Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/03/2008 Council PacketWORK SESSION AGENDA CITY OF LINO LAKES Monday, November 3, 2008 CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION Community Room (not televised) 5:30 P.M. 1. 2009 Budget — Reallocation of Funds for Charter Commission 2. Request for Audit of Charter Commission 3. I -35W North Corridor Coalition Update 4. Request to Amend Animal Ordinance 5. Five -Year Financial Plan To follow 6. Utility Rates — Set Public Hearing 7. Storm Water Utility (verbal report) 8. Review of Citizen Awareness Plan 9. City Code Update 10. Economic Development Meeting 11. Review of Regular Meeting Agenda 12. Comp Plan Review Adjourn PAGE 1 S121Od3H 1`df1NN`d SINI0d NOISSl0S10 S31(1N101)4001 )18310 kLI0 S0NI133W 3O 31fNIW S3111NIIN )1001)121310 A110 woa «e =_ gJ c ==mm m- m 05_m >< IE 2E ge -<3M =w =¥ 1#27 mm qq °f ®X) 0 0 __00mX IX-Ie® -I -I gaming > > Tomo- m m mf »q Z Z q)�®0 CO CO mm =p 0 0, - > > w _ X _ § -10 ) m F m _ ONISSINI MO 3131dW00NI DNISSIW 80 3131d0100NI 0302IO0321 3dd1 ON11331111 11VH A110 1V 0321O1S 3■0H S.3NOMIOS IV 0321O1S S1Sv00vO218 ON11331A1 031Sd00vO8B 2I3A3N 031SVOOVO2I9 83A3N ¥ z 0 S3IONVOVA S3IONVOVA . C . m -0 0> 00 )7 gzz li m 0 13 �0 mZ 2� z ® X� § m m L. M -n> 0 L. \ 2I § z m m mO 0 �k\ Om \) =zE _ _ Mom o= _> 3 \� m$ r0 0m -1 \\ 3 M - -n 2 \ m k rn m >q E 0 -4 j\ j0 \0, > 00 §/7 > 5o 2§z o kk§ � �0 )k§ m 0> m Op } 14 m/< F q/ \e§ win §k m 1 0 z w m = 0 m NO BALANCE ON ISSUES FOR RESIDENTS M3IA321 2103 211VH0 APPLICATIONS SENT TO CHARTER S3IONVOVA 83dVd NI 031S0d L 213ddd NI 031S0d SBION` OVA mm 0 ° x 0 0 °m j0 k m 2m \c m /# iF Om Fm 0> §o m 0 � w \ $$ k .Cl) F N830N00 JO SW31I LINO LAKES CHARTER COMMISSION DISCUSSION POINTS 7 SNOIS NOIVdINVO \ -\ owyli -‹ o 00 00 z] -10 mw x2 _0 $k c a SNOIS NOIVdWVO SNOI10313 2IOd 3OVSl NOIS mo \k Q0 \ li3NfOO 1V031 S1N3WaN3WV 1O11V8 SON11331N Nv-ino3N S1S3f103t1 ON1133W 10f1GNO0 3O 3000 co _ ao_ m >Z0 oo* 33 moo mo m® g <c/ § =o cc 3/2 �w Or. 0 \\ mr5 z/\ wo o0w c Io e> ® q m Z5 m ®� «o =, 2 m \\ >Dm coz\ k kR \ �� \ \§ m 0 §\ c \1- C)k \g z /\ z zm m q§ / *) ] 0 corn 0 �} 0 1 MV1 31V1S S31V1OIA -o2 »m§ \\ /0) rn mz rn >mo \ \13_ =e72-$ 7 //\ k\kk W\/ mmm -10 m A3N IOl1V NMO 2113H1 a3UIH S2I3AVd XVI 01 1S00 IVNOI11aaV A1I OH1f1V 1VO31 H31 IVHO GN31A1V aNV 31111VZI3 =ooze 0wz >10 I > mo goo 2o§ 0m) /j\ �j0 32�®§ m7m §ak ti mci, Z ®omie §/q g0m -0�I >-u e/\ C >mZ- °0 kk- om -1 om k §2§2 >m ] =oE c R§ ®>� #q K) 0 wcz f2 omrx zm 0 ¥za 0 m> K \j\ 2> Z I\® 0 2z / §\2 §) / 2 z > z)mz *M m > n z-1 qmc $/ m m z °m = a \ >wo 0= «Z Z ZZZ 0=¥ om> 2Cn §° 0 000 c <m M«_ 13® ®- 0 000 zm« o 000 �2 z0 m mmm f0 §r� o0 0 000 Gz I zmo z >K mmq 0 000 \/ mzw =¥I o 000 rm �§§ 0 0-1 -lo § 000 cm 3® 0-1 0 000 )q reC q2\ a a¥w \§ Wq zzz ¥o ¥W q3\ -<-n m_ I1m /\ m> ¥ =r- 0 2 §_n ¥e 00 0�< rnk • • • WS -1 WORK SESSION MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and City Council From: Al Rolek Date: November 3, 2008 Re: 2009 Budget — Reallocation of Funds for Charter Commission cc: At the August 4 Council work session then - Charter Commission Cori Duffy presented a letter to the City Council requesting a budget of $7,500 for 2009 to further frame and amend the Charter. This request, as well as requests from other outside agencies, was presented to the Council at the budget work session on August 18. Copies of the request and the other requests are attached. At that time staff presented a budget that was very lean and which had been cut by over $500,000, including reduced funding for street maintenance, storm drainage maintenance, trail extensions, capital equipment levies and a number of other areas. Because of the number of budget restrictions and tight budget conditions, Council consensus at the time was to not include additional funding requests in the 2009 budget. Since that time, the Charter Commission has renewed its request for additional funding for 2009. Given the nature of the proposed budget, should Council wish to honor the request, staff would recommend that the additional funding be reallocated from the budgeted contingency. The intent would be to reallocate $6,000 from the contingency to the Charter Administration budget, bringing the total for that line in the budget to $7,500 and reducing the contingency from $44,132 to $38,132 for 2009. Staff is awaiting Council direction on this request. Page 1 ,., „. - -„v:. . ^, ^: ^•p.; -:::1tA;r,:n r,!c'arr.:q,?;n';. r,. ;erii ('r, :6s, 5_ny'r;9:. p ^,M'.. r^.vi :.:y:.'�,. �'4 'r'm r... ia';�(Si 9 ,r.r rF�. ;i'F;7;1 �'iAyn4 i�',•? ^i 5..4 1 rr;.4 �. �..:. 5. .:. (.: .. .. 600 Town Center Parkway Lino Lakes, MN 55014 August 4, 2008 Mr. John Bergeson Lino Lakes Mayor 6996 West Shadow Lake Drive Lino Lakes, MN 55014 Dear Honorable Mayor Bergeson, On behalf of the Lino Lakes Charter Commission, we formally request additional funding for 2009 in the amount of $7500.00. We anticipate that additional resources will be needed to further frame and amend the City Charter next year. Thank you for your time and consideration. cc: Council member Jeff Reinert Council member Kathi Gallup Council member Jeff O'Donnell Council member Dan Stoltz City Clerk Julie Bartell City Administrator Gordon Heitke Respectfully, Cori Duffy Chair, Lino Lakes Chart Commission July 24, 2008 Gordon Heitke, City Administrator City of Lino Lakes 600 Town Center Pky Lino Lakes, MN 55014 Dear Mr. Heitke: Alexandra House respectfully requests that the City of Lino Lakes allocate $9,997.00 for services provided to Lino Lakes residents by the Alexandra House Community Program. In 2007, a total of 23,218 advocacy and support services were provided to Anoka County victims of domestic violence by our Community Program. Of those services, Lino Lakes residents received 957. This is an 89% increase from the previous year. I have included a budget that details the services provided to Lino Lakes residents, the total cost of providing those services, and the portion of those costs we are requesting the City of Lino Lakes financially support. Community Program services include: assistance in filing protection orders, accompaniment and legal representation during subsequent hearings, crime victim advocacy immediately following a domestic assault and throughout the criminal court process, follow -up provided to patients at Mercy and Unity Hospitals and clinics, support groups, legal clinics, safety planning, information and referral services. Domestic violence is a serious crime that impacts the public health and safety of every community in this country. The negative consequences of domestic violence reach beyond family and friends into the workplace and to society as a whole. In 2003, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported that health - related costs of domestic violence exceeded $5.8 billion each year in the United States. • • • • Nearly half of all battered women report some type of injury as a result of their victimization. Three out of ten women murdered in the U.S. are the victims of intimate partner violence. A domestic assault situation is one of the most dangerous calls responded to by law enforcement. It is critical that law enforcement professionals develop and implement programs, policies and practices that are both safe and effective in meeting the serious and unique challenges of domestic violence cases. Research shows a well- coordinated and multidisciplinary approach is one of the more effective means of reducing domestic violence. Strategies that emphasize victim safety, while holding offenders accountable, have proven to be one of the most successful means of intervention. Alexandra House partners with nearly all law enforcement agencies in the county, including the Lino Lakes Police Department and city prosecutors, to create this kind of response to domestic violence in order to reduce the incidence of domestic violence in Lino Lakes while ensuring the safety of victims and holding offenders accountable. Your financial support in 2008 was greatly appreciated. Support from Lino Lakes, other cities and Anoka County allowed us to continue to provide critical services to victims of domestic violence in Lino Lakes and throughout the County. We look forward to a continued partnership with the City of Lino Lakes in providing crisis intervention and prevention services to residents of your city. Should you have any questions regarding this request, please do not hesitate to contact me. I would be pleased to attend a city council meeting to further discuss this funding request and respond to any questions you may have. Thank you very much for your consideration. Sincerely, Connie Moore Executive Director Cc: John J. Bergeson, Mayor David Pecchia, Police Chief City Council Members: Jeff O'Donnell, Daniel Stoltz, Jeff Reinert, Kathi Gallup David Pecchia, Police Chief ALEXANDRA HOUSE, INC. City of Lino Lakes Budget January 1, 2009 - December 31, 2009 Services Provided # of Services Provided Protection Order Filings 6 Civil Legal Information Advocacy 185 Civil Court Hearings 10 Crisis Line 142 Legal Representation on OFP's 1 Family Law Info Sessions / Legal Clinics 1 Arrest/Non- Arrest Victim Follow up 31 Criminal Court Information & Advocacy 422 Criminal Court Hearings Attended 43 Safety Planning 45 Community Support Groups 1 Violence Prevention 28 VP Presentations - # of Students 42 TOTAL 957 Total services provided by Alexandra House, Inc. Community Program 23,218 Lino Lakes percent of total services provided 4% Community Program Budget 693,000 Amount charged to City of Lino Lakes $ 28,564 Amount paid by other sources (60 %) $ 18,567 AMOUNT REQUESTED $ 9,997 • • • • Ensuring the success of youth for over 30 Years! Lakes Area Youth Service Bureau Main Office: 244 North Lake Street Forest Lake. MN 55025 Phone: 651- 464 -3685 . Fax: 651 -464 -3687 www.ysblakesarea.org TO: D ecchia & Kent Strege, Lino Lakes Police Department FROM: Jeanne Walz, Executive Director, Lakes Area Youth Service Bureau RE: REQUEST FOR FUNDS TO Lino Lakes - FY 2009 As you begin your budget deliberations for FY 2009, please include an increase in the financial support you provide for YSB services to your youth & families. Attached you will find a market value statement of services provided to your citizens in 2007 as well as a statistical grid showing how many citizens were served in 2006, 2007 and as of June 30, 2008. I have also provided an overview of YSB services /programs available to your citizens. We are requesting financial support in the amount of $5,000 for FY 2009. The Youth Service Bureau has been a resource for youth and families for 32years. Statistics for 2007 again indicate that our programs significantly impact the lives of youth, families and communities served by our programs: • 89% of youth completing services do not reoffend after one year • 92% of youth make better choices after completing YSB programming. Recent research conducted by the Minnesota Youth Intervention Programs indicate that successful youth prevention and diversion programs, like those provided by the YSB, save the community over $7 in future social costs for each dollar invested. I would welcome the opportunity to speak to your city council upon request and will follow up by telephone to learn of your council's interest. Thank you for your consideration. We are deeply grateful for your continued partnership with YSB. CC: Kathy Lillis, Board Chair, Lakes Area Youth Service Bureau Lakes Area Youth Service Bureau has received the Charities Review Council's seal of approval for meeting all standards of accountability. This important review process helps our donors to know that we are good stewards of their financial support. Please view our report at www.smartgivers.orQ. Ensuring the success of youth for over 30 Years! Lakes Area Youth Service Bureau Main Office: 244 North Lake Street Forest Lake, MN 55025 Phone: 651- 464 -3685. Fax: 651- 464 -3687 www.ysblakesarea.org The following is a brief report on Lakes Area Youth Service Bureau's programs that directly affect the residents of your community. If you have any questions about this report, please call Jeanne Walz, Executive Director at 651 - 464 -3685 City of LINO LAKES Report Period: January 12007 to December 31, 2007 Total market value of all services through December 31: $27,390 (Please note that these numbers represent the market value of services provided, not what YSB charges for these services. Because of your collaboration with YSB, many of these services are offered at less cost or on a sliding fee scale based on income.) Services Provided: Community Justice /Diversion Services Restitution Services Community Service Hours Youth Counseling Services Prevention Programs /Activities Parenting Services /Adult Volunteers Community Events /Activities Market Value # Served Hours of Service $11,220 17 204 included included $2,250 3 30 $6,525 29 145 $7,020 39 156 $375 15 15 Requested Contract for Service Amount 2009: $5,000 • • • • • WS — Item 2 WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT Work Session Item 2 Date: November 3, 2008 To: City Council From: Gordon Heitke Re: Request for Audit of Charter Commission Background The City Council was presented with a written request to conduct an audit of the practices of the Lino Lakes Charter Commission by the Citizens for Safer Roads at its regular Council meeting of October 27, 2008. Council members Stoltz and Bergeson have submitted requests to have this issue placed on the next (Nov. 3) work session. Requested Council Direction Placed on agenda by request, no direction being requested by staff at this time. Attachments 1. Request for Audit, Citizens for Safer Roads 1 Charter Commission Audit Requested Presented to: The Lino Lakes City Council. 10/27/2008 A recent review of Charter Commission public records was conducted with the following findings and observations. The leaders of the Charter Commission are former council members that have surrounded themselves with like minded members that do not have a balanced view of the city needs and are pro- charter at all cost. Previous members have complained that members with dissenting views get forced off the commission while people with anti -city views get appointed or re- appointed. These are comments on record made by charter members regarding the city council. One was quoted as saying "screw the council" yet another was quoted as saying "we should bust them in the mouth ". Then Lino Lakes Charter Commission is using Taxpayer dollars this election to printing there Charter amendment campaign signs. These signs refer the public to there web site which is full of misinformation and has a very strong anti -city government tone. Legal authority of the Charter is limited by state law. A review of old agendas would reveal the Charter Commission went way beyond authority including regular review and critique of city council minutes and actions. Charter meeting used to be tape recorded and stored at city hall. They are now stored at someone's home and not available to the public. Minutes of the meetings used to be taken by the city clerk. They are now done by a charter member and most of the discussion and decisions are missing. Legal council is available to the Charter Commission and provided by the city attorney yet they hire there own attorney at additional expense to the city. The process for vacancies on the charter commission has changed in the past 5 years. Before applicants applied in writing to the city clerk. These applications were then forwarded on to a Judge for approval in an effort to keep balanced views on the committee. The Charter Commission now has applicants apply directly to them in writing. From there we don't know if all applications are forwarded to the Judge for review and selection. New members have no training our understanding of there role. Its time to hold the Charter Commission accountable. We are formally requesting the Lino Lakes City Council to have the proper public authority conduct an audit of the Charter Commissions ethics, fiances, activities and practices. We are requesting they be communicated with as to what there responsibilities are as required by state law and to operate within those limits. Respectfully submitted by Citizens for Safer Roads. • • • • • • WS — Item 3 WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT Work Session Item 3 Date: November 3, 2008 To: City Council From: Gordon Heitke Re: Update From North Metro I -35W Corridor Coalition Background The North Metro I -35W Corridor Coalition is a coalition of north metro local governments served by I -35W who plan and advocate for I -35W improvements. Mr. Bob Benke of Community Resource Partnerships, Inc., and Mr. Dick Swanson of the Blaine City Council, have requested to appear before the Council to provide an update on I -35W issues and the activities of the group. Requested Council Direction No direction sought at this time. Attachments 1. North Metro I -35W Corridor Coalition Progress Report, August 2008 1 N M I -35W CORRIDOR \ COALITION Anoka County - Blaine - Circle Pines — Lexington - Minneapolis - Mounds View - New Brighton - Ramsey County NORTH METRO I -35W CORRIDOR COALITION PROGRESS REPORT AUGUST 2008 1000 Westgate Drive, Suite #252, St. Paul, MN 55114 TEL (651) 203 -7241 FAX (651) 290 -2266 • • • S INTRODUCTION Almost three years ago, on August 31, 2005, the Board of Directors of the North Metro I -35W Corridor Coalition adopted a Resolution committing to focus future efforts on achieving transportation system improvements in the north I -35W Corridor. The Resolution further invited all interested cities, counties, townships and business organizations to join in that effort. Following is a summary of achievements and the current status of improvements pending in the Corridor. • • CURRENT WORK TASKS 1. FEDERAL & STATE FUNDING a. Goal: Secure federal and state fund allocations and near term scheduling of priority projects, including reconstruction of 1 -694 between I -35W & 1 -35E, congestion mitigation projects on I -35W and provisions for transit service in the Corridor. b. Progress: i. Congress has approved an earmark of $882,000 in 2008 funds for congestion mitigation and future system design tasks. ii. The Senate has earmarked $1 million in 2009 funds for further work on congestion mitigation and system design. iii. Mn /DOT is scheduling regular program funds to match and supplement available federal funds. One example is the installation of a median cable barrier system to enhance safety in the Corridor. iv. Transit services in the Corridor area benefited with a $14 million allocation of funds provided to Minnesota for mitigation of impacts of the I -35W Bridge collapse. v. The updated Metro Transit System Plan identifies the I -35W Corridor for consideration for additional services. vi. Mn /DOT is planning for a major pavement repair project in 2011 from 1 -694 to 95th Avenue. 2. CONGESTION MITIGATION PROJECTS: a. Goal: Implement low cost/high payoff projects that reduce congestion. b. Progress: i. Construction of an auxiliary lane on southbound I -35W between Lake Drive and TH 10 westbound is scheduled for construction in 2009. ii. Construction of an auxiliary lane on northbound I -35W between Lake Drive and 95th Avenue is anticipated in 2010. iii. Design work is underway on the 1 -694 interchange to address northbound I- 35W congestion. 3. SYSTEM DESIGN PLANNING a. Goal: Identify future I -35W mainline expansion design plans that will provide the framework for staged construction. 1000 Westgate Drive, Suite #252, St. Paul, MN 55114 TEL (651) 203 -7241 FAX (651) 290 -2266 b. Progress: Mn /DOT is assembling current data and are updating traffic forecasts. Recommendations for "next steps" will be discussed at our September Board meeting. 4. ORGANIZATION MEMBERSHIP a. PUBLIC: Current Membership includes Anoka County, Blaine, Circle Pines, Lexington, Minneapolis, Mounds View, New Brighton and Ramsey County. b. COMMUNITY: Current participating partners include the Twin Cites North Chamber of Commerce, Mn /DOT and Metro Transit. BACKGROUND The NM I -35W Corridor Coalition was established in December 1996 with the adoption of the enabling Joint Powers Agreement by the founding member cities. The founding members formed the Coalition specifically to jointly address intensifying concerns about congestion in the I -35W Corridor north of TH 36, the impacts that congestion was having on the quality of life in the member communities and the adverse impacts congestion would have on pending development and redevelopment projects in the Corridor. Recognizing that major investments required for expansion of I -35W to address capacity constraints that were causing the congestion were not programmed in the foreseeable future, the Coalition embarked on a two pronged strategy. The first strategy focused on bringing the needs for improvements to the attention of Mn /DOT and the Metropolitan Council to ensure that investments would be scheduled in future plans. The second strategy focused on determining the improvements needed to balance the need for regional mobility and local access required to support the pending economic growth ventures. Progress on the first strategy has been slow. While numerous studies have demonstrated the significant need for expansion of capacity on I -35W, programming of the major investments has not progressed because the "2030 PLAN" is fiscally constrained and funding for expansion of capacity is a lower priority than safety, system preservation and system management categories of work. Consequently, more emphasis has been placed on a new two -part strategy. Given that major reconstruction is years in the future, the Coalition's current emphasis is on 1) development and funding of "congestion mitigation" projects that will provide early relief through lower cost small area projects, and, 2) preparing a design plan for the ultimate reconstruction so that interim investments will fit the final layout and investments will not be wasted. These strategies work in parallel and provide the opportunity to make progress in a difficult funding environment. U: \I- 35W\2006 -2007 ACTION PLAN\August 2008 Progress Report.doc 1000 Westgate Drive, Suite #252, St. Paul, MN 55114 TEL (651) 203 -7241 FAX (651) 290 -2266 • • • • • • WS — Item 4 WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT Work Session Item 4 Date: November 3, 2008 To: City Council From: Gordon Heitke Re: Request to Amend Animal Ordinance Background The Council recently updated the animal ordinance (Ord. No. 03 -08). Jeremy and Jamie Gudmundson, 992 Kelly Street, has been in contact with city staff regarding their desire to have three dogs rather than the two as allowed by ordinance on parcels of land less than one acre. Staff has explained the reasons behind the animal ordinance. The Gudmundson's are seeking a way through a variance, amendment or other means to be able to have three dogs allowed for their property and have requested an opportunity to address the Council. City Attorney Baumgartner will be providing an opinion on whether a variance can be considered for this type of ordinance. Staff finds that the request for more than two dogs at this location can not be permitted under the current ordinance. Requested Council Direction Determination of Council position on request. Attachments 1. Gudmundson letter, Oct. 17, 2008 2. Ordinance No. 03 -08 3. Staff explanation for updated animal ordinance standard 4. Survey of dog regulations of other cities (provided by Gudmundson) 1 • • Date: October 17, 2008 To: City Council Members, Officials and the Police Department of Lino Lakes We are concerned about Ordinance No. 03 -08. Specifically 503.10 number 2 on private kennel licenses. While we agree with 503.10 number 1, parts "a" and "b ", we would like to discuss with you number 2. This part of the ordinance states that one acre of land is required for a resident to obtain a private kennel license. This requirement limits nearly 100% of new residents into Lino Lakes. Lots are typically .25 or .5 of an acre in new developments. Our property is located in the Pine Glen development, and is approximately .5 of an acre. We have been in contact with various city officials, and received the reasoning behind the requirement of at least one acre. It was stated that a larger lot size mitigates nuisances. We cannot see how a larger lot size is a factor in controlling potential nuisance problems. It depends on the homeowner and their level of responsibility. Amount of acreage does not apply when the dogs live inside the home, and are exercised with a leash. We feel this requirement should be evaluated and determined on a case -by -case basis. We would also like to point out that this requirement is not comparable to other surrounding cities. Lino Lakes is not nearly as populated as surrounding cities. Therefore, we would like to request a variance for our property. We are interested in owning three dogs. We currently have two dogs, and are interested in either adopting or fostering one more. We are agreeable to complying with all parts of the current animal control ordinance- obtaining a private kennel license, paying the respective annual fee, having an inspection of our property from a city official, keeping current on vaccinations, and registering the dogs at the city office with an ID tag. We feel strongly that it is possible to provide a safe home to three dogs on our property, with no nuisance complaints. Our property is next to a utility area and surrounded by wetlands on two sides. The area surrounding our lot is much larger than the portion of the lot we actually "own ". We upkeep the area surrounding the city utility barrier, and have sodded an extra part of the area near the wetland. Our dogs are never unsupervised while outside. They are exercised daily by wallang on a leash, and play ball in our backyard. The dogs respond to voice commands, and are never exercised in the front yard near the road or close to neighbors. The dogs live inside our home, as part of the family. We do not have an outdoor kennel, and the dogs are never left outside unattended.. As responsible dog owners, managing waste and preventing odor is not a problem. There is no disturbance to neighbors from barking or other noises. Instead of owning a third dog, should we decide to foster a third dog, I was informed that we are not allowed this either. We want to point out that again, this is not comparable to other surrounding cities. We have been in contact with several fostering groups • • • throughout the metro area, and their respective city ordinances do not apply to foster dogs. These dogs are placed in foster homes temporarily, until a forever home can be found. Without foster homes being available, an even larger amount of dogs will be surrendered to shelters. If requested, our nearby neighbors could be contacted and asked if they would be agreeable to signing a written document, which could state that they are aware of our intentions and have no objections. Also, we would welcome an inspection of our home and property by a city council official or member of the police department. We have sent this request to several city officials, and would appreciate the city council members being aware also. Please forward this to the city council members. We are also willing to discuss this further at another opportunity, with an open -mike format at the city council meeting. Sincerely, Jeremy and Jamie Gudmundson 992 Kelly Street Phone: 651- 493 -6730 Email: jamiemwhite@vahoo.com • • 1 s` Reading: Z' Z S Zoo g Published: fo If of 260 7 2 "° Reading: 5 j 2 2 0o S Effective: -7 1 9 1 1 2 0 0 8 To County Recorder: Council Member moved for adoption of the following ordinance: CITY OF LINO LAKES ORDINANCE NO. 03-08 AMENDING THE CITY CODE BY REPEALING AND REPLACING CHAPTERS 502, 503, 506 and 607 RELATED TO ANIMAL CONTROL REGULATIONS The City Council of The City of Lino Lakes do ordain as follows: Section 1. That the Lino Lakes Code of Ordinances be amended by repealing and replacing Chapters 502, 503, 506 and 607 with an amended Chapter 503 to read as follows: CHAPTER 503. ANIMAL CONTROL REGULATIONS Section 503.01 Definitions 503.02 Enforcement 503.03 Right of Entry 503.04 Impounding Animals 503.05 Impounding Strays 503.06 Impounding Facility 503.07 Redeeming Impounded Animals 503.08 Disposition of Impounded Animals 503.09 License and Vaccination Requirements 503.10 Kennel Licenses: Private and Commercial 503.11 Health and Maintenance Standards 503.12 Prohibitions 503.13 Confinement in Motor Vehicle 503.14 Rabies; Animal Bites 503.15 Dangerous and Potentially Dangerous Animals 503.16 Dangerous Animal Requirements 503.17 Forfeiture of Ownership Rights 503.18 Farm Animals 503.19 Wild Animals 503.20 Penalty 503.21 Exemptions Page 1 of 20 503.01 DEFINITIONS. • Unless the context clearly indicates otherwise, the words and phrases below are defined for the purpose of this chapter as follows. ANIMAL: Any mammal, reptile, amphibian, fish, bird (including all fowl and poultry) or other member commonly accepted as a part of the animal kingdom. Animals shall be classified as follows: a) Domestic Animal. Any animal commonly accepted as a domesticated household pet. Unless otherwise defined, such animals shall include dogs, cats, caged birds including pigeons, gerbils, hamsters, guinea pigs, domesticated rabbits, fish, non - poisonous, non - venomous and non - constricting reptiles or amphibians, and other similar animals. b) Wild Animal. Any animal commonly considered to be naturally wild and not naturally trained or domesticated, or which is commonly considered to be inherently dangerous to the health, safety, or welfare of people. Unless otherwise defined, such animals shall include: 1. Any member of the large cat family (family felidae) including lions, tigers, cougars, bobcats, leopards and jaguars, but excluding commonly accepted domesticated house cats. 2. Any naturally wild member of the canine family (family canide) including wolves, foxes, coyotes, dingoes, and jackals, but excluding commonly accepted domesticated dogs. 3. Any crossbreeds such as the crossbreed between a wolf and a dog, unless the crossbreed is commonly accepted as a domesticated house pet. 4. Any member or relative of the rodent family including any skunk (whether or not descented), raccoon, or squirrel, but excluding those members otherwise defined or commonly accepted as domesticated pets. 5. Any poisonous, venomous, constricting, or inherently dangerous member of the reptile or amphibian families including rattlesnakes, boa constrictors, pit vipers, crocodiles and alligators. 6. Any other animal which is not explicitly listed above but which can be reasonably defined by the terms of this subpart, including but not limited to bears, deer, monkeys and game fish. Page 2 of 20 • • • c) Farm Animal. Any animal commonly associated with a farm or performing work in an agricultural setting. Unless otherwise defined, such animals shall include members of the equestrian family (horses, mules), bovine family (cows, bulls), sheep, poultry (chickens, turkeys), fowl (ducks, geese), swine (excluding Vietnamese pot - bellied pigs), goats, bees, and other animals associated with a farm, ranch, or stable. AT LARGE. An animal not under the custody and control of the owner or other person, either: a) confined or restrained on the owner's property by leash, cord, chain, enclosure or fencing . Restraint by voice command or a remote electronic training device, on the owner's property, shall be allowed provided that the animal is under the immediate supervision of its owner or other responsible person. b) confined within a private vehicle or restrained by a leash not exceeding 6 feet in length while off the premises of the owner AUTHORIZED CITY PERSONNEL. The chief of police, law enforcement personnel, and others designated by law enforcement personnel to assist in the enforcement of this chapter. KENNEL, COMMERCIAL. Any structure or premises on which dogs are kept for the business of boarding for a fee, for the business of breeding for sale or other profit - making purpose, and not solely for private enjoyment. KENNEL, PRIVATE. Any structure or premises on which between 3 (three) and 4 (four) dogs, over six months of age, are kept for private enjoyment and not for monetary gain. MALTREATED ANIMAL. An animal that has not been given adequate food, water, or shelter as specified in §503.11 or that has been subjected to the conduct prohibited by Minn. Stat. §343.21. OWNER. A person owning, keeping, harboring or acting as custodian of an animal. All adult occupants of the property where the animal resides or is kept are considered an owner or owners. PARCEL OF LAND. A contiguous tract or area of and established by plat, subdivision, or as otherwise permitted by law, that has one legal description and parcel identification number recorded with the Anoka County Property Records Department. Also referred to as a "lot" or "lot of record." PERSON. An individual, firm, partnership or corporation. Page 3 of 20 PREMISES. A building, structure, shelter or land where an animal is kept or confined. PUBLIC NUISANCE ANIMAL. An animal that: a) is maintained in a manner that violates §503.11; b) by virtue of number or types of animals maintained, is offensive or dangerous to the public health, safety or welfare; or c) has been the subject of a violation of this chapter more than two times in a 24 -month period. VETERINARY HOSPITAL. A place for the treatment, hospitalization, surgery, care and boarding of animals and birds, under the direction of one or more licensed veterinarians. 503.02 ENFORCEMENT. The provisions of this chapter will be enforced by the chief of police, law enforcement personnel, law enforcement designees, and the assistance of other personnel when appropriate. 503.03 RIGHT OF ENTRY. Authorized city personnel have the right to enter upon a premises at reasonable times for the purpose of discharging their duties imposed by this chapter when there is reasonable belief that a violation of this chapter has been committed. Authorized city personnel may enter the private dwelling of an individual for the purposes of seizing animals or otherwise enforcing the provisions of this chapter with consent, or by first obtaining a search warrant. 503.04 IMPOUNDING ANIMALS. 1. Authorized city personnel may seize and impound an animal found to be in violation of this chapter. These personnel may enter onto private property to seize and impound animals when: a) they have a reasonable and immediate concern for the animal's health, safety or welfare; b) they have a reasonable and immediate concern for the health, safety or welfare of human beings or other animals as a result of the animal's continued presence on the property; or Page 4 of 20 • • • • • • c) they have reasonable cause to believe that a violation of this chapter has occurred or is occurring and that seizure is necessary to prevent further violation, but only after a reasonable effort has been made to contact an occupant of the property. 2. A person must not interfere with authorized city personnel impounding an animal, nor refuse to surrender an animal to these personnel. 3. Written notice of the seizure shall be left in a conspicuous place if personal contact with the animal owner is not possible. 4. The animal owner is responsible for costs for the impounding and housing of an impounded animal. 503.05 IMPOUNDING STRAYS. 1. Authorized city personnel may seize and impound an animal found at large on public property or claimed to be a stray by the occupant of the premises upon which the animal is found. 2. An impounded stray animal displaying a need for medical care may be taken to a veterinarian for emergency treatment. The owner of the animal is responsible for payment of expenses incurred as a result of the veterinarian's treatment. 3. Authorized city personnel shall give notice of an impounded animal to the owner if known. 503.06 IMPOUNDING FACILITY. 1. The council will designate a place as an animal impounding facility for keeping animals that are impounded by the city. 2. Each month the impounding facility will give to the city a written report showing the animals impounded, the duration of the impoundment, and the method of disposal for each animal. 503.07 REDEEMING IMPOUNDED ANIMALS. The owner of an impounded animal may redeem such animal upon payment of all impounding and /or boarding fees. Animal Owner is responsible for all assessed fees. No dog may be released unless properly inoculated for rabies and licensed by the city. Page 5 of 20 503.08 DISPOSITION OF IMPOUNDED ANIMALS. If an impounded animal is not redeemed within five business days after the required notice, as specified in sections 503.04 and 503.05, authorized city personnel may give the animal away or direct the impounding facility to dispose of the animal in a humane manner. 503.09 LICENSE AND VACCINATION REQUIREMENTS: 1. License and Registration. All dogs within the City of Lino Lakes shall be licensed except the following: a) Dogs less than six (6) months of age; b) Dogs which are brought into the City for appearances in an animal show or trial; c) Dogs being used by law enforcement officers. 2. Limitations. No more than two dogs over six (6) months of age shall be kept on a property except as provided for in Section 503.10. 3. Vaccination Required. A person who owns, harbors or keeps a dog over six months old within the city must have the dog vaccinated by a licensed veterinarian with an anti - rabies vaccine that is currently effective. The owner shall be responsible for revaccination of the anti - rabies vaccine upon each expiration date and return to the city for re- licensing of their dog. 4. Tag Required. A person who owns, harbors or keeps a dog over six months old within the city must securely attach the City of Lino Lakes identification tag to the dog's collar so that it can be readily seen. The identification tag must be worn by the dog at all times when it is off the owner's or keeper's property. 5. Licensing /Vaccination Procedures. a) Application. Except as herein provided, within thirty (30) days of acquiring possession of a dog which has not been licensed by the City, or within thirty (30) days of moving to the City with a dog which has not previously been licensed by the City, the owner of the dog shall make application for a dog license. The application shall be on forms provided by the City. The applicant shall also provide proof of vaccination and spay or neuter status to the City prior to the issuance of a license or renewal of a license. b) License Fee. License application must be accompanied by a non - refundable fee as established by City Council ordinance. Page 6 of 20 • • c) Duration of License. All licenses are valid for the same length of time as the rabies vaccination and must be renewed within 30 days after the vaccination or a penalty will be applied in the amount set forth by City Council ordinance. d) Receipt and Tags. Upon completion of the application form, receipt of the license fee(s), and receipt of proof of vaccination and spay or neuter, if applicable, the City shall cause a license fee receipt to be issued to the applicant, along with a metallic tag. The applicant shall cause the tag to be affixed permanently by metal fastening device to the collar of the licensed dog in such a manner that the tag is easily observed. If a tag is lost, a duplicate may be issued by the City upon presentation of a receipt showing payment of the initial license fee and upon payment of an additional fee for each duplicate tag in the amount set forth by City Council ordinance. e) Change of Address. An applicant who has obtained a dog license shall notify the City of applicant's address change within corporate limits of the City within thirty (30) days of any address change. f) Counterfeit Certificate. A vaccination certificate is valid only for the dog and owner to which it was issued. A person must not use a rabies vaccination certificate for a different dog than the one for which it was issued. . g) Counterfeit Tags. No person shall counterfeit, attempt to counterfeit, or attach any counterfeit tag to any dog in the City. • h) Transfer of Tags. No person shall transfer a dog tag from one dog to another. i) Change of Ownership. If there is a change in ownership of the dog during the duration of the license, the new owner may have a current license changed to their name upon payment of an ownership transfer fee, or may secure a new license. The ownership transfer fee shall be $1.00 503.10 KENNEL LICENSES: COMMERCIAL AND PRIVATE. 1. General. Any person who owns, keeps, or allows the keeping of more than two dogs over six months of age on any parcel of land must first acquire a kennel license from the city. A person who owns or operates a commercial kennel or a private kennel must renew the license annually and comply with applicable requirements herein. a) An application for a private or commercial kennel license must be submitted to the police department accompanied by the fee established by City Council ordinance. Page 7 of 20 b) A kennel license may be issued after an inspection reveals that adequate safeguards are present to protect the surrounding neighborhood from nuisances and to ensure compliance with this chapter as well as Chapter 1007. A license may not be issued if the location does not comply with the applicable health and maintenance standards set forth below. The license may include conditions that authorized city personnel deem reasonably necessary to protect public health and safety and to protect people in neighboring property from unsanitary conditions, unreasonable noise and odors, and other unreasonable annoyances. The license or permit may be reasonably modified by authorized city personnel if necessary to respond to changed circumstances. The modification will be effective 10 days after the mailing of written notice by certified mail to the holder. c) Each dog over six months of age is required to have an individual dog license obtained by the city. d) A kennel license will be issued for a maximum of one year and will expire on May 31 of each year. A license may be revoked because of a violation of this chapter, or another relevant law, ordinance or regulation. 2. Private Kennel. A minimum of one acre of land is required to obtain a private kennel license in any zoning district. Every kennel shall be enclosed or fenced in such manner as to prevent the running at large or escape of animals confined therein. A private kennel license shall be limited to a maximum of four dogs. 3. Commercial Kennel. Commercial kennels shall also be subject to the provisions of Chapter 1007. 503.11 HEALTH AND MAINTENANCE STANDARDS. 1. All Animals - Health Standards. The owner of an animal kept in the city must comply with the following standards. a) An animal kept outdoors or in an unheated enclosure must be provided with adequate shelter and bedding to protect it from the sun, rain, snow, and temperatures below 50 degrees Fahrenheit. b) The shelter must include a moisture proof and windproof structure of suitable size to allow the animal to stand in an upright position and to lie down stretched out so that no part of its body need touch the sides of the structure. The structure must be made of durable material sufficient to allow retention of body heat with a solid floor raised at least two inches from the ground and an entrance covered by a flexible windproof material or self - closing swinging door. The structure must be provided with sufficient quantity of suitable bedding material consisting of hay, straw, cedar shavings, blankets or the Page 8 of 20 • • • equivalent to provide insulation and protection against cold and dampness and to promote retention of body heat. The structure must be structurally sound and maintained in good repair. The structure shall meet the accessory building requirements as set forth in Chapter 1007. c) In lieu of the requirements of paragraphs a and b, an animal may be provided with access to a barn with a sufficient quantity of loose hay or bedding and protection against cold and dampness. d) If an animal is confined by a chain, the chain must be so attached that it cannot become entangled with the chains of other animals or other objects. A chain must be of a size adequate to restrain the animal involved and must be attached to the animal by means of a well fitted collar. The collar must be large enough to allow free breathing but small enough to avoid being easily pulled over the animal's head. A chain must be at least three times the length of the animal as measured from the tip of his nose to the base of his tail. e) A female dog in season must be confined indoors or in a secure enclosure so that she will not be in contact, except for intentional breeding purposes, with another dog or create a nuisance by attracting other animals who engage in continued barking, yelping or howling. f) An animal must be provided with sufficient food and water daily to meet adequate nutritional requirements. g) No person shall beat, torment, tease, or otherwise abuse an animal, or permit an animal to fight. h) The owner of any animal within city limits will provide veterinary care when needed to prevent suffering of any sick or injured animal. 2. All Animals — Maintenance Standards. An owner of an animal kept in the city must comply with the standards below. Before commencing an action to enforce compliance with these standards, enforcement personnel must give an owner notice of a violation and a reasonable opportunity to comply. a) An owner must maintain an animal and the area where it is kept so that no odor that offends the senses of a reasonable person is detected, for more than one day, off the property where the animal is kept. b) An owner must maintain the property where the animal is kept so that there is no erosion, and no drainage of water contaminated by the animal, onto adjacent properties or into wetlands. Page 9 of 20 c) The owner must manage the feces and other bodily wastes from the animal in a timely and sanitary manner that prevents health risks and prevents odors that are prohibited under paragraph (a) above. 3. Commercial Kennels & Veterinary Hospitals. In addition to the standards established under paragraphs 1 and 2, commercial kennels and veterinary hospitals must comply with the following standards. a) Housing facilities must be structurally sound and maintained in good repair. Indoor housing facilities must be adequately ventilated and have ample light, either natural or artificial. b) An enclosure must be of sufficient size to allow each animal to turn around fully and to stand, sit and lie in a comfortable normal position. The floors of the enclosure must be constructed so as to prevent injury to the animal's legs and feet. c) The temperature for indoor housing facilities must not be allowed to fall below 50 degrees Fahrenheit for dogs not accustomed to lower temperatures. d) Disposal facilities must be provided to minimize vermin, infestation, odors and disease hazards. e) Adequate storage and refrigeration must be provided to protect food supplies against contamination and deterioration. f) The premises, cages, enclosures and housing facilities must be clean and disinfected as often as is necessary to maintain clean and sanitary conditions at all times. g) Animals must be fed at least once a day with clean, wholesome food, sufficient to meet the normal nutritional requirements for the animal's age, size and condition. h) Clean potable water must be made available to all animals at least twice daily for periods of not less than one hour. i) Feeding and water receptacles must be kept clean and sanitary at all times. j) Animals housed in the same primary enclosure must be maintained in compatible groups. Non -adult animals must not be housed in the same primary enclosure with adult animals other than their mothers. k) An animal exhibiting a vicious disposition must be housed separately. Page 10 of 20 • • • I) Females in season must not be confined in the same enclosure with males except for breeding purposes. Animals used for breeding must be of compatible size and only one male and one female may be mated at one time in a single enclosure. m) Animals affected with clinical evidence of infections, contagious or communicable disease must be separated from other animals in a manner to minimize the chance of further infection. An effective program for the control of insects, ecto parasites and other pests must be established and maintained. 503.12 PROHIBITIONS. 1. An owner must not cause or permit his /her animal to run at large within the city limits. This restriction does not apply to: a) dogs that have been specially trained and certified to perform tasks to assist people, such as handicapped assistance, police canine duties, or search and rescue. b) pigeons that have been released for limited periods necessary for exercise, training or competition provided it is not within twelve hours following a feeding. c) dogs that are engaged in a lawful hunt while under the control of a licensed hunter through voice command. 2. An owner must not permit any animal to be on park property, city trails, public property or the property of another without having in the owner's immediate possession a device for the immediate removal of feces material deposited by the animal as well as a container for the transport of such material to an appropriate disposal receptacle. 3. A person must not abandon an animal within the city. 4. A person must not keep, own, harbor or otherwise possess a public nuisance animal, as defined in §503.01. 5. A person must not allow an animal to create a habitual disturbance. Habitual disturbance shall be defined as howling, yelping, barking, crowing, or other kinds of noise for repeated intervals of at least three minutes with less than one minute of interruption that is audible off of the owners' premises. 6. A person must not permit an animal under his /her care, custody or control to damage another person's lawn, garden or other property. Page 11 of 20 7. A person must not injure, harass, or interfere with a police canine in the lawful performance of its duties, or attempt, permit or cause the same. 8. An owner of an animal must not fail to restrain the animal from inflicting or attempting to inflict bodily injury on a person at any place or on a domestic animal off the owner's property, except in the circumstances defined in Section 503.15, Subd. 3.b., Potentially Dangerous Animal. 9. A person, except police officers in the lawful performance of their duties using a police canine, must not cause or encourage an animal to engage in unprovoked attacks upon human beings or domestic animals. 10. A person must not own, possess, harbor, or train an animal for the purpose of fighting with other animals. 11. It is unlawful for an owner to sell or cause to be sold any animal without first providing the purchaser with written certification as to the origin of the animal. 503.13 CONFINEMENT IN MOTOR VEHICLE. 1. A person must not cause or allow an animal to be placed or confined in a motor vehicle without adequate ventilation or when the atmospheric temperature, humidity, and sun rays can be reasonably expected to cause suffering, disability or death. Evidence that the animal is suffering from heat stress is prima facie evidence of a violation of this section. 2. This section does not prohibit the transportation of horses, cattle, sheep, poultry or other agricultural livestock in trailers or other vehicles designed and constructed for that purpose. 3. Authorized city personnel who find an animal in a motor vehicle in violation of this section may break and enter into the vehicle if necessary to remove the animal. Neither the personnel nor the city will be liable for vehicle damage that results. An animal removed must be taken immediately to the animal impounding facility to be evaluated by a licensed veterinarian. The personnel must leave within the vehicle a written notice giving their name and position and the address where the animal may be redeemed. The owner of the animal is responsible for any applicable fees and all medical and housing expenses incurred. 503.14 RABIES; ANIMAL BITES. 1. A dog or animal displaying symptoms of being rabid may be seized at any place or time and will be confined in the city impounding facility at the expense of the owner, until found to be free from rabies. Page 12 of 20 • • 2. If a dog or other animal appears to be diseased, vicious, dangerous, rabid or has been exposed to rabies, and the dog or other animal cannot be impounded without serious risk of personal injury, the dog or other animal may be killed, if reasonably necessary for the safety of a person or persons. 3. When a dog or other animal has bitten a person and the skin has been broken or the services of a doctor are required, the owner or custodian of the biting animal and the person bitten or his /her parent or guardian must report the incident to the Lino Lakes Police Department within 24 hours of the bite. The dog or other animal must be confined for a period of not Tess than 10 days in a veterinary hospital or on the owner's premises, as determined by the authorized city personnel. These personnel may refuse to permit confinement on the owner's premises if the animal has previously been found repeatedly at large or if the animal does not have a currently effective rabies inoculation. If confinement on the owner's premises is permitted, the animal may not be allowed off the premises or in contact with people or other animals during the confinement period, except for medical purposes. If the owner fails to comply with these restrictions, authorized city personnel may enter onto the property, seize the animal, and remove it to a veterinary hospital. The owner is responsible for all costs of confinement incurred under this section. As a condition of releasing a confined animal, authorized city personnel may require that the animal's owner take the animal for an examination by a veterinarian and may require the owner to follow any recommendations from the veterinarian regarding the animal's training or behavior. The authorized personnel must notify the owner of these requirements in writing. Failure to comply with a requirement is a violation of this code, punishable as a misdemeanor and /or as a civil violation. 503.15 DANGEROUS AND POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS ANIMALS. 1. Attack by an animal. It shall be unlawful for any person's animal to inflict or attempt to inflict bodily injury to any person or other animal whether or not the owner is present. This section shall not apply to an attack by a dog under the control of an on -duty law enforcement officer or to an attack upon an uninvited intruder who has entered the owner's home with criminal intent. 2. Destruction of a dangerous animal. The animal control officer shall have the authority to order the destruction of dangerous animals in accordance with the terms established by this ordinance. 3. Definitions: a. A Dangerous Animal is an animal which has: i. Caused bodily injury or disfigurement to any person on public or private property; or Page 13 of 20 ii. Engaged in any attack on any person under circumstances which would indicate danger to personal safety; or iii. Exhibited unusually aggressive behavior, such as an attack on another animal; or iv. Bitten one (1) or more persons on two (2) or more occasions; or v. Been found to be potentially dangerous and /or the owner has personal knowledge of the same, the animal aggressively bites, attacks, or endangers the safety of humans or domestic animals. b. A Potentially Dangerous Animal is an animal which has: i. Bitten a human or a domestic animal on public or private property; or ii. When unprovoked, chased or approached a person upon the streets, sidewalks, or any public property in an apparent attitude of attack; or iii. Has engaged in unprovoked attacks causing injury or otherwise threatening the safety of humans or domestic animals. c. Proper Enclosure. Proper enclosure means securely confined indoors or in a securely locked pen or structure suitable to prevent the animal from escaping and to provide protection for the animal from the elements. A proper enclosure does not include a porch, patio, or any part of a house, garage, or other structure that would allow the animal to exit of its own volition, or any house or structure in which windows are open or in which door or window screens are the only barriers which prevent the animal from exiting. The enclosure shall not allow the egress of the animal in any manner without human assistance. A pen or kennel shall meet the following minimum specifications: i. Have a minimum overall floor size of thirty -two (32) square feet. ii. Sidewalls shall have a minimum height of five (5) feet and be constructed of 11 -guage or heavier wire. Openings in the wire shall not exceed two (2) inches, support posts shall be one - and - one - quarter -inch or larger steel pipe buried in the ground eighteen (18) inches or more. When a concrete floor is not provided, the sidewalls shall be buried a minimum of eighteen (18) inches in the ground. iii. A cover over the entire pen or kennel shall be provided. The cover shall be constructed of the same gauge wire or heavier as the sidewalls and shall have no openings in the wire greater than two (2) inches. Page 14 of 20 • • • • • iv. An entrance /exit gate shall be provided and be constructed of the same material as the sidewalls and shall also have no openings in the wire greater than two (2) inches. The gate shall be equipped with a device capable of being locked and shall be locked at all times when the animal is in the pen or kennel. d. Unprovoked. Unprovoked shall mean the condition in which the animal is not purposely excited, stimulated, agitated or disturbed. 4. Designation as potentially dangerous animal. The animal control officer shall designate any animal as a potentially dangerous animal upon receiving such evidence that such potentially dangerous animal has, when unprovoked, then bitten, attacked, or threatened the safety of a person or a domestic animal as stated in Subd. 3.b. When an animal is declared potentially dangerous, the animal control officer shall cause one (1) owner of the potentially dangerous animal to be notified in writing that such animal is potentially dangerous. 5. Evidence justifying designation. The animal control officer shall have the authority to designate any animal as a dangerous animal upon receiving evidence of the following: a. That the animal has, when unprovoked, bitten, attacked, or threatened the safety of a person or domestic animal as stated in Subd. 3.a. b. That the animal has been declared potentially dangerous and such animal has then bitten, attached, or threatened the safety of a person or domestic animal as stated in Subd. 3.a. 6. Authority to order destruction. The animal control officer, upon finding that an animal is dangerous hereunder, is authorized to order, as part of the disposition of the case, that the animal be destroyed based on a written order containing one (1) or more of the following findings of fact: a. The animal is dangerous as demonstrated by a vicious attack, an unprovoked attack, an attack without warning or multiple attacks; or b. The owner of the animal has demonstrated an inability or unwillingness to control the animal in order to prevent injury to persons or other animals. 7. Procedure. The animal control officer, after having determined that an animal is dangerous, may proceed in the following manner: a. The animal control officer shall cause one (1) owner of the animal to be notified in writing or in person that the animal is dangerous and may order the animal seized or make such orders as deemed proper. This owner shall be notified as to dates, times, places and parties bitten, and shall be given Page 15 of 20 fourteen (14) days to appeal this order by requesting a hearing before the city council for a review of this determination. i. If no appeal is filed, the orders issued will stand or the animal control officer may order the animal destroyed. ii. If an owner requests a hearing for determination as to the dangerous nature of the animal, the hearing shall be held before the city council, which shall set a date for hearing not more than three (3) weeks after demand for the hearing. The records of the animal control or city clerk's office shall be admissible for consideration by the animal control officer without further foundation. After considering all evidence pertaining to the temperament of the animal, the city council shall make an order as it deems proper. The city council may order that the animal control officer take the animal into custody for destruction, if such animal is not currently in custody. If the animal is ordered into custody for destruction, the owner shall immediately make the animal available to the animal control officer. iii. No person shall harbor an animal after it has been found to be dangerous and ordered into custody for destruction. 8. Stopping an attack. If any police officer or animal control officer is witness to an attack by an animal upon a person or another animal, the officer may take whatever means the officer deems appropriate to bring the attack to an end and prevent further injury to the victim. 9. Notification of New Address. The owner of an animal which has been identified as dangerous or potentially dangerous must notify the animal control officer in writing if the animal is to be relocated from its current address or given or sold to another person. The notification must be given in writing at least fourteen (14) days prior to the relocation or transfer of ownership. The notification must include the current owner's name and address, the relocation address, and the name of the new owner, if any. 503.16 DANGEROUS ANIMAL REQUIREMENTS 1. Requirements. If the city council does not order the destruction of an animal that has been declared dangerous, the city council may, as an alternative, order any or all of the following: a. That the owner provide and maintain a proper enclosure for the dangerous animal as specified in Section 503.15, Subd. 3.c. Page 16 of 20 • • b. Post the front and the rear of the premises with clearly visible warning signs, including a warning symbol to inform children, that there is a dangerous animal on the property, as specified in Minnesota Statute 347.51; c. Provide and show proof annually of public liability insurance in the minimum amount of three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000.00); d. If the animal is a dog and is outside the proper enclosure, the dog must be muzzled and restrained by a substantial chain or leash (not to exceed six (6) feet in length) and under the physical restraint of a person sixteen (16) years of age or older. The muzzle must be of such design as to prevent the dog from biting any person or animal, but will not cause injury to the dog or interfere with its vision or respiration; e. If the animal is a dog, it must have an easily identifiable, standardized tag identifying the dog as dangerous affixed to its collar at all times as specified in Minnesota Statute 347.51; f. All animals deemed dangerous by the animal control officer shall be registered with Anoka County within fourteen (14) days after the date the animal was so deemed and provide satisfactory proof thereof to the animal control officer. g. If the animal is a dog, the dog must be licensed and up to date on rabies vaccination. If the animal is a cat or ferret, it must be up to date with rabies vaccination. 2. Seizure. Animal control shall immediately seize any dangerous animal if the owner does not meet each of the above requirements within fourteen (14) days after the date notice is sent to the owner that the animal is dangerous. Seizure may be appealed to district court by serving a summons and petition upon the city and filing it with the district court. 3. Reclaiming Animals. A dangerous animal seized under Subd. 2 may be reclaimed by the owner of the animal upon payment of impounding and boarding fees, and presenting proof to animal control that each of the requirements under Subd. 1 is fulfilled. An animal not reclaimed under this section within fourteen (14) days may be disposed of as provided under Section 503.15, Subd. 6, and the owner is liable to animal control for costs incurred in confining, impounding, and disposing of the animal. 4. Subsequent Offenses. If an owner of an animal has subsequently violated the provisions under Section 503.15 with the same animal, the animal must be seized by animal control. The owner may request a hearing as defined in Section 503.15, Subd. 7. If the owner is found to have violated the provisions for which the animal was seized, the animal control officer shall order the animal destroyed in a proper Page 17 of 20 and humane manner and the owner shall pay the costs of confining the animal. If the person is found not to have violated the provisions for which the animal was seized, the owner may reclaim the animal under the provisions of Subd. 3. If the animal is not yet reclaimed by the owner within fourteen (14) days after the date the owner is notified that the animal may be reclaimed, the animal may be disposed of as provided under Section 503.15, Subd. 6 and the owner is liable to the animal control for the costs incurred in confining, impounding, and disposing of the animal. 503.17 FORFEITURE OF OWNERSHIP RIGHTS. 1. The ownership rights of a person owning the following types of animals may be forfeited to the city pursuant to the procedure in this section: a. a public nuisance animal; b. a wild animal; and c. a maltreated animal. In addition, the ownership rights of other animals owned by the same owner may be forfeited if he /she has demonstrated an inability or unwillingness to properly care for or control the animal in order to prevent it from becoming a public nuisance animal or a maltreated animal. 2. Authorized city personnel must notify the owner or apparent owner of the animal sought to be forfeited that the city intends to forfeit his /her ownership rights. The notice must be served on the owner personally or by registered mail. The notice must be in writing and state the reasons why forfeiture is sought, including a summary of applicable incidents. 3. The owner shall be given fourteen (14) days from the date of the notice to appeal the forfeiture decision by requesting a hearing before city council for a review of this determination. i. If no appeal is filed, the forfeiture decision will stand. ii. If an owner requests a hearing for determination as to the forfeiture of his ownership rights, the hearing shall be held before the city council, which shall set a date for hearing not more than three (3) weeks after demand for the hearing. The records of the animal control or city clerk's office shall be admissible for consideration by the animal control officer without further foundation. After considering all evidence, the city council shall make an order as it deems proper. 4. If the animal is deemed forfeited, the owner must immediately give the animal to authorized city personnel, and a failure or refusal to do so is a misdemeanor. Page 18 of 20 • • • • Authorized city personnel may use reasonable force and go onto private property to take the animal into custody. 5. Authorized city personnel will determine on a case by case basis whether forfeited animals may be destroyed or given to new owners who will adequately care for and control the animal. 503.18 FARM ANIMALS. 1. In addition to the provisions of this chapter, the keeping of farm animals or limited livestock raising may be permitted in rural zoning districts according to the regulations of §1007. 2. An exception shall be made to this subsection for those animals brought into the city as part of an operating zoo, veterinarian clinic, scientific research laboratory, or a licensed show or exhibition. 3. The keeping of farm animals legally existing at the adoption of this ordinance in residential zoning districts may continue to exist as to type and number of animals with the following provisions: a. the current use shall not be expanded; b. the current use shall cease if discontinued for more than a period of one year; c. a violation of any section of this chapter shall cease the current use. 503.19 WILD ANIMALS. It shall be illegal for any person to own, possess, harbor, or offer for sale, any wild animal as defined in Section 503.01 within the City limits. Any owner of such an animal at the time of adoption of this Code shall have thirty days in which to remove the animal from the City after which time the City may impound the animal as provided for in this Section. An exception shall be made to this prohibition for animals specifically trained for and actually providing assistance to the handicapped or disabled, and for those animals brought into the City as part of an operating zoo, veterinarian clinic, scientific research laboratory, or a licensed show or exhibition. 503.20 PENALTY. A violation of any section of Chapter 503 is a misdemeanor. Each day on which a violation continues shall constitute a separate violation. Page 19 of 20 503.21 EXEMPTIONS. • Animals used for law enforcement and fire rescue purposes in their official capacities are exempt from this chapter. Section 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after 30 days following its passage and publication, in accordance with Section 3.09 of the City Charter. John Bergeson, Mayor Attest: Julianne Bartell, City Clerk Adopted by the Lino Lakes City Council this day of , 2008. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by Council Member and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: The following voted against same: Whereupon said ordinance was declared duly passed and adopted. • Page 20 of 20 Gordon Heitke Weom: Dawn Bugge nt: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 2:10 PM To: Gordon Heitke Subject: animal control regs Original Message From: Dawn Bugge Sent: Monday, October 06, 2008 4:27 PM To: 'jamiemwhite @yahoo.com' Subject: RE: E -Mail Contact Form (form) has been filled out on your site. Jamie, Thank you for your request for information via the city's website. The city has established a maximum number of two dogs per parcel in order to prevent nuisances and maintain clean and healthy living environments to the extent possible. For a number of years, the city has allowed for additional dogs at a residence by special permit, which was based in part on larger lot sizes. Up until the recent ordinance amendment, this requirement was a five acre lot size. The city's recent adoption of Ordinance No. 03 -08, which became effective in July, reduced this to a one acre minimum. The city's intent is to limit the number of dogs in residential areas of the city to control problems with dog noise and odor as it affects health and general welfare. Lot sizes in our urban residential areas typically range from 1/4 to 1/2 acre in size. Larger lot sizes are typically located in our rural and less densely populated areas. The city has determined that the larger lot size is a mitigating factor to control these potential 410roblems. City Hall Staff and the Lino Lakes Police Department worked together to determine updated guidelines that could be regulated in an effort to maintain the health and welfare of both the citizens of our community as well as their pets. The Police Department deals with nuisance complaints from residents on a daily basis. Residents do not always follow health and maintenance guidelines, and therefore pose a nuisance to neighboring property owners. The city receives a great number of complaints that revolve around the keeping of animals, specifically barking dogs, at large dogs, dog bites, feces control, etc. Based on the number of nuisance violations in the city, our regulations are established accordingly to attempt to maintain animal control. Please contact the Lino Lakes Police Department at 651 - 982 -2300 if you have additional questions regarding the city's animal control regulations. Sincerely, Dawn Bugge Community Development Assistant City of Lino Lakes 600 Town Center Parkway Lino Lakes, MN 55014 Ph: 651- 982 -2422 Fax: 651 - 982 -2499 dawn.bugge @ci.lino- lakes.mn.us • 1 Z 0 itoxo O p .i 00 — CD ,-- N -I' < `J M M 1-+ 00 kn in N- N N M .x O M ... d' .-+ N l---- N ic N 00 —+ in N 1 19k Additional notes Private kennel license required for owning three dogs, however, license restricted to one acre lot size. Private kennel license required for owning three dogs, however, license restricted to one acre lot size. Private kennel license required for owning three dogs. License not restricted by acreage minimum, is open for inspection and revocation by city. Multiple dog license required for three dogs, granted by inspection from police department. License can be obtained with approval from 75% of neighbors adjoining property to own three or four dogs. A fence is required. Four dogs not allowed in single- family residential areas. If own more than three dogs, private license is required. License not able to be obtained in some zoning areas. Owning four or more dogs requires a permit and written approval from 75% of owners within 150 feet of property. Multiple animal license needed for more than three dogs, required to obtain 80% of approval from neighbors within 100 feet and an inspection by the city. Need private kennel license to have four dogs, required to have more than three acres. Need kennel license to have four dogs, zoning restrictions apply. Owning four dogs is not possible, unless a commercial kennel license is obtained, and this can not be on a residential property. Kennel license required for owning four dogs. Kennel license required for owning four dogs. b u) O cd O m b!J 0 'C 0 bA 0 Owning four dogs is not allowed. Cannot own four dogs in a residential area. Owning four dogs would be allowed with a kennel license. 2 2 (3 = inspection/license) 2 (3 = inspection/fence /license) M M M M M M M M M M M M M Coon Rapids N Gi Blaine St. Paul Minneapolis > "" 0 Brooklyn Park White Bear Lake a? w 1 Anoka Champlin ra.) New Hope From: Julie Bartell Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2008 4:18 PM To: Gordon Heitke Subject: FW: Variance from Animal Control Regulations Ordinance From: hawklaw2 @aol.com [mailto:hawklaw2 @aol.com] Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2008 2:44 PM To: Julie Bartell Subject: Variance from Animal Control Regulations Ordinance Julie, I have reviewed the October 17, 2008 letter from Jeremy and Jamie Gudmudson that you provided me with at the last council meeting, along with Lino Lakes' Animal Control Regulations Ordinance No. 03 -08, and offer the following response: As I understand the issue, the Gudmundsons desire to keep more than the alloted 2 dogs on their property over the age of six months. The Ordinance would require them to obtain a kennel license in order to do so. In reviewing the kennel license requirements under 503.10, I note initially that there is no acrage requirement associated with commercial kennels, while there is a one acre requirement associated with private kennels. Reference under commercial kennels is made to Chapter 1007, but that Chapter was not provided to me and the copy of the Lino Lakes City Code that I have indicates that Chapter 1007 refers to shade trees. If you have any questions, or need further clarification, please feel free to contact me. Scott C. Baumgartner Hawkins & Baumgartner, P.A. 2140 Fourth Avenue North Anoka, MN 55303 (763) 427 -8877 McCain or Obama? Stay up to date on the latest from the campaign trail with AOL News. • • WS -5 WORK SESSION MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and Council Members From: Al Rolek Date: November 3, 2008 Re: 2009 -2013 5 -year Financial Plan - Draft CC: Gordon Heitke Attached is a draft summary of the 2009 -2013 5 -year Financial Plan for discussion at the work session meeting on November 3. The plan was developed following the process approved by the City Council in the resolution adopted last December, with the underlying values of meeting our obligations to the citizens of Lino Lakes and maintaining service levels. Due to the state of the economy during this cycle and the constraints placed on local government by the state legislature, the plan being presented this year remains unbalanced between revenues and expenditures. The economic situation we are encountering this year has not only affected financial planning for Lino Lakes but has presented problems to all governmental entities as well as private businesses. These are uncharted times, and we are not alone in struggling through them. The difficulty encountered with limits on local levies, holding the line on tax rates, dealing with rising costs, analyzing future needs, all while dealing with a contracting to slow growing tax base has been a great challenge. Staff is seeking direction from the City Council in setting priorities on city services in resolving the funding gap. The draft plan is a compilation of projected needs over the coming five -year period submitted by the department directors for their respective areas of responsibility. It anticipates an overall increase in expenditures of 38.11% for the five -year period. In light of the collapse in the real estate market, and based on information from the city assessor, anticipated growth in the tax base was revised downward from the previous plan, ranging from -5% to +2% over the plan period, reflecting a return to slow growth in years 4 and 5. The tax base forecast includes adjustments for both market fluctuation and new construction. In addition, TIE' District 1 -9 will decertify during this period and adjustments for adding the district value to the general tax base are included in the analysis. The net result of the analysis is an overall growth in tax base of 4.13% over the 5 -year period. Given this rate of growth in the tax base, the city tax rate in the plan will adjust from 38.967% in 2008 to 44.196% 2011 through 2013. The primary reason for the growth in the tax rate is the reduction in the tax base forecast. The tax rate was held at the 2011 level pending further discussion with the Council. A general inflation factor of 3% per year was used throughout the plan. A number of areas, such as energy, fuels, medical insurance, etc., were increased at a greater rate due to market conditions. The primary drivers for increases within the draft plan are staff additions and personnel costs, energy and fuel costs, pavement management, and capital equipment replacement planning. The Fire Protection budget anticipates increases of 5% per year in response to city growth. Planning for long -term capital outlay is continued throughout the term of the plan. Anticipated staffing needs of 14.25 employees, with related benefits and other personnel costs, are included from 2009 — 2013. You should also be aware that certain assumptions are made with regard to certain staff additions. For example, it is anticipated that Homeland Security grants and additional COPS grants will be available to offset the cost of adding police officer positions each year. If these funding sources are not available, the addition of these positions will be re- evaluated in future revisions of the plan. Also, additional police supervisory positions are conditioned on the addition of patrol officers. In reviewing this draft plan on Monday night, staff is seeking direction from the City Council in its vision for the future of the city and how it will be managed financially. While this is important in considering the current plan, the trend that has emerged makes strategic planning imperative to the sound financial operation of this city. To this end, staff feels that a strategic planning initiative should be undertaken early in 2009 and be continued to a satisfactory completion to determine the Council's strategic priorities and direction for the City, which will be especially important in preparing the 2010 budget and future revisions of the 5 -year financial plan. It must be recognized and reiterated that this is a financial plan, not a budget, and it does not constitute authorization for future spending. The city budget will continue to be prepared annually, and current needs will continue to be presented to Council on an annual basis. While it is Council's, and staff's, intention to be fiscally responsible, it is possible that future budgetary needs may differ from what is outlined in the five -year plan, resulting in a tax rate higher or lower than anticipated in the plan. Likewise, the five -year plan will be updated each year and city needs reassessed at the time of renewal. • • • • • • Staff is looking for City Council direction relative to the preparation of a final draft. According to the process, a final draft will be reviewed at the December work session with a public hearing to be scheduled in December, at which time it is expected that the plan would be formally adopted. If additional time is needed, the Council would need to set a special work session prior to the public hearing to finalize the document for adoption. • CITY OF LINO LAKES FIVE -YEAR GENERAL FUND PLAN SUMMARY 2009 - 2013 Adopted Proposed Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 General Fund Plan Total Estimated Expenditures Total Estimated Revenue Estimated Surplus /(Deficit) Annual Change Total Change % from 2008 Tax Levies General Fund Levy Special Levies Debt Levies Total Tax Levy Annual Change % Total Change % from 2008 Tax Rates Tax Capacity Rate Annual Change in Tax Rate Total Change in Tax Rate from 2008 9,907,798 10, 064, 722 10, 984, 552 11, 803,435 12, 755, 562 13, 683, 681 9,907,798 10,064,722 10,651,348 11,301,415 11,681,774 11,915,376 (333,204) (502,020) (1,073,788) (1,768,305) 1.58% 5.83% 6.10% 3.37% 2.00% 1.58% 7.50% 14.07% 17.90% 20.26% 7,903,122 8,247,178 8,568,818 8,903,002 9,030,440 9,230,863 108,532 47,994 49,434 50,917 52,444 54,018 893,720 949,166 970,928 1,044,588 1,115,602 1,117,575 8,905,374 9,244,338 9,589,180 9,998,507 10,198,486 10,402,456 3.81% 3.73% 427% 2.00% 2.00% 3.81% 7.68% 12.27% 14.52% 16.81% 38.967% 38.574% 42.179% 44.196% 44.196% 44.196% (0.03 %) (0.39 %) 3.61% 2.02% (0.03 %) (0.39 %) 3.21% 5.23% 0.00% 0.00% 5.23% 5.23% CITY OF LINO LAKES 2009 - 2013 Estimated Tax Levy • Pay Pay Pay Pay Pay Pay 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 General Fund Levy 7,903,122 8,247,178 8,568,818 8,903,002 9,030,440 9,230,863 Special Levy - Target/Kohls Abatement 70,114 - - - - Special Levy - PERA Contribution 38,418 47,994 49,434 50,917 52,444 54,018 108,532 47,994 49,434 50,917 52,444 54,018 Debt Levy Public Project Revenue Bond 1999C 109,557 104,570 Civic Complex Bond 1998A "" 191,213 126,788 G.O. Improvement Bond 1998B - - Taxable G.O. Imp Bond 2003B 20,741 19,534 23,524 21,917 20,248 23,781 G.O. Imp Refunding Bond 2005B 108,041 113,482 124,176 124,172 134,863 134,528 G.O. Tax Abatement Bond 2006C (YMCA) 108,591 108,591 140,091 196,581 235,011 245,511 G.O. CIP Bond 2006E 125,580 209,580 442,470 445,410 468,720 459,060 Certificate of Indebtedness 2004 - - - Certificate of Indebtedness 2005 40,404 - Certificate of Indebtedness 2006 122,603 120,698 - - Certificate of Indebtedness 2007 66,990 62,948 60,060 - Certificate of Indebtedness 2008 - 82,975 81,732 80,808 Certificate of Indebtedness 2009 - 98,875 96,600 98,280 - Certificate of Indebtedness 2010 - - - 79,100 79,380 76,44 Certificate of Indebtedness 2011 - - - 79,100 79,380 Certificate of Indebtedness 2012 - - - 98,875 Total Debt Levy 893,720 949,166 970,928 1,044,588 1,115,602 1,117,575 Total Levy 8,905,374 9,244,338 9,589,180 9,998,507 10,198,486 10,402,456 • B -2 limaalerfatiAtl • Taxable Market Value Annual % Change Total Net Tax Capacity Value Less FD Contribution in Value Less Captured Value for Tax Increment * Total Net Tax Capacity Value Annual % Change Total % Change from 2008 CITY OF LINO LAKES 2009 -2013 Financial Plan Net Tax Capacity Calculation Actual 2008 Estimate 2009 Estimate 2010 Estimate 2011 Estimate 2012 Estimate 2013 2,021,961,000 2,108,241,700 4.83% 4.27% 22,092,854 23,261,403 1,282,009 1,461,587 532,660 642,048 2,002,829,615 2,002,829,615 2,042,886,207 2,083,743,931 (5.00 %) 0.00% 2.00% 2.00% 22,098,333 1,388,508 414,482 22,098,333 1,388,508 414,482 22,540,300 1,416,278 422,772 22,991,105 1,444,603 431,227 20,278,185 21,157,768 4.34% 4.34% 20,295,343 20,295,343 *T1F District 1 -9 decertifies after2009 Net Tax Capacity Rate Calculation Total Levy Less FD Distribution Total Net Levy for Tax Rate • Annual% Change Total % Change from 2008 • 2008 8,866,956 965,414 5.80% 7,901,542 (4.08 %) 0.08% 20,701,250 21,115,275 0.00% 2.00% 0.08% 2.09% 2009 2010 2011 2012 9,244,338 9,589,180 9,998,507 10,198,486 1,082,933 1,028,786 1,028,786 12.17% (5.00 %) 0.00% 8,161,405 8,560,394 8,969,721 3.29% 3.29% 4.89% 8.34% 1,049,362 2.00% 9,149,124 4.78% 2.00% 13.52% 15.79% 2.00% 4.13% 2013 10,402,456 1,070,349 2.00% 9,332,107 2.00% 18.10% GitragiICa,} aaLYA to a ;3,81.96+ B -3 ADMINISTRATION SENIORS FINANCE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLANNING & ZONING ENGINEERING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL SOLID WASTE FORESTRY POLICE BUILDING INSPECTIONS STREETS FLEET GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS PARKS RECREATION TOTAL GENERAL WATER SEWER GRAND TOTAL CITY OF LINO LAKES 2009 -2013 FINANCIAL PLAN PERSONNEL - TOTAL Personnel are shown as Full Time Equivalents (FTE) 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 5.000 5.000 5.000 5.000 5.000 0.625 0.625 0.625 0.625 0.625 3.500 3.500 3.500 3.500 3.500 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 2.000 2.000 2.000 2.000 2.000 3.000 3.000 3.000 3.000 3.000 1.100 1.100 1.100 1.100 1.100 0.300 0.300 0.300 0.300 0.300 0.600 0.600 0.600 0.600 0.600 31.750 34.000 38.000 41.000 43.000 4.000 4.000 4.000 4.000 4.000 7.350 7.850 7.850 7.850 7.850 1.150 1.650 1.650 1.650 1.650 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 6.000 6.000 6.000 6.000 7.000 3.200 3.200 3.200 3.200 3.200 71.575 74.825 78.825 81.825 84.825 2.150 2.150 2.650 2.650 2.650 2.150 2.150 2.650 2.650 2.650 75.875 79.125 84.125 87.125 90.125 A -6 • • • • CITY OF LINO LAKES 2009 -2013 FINANCIAL PLAN PERSONNEL CHANGES FOR 2009- 2013 FT 5 -year 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Totals Police Captain - - - 1.000 1.000 Police Sergeant 1.000 - 1.000 Patrol Officer - 2.000 2.000 2.000 2.000 8.000 Community Service Officer 1.000 - 1.000 Community Relations Coordinator - 0.250 - - - 0.250 General Maintenance - Streets - 0.500 - - - 0.500 General Maintenance - Mechanic - 0.500 - - - 0.500 General Maintenance - Parks - - 1.000 1.000 General Maintenance - Utilities - 0.500 - 0.500 General Maintenance - Utilities 0.500 - 0.500 Totals 3.250 5.000 ESTIMATED ANNUAL WAGE COST FOR NEW PERSONNEL 2009 -2013 Police Captain ** Sergeant ** Patrol Officers * Community Service Officer Community Relations Coordinator General Maintenance - Streets General Maintenance - Mechanic General Maintenance - Parks General Maintenance - Utilities General Maintenance - Utilities 3.000 3.000 14.250 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 - - - 95,783 98,656 - 85,710 88,282 90,930 - 95,304 214,931 356,544 523,078 33,615 37,158 40,011 - 19,860 20,456 21,070 21,702 20,749 24,042 27,547 28,374 - 27,262 28,080 28,922 29,790 - 45,347 21,372 24,763 28,374 - 21,372 24,763 28,374 Totals 163,175 449,578 704,831 934,634 * Grant Positons ** Supervisory positions are contingent on increased patrol positions Personnel are shown as Full Time Equivalents (FTE) CITY OF LINO LAKES FIVE -YEAR GENERAL FUND REVENUE PLAN SUMMARY 2009 - 2013 RAIT Adopted Proposed Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total Property Taxes 7,778,236 8,130,141 8,458,252 8,793,919 8,927,884 9,129,881 Total Intergovernmental Revenue 657,000 652,000 786,746 950,455 1,137,802 1,151,986 Business Licenses and Permits 41,900 43,400 43,400 43,400 43,400 43,400 Non - Business Licenses and Permits 600,600 447,650 555,100 691,100 730,100 734,100 Charges for Services 19,500 11,500 15,500 17,500 19,500 19,500 Public Safety 161,000 231,000 231,000 231,000 231,000 231,000 Municipal Fines 110,000 130,000 130,000 130,000 135,000 135,000 Investments 200,000 175,000 175,000 180,000 185,000 190,000 Administrative Charges 70,000 65,000 65,450 65,914 66,391 66,883 Miscellaneous 269,562 179,000 190,900 198,127 205,697 213,626 Total Revenues 9,907,798 10,064,691 10,651,348 11,301,415 11,681,774 11,915,376 ANNUAL INCREASE % TOTAL INCREASE % FROM 2008 3.11% 1.58% 5.83% 6.10% 3.37% 2.00% 3.11% 1.58% 7.50% 14.07% 17.90% 20.26% C -1 • • CITY OF LINO LAKES 2009 - 2013 FIVE YEAR FINANCIAL PLAN GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES Proposed Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated DEPT# DESCRIPTION 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 • ADMINISTRATION 401 MAYOR AND COUNCIL 107,235 96,955 100,947 103,375 105,892 108,500 402 ADMINISTRATION 508,926 540,672 562,790 586,615 612,190 639,728 403 ELECTIONS 26,208 14,464 30,320 15,461 35,379 17,928 404 CABLE TV 3,180 3,180 3,155 3,232 3,313 3,395 405 CHARTER COMMISSION 5,700 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 406 SENIORS 38,726 39,730 41,801 43,924 46,238 48,770 407 FINANCE 504,225 518,022 555,131 582,723 606,812 632,560 414 LEGAL CONSULTANTS 181,500 150,000 154,500 159,135 163,909 168,826 TOTAL ADMINISTRATION 1,375,701 1,365,223 1,450,844 1,496,665 1,575,933 1,621,908 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 415 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 172,693 106,735 121,066 135,473 140,223 145,358 416 PLANNING AND ZONING 258,032 268,175 279,328 252,905 262,161 272,164 417 ENGINEERING 245,000 200,000 276,500 235,500 295,500 255,500 418 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 248,857 258,886 270,390 291,857 295,260 309,189 461 ENVIRONMENTAL 101,441 108,158 110,163 114,644 119,495 124,764 462 SOLID WASTE ABATEMENT 37,530 38,872 40,648 42,216 43,894 45,695 463 FORESTRY 62,635 68,609 67,806 70,494 73,391 76,523 TOTAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1,126,189 1,049,435 1,165,902 1,143,090 1,229,925 1,229,192 PUBLIC SAFETY 420 POLICE PROTECTION 3,101,308 3,223,398 3,646,787 4,119,781 4,640,700 5,072,026 421 FIRE PROTECTION 487,757 512,288 537,902 564,798 593,037 622,689 422 BUILDING INSPECTIONS 353,853 358,599 380,382 405,281 424,044 443,381 TOTAL PUBLIC SAFETY 3,942,918 4,094,285 4,565,072 5,089,859 5,657,781 6,138,096 PUBLIC SERVICES 430 STREETS 911,912 988,288 1,044,385 1,105,321 1,143,228 1,248,227 431 FLEET MANAGEMENT 352,955 423,678 511,110 568,754 636,310 715,684 432 GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS 485,073 512,664 548,554 587,648 630,960 679,046 450 PARKS DEPARTMENT 606,060 650,010 679,589 709,142 741,026 847,465 451 RECREATION 315,990 327,007 316,596 330,455 345,399 361,563 TOTAL PUBLIC SERVICES 2,671,990 2,901,647 3,100,234 3,301,320 3,496,923 3,851,984 OTHERS 499 CONTINGENCY/OTHERS/TRANSFERS 791,000 654,132 702,500 772,500 795,000 642,500 TOTAL OTHERS 791,000 654,132 702,500 772,500 795,000 842,500 TOTAL GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES 9,907,799 10,064,722 10,984,552 11,803,435 12,755,562 13,683,681 ANNUAL INCREASE % 1.58% TOTAL INCREASE % FROM 2008 1.58% D -1 9.14% 7.45% 8.07% 7.28% 10.87% 19.13% 28.74% 38.11% 5 0 as UI O z towto 0 re 0 a 4-- 0 U O Y J 0 0 10 J Q t] LI- 0 W P, a, m O U 0) N — r-i 40JECT COSTS J < 1- 0 F 10000001000 0 0 0 1.- 0 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 6600/000 0 CO 0 N 0 0 Cr) s - CO 0 CO 0) u) • N 0 0 0 0 N ON CO CO 0 CO C 0 00000000000000000000 0 0 0 0 0 00010000000000)0000000 60006.- t0 r I.- CD CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0) 0 OtD004.O N t7 N CO n CD O m 0 . 0 sr 0 .- ,_ •' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0) ID V' CO u) O) CD 0) 'Q 00 N 10 0000000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 00 0000000 -r' of n u)O 0 u) 00)0 i-- V CD t0 co 1� 1. 0) N u) 0 1- V-- N CO • 0) t0 6,445,500 23,987,976 0 E o 0 w . 1 . . ■ ■ • . • 1 o 0 t0 to . • 1 . 0 • • 0 O m 7 . . • 1 1 1 0 . 0 1 . • • • 174,000 490,000 i • . • O . o o 0 0 0 N 0 0 Or • • • • i . • • • • • • • • 73,0001 - 602,250 170,000 0 0 O 0 co 0 0 ' 0 0 o 0 0 t+) ID 0''• 0 0 6 0) 0 • 0 0 0 0 0 f0 1- 0 •• o•' 0 0 tD (0 O• 0 1-- 0 N • o 6 0) 0 0•' • o tD o N o O t+) O ti 1 1 1 a U) •.• 1 0 1 0 0 (1) O 0 0 V) 0) O 0 u) s- .- 0 . . 0 O CO CO 1..- 0 . ID N O . - 0 O N 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 ti 0N CD 0) CD CO 'V 0) 4,355,000 7,413,650 0 O 0 ' 1 CD 0 0 0 O o0 u) 1� O N n CO ' ' CD 0 0 CD 0 N O N 0) 1 1 ' 0 0 0 O r ' 0 0 ' 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O t0 u) 0 m N ' ' • ' 0 0 • 0 0 0 0 O O CO s- O ' 0 6 O MI ' 0 0 ' 0 ' 0 0 0 0 0 CD O CO s- CO ' • • ' 376,000 2,324,716 m to • 0 0 0 0 0 CD 0 0 m u) 0 0 co 0 0 Cc) O N n • 1 0' CD CO 0 N CD u) 0' 0 t ) N O V .' ' 0 ' 0 0 0 0 0 N 00 CV N O O N N O' O 0) 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 t0 0 of 0 V 10 V 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD CO 0) of 0' 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 N 1- 0 O R CO 10 to 0) O 1.- N 1 1 1' 1 1,467,500 12,787,360 PROJECT 2009 Surface Water Management Project' 2009 Seal Coat and Overlay Protect CSAH 14135E Interchange Recan (City Share est) Cedar Street PMP Imnlementatlon w /RCWD • 2012 Reconstruction Feasibility Study' Local Surface Water Management Plan Update Upgrade Lift Station No. 8 Sanitary Sewer Rehab 12012 Street Reconstruction' 2014 Street Reconstruction Feasibility Study total 2013 Surface Water Management Project 2013 Seal Coat and Overlay Project 12th Ave (Birch to Holly Dr) (MSA) CSAH 23 Reconstruction (77th to Meln) City Share Sanitary Sewer Rehab 12013 Sub -Total 2009 TO 2013 TOTALS s. N } D 0 a J CO s- N 0 0 N N N Q E E w 2, N n 4) N N O J E _p U 5 g O 0 c 5 U m u U D W m 10 N W 5 4- 2 O O ti O N N -o rx N 64 C V t0 (0 o a m o a d th EO W i a m o E 2 m Q m c 3 2 0 m W O t > Q O C n O O m 0 W — C '��i O ul O `0 o m = c a s E.- > w d v 0 c 0 Z .p 0 m 0 co m 2 Ef° =2 CO i T N L C H- L U 0 3 >. 0 0 P p c g m c< m 0 c r 10 0)) m COC m o `p o O ®p_ m W W y m= .4 N G C 58 D C O b 10 D (01,J Q C to P d to00to m 0 a C N 2 L a j m l0 m N C - N Y N � y C N r N O J ;KF m C N= C N a c 0 C Q ° aN ' 0 • • PROGRAM SUMMARY Other. Water Operating Fund Other. Sewer Utility Fund; subj to referendum Draft 2008- 2013 CIP 125,000 385,000 5,000,000 322,478 50,000 950,000 60,000 �nnr w�n v wm vi S o ry rI ni Assess • • . . _ - 133,000 70,000 68,000 400,000 . 490,250 1 73,000 o O SWU I n h n n g. a m N N n m 4.355.000 5,974.000 'o 2009 Surface Water Management Project' 2009 Seal Coat and Overlay Project CSAH 14/35E Interchange Ronan (City Share est) Cedar Street RMP Implementation w/RCWD Well No. S 8 Pumphousa Sanitary Sewer Rehab2 fetal• 2010 Surface Water Management Protect 2010 Seal Coal and Overlay Project 2012 Reconstruction Feasibility Study' Local Surface Water Management Plan Update Upgrade Lill Station No. 7 ,Senitary Sewer Reheb Woodridge Estates Trunk Watennaln Ext fatal 2011 Surface Water Management Pmjecl 2011 Seel Coat and Overlay Protect Holly Or (Holly Ct to Cnty J (MSA) Upgrade Lig Station No. 8 Sanitary Sewer Rehab Water Tower No. 1 Painting Trunk Watermain Part Cl la Marshan Lena fatal 2012 Surface Water Management Project 2012 Seal Coal and Overlay Project 2012 Street Reconstruction' 2014 Street Reconstruction Feasibility Study Civic Center Perking Lot Expansion Sanitary Sewer Rehab 'total 2013 Surface Water Management Project 2013 Seal Coat and Overlay Project 121h Ave (Birch to Holly Dr) (MSA) CSAH 23 Reconstruction (77111 to Main) City Share Sanitary Sewer Rehab 8000101 Station Well No. 7 1.5 M gal Ground Storage Trunk Water Main EDO to Aqua (Fees. Sldy) 2013 Sub.Toial 2009 TO 2013 TOTALS d ry r !q ry r b ry ry b N ry ry > n Draft 2008- 2013 CIP CITY OF LINO LAKES 2008 -2012 FINANCIAL PLAN STREET AND UTILITY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Funding Source Summary - Street Maintenance Project Funds Funding Source Summary - Street & Utility Project Funds 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Beginning Undesignated Cash Balance 1/1 - - - - - Area & Unit Charges /Assessments* 400,000 400,000 500,000 550,000 600,000 Property Tax Support 385,000 402,500 422,500 445,000 467,500 Surface Water Management Transfers In 77,616 70,000 155,000 - 120,000 Street Maintenance Projects (385,000) (402,500) (422,500) (445,000) (467,500) Interest Income @ 3% 500,000 - 1,306,000 - 1,251,000 Anoka County Participation 304,860 - - - - Ending Cash Balance 12/31 - - - - - Funding Source Summary - Street & Utility Project Funds Funding Source Summary - Area & Unit Fund 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Beginning Undesignated Cash Balance 1/1 - - - - - Area & Unit Charges /Assessments* 400,000 400,000 500,000 550,000 600,000 Area & Unit Transfers In 1,000,000 235,500 330,000 53,500 4,355,000 Surface Water Management Transfers In 77,616 70,000 155,000 - 120,000 Storm Water Utility Transfers In - - - - - MSA Participation 500,000 - 1,306,000 - 1,251,000 Anoka County Participation 304,860 - - - - Other Financing Sources - 133,000 536,000 490,250 73,000 Tax Increment Financing - - - - - Special Assessments 4,500,000 - 70,000 3,085,750 34,000 Property Tax Support 125,000 180,000 135,000 2,600,000 145,000 Ending Cash Balance 12/31 1,169,670 1,031,291 922,385 1,408,184 (2,234,473) Capital Outlay Projects (6,507,476) (618,500) (2,532,000) (6,229,500) (5,978,000) Interest Income @ 3% - - - - - Ending Cash Balance 12/31 - - - - - Funding Source Summary - Area & Unit Fund * Anticipated new residential plus C & I and Indiv conne 45 + 10 150 +40 150 +40 150 +40 150 +40 Funding Source Summary - Surface Water Management Fund 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Beginning Undesignated Cash & Investment Balance 1 2,100,000 1,169,670 1,031,291 922,385 1,408,184 Area & Unit Charges /Assessments* 400,000 400,000 500,000 550,000 600,000 Area & Unit Charges - Legacy/Woods Edge - - - 232,000 232,000 Flat Water Charges /Penalties 240,000 250,000 260,000 260,000 260,000 Repayment of Recreation Complex Loan 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 Temporary Interfund Loan - - - - - Capital Outlay Projects -Tfrs to Project Funds (1,000,000) (235,500) (330,000) (53,500) (4,355,000) Debt Service Payments/Transfers (704,398) (682,917) (665,771) (643,717) (414,575) Interest Income @ 3% 34,068 30,038 26,866 41,015 (65,082) Ending Cash Balance 12/31 1,169,670 1,031,291 922,385 1,408,184 (2,234,473) * Anticipated new residential plus C & I and Indiv conne 45 + 10 150 +40 150 +40 150 +40 150 +40 Funding Source Summary - Surface Water Management Fund CI -11 • • 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Beginning Undesignated Cash Balance 1/1 173,000 134,296 153,774 101,738 223,240 Surface Water Mgmt Charges /Assessments 85,000 85,000 100,000 115,000 130,000 Capital Outlay Projects -Tfrs to Project Funds (127,616) (70,000) (155,000) - (120,000) Interest Income @ 3% 3,912 4,479 2,963 6,502 6,997 Ending Cash Balance 12/31 134,296 153,774 101,738 223,240 240,237 CI -11 • • 5 C7 0 n. z w 5 w 0 a 2 J F F. U W F J U LL z N W Z Y p J =j O� Zm � J LL O. O U Z 2 PROJECT FUNDING SOURCES I TOTAL 0 0 0 0 . 69 0' 0 0 0 r 69 63 69 E9 $ 500,0001 $ 90,000 $ 590,000 0 0 00 0 o 0 0 0 0 o ) cm E9 E9 $ 6,300,000 1 0 0 0 0" 0 o r E9 GF Tax Levy 1 E9 E9 E9 E9 E» E9 0 C C 0 O CO o f9 • 63 E9 FPr $ 6,000,000 $ 6,000,000 $ 6,000,000 V) to U) N N Q I E9 69- E9 E9 ER f9 ED L 0 69 E9 E9 EA 63 E9 Facilities Fund O 0 0 0 r E9 O 0 0 o r E9 E9 ER $ 500,000 $ 90,000 O 0 o rn 0 E9 $ 300,000 0 0 P. 00 m 63 0 0 o, 00'� o M I PROJECT COSTS TOTAL I 0 0 0 O E9 0' 0 0 o r E9 E9 E9 ' 69- 0 0 0 o 0) 0 69 0 0 0 o 0) u) E9 $ 6,000,000 $ 300,000 0 0 0 0 o m o E9 0 0 0 0 0 0 ti f9 1 Easem. /ROW E9 E9 E9 E9 69 di Other o o 0 O EA o 0 o O 69 U3 'o E9 0 o O W 63 000'06 t 69 $ 200,000 N rn C CO ' E9 69 E9 $ 500,000 0 00 °0 0 E9 $ 6,000,000 $ 300,000 0 0 00 M ED E9 0 0 0 CO. ED E!} Land E/9 69 E9 E9 64 U3 !PROJECT City Hall Emergency Wiring /Generator Reloc dal tai 12011 Subtotal Feasibility Study /Plans - Pub Works Facility Civic Center Parking Lot Expansion 12012 Subtotal Public Works Facility Salt/Sand Storage Shed 12012 Subtotal GRAND TOTAL `m N ›- O)0 0 Cl 0 0 N c) 0 N Funding Source Summary - Municipal Buildings & Facilities Fund CI -15 • • 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Beginning Undesignated Cash Balance 1/1 1,549,000 1,652,120 1,876,732 2,113,334 1,754,743 Cellular Antenna Leases 165,000 169,950 175,049 180,300 185,709 General Fund Contributions - - - - - Issuance of Debt - - - - 6,000,000 Capital Outlay Projects/Tfrs to Project Funds (110,000) - - (590,000) (6,300,000) Interest Income @ 3% 48,120 54,662 61,553 51,109 49,214 Ending Cash Balance 12/31 1,652,120 1,876,732 2,113,334 1,754,743 1,689,666 CI -15 • • CITY OF LINO LAKES 2009 -2013 Financial Plan Park and Trail Capital Improvements PARKS TOTALS 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 0 0 0 0 0 $o $o $o $o $o SPECIFIC PROPOSED PARK/TRAIL PROJECTS TOTALS TOTAL PARK/TRAIL PROJECTS so $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Park/Trail Capital Projects determined annually by Parks Commission, therefor not shown in forecast CITY OF LINO LAKES 2009 -2013 Financial Plan Park and Trail Capital Improvements Funding Source Summary - Dedicated Parks Fund Park/Trail Capital Projects determined annually by Parks Commission, therefor not shown in forecast CI -17 • • • 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Beginning Cash Balance 1/1 $ 140,000 $ 209,702 $ 305,824 $ 434,980 $ 597,666 Park Dedication Fees 115,125 115,125 146,250 177,375 208,500 General Fund Contribution -Imps - 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 General Fund Surplus - Land 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 Park/Trail Capital Projects - - - - - Installment on Rec Complex Land (100,000) (100,000) (100,000) (100,000) (100,000) Interest Income @ 3.00 % 4,577 5,997 7,906 10,310 13,217 Ending Cash Balance 12/31 $ 209,702 $ 305,824 $ 434,980 $ 597,666 $ 794,383 Park/Trail Capital Projects determined annually by Parks Commission, therefor not shown in forecast CI -17 • • • • • COMMENTS New Request Replace #400, 2000 GMC 1 Ton 4X4 Replace #118, 1988 Vermeer Chipper New Request New Request New Request Replace #133, 2000 Toro Proline Mower New Request Replace #116, 1982 Ford Tractor Replace #203, 2001 Chevy 1 Ton 4X4 Replace #248, 2001 Chevy Pickup New Request Replace #115, 1965 Snow Blower Attachment Replace #221, 2002 Ford 1/2 Ton 4x4 Pickup Replace #526, 1990 Caterpillar Generator Replace #204, 2002 Chevy 1/2 Ton Replace 6126, 1989 Vermeer Tree Spade Replace #123, 2003 5T Praline Mower Replace #246, 1999 Ford Dump Truck Replace #205, 20031 Ton with Plow Replace #702, 2003 112 Ton Pickup eii CD U CD N to 0 to !Replace #129, 1990 Owens Pro 5000E New Request ! Replace #525, 2004 Ford Truck Replace #220, 2004 Ford 1/2 Ton w /plow Replace #233, 2004 Ford 1/2 Ton 1Replace 1998 Green Tandem Trailer 54,000 45,000 C. 22,000 ri xr 2012 rcz 40,0001 0. v es o o CI 75,000 47,000 ! CD 0 4•74 40,000 Cn YR ACQUIRED New Request 2000 New Request New Request New Request 2000 New Request CO N N New Request rn 2002 2002 rn 2003 °' 2003 2003 0 Cr/ New Request 2004 2004 2004 USEABLE LIFE 1 15 yr 9yr ! 9yr 20 yr 9yr 20 yr 13 yr 9yr 9yr 20yr 9yr 9yr 9yr VEHICLES 1 EQUIPMENT f 3 CI_ 3 ~ E p 0 3 ate. v a c v I- Vermeer Chipper 1 3 a. x a. I-. cx Aerovator F a = E E Toro Z -Mower Trackless w/ Attachments Tractor w/ Attachments 1 Ton 4x4 Pickup w/ Plow 1 Ton Pickup w/ Plow Midsize Tractor w/ Attachments Snow Blower Attachment For Loader d 3 ID v o c- Generator n Y v ac . ~ Tree Spade 52" Proline Mower Single Axle Dump Truck w/ Plow 1 Ton Pickup w/ Plow 1/2 Ton Pickup 1Case Skid Steer Generator 0 a_ 3 Y r Q m m 11 Ton Pickup w/ Utility Box & Hoist n_ n s v CL F n s o a r !Tandem Trailer TOTAL I • m I I c ,- 1 204 1 205 ti `? CO i 525 1 220 I 0 N 0 G) C v) WCL a a▪ a J C p co a it Cis ▪ M U- 0 N d U o N Cr) a COMMENTS Replaces 2006 Ford Crown Vic Replaces 2006 Ford Crown Vic Replaces 2006 Ford Crown Vic Replaces 2007 Ford Crown Vic Replaces 2007 Ford Crown Vic Replaces 2007 Ford Crown Vic New Sqd. & Equip. Replaces 2008 Ford Crown Vic Replaces 2008 Ford Crown Vic Replaces 2008 Ford Crown Vic Replaces 2008 Ford Crown Vic Replaces 2006 Ford Explorer Replaces 2009 Ford Crown Vic Replaces 2009 Ford Crown Vic Replaces 2009 Ford Crown Vic New Sqd. & Equip. Replaces 2010 Ford Crown Vic Replaces 2010 Ford Crown Vic Replaces 2010 Ford Crown Vic Replaces 2010 Ford Crown Vic 2013 1 26,000 26,000 0 00 (.p N 26,000 0 0 0 0 T 2012 25,500 25,500 25,500 25,500 102,000 2011 25,500 25,500 25,500 25,500 25,500 0 0 ILO ti N T 2010 0 0 o ('; N 25,000 25,000 25,000 0 0 0 0 0 T 0 o N 0 0 o 1. N 25,000 25,000 I 76,000 COST YR ACQUIRED 2006 2006 CD o N 2007 N- o N 2007 2008 - 2008 2008 2008 2006 2009 2009 2009 0 o N 2010 2010 0 O N USEABLE LIFE 3 yrs 3 yrs 3 yrs M 3 yrs r' r) 3yrs e7 3 yrs 3 yrs 3 yrs 3yrs r) 3 yrs 3yrs 3 yrs 3 yrs 3 yrs 3 yrs VEHICLES / EQUIPMENT 1 Ford Crown Victoria Ford Crown Victoria Ford Crown Victoria Ford Crown Victoria Ford Crown Victoria Ford Crown Victoria Ford Crown Victoria co "C O U_ 0 0 0 LL Ford Crown Victoria Ford Crown Victoria Ford Explorer Ford Crown Victoria Ford Crown Victoria Ford Crown Victoria Ford Crown Victoria Ford Crown Victoria (Ford Crown Victoria Ford Crown Victoria 1Ford Crown Victoria 1Ford Crown Victoria TOTAL d z r— z • City of Lino Lakes Capital Equipment Replacement Future Levy Impact: 2006 Certificates Total w /5% Principal Interest Total Overlevy Balance 2006 Certificates Issued 307,000 2007 90,000 26,479 116,479 122,303 217,000 5,824 2008 107,000 9,765 116,765 122,603 110,000 5,838 2009 110,000 4,950 114,950 120,698 0 5,748 Totals 307,000 41,194 348,194 365,603 Future Levy Impact: 2007 Certificates Total w /5% Principal Interest Total Overlevy Balance 2007 Certificates Issued 160,000 2008 50,000 13,800 63,800 66,990 110,000 3,190 2009 55,000 4,950 59,950 62,948 55,000 2,998 2010 55,000 2,475 57,475 60,349 0 2,874 Totals 160,000 21,225 181,225 190,286 Future Levy Impact: 2008 Certificates Total w /5% Principal Interest Total Overlevy Balance 2008 Certificates Issued 209,000 2009 63,000 16,023 79,023 82,975 146,000 3,951 2010 72,000 5,840 77,840 81,732 74,000 3,892 2011 74,000 2,960 76,960 80,808 0 3,848 Totals 209,000 24,823 233,823 245,515 Future Levy Impact: 2009 Certificates Total w /5% Principal Interest Total Overlevy Balance 2009 Certificates Issued 250,000 2010 75,000 19,167 94,167 98,875 175,000 4,708 2011 85,000 7,000 92,000 96,600 90,000 4,600 2012 90,000 3,600 93,600 98,280 0 4,680 Totals 250,000 29,767 279,767 293,755 Future Levy Impact: 2010 Certificates Total w /5% Principal Interest Total Overlevy Balance 2010 Certificates Issued 200,000 2011 60,000 15,333 75,333 79,100 140,000 3,767 2012 70,000 5,600 75,600 79,380 70,000 3,780 2013 70,000 2,800 72,800 76,440 0 3,640 Totals 200,000 23,733 223,733 234,920 CI -22 Future Levy Impact: 2011 Certificates Total w /5% Principal Interest Total Overlevy Balance 2011 Certificates Issued 200,000 2012 60,000 15,333 75,333 79,100 140,000 2013 70,000 5,600 75,600 79,380 70,000 2014 70,000 2,800 72,800 76,440 0 Totals 200,000 23,733 223,733 234,920 Future Levy Impact: 2012 Certificates 3,767 3,780 3,640 Total w15% Principal Interest Total Overlevy Balance 2012 Certificates Issued 250,000 2013 75,000 19,167 94,167 98,875 175,000 4,708 2014 85,000 7,000 92,000 96,600 90,000 4,600 2015 90,000 3,600 93,600 98,280 0 4,680 Totals 250,000 29,767 279,767 293,755 Future Levy Impact: 2013 Certificates Total w /5% Principal Interest Total Overlevy Balance 2013 Certificates Issued 250,000 2014 75,000 19,167 94,167 98,875 175,000 4,708 2015 85,000 7,000 92,000 96,600 90,000 4,600 2016 90,000 3,600 93,600 98,280 0 4,680 Totals 250,000 29,767 279,767 293,755 Total Overlevies 2007 12,814 2008 10,952 2009 12,696 2010 11,474 2011 12,215 2012 12,227 2013 12,128 2014 12,948 2015 9,280 2016 4,680 CI -22 • • • 2006 Certificate 2007 Certificate 2008 Certificate 2009 Certificate 2010 Certificate 2011 Certificate 2012 Certificate Debt Levy Equip Levy Total Levy Annual Change in Levy New Certificates Issued CITY OF LINO LAKES 2009 -2013 Financial Plan Capital Equipment Replacement Financing Schedule Police, Fire, Public Works & Parks 2009 2010 2011 120,698 62,948 82,975 2012 2013 60,349 81,732 80,808 98,875 96,600 98,280 75,333 79,380 76,440 79,100 79,380 98,875 266,620 240,956 252,741 256,760 254,695 200,000 200,000 250,000 250,000 275,000 466,620 440,956 502,741 506,760 529,695 (50,537) (25,664) 61,786 4,019 22,935 250,000 200,000 200,000 250,000 250,000 Equipment Replacement Fund Balance 1/1 Certificates /Levy Unused 5% Overlevy Scheduled Purchases Public Services Police Fire Other Equipment (Engineering, Inspect) Sale of Used Vehicles (Salvage) Interest Income @ 3% 2009 121,841 450,000 12,696 ($293,000) (75,000) (69,000) 12,000 4,786 2010 164,323 400,000 11,474 2011 2012 91,976 60,967 450,000 500,000 12,215 12,227 2013 128,434 525,000 ($333,000) ($317,500) ($292,000) ($342,000) (100,000) (127,500) (102,000) (104,000) (69,500) (70,000) (70,500) (71,000) 16,000 2,679 20,000 16,000 16,000 1,776 3,741 4,573 Balance 12/31 164,323 91,976 60,967 128,434 157,007 COMPUTER REPLACEMENT SCHEDULE City Hall Desktop /Laptop Workstations l0u FA8 LIFE EST COST PURCH 2009 TO BE REPLACED 2010 2011 2012 2013 1 Marty Aslesen LLWS28 NA 4 YRS 2/2/2005 1,500 * * 2 Paul Bengtson LLWS27 NA 4 YRS 2/2/2005 1500 * * 3 Julie Bartell LLWS11 LLPW06 4 YRS 4/17/2006 1,500 * 4 Dawn Bugpe LLWS25 LLPW01 4 YRS 4/10/2004 1,500 1,500 * * 5 Mary Bumside LLWS19 LLPW07 4 YRS 4/17/2006 1,500 * 6 Tonya LLWS17 LLPW05 4 YRS 2/7/2007 1,500 * 7 Carol Danielson LLWSO4 LLPW04 4 YRS 4/17/2006 1,500 * 8 Rick Degardner LLWS18 NA 4 YRS 2/7/2007 1500 * 9 Mary Alice Divine LLWS15 4 YRS 5/17/2003 1,500 * $ 1.688 10 Mary Fogarty LLWS21 4 YRS 3/26/2004 1,500 * 11 Lynn Francis LLWS03 4 YRS 12/19/2006 1,500 * 12 Lynn Francis -OLD LLWS01 NA 1/10/2002 13 Michael Grochala LLWS14 4 YRS 4/10/2004 1,500 * 14 Gordon Heitke LLMOBILED1 4 YRS 1/29/2004 2,500 * 15 Lisa Hogstad LLWS24 4 YRS 11/11/2005 1,500 * * 16 Brian Hronski LLWS23 4 YRS 11/21/2005 1,500 * * 17 Pete Kluegel LLWSO8 INHERIT 3/7/2000 18 Joyce Lund LLWS06 10/6/2005 10/6/2005 1,500 * * 19 Patrick Moonen LLWS26 INHERIT 2/2/2001 20 Al Rolek LLWS31 4 YRS 6!7/2005 1,500 * * 21 Vern Rylander LLWS02 INHERIT 4/30/1999 22 Paula Schloer LLWS05 4 YRS 1/23/2004 1,500 * 23 Jeff Smyser LLWS16 4 YRS 4/10/2004 1,500 * 24 Engineering Asst LLWS13 INHERIT 1/18/2000 25 Jim Studenskl LLWS32 4 YRS 6/17/2005 1,500 * * 26 Dan Tesch LLWS07 4 YRS 5/17/2003 1,500 * 27 Jean Vlger LLWS33 4 YRS 6/17/2005 1,500 * * 28 Chris Winter LLWS12 INHERIT 1/28/2003 29 Georgia Wot jer LLWS29 4 YRS 11/14/2005 1,500 * * 30 Sandy Wood LLWS22 4 YRS 12/6/2004 1,500 * 31 Utility Phone Read NA - 2/7/2007 32 Admin Laptop LLMOBILE02 4 YRS 1/1/2004 2,500 * 33 Utility Laptop LLMOBILE03 - 12/30/2003 34 Utirrty AutoVu Laptop LLMOBILE04 - 4/2007 File Servers File Servers 35 Finance Server LLAPP1 4 YRS 4/10/2006 4,000 * 36 Main Server LLFS1 4 YRS 7/12/2006 4,000 * TOTAL UNITS ESTIMATED COST 9 6 4 8 9 $ 13,905 $ 14,853 $ 6,556 $ 15,757 $ 15,650 Public Works FA LIFE PURCH EST COST TO BE REPLACED 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 37 P/R Open Workstation NA INHERIT 2/2/2001 38 Kay Stansberry NA - 12/2/2003 39 Tim Budig LLPW06 INHERIT 1/2002 40 Tom DeWolte LLPW01 4 YRS 9/23/2004 1,500 * 41 Tim Hillesheim LLPW07 INHERIT 1/28/2002 42 Mike Hoffman LLPW05 INHERIT 1/2002 43 Tim Payne LLPW04 INHERIT 1/28/2003 44 Les Rydeen NA - 10/2002 TOTAL UNITS ESTIMATED COST 1 $ 1.688 CI -24 • • • PRINTERS Office Equipment Replacement Schedule FA# LIFE PURCHASED COST TO BE REPLACED 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Hp Laserjet 4000 - Sandy W 714 8 YRS 10/12/1998 $ 1,592.18 Hp Laserjet 4000 - Joyce L 746 8 YRS 2/18/1999 $ 1,586.86 * Epson Receipt Printer - Admin Recept 756 10 YRS 4/12/1999 $ 679.04 * HP Laserjet 8150DN - Network 1596 6 YRS 12/24/2001 $ 3,247.19 HP Laserjet 4100 - Georgia W 1679 8 YRS 2/14/2002 $ 1,072.97 * Kyocera -Mita 5530 Scanner /Copier - Network 7 YRS 8/15/2002 $ 21,202.76 * HP LaserJet 4250TN - Burster room 6 YRS 3/31/2006 $ 1,570.88 * Ricoh Aficio 2060 Copier /scanner /printer - Network 7 YRS 5/2006 $ 17,531.00 * Konika Color C250 Copier /scanner /printer - Network 6 YRS 5/2006 $ 7,220.00 * Ricoh Aficio MP 3500 Copier - Parks & Rec 7 YRS 3/23/2007 $ 8,269.73 Hp Laserjet 5ssi - Network 461 INHERITED WILL NOT REPLACE 2/22 /1999 $ 4,600.19 Minolta DeskLaser 6100 - Color - Network 1564 12/23/2000 $ 2,757.99 TO BE REPLACED OTHER EQUIPMENT OVER $1,000.00 FA# LIFE PURCHASED COST 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2 -Way Radio - - Pitney Bowes Postage Machine - copy room 10 YRS 10/14/2007 $ 5,276.01 Panasonic OF -560 Fax- copy room 583 10 YRS 1/7/1998 $ 1,890.18 NEC LT156 Projector 1595 8 YRS 10/8/2001 $ 3,924.53 Xerox Copier - Public Works 10 YRS 12/28/2005 $ 2,908.52 Neopost Folder/Sorter /Stuffier - Burster room 10 YRS 2/2006 $ 8,571.44 Apollo Overhead Projector - - Office Equipment Replacement Fund 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Balance 1/1 189,214 72,977 87,396 109,015 110,534 Levy/Transfers - General Fund 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 Transfers - Water /Sewer Fund 3,000 2,000 Scheduled Purchases Computers (13,905) (14,853) (6,556) (17,445) (15,650) Office Equipment (29,458) (1,273) - (11,255) (21,561) Other- Financial Software (100,000) - - - Interest Income @ 3% 2,126 2,546 3,175 3,219 2,950 Balance 12/31 72,977 87,396 109,015 110,534 101,273 • • CI -26 • • WS -6 WORK SESSION MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and City Council From: Al Rolek Date: November 3, 2008 Re: Utility Rates — Set Public Hearing cc: In June, 2007 the City Council authorized the preparation of a utility rate study to be done in coordination with the Water Management and Conservation Plan being prepared by the City engineers. The results of the study, which were originally presented to Council in October, 2007, recommended a conservation rate schedule to encourage citizens and businesses to conserve this vital natural resource. State law also requires that water conservation measures, including a conservation rate schedule, be implemented and be in compliance with state regulations before requesting approval to construct new wells or increase pumping volumes. Several questions were raised by Council and staff relative to relative to the rate structure. Our consultants then reviewed and revised their recommendations and presented them in a final report to the Council in April, 2008. The City Council formally accepted the report in May, 2008 (copy attached). Staff is now beginning the process to approve the new water rate schedule. An information brochure is planned to inform water customers of the new schedule, how it would impact the average customer, and a public hearing will be scheduled to take public comment, after which it is intended that the new schedule would be approved. Staff would recommend implementing the schedule on January 1, 2009. Staff is requesting Council direction relative to moving forward with the recommended schedule. Due to some opposition on the Council to the suggested rate schedule, further clarification is needed. If Council consensus is to move forward with the recommended schedule, the materials would be mailed in November with a public hearing at the 2nd meeting in November. If further revisions are required, the revisions would be made in November /December and the informational materials would be mailed in early January with a late January hearing. Staff is looking forward to a resolution to this question. Page 1 • Amendment to Final Report Dated October 1, 2007 City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota April 25, 2008 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL April 25, 2008 Mayor Bergeson & City Council Members Gordon Heitke, City Administrator City of Lino Lakes 600 Town Center Parkway Lino Lakes, M innesota 5501.4 -1182 Springsted Incorporated 380 Jackson Street, Suite 300 Saint Paul, MN 55101 -2887 Tel: 651 - 223 -3000 Fax: 651-223-3002 wm.springsted.com Re: AMENDMENT TO: Water and Wastewater Utility Rate Study — Dated October 1, 2007 Dear Mayor Bergeson, City Council Members & Mr. Heitke: Following the April 7, 2008 City Council work session, Springsted Incorporated was instructed to amend the Water and Wastewater Utility Rate Study, dated October 1, 2007 to reflect changes in our recommended water conservation rate structure. This amendment provides the revised water rate structure and explains the basis for our recommendations. Again, we appreciate the opportunity to conduct the Water and Wastewater Utility Rate Study for the City of Lino Lakes and appreciate the time and effort put forth by City staff to assist us in this endeavor. Respectfully submitted, Terri S- featon. Terri Heaton, Senior Vice President Client Representative lev • • • • Based on discussions following the submission of the Water. and Wastewater Utility Rate Study dated October 1, 2007, we have developed a revised water conservation rate structure. The revised structure includes separate blocks and rates for residential and non- residential customers. In addition, separate blocks were created for non- residential domestic /processed and irrigation use. The goal of the revised rate structure is to encourage conservation by reducing excessive irrigation use, while being mindful that much of the non - residential domestic water use is non- discretionary. The first step in configuring the block rate structure was to determine discretionary vs. non- discretionary (irrigation) use among residential and non- residential customers. This involved reviewing detailed consumption records provided by the City. Below are some highlights on past water use in the City: Winter water use (Quarter 1, 2006 data) • The average residential winter water use was 16,072 gallons in quarter 1 of 2006 and 15,901 in quarter 1 of 2007. • 98.6% of residential users used 40,000 gallons or less (98.7% in quarter 1 of 2007). • Only 52 customers (1.4% of users), used more than 40,000 gallons (53 in quarter 1 of 2007). • 95.3% of residential users used 30,000 gallons or less (95.0% in quarter 1 of 2007). • 181 customers (4.7% of users), used more than 30,000 gallons (201 in quarter 1 of 2007). Winter water use is a good indicator of non - discretionary water use. As shown above, 98.6% of all residential users consumed less than 40,000 gallons per quarter. Therefore, our assumption was that water consumption over 40,000 gallons per quarter is due primarily to irrigation. Summer consumption statistics include: Summer water use (Quarter 3. 2006 data) • Average residential water use is 46,700 gallons. • 43.3% of residential users use 40,000 gallons or less • 936 or 23.8% of residential. customers use 80,000 gallons or more in the summer months, which is double what 98.6% of customers use in winter. • 247 or 6.7% of residential. customers use 120,000 gallons or more in the summer months, which is triple what 98.6% of customers use in winter. The city's goal of 75 gallons per capita daily would equate to 20,250 gallons/quarter for a 3- person household, or 40,500 gallons /quarter for a six - person household. AMENDMENT TO: Water and Wastewater Utility Flate Study — Dated October 1, 2007 2 These statistics helped form the lower two blocks in our proposed rate structure. • In addition, the following assumptions were made in determining the revised rate structure: • Revenue requirements are $1,150,000. Revenue includes only charges for consumption and does not include the flat $10 per residential equivalent unit (REU), hook -up charges, or water meter sales. • Lino Lakes Public Service Department provided Springsted with 2006 water usage data by quarter for all non- residential accounts with one meter. In order to differentiate between domestic and irrigation use, it is assumed that all water consumed in quarters 3 and 4 that was above their maximum use in quarters 1 and 2 is for irrigation. • Non - residential users that currently have only one meter will install a second deduct meter to avoid paying residential rates. After reviewing the 2006 quarterly usage data for each non - residential account with one meter, if it was determined the customer does not use irrigation water, the revenue for these accounts were calculated using the non - residential domestic block rates. • For non - residential accounts that already have two meters, the data provided by Lino Lakes Public Service Department distinguished domestic and irrigation water consumption; therefore, no assumptions were required to differentiate between domestic and irrigation water use. • The rate structure would promote conservation, thereby decreasing excessive water use. o There would be a 20% reduction in residential water use (based on 2006 consumption data) for all water consumed over 40,000 /quarter. o There would be a 40% reduction in non - residential irrigation use over 40,000 gallons in quarters 3 and 4, the primary quarters irrigation would occur. • Irrrigation of city parks was factored in at the irrigation rate blocks. The tables below show the proposed blocks and rates for residential and non- residential. domestic /processed and irrigation water consumption. The gallons shown are based on 2006 consumption and reduced for the assumed conservation rates — 20% for residential water use over 40,000 gallons per quarter; 40% for non-residential. irrigation over 40,000 gallons in quarters 3 and 4. Please note that the residential blocks include both domestic /processed and irrigation use, while the non - residential domestic /processed and irrigation blocks are separate. Therefore, the last three blocks under residential use are higher than those charged to the non - residential accounts for domestic /processed use because it is assumed the residential use falling in the last three blocks is primarily for irrigation, while the non - residential use falling in the last three blocks is needed to support operations. AMENDMENT TO: Water and Wastewater Utility Rate Study - Dated October t, 2007 • RESIDENTIAL Blocks Rates Gallons Revenue 0 - 20,000 $1.80 100,613,000 $ 181,103 21,000 - 40,000 $2.00 117,598,000 $ 235,196 41,000 - 80,000 $2.50 93,478,000 $ 233,694 81,000 - 120,000 $3.00 60,746,000 $ 182,237 > 120,000 $3.50 45,074,000 $ 157,760 Total 417,509,000 $ 989,991 NON - RESIDENTIAL DOMESTIC Blocks Rates Gallons Revenue 0 - 20,000 $1.80 1,772,000 $ 3.190 21,000 - 40.000 $2.00 1,926,000 $ 3,852 >40,000 $2.25 36,425.000 $ 81.956 Total 40,123,000 $ 88,998 NON - RESIDENTIAL IRRIGATION Blocks Rates Gallons Revenue 0 - 40,000 $2.50 1,788,000 $ 4,470 40,000 - 80,000 $3.00 1,442,000 $ 4,326 > 80,000 $3.50 18,812,800 $ 65,845 Total 22,042,800 $ 74,641 Based on the proposed blocks, rates, and conservation assumptions, the total estimated revenue is $1,153,629. The following tables summarize the projected changes in consumption. patterns and the net effect on revenues as well as the projected impact on various customer types. Based on 2006 Water Use (less conservation estimates)- Lino Lakes, MN Residential Domestic and Irrigation Water Use Non - Residential 1 -Meter (estimated) Domestic Irrigation Proposed Blocks & Rates Gallons Revenue 417.508.600 $ 989,991 Total Non- Residential 1 -Meter Non - Residential 2- Meters (actual) Domestic Irrigation Total Non - Residential 2- Meters TOTAL Residential and Non - Residential 9,234,000 $ 5,888.600 $ 15,122,600 $ 30,889,000 $ 16,154,200 $ 47,043,200 $ 479,674,400 .$' 20,083 19,854 39,937 2006 Blocks & Rates Gallons Revenue 461,228,000 $ 812,385 17,803.000 $ 36,520 Change in Revenue Percent Change 177,606 21.9% 17,803,000 $ 36,520 $ 3,417 9.4% 68,915 30.889,000 $ 54,787 25,505,000 $ 123,702 56,394,000 $ 153;629 535,425,000 $ 63,558 $ 5,358 52.489 $ 2,297 116.047 $ 7,655 964,952 5 188,678 8.4% 4.4% 6.6% 19.6% AMENDMENT TO `hater and Wastewater Utility Rate Study - Dated October 1, 2007 3 0 a) E a? 0 O co O o a o ra a) °) can 0 0 .-5-' N il-� M ,O ,O ..O .O gO .O �O .O .O .O 'O .O ' O C Q,} O 0 N--- CO 0) (f N CO c- d- 0) CO CO v- N 0 a .Q sV. tU d' co O) tf) 0) ) CO 0) (f) CO d' 0.7 ,... R% C) .L p U o) d V 0) co E o o o o v.. o s 06 L C) N N •r• 0) •- ti <- N ,- O N- 0 N O CO 0 U O CO N • 69 69 d' CO 4fi LO CO tti 69 d' (J- d 0) Eft 69 •-• d' d3. ,Q 69 d 69 69 N 69 N (f) CF} 69 y i 6o H T E9 Q U, o o L. as . as E m O- co or C o '6 N co co 0) (n 0 0 — 0) (n CO — N CO 0 ti (0 (0 O OV q C) G) * l, N- LO d' CO CO CO N N- d (O h- 0 69 'd' CO V' 63 •fi u} t0 U) '"'' 69 63 N — �- CO 69 — t- (0 1 69 69 (O i; 0 69 O 69 E9 69 63 63 H3 69 69 o '-(7. p Q 2 69 () a) O 0. `O 0 v o $- 4 0 CO U) d' d- Nom- d' V- 0) d' N. (Y) ti N (0 N O (0 (.C) CO O ON a Z O 0 d' r` .-- CO LO N r LC) � O (C) CO 63 d' N 0) 6• Q) 0 C3 '" 64 69 N O T- t- CO ‘Zr 69 c- <-- 0) O) 69 69 10 (ti 0 69 69 69 69 ff} if3 69 b9 69 Q CL 6Ft O E Q cn co E o ct) i Q CO 0 0 4t U) in d 0) d- r` ti CO CO 0) CO CO CO < CO. d CO < 0' a N d 0 h---. CO 0) CO to N. CO om N .- 0) N O 0) N t) Z z o N 0 fl 0 0 0 -0 S. = N a) a) g) o (0 't b (0 D ci) o o a) co > . -, a) a) or N Q .� D a) fi O v) o 0 -0 o a) co w., c a) 0) a co � > .- E zo riddh2 o va'i D D a) �`.t o e Q F— U cn Cis O 4 > °7 n3 0 Co (� (o Co •U ,V C ' 3 •V o ' U co U c > U c `� .L Q C. 2 '� . r in c `- m o cz v 0 o 0 o ` w a ■ u a , in o o 03 co cu i'ii tY Cr U O c c Q CL U CO ,..:E U r- ni Account Type and Use AMENDMENT TO: Water and Wastewater Utility Rate Study — Dated October 1 0 • • Projected Bills for Households of Various Sizes Consumption Consumption Bill at Bill at Quarterly Quarterly Persons per 75 Quarterly Current Proposed $ % Household gpcd Use Rates Block Rates Increase Difference 2 75 13,500 $ 23.90 $ 24.30 $ 0.40 e, 1.67% 3 75 20,250 $ 35.84 $ 36.50 $ 0.66 1.84% 4 75 27,000 $ 47.79 $ 50.00 $ 2.21 4.62% 5 75 33,750 $ 60.86 $ 63.50 $ 2.64 4.34% 6 75 40,500 $ 74.84 $ 77.25 $ 2.41 3.22% Other Considerations The City may want to consider extraordinary cases in determining rates to individual customers or blocks of customers. For example, residential swimming pools or commercial greenhouses can be assessed at the domestic or irrigation block rates. A. review of the 2006 consumption data shows that one customer used approximately 2.95 million and 3.67 million gallons of water in the third and forth quarters, respectively. These extraordinary cases should be reviewed to ensure the new rates are applied fairly and consistently. AMENDMENT TO: Water and Wastewater Utility Rate Study — Dated October 1, 2007 • • • WS — Item 8 WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT Work Session Item 8 Date: November 3, 2008 To: City Council From: Gordon Heitke Re: Review of Citizen Awareness Plan Elements Background The City Council, at its September 22, 2008 work session, agreed to various elements of a citizen awareness plan to provide factual information to voters related to the charter amendment referendum. Council members O'Donnell and Stoltz have submitted requests to have this issue placed on the next (Nov. 3) work session. Requested Council Direction Placed on agenda by council members' request, no direction being requested by staff at this time. Attachments 1. September 22, 2008 minutes regarding elements of the Citizen Awareness Plan 2. Springsted memo on remaining survey element 1 • • • CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION SEPTEMBER 22, 2008 APPROVED 90 A special edition of the city newsletter was discussed. Mr. Deets recommends that if a 91 newsletter is done it shouldn't be a passive effort - it is very important to make sure that a 92 newsletter gets to every home in enough time. Utilizing a cheaper mailing option such as 93 bulk rate may not be an option. 94 95 The council discussed the cost of mailing a newsletter. Deb Barnes, Editor of The Citizen 96 added that the paper has approached both the city (through Administrator Heitke) and the 97 Charter Commission offering to run side by side pieces on the charter amendment issue. 98 That would be a lower cost method of getting information into homes, although that 99 newspaper doesn't serve the entire city. 100 101 The council directed Mr. Deets to formulate a communication plan proposal that consists 102 of a moderate to reasonable up front information campaign combined with the exit poll in 103 case it doesn't pass. The up front campaign should include a special edition of the city 104 newsletter. 105 106 The council recessed at 6:30 p.m. to the regular council meeting. 107 108 The work session was reconvened at 7:15 p.m. 109 110 Mr. Deets and reviewed his recommendations for a communication plan based on the 111 council's direction. With the goal of educating and actively engaging people in the issue, 112 he recommends the following: 113 a) a special edition eight -page newsletter (mailing on the l6`' of October); the 114 council can review the content (including balance) of the newsletter at the work session 115 on October 6; 116 b) newsletter content goes to the city Website; 117 c) key content from the newsletter will be run in an ad in the community papers; 118 d) an opinion piece that comes from the community; 119 e) an exit poll done quickly after the election by the Springsted Center for Public 120 Research, normally accomplished by phone utilizing a voter data base from either this 121 year's election or a previous election depending on what is available quickly. The exit 122 poll won't be done if the amendment passes. 123 124 Economic Development Coordinator Divine was identified as the city contact person for 125 the communication effort. 126 127 The meeting was adjourned at 7:40 p.m. 128 129 These minutes were considered, corrected and approved at the regular Council meeting held on 130 131 132 133 134 October 13, 2008. !-' l _ Julianne : ell, City C -rk • • • Springsted October 29, 2008 Mayor John Bergeson and City Council Mr. Gordon Heitke, City Administrator 600 Town Center Parkway Lino Lakes, MN 55014 -1182 RE: Community Survey on Referendum Results Springsted incorporated 380 Jackson Street, Suite 300 Saint Paul, MN 55101-2887 Tel: 651- 223 -3000 Fax: 651 - 223'3002 N.w '.springsted.cOmT`:. Springsted proposes developing, conducting, analyzing, and reporting a statistically valid community survey for the City of Lino Lakes ( "City "). I am confident that data obtained from such a survey will provide valuable information to assist the City in evaluating the referendum outcome, including current perceptions, and the reasons voters made the choices they did. This information will assist the City with planning for the future. Springsted's proposal is done in collaboration with the Center for Community Opinion, which has done extensive scientific polling for cities, school groups, libraries, community colleges, non - profits, and businesses. Each survey is preceded by careful background research and attention to detail as survey questions are developed. The results and analysis provide valuable information that promotes sound decision - making in areas such as policy development, market planning and campaign strategy. We recommend that a survey based on 300 completed interviews using a questionnaire that includes a maximum of 30 questions. This length should provide you with sufficient capacity to pursue a range of topics. The margin of error achieved with 300 interviews provides an acceptable level of precision for the purposes of your study. The basic features of such a survey would be: 300 interviews and up to 30 questions Re.istered voters livin within the Cit +1- 4' %% with a 95% confidence level. 10 to 12 minutes Available from questions asked and from voter file Written report and graphic presentation of resultsl $12,363 plus $ 750 for consultation, travel, and miscellaneous City of Lino Lakes Survey, October 29, 2008 Page 2 We are available to further discuss this further at your convenience. Sincerely, 7.;247 o. _e4,6,0 Terri Heaton Senior Vice President Attachment Cc: Mr. Alan Rolek, Finance Director Mr. Michael Grochala, Community Development Director Ms. Mary Divine, Economic Development Specialist • • • • WS — Item 9 WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT Work Session Item #9 Date: November 3, 2008 To: City Council From: Julie Bartell Re: City Code Update Background The Lino Lakes City Code, the regulations of the city, has not been updated since 1993. The council has established a 2008 goal to update the code. Currently, the City Code is maintained in the form of a three -ring binder into which staff inserts ordinances as they are approved by the city council. A portion of the code update project is to have that code book reprinted to include all changes since 1993. In addition, staff would like to join the vast majority of Minnesota cities and also maintain an on -line city code, accessible from the city's Web page. This type of access to city regulations is now widely expected by interested citizens, the city's legal counsel, the police department and the larger community in general. The process of updating the code has involved the following steps: • The city hired a code company who prepared a draft code that includes all changes since 1993 and whose legal staff advised the city on changes to bring the code up to date (mainly with state law); • Department directors were asked to review and approve portions of the draft code that relate to their responsibilities along with the legal editorials. In general, directors were advised that policy issues that will require more extensive review and consideration by the council shouldn't be included in a recodification project but rather should be brought forward for individual consideration; • The city clerk inserted all changes into the draft code document for review by the council. 1 • • • Note that the update project does not include the land use or shoreland and flood plain management sections of the code at this time. Those regulations will be updated following completion of the comprehensive plan review. Requested Council Direction Staff is presenting a draft updated city code to the council; changes to the code along with brief explanations when appropriate are denoted in red. It is recommended that the council begin to review this document. Staff intends to review all changes with the council, with a more in depth presentation on certain areas where there are substantive or policy driven changes. Eventually, the draft code must be adopted by the council to become effective. Staff has prepared a tentative schedule indicating the remaining steps to the code update project. The schedule along with the draft code document will be distributed at the work session. 2 • • WS — Item 10 WORK SESSION STAFF REPORT Work Session Item 10 Date: November 3, 2008 To: City Council From: Mary Alice Divine Re: Economic Development Meeting Background One of the City Council's goals for 2008 -2009 is to "Diversify, Expand and Enhance the City's Tax Base." (See attached goal.) The first objective was to prepare, approve and carry out an economic development strategy to implement the Economic Development portion of the Comprehensive Plan. The draft Comprehensive Plan, with a section on Economic Development, is now under consideration by the Council. Based upon the outcome of this first objective, the council then wanted to determine the role that the Economic Development Advisory Committee (EDAC) would play in carrying out that strategy. A key action step was to meet with EDAC to clearly define the council's economic development objectives and EDAC's role in meeting those objectives. Another council action step was to establish a communication procedure so EDAC can better understand the correlation between EDAC recommendations and council's development decisions. A meeting date to discuss these issues was to be determined by the city council in the fourth quarter of 2008. EDAC has been meeting monthly since 1993. Members are appointed based on their skills and experience in financial, real estate and economic development fields. Since its inception, EDAC has developed five -year economic development plans which are broad brush goals, and a one -year action plan designed to implement those goals. In 2008, EDAC determined that it would be appropriate to wait until the Comp Plan was complete and then revisit both the five -year plan and one -year action plan, using the new Comp Plan as guidance. 1 Members have changed over the years, as well as economic development objectives and market forces. During that time, EDAC has questioned its role and its value as an advisory group to the Council. Dialogue with the City Council and EDAC as it moves through the Comp Plan approval process would satisfy this Council goal and provide EDAC with direction as it begins developing its plans in 2009. Requested Council Direction Staff requests input from the City Council regarding a meeting with EDAC to discuss with the group the Council's economic development goals, policies and strategies, and Council's expectations of EDAC's as an advisory committee to the Council. Attachment(s) 1. Council Goal No. 5: Diversify, expand and enhance the city's tax base 2 • • • 0 5. Goal: Diversify, expand, and enhance the city's tax base • • a. Specific Performance Objectives to be completed during 2008 (1) Objective: Based upon the outcomes presented in the approved updated Comprehensive Plan, develop specific city council guidance for economic development in support of the Comprehensive Plan; i.e., what does the city council want to achieve with regards to economic development, how does it propose that the city proceed and who should be involved? (This guidance should define the parameters in which staff is to operate in response to economic development opportunities /inquiries brought forth by developers and businesses) (Fourth Quarter 2008) a. Key Action Steps: i. Prepare, approve, and carry out an economic development strategy as an implementation action of the Comprehensive Plan. b. Lead Parties: Community Development Staff Key Contributors: Key guidance provided by City Council at a work session(s) to be scheduled, with possible assistance of: Comprehensive Plan Advisory Panel Planning and Zoning Board Economic Development Advisory Board Economic Development Consultants Development Sector c. Funding Source: General Fund — CD Budget / Economic Development Budget STATUS: Pending Completion of Comprehensive Plan (2) Objective: Based upon the outcome of Objective 1, determine the role city council wishes for the Economic Development Advisory Commission (EDAC) (Fourth Quarter 2008) a. Key Action Steps: i. Meet jointly with EDAC to clearly define council's economic development objectives and EDAC's role in meeting those objectives ii. Establish a communication procedure so EDAC can better understand the correlation between EDAC recommendations and council's economic development decisions b. Lead Parties: Key Contributors: Community Development Staff Key guidance provided by City Council at a work session(s) to be scheduled, EDAC. c. Funding Source: General Fund — CD and Economic Development (Staff Time) STATUS: Meeting date needs to be determined by council. b. Specific Performance Objectives for Calendar Year 2009 (1) Objective: Continue with developing city council guidance on the Economic Development Plan that will be established in support of the adopted Comprehensive Plan (Ongoing) a. Key Action Steps: i. Complete any work remaining from 2008, prepare any needed refinements or updates to economic development strategy ii. Re- evaluate EDAC 5 -year plan to determine if it remains relevant to current Comp Plan and Council's economic development goals iii. Provide input into EDAC development of its 1 -year action plan iv. Adopt EDAC's economic development plans b. Lead Parties: Community Development Staff Key Contributors: Key guidance provided by City Council, with possible assistance of Economic Development Advisory Board, Economic Development Consultants, Developers c. Funding Source: General fund — CD Budget, Contingency • • •