Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/06/2005 Council Packet• • WORK SESSION AGENDA CITY OF LINO LAKES Wednesday April 6, 2005 CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION Community Room (not televised) 5:30 P.M. 1. Charter Cities Workshop — LMC Staff Attorney 2. VLAWMO Reorganization 3. I -35E Corridor AUAR 4. Pavement Management Program 5. Lease of City Property to American Legion 6. Road Reconstruction Communication Plan 7. Charter Commission Request 8. City Involvement in Blue Heron Days 9. Regular Agenda Items 10. Adjourn Revised 04/04/05 ajb 9:35 a.m. • WS -2 WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT Work Session Item No. 2 Date: Council Work Session, Wednesday, June 9, 2004 To: City Council From: Gordon Heitke, City Administrator Re: Future Reorganization of VLAWMO IIIBackground The Vadnais Lake Area Water Management Organization (VLAWMO) was established in 1983 to meet the requirements of the Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act and consists of six cities and the St. Paul Water Utility. VLAWMO acts as the Local Government Unity (LGU) in the administration of the Wetland Conservation Act for the six cities and promotes preservation of natural surface and groundwater systems. Since its inception in 1983 the organization has reviewed development plans to ensure compliance with the Wetland Conservation Act, promoted pubic education programs, sponsored ongoing water quality testing programs and worked with other agencies to resolve wetland impact issues. Due to budget limitations, the VLAWMO Board has recently been reviewing possible organizational alternatives for the future. Member government units recently approved a one -year extension of the joint powers agreement to January 1, 2006 to allow time for study and formulation of a recommendation for future operation. Since many of the functions performed by VLAWMO are also accomplished by cities directly or by adjoining Watershed Districts, it may be advisable to combine VLAWMO with one of the adjoining Watershed Districts (Rice Creek Watershed District or Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed District). By combining watershed organizations there may be financial as well as service advantages. • • • Mr. Jeff McDowell, Lino Lakes representative on the VLAWMO Board, will be present to discuss the Board discussions on the future of VLAWMO, including the possibility of merging with another watershed organization. Requested Council Direction Mr. McDowell is looking for input from the Lino Lakes Council on future alternative structures for assuming the responsibilities and work of the current VLAWMO. • • WS -4 WORK SESSION MEMORANDUM To: City Council From: Gordon Heitke Date: April 6, 2005 Re: Work Session Item 4 Draft Pavement Management Policies As part of the Pavement Management Program (PMP) staff has prepared a draft of the Pavement Management Policies document. The intent of the policy document is to establish the procedures for implementation of the PMP. These procedures include the overall street condition rating, project financing, special assessment determination and maintenance. Attachments 1. Draft Pavement Management Policies DRAFT Page 1 Draft Draft Draft PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT POLICIES TABLE OF CONTENTS I. PURPOSE 1 II. ESTABLISHMENT OF RATING SYSTEM 1 III. PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT CATEGORIES 1 A. Street Reconstruction B. Street Maintenance IV. PROJECT SELECTION CRITERIA 2 V. FINANCING 2 VI. STORM WATER UTILITY 3 totO VII. ASSESSMENTS 3 VIII. MAXIMUM ASSESSMENT RATE 5 • IX. TERM OF ASSESSMENTS 5 X. INTEREST RATE ON ASSESSMENTS 6 XI. CORNER LOTS 6 XII. IRREGULARLY SHAPED LOTS 6 XIII. LOT WIDTH 6 XIV. COLLECTOR STREET CREDITS 6 XV. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 6 XVI. MAINTENANCE OF STREETS 6 XVII. MUNICIPAL UTILITIES 7 XVIII. CITY STANDARD STREET DESIGN 8 XIX. SENIOR CITIZEN /DISABILITY SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DEFERRALS 8 • Pavement Management Policy i 04/04/05 • • Draft Draft Draft I. PURPOSE The Pavement Management Program (PMP) sets forth a system for the optimal maintenance of streets to extend their useful life and the reconstruction of streets, which have exceeded their useful life, and establishes a funding strategy to maximize available resources to carry the maintenance and reconstruction activities. The Pavement Management Program Policies will guide the timing and type of maintenance actions and reconstruction activities and the financing of activities. These policies will preserve the City's asset of streets, provide for the safe and efficient travel of its citizens, retain property values, keep the City attractive and desirable, and minimize costs to the property owners and taxpayers of the City. II. ESTABLISHMENT OF RATING SYSTEM A. Background. In 2004, the City and TKDA investigated and evaluated every block of City pavement to establish its condition based upon what defects each block contained. City records were investigated to obtain knowledge of how old each block is and what maintenance has occurred throughout its history. This information was then entered into a nationally accepted computer program that identifies and analyzes all defects in each block of road and records it together with all relevant information concerning that block to determine the capable condition of the street. B. Index. The program rates the streets by using an Overall Condition Index (OCI) having a 1 -100 scale with 100 being a perfect new street. It then projects the OCI of a segment and gives budget- dependent maintenance protocols for a given time period. It is the City's goal to maintain an overall OCI rating of 70.street C. Rating Procedure. Each City street shall be rated every four years by the public works /engineering staff. This will be accomplished by reviewing 25% of the street mileage every year. III. PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT CATEGORIES The pavement management categories considered for City streets will be as follows: A. Street Reconstruction (OCI 0 -40, "Problem" category) Includes: Storm Sewer Grade Changes Subgrade Correction (Major/Minor) Install Concrete Curb and Gutter Pavement Management Policy 1 04/04/05 • • • Draft Draft Draft Recycle Existing Pavement Financing: Lot/Unit Assessment Commercial /Industrial = 50% of project cost up to maximum assessment rate Residential = 50% of project cost up to maximum assessment rate City contributes balance from General Fund, State Aid Funds, or other sources. B. Street Maintenance. 1. Overlay (OCI 40 -70, "Marginal" category) Includes: Crack Filling Milling Surface Patching Pothole Subgrade and Base Correction Repair or Replace Concrete Curb and Gutters 1 1/2 Inch Bituminous Surface Overlay Financing: City General Fund or other sources 2. Sealcoat (OCI 70 -100, "Adequate" category) Includes: Pothole Filling Crack Filling Sealcoat Financing: City General Fund or other sources IV. PROJECT SELECTION CRITERIA The OCI rating shall serve as the base criteria for project selection. In addition to the OCI, streets shall be evaluated according to Average Daily Traffic (ADT), Stormwater Management, Public Utilities and project priority groupings to achieve economies of scale. The City Engineer shall annually prepare a five year Street Maintenance & Reconstruction Plan based on these criteria for review and approval by the City Council. V. FINANCING The components of the Pavement Management Program (PMP) will be financed as follows: A. Maintenance (Sealcoating and Overlays) — The City will levy a property tax each year to pay for annual maintenance costs as outlined in the PMP. B. Local Street Reconstruction — The City will use: Pavement Management Policy 2 04/04/05 • Draft Draft Draft 1. General Obligation Street Reconstruction Bonds authorized under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 475 for reconstruction projects where the existing street width is adequate and /or where no additional improvements, such as curb and gutter, are needed. 2. General Obligation Improvement Bonds authorized under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429 for reconstruction projects where the existing street width is not adequate and/or where additional improvements, such as curb and gutter, are needed and at least 20% of the project cost is to be assessed. 3. General Obligation Bonds authorized under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 475 for reconstruction projects where the existing street width is not adequate and/or where additional improvements, such as curb and gutter, are needed and less than 20% of the project cost will be assessed. Street reconstruction projects financed through these means will be funded from special assessments to benefited properties, proceeds fro torm water utility, and city tax levies and other sources. 11011/t4 C. Municipal State Aid Streets. 1. MSA funds or bonds will be used to finance reconstruction of streets • designated as part of the City's MSA system. • 2. Properties benefiting from these projects will specially assessed according to the same formula used for benefited properties on local streets. 3. Other financing sources, including but not limited to, proceeds from the storm water utility and city tax levies may also be used. VI. STORM WATER UTILTY The City Council shall establish and maintain a storm water utility as authorized under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 444, for the purpose of financing those costs of the PMP related to storm water improvements, and for maintaining the storm water management system. VII. ASSESSMENTS A. The following is the general Street Reconstruction Policy for special assessments to benefiting property. 1. It is the policy of the City to special assess abutting benefiting property for street reconstruction costs, but not in excess of the special benefit to the Pavement Management Policy 3 04/04/05 Draft Draft Draft property. This policy applies to all streets that are the responsibility of the • City. s 2. The maximum assessment rate for the reconstruction of previously paved streets shall be determined according to Section G of this policy. 3. Assessments shall not exceed any of the following: (a) the special benefit to the property being assessed; (b) the total project cost. (c) the maximum assessment rate. 4. Project cost includes both direct construction costs, including land acquisition, and all indirect costs suc ngineering, legal, fiscal and administration. B. Method of Assessment The City Council, shall assess street improvements on the basis of a lot/unit assessment. The lot/unit assessment shall be calculated as follows: 1. Rural, Single Family, Two Family Residential Districts. (a) One half of the total cost of the improvements shall be divided by the total front footage for the improvement. The quotient of this shall be the Calculated Assessment Rate. (b) The Calculated Assessment Rate shall be compared to the Maximum Assessment Rate, as provided for under this policy and the lesser of the two shall be the Assessment Rate. (c) The Assessment Rate shall be multiplied by the minimum required lot width of the respective zoning district that applies. The product of this shall be the Lot/Unit Assessment (d) Exceptions. Where parcels in Rural Zoning Districts have less than the minimum required lot width they shall be evaluated under the lot width requirements of the most applicable single family district. ii. Where parcels within zoning districts have less than the minimum required lot width of the respective district the Lot/Unit Assessment shall be calculated by multiplying the individual lot width by the Assessment Rate. Pavement Management Policy 4 04/04/05 • Draft Draft Draft 2. Medium & High Density Residential, Commercial and Industrial Districts (a) One half of the total cost of the improvements shall be divided by the total front footage for the improvement, as determined under this policy. The quotient of this shall be the Calculated Assessment Rate. (b) The Calculated Assessment Rate shall be compared to the Maximum Assessment Rate, as provided for under this policy and the lesser of the two shall be the Assessment Rate. (c) The Assessment Rate shall be multiplied by the minimum required 1000 lot width of the respective zoning district that applies. The product of this shall be the Lot/Unit Assessment. (d) Parcels shall be converted into an equivalent number of parcel units by dividing the area of the parcel by the minimum lot area of the respective zoning district. The quotient of this shall be the Unit Assessment Multiplier. (e) The Lot/Unit Assessment shall be multiplied by the Unit Assessment Multiplier. The product of this shall be the assessment amount. 3. When an assessable parcel from an improvement project is subdividable under City Code, the City will assign the maximum number of lots /units to the parcel that would result from a future subdivision under the current City Code. 4. Nothing herein shall preclude the City Council from assessing 100% of a project cost upon receipt of a Petition and Waiver of Irregularity and Appeal from 100% of the property owners benefiting from the project. VIII. MAXIMUM ASSESSMENT RATE The base year for the street assessment under the Pavement Management Program will be 2005. The maximum assessment rate shall be $77.00 per front footage. This rate shall be adjusted annually (January 1) using the National Engineering News Record (ENR) cost. index. IX. TERM OF ASSESSMENTS Project costs assessed under this policy will be collected over a 15 year period. Pavement Management Policy 5 04/04/05 • • Draft Draft Draft X. INTEREST RATE ON ASSESSMENTS An interest rate of assessments shall be charged at 2% over the rate of bonds issued to finance the project. The minimum interest rate shall be 7% per annum. XI. CORNER LOTS Corner lots in Single Family, Two Family and Medium Density Districts where single - family homes, two - family homes, townhomes, or condominiums are- built, will be a part of the improvement and assessment process if the driveway for the subject corner lot is on the improvement street. Such lot shall be assessed on a unit basis the same as interior lots. However, regardless of driveway location, where a lot is subdividable and such subdivision fronts the improvement street, the parcel shall be as for all units in excess of the original lot. XII. IRREGULARLY SHAPED LOTS Irregularly shaped lots will be considered on an individual basis. Such lots will be measured and assessed on their average width with the lot width at the front setback line taken into consideration. XIII. LOT WIDTH Lot width is generally considered the lot width at the front setback line, with the exception of irregularly shaped lots. XIV. COLLECTOR STREET CREDITS All residential properties, with the exception of properties with a density of greater than 6 units /acre, will only be assessed for a city standard street as defined in Section XVIII., of this policy. Residential properties with greater than 6 units per acre density and commercial /industrial properties will be assessed toward the entire cost of street improvement as outlined in these policies. XV. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM The Street Maintenance and Reconstruction Plan, established per Section ? ? ?, shall be part of the City's Capital Improvement Program which is prepared during the budgeting process. XVI. MAINTENANCE OF STREETS A. General Maintenance. An important element of a good street Pavement Management Plan Program is to provide good maintenance practices. Streets should be swept as early as possible in the spring to help dry the streets; cracks should be filled as early as possible in the year to prevent moisture into the sub- Pavement Management Policy 6 04/04/05 • • • Draft Draft Draft base; filling of potholes should be made as necessary to prevent travel hazards and damage to sub -base; and special maintenance shall be consistently performed to protect and prolong the life of the pavement. The City Council needs to provide the necessary funding in the budget to perform the necessary maintenance work in a timely and professional manner. B. Special Maintenance. Special maintenance shall be include timely seal coating and bituminous overlays on streets as follows: C. Minor Maintenance. 1. Public Works will perform minor maintenance on the streets to address tioidel safety issues that may occur. When a street is scheduled for reconstruction, only pothole filling or other safety measures will occur on that road. It is not cost effective for the City to expend funds on temporary street maintenance on a road that has deteriorated to the point of requiring reconstruction. In such cases the City, where conditions warrant, may post signs cautioning the public of poor street surface conditions and recommending reduced speed. XVII. MUNICIPAL UTILITIES. A. In instances where street reconstruction is proposed within areas not currently serviced by municipal sanitary sewer and/or water, the City shall provide for the extension of these services in conjunction with the improvement project subject to the following: 1. Municipal sanitary sewer and water are available to service the project area. 2. The City's Comprehensive Plan guides the area for sewered development Pavement Management Policy 7 04/04/05 Age of Street Maintenance Action 5 — 7 years First sealcoating 10 —14 years Second sealcoating 15 — 21 years Third sealcoating 20 — 28 years First overlay 25 — 35 years First sealcoating 30 — 42 years Second sealcoating 35 — 49 years Second overlay 40 — 56 years First sealcoating 47 — 65 years Road reconstruction C. Minor Maintenance. 1. Public Works will perform minor maintenance on the streets to address tioidel safety issues that may occur. When a street is scheduled for reconstruction, only pothole filling or other safety measures will occur on that road. It is not cost effective for the City to expend funds on temporary street maintenance on a road that has deteriorated to the point of requiring reconstruction. In such cases the City, where conditions warrant, may post signs cautioning the public of poor street surface conditions and recommending reduced speed. XVII. MUNICIPAL UTILITIES. A. In instances where street reconstruction is proposed within areas not currently serviced by municipal sanitary sewer and/or water, the City shall provide for the extension of these services in conjunction with the improvement project subject to the following: 1. Municipal sanitary sewer and water are available to service the project area. 2. The City's Comprehensive Plan guides the area for sewered development Pavement Management Policy 7 04/04/05 • • Draft Draft Draft 3. With the exception of trunk improvements (i.e., oversizing or overdepth) sanitary sewer and water main extension shall be 100% assessed to benefited properties. Such assessments shall be in accordance with Minnesota Statute 429 and City Charter requirements. XVIII. CITY STANDARD STREET DESIGN A. The City Standard Street Design shall be 32 feet from back of curb to back of curb . 1. Exception. In cases were the existing street proposed for reconstruction is 29 feet wide or less, and not a Municipal State Aid Road, County, or other designated collector road, the street shall be reconstructed to a maximum width of 29 feet from back of curb to back of curb. All such streets constructed to such width shall be limited to parking on one side and be signed accordingly. B. The pavement section shall consist of a minimum 7 ton design, which consists of 1 -1/2 inches of bituminous wearing course, 2 inches of bituminous base course, and 8 inches of Class 5 aggregate base course. XIX. SENIOR CITIZEN /DISABILITY SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DEFERRALS. Owners of homestead property aged 65 or older, or who are retired by virtue of permanent and total disability may, if eligible, apply for deferral of special assessments in accordance with Ordinance 07 -90. Pavement Management Policy 8 04/04/05 • WS -5 WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT Work Session Item No. 5 Date: Council Work Session, Wednesday, April 6, 2005 To: Mayor and City Council From: Mary Divine Re: Leasing Property to the American Legion • Background At the last work session, Council discussed a request from the American Legion to lease approximately 50 feet of city property that is adjacent to the Legion for use as horseshoe pits. Council directed staff to contact the City of Circle Pines, which has horseshoe pits connected to a local bar, to find out what types of issues can arise from this activity. Gordon Heitke contacted Jim Keinath, Circle Pines City Administrator. Mr. Keinath said the horseshoe pits posed problems for the neighborhood with noise and underage drinking. The Legion wants to have four horseshoe pits and hold games on weeknights until dusk and on weekends. The Legion has offered to pay $500 per month for 12 months out of the year, although they would be using the property for about 5 months of the year. Council may want to consider the neighborhood response to noise that would accompany this operation, both from the number of people that would be outside the Legion and the sound of horseshoes clinking. The Legion has indicated that it will not allow drinks to be brought outside, but that may be difficult to enforce. Police Chief Pecchia has indicated he would not be in favor of this activity for these reasons. • • • WS-s Other issues to consider are 1. City liability. 2. Hours /days of operation. 3. Equipment that the Legion may have in conjunction with the activity, such as spectator seating, or equipment that the city may require, such as trash containers. 4. A cutoff date and ability to break the lease with notice. The city attorney advised that any restrictions the city wishes to impose could be addressed in the lease as well as anything else the City Council may want to include if the decision is made to lease the property. The Legion could be required to apply for a Conditional Use Permit and submit a site plan showing location and boundaries of the horseshoe pits, and address any restrictions such as fencing or screening the city may wish to impose. • • WS -6 WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT Work Session Item No. 6 Date: Council Work Session, Wednesday, April 6, 2005 To: City Council From: Gordon Heitke, City Administrator Re: Road Reconstruction Communication Plan Background If the City Council conducts a referendum on a street reconstruction project this year, a plan for providing information to the public in order for voters to make an informed decision is needed. I am recommending that the City Council consider engaging the services of a qualified consultant to design and implement the public information program. This recommendation is being made because of the following: 1. Criticism of past in -house public information efforts. 2. Perception by some that city staff is opposed to requirements within the charter, therefore may not be viewed as being objective and impartial. 3. Current work load of existing city staff. The need for a public communication program was briefly discussed with Springsted Inc. during the preparation of the Pavement Management Financing Report. They have indicated an interest in serving in a consulting role to prepare and implement a public information program. Requested Council Direction Staff is requesting direction from the Council as to whether: 1) a consultant can be used to prepare and implement a public information program, and 2) it wishes to receive a specific proposal for services from Springsted Inc. or another consultant(s). • • • WS -7 WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT Work Session Item No. 7 Date: Council Work Session, Wednesday, April 6, 2005 To: City Council From: Gordon Heitke, City Administrator Re: Charter Commission Request Background On May 10, 2004 and June 28, 2004 the City Council approved expenditures for legal services related to the City Charter. Since that time, the Charter Commission has requested that these types of expenditures not be allocated to the charter area of the city budget since they were not initiated or approved by the Charter Commission. It has been suggested that it was "wrong" for the expenses to be accounted for in the manner they were. The staff and City Council should take very seriously any suggestion of improper accounting of public funds, therefore, staff has consulted with the City Auditor and requested an opinion on the appropriateness of the accounting of these expenditures (attached). Following further correspondence with the Chairman of the Charter Commission, this issue remains unresolved. The Charter Commission's request is to modify the 2004 financial records to remove these expenditures and not have staff initiated expenses or those not approved by the Charter Commission to be accounted for in a matter that would occur under a heading of "Charter Commission ". Since the Council approved these expenditures, and according to the City Auditor they were appropriately accounted for, the Council must determine if there is to be any modification of the 2004 financial records, as staff does not have this authority. Staff will clarify with Council the proposed accounting of charter related expenditures for the 2005 City Budget. 1 • • • Requested Council Direction Staff is requesting that the City Council: 1) either confirm that there was nothing technically improper with the 2004 accounting of expenses, based on the City Auditor's opinion, or further investigate this issue in order to make a determination. If the Council wishes to modify the 2004 financial records to account for these types of expenditures differently than what occurred, staff needs to be directed to make such modifications. It is staff's recommendation that any modification of the 2004 financial records be done only after consultation with the City Auditor regarding such modification to ensure that Generally Accepted Accounting Principles are being adhered to, 2) provide direction to staff as to how similar expenses are to be accounted for in 2005, and have the City Auditor review and comment on the proposed accounting for compliance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. Attachments 1. Charter Commission Minutes, 10/14/04, 1/13/05 2. Finance Director Rolek memo, Nov. 19, 2004 3. Darwin Viker, LarsonAllen letter, March 30, 2005 4. Charter Commission Chair Trehus /Administrator Heitke correspondence, March, 2005 Gordon Heitke om: MICHAEL TREHUS [mtreehugger ©msn.com] nt: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 12:07 PM . o: Gordon Heitke Subject: RE: City Budget I have to question whether the city auditor had accurate facts on which to base his opinion. The "cost center" of the expense in question is most definately not the Charter Commission. Therefore the expenditure in question has not been allocated to related cost center, which then makes the opinion that the accounting of this expenditure was appropriate erroneous. Utilizing a CATEGORY for "staff initiated charter related costs" for 2004 would resolve the above discrepancy. Otherwise, I'm afraid this issue will continue to remain on the Charter Commission's agenda. I'd much rather put it to rest now. Regarding a "staff initiated charter related costs" as a separate line item, I am concerned that this means that staff costs will still be recorded under the heading "Charter Commission." If what what I surmise is accurate, I think we still have a potential problem. I'm sure you'd agree that keeping charter commission expenses accounted separately is more clear, and therefore the appropriate practice. I strongly recommend a separate CATEGORY for expenses directed by the commission or incurred directly by the commission. Anything relating merely to the charter itself needs to be somewhere else. Regarding the potential educational workshop on April 14: 4is you may know from reading the meeting minutes, the Charter Commission Manned in January to have its own educational workshop, a presentation to ne provided to us in the July meeting. So what you have suggested appears duplicative to some extent. It is appropriate for the commission to discuss your option for alternative /additional training if it is still open. You may present it to us in the meeting on the 14th, or I can present it for you. If you need to hold the educational workshop sooner, I don't see this as a bad thing, given the timing, the duplication involved, and the drawbacks that come along with having a very large group of people (well over 20 people with staff, Council and our group), so please feel free to do so if you feel so inclined. >From: "Gordon Heitke" <gheitke @ci.lino- lakes.mn.us> >To: "MICHAEL TREHUS" <mtreehugger @msn.com> >Subject: RE: City Budget >Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 17:28:57 -0600 > >City staff has consulted with the city auditor regarding the 2004 >allocation of the cost of bond counsel's interpretation of charter >requirements. From a technical accounting and reporting perspective, it is >his opinion that the accounting of this expenditure was appropriate as it >is the proper accounting practice to allocate expenditures to the related >cost center. Since the accounting of the expenditure was technically >proper, the concerns of the Charter commission is one of policy. The City >Council approved the payment of the bill as a charter related expense, >therefore it is the Council that must decide as to whether they wish to >make an adjustment of the record. I will place your request to change the >2004 financial records to remove this expenditure from the charter area of >the city budget on the April 6 Council work session agenda. >It is the intention of staff to account for "staff initiated" charter >related costs as a separate line item from the Charter Commission initiated 1 >expenses in 2005. > >Any more thoughts on the joint workshop session? Original Message From: MICHAEL TREHUS [mailto:mtreehugger @msn.com] >Sent: Monday, March 28, 2005 7:13 PM >To: Gordon Heitke >Subject: Re: City Budget > > >By the way, do you have an E.T.A. on a resolution to the City >budget /Charter Commission thing yet? > > > Original Message >From: Gordon Heitke >Sent: Monday, March 28, 2005 3:14 PM >To: MICHAEL TREHUS >Subject: RE: Charter City Workshop > >The workshop portion would probably be from 1 to 1.5 hours. Do you think >the Charter Commission might be available to begin at 6:30 p.m.? This >would obviously cut into the meeting time, however, the workshop might >reduce the time required for the meeting as some of the questions and >discussion might be taken care of at the workshop. Let me know how I >should proceed. Thanks. > > Original Message >From: MICHAEL TREHUS [mailto:mtreehugger_ @ msn.com] >Sent: Monday, March 28, 2005 11:57 AM >To: Gordon Heitke > Subject: RE: Charter City Workshop � >▪ Hi Gordon, > >Thanks for your efforts in this regard. Please bear in mind that the >charter commission has its own agenda to work through in addition to the >joint meeting and now a potential workshop. Also understand that members >are planning on coming at 7:00, and the meeting is just 2 weeks away. This >change, if we elect to have the workshop, would be made under short notice. > >That having been said, how long would the workshop last? What time are you >thinking this thing would begin? > >Mike Trehus >Chair > > >From: "Gordon Heitke" <gheitke @ci.lino- lakes.mn.u.s> > >To: "MICHAEL TREHUS" <mtreehugger @msn.com> > >Subject: Charter City Workshop > >Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 18:32:36 -0600 > > > > > >Over the past year, there have been instances of questions being raised > >amongst council members related to the roles and authorities of charter > >commissions and city councils and their relationship to each other. >These > > questions have related to the review of work plans, fund transfers, >street > >improvement activities, and cost allocations to the charter category >within > >the city budget. At last evening's City Council Work Session, I >recognized > >my limited experience with charter cities and need for additional > >education. Council members also acknowledged their need and or interest 2 >in > >receiving additional training on charter cities. I was directed to > >organize an educational workshop for the Council with the intention that > Charter Commission members could also attend. To accomplish that, I am 41/1 > wondering if you think it is possible to have two components to the joint >meeting scheduled for April 14. I am wondering if we could start early > >with the workshop component and then go into the joint meeting agenda. I > >recognize that it would be a longer than usual evening, but it should >work > >with most everyone's schedule since the joint meeting has previously been > >set. > > > >Do you think that the Charter Commission would be interested in this > > workshop? If so, would it work better to combine the workshop with the > > previously scheduled meeting, or would having it in conjunction with a > > Council work session be preferred? Please give me your thoughts on >this. > > > >Also, I received your voice mail regarding the charging of costs to the > > charter category of the city budget. Since the City is bound by certain > >accounting and reporting standards, staff is currently conferring with >the > >City's auditor and is awaiting his response. > > > >Gordon Heitke > >Administrator > >City of Lino Lakes »600 Town Center Parkway > >Lino Lakes, MN 55014 -1182 »651-982-2405 »651-982-2499 fax »gheitke@ci.lino-lakes.mn.us > > • • Lars:nAllerf CPAs, C.;onsuieancs & Advisors www.larsonaIlen.com March 30, 2005 Mr. Alan Rolek, Director of Finance City Council City of Lino Lakes 1189 Main Street Lino Lakes, MN 55014 Dear Mr. Rolek, You asked me to comment on the proper coding of expenditures of 51,532 spent on legal fees to Kennedy and Graven in regards to charter questions during 2004. These costs were coded to the Charter Commission department portion of your budget. Each year the city budgets for costs related to the Charter. Within this department are line items such as professional fees, municipal attorney, supplies and news letter. This is the City's budget and the City Council has the discretion on how to use this budget appropriation. Accordingly, legal costs related to researching and interpreting the Charter would be appropriate expenditures charged to this department. Generally Accepted Accounting Principals also require expenditures to be coded to the function that the cost relates to. It appears there has been some confusion related to this portion of the City's budget where the Charter Commission felt this was the appropriation for the Commission and that it was their budget to use at their discretion. As mentioned above, this is the City's budget to be used at the discretion of the City Council. To avoid future confusion, you should consider changing the department name to something like Charter Administration and then have a line item within that department titled Charter Commission. You could then show a budget for that Iine. Again the amount budgeted is at the City's discretion. However, State Statutes indicate the Commission can spend up to 51,500 and the city would have to pay these expenses. Please feel free to contact me if you need more clarification. Sincerely, Larson, Alien Weishair & Co., LLP Darwin Viker, CPA 109 North Main Street, PO Box 217, Austin, MN 55912, 507/434 - 7000, Fax 507/437 -8997 Larson, Mkn, Weishair & Co., LLP 1 An lndencndcnt Member of Baker Tilly tncer tional • • • Memorandum To: Charter Commission Chair Michael Trehus From: Al Rolek, Director of Finance Date: November 19, 2004 Re: Charter Commission Budget Questions Cc: Mayor John Bergeson, Council Members Donna Carlson, Caroline Dahl, Jeff Reinert, Dan Stoltz, City Administrator Gordon Heitke In replying to your e -mail request I will respond to each of your questions in the order you have listed them. However, before doing so, I want to address the overall question of budget. The City Council provides, within its annual budget, a budget for Charter Commission. It is my understanding that this budget is intended for direct Charter Commission expenses and /or for administrative expenses incurred relative to charter questions or items. Although the City Council is not obligated to directly budget for such expenditures, Minnesota Statutes (attached) require that the city provide up to $1,500 for reasonable and necessary expenses as outlined in the statute; however, the City Council may authorize additional expenses as it deems necessary. With that background I will move on to your questions. 1) In 2004, a $1,532.00 cost is shown in a budget spreadsheet that was distributed as being incurred by the charter commission for municipal attorney. To the best of my knowledge, no member of the Charter Commission had anything to do with this cost. Commissioners want to know: a) What attorney was paid (or will be paid) this amount? The expenses were paid to Kennedy and Graven for questions related to the charter and for charter review. b) Who is the actual person from the city who incurred this cost? For what reason? • • • These actions were initiated by staff to perform a legal review of the charter relative to public improvements. Also included was attendance of the attorney at a Charter Commission meeting. c) Since this does not appear to be a result of any action by the Charter Commission or its members, why is this being deducted from the Charter Commission's budget? As stated above, these were expenses related to the charter and were applied to the Charter Commission area of the budget. The expenses, while initiated by staff, were approved as to their amount and their cost center by the City Council at the time of payment. d) Since this event put us over the budget for 2004, does this event have any affect on the actual money available and or budgeted to the Charter Commission that it actually needs to operate? No. Should the Charter Commission have need for any of the services authorized under statute, the cost of such services, up to $1,500, will be paid by the city. Should these costs exceed $1,500, the City Council will need to authorize the additional expenditure prior to its occurrence. e) Could this type of event occur in the future? Yes, it could potentially reoccur in the future. f) What effect would a similar event have on any future Charter Commission budget(s)? There may be an effect on future budgets depending on the City Council's willingness to fund these expenditures. Because the City Council sets the budget, expenditures in this area and all budget areas are reviewed and /or revised at their discretion. 2) The aforementioned budget spreadsheet shows $450 for "Newsletter." Please explain what these dollars are intended for and how the Charter Commission might use them. The budget is intended to fund charter articles or initiatives published in the city newsletter. If there were any charter initiatives, the cost of publication for this area of the newsletter would be charged in this line item. 3) Is it true that the actual budget for the Charter Commission for 2005 has been revised upward of the $1,150 shown in the spreadsheet? Could you please forward the current 2005 Charter Commission budget to me? Yes, the City Council added $700 to the budget to cover the cost of minute taking. The total proposed budget for 2005 is $1,850. A copy of the Charter Commission budget is attached for your review. • • 4) Is it true that the Charter Commission can spend in excess of the budget if an unforeseen need arises? How might we go about receiving additional monies should the need arise? As stated above, state statute provides that the City must pay up to $1,500 per year for authorized expenditures. Should expenditures be expected to exceed that amount, authorization must be sought and received from the City Council. The Charter Commission may make a request of the City Council for additional funding during the annual budgeting process. I hope that this answers the Charter Commission's questions. If you need any further clarification or have any other related questions, please feel free to call or e -mail them to me. • Charter Commission January 13, 2005 Page 1 DATE TIME STARTED TIME ENDED MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS EXCUSED MEMBERS UNEXCUSED STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT CITY OF LINO LAKES CHARTER COMMISSION January 13, 2005 7:03 P.M. 9:20 P.M. Dahl, Aldentaler, Trehus, Handrick, Vacha Duffy, Williams, Bor, Montain, Storberg, and Carlson Warren and Zastrow None City Clerk, Ann Blair (part) CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Chair Trehus called the regular meeting of the Lino Lakes Charter Commission to order at 7:03 p.m. on January 13, 2005. • APPROVAL OF AGENDA Chair Trehus added Item 6G, Council Minutes Discussion and Item 7C, Members Resignations. OPEN MIKE No one was present for open mike. APPROVAL OF MINUTES October 14, 2004 — MOTION by Commissioner Vacha, seconded Commissioner Handrick, to approve the October 14, 2004 Charter Commission minutes as presented. Motion carried with Commissioner Montain abstaining. REPORTS OF THE COMMITTEES Archives Report /City Web Site (Commissioner Dahl) — Commissioner Dahl advised she contacted the Minnesota Historical Society regarding the names of previous Charter Members. They can look up names to locate previous members but there is a charge of $12.00 per name. She suggested Commissioners split up the names on the list and do their own search. Commissioner Storberg suggested Mr. Weibel is contacted to see if he knows anything regarding • the outstanding names on the list. • Charter Commission January 13, 2005 Page 2 Commissioner Dahl advised letters have been sent out to the previous members but the City has not received any responses. The intent is to collect any old Charter documents. Commissioner Handrick and Commissioner Bor volunteered to help locate outstanding names on the previous member's list. Commissioner Dahl stated she would get a list of the names from the City Clerk. The names could also be advertised in the Quad. Commissioner Bor also suggested contacting Betty Friesen regarding this issue. City Website Update (Commissioner Dahl) — Commissioner Dahl advised Lisa Hogstad emailed everyone possible regarding the new website. The new website is up and running. If anyone has any concerns or suggestions, contact Lisa Hogstad at the front desk. City Clerk Blair requested the Commission move to the Council Chambers for a group picture. Response to Charter Documents Letter (Commissioner Dahl) — Commissioner Dahl had previously indicated the City has not received any responses to the Charter Documents letter sent by the City. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Five -Year Plan (Chair Trehus) — Chair Trehus indicated he has no new information on the Five -Year Plan. Commissioner Dahl stated the Council does not have any additional infolluation either. The Commission can ask the City Administrator or could discuss the Five -Year Plan with the Council at the joint meeting. She noted the Five -Year Plan will be updated every year and is a work in progress. Commissioner Montain asked when the Plan would be up -to -date. He stated it seems as though the Commission is always waiting on something to have the Plan finished and in place. Chair Trehus stated the City is currently waiting on the Pavement Management Program to be completed. Commissioner Montain stated the Charter requires the City have a Five -Year Plan. It is the Commission's job to make sure the Five -Year Plan is in place. The Plan can be amended yearly but the framework needs to be in place. Chair Trehus noted the Commission did get a Five -Year Plan. The City is currently doing • updates on it. This issue will be discussed at the Joint meeting with the City Council. • Charter Commission January 13, 2005 Page 3 Commissioner Bor stated she would like to know the history of the Five -Year Plan as well of the dates of completion and dates of the revisions. MOTION by Commissioner Vacha, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to request an update from City Staff at the next meeting on a Five -Year Plan that is compliant with the City Charter per Section 7.05. Commissioner Montain stated he would also like information on how the Five -Year Plan is tied into the City's budget. Commissioner Storberg suggested property taxes be raised throughout the City to pay for road improvements, which ties into the Five -Year Plan and Pavement Management Plan. Chair Trehus advised he would send a letter to the City Council regarding this issue prior to the joint meeting. MOTION carried. Pavement Management Program (Chair Trehus) — Chair Trehus advised the Commissioner's received a preliminary Pavement Management Report. He asked for any questions or comments. Commissioner Storberg stated she has an issue with the Plan in relation to some of the bad roadways within the City. It seems as though there are some bad roads in new developments and that the developer should be responsible for those roadways. Commissioner Bor stated the City is working on an AUAR process to provide information to the City on transportation issues with the City. All of the information gathered needs to be shared with residents within the City. The City also needs to make sure every effort is made to communicate the transportation issues, as well as funding issues, to the residents. Communication to the Residents — Chair Trehus stated it was disappointing that there was no reference to communication to residents in relation to the Pavement Management Plan. The Pavement Management Plan as well as communication to residents will be discussed further at the joint meeting with the City Council. MOTION by Commissioner Bor, seconded by Commissioner Duffy, that an update be provided to the Commission on the draft Pavement Management Plan and any communication that may be evolving to residents. Motion carried. Commissioner Storberg stated she would ask City Staff and the City Council about the possibility of the City increasing property taxes city wide to pay for road reconstruction within the City, and to put funds into the Public Works Fund at the joint meeting in April. She indicated she would also ask for clarification on the definition on reconstruction of roadways and new road construction. • • • Charter Commission January 13, 2005 Page 4 Charter Commission Budget — Chair Trehus advised a copy of the state statute regarding the Charter budget was distributed in the packets. The statute states the Charter Commission has up to $1,500 per year to spend at its discretion. A memo from the Finance Director was also in the packets. The memo indicated that regardless of where the funds are put into the budget, the Charter Commission could spend the $1,500. If the Commission needs additional funds, approval from the City Council would be required. Commissioner Storberg stated the City was wrong by spending the Commission's funds for the lawyer's fees. The City does not have the right to do that. Chair Trehus stated that regardless of how the attorney was billed, the Commission can spend up to $1,500 per year at their discretion. Any fund left over go back into the General Fund. Commissioner Carlson stated the attorney's fee should not be shown as a Charter Commission expense. City Staff initiated that expense. MOTION by Commissioner Carlson, seconded by Commissioner Storberg, to have Chair Trehus communicate to City staff, by letter, that any expenditure's shown in the budget as Charter Commission expenditures must be approved by the Charter Commission. The $1,500 expense for the attorney must not be noted as a Charter Commission expense. Motion carried. Application to Charter Commission (Commissioner Dahl) — Commissioner Dahl advised a draft copy of the application to the Charter Commission was distributed at the last meeting. Commissioner Carlson has made some suggestions to the draft. A copy of that draft was distributed. Commissioner Carlson reviewed the suggested changes noting he would like to make the application more user friendly. MOTION by Commissioner Montain, seconded by Commissioner Bor, to use the revised application to Charter Commission as the official application. Chair Trehus indicated he would like to add the statement regarding the addition of a resume to the application. Commissioner Handrick stated she believes if an applicant has a resume, they would automatically attach it to the application. Commissioner Montain agreed to accept the amended motion to include on the application the statement "Attach any additional information if you desire ". Commissioner Bor accepted the amendment to the motion. • Charter Commission January 13, 2005 Page 5 Commissioner Carlson indicated he would email the approved application to the City Clerk and also forward to the Commissioner's. MOTION carried. Review City Council Meeting Minutes for Charter Compliance — Chair Trehus asked if any of the Commissioners had found any issues with the City Council Meeting Minutes. The Commission had no comments. Council Minutes Discussion (Chair Trehus) — Chair Trehus advised the City would no longer be emailing meeting minutes to the Commission. The meeting minutes can be found on the City website. Hard copies are still available to those who request them. He asked the Commission to note any missing,set of meeting minutes on the website. NEW BUSINESS Update from League of MN Cities Regarding Other Charter Cities (Commissioner Handrick) — Commissioner Handrick advised she called the League of MN Cities and was sent a list of all Charter cities within the state. She distributed that list along with a list of city Charters available on -line. She stated she also inquired about restrictions of other Charter cities. Mr. Duke Addicks, Attorney from League of MN Cities, responded that he was unaware of other cities that have such strict restrictions as the City of Lino lakes. She indicated she would go on line and review some of the other cities Charters. Also, Rylee Retzer, League of MN Cities, advised she does do Charter presentations for cities and City Councils free of charge. The only charge that would occur is if the Commission had a specific question about a section of the Charter. It was the consensus of the Charter Commission to try to schedule a presentation by Rylee Retzer for the July 2005 Charter Commission meeting. Member's Resignations — Chair Trehus advised he received a resignation letter from Commissioner S. Lane and Commissioner G. Lane. Therefore, the Commission has two vacancies. He asked Commissioners to encourage anyone interested to submit a letter of application. The vacancies will also be advertised in the Quad. Set April 14, 2005 Agenda — Chair Trehus advised the following items would appear on the April 14, 2005 Charter Commission agenda: 1. Call to Order and Roll Call 2. Approval of Agenda 3. Open Mike • Charter Commission January 13, 2005 Page 6 4. Joint Meeting with Council A. Road Reconstruction B. Five -Year Plan C. Pavement Management Report D. Communication to the Residents E. Charter Commission Budget F. Other 5. Approval of Minutes A. January 13, 2005 Discussion of Joint Meeting 7. New Business A. Set Agenda for July Meeting B. Confirm League of MN Cities Presentation 8. Adjourn ADJOURN MOTION by Commissioner Dahl, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adjourn the meeting at 9:20 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Respectfully Submitted, Kim Points TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. Charter Commission October 14, 2004 Page 1 DATE TIME STARTED TIME ENDED MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS EXCUSED MEMBERS UNEXCUSED STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT DRAFT CITY OF LINO LAKES CHARTER COMMISSION October 14, 2004 7:05 P.M. 9:11 P.M. Dahl, Aldentaler, Handrick, Stroberg, Trehus, Warren, Duffy, Williams, Bor, and Carlson Montain, G. Lane, S. Lane, Zastrow, and Vacha None. None. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Chair Trehus called the regular meeting of the Lino Lakes Charter Commission to order at 7:05 p.m. on October 14, 2004. OPEN MIKE No one was present for open mike. APPROVAL OF MINUTES July 8, 2004 — Commissioner Duffy, requested the following change: Page 2, change Reports of the Char to "Reports of the Chair ". Commissioner Handrick requested she be moved from members unexcused to members excused. She noted she had sent an e -mail stating she would not be present at this meeting. MOTION by Commissioner Warren, seconded Commissioner Duffy, to approve changing Commissioner Handrick to an excused absence. Motion carried. MOTION by Commissioner Warren, seconded by Commissioner Duffy, to approve the July 8, 2004 Charter Commission minutes as amended. Motion carried. July 19, 2004 — There were no corrections made. Motion by Commissioner Duffy, seconded by Commission Williams, to approve the July 8, 2004 Charter Commission minutes as presented. Motion carried. 1 • • Charter Commission October 14, 2004 Page 2 DRAFT REPORTS OF THE CHAIR Member's Terms (Chair Trehus) - Chair Trehus handed out the current member list and when their terms expired. He stated the old State Statute was that Charter Commissioners could not serve more than two terms consecutively and that requirement had now been removed. He noted Charter Commissioners could now serve unlimited terms. He stated according to the By -Laws, the Chair was required to notify members of their terms expiration five months in advance. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES City Web Site /Commissioners' Group Photo (Commissioner Dahl) - Commissioner Dahl stated at their last meeting the Commissioners had agreed to have a group photograph taken. She indicated they would be taking that group picture tonight. Archives Report (Commissioner Dahl) — Commissioner Dahl stated they had not sent any more letters out to foinier Charter Commissioners because there were a lot of names and the current addresses were not in the City of Lino Lakes. She noted looking up the addresses took a lot of time so she asked if there were any Commission members who would be willing to look up five or ten former Charter Commissioner's addresses and phone number. Once the addresses were obtained, Ann Blair would send out the form letters. Commissioner Dahl stated the reason for the letters being sent out was to ask previous Commissioners for any old charter documents they had and were willing to give to the Commission. Commissioner Bor asked if Betsy Freezen( ?sp) had any history with the Charter Commission. Commissioner Dahl replied she did not believe Betsy had any documents. Commissioner Dahl asked for a Committee to be formed to find the previous Commissioners addresses and phone numbers. Commissioner Warren volunteered to look up five names. Commissioner Stroberg stated she had located the original Charter and would give it to Commissioner Dahl to deteiniine if there were additional former Commissioners who needed to be looked up. Commissioner Bor stated the City could also give the names to the Minnesota Historical Society to assist in looking up residents in Minnesota. Commissioner Dahl stated she did not mind looking up the names, but it was very time consuming. She noted she would get in touch with the Minnesota Historical Society for assistance before asking for the Committee members to look up addresses. • • Charter Commission October 14, 2004 Page 3 DRAFT Charter Documents Letter (Commissioner Dahl) — Commissioner Stroberg stated she had located newspaper articles from the Circulating Pines from ten years ago regarding the Charter Commission. She gave the original documents to Commissioner Dahl for the Charter files. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Five -Year Plan — Chair Trehus stated he had requested further information on the Five -Year Plan from City Administrator Gordon Heitke who indicated it was possible that a draft of the 5- year plan could be prepared late 2004 with Council approval in early 2005. He asked if there were any comments with the five -year plan. Pavement Management Report — Chair Trehus stated he had requested further information on the Pavement Management Report from City Administrator Gordon Heitke who indicated in a memorandum to the Commission that the draft Pavement Management Plan will be completed and presented to the City Council for their initial review in November. Mr. Heitke's memorandum stated it was anticipated that the Pavement Management Plan, when completed in greater detail, would provide a general schedule for improvement of streets within each category. This general schedule will be further refined when incorporated into the Five Year Financial Plan update. The final project implementation schedule will not only be based on the condition rating, but will be influenced by other factors, including but not limited to available funding, sanitary sewer and water improvements, traffic volumes, drainage issues, etc. This schedule will be continually updated on a yearly basis as conditions and factors usually change over time. Commissioner Bor noted there would need to be a City referendum for approving a pavement management plan. Chair Trehus noted the thirteen percent of the streets requiring a complete reconstruct would only increase in the future. Commissioner Stroberg asked why they could not pay a little more taxes, which would go into the general fund to pay for street reconstruction. Commissioner Dahl noted the City needed to communicate the importance of a pavement management plan properly to the residents, which had not been correctly done the last time. Commissioner Bor stated they needed to make sure this was communicated correctly this time and they needed to keep on task on it. Commissioner Warren stated in the past the communication was poor and the referendum did not go through, but if the residents had sufficient communication, it might go through. She • Charter Commission October 14, 2004 Page 4 DRAFT expressed a concern that there was no timeframe set up and this might not be decided until the next election in two years. Chair Trehus asked Commissioner Dahl if the Council had any feedback to the Commission's letter. Commissioner Dahl stated the letter was received by the Council and there was a little discussion on it, but there was no response. Commissioner Duffy stated she got the overall sense that Mr. Heitke's memorandum was being polite, but thought of the Charter Commission as a hindrance. Commissioner Bor stated she had spoken with Mr. Heitke about the Pavement Management Plan and a communication plan, and he indicated that the actual participants in a process was limited to a very few people and it was difficult to get residents to come to public hearings. She stated she had told him not to "mess with the Charter ". She stated those kinds of interactions were good for communication and she would like to see the Commission continue to communicate with staff and Council, so the residents could make an informed decision on any referendum. She stated she wanted more detail's given to the residents. Chair Trehus stated he did not believe the City was locked into a referendum for an overlay. Commissioner Bor noted she did not know if an overlay would be sufficient. She indicated she wanted to see the plan to assist her in understanding how the budget worked. Communication to the Residents — Chair Trehus stated he had requested further information on communication to the residents from City Administrator Gordon Heitke who indicated in a memorandum to the Commission that staff will be recommending that upon City Council determining that the proposed program is in a form suitable for public review, that various means of informing the public be considered and carried out. Mr. Heitke's memorandum indicated the obvious means of communication includes a detailed presentation at a televised regular Council meeting, articles in the City newsletter, special informational meeting(s), public hearing(s), information posted on the City's web site, detailed articles in the local newspapers, special mailings, etc. Mr. Heitke's memorandum noted staff would be discussing the various means of informing the public on both the proposed Pavement Management Plan and proposed 2005 general fund budget and levy with the City Council. At that time the Council will direct staff as to how to proceed with a public information effort. The Charter Commissioner's memo of July 8, 2004 has been provided to the City Council and will be provided again, along with any additional comments you may provide, during this discussion. Chair Trehus stated he was disappointed nothing had been done regarding communication to the residents. • • Charter Commission October 14, 2004 Page 5 DRAFT Commissioner Bor stated she had contacted the Quad Newspaper to ask if they wanted to prepare an article on this, but she had not received a response. Commissioner Warren noted it appeared nothing was going to be done until November. Chair Trehus stated these three issues would remain on their agenda as unfinished business. MOTION by Commission Warren, seconded by Commissioner Carlson that the Commission ask the Council to present to the Commission the Communication Plan and the communication itself prior to it being released to residents so the Commission could assist Council in making sure the residents of the City get as much of the information they need to make an informed decision if there should be a referendum. Commissioner Carlson requested an amendment to the Motion asked for the formula that would be used for cost - sharing, how it was determined, and how it was applied. Chair Trehus expressed concern that this amendment is a separate issue than what Commissioner Warren was requesting. Commissioner Bor stated she wanted to understand the formula in order to make an informed decision. Commissioner Bor asked if the Commissioners could be in attendance at the November Council worksession to discuss these issues. Commissioner Dahl replied if the Commissioners wanted to be on the November agenda, she believed that was possible. She noted these worksessions were open to the public. Chair Trehus asked if the Commissioners wanted to attend the work session as audience members or should they ask for a special meeting with the Council either before or after this work session, or should they wait until a decision has been made and then request a meeting. Commissioner Stroberg asked if anyone had checked with the other Cities who had charters to see how other cities repaired their roads. Commissioner Bor relied there were very few charters that had this particular clause in it. Commissioner Dahl stated staff was working on gathering this information. Commissioner Stroberg stated she would like to see an independent professional obtain and analyze information on cities who had charters. Commissioner Carlson believed Council and staff should present their plan to the Commission after they had reviewed everything, but before it had been put in the paper. He stated the Commission should not get involved in this before that time. • • Charter Commission October 14, 2004 Page 6 DRAFT The Commission agreed to not officially ask to be on the City Council Worksession agenda, but would wait until the Council had made their decisions before a meeting would be requested. Chair Trehus asked what form the Commissioners wanted to communicate their motion. The Commission agreed that Chair Trehus would draft a letter to the City Administrator and Council informing them of this Motion. Motion carried unanimously. Commissioner Handrick stated she would contact the Minnesota League of Cities to obtain infouuation on how other Charter Cities paid for reconstruction of their road and would report back to the Commission at the next meeting. Commission Members Not Receiving City Council Minutes — Commissioner Dahl stated the Commissioner members could obtain the City Council Minutes from the City website. Commissioner Carlson stated he has not been receiving any minutes and he wanted a hard copy of both the City Council Minutes and Worksession Minutes. Commissioner Dahl replied she would inform Ann Blair of this. Review City Council Meeting Minutes for Charter Compliance — Chair Trehus asked if any Commissions had found any issues. The Commissioner's had no comments. NEW BUSINESS Charter Commission Budget (Commissioner Dahl) - Commissioner Dahl handed out the budget to the Commission and reviewed it for the Commission. She stated there was a deduction for the use of an attorney, which she did not believe was accurate. She noted there was no budget for Timesavers, which has now been added. She stated she believed staff had gone to several attorneys and talk about the road issue, but she wanted the Commissioners to know it was not the Charter that did this. She stated staff had told her that since it was regarding road reconstruction, it could be taken out of the Charter budget, but in her opinion, they should have asked the Charter Commission if they could do that. She asked the Commission what they wanted to do about this. Commissioner Stroberg asked which attorney was paid and for what. Chair Trehus replied he would check with City staff for this information and he would give an update at the next meeting. Chair Carlson stated he was skeptical when it came to the budget and he did not feel the • attomey's fees being taken out of the Commission's budget was right. • • • Charter Commission October 14, 2004 Page 7 DRAFT Commissioner Dahl stated if the Commission needed more money, they could go to the Council and request more. She expressed concern that nobody knew about this and no permission had been requested. Chair Trehus stated he would ask who authorized the amount and who was paid. Commissioner Stroberg asked what happened with the left over funds from their budget from year to year. Commissioner Dahl replied the excess funds were put back into the General Fund. Commissioner Warren left the meeting at 8:52 p.m. Posting Charter Commission Meeting in the Official Newspaper — Commissioner Dahl noted Ann Blair had posted the Charter Commission Meeting in the City's official newspaper. Commissioner Dahl asked the Commission if they each wanted a binder for their Charter documents. She stated this was up to the Charter, but she wanted a binder to organize her documents. Commissioner Stroberg stated she had given the City a lot of blue binders a couple of years ago and asked what happened to those. Chair Trehus requested the Chair and Vice Chair to see if there would be a budget shortfall in 2005. Commissioner Dahl stated there were already funds for Timesavers put into the budget and in her opinion, the Commission would not run short of money. MOTION by Commissioner Bor and seconded by Commissioner Handrick, to purchase the more expensive binders and when the Commissioners left the Charter Commission, the binders get returned to the Commission. The Motion carried. Set January 13, 2005 Agenda — Chair Trehus advised the following items would appear on the January 13, 2004, Charter Commission agenda: 1. Call to Order and Roll Call 2. Open Mike 3. Approval of Minutes A. October 14, 2004 4. Reports of the Committees A. Archives Report/City Web Site (Commissioner Dahl) B. City Website Update (Commissioner Dahl) C. Response to Charter Documents Letter (Commissioner Dahl) • Charter Commission October 14, 2004 Page 8 DRAFT 5. Unfinished Business A. Five -Year Plan B. Pavement Management Program C. Communication to the Residents D. Review City Council Meeting Minutes for Charter Compliance E. Update from League of MN Cities regarding other Charter Cities (Commissioner Handrick) F. Charter Commission Budget G. Application to Charter Commission 6. New Business A. Set April 9. Adjourn ADJOURN , 2005 Agenda MOTION by Commissioner Duffy, seconded by Commissioner Carlson, to adjourn the meeting at 9:15 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Respectfully Submitted, Kathy Altman TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. • • WS -8 WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT Work Session Item No. 8 Date: Council Work Session, Wednesday, April 6, 2005 To: City Council From: Gordon Heitke, City Administrator Re: City Involvement in Blue Heron Days Background Following the 2004 Blue Heron Days Festival, the City Council decided to incorporate $3,000 in the 2005 budget for "community festival" purposes with the intention of further discussion in 2005. Some time ago, staff reported to Council on discussions with the Royalty Committee regarding the need for and their interest in having a permanent parade float. This issue was discussed again recently and both the Royalty Committee and chairman of the Blue Heron Days Committee would like to see the City of Lino Lakes participate in the construction of a parade float which could be used year round to promote the community and its festival. Requested Council Direction Staff, the Royalty Committee and Blue Heron Days Committee is seeking a response from the City Council as to whether there is support to use the budgeted festival funds to construct a permanent parade float which could be used by the Royalty Committee to represent the community in various parades throughout the year.