Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/20/1982 Council Minutes276 Special Council Meeting December 20, 1982 A special meeting of the Lino Lakes City Council was called to order at 7:30 P.M., December 20, 1982 by Mayor Benson with all Council members present. Mr. Schumacher, Mr. Bill Short, Mr. Dave Liddle of Dain Bosworth was also present. Mayor Benson opened the Public Hearing on the Mortgage Revenue Bonds /Housing Plan at 7:33 P.M. Mayor Benson requested Mr. Schumacher to explain the process which he did. He then turned the meeting over to Mr. Dave Liddle of Dain Bosworth. Mr. Liddle noted that this public hearing is for the purpose of considering a housing plan which is different from the housing program. The housing plan sets forth the types of housing that will be needed to fill the requirements of this City now and in the future. This housing plan has been submitted to the Metropolitan Council for their review. Mr. Liddle noted that they make comments on this plan but has no bearing on the review by the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency. The recommendations, if made by Metropolitan Council, may not be considered by the MHFA. There are several areas in which the City must conform, according to MHFA, but the comments of the Metropolitan Council is not one of the areas. Mr. Liddle outlined the process - consideration of the housing plan at this meeting, a public hearing on December 27, 1982 on the housing program, the two are then submitted to the MHFA for consideration. This must be submitted on or before the 2nd of January. They meet on the third Thursday of the Month an d this submission will be considered at that time. Mayor Benson asked Mr. Liddle to explain the difference between the Housing plan and the housing program. Mr. Liddle said the housing plan is the part of the Comprehensive Plan which sets out the situation as of the time the plan was prepared, the needs to be filled over the coming years, the lacking in the housing to fill those needs, the goals established and the manner in which this may be accomplished. The program becomes a specific document as to how the City will achieve one of the goals of the plan. Mr. Kulaszewicz noted that two of the developments are outside the urban service district, does this have any bearing on the MFHA's consideration of the housing program? Mr. Liddle said if Metropolitan Council said we like three of the developments and not two, does this have any effect on the City getting the monies? Mr. Liddle said in his review of State Law indicates that this would have no effect whatsoever. State Law states that MFHA has about four things that can look at and that is the limit and nothing refers to the comments of Metropolitan Council's review. It cannot be denied on the basis of Metropolitan Council's comments. Mr. Schumacher asked as what point in time does the 4% have to be deposited and Mr. Liddle must be submitted shortly before bond closing. Mr. Liddle said a letter from the developers stating the amount of the monies they will be using and indicating that 4% of that amount is on deposit or available. Mayor Benson asked if 4% is an adequate amount and Mr. Liddle said it is a realistic amount, but whether it is enough to obtain these funds, he didn't know. There is only 27.5 million dollars for the seven county metro area and there 5 issuers have asked for 47.5 million dollars, so someone is going to be disappointed. Mr. Liddle felt that 4 or 5% is a realistic figure, any more than that, and it is not a good use Special Council Meeting December 20, 1982 �. of their money. There was discussion on the ability to change this figure and Mr. Liddle said it could be adjusted, either up or down. Mr. Liddle said this hearing is on the housing plan and the figure of percentage need not be considered tonight. This will be in the housing program. Mr. Marier asked if Mr. Liddle represents Lino Lakes? Mr. Liddle said he had been retained by the City of Lino Lakes to assist in the preparation of the housing plan and program. Once the preparation of the bond sale, then he bills the dollar amount. Mr. Marier asked what happens if any of the developers do not follow through - who is responsible for those bonds? Mr. Liddle said Dain Bosworth purchases the bonds and reoffers them for sale. The City has no financial responsibility in this program. Mayor Benson asked Mr. Short for his comment. Mr. Short noted that the housing plan is out of the Comprehensive Plan as updated. There has been a housing policy added. He read this addition. Under implementation Number 5 had been added to relate to the Mortgage Revenue Bonds. Mr. Short reported that the Human Resources Committee had reviewed this today and had recommended a) amend the bond plan to indicate that the funds would only be used in the 1990 urban service area. Mr. Short said they have asked what effect does this review have on the consideration of this by the MHFA and they have not received an answer and according to law, it should not have any influence whatsoever. Mr. Kulaszewicz asked if other smaller developers could be included in this program in the urban service district. Mr. Short agreed, this is one of the recommendations. There has been some discussion in this area but no commitments at this point in time. Mr. Liddle said this is an allowable operation and can be done at any time, either before or after the bond sale. Mr. Short was asked about the qualifications for persons who would be in the market for these homes. Mr. Short explained the 80% level of income would be approximately $25,000.00. This is a modest income level. Mr. Liddle said the State sets up the income level. The price of the home they can purchase to include the house, lot and all necessary structures to make the house livable. There was discussion on the limits of income, the limit of the cost of the home and who can qualify. Mr. Reinert asked if there was any control the Council has as to where these homes are to be constructed and Mr. Liddle said, there are none at this time, but he felt this could be done. Mr. Liddle said it is not necessary to have this in the program, he would suggest this be done at a later date. Mr. Liddle pointed out the Council could approve the plan tonight, could approve the program next week, and the money is allocated, this Council may decide not to go forward and cancell the entire program. There was a question as to the cost of Mr. Liddle's services and Mr. Liddle said the City is not responsible for his fees and the City has no obligation to him. Mr. Marier asked what the negotiations with the developers as to the responsibilities of the City and Mr.. Schumacher said the developers have agreed to pay all the expenses. Mr. Marier asked if this was in writing and Mr. Schumacher said, No. Mr. Marier questioned Mr. Short's time - this, too, is to be paid by the developers. ?78 Special Council Meeting December 20, 1982 Mr. Al Ross, from the audience, asked if the City could require a garage to be constructed with these homes. Mr. Short noted that the Task Force is not requiring a garage in the current zoning Ordinance. Mayor Benson closed the Public Hearing at 8:30 P.M. Jeff Joyer, from the audience, agreed that the developers would pay all costs involved in this program regardless of the outcome. Mrs. Elsenpeter moved to adopt the Housing Plan as submitted. Seconded by Mr. Marier. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Reinert moved that before the next hearing Mr. Short and Mr. Schumacher create a distribution plan on a prorated basis. Seconded by Mr. Marier. Motion carried unanimous ly . Mr. Marier moved that a contract be presented from the developers in respect to assuming all costs of this program. Seconded by Mr. Kulaszewicz. Motion carried unanimous ly . A recess was called at this point in the meeting. The meeting reconvened at 8:58 P.M. The Public Hearing on the final budget was called to order at 8:58 P.M. Mayor Benson asked Mr. Schumacher to discuss the budget as had been presented to the Council. Mr. Schumacher reviewed the process of establishing the figures as presented to the Council. Mayor Benson asked about the list of expenditures - why is the Sewer and water department not listed when he has a budget for this fund? Mr. Schumacher explained this is an enterprise fund and therefore, is not included in the General Fund, as such. Mrs. Elsenpeter asked where the expenditures are listed for the anticipated deficit in that fund? Mr. Schumacher said that if the revenue of the increase that was just passed, this fund will have a three thousand surplus. Mr. Kulaszewicz asked what will be lost from the State aid for next year and Mr. Schumacher said, about $ 7000.00. Mr. Reinert felt that this latest fix of the State budget is not going to be enough. He felt that when the new administration gets into office, there will be another round of cuts. Mr. Reinert suggested looking at this budget with that in mind and anticipating some areas where this City could come up with some percentage cuts. He suggested that if there are funds available at the end of the year, some of the areas cut, could be restored. Mr. Marier agreed and asked Mr. Reinert if he had anything in mind as to the percentage and Mr. Reinert felt that perhaps somewhere between 6% to 10% in some selective areas. Mr. Marier asked if he was prepared to take each department and cut. Mr. Reinert said that a straight percentage cut across the Board was not what he meant - he had some areas to be considered. He felt that the Mayor & Council, Administration, Government Buildings, Police, and Park Department. Special Council Meeting December 20, 1982 2 t' Mr. Marier asked, if these funds become surplus, does he have a certain department where these funds are to be allocated? Mr. Reinert felt this has been discussed, he suggested the streets of the City could use a bumper. Mayor Benson added Consultants to this list. Mayor Benson asked about the $6000.00 increase in the Centerville Department Contract, why? Mr. Schumacher reported that this is the result of a very complicated formula. Mayor Benson asked if this has anything to do with the transfer of the area to that department and Mr. Schumacher said, he felt this would be equal with the reduction in the Lexington Fire Department contract. Mayor Benson felt the Building Inspections could also be reduced - also some areas in Public Works that could be reduced. Mayor Benson listed fuels and shop repairs, reduce some street signs costs, delay the purchase, also street lights. Building Inspections - fuels, be more aware of the trips made and where to - Mrs. Elsenpeter felt, that with the anticipated increase of work load with the addition of inspections in Circle Pines, there will also be additional income. There was discussion on the percentage to be cut, how this would affect the service level provided by. the City and how the public would react to this. Mr. Schumacher suggested delay on the capital improvements until there is information from the State. Mr. Marier felt that something must be done about the roads - and the patching and sealcoating type repairs should not be assessed back to the people. Mayor Benson felt that delaying some things and listed the following areas for consideration; Under Mayor & Council, eliminate $500.00 for the Task Force and $500.00 for travel and conferences - if the members want to attend the League of Minnesota Cities convention, then pay part of their expenses; $7000.00 under Administration, part of that would be salaries, part under conferences; Consultants - $6000.00; delay the computer - $6000.00; delay the squad car, breatherlizer, and look at more down time, use radar more - $20,000.00; Public Works - $4,000.00 in the area of Street signs and street lights, delay for a period, wait a little longer during snow fall; Park Department - delete $500.00 going to school recreation, and reduce the salaries $2500.00. This totals $46,000.00 - a 5.1% decrease - this would not mean a cut in salaries and basically no cut in services and wait until there is information from the state. Mr. Marier moved to approve these suggestions. Seconded by Mrs. Elsenpeter. Don pointed out that he has a file on street light requests - some of these have been delayed for two years. Mayor Benson felt that if there is another area where this money could be withheld, then the street lights could be installed. He felt that if there is money forth coming from the State, then there would be no problem. Mrs. Elsenpeter said this should be with the understanding that the items listed to be held will be reviewed for possible reinstatement and the Council agreed. Mr. Reinert asked, if we are reducing the by 5.1% or are we asking the Department heads to hold back on these items listed which constitutes 5.1% of the budget? After some discussion, the general consensus of the Council was these items will be reviewed in March and the street program for the coming year will be reviewed also. 280 Special Council Meeting December 20, 1982 The Public Hearing on the Budget was closed at 10 :44 P.M. On voting on the motion, the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Marier moved to adjourn at 10:45 P.M. Seconded by Mr. Kulaszewicz. Aye. 1983 BUDGET RECEIPTS: DISBURSEMENTS: Levy $430,631 Special Levies 116,730 State Aid 171,011 State Aid Roads 13,000 City Services 85,000 Police Receipts 69,300 Refunds & Reimbursements 15,000 Federal Revenue Sharing 29,453 Total $930,125 Mayor & Council Elections & Votes Registration Administration Assessor Legal Publication Consultants Planning & Zoning Board Charter Commission Government Buildings Police Department Fire Department Building Inspections Civil Defense Animal Control Cable TV Public Works Department Weed Inspection Park Department Park Board Members Certificate of Indebtedness Total Receipts over Disbursements, $33,848. Edna L. Sarner, Clerk- Treasurer $ 13,275 2,500 100,985 14,125 2,700 58,000 945 400 30 , 325 301,015 43,995 40 ,625 2,545 3,500 1,100 168,425 275 46,070 700 64,772 $896 ,277