this
letter, Franchisee disputes any entitlement of Commission or member cities to
withdraw, collect or assess any damages or penalties .pursuant to the Notice.
LJ
CONCLUSION
The above analysis fully and conclusively demonstrates that the actions
addressed in the Notice do not constitute a violation of the Franchise. Both
federal law and the Franchise re uired that Franchisee cease paying franchise
fees on cable modem service revenues. Moreover, state law precludes any
imposition of such fees on cable modem services.. As for reporting cable modem
service revenues, though we disagree that there is any such obligation,
information meeting the requirement for cure of any alleged violation of Section
8.5 is provided herewith. Accordingly, there is no existing violation of the
Franchise and no basis for further action on the Notice.
As indicated above, we would appreciate the opportunity to discuss these
matters at an upcoming Commission or City Council meeting or with Commission
or member city representatives prior to any further action by the Commission or
member cities. In any event, please feel free to call with any questions or if you
wish to discuss this matter further. Also, as I will be leaving my position in the
next few days, all future contact with Franchisee on this matter which would
otherwise be directed to me should be directed to Jon Kreucher, Division Vice
President, Regulatory Affairs. His contact information is as follows:
Ms. Coralie A. Wilson
January 10, 2003
Page 12
Jon Kreucher
Division Vice President, Regulatory Affairs
29777 Telegraph Road
Suite 44006
Southfield, MI 48034
(248) 233-6719
(248) 233-6712
jon kruecherCcable.comcast.com
In addition, please provide a copy of any future correspondence on this matter to
John F. Gibbs at Robins, Kaplan, Miller &Ciresi, L.L.P.
Si cerely,
~~~
- David G. Seykora
•
cc(w/o attachments):
David Sands, North Suburban Communications Commission Chair
Thomas D. Creighton, Esq.
Stephen J. Guzzetta, Esq.
Member City Managers/Administrators/Clerk (as appropriate)
Member City Attorneys
Jon .Kreucher, Comcast
Kathi Donnelly-Cohen, Comcast
John ~. Gibbs, Esq., Robins Kaplan Miller &Ciresi L.L.P
•
BETTY McCOLLUM
4TH DISTRICT, MINNESOTA
1029 LGNGWDRTH FIOUSE OFFICE BUILDING
WASHINGTON, DC 20515
• (2021225631
FAx:12021225-1968
165 WESTERN AVENUE NORTH
SUITE n
ST. PAUL, MN 55102
(6511224-9191
FAx:16511224-3056
January 13, 2003
UNITED STATES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Ms. Heather M. Worthington
City Administrator
City of Falcon Heights
2077 West Larpenteur Avenue
Falcon Heights, MN 55113
Dear Ms. Worthington:
COMMITTEE ON
EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE
COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES
vvvvw. h o u s e. g o v/m cco I l u m
JAN 1 4 2003
I write to invite you to join me, mayors and emergency personnel from the Fourth Congressional
District for a press conference on Thursday, January 23, at the State Capitol, Room 15 at 10:00
a.m. urging President Bush and the Leadership of the U.S. House and U.S. Senate to quickly
pass $3.5 billion in critical home town security funding for our first responders and law
• enforcement.
In February of 2002, the President proposed $3.5 billion fora "First Responder Initiative" to help
state and local first responders prepare for possible terrorist attacks. There is wide spread
support for this increased funding for emergency personnel and our mayors and cities have
been clear that it is necessary. However, because Congress has failed to pass appropriations
legislation for 2003, we have been unable to provide this critical funding for our communities.
Cities and communities around the country expected the $3.5 billion appropriation and planned
accordingly. Local governments are struggling under the effects of the recession and the
increased responsibility and security needs following September 11. The delay in receiving
these funds prevents localities from making needed improvements and acquiring the equipment
and training necessary to protect our citizens.
Local governments need this funding and they need it quickly. I hope you will join me at the
press conference to urge President Bush, the Speaker of the House, and Senate Majority
Leader to fulfill their promise to our first responders and our communities so they can continue
to keep Minnesota safe. For talking points, a sample press release, or other information, please
contact Emily Lawrence in my St. Paul Office at 651-224-9191 or by a-mail at
Emily.Lawrence@mail.house.gov.
Sincerely,
. Betty McCol
Member of Congress
~~~'
BM:EL
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER