Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/25/2003LAUDERDALE CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 25, 2003 CITY HALL, 7:00 P.M. The City Council is meeting as a legislative body to conduct the business of the City according to ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER AND THE STANDING RULES OF ORDER AND BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL. Unless so ordered by the Mayor, citizenjWicipation is limited to the times indicated and always within the prescribed rules of condu blic input at meetings. 10 r 1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER AT 7:00 P. M. 2. 3. ROLL: Councibneinbers: Staff McCloskey _ Gill -Gerbig _ Mayor Dains Getschow APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA Christensen Giannetti Bownik _ 4. APPROVAL A. Approval of minutes of the City Council Meeting of 11/12/03 B. Approval of claims totaling $50,517.83 5. OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA Any member of the public may speak at this time on any item NOT on the agenda. In consideration of the public attending the meeting for specific items on the agenda, this portion of the meeting will be limited to fifteen (15) minutes. Individuals are requested to limit their comments to four (4) minutes or less. If the majority of the Council determines that additional time on a specific issue is warranted, then discussion on that issue shall be continued under Additional Items at the end of the agenda. Before addressing the City Council, members of the public are asked to step up to the microphone, give their name, address and state the subject to be discussed. All remarks shall be addressed to the Council as a whole and not to any member thereof. No person other than members of the Council and the person having the floor shall be permitted to enter any discussion without permission of the presiding officer. Your participation, as prescribed by the Council's ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER AND THE STANDING RULES OF ORDER AND BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL, is welcomed and your cooperation is greatly appreciated. City of Lauderdale Council Agenda November 25, 2003 Page 2 6. CONSENT 7. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS/RECOGNITIONS/PROCLAMATIONS/ CITIZENS ADDRESSING STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS 8. INFORMATIONAL PRESENTATIONS 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS Public hearings are conducted so that the public affected by a proposal may have input into the decision. During hearings, all affected residents will be given an opportunity to speak pursuant to the ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER AND THE STANDING RULES OF ORDER AND BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL. A. Zoning Ordinance (City Code, Title 10) Amendment- building setback from shorelines 10. ACTION A. Zoning Ordinance (City Code, Title 10) Amendment- building setback from shorelines B. Approval of the 2004 Recycling Contract Extension C. Approval of the 2004 Recycling Rates D. 2004 Sanitary Sewer Rates E. 2004 Storm Water Utility Rates F. 2004 Audit and Financial Services Agreement 11. DISCUSSION A. 2004 Budget (Adoption scheduled for December 9, 2003) 12. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA 13. ADDITIONAL ITEMS 14. SET AGENDA FOR NEXT MEETING 15. ADJOURNMENT Lauderdale City Council Meeting Minutes November 12, 2003 1. Meeting called to order at 8:00 P.M. 2. ROLL Council present: Christensen, McCloskey, Gill -Gerbig, Giannetti and Mayor Dains Staff present: Administrator Getschow, Assistant to the Administrator Bownik 3. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA A. Approval of Agenda. Motion by Christensen, second by Giannetti to approve the agenda. Motion carried unanimously. 4. APPROVAL A. Approval of Minutes. Motion by Gill -Gerbig, second by McCloskey to approve the minutes of the October 28, 2003 City Council meeting. Motion carried unanimously. B. Approval of Claims totaling $15,903.65. Motion by McCloskey, second by Christensen to approve the claims totaling $15,903.65. Motion carried unanimously. C. Approval of Pay Request #7 for the 2003 Street and Utility Improvements for S.M. Hentges and Sons in the amount of $5,133.99. Motion by Giannetti, second by McCloskey to approve Pay Request #7 for the 2003 Street and Utility Improvements in the amount of $5,133.99. Motion carried unanimously. 5. OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA Lauderdale City Council Meeting Minutes, November 12, 2003 Page 2 6. CONSENT 7. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS/RECOGNITIONS/PROCLAMATIONS/ CITIZENS ADDRESSING STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS INFORMATIONAL PRESENTATIONS A. City Prosecution Presentation- Martin Costello. Martin Costello, the Lauderdale City Prosecutor with Hughes and Costello, gave a presentation to the City Council on prosecution services. The presentation included: an explanation of municipal prosecution, the duties of a municipal prosecutor, and the work of the municipal prosecutor in the City of Lauderdale. Council member McCloskey asked for Mr. Costello's thoughts on the recent news regarding the potential closure of the suburban court in Maplewood. Costello stated that he, as most municipal prosecutors; strongly favors the need for a suburban court presence. In fact, Costello hopes that the suburban court facility is not only retained, but also improved. 9. REPORTS 10. PUBLIC HEARINGS 11. ACTION A. Resolution 111203A: Resolution Certifying the Election Returns of the November 4, 2003 General Election and the November 12, 2003 Recount Results for the Office of City Council. Bownik presented the resolution canvassing the municipal election of November 4, 2003 and the requested recount of November 12, 2003 that occurred at 5:00 p.m. that day. Bownik stated that during the recount, the ballots were hand -counted by two election judges. The recount results are the same results as the machine -counted ballots from regular November 4 election- 194 votes for Karen Gill -Gerbig and 193 votes for Leanne Lemire for the second City Council position. Motion by McCloskey, second by Gill -Gerbig to approve Resolution 111203A: Resolution Certifying the Election Returns of the November 4, 2003 General Election and the November 12, 2003 Recount Results for the Office of City Council. Roll: Yes: all. Motion carried Lauderdale City Council Meeting Minutes, November 12, 2003 Page 3 B. Consideration of a revision to the Lauderdale City Code Title 6 (Motor Vehicles), Chapter I (Parking Restrictions). The City Administrator stated that there was a discussion at the October 14th City Council meeting regarding the parking of recreation vehicles, boats, etc. on the street that are over 20 feet in length. There was a discussion on whether the parking ordinance should apply to the parking of recreation vehicles, boats, etc. of all lengths on the street. The Council could not reconcile the rationale for why 20 feet is the barometer for why a recreation vehicle can or cannot be parked on the street indefinitely. Consensus at the October Council meeting was to draft an ordinance revision that includes parking regulations for all recreation vehicles and boats, not just those 20 feet and over. The Administrator stated that the draft ordinance was placed on the website for the past 2-3 weeks for informal notice and comment purposes. Motion by Gill -Gerbig, second by Giannetti to approve the included revision to the Lauderdale City Code Title 6 (Motor Vehicles), Chapter 1 (Parking Restrictions). Roll: Yes: all. Motion carried. 12. DISCUSSION A. Consideration of a revision to the Lauderdale City Code Title 3 (Business Regulations), Chapter 2 (Liquor Control)- civil penalty schedule for liquor licensees. The City Administrator stated that the Council has discussed revising the liquor control ordinance as it relates to civil penalties for licensee violations at both of the October City Council meetings. At the last meeting, the Council discussed adopting penalties that are more stringent than the Saint Anthony and Falcon Heights ordinance and requested further clarification on a few components of the penalties. The Council then discussed whether the penalties should sunset after ownership changes or after a certain number of consecutive years of being without any violations. The City Attorney is still reviewing the draft and should provide final comment within the next few weeks. The Administrator requested that the Council can still provide feedback on the components of the penalty schedule. Staff can then draft a final proposed ordinance revision based on that feedback and Attorney review for approval at a future meeting. Lauderdale City Council Meeting Minutes, November 12, 2003 Page 4 13. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA 13. ADDITIONAL ITEMS 14. SET AGENDA FOR NEXT MEETING 1. 2004 Recycling Contract Extension 2. 2004 Recycling Rates 3. 2004 Sanitary Sewer Rates 4. 2004 Storm Sewer Rates 5. 2004 Budget Discussion in preparation for December meeting approval 6. 2004 Audit and Financial Services Agreement 7. Zoning Ordinance Revision -shoreline setback regulations 15. ADJOURNMENT Motion by McCloskey, second by Gill -Gerbig to adjourn at 9:03 P.M. Ayes: All. CITY OF LAUDERDALE Claims for Approval November 25, 2003 City Council Meeting Payroll 11/21/03 Payroll: Check # 7463-7469 11/21/03 Payroll: EFT: Federal Withholding Taxes/FICA 11/21/03 Payroll: EFT: PERA 11/21/03 Payroll: EFT: ICMA Retirement Fund 11/2003 Payroll: EFT: State Withholding Taxes Vendor Claims 11/25/03 Claims: Check # 16625-16648 Subtotal of Claims From Above $6,207.18 $2,499.47 $1,042.10 $1,280.43 $882.16 $38,606.491 $50,517.83 Total Claims for Approval $50,517.83 CITY OF LAUDERDALE 11/19/03 4:16 PM Page 1 Paid Register Check Employee Pay Pay Group Check Check Numbe Number Employee Name Period Description Amount Date Status 007464 000000003 GETSCHOW, RICK 24 BI -WEEKLY $1,874.79 11/21/03 Outstanding 007465 000000002 HINRICHS, DAVID C 24 BI -WEEKLY $992.65 11/21/03 Outstanding 007466 000000005 HUGHES, JOSEPH A 24 BI -WEEKLY $1,428.21 11/21/03 Outstanding 007467 000000052 JAMES, VIRGINIA 24 BI -WEEKLY $14.00 11/21/03 Outstanding 007468 000000048 LAWRENCE, DONNA 24 BI -WEEKLY $16.00 11/21/03 Outstanding 007469 000000037 WALSH, KEVIN 24 BI -WEEKLY $881.10 11/21/03 Outstanding 007462 VOID 24 $0.00 11/21/03 Void 007463 000000011 BOWNIK, JAMES 24 BI -WEEKLY $1,000.43 11/21/03 Outstanding $6,207.18 I CITY OF LAUDERDALE 11/20/03 3:19 PM Page 1 Vendor Transactions CHECK Check Batch Nbr Date Name Invoice Amount Comments Search Name AFSCME 016625 11/25/03 112503claims 11/25/03 $76.24 11/03 union dues Search Name AFSCME $76.24 Search Name AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING 016626 11/25/03 112503claims 24496 $180.00 bituminous testing '03 street project Search Name AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING $180.00 Search Name AMERIPRIDE 016627 11/25/03 112503claims 11/25/03 $84.10 kitchen, bathroom supplies Search Name AMERIPRIDE $84.10 Search Name BFI 016628 11/25/03 112503claims 11/25/03 $2,415.00 10/03 recycling services Search Name BFI $2,415.00 Search Name BLUE CHIP TREE CO., INC. 016629 11/25/03 112503claims 11/25/03 $79.88 chip brush for city Search Name BLUE CHIP TREE CO., INC. $79.88 Search Name BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK 016630 11/25/03 112503claims 103418 $48.00 10/03 general engineering 016630 11/25/03 112503claims 103419 $384.00 10/03'02 st/util improvements 016630 11/25/03 112503claims 103420 $5,062.94 10/03'03 st/util improvements Search Name BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK $5,494.94 Search Name CARE AIR CONDITIONING/HEATING 016631 11/25/03 112503claims 1488 $177.00 complete the repair of social rm furnace Search Name CARE AIR CONDITIONING/HEATING $177.00 Search Name CARTRIDGECARE INC. 016632 11/25/03 112503claims m4619 $146.97 toner for printer Search Name CARTRIDGECARE INC. $146.97 Search Name CINTAS 016633 11/25/03 112503claims 11/25/03 $74.46 11/13, 11/20 pw uniforms Search Name CINTAS $74.46 Search Name CITY OF ROSEVILLE 016634 11/25/03 112503claims 4249 $164.08 11/03 technical services Search Name CITY OF ROSEVILLE $164.08 Search Name CITY OF ST ANTHONY 016635 11/25/03 112503claims 773 $19,266.66 12/03 police services Search Name CITY OF ST ANTHONY $19,266.66 Search Name ESCHELON TELECOM, INC 016636 11/25/03 112503claims 552375 $233.49 11/03 city hall phone Search Name ESCHELON TELECOM, INC $233.49 Search Name LILLIE SUBURBAN NEWS 016637 11/25/03 112503claims 11/25/03 $578.00 10/03 roseville review delivery Search Name LILLIE SUBURBAN NEWS $578.00 Search Name MERCURY WASTE SOLUTIONS CITY OF LAUDERDALE 11/20/03 3:19 PM Page 2 Vendor Transactions CHECK Check Batch Nbr Date Name Invoice Amount Comments 016638 11/25/03 112503claims 206491 $13.82 florescent light disposal Search Name MERCURY WASTE SOLUTIONS $13.82 Search Name MET -COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SER. 016639 11/25/03 112503claims 764818 $6,638.67 12/03 wastewater services Search Name MET -COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SER. $6,638.67 Search Name NORTH SUBURBAN ACCESS CORP 016640 11/25/03 112503claims 03-068 $491.07 3g03 program ming/webstream ing Search Name NORTH SUBURBAN ACCESS CORP $491.07 Search Name NORTH SUBURBAN COMMUNICATIONS 016641 11/25/03 112503claims cc03-42 $140.30 3g03 internet services Search Name NORTH SUBURBAN COMMUNICATIONS $140.30 Search Name RAMSEY COUNTY, PROP REC & REV 016642 11/25/03 112503claims risk636 $936.97 11/03 employee benefits Search Name RAMSEY COUNTY, PROP REC & REV $936.97 Search Name SAM'S CLUB 016643 11/25/03 112503claims 1391 $260.50 day in the park supplies Search Name SAM'S CLUB $260.50 Search Name SPRINT PCS 016644 11/25/03 112503claims 11/25/03 $10.51 10/03 pw cell phone 016644 11/25/03 112503claims 11/25/03 $10.52 10/03 pw cell phone Search Name SPRINT PCS $21.03 Search Name ST PAUL POSTMASTER 016645 11/25/03 112503claims 11/25/03 $300.00 1804 newsletter postage Search Name ST PAUL POSTMASTER $300.00 Search Name UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA 016646 11/25/03 112503claims 11/25/03 $325.00 building officials institute Search Name UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA $325.00 Search Name WALTER'S RUBBISH 016647 11/25/03 112503claims 250857 $38.92 11/03 garbage service 016647 11/25/03 112503claims 250857 $38.93 11/03 garbage service Search Name WALTER'S RUBBISH $77.85 Search Name XCEL ENERGY 016648 11/25/03 112503claims 11/25/03 $430.46 10/03 street lighting Search Name XCEL ENERGY $430.46 Grand Total $38,606.49 MemosbyJames Date: November 25, 2003 To: Honorable Mayor and Council 06 From: James Bownik, A2CA Re: Zoning Ordinance Amendment BACKGROUND PROPOSAL: The City of Lauderdale is proposing an Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance establishing an ordinary high water level setback of 50 feet for general development near DNR protected waterbodies. At the October 14 meeting, the City Council discussed the need to amend the zoning ordinance to reflect a 50 -foot setback from the ordinary high water level for general development near DNR protected waterbodies. As you are aware, the storm water management ordinance makes reference to a 50 -foot building setback from the ordinary high water level of Walsh Lake, which is DNR protected waterbody #214W. While the 50 -foot setback distance is consistent with statewide standards for the management of shorelands, the location of the regulation in our storm water management ordinance and the way it is stated is not the optimal way to regulate shorelands. Instead, the 50 -foot setback regulation should be explicitly stated in the zoning ordinance to clear up any ambiguity and make it easier and less costly to enforce. This zoning amendment would be an ordinance of general application, and would apply to any property in Lauderdale along Walsh Lake. I have updated the Land and Yard Requirements Table to reflect this addition. This essentially adds the shoreland regulation that is currently in the storm water management ordinance to the zoning ordinance. I have also included the memo and information provided at the October 14, 2003 meeting by City Administrator Rick Getschow. REQUIREMENTS FOR APPROVAL OF A ZONING AMENDMENT REQUEST Title 10-3-5 Amendments: "The City Council may by two-thirds (2/3) vote of all its members amend this Title as proposed by the City Council, by the Planning Commission or by a petition of a person owning property within Lauderdale..." PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION The Planning Commission did not meet to discuss the variance request due to the lack of a quorum. Instead, this action item was placed directly on the council agenda per Title 2- 1-10-4:. of the current Zoning Ordinance. The Planning Commission received the information packet and have been invited and encouraged to attend the council meeting in order to provide input to the Council. PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE ZONING AMENDMENT REQUEST On November 14, 2003, property owners within 350 feet from the perimeter of the subject property were sent notice of tonight's public hearing. A Public Notice was also published in the November 11, 2003 edition of the Roseville Review. CITY COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Approve or deny the zoning amendment request. If approved, the amendment to the zoning ordinance will be published in the Roseville Review. LA605 10-8 (3) LAND AND YARD REQUIREMENTS TABLE Lot Size Yard Setback feet Usable District Area Width Front Rear SideMaximum EDwelling Open (sq. ft.) (ft.) Coverage* Space R-1 Suhurhan Residential See complete R-1 Setback Requirements Table ado ted 3/10/98. 7,500 60 30 20 5 7,500 **30 Single Family Dwellings Two Family Dwellings 10,000 80 30 20 5 5,000 ***30 - Other Uses 10,000 80 30 20 5 R-2 Urban Residential Single Family Dwellings 5,000 40 25 20 5 5,000 **30 Two Family Dwellings 7,500 60 25 20 5 3,750 ***30 - Townhouses 2,500 20 25 20 - 5,000 20 52 Multi Family Dwellings 7,500 60 25 20 10 1,875 28 44 Other Uses 10,000 75 25 20 10 R-3 MultiniP RPSIdPntlal Single Family Dwellings 5,000 40 20 20 10 5,000 **30 Two Family Dwellings 7,500 60 20 20 - 3,750 ***30 - Townhouses 2,500 20 20 20 - 5,000 20 52 Multi Family Dwellings 25,000 100 20 20 15 870 30 40 Other Uses 5,000 50 20 20 10 B-1 Community gua�cY Multi Family Dwellings 5,000 50 - 15 - 1,675 28 44 Other Uses 5,000 50 15 1-1 Light Industrial All Uses 1 acre 150 30 30 20 C-1 Conservation All Uses 2 acres 300 50 30 30 All Districts A 50 -foot setback is required from the ordinary high water level of DNR protected All Uses waterbodies (Walsh Lake, #214W). * Maximum coverage shall be the percentage of lot area enclosed by the exterior faces of the exterior walls. ** Figure includes assumed garage coverage of 576 sq. ft. *** Figure includes assumed garage coverage of 1,252 sq. ft. (Zoning Ordinance as amended) Lauderdale City Council Memorandum Council Meeting Date: October 14, 2003 To: Mayor and City Council From: Rick Getschow, City Administrator Agenda Item: Work Session Discussion Items: A. DNR "Management of Shorelines" setback regulations B. Parking Ordinance C. Social Room/Kitchen Window Replacement BACKGROUND: The following are the items for discussion at the work session that follows the regular meeting: A. DNR "Management of Shorelines" setback regulations. Another issue that has arisen with this Karkoc property is a shoreline setback that exists through the city's adoption of the DNR standards for shoreline management. The City adopted a Storm water Management Ordinance in 1997. In the wetland section, of that ordinance, the following language exists: Redevelopment along the south end of Walsh Lake (DNR waterbody 21499 shall be done following WDNR standards for "Management ofShorelines". In the DNR shoreline document, the setback for residential development from a DNR water body is 50 feet from the ordinary high water level (OHWL). Representatives of the Karkoc property have stated that since the City does not possess its own shoreline setback in its zoning ordinance, simply adopting the DNR standard may not be sufficient. They felt that the watershed district, not the City, should enforce this DNR setback. At the meeting, we will need discuss the following questions related to this issue: 1. Is it the Council's intent to regulate the DNR shoreline setback of 50 feet? 2. Is the enforcement of the DNR setback legally defensible through the storm water management ordinance? or 3. Should this setback be a city -adopted setback that is placed in the zoning ordinance? The City Attorney will either be present at the meeting or will provide further input that can be presented to the Council on this issue. M E M O S B Y J A M E S DATE: November 25, 2003 TO: Honorable Mayor and Council FROM: James Bownik, A2CA RE: 2004 Recycling Contract BACKGROUND City staff has negotiated a contract extension with BFI Waste Systems for 2004 recycling services. It incorporates a very small rate increase with the same bi-weekly service: 1. The rate would be set at $2.15 per resident per month. This is an increase of .05 over the contract from last year. 2. Recycling pickup would continue to take place on every other Monday. 3. Recycling will also continue to be done in the two -sort method (paper and all other types). 4. The contract expires at the end of 2004, so another round of proposals would be required in the fall of 2004 from companies that would be interested in Lauderdale's recycling services. I have included a letter from BFI requesting the contract extension. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Approve the contract renewal at a rate of $2.15/month/resident with BFI Waste Systems for 2004. November 19, 2003 City of Lauderdale Attention: Rick Getschow 1891 Walnut Street Lauderdale, MN 55113-5137 Dear Mr, Getschow: Thank you so much for talking with me to discuss an extension of the current curbside municipal recycling contract. Per your request, the following is a summary of our discussion. BFI Waste Systems of North America, Inc. (BFI) would like to formally request an extension of our current contract with the City of Lauderdale. The extension will be for one (1) year and initiate on January 1, 2004 through December 31, 2004. CURRENT RATE - (As of January 1, 2003) Recycling: $2.10 Every Other Week Collection EXTENSION PROPOSAL - (January 1, 2004) Recycling: $2.15 Every Other Week Collection If you have any additional questions or need further clarification, please contact me directly at 651-286-4570. I am looking forward to extending our positive relationship and look forward to a continued partnership. Sincerely Craig Seim General Manager BFI St. Paul Hauling Division St. Paul Division - 4325 E. 66th Sheet • Inver Grove Heights, Minnesota 55076 Phone 651-455-8634 - Fax Operations/Sales 651-286-4548 - Fax Administration 651-286-4547 • www.awin.com Lauderdale City Council Memorandum Council Meeting Date: November 25, 2003 To: Mayor and City Council From: Rick Getschow, City Administrator Agenda Item: 2004 Recycling Rates BACKGROUND: Pursuant to our contract with BFI, the one-year extension that is scheduled to be approved is $2.15 per month or $25.80 per year for each household. This is a $0.05 per month or $0.60 per year proposed increase from 2003. Past practice with the City has been to base the recycling fees solely on funding the contract collection costs and not the overall recycling program costs (after accounting for the SCORE grant). Included in the recycling fund budget besides the contract are city personnel costs/benefits and supplies. Ramsey County recommends that the City base its fee on a formula that takes into account all recycling fund costs, and subtracts SCORE revenue to obtain a recycling budget. Unfortunately, this philosophy of basing the recycling fees solely on contract collection costs over the past few years has meant that this fund has been producing a deficit and requiring the use of reserves. This is because SCORE grant funds and interest income have decreased while labor and supply costs have slightly increased.. The following table illustrates the current budgeting philosophy with figures from 1999-2003: Revenue: Recycling Fee Expenditure: Recycling Contract Revenue: SCORE, Interest Expenditure: Personnel, Supplies Surplus/Deficit 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 $16,243 $22,052 $22,052 $16,243 $22,052 $22,052 $ 6,262 $ 6,929 $ 7,213 $ 5,935 $ 5,443 $ 6,607 $ 327 $ 1,486 $ 606 $28,290 $29,686 $28,290 $29,686 $ 5,182 $4,912 $ 9,310 $9,599 ($4,128) ($4,687) i l . Even though reserves of between $15,000-$20,000 exist in this fund, their use on an annual basis is not recommended. Included in the packet is an analysis of the rates that could be charged illustrating their impacts on the fund. It would take a monthly rate of approximately $2.45 to break even on the fund based on the proposed 2004 Budget. However, based on the fact that actual costs usually come in lower than budgeted, a rate of either $2.35 or $2.40 per month per household for 2004 may be more appropriate to balance the projected costs. This would increase the annual household recycling cost between $2.40-$3.00 for 2004. Also included in the packet is a copy of the proposed budget for the Recycling Fund (203). ENCLOSURES: 1. Recycling Fund Proposed 2004 Budget (203) 2. 2004 Recycling Rate Analysis COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve the 2004 residential recycling rates. 101 DEPT. 50000 121 REVENUES: 36100 Recycling Fee 33622 SCORE Grant 36211 Investment Interest 36255 Other 201 Total Revenues 202 EXPENDITURES: 101 Reg. FT Employees 121 PERA Contributions 122 FICA Contributions 126 ICMA Retirement 131 Group Insurance 133 Life Insurance 201 General Supplies 202 Permanent Supplies 327 Other Service 389 Recycling Contract 437 Sales Tax 438 Dues & Subscriptions 440 Meeting Expenses 444 Contingency Funds 800 City-wide Clean -Up 881 Total Expenditures 750 Surplus (Deficit) Beginning Fund Balance Surplus (Deficit) 39200 Transfers In 710 Transfers Out Ending Fund Balance Recycling Fund 203 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2003 2004 Actual Actual Actual Actual Adopted Projected Proposed 16,825 21,982 22,229 29,067 29,686 29,686 30,392 5,462 5,478 5,480 4,627 4,612 4,612 4,525 800 1,451 881 309 750 300 300 - - 852 246 - - - 23,087 28,911 29,442 34,249 35,048 34,598 35,217 3,760 4,193 5,426 6,609 7,000 7,000 7,000 181 217 168 373 387 387 387 224 317 321 516 536 536 536 185 344 342 757 1,080 1,080 1,080 - - 193 - - 200 - 1,585 372 1,357 829 200 552 200 16,243 22,052 20,837 28,290 29,686 29,686 30,392 - - - - 20 - 20 - - 15 - - - - - - - - 200 - - 22,178 27,495 28,659 37,374 39,109 39,441 39,615 909 1,416 783 (3,125) (4,061) (4,843) (4,398) 24,393 25,302 26,718 27,501 24,376 24,376 19,533 909 1,416 783 (3,125) (4,061) (4,843) (4,398) 25,302 26,718 27,501 24,376 20,315 19,533 15,135 J Q Z Q W Z J U V W w Iq C) C) N "O . 00000 O O N c0 00 O O O U- c6 T Ctti O O O 00 ti ti ct 3 M Cfl O N C!) (0 LO �t 0 Q d M N N T 6g N L 63 63 63 63 63 7 -0 7 4-- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LL N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 5,— mmmmmmmm d(J) M M M M M M M M O 660961366461k Vytrk 6rk663 O CO N U U N O O 00 C. N O C. CO• N O M O ti d ti O T N N M 't d" CO OEfl c) ct T 00 LO N 0) U a NNC6 q: ' � 69 63 69 69 69 C!3 CO N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O It NtIt Itlqt It "t V N N N N N N N N O"-' mm000O)mO) O V M M Ch M co M co M C6 N C OM CM OCM M M COY M CT CM O 69 64 63 64 69 69 6R 63 U _ O dO' N O 000 0 dO' N O N6 O N6 O M6 C> m 0 0 T T N M d' M O W t1� N 0 O M 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 CO 00 w m Cao 00 Cao 00 00 T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T O 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 N 00 d: O Cfl N 00 "I: O C O Ln CO h I- M 00 0 O C(_) N N N N N N N M Q (Al Cfl 69 69 69 64 69 69 a) :E m Ln0LX) OLOOLn0 T NN c!cl Lq C N N N N N N N N O 69 63 63 69 69 69 69 64 (U Lauderdale City Council Memorandum Council Meeting Date: To: From: Agenda Item: effeJX*1fKW November 25, 2003 Mayor and City Council Rick Getschow, City Administrator 2004 Sanitary Sewer Rates As part of the 2003 budget process, the Council increased sanitary sewer rates 2.4% from $41.00 to $42.00 per residential household per quarter. This increase was intended to offset the sewage fees charged by the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) and the labor and operational costs by the City to maintain city sanitary sewer facilities such as the lift stations. Since the 2003 Budget was adopted there have been two positive developments that have occurred related to the Sanitary Sewer Fund: The elimination of the remaining sanitary sewer lift stations in 2003 means that there are no costs associated with these lift stations for the first time in 2004. 2. The 1997 MCES error regarding the double counting of apartment buildings for sewer treatment purposes reduces the treatment costs for the second half of 2003 and beyond. With our current rate scenario and the developments above, the fund is projecting a surplus for 2003. The 2004 Budget is budgeted to also provide a surplus at the current 2003 sewer rate. Therefore, I am not proposing any options for increasing the sanitary sewer rate and recommend that it be kept the same as the current year for 2004. ENCLOSURES: 1. Sewer Utility Fund (601) Proposed 2004 Budget COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Approve the 2004 sanitary sewer rates as $42.00 per residential household per quarter for residential accounts and $2.07 per unit for commercial accounts, which is the same rate as 2003. Sewer Utility Fund 601 DEPT. 49000 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2003 2004 Actual Actual Actual Actual Adopted Projected Proposed REVENUES: 37210 Sewer Charges 211,830 212,941 228,495 224,745 229,128 225,000 225,000 36211 Investment Interest 2,403 4,110 3,207 873 2,700 1,000 1,000 36250 Refunds/Reimbursements - 10 - 1,721 - 248,227 - 37230 Penalties - - - - - - - 37240 Sewer Assessments -SAC - 288 3,450 3,732 - - - Total Revenues 214,233 217,349 235,152 231,071 231,828 474,227 226,000 EXPENDITURES: 101 Reg. FT Employees 39,792 40,727 42,864 41,389 44,000 44,000 45,760 102 On -Call Pay 3,438 4,465 9,397 8,198 9,000 9,000 9,000 103 PT Employees - - - - - - - 104 Temp. Employees - - - - - - - 121 PERA Contributions 2,240 2,396 2,782 2,726 2,728 2,500 2,837 122 FICA Contributions 3,368 3,632 4,255 3,890 3,774 3,458 3,925 126 ICMA Retirement - - - - 134 - - 131 Group Insurance 3,144 2,531 2,994 3,001 4,590 4,335 4,842 133 Life Insurance - - - - - - - 151 Worker's Comp. 1,439 1,818 1,803 1,572 1,818 1,653 1,818 201 General Supplies - - - - 200 200 200 202 Permanent Supplies - - - - - - - 203 Postage - - - - - - - 212 Motor Fuels 784 966 1,063 797 1,000 1,000 200 224 Street Maint. Supply - - - - - - - 225- Landscaping Materials - - - - - - - 227 Tools & Equipment - - 314 - 100 - 100 228 Misc. Repairs/Maint.Supply - - - - 1,000 - 1,000 301 Auditing 1,225 1,566 2,298 1,830 1,700 1,900 1,700 304 Engineering - 439 3,761 - - 200 - 307 Computer Services 603 - - - - - - 308 Training/Conferences 300 248 - 487 500 100 500 315 Sewer Jetting - 470 1,875 810 1,000 1,000 1,000 316 Sewer Televising - - 835 - - - - 327 Other Services 5,213 4,829 4,833 9,046 7,888 4,200 7,888 352 Public Info. Notices - - - - - - - 355 Misc. Printing/Processing - - - - - - - 361 General Liability 2,071 1,994 2,226 2,343 1,900 2,539 1,900 362 Property Insurance 518 526 629 642 526 726 526 363 Automotive Insurance 382 340 359 369 340 387 340 381 Electric 2,796 3,359 3,361 2,422 2,500 1,500 - 382 Water 14 15 15 24 25 15 25 383 Gas Utilities 727 1,118 1,469 1,054 1,000 1,200 - DEPT. 49000 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2003 2004 Actual Actual Actual Actual Adopted Projected Proposed 387 Met Council Sewer Charges 171,998 132,384 130,520 122,643 138,000 100,000 100,000 388 Met Council SAC Charges - - 3,450 - - - - 391 Telephones/Pagers 3,751 2,732 2,737 1,731 1,000 700 - 402 City Truck Repair/Maint. 644 534 1,296 802 1,000 1,000 1,000 408 Lift Station Repair/Maint. 1,251 349 8,414 390 1,000 - - 409 Other Equip. Repair/Maint. - 15 - - - - - 424 Vehicle Rental - - - - - - - 425 Clothing 1,323 1,428 1,357 1,807 1,400 2,000 1,800 442 Misc. 500 - - - - - - 444 Contingency Funds - - - - 2,500 2,500 2,500 521 City Garage - - - - - - - 530 Furniture & Equipment - - - - - - - 538 Computer Software - - - - - - - 540 Machinery & Equipment - - - - 500 - 500 553 Manhole Reconstruction - - - - - - - 560 Vehicle - - - - - - - 562 Truck - - - - - - - Total Expenses 247,521 208,881 234,907 207,973 231,123 186,113 189,362 Surplus (Deficit) (33,288) 8,468 245 23,098 705 288,114 36,638 Beginning Fund Balance 134,340 101,052 109,520 109,765 132,863 132,863 172,750 Surplus (Deficit) (33,288) 8,468 245 23,098 705 288,114 36,638 39200 Transfers In - - - - - - - 710 Transfers Out - - - - - 248,227 - Ending Fund Balance 101,052 109,520 109,765 132,863 133,568 172,750 209,388 Lauderdale City Council Memorandum Council Meeting Date: November 25, 2003 To: Mayor and City Council From: Rick Getschow, City Administrator Agenda Item: 2004 Storm Water Utility Rates BACKGROUND: In 1994, the City Council adopted a Storm Water Utility Ordinance that created a funding mechanism to help finance future improvements to the storm water system. Fees for other property types were based on this rate using a residential equivalency factor (REF). Acreage and hard surface area for each property type play a part in determining the REF, which attempts to estimate the storm water contribution to the system. As part of establishing the Utility, the City Council also approved a rate increase each year for four years of at least $1.00 to the base residential rate that began at $2.50 per quarter per residential unit in 1994. For 1998-2002, the fee was stabilized at $6.50 per quarter per residential unit and the equivalent REF increase for other property types. In 2003, the Council increased the fee to $7.50 per quarter per residential unit. This was based on the new NPDES permit and annual reporting requirements, which began in 2003. I have included the 2004 budget for the Storm Water Improvement Fund to provide a snapshot of current and past finances. As you know, this fund has financed the storm water system upgrades as part of the street and utility improvement projects throughout the City. ENCLOSURES: 1. Storm Water Improvement Fund (403) Proposed 2004 Budget COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve the 2004 storm water utility fee rate at $7.50 per quarter for residential units, and the equivalent REF for other property types. This is a 0% increase and the same rate as 2003. Storm Water Improvement Fund 403 DEPT. 48403 REVENUES: 37300 Storm Sewer Fee 36211 Investment Interest 37230 Penalties 39999 Other 36100 Special Assessments Total Revenue EXPENDITURES: 101 Reg. FT Employees 121 PERA Contributions 122 FICA Contributions 131 Group Insurance 133 Life Insurance 201 General Supplies 327 Other Service 304 Engineering 444 Contingency Funds 554 Storm System Repairs 1,218 NPDES Phase II Permit 2,160 Total Expenditures 1,528 Surplus (Deficit) 2000 2001 2002 2003 2003 2004 Actual Actual Actual Adopted Projected Proposed 45,397 44,873 43,819 47,000 47,000 47,000 33,975 22,487 5,080 7,500 4,000 4,000 2,000 - - - 79,372 67,360 50,899 54,500 51,000 51,000 13,857 15,010 17,935 17,542 17,542 18,244 733 761 953 970 970 1,009 1,112 1,182 1,350 1,342 1,342 1,396 802 793 1,218 2,160 2,160 2,279 1,528 378 847 - - - - 350 - 500 500 1,000 - - 5,000 10,000 10,762 1,000 18,032 18,474 27,303 32,514 33,276 24,927 61,340 48,886 23,596 21,986 17,724 26,073 Beginning Fund Balance 462,129 549,498 357,482 305,170 305,170 322,894 Surplus (Deficit) 61,340 48,886 23,596 21,986 17,724 26,073 39200 Transfers In 61,029 59,098 64,092 40,000 40,000 - 710 Transfers Out 35,000 300,000 140,000 40,000 40,000 - Ending Fund Balance 549,498 357,482 305,170 327,156 322,894 348,967 Lauderdale City Council Memorandum Council Meeting Date: November 25, 2003 To: Mayor and City Council From: Rick Getschow, City Administrator Agenda Item: 2004 Audit and Financial Services Agreement BACKGROUND: Attached is a copy of the proposed agreement for services from Abdo, Eick & Myers. This proposed agreement contains the same language as past agreements, except that special attention will be given to GASB 34 regulations and another new federal rule - SAS 99. Statement of Audit Standards (SAS) has promulgated a new audit rule that will increase the amount of hours spent on the audit for fraud prevention and detection purposes. Most financial consultants and auditors feel that this federal rule came about as a result of the recent corporate frauds such as Enron. Nonetheless, it applies to all entities and will increase the audit cost. The proposed agreement's not to exceed amount for services in 2004 is $7,500. This is a $2,000 increase from last year as a result of the GASB 34 and SAS rules mentioned above. The financial services offered will also include the completion of the annual TIF report. ENCLOSURES: 1. 2004 Proposed Financial and Audit Services Agreement COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Authorize the City Administrator to enter into an agreement with Abdo, Eick & Myers for 2004 financial and audit services. ABDO SICK & Nell MT E S LLP Certified Public Accountants & Consultants Grandview Square 5201 Eden Avenue Suite 370 Edina, MN 55436 Mr. Rick Getschow City of Lauderdale 1891 Walnut Street St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 Dear Rick: November 20, 2003 Enclosed is the 200 q engagement letter. As we discussed, it has been prepared with additional costs to implement Statements on Auditing Standards (SAS) No. 99. We sent a letter outlining what SAS No. 99 was and what it would involve a couple of months ago. SAS No. 99 is an audit standard that relates to fraud. It is required to be in place for this audit and will result in additional time in completing the audit. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at your earliest convenience. Sincerely, ABDO, EICK & MEYERS, LLP Certified Public Accountants AV,." AAhj Steven R. McDonald, CPA Enclosures 952.835.9090 • Fax 952.835.3261 ��� _ 11 JJ J_ E W LLP Certified Public Accountants & Consultants Grandview Square 5201 Eden Avenue Suite 370 Edina, MN 55436 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Lauderdale 1891 Walnut Street St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 Dear Honorable Mayor and City Council: November 20, 2003 We are pleased to confirm our understanding of the services we are to provide the City of Lauderdale for the year ended December 31, 2003. We will audit the financial statements of the City as of and for the year ended December 31, 2003. We understand that the financial statements will be presented in accordance with the financial reporting model in effect prior to that described in GASB Statement No. 34. Also, the document we submit to you will include the following additional information that will be subjected to the auditing procedures applied in our audit of the financial statements: 1. Combining and Individual Fund Financial Statements Audit Objective The objective of our audit is the expression of an opinion as to whether your financial statements are fairly presented, in all material respects, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America and to report on the fairness of the additional information referred to in the first paragraph when considered in relation to the financial statements taken as a whole. Our audit will be conducted in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and will include tests of the accounting records and other procedures we consider necessary to enable us to express such an opinion. If our opinion on the financial statements is other than unqualified, we will fully discuss the reasons with you in advance. If, for any reason, we are unable to complete the audit or are unable to form or have not formed an opinion, we may decline to express an opinion or to issue a report as a result of this engagement. Management Responsibilities Management is responsible for making all financial records and related information available to us. We understand that you will provide us with such information required for our audit and that you are responsible for the accuracy and completeness of that information. We will advise you about appropriate accounting principles and their application and will assist in the preparation of your financial statements, but the responsibility for the financial statements remains with you. That responsibility includes the establishment and maintenance of adequate records and effective internal control over financial reporting, the selection and application of accounting principles, and the safeguarding of assets. Management is responsible for adjusting the financial statements to correct material misstatements and for confirming to us in the representation letter that the effects of any uncorrected misstatements aggregated by us during the current engagement and pertaining to the latest period presented are immaterial, both individually and in the aggregate, to the financial statements taken as a whole. 952.835.9090 • Fax 952.835.3261 November 20, 2003 Page Two Audit Procedures - General An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements; therefore, our audit will involve judgment about the number of transactions to be examined and the areas to be tested. We will plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable rather than absolute assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether from errors, fraudulent financial reporting, misappropriation of assets, or violations of laws or governmental regulations that are attributable to the City or to acts by management or employees acting on behalf of the City. Because an audit is designed to provide reasonable, but not absolute, assurance and because we will not perform a detailed examination of all transactions, there is a risk that material misstatements may exist and not be detected by us. In addition, an audit is not designed to detect immaterial misstatements, or violations of laws or governmental regulations that do not have a direct and material effect on the financial statements. However, we will inform you of any material errors that come to our attention, and we will inform you of any fraudulent financial reporting or misappropriation of assets that come to our attention. We will also inform you of any violations of laws or governmental regulations that come to our attention, unless clearly inconsequential. Our responsibility as an auditor is limited to the period covered by our audit and does not extend to matters that might arise during any later periods for which we are not engaged as auditors. Our procedures will include tests of documentary evidence supporting the transactions recorded in the accounts, and may include tests of the physical existence of inventories, and direct confirmation of receivables and certain other assets and liabilities by correspondence with selected individuals, creditors, and financial institutions. We will request written representations from your attorneys as part of the engagement, and they may bill you for responding to this inquiry. At the conclusion of our audit, we will also require certain written representations from you about the financial statements and related matters. Identifying and ensuring that the City complies with laws, regulations, contracts, and agreements is the responsibility of management. As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, we will perform tests of the City's compliance with applicable laws and regulations and the provisions of contracts and agreements. However, the objective of our audit will not be to provide an opinion on overall compliance and we will not express such an opinion. Audit Procedures - Internal Control In planning and performing our audit, we will consider the internal control sufficient to plan the audit in order to determine the nature, timing, and extent of our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the City's financial statements. An audit is not designed to provide assurance on internal control or to identify reportable conditions. However, we will inform the governing body or audit committee of any matters involving internal control and its operation that we consider to be reportable conditions under standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. Reportable conditions involve matters coming to our attention relating to significant deficiencies in the design or operation of the internal control that, in our judgment, could adversely affect the City's ability to record, process, summarize, and report financial data consistent with the assertions of management in the financial statements. � � g November 20, 2003 � Page Three a Audit Administration, Fees, and Other We understand that your employees will prepare all cash or other confirmations we request and will locate any invoices selected by us for testing. Our fee for these services will be at our standard hourly rates plus out-of-pocket costs (such as report reproduction, typing, postage, travel, copies, telephone, etc.). We estimate that our gross fee, including expenses will be approximately $7,500. This estimate is based on the prior year time and the estimated cost for the implementation of SAS 99. Our standard hourly rates vary according to the degree of responsibility involved and the experience level of the personnel assigned to your audit. Our invoices for these fees will be rendered each month as work progresses and are payable on presentation. In accordance with our firm policies, work may be suspended if your account becomes 90 days or more overdue and may not be resumed until your account is paid in full. If we elect to terminate our services for nonpayment, our engagement will be deemed to have been completed upon written notification of termination, even if we have not completed our report. You will be obligated to compensate us for all time expended and to reimburse us for all out-of-pocket costs through the date of termination. The above fee is based on anticipated cooperation from your personnel and the assumption that unexpected circumstances will not be encountered during the audit. If significant additional time is necessary, we will discuss it with you and arrive at a new fee estimate before we incur the additional costs. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to the City and believe this letter accurately summarizes the significant terms of our engagement. If you have any questions, please let us know. If you agree with the terms of our engagement as described in this letter, please sign the enclosed copy and return it to us. Sincerely, ABDO, EICK & MEYERS, LLP Certified Public Accountants Steven R. McDonald, CPA RESPONSE: This letter correctly sets forth the understanding of the City of Lauderdale. By: Title: Date: Lauderdale City Council Memorandum Council Meeting Date: November 25, 2003 To: Mayor and City Council From: Rick Getschow, City Administrator Agenda Item: 2004 Budget Discussion BACKGROUND: At the December 9, 2003 Council meeting the City Council will approve the 2004 property tax levy and the 2004 Budget. I will provide a presentation of the property tax levy and the budget at that meeting. This item as placed on the agenda in case the Council wishes to provide any further feedback on the budget or wish to have any final discussions before the budget is approved. One brief topic of discussion that I would like to address is the $248,000 recently brought into in the sanitary sewer fund (601) as a result of the MCES waste water treatment error. We will be conducting our 2003 Budget transfers at the December meeting and a transfer from this fund is planned. Even though most of these enterprise fund profits should be transferred to our debt funds, there is the ability to transfer some of the funds to other areas of the budget that include: General Fund- Replacement trees for the Street/Utility Improvements 2000-2003 General Fund- Match for the LCDA Grant General Fund- Participation in the Housing Resource Center (HRC) (This may be covered by county levy) General Capital Improvement Fund- future replacement of the smaller truck and the Social Room/Kitchen furnace This is only a discussion item. Action on the 2004 Budget and property tax levy will occur at the December 9, 2003 meeting.