Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/08/2006 Council Packet• WORK SESSION AGENDA • • CITY OF LINO LAKES Wednesday February 8, 2006 CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION Community Room (not televised) 5:30 P.M. 1. Environmental Board Goals (see City Council Agenda Item 6A) 2. YMCA 3. Super Rink Participation 4. VLAWMO Resolution 5. Advisory Board Appointment Process 6. Regular Agenda Items 7. Adjourn PAGE 1 WS -2 WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT Work Session Item No. 2 Date: Council Work Session, Wednesday, February 8, 2006 To: Mayor and City Council From: Michael Grochala Re: YMCA Alternative Development Options Background On January 23, 2006 the City Council approved a PUD Final Plan for the Chain of Lakes YMCA. The approved plan was for a first phase of development that will include 37,304 square feet, with future phases proposed to include a gymnasium expansion of approximately 4,200 square feet, a leisure pool of approximately 5,400 square feet, and a multi - purpose room. History In 1999, the City and the YMCA of Greater Saint Paul formed a partnership for the purpose of constructing a YMCA in Lino Lakes. The city's participation was in response to the 20/20 Vision process and the citizen survey, which indicated strong support for a community center. • 77% favored the construction of a community center • 59% supported issuance of construction bonds to build a community center • 73% supported operation of all or parts of a community center by a private company In addition, the city was attempting to create a mixed use downtown that would be a source of community identity and pride, and the YMCA was considered a vital link in providing that identity and helping to spur further commercial development in the downtown. WS -2 In the original agreement approved in 1999, the city agreed to financial participation of $1.5 million in cash for construction, plus land and infrastructure estimated at the time to be approximately $500,000, for a total cash contribution of $2 million. The land was approximately 7 acres that had been removed from the regional park in a "land swap" that was approved by the Metropolitan Council. Through the swap the city received 14 acres for the city hall and YMCA at a cost of $300,000. In turn, the YMCA agreed to build approximately 37,000 square feet that included a "teen center, gym, indoor pools, running /walking track, cardiovascular /strength training area, aerobic studio, family program space and Child Watch. Building design will provide for future expansion opportunities. " City residents would receive discounted membership fees and "open community" days where all residents could use the facilities. The Council considered this joint venture a way to get a family oriented community center for approximately 30 cents on the dollar with no long term operations and maintenance costs. Financial Evolution of the Project In 1999 Springsted, Inc. studied the financial implications of the city's commitment and analyzed financing options. At the time of the study, the YMCA had completed market research that indicated a 46,000 - square foot facility would better serve the community, for a cost of approximately $6 million. The YMCA capital funding was to be limited to $2 million. The city's cash contribution was estimated to be $2 million total. The remaining was to be from community contributions. An updated analysis in 2004 by Springsted recommended using tax abatement, a tool that was not available in 1999, to pay for the city's $1.5 million cash contribution. The City Council established a Tax Abatement District in the southern portion of the Woods Edge development to capture the city portion of taxes generated by new development. Springsted estimated the cost to a taxpayer in a $228,000 home to be $20 /year, declining over the life of the bonds, but growth in residential tax base could offset any increase in the tax rate. The city has also benefited from the development of Legacy at Woods Edge with Hartford Group as the master developers. If the YMCA had been constructed prior to Woods Edge being underway, the city would have been obligated for the costs of construction of Town Center Parkway, including improvements to the Lake Drive intersection, plus extension of utilities, to the YMCA site. The Woods Edge development required these infrastructure improvements, which are fully assessed to Hartford Group, thus relieving the city of that obligation. Current Financial Situation The YMCA has spent years fundraising in the community, and has approximately $6.3 million available for construction. However, construction costs have risen considerably since 1999. A community capital campaign is underway to attempt to raise an additional $800,000 needed to build the full sized gym. While continuing to try to raise funds, the Y board concluded the first phase needs to be in the ground this year, and submitted for WS -2 approval what could be built with $6.3 million. This facility includes a half -sized gym, and the leisure pool and multi - purpose room were omitted, while recognizing these facilities could be added in the future. The exterior facade of the facility also falls short of the architectural and materials standards set for the Woods Edge downtown development. Proposed Alternative Development Scenario City Council members have expressed their concern with the size of the first phase of the YMCA facility, the lack of a leisure pool which is attractive to the young family demographic in Lino Lakes, and the lack of architectural appeal of the facility. Staff has discussed with the YMCA, Springsted, and Kennedy & Graven options that might be available to provide the size and type of facility that City Council and the community had anticipated. It is estimated that currently $1,850,000 is needed to do the building that was approved, with the addition of the leisure pool. The following is an alternative funding scenario that provides $1,850,000 to build the leisure pool in the first phase, plus additional upgrades to the facade of the building. 1. Part of the 2005 updated agreement called for a 5 -year, 10 percent discount to Lino Lakes residents on their monthly membership fees at the YMCA. While this is a considerable benefit to residents who join the Y, it restricts the ability of the YMCA to take on more debt, and benefits only residents who become members. If that portion of the agreement was eliminated, it would enable the YMCA to take on an additional $1 million in debt. 2. Springsted updated its analysis of the capacity of the Tax Abatement District, based on assumptions of anticipated values and phasing of the southern portion of Woods Edge. A 15 -year abatement will generate $2,406,845. 3. The city is currently committed to 15 -years of abatement for its $1.5 million contribution. There is capacity available to provide the additional $850,000 to meet the current gap in funding. This potential additional contribution would be capped at $850,000. Any additional funds raised by the YMCA would lower the city's commitment. The amount of the city's additional contribution would be based on final bid numbers and additional funds raised through fundraising. 4. Because the city did not have to find a funding source for extension of road and utilities to the YMCA, the total city contribution, in today's dollars, remains approximately the same 30 cents on the dollar that was originally anticipated in 1999. 5. The City Parks and Recreation Department is currently working with the YMCA for additional joint programming and opportunities for all residents to be able to utilize the facility. Council Direction Terri Heaton from Springsted and Steve Bubul from Kennedy & Graven will be present at the work session to answer questions. Staff is seeking Council direction regarding this alternative, based on the benefits gained from completing the YMCA leisure pool with phase one, rather than some undetermined time in the future. WS -2 Actions required to accomplish this would include: 1. City Council adds to the Monday, February 13 agenda a resolution calling for a public hearing to grant a property tax abatement and to amend the business subsidy agreement to the with the YMCA 2. Hold the public hearing on Monday, February 27 and consider adoption of the property tax abatement and amendment to the business subsidy agreement. WS #3 WORK SESSION MEMORANDUM To: Mayor Bergeson and City Council Members From: Rick DeGardner, Public Services Director Date: February 8, 2006 Re: Super Rink Participation During the "Super Rink Request" discussion at the January 18, 2006 Work Session, several questions were posed. I have attached Mr. Erickson's responses as follows: 1. Draft Resolution 2. Formula for the 3 Cities — population + skaters 3. Summary of the National Sports Center (NSC) figure skating participants — Lino Lakes 4. Summary of NSC public skating opportunities. Included in the draft resolution is a special clause allowing the city of Lino Lakes sole discretion to pay in 2006 or 2007(Article 2). Also, The NSC will continue to offer public skating programs (Article 4). As you may recall the Centennial Youth Hockey Association (CYHA) is requesting funding from the cities of Lino Lakes, Centerville, and Circle Pines to help assist the funding of the Super Rink Expansion. With a total commitment to fund $780,000 the CYHA is requesting that the area cities fund $100,000 collectively as distributed below: City of Lino Lakes $72,000 City of Centerville $16,000 City of Circle Pines $12,000 The City Council needs to determine whether the City of Lino Lakes is willing/able to commit funding for this endeavor. The Park Board will be discussing this at their February 6 meeting. I will forward their comments prior to this Wednesday's Work Session. Page 1 Resolution City of Lino Lakes RESOLUTION APPROVING PARTICIPATION IN SUPPORTING A FOUR SHEET ICE FACILITY EXPANSION AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF DOCUMENTS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH WHEREAS, the City of Lino Lakes in conjunction with the Cities of Centerville and Circle Pines have determined a need to provide its residents with access to an indoor ice arena intended to be used predominantly for youth athletic activities; and WHEREAS, the Minnesota Amateur Sports Commission ( "MASC ") and National Sports Center ( "NSC ") propose constructing and operating a facility consisting of four new ice sheet expansion (the "Facility ") to the Super Rink on the property of the National Sports Center located in Blaine, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City has been offered the opportunity to participate in the support of the operation of the new Facility for the purpose of supporting its community hockey association. WHEREAS, the financing of the Facility will be undertaken by the issuance of revenue bonds of the Anoka County Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA) backed by an annual appropriation lease purchase agreement of Anoka County, Minnesota (the County); and WHEREAS, the County and HRA have required , as a condition of their participation in the financing, a finding that the Facility's revenues and other available money will be sufficient to pay debt service with respect to the bonds; and WHEREAS, the County, the HRA, the MASC and the NSC will enter into one or more agreements setting forth the respective rights and obligations of the parties with respect to the Facility; and WHEREAS, the City is authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.191 to enter into an agreement with respect to support the financing the Facility; including securing its obligations pursuant to the agreement by a first charge on the gross revenues of the Facility and to provide for a the payment of operating costs of the Facility to the extent that revenues are insufficient therefore; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LINO LAKES, MINNESOTA. 1) The City hereby determines and agrees to participate in the support of the operation and use of the Facility, provided that the City's participation shall be in an amount equal to one hundred percent (100%) of One of four ice sheets of the Facility ( "Percentage Share ") from September to March annually or 1340 hours (exclusive of certain time allocated to MASC). Each cities percentage of 1340 hours is proportionate to their percentage contribution towards construction. 2) The Cities hereby appropriate $100,000 dollars to be applied to costs of construction and financing of the Facility as follows; City of Lino Lakes appropriates $72,000. City of Centerville appropriates $16,000 City of Circle Pines appropriates $12,000 The City of Lino Lakes pledge may be funded in 2006 or 2007 or in combination and at the sole discretion of the City of Lino Lakes. 3) The Cities agree to support rental income for the Facility in an amount equal to the agreed upon annual hourly rate times its Percentage Share of agreed upon prime time hours (not less than 1340 hours) which rental income shall be passed though for the purpose of paying debt service with respect to the bonds and paying operating costs of the Facility. To the extent that actual revenues of the Facility, after application to payment of debt service and accumulation and maintenance of required reserves, are inadequate to pay operating costs of the Facility, the City agrees to pay the amount equal to the unsold hours on its designated sheet of ice. In any given year of the 20 year bond repayment period, the City obligation shall be limited to the unsold hours on its designated one ice sheet in the high season of September, October, November, December, January, February and March. 4) The ice sheet rights shall be granted to the Centennial Youth Hockey Association. In addition, CYHA and the National Sports Center are committed to continue the public access policy of the Super Rink and expansion to offer Centennial area skaters programs such as pubic skating, senior skating, learn to skate, and figure skating. 5) The Mayor and City Manager of the City are hereby authorized to execute an agreement with MASC and NSC including terms specifically authorized hereby, and such other terms as are not inconsistent therewith, and are necessary and appropriate to provide for the financing, construction, operation and use of the Facility, all as determined by the Mayor and City Manager in their discretion. Execution by the Mayor and City Manager shall be evidence of such determination. Adopted by the City Council this _ day of January 2006. Mayor Formula City Backing + 100K Population Skaters* Plan 100K Circle Pines 5000 (18 %) 9% 12% $12,000 Lino Lakes 19000 (68 %) 74% 72% $72,000 Centerville 3600 (13 %) 15% 16% $16,000 * Centennial Youth Hockey Skaters(54) who are Blaine residents are exempted from the formula as the City of Blaine has already contributed $500K and has backed two full sheets Summary- City of Lino Lakes Resident Participation NSC Figure Skating Blaine, Minnesota Registered Skaters Figure Skating Club Skaters Lino Lakes Centerville /Circle Pines Fa112004 7 1 Winter 2005 6 1 Spring 2005 9 2 Summer 2005 4 0 Skating School Lino Lakes Centerville /Circle Pines Fa112004 20 10 Winter 2005 56 21 Spring 2005 47 15 Lino Lakes Total 149 Centerville /Circle Pines Total 50 Public Skating Opportunities • Public Skating 40 weeks /year Tuesdays 2hrs. Thursday 2hrs. Wednesday evening 1 _hrs. Saturday afternoon 2hrs. Sunday afternoon 2hrs. • Open Hockey 46 weeks /year Tuesday 2hrs. Thursday 2hrs. • Senior Skating 46 weeks /year Tuesdays 2hrs. Thursdays 2hrs. • Adult Hockey 40 weeks /year Sunday — Wednesday evenings • Special open skating and open hockey Martin Luther King Day Presidents Day Christmas Holidays • -c-05 CD CD U C c L c a) O O U) U (1) _b Ct. N co L7. 7 -0 0 ° o v c .0 co m - >_ U) O co v_i c co co � LLI 2 °Q v- un_ co i:C -C c c6 0� Z.t: 0... &63 ci) < 8 a_ Q U) m - < cn • O a) i Nit, w . co c u) (f) CD . — c- co a) co CD t.)4 -p_ °- 0) a c ta, -Ea ..c c c -L- = Erm C la 0 0 CD U �- 0 t1) 0 cn 0 co • • ie of Minnescta co hockey associations U U 0 E �` 0 as O 0 0 -o WV i a) O c cs) 0, c O CO e Previous Years 2005 Team Successes N 0 O E U CO a) U M CO CD CD Q `J E < (.g �MM � W 0 O O PeeWee A State Champions Bantam A State Runner Up 2002 Bantam A VFW State Champions Bantam B State Runner Up Bantam A State Champions PeeWee B2 District Champions AA State High School Champions Q N 0 (D O_ O E a co E CO U -C U •L U D Q d' '5 U) L co CD A A A A A A • e .sue 0 n Cfl O 0 O in LC) O O O CN CO CO O7 CO •Circle Pines • CD c 0 0 0 c E a) C/) ct M — 00 cj- d' d' Cr) Cr) Cr) 00 d' Cr) - Hours Furchased :t&-`) 1 E D _ U O U o X Ca aa)i -a U O o N 0 0 F_ 0 L 0 U O 15 co ca = U _o cn = - O = 0) 0) C6 v < U U W Li 2 °' z 0 >- "0 O a co o L D (12 (o cn (12 (12 = '� C9 LX") O T-- 00 = cn CO N t� 1-) - o Li-) in d- d- C- + r- T- r r T- p O a) N .V C9 LO CO N O O O O O c co co co 4 A N r o 0 O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 73 -0 N N N N N Q Q • 0 c O W 'o L CD RS co C (TS C � T • 0 CO < 0 Q co" .c.) U 0 0 E CO � 0 0 0 2 a) c 0 0 0) c 00 m 0 0 4- c 0 I 0 0 tea) •U co 0 Ci O (/) () • (v a) 0 co c -f� co .— V J a) U 4- o U o 0- a)U) 0 (0 L c 0- o H z 0 E E 0 (7) c 0 ▪ 0) . 0 • • 0 0 Super Rink (4sheets) a) 0 City of Andover c CO 780K with city backing L L >' O O co o 0 ^ U MD Y W (a W OLO O co CO OC Ct N.-- -J N .n < I 0 N Contribution City cost /Sheet A >+ U 7,02 0) .v 0 .— o 0_ c a) y co la, ®®' it • Recommendation 0) m a) 0 U N 0 U O c 0 0 Lino Lakes 72% E LLL Centerville 16% Circle Pines 12% • ax 0 0 0 1 w Centennial Youth Hockey has first rights. If CYHA releases some hours: U Y O U 2 Y = co a) = - O = > C O = O O o O U • › Q i Y ca. .E.5 co u) 'a N C) N O —I O co C 'a C C O t i.. ▪ 4= CD O O O Y V O C U rn m a) co C) a) > a) a) C > = C) a) 0) 05 •U 1.• 2nd Priority (March 1) U) O O m L' C L C LE O a) co Q N 0 N cu O c s,,.. C Cl. Y = .- > N O = p J C 0 -o O `t,-) o a) o _ 0 i .-.9 O O L _ c 0) >+ t L.L. = Y > O Y a) >- (n o �- C 2 °o L. Q3 2 • LL Q O W :cm.0) Q a) O ca Q. Q) N Z U) °O .0 W c Y E ,C 0 U L 1— Z _0 Q cu U) .0 a) 0)- a) ao U O7 X T- y) m U i O .c.- 1-- (A O0 , cL . a L a 0) P. w o M v Z • • V • ix (0(1) vowa O Oo. (I) (1) a) >1 -0 virJ 0) • 1.0 :a4 C0>LL • 15 Intl ma O • • • N O O U kE5,1 • C O W w N cA o n 61 O O O O •..., • _ -, Cn• CCU c' _� •- Cti — '� V1 k Cd CC3 y - ct 00 y o o N •,—, •,—. M y v� - O U 00 E i ct O '' W oCI a? z c-• 3 Z ct © W c Ntz tU cWWW wo t t( P, W z C4 P4 g "6". zw Oz �aa► -a c. o d ''E4 o o H °�� 4. TARGET CENTER? moimmi • • • z 11 O — J -.. avow NOSSIOVw s 4141 it'. Dm 1E4 mu DE mai mu qt. 121 EH EC IIERIEE1 Dim so Dm 111111 z� 1! 1 - 'Fo DEL 5' WV- En - Afai ES 133w1C iw0dN3AVa 40 AVMNOIN s -1 M • • • V N ion visitors • 0 0 L L 0 0 0 .CI) CI) .(1) .� .� .> .0 .0 0 2002 - 2.7 mi 2003 - 2.9 mi 2004 -3.2 mi ion visitors L 0 c 0 E E Lid O cr5 1 LO cO CCD 0 N N V to • • c V 0 0 co -0 0 • E E 0 U L To 0 c > 0 O C6 E co - O L -c m c co c o _CI_ O U _U `� Z w .0 , a) # H �,(a L O . c O co /' W E o c_c cD co (n 0) X O O O o w . -0 co C- c O O) Y (tS O o . (%) U U U O o 0 ▪ , L L._ = c ÷E' 7t, > > 0 Q_ a) a) U • • • 1700 105th Avenue NE 0) z 2 a) .c3 Phone: 763.785.5632 Fax: 763.785.5698 Email: perickson©mnsports.org Lt, WS - 4 WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT Work Session Item No. 4 Date: Council Work Session, February 8, 2006 To: City Council From: Gordon Beitke Re: Resolution for VLAWMO Special Taxing District Background Throughout the past two years, discussions have occurred within the VLAWMO Board and member units as to the need to restructure VLAWMO to in order to have the necessary resources to effectively manage the water resources within its jurisdiction. Recently, member units, including Lino Lakes, agreed to extend the joint powers agreement for an additional year in order to allow for the exploration of ways to obtain adequate financial resources, as well as address the need for a water plan and resolve governance issues. The Board of Directors has proposed to address the funding problem by proposing legislation which would make VLAWMO a special purpose taxing district, allowing them to levy taxes on properties within their jurisdiction. The Board is seeking resolutions of support from its member units for this legislation. Jeff McDowell, Lino Lakes representative on the VLAWMO Board, will be present to discuss this proposed legislation and resolution with the Council. Requested Council Direction Staff is requesting that the Council determine its position on the resolution at the work session in order for the VLAWMO Board to be aware of the intention of the Lino Lakes City Council for their February 9 meeting. Formal action by the City Council is scheduled for Monday, February 13, 2006. 1 Attachments 1. VLAWMO letter, December 28, 2005 2. VLAWMO letter, January 12, 2005 (2006) 3. Memorandum from Schilling Consultant Services regarding funding research 2 December 28, 2005 Cities of Gem Lake, Lino Lakes, North Oaks, Vadnais Heights, White Bear Lake, Town of White Bear and Board of Water Commissioners — Saint Paul Re: Special Taxing District Request for Resolution of Support Dear Mayors, City Councilors, Town Board members and Commissioners: Members Gem Lake Lino Lakes North Oaks St. Paul Regional Water Service Vadnais Heights White Bear Lake White Bear Township Over the last year and a half we have talked about what the Vadnais Lake Area Water Management Organization should be doing in the future and how to accomplish it. Our Commissioners and staff have attended many of your meetings and some of you have attended VLAWMO meetings. From this input, the VLAWMO Board concluded: • There is a desire to retain the grassroots Joint Powers watershed structure rather than become a watershed district. However, costs are and will continue to increase to comply with state and federal unfunded mandates. In addition, there is a strong local desire to have well managed water resources. VLAWMO FUNDING AND TAX EQUITY Our budget is supported mainly by contributions from our member communities using a formula within the VLAWMO Joint Powers Agreement. Several of our member communities have told us their 2006 VLAWMO share may become a difficult future budget item. Tax equity is also a concern for most of our members. Many of their taxpayers outside the VLAWMO boundary subsidize VLAWMO watershed costs through property taxes or stormwater utility fees. This is because the watershed districts surrounding most of VLAWMO levy a tax upon residents within their geographic area to pay for watershed costs. Thus, taxpayers of our six communities living in neighboring watershed districts effectively pay twice for watershed services. WHY ADDRESS THE ISSUE NOW? ♦ VLAWMO is working on its third generation Watershed Management Plan, an unfunded state mandate that has roughly doubled our 2006 budget. We will seek your input to help identify goals and prioritize watershed needs with a target of Plan completion by next summer. VLAWMO functions include but are not limited to: monitoring water resources, assessing wetland health, working with developers, working with local residents on strategic lake plans, offering a water education program, and setting priorities for efficient use of public dollars. 4701 Highway 61, White Bear Lake, MN 55110; 651 - 429 -8522, Fax: 651 - 429 -8500 website: www.vlawmo.org; email: office @vlawmo.org 1 ♦ We are also updating the Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) outlining how the watershed is managed. The ability to receive funding through tax levy is one change being considered along formalizing our Technical and Citizen Advisory Committees. We hope to start discussion among our members very soon, with consensus on language by mid year. ACCOUNTABILITY for public funding will be built into the JPA, particularly from a cost and benefit perspective. You, as the elected representatives of your communities, will be a part of the drafting of the new JPA and will continue to play a vital role in this watershed. MINNESOTA STATUTES section 103B.241 (attachment C) gives watershed management organizations the ability to levy a tax to cover the costs of writing and implementing a Watershed Management Plan. However, VLAWMO will need designation as a special taxing district in the tax code (M.S. 275.066) to implement this levy authority. This requires legislative action. Middle Mississippi WMO became a special taxing district in 2000 and now has levy authority. REQUEST: Please consider the enclosed sample Resolution of support for VLAWMO to become a special taxing district or other letter at your January or February meeting. (See attachment A) Discussions with our local State Legislators have indicated your support is critical to this legislative request. If you would like your Commissioner or me to attend your meeting to discuss the issue please let us know. The VLAWMO needs funding to adequately address its responsibility that is closer to what other metro area watersheds receive. The Legislative effort is a one -line addition of VLAWMO's name to the list of Special Taxing Districts under M.S. 275.066 (attachment B). The Board wishes to thank you for the extension of the current Joint Powers Agreement. We plan to use this time productively as we work on the Watershed Management Plan and Joint Powers Agreement updates, the levy request and, of course, normal watershed business such as administering the Wetland Conservation Act, completing the Lambert Lake Governor's Clean Water Initiative project, and monitoring for the 10th year, nine basins through the volunteer Citizen's Lake monitoring program. Communication is key in the next year. Please let us know if you have questions or comments. We would be happy to visit your Board, Council or Environmental committee meetings. Sincerely, Stephanie McNamara, Administrator — Wetland Specialist for the VLAWMO Board of Commissioners Enclosures 3 2 Attachment A DRAFT RESOLUTION NUMBER RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF DESIGNATING VADNAIS LAKE AREA WATER MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION (VLAWMO) AS A SPECIAL TAXING DISTRICT UNDER MINNESOTA STATUTES 275.066. Whereas, VLAWMO is a Joint Powers Water Management Organization established for the General Purpose of: to (1) protect, preserve and use natural surface and groundwater storage and retention systems; (2) minimize capital expenditures necessary to correct flooding and water quality problems; (3) identify and plan for means to effectively protect and improve surface and groundwater quality; (4) establish more uniform local policies and official controls for surface and groundwater management; (5) prevent erosion of soil into surface water systems; (6) promote groundwater recharge; (7) protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat and water recreational facilities and secure other benefits associated with the proper management of surface and groundwater, and Whereas, members of the Joint Powers Water Management Organization currently support VLAWMO through general fund budgets or utility fee budgets, and Whereas, VLAWMO members have found.this funding method to be inequitable , with residents outside of the VLAWMO jurisdiction paying for two watershed budgets, and Whereas, the ability to levy for planning and implementation of Water Plans and Projects is provided to Water Management Organizations (WMO), under Minnesota Statute section 103B.241, and Whereas, we have been advised that designation as a Special Taxing District under Minnesota Statute section 275.066 is required to allow this Water Management Organization to levy a tax, with the precedent of Middle Mississippi WMO, Therefore, be it Resolved the City / Board of supports the inclusion of the Vadnais Lake Area Water Management Organization under Minnesota Statutes section 275.066 as a Special Taxing District through legislative action. Dated: Signed: Attachment B Minnesota Statutes 2005, 275.066 Copyright 2005 by the Office of Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. Minnesota Statutes 2005, Table of Chapters Table of contents for Chapter 275 275.066 Special taxing districts; definition. For the purposes of property taxation and property tax state aids, the term "special taxing districts" includes the following entities: (1) watershed districts under chapter 103D; (2) sanitary districts under sections 115.18 to 115.37; (3) regional sanitary sewer districts under sections 115.61 to 115.67; (4) regional public library districts under section 134.201; (5) park districts under chapter 398; (6) regional railroad authorities under chapter 398A; (7) hospital districts under sections 447.31 to 447.38; (8) St. Cloud Metropolitan Transit Commission under sections 458A.01 to 458A.15; (9) Duluth Transit Authority under sections 458A.21 to 458A.37; (10) regional development commissions under sections 462.381 to 462.398; (11) housing and redevelopment authorities under sections 469.001 to 469.047; (12) port authorities under sections 469.048 to 469.068; (13) economic development authorities under sections 469.090 to 469.1081; (14) Metropolitan Council under sections 473.123 to 473.549; (15) Metropolitan Airports Commission under sections 473.601 to 473.680; (16) Metropolitan Mosquito Control Commission under sections 473.701 to 473.716; (17) Morrison County Rural Development Financing Authority under Laws 1982, chapter 437, section 1; (18) Croft Historical Park District under Laws 1984, chapter 502, article 13, section 6; (19) East Lake County Medical Clinic District under Laws 1989, chapter 211, sections 1 to 6; (20) Floodwood Area Ambulance District under Laws 1993, chapter 375, article 5, section 39; (21) Middle Mississippi River Watershed Management Organization under sections 103B.211 and 103B.241; (22) emergency medical services special taxing districts under section 144F.01; (23) a county levying under the authority of section 103B.241, 103B.245, or 103B.251; (24) Southern St. Louis County Special Taxing District; Chris Jensen Nursing Home under Laws 2003, First Special Session chapter 21, article 4, section 12; and (25) any other political subdivision of the state of Minnesota, excluding counties, school districts, cities, and towns, that has the power to adopt and certify a property tax levy to the county auditor, as determined by the commissioner of revenue. HIST: 1994 c 416 art 1 s 28; 1995 c 186 s 54; 1995 c 236 s 2; 2000 c 490 art 5 s 17; 1Sp2001 c 5 art 3 s 50; 1Sp2003 c 21 art 4 s 7 * NOTE: The amendment to clause (22) by Laws 2001, First *Special Session chapter 5, article 3, section 50, is effective *for taxes levied in 2002, payable in 2003, through taxes levied *in 2007, payable in 2008. Laws 2001, First Special Session *chapter 5, article 3, section 50, the effective date. Attachment C Minnesota Statutes 2005, 103B.241 Copyright 2005 by the Office of Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. Minnesota Statutes 2005, Table of Chapters Table of contents for Chapter 103B 103B.241 Levies. Subdivision 1. Watershed plans and projects. Notwithstanding chapter 103D, a local government unit or watershed management organization may levy a tax to pay the increased costs of preparing a plan under sections 103B.231 and 1035.235 or for projects identified in an approved and adopted .._....__...._... - - -- plan necessary to implement the purposes of section 1035.201. The proceeds of any tax levied under this section shall be deposited in a separate fund and expended only for the purposes authorized by this section. Watershed management organizations and local government units may accumulate the proceeds of levies as an alternative to issuing bonds to finance improvements. Subd. 2. Priority programs; soil and water conservation districts. A county may levy amounts necessary to pay the reasonable increased costs to soil and water conservation districts of administering and implementing priority programs identified in an approved and adopted plan. HIST: 1990 c 391 art 2 s 13; 1990 c 601 s 22; 1992 c 511 art 2 s 2; art 5 s 2; 1995 c 184 s 12 January 12, 2005 To: The local government units comprising the Vadnais Lake Area Water Management Organization (VLAWMO) Cities of Gem Lake, Lino Lakes, North Oaks, Vadnais Heights, White Bear Lake, Town of White Bear and Board of Water Commissioners — Saint Paul; Re: Special Purpose Taxing District (levy authority) Request for Resolution of Support Members Gem Lake Lino Lakes North Oaks St. Paul Regional Water Service Vadnais Heights White Bear Lake White Bear Township The Board of Commissioners of the Vadnais Lake Area Water Management Organization (VLAWMO) is pursuing special legislation at the capital which would provide levy authority to the watershed management organization. This levy authority was important to many of the VLAWMO members during our organizational discussions over the past year at least in part because of tax equity issues. The VLAWMO board has investigated the process necessary (attachment A) to be designated as a Special purpose taxing district (levy authority) and feels that a resolution of support from all of the members is vital to this effort (attachment B). The VLAWMO Board, with the best interests of water resources in mind, hopes you will put this request for support on your next agenda. Timing is critical. VLAWMO would like an indication your support of this effort by our February 9th meeting if at all possible. At the January 12th Board meeting a variety of factors were considered important to this discussion: The legislative session this year is very short and starts soon. In order for this effort to proceed this year, it must pass through a policy committee by March. • We have potential legislative authors, but they are awaiting your letters or resolutions of support. • Receiving levy authority from the legislature is still several steps away from using it. o Our current Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) does not allow it. It should be noted that even if the legislature grants this watershed levy authority comparable to watershed districts, we CANNOT use it without an updated JPA. 4701 Highway 61, White Bear Lake, MN 55110; 651 - 429 -8522, Fax: 651 - 429 -8500 website: www.vlawmo.org; email: office @vlawmo.org o Concern has been expressed regarding budgetary oversight by elected JPA members. Our JPA outlines the operating structure of our watershed, including budgetary development and oversight. Draft language for an updated JPA is available and we hope to initiate discussion shortly. o The logistics of identifying the VLAWMO parcels of land and working with two counties to enter this new taxing district are significant. VLAWMO has no budget for outside assistance to complete this task in 2006. Even with favorable legislation this year, actual levy income would likely not be available until 2008. ♦ The "watershed approach" acknowledges that water resources do not follow political boundaries. Those within the watershed are generally entrusted with the responsibility for its care; they are the designated stewards of the watershed. They tend to know their resources best and have a vested interest in their careful management. The watershed approach to water management is considered the most efficient in the metropolitan area and around the nation. Watershed Districts around the metro area already have levy authority to support their management efforts. ♦ Finally, as noted in the earlier letter, most of our communities have portions of their geography in two or more watersheds. Because of VLAWMO's assessment method of funding, residents of our communities living in other watersheds are paying for their own watershed as well as to support VLAWMO. Assessing only VLAWMO residents for the costs of VLAWMO water management would address this tax equity issue. Thank you for your consideration. Our Commissioners and staff are available for questions or meetings. Sincerely, ,7Y?rfa•w2>/2g.(7t-o“,a-aa- Stephanie McNamara, Administrator — Wetlands On behalf of the VLAWMO Board of Commissioners Attachment B DRAFT RESOLUTION NUMBER RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF DESIGNATING VADNAIS LAKE AREA WATER MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION ( VLAWMO) AS A SPECIAL TAXING DISTRICT UNDER MINNESOTA STATUTES 275.066. Whereas, VLAWMO is a Joint Powers Water Management Organization established for the General Purpose of: to (1) protect, preserve and use natural surface and groundwater storage and retention systems; (2) minimize capital expenditures necessary to correct flooding and water quality problems; (3) identify and plan for means to effectively protect and improve surface and groundwater quality; (4) establish more uniform local policies and official controls for surface and groundwater management; (5) prevent erosion of soil into surface water systems; (6) promote groundwater recharge; (7) protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat and water recreational facilities and secure other benefits associated with the proper management of surface and groundwater, and Whereas, members of the Joint Powers Water Management Organization currently support VLAWMO through general fund budgets or utility fee budgets, and Whereas, VLAWMO members have found this funding method to be inequitable , with residents outside of the VLAWMO jurisdiction paying for two watershed budgets, and Whereas, the ability to levy for planning and implementation of Water Plans and Projects is provided to Water Management Organizations (WMO), under Minnesota Statute section 103B.241, and Whereas, we have been advised that designation as a Special Taxing District under Minnesota Statute section 275.066 is required to allow this Water Management Organization to levy a tax, with the precedent of Middle Mississippi WMO, Therefore, be it Resolved the City / Board of supports the inclusion of the Vadnais Lake Area Water Management Organization under Minnesota Statutes section 275.066 as a Special Taxing District through legislative action. Dated: Signed: Attachment A Memorandum - Schilling Consultant Services Date: 01/09/2006 To: Mr. Jeff McDowell, Acting Chairperson Vadnais Lake Area Water Management Organization Cc: Board and staff From: Joel G. Schilling, Principal RE: Special Taxing District - Memorandum Report The following is a memorandum report to the Board presenting results on research into WMO funding and Special Taxing Districts investigation. What is a special taxing district? Property taxes are levied by taxing authorities in Minnesota such as cities (home rule and statutory), towns, counties, school districts and special taxing districts in accordance with Minnesota Statutes (M.S.), section 275.065. A special taxing district is a less traditional taxing authority. They are enumerated as both specific and generic entities within M.S. 275.066 (see Appendix A). It's well to note that watershed districts are the first generic entity listed on line (1) of section 275.066. How does a water management organization generate operating funds? As you are aware there are two types of water management organizations, watershed districts organized under M.S. Chapter 103D and joint powers boards such as VLAWMO organized under M.S. section 471.59. We've already noted that a watershed district is a special taxing district, thus already having the authority to recommend a property tax levy to the county to generate operating funds. Joint powers WMOs are based upon a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) spelling out how the joint entity of two or more governments will exercise a power commonly held. The JPA derives from Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59 (joint exercise of powers) with funding authority from Subdivision 3, stating in part: "Funds may be paid to and disbursed by such agency as may be agreed upon, but the method of disbursement shall agree as far as practicable with the method provided by law for the disbursement of funds by the parties to the agreement." The key words are "Funds may be paid to and disbursed by such agency as may be agreed upon, etc." The statute does not specify how funds are to be generated by the parties to the agreement. However from the administrative perspective of metropolitan water management, Minnesota Rule, Section 8410.0030, Subpart 1 advises a WMO that a JPA should contain at a minimum: 01/09/06 46 Bertha Ct., Mahtomedi, MN 55115 -2031 1 Memorandum - Schilling Consultant Services D. a process for establishing an annual budget and work plan; and E. a formula for determining each member's share of the annual operating budget. Thus the Joint Powers Agreement is very important in spelling out in a narrative and/or formula methodology how each member's share of anticipated expenses will be provided. Do the statutes grant authority to a water management organization for planning and capital improvement funding? Yes, but only under a certain circumstances. Minnesota Statutes, section 103B.241 Levies; Subdivision 1 specifies in part: "..... water management organization may levy a tax to pay the increased costs of preparing a plan under sections 103B.231 and 103B.235 or for projects identified in an approved and adopted plan necessary to implement the purposes of section 103B.201." While the language is quite clear that a WMO may levy a tax, the obstacle preventing such is that a WMO must be designated as a special taxing district in order to execute this statutory language. Notwithstanding watershed districts already having this authority to date, only the Middle Mississippi River Watershed Management Organization has sought and been granted designation as a special taxing authority (Appendix A, line 21). It is also important to note that the above statutory section specifies levy authority for the broad purposes of the metropolitan water management program including both planning and capital improvements. The method for capital improvements funding is specifically given in section 103B.251, Subdivision 1. Here the WMO with an approved plan certifies to the county for payment by the county for the cost of the capital improvement. If the territory of the WMO extends into another county such as VLAWMO (Anoka and Ramsey counties), then certification would be necessary from both county boards (Subdivision 5). The WMO may apportion the capital improvement cost among subwatershed units in the watershed by establishing one or more tax districts (ibid.). Can a local unit of government within a WMO set -up a special tax district? Yes, M.S. 103B.245, Subdivision 1(a) and (b) provides authority to a local government unit to set -up a special tax district, not to be confused with a special taxing district. The special tax district is called a watershed management tax district comprised of specific territory within the watershed and can be used for paying the costs of planning required under 103B.231 and 103B. 235. The watershed management tax district is established by ordinance through the public hearing process (Subdivision 2). Following adoption of the ordinance, the local government unit may annually levy a tax on all property within the watershed management tax district. Advantage Establishing a watershed management tax district within a local government unit could remove the concern over double taxing parcels when a WMO member provides its share WMO funding through its general fund. In other words, parcels within a local government unit that fall within a watershed district are effectively taxed twice for the same purposes. once by the watershed district and again as a proportionate share of the WMO's budget coming from the local government's general fund. 01/09/2006 46 Bertha Ct., Mahtomedi, MN 55115 -2031 2 Memorandum - Schilling Consultant Services Disadvantages Each local government within VLAWMO would identify those parcels within the newly established watershed management tax district(s) for determining the levy amount equal for its share of the proposed WMO budget. This presumably is a one -time cost once parcels are set -up in a file. However, Ramsey County requires an administrative fee of $5.00 per parcel. Thus for example, if the local government unit had 1000 parcels in the watershed management tax district, an additional administrative fee of $5,000 would be paid to the County each year. This is a similar requirement for special assessments under typical capital improvement projects authority per M.S. Chapter 429, but typically these are one -time costs per parcel. The above procedure also incurs additional VLAWMO administrative costs to assure that each local government is levying the right amount of taxes each year to achieve the requested VLAWMO budget amount. Can a local unit of government use a stormwater utility as a funding source? Yes and a number of local government units in the metropolitan area have established stormwater utilities, including the City of Vadnais Heights under authority granted in M.S. 444.075. Advantage The stormwater utility is most equitable form of funding stormwater- related issues and in this case providing the funding contribution to a WMO. While the local government unit could take its share for the WMO budget out of its stormwater utility enterprise fund, again parcels would be double charged that are within another WMO. To remove the double charging, the local government unit would need to establish a separate stormwater utility district covering only that portion within the WMO. Disadvantage There would be an internal local government unit cost in setting up a separate parcel file for the WMO area, but this would presumably be a one time cost. However, there would need to be additional work by the local government unit every year to segregate only the WMO cost to be charged back to a given parcel. While the stormwater utility is the most equitable method, it should be noted that some parcels might not have a utility charge (e.g. open space, parcels without city sewer or water). Can a WMO seek designation as a special taxing district for future funding source? Yes, the water management organization may seek designation authority from the Minnesota Legislature as a Special Taxing District under M.S. 275.066. Besides watershed districts and the Middle Mississippi River Watershed Management Organization mentioned previously, counties are also special taxing districts. This latter county authority only applies for those counties (Carver, Dakota and Scott) in the metropolitan area that are conducting watershed planning for minor watersheds within their boundaries [M.S. 103B.245, Subd. 1(c) and 103B.253]. Essentially, a WMO acting as a special taxing district determines proposed annual expenditures for its budget. It then determines the levy amount dependent upon the tax capacity of its legal area, sets the levy amount and communicates it to the county for certification of payment. Advantage Short of the storm water utilities in each local government, a special taxing district method is the most equitable approach as WMO budgets increase as a result of additional federal and state mandated programs to improve water quality, fish and wildlife habitat. Each parcel is taxed in accordance with its location within that WMO. 01/09/2006 46 Bertha Ct., Mahtomedi, MN 55115 -2031 3 Memorandum - Schilling Consultant Services No double taxation occurs. The county is given the special taxing district boundaries and presumably they will not change. Parcel numbers are generated along with the total tax capacity. A levy amount is determined that will generate the appropriate amount of revenue to achieve the annual operating budget. Disadvantage The main disadvantage is that the special taxing district may appear to formalize the WMO as another layer of local government. An additional concern relates to assurances that the WMO Board is comprised of either elected officials or other interested persons who are not staff members of the respective members (M.S. 103B.227, Subd. 2). Finally, because the joint powers WMO is governed by appointed managers or commissioners, there may be a need to amend the respective JPA to require each member review and approve the WMO budget prior to submission of the levy amount to the county. What would be the legislative process for seeking special taxing district authority? As discussed previously, Minnesota Statutes, Section 275.066 defines such entities within Minnesota. Some are specific (Middle Mississippi River Watershed Management Organization) and some are generic (watershed districts). The Middle Mississippi River Watershed Management Organization sought -out and successfully received legislative authority in the 2000 legislative session. During the 2005 legislative session, three WMOs bordering the St. Croix River sought, but were unsuccessful at similar legislative authority (House File 1496). Meeting with legislators representing the VLAWMO area to explain the issue and explore their support for legislation providing such authority is a good first step. Soliciting local government unit support in the form of resolutions passed by their governing bodies is the next step in the process. Several WMOs west of the Mississippi River in the Metro Area have some similar interest in such authority. Specific legislation for VLAWMO is a simple bill adding its name to M.S. 275.066 as another special taxing district in Minnesota. A second option would be to add VLAWMO to House File 1496, thus having a bill reflecting four WMOs requesting such authority. Third would be to further explore the interest in generic authority (e.g. all joint powers WMOs would be special taxing districts) with other WMOs and the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities. This option would need careful study and discussion as it would include approximately 27 WMOs in the Metropolitan Area who would have such authority, but not necessarily be required to use it for revenue purposes. Nonetheless, a fair amount of education would be needed to reduce any misconceptions. Conclusions • Revenue generation by Joint Powers Agreement WMOs using member general fund or stormwater utility fee contributions is an effective method for relatively modest budgets. However, double taxing or charging of parcels is a problem. • Existing statutory authority in Section 103B.245 allowing establishment of a watershed management tax district has not been used by local government units in WMOs on a regular fashion for day -to -day operating funds, but has merit as a funding mechanism for occasional capital improvement projects. • Special Taxing District designation authority for VLAWMO under M.S. 275.066 is a fairly simple legislative bill for possible enactment and permanently resolves the tax inequity issue. • Seeking the same authority by combining with other interested WMOs or seeking generic authority for all joint powers WMOs will require more discussion with interested parties and legislators. 01/09/2006 46 Bertha Ct., Mahtomedi, MN 55115 -2031 4 1 APPENDIX A Minnesota Statutes 275.066 Special taxing districts; definition. For the purposes of property taxation and property tax state aids, the term "special taxing districts" includes the following entities: (1) watershed districts under chapter 103D; (2) sanitary districts under sections 115.18 to 115.37; (3) regional sanitary sewer districts under sections 115.61 to 115.67; (4) regional public library districts under section 134.201; (5) park districts under chapter 398; (6) regional railroad authorities under chapter 398A; (7) hospital districts under sections 447.31 to 447.38; (8) St. Cloud Metropolitan Transit Commission under sections 458A.01 to 458A.15; (9) Duluth Transit Authority under sections 458A.21 to 458A.37; (10) regional development commissions under sections 462.381 to 462.398; (11) housing and redevelopment authorities under sections 469.001 to 469.047; (12) port authorities under sections 469.048 to 469.068; (13) economic development authorities under sections 469.090 to 469.1081; (14) Metropolitan Council under sections 473.123 to 473.549; (15) Metropolitan Airports Commission under sections 473.601 to 473.680; (16) Metropolitan Mosquito Control Commission under sections 473.701 to 473.716; (17) Morrison County Rural Development Financing Authority under Laws 1982, chapter 437, section 1; (18) Croft Historical Park District under Laws 1984, chapter 502, article 13, section 6; (19) East Lake County Medical Clinic District under Laws 1989, chapter 211, sections 1 to 6; (20) Floodwood Area Ambulance District under Laws 1993, chapter 375, article 5, section 39; (21) Middle Mississippi River Watershed Management Organization under sections 103B.211 and 103B.241; (22) emergency medical services special taxing districts under section 144F.01; (23) a county levying under the authority of section 103B.241, 103B.245, or 103B.251; (24) Southern St. Louis County Special Taxing District; Chris Jensen Nursing Home under Laws 2003, First Special Session chapter 21, article 4, section 12; and (25) any other political subdivision of the state of Minnesota, excluding counties, school districts, cities, and towns, that has the power to adopt and certify a property tax levy to the county auditor, as determined by the commissioner of revenue. HIST: 1994 c 416 art 1 s 28; 1995 c 186 s 54; 1995 c 236 s 2; 2000 c 490 art 5 s 17; 1Sp2001 c 5 art 3 s 50; 1Sp2003 c 21 art 4 s 7 * NOTE: The amendment to clause (22) by Laws 2001, First *Special Session chapter 5, article 3, section 50, is effective *for taxes levied in 2002, payable in 2003, through taxes levied *in 2007, payable in 2008. Laws 2001, First Special Session *chapter 5, article 3, section 50, the effective date. Copyright 2005 by the Office of Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. 01/09/06 46 Bertha Ct., Mahtomedi, MN 55115 -2031 5 WS -5 WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT Work Session Item No. 5 Date: Council Work Session, February 8, 2006 To: City Council From: Dan Tesch Re: Advisory Board Appointment Process Background An announcement of the application period for advisory board appointments was published in the Quad Press on November 15, 2005, with the application deadline of December 9, 2005. The City Council chose to extend the application period at its work session of January 4, 2006. This extended application period was published in the newspaper on January 17, 2006, with the application deadline of January 31, 2006. The number of applicants for each advisory board, exceed the number of vacancies, so the Council can move forward in the appointment process. One additional application was found on the receptionist's desk the morning of February 1. Requested Council Direction Staff is seeking direction as to when the Council wishes to interview applicants. Also, staff is seeking direction from the Council as to the handling of the application which was found on the receptionist's desk at 8 a.m. on February 1. Staff normally administers deadlines to be the end of the work day. Another person did not apply since they could not get their application to City Hall before closing time on the deadline day. Attachment 1 (1) 4E" al 0 a w ca- 0 < as s_ _J C13 0 0 Ca 4-0 0 co .4?-''' Ic-- CD < Vacancies (.1 c-4 "zr cl New Applicant ;Teri Luciw [Richard Jenson ..5 cz 0 -CI— O- a) z Matt Koehn ;Kimberley Brouillet New Applicant Sarah Norman Martha De Haven Kimberley Brouillet Jeff McDowell New Applicant [Michele Keller Jeff Thill Seeks Reappointment Rob Rafferty Ii Paul Tralle Seeks Reappointment Pamela Taschuk Wm. Kusterman Seeks Reappointment Teresa O'Connell Seeks Reappointment ;John J. Milbauer Julie Jeffrey-Schwartz Jason Helgemoe P& Z Board [Park Board Environmental Bd () < 0 w Memorandum To: City Council and Mayor Bergeson From: Julie Bartell, City Clerk Date: February 8, 2006 Re: Minutes — September 8, 2005 Special Work Session u ) Wei k. &1 The purpose of this memorandum is to provide background information regarding the minutes of the September 8, 2005 Special Council Work Session. The minutes have been considered by the City Council at several meetings: October 24, 2005 and November 14, 2005 — The minutes were removed from the Council meeting agenda; no discussion is noted; November 22, 2005 — The minutes are discussed at a work session with Council Member Carlson indicating that she would be requesting a correction to the minutes at the next Council meeting; Staff was directed to provide the proposed correction with the minutes at the upcoming meeting; December 12, 2005 - The minutes are considered at the Council meeting (in the packet, the Council receives the minutes including the proposed correction); a motion to approve the minutes, as corrected, loses on a 2 -3 vote. There is no action taken to approve the minutes without the correction; January 9, 2006 — The minutes are referred to the next work session/Council meeting for further discussion; January 23, 2006 — Council Carlson brings forward a draft of the minutes that includes in the text the proposed correction; the Council directs staff to bring forward the original minutes for consideration at the next meeting. Based on the Council's previous vote to not approve the correction to the minutes, it is not appropriate under Roberts Rules of Order to again consider the correction. A motion to reconsider is allowed on the same day (or the next day) and then only by a member who voted on the prevailing side. The minutes, in their original draft form, remain before the Council for consideration.