Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packets - 1991/03/04 • CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL AGENDA SESSION MARCH 4, 1991 ._ 6:00 P.M. JOINT MEETING WITH PARKS AND RECREATION COMNIISSION * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 7:00 P.M. 1. Presentation by Springsted Regarding General Obligation Water Revenue Bonds 2 . Presentation by Everest Group Regarding Proposed Phase II Development Changes 3 . Presentation by Mark Lobermeir, Short-Elliott- 411 Hendrickson Re: Proposed Surface Water Management Utility 4 . Presentation by Fire Chief Ron Fagerstrom Regarding Emergency Vehicles 5 . Discussion of Cable Committee's Guidelines for Implementation of Cable TV Programming 6 . Discussion Regarding Festival In The Park Options 7 . Update on Proposed Joint Athletic Fields on County Road J 8 . Discussion of the Proposals for the Land Use Study 9 . Discussion of Meeting Date for Administrator's Performance Goals and Objectives 10 . Consideration of Date for Spring Clean Up Day 11. Preview of "Aid to Cities" Video 411 NEXT REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING: MARCH 11, 1991 MEMORANDUM Memo To :Mayor and Council Members From :Ric Minetor, City Engineer/Director of Public Works Date :March 4, 1991 Subject :1991 Municipal State Aid Maintenance Allocation The City of MOunds View has a total 1991 State Aid allotment of $251,234 from Mn/DOT for street maintenance and construction. Mn/DOT has allocated the minimum of $1,500 per mile or $10,410. The City in the past has been receiving 25% of the total allotment for maintenance. This would be $62,808 this year. In mid-December I sent a request to Mn/DOT for a 25% maintenance allocation from the 1991 State Aid allocation. Apparently this request did not arrive before the deadline of December 15, 1990. I received a call from Elmer Morris, State Aid Engineer, in early January and learned that the request had been denied due to Mn/DOT not receiving the request before December 15th. I then sent a variance request to Mn/DOT as suggested by Elmer. Recently I received a call from the State Aid office in St. Paul: I was informed that the Council would need to pass a resolution requesting the 25% maintenance allocation. I have drafted the attached resolution for that purpose. I recommend the Council approve Resolution No. 4056. -gym ( 411 MEMORANDUM Memo To :Mayor and Council Members From :Ric Minetor, City Engineer/Director of Public Works - Date :February 28, 1991 . 414!fAfr-1-'*- . Subject :Analysis of Bond Sales for Water Dept. Capital Projects We have received the analysis of bond sales from Springsted Co. (attached) for the proposed water department capital improvement projects. Ron Langness from Springsted will be available Monday night to answer any questions regarding this analysis. The rates currently in effect and approved through 1994 will carry any of the .3 options outlined in Ron's analysis. The major projects are the construction of a new treatment plant and the rehabilitation of treatment plants 2 & 3 . The new treatment plant is nearly half the total cost. Rehabilitaion of plants 2 & 3 are also expensive totalling $500,000. However, the new equipment and backwash reclmation will result in conserving approximately 10 million of gallons of water each year. Costs 0 will also be reduced due to more efficient treatment. There are 3 projects that are considered questionable at this time. These are the rehabilitation of well #4 , the transmission line from well #4 to the new treatment plant, and the painting or demolition of tower #2. Rehabilitation of well #4 and the transmission line from well #4 to the new treatment plant are related projects. If the well is not rehabilitated it would appear to be inappropriate to construct the transmission line. Likewise, if the well is rehabilitated, it is necessary to construct the transmission line in = -= _ - = : _ • ' : - - - -= -,.nga-nese-r-emoval . OUT original cort estimate for rehabilitating this well was $50,000. We reviewed the plans, test well information, and discussed the possible rehabilitation method with the Department of Health. Due to requirements of the department of health and the method of construction, the rehabilitation cost is estimated at $161 ,000 - more than triple our initial estimate. This well is not necessary in the system, but can serve as an emergency backup, which is how we have utilized it over the last 3 years. If it is included for rehabilitation , it would provide excess capacity and an alternative if another well was out of service for a significant time period. The Council will need to determine the appropriateness of including these 2 projects. The painting or demolition of tower #2 is a complex issue. As we have previously discussed; due to the lead based primer, painting of this tower may be very expensive. The tower would likely need411 to be shrouded to contain the removed paint and cleanup on the ground could also be expensive. The alternative is to either remove this tower or to remove the existing tower and put up a smaller tower. We are preparing computer simulation models of the water system to determine if a tower is trult needed and if so what size. The estimated $345 , 000 would cover the cost .of removing this tower and installing a new smaller tower. The Council will need to determine if this project should be included in the bond issue also. f dr SPRINGSTED 4C-97 PUBLIC FINANCE ADVISORS • 500 Elm Grove Road 85 East Seventh Place 135 North Pennsylvania Street Suite 101,P.O.Box 37 Suite 100 Suite 2015 Elm Grove,WI 53122-0037 Saint Paul,MN 55101-2143 Indianapolis,IN 46204-2498 (414) 782-8222 (612)223-3000 (317)684-6000 Fax:(414)782-2904 Fax:(612)223-3002 Fax:(317)684-6004 2739 Second Avenue S.E. 6800 College Boulevard 222 South Ninth Street Cedar Rapids,IA 52403-1434 Suite 600 Suite 2825 Fax:1(913)363-6999-221Overland Park,KS 66211-1533 Minne2 apolis,MN 55402-3368 77 Fax:(913)45-017 70 Fax:(612)33333-3-2363 1,,c�2627?8?4. ,9 ./ February 25, 1991 tt-�' �y� '� w CAI ;O . (.11 Ce- 15VrIvS \k/ Mayor Jerry Linke o-2/e, r, � Member, City Council %nit,/E` ; ;�,v.;- Ms. Samantha Orduno, Clerk/Administrator Mr. Donald Braeger, Finance Director Mr. Ric Minetor, City Engineer/Director of Public Works Mounds View City Hall 2401 Highway 10 Mounds View, MN 55112 11 Re: General Obligation Water Revenue Bonds, Series 1991 We have reviewed the City's water enterprise capital needs, its projected revenues and the ability to finance the projects with those revenues. This letter summarizes our analysis providing some options that the City may wish to consider. Appendix I is a summary provided us by Mr. Minetor outlining the capital needs of the City for the next year. These project costs also include engineering expenses. Projects relating to well No. 4 and to water tower No. 2 are considered optional projects which may be dropped and for this reason we have provided a second option of bonding needs. To the listing provided-us we have added the estimated costs of bond issuance and underwriter's discount, adjusting the numbers for potential investment earnings, resulting in bond issue sizes of $2,875,000 if all of the work were to be done and $2,225,000 if the optional projects were not included. • Appendix II is a summary of the revenues available from the water utility to finance the projects. These numbers are extracted from the Voto, Toutges, Redpath & Co., Ltd. report dated December 20, 1990. This report included projected rate increases for the next four years. Appendix Ill is a debt service amortization schedule for the Option 1 ($2,875,000) bonding. This assumes the bonds will be sold this spring using current market rates. We have hedged the rates slightly higher than bids received during the week of February 18 because there is the likelihood of a slightly upward trend in interest rates as the full construction season begins and the supply of tax-exempt bonds being offered continues to increase. The length of this program was designed to provide a buffer of approximately 10% of surplus revenues over debt service. Minnesota Statutes requires that the City provide at least 5% for a cushion, however • the City will have other capital needs which it may want to provide for from available cash rather than additional borrowing. Also, these revenues are projections which may change as the years go on. Please notice that the available income projection does not go beyond the estimates of the 1994 net revenues at which point we have frozen the numbers. City of Mounds View, Minnesota February 25, 1991 Page 2 Appendix IV is the debt service for Option 2 of a smaller bond issue ($2,225,000) spread over • the same term as with Option 1. The annual surplus is about 40%, however this bond issue does not include all of the capital needs identified with Option 1, which needs the City may wish to undertake at a future date. Appendix V amortizes the Option 2 debt service over a • shorter term, maintaining an annual surplus of approximately 10%. There are many ways to look at the financing of utility project costs and many considerations that must be taken into account before a final debt service schedule is developed. We would be happy to discuss with you these options or any other options you may wish to have considered. Respectfully submitted, Ronald W. Langnes Senior Vice President rls Enclosures • • l:' 12g�sW APPENDIX 4 FSB �gg1 • oo csrf 9s NJEiN C) �l ° so City of Mounds View, Minnesota ! Nv Prepared 21 -Feb-91 Water Projects for Bonding �I�IZ��"�� Springsted Incorporated Composition of. Issue Project # Project Option 1 Option 2 91 -4 Long Lake Rd - TH 10 Crossing 69,000 69,000 91 -2 Bronson Water Main 51 ,750 51 ,750 91 -2 Hillview/Oakwood Loop 41 ,900 41 ,900 91 -3 City Hall Sewer Service 17,250 17,250 90-3 Treatment Plant #1 1 ,414,000 1 ,414,000 91 -5 Treatment Plants #2 & 3 500,000 500,000 90-10 Generator at Booster Station 80,000 80,000 91 -6 Well #4 Rehabilitation 161 ,000 0 91 -6 Well #4 Transmission Line 143,750 0 90-1 Tower #2 Demolition/Painting 345,000 0 Subtotals 2,823,650 2,173,900 Add: Costs of Issuance 25,000 23,000 Underwriter's Discount 37,375 28,925 Less: Investment Earnings (11 ,025) (825) Net Bond Issue 2,875,000 2,225,000 APPENDIX H • City of Mounds View, Minnesota Prepared 23-Feb-91 Water Enterprise - Revenues and Expenses Springsted Incorporated Funds Available for Debt Service 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Operating Revenues 412,420 434,735 482,977 508,546 557,887 Operating Expenses 482,824 552,309 541 ,012 549,164 581 ,730 j Net Income From Operations (70,404) (117,574) (58,035) (40,618) (23,843) Add Back Depreciation 129,816 156,801 184,186 190,160 194,640 Interest Income 112,349 118,096 116,830 114,617 115,774 Net Available for Debt Service 171 ,761 157,323 242,981 264,159 286,571 Numbers extracted from Voto, Tautges, Redpath & Co. , LTD report dated December 20, 1990. • • APPENDIX III 410City of Mounds View, Minnesota Prepared February 23, 1991 G.O.Water Revenue Bonds, Series 1991 By SPRINGSTED Incorporated Option 1 - $2,875,000 Dated: 6- 1 -1991 Mature: 2- 1 First Interest: 2- 1 -1992 Total Projected Year of Year of Principal Available Annual Revenue Mat. Principal Rates Interest & Interest Income Surplus (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) 1991 1992 0 0.00% 121 ,227 121 ,227 157,323 36,096 1992 1993 35,000 5.00% 181 ,840 216,840 242,981 26,141 1993 1994 60,000 5.15% 180,090 240,090 264,159 24,069 1994 1995 85,000 5.30% 177,000 262,000 286,571 24,571 1995 1996 90,000 5.40% 172,495 262,495 286,571 24,076 1996 1997 90,000 5.50% 167,635 257,635 . 286,571 28,936 1997 1998 95,000 5.60% 162,685 257,685 286,571 28,886 1998 1999 105,000 5.70% 157,365 262,365 286,571 24,206 1999 2000 110,000 5.80% 151 ,380 261 ,380 286,571 25,191 2000 2001 115,000 5.90% 145,000 260,000 286,571 26,571 2001 2002 120,000 6.00% 138,215 258,215 286,571 28,356 2002 2003 130,000 6.10% 131 ,015 261 ,015 286,571 25,556 2003 2004 135,000 6.20% 123,085 258,085 286,571 28,486 0 2004 2005 145,000 6.30% 114,715 259,715 286,571 26,856 2005 2006 155,000 6.40% 105,580 260,580 286,571 25,991 2006 2007 165,000 6.50% 95,660 260,660 286,571 25,911 2007 2008 175,000 6.60% 84,935 259,935 286,571 26,636 2008 2009 185,000 6.70% 73,385 258,385 286,571 28,186 2009 2010 200,000 6.80% 60,990 260,990 286,571 25,581 2010 2011 210,000 6.90% 47,390 257,390 286,571 29,181 2011 2012 225,000 7.00% 32,900 257,900 286,571 28,671 2012 2013 245,000 7.00% 17,150 262,150 286,571 24,421 TOTALS: 2,875,000 2,641 ,737 5,516,737 6,109,312 Bond Years: 40,316.67 Annual Interest: . 2,641 ,737 Avg. Maturity: 14.02 Plus Discount: 37,375 Avg. Annual Rate: 6.552% Net Interest: 2,679,112 T.I.C. Rate: 6.640% N.I.C. Rate: 6.645% Interest rates are estimates; changes may cause significant alterations of this schedule. The actual underwriter's discount bid may also vary. • 1 APPENDIX IV City of Mounds View, Minnesota Prepared February 23, 1991 • G.O.Water Revenue Bonds, Series 1991 By SPRINGSTED Incorporated Option 2 - $2,225,000 Dated: 6- 1 -1991 Mature: 2= 1 First Interest: 2- 1 -1992 Total Projected Year of Year of Principal Available Annual Revenue Mat. Principal Rates Interest & Interest Income Surplus (1 ) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) 1991 1992 0 0.00% 93,947 93,947 157,323 63,376 1992 1993 20,000 5.00% 140,920 160,920 242,981 82,061 1993 1994 40,000 5.15% 139,920 179,920 264,159 84,239 1994 1995 65,000 5.30% 137,860 202,860 286,571 83,711 1995 1996 70,000 5.40% 134,415 204,415 286,571 82,156 1996 1997 70,000 5.50% 130,635 200,635 286,571 85,936 1997 1998 75,000 5.60% 126,785 201 ,785 286,571 84,786 1998 1999 80,000 5.70% 122,585 202,585 286,571 83,986 1999 2000 85,000 5.80% 118,025 203,025 286,571 83,546 2000 2001 90,000 5.90% 113,095 203,095 286,571 83,476 2001 2002 95,000 6.00% 107,785 202,785 286,571 83,786 2002 2003 100,000 6.10% 102,085 202,085 286,571 84,486 2003 2004 105,000 6.20% 95,985 200,985 286,571 85,586 2004 2005 115,000 6.30% 89,475 204,475 286,571 82,096 • 2005 2006 120,000 6.40% 82,230 202,230 286,571 84,341 2006 2007 130,000 6.50% 74,550 204,550 286,571 82,021 2007 2008 135,000 6.60% 66,100 201 ,100 286,571 85,471 2008 2009 145,000 6.70% 57,190 202,190 286,571 84,381 2009 2010 155,000 6.80% 47,475 202,475 286,571 84,096 2010 2011 165,000 6.90% 36,935 201 ,935 286,571 84,636 2011 2012 175,000 7.00% 25,550 200,550 286,571 86,021 2012 2013 190,000 7.00% 13,300 203,300 286,571 83,271 TOTALS: 2,225,000 2,056,847 4,281 ,847 6,109,312 Bond Years: 31 ,383.33 Annual Interest: 2,056,847 Avg. Maturity: 14.10 Plus Discount: 28,925 Avg. Annual Rate: 6.554% Net Interest: 2,085,772 T.I.C. Rate: 6.642% N.I.C. Rate: 6.646% Interest rates are estimates; changes may cause significant alterations of this schedule. The actual underwriter's discount bid may also vary. 1 APPENDIX V . City of Mounds View, Minnesota Prepared February 23, 1991 G.O.Water Revenue Bonds,_ Series 1991 By SPRINGSTED Incorporated Option 2 - $2,225,000 Dated: 6- 1 -1991 Mature: 2- 1 First Interest: 2- 1 -1992 Total Projected Year of Year of Principal Available Annual Revenue Mat. Principal Rates Interest & Interest Income Surplus (1 ) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) 1991 1992 0 0.00% 85,857 85,857 157,323 71 ,466 1992 1993 85,000 5.00% 128,785 213,785 242,981 29,196 1993 1994 110,000 5.15% 124,535 234,535 264,159 29,624 1994 1995 140,000 5.30% 118,870 258,870 286,571 27,701 1995 1996 145,000 5.40% . 111 ,450 256,450 286,571 30,121 1996 1997 155,000 5.50% 103,620 258,620. 286,571 27,951 1997 1998 160,000 5.60%.. 95,095 255,095 286,571 31 ,476 1998 1999 170,000 5.70% 86,135 256,135 286,571 30,436 1999 2000 180,000 5.80% 76,445 256,445 286,571 30,126 2000 2001 190,000 5.90% 66,005 256,005 286,571 30,566 2001 2002 205,000 6.00% 54,795 259,795 286,571 26,776 2002 2003 215,000 6.10% 42,495 257,495 286,571 29,076 2003 2004 230,000 6.20% 29,380 259,380 286,571 27,191 410 2004 2005 240,000 6.30% 15,120 255,120 286,571 31 ,451 TOTALS: 2,225,000 1 ,138,587 3,363,587 3,816,744 Bond Years: 19,158.33 Annual Interest: 1 ,138,587 Avg. Maturity: 8.61 Plus Discount: 28,925 Avg. Annual Rate: 5.943% Net Interest: 1 ,167,512 T.I.C. Rate: 6.117% N.I.C. Rate: 6.094% Interest rates are estimates; changes may cause significant alterations of this schedule. The actual underwriter's discount bid may also vary. _ Te . aZ • MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL � ,D FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR SAMANTHA ORDUNO T DATE: FEBRUARY 28, 1991 RE: PRESENTATION BY EVEREST GROUP Two weeks ago Tim Nelson and Bill Franke of Everest met with Rick Minetor and myself to bring us up-to-date on their development plans for Phase II and the Loose Ends site. Phase II Evidently, there is a possible tenant for Building I . In regards to Buildings H & J, Everest would like to address the Council with a revision to the square footage of the two buildings . The proposal is to decrease the size of Building J and increase the size of Building H while maintaining the previously agreed upon total square footage of the two buildings . This revision may also include upgrading of the exterior of Building J to accommodate a higher quality of tenant. 411 Loose Ends Site The Everest Group does not have immediate plans for the building. They expressed desire to secure a "temporary" tenant (temporary was defined as not more than one year) until plans are formulated for the development of the remainder of Phase I. There are several important issues the Council may wish to consider discussing with Everest regarding the Loose Ends site: * The type and service level of a temporary business on that site. Because it is a very visible site and has a high measure of geographical connection to the Business Park, it is necessary to maintain a high degree of quality on the site. * The marketability of the site if the building was removed, the land cleared and prepared for development. * If an acceptable temporary tenant is not found and the building is not removed, the site must be maintained at an appropriate level. MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL • FEBRUARY 28, 1991 PAGE TWO At the present time, the building appears to be in good condition. However, there are several things the company could do to enhance the site and contribute to a more improved visual image; i.e. , remove the sign and the barrels adjacent to the building. The Council may wish to address these issues during Everest's update. r?!' 2t<, h . • ".i, „.._;,,,,,,,_,v.;,-,,,,,..• , # i. :: {S 1.<;' 4”?";,` ,+ 641 r'y. -4'�n.,z4- s S't';:'4-',:f.:...,1.ii-ils z 3_i'`• �r:-. -,,;-: :',1-7--,-,..,, r +,� ,fix,+ <{I�--I- ;;;Yi N�-y ,g,a .uaK1.. ' r 'Yw 4 dY yr u 'z 1 ,-•t .i 1 � ur�c'�t r r' J t• '��'� a+«tE ?: `'�aSY-s #';,4-,-. °n yns � �_, t W+ „ �' t S,N.r.t�y•{i .j Fx f Y� S. Aq:;.�s TT.1� r s s s',. y #aE ,t. _ } 7 Tom_ • T- ' 3te` r- ,�+-,; r , tV - `} ^�e-*v,•.ss^r..z• '.�?. fi+�&'''''' ;at:�a.1y5'{L ft0Fsu rsr*+ ,v4 Ir sir? ')fie,Yaa,r.i p ~ r'..y -,m A',f . #MWI -. ' .y;41""r1W ( N..z?'Y «'.4�\s.!} i.(.F;'' :�•- I < p� -ta 3-111.•-•-s j 4: .(4�yi 'L ' V/ .'4/2= am 7CI rT4.' _JIM S 'al .1-•-4 - `D .uwrean..y.n6ra _ • -,Z �.. .,,, - ..o-... -a._ y j,�S �.a 4 MS£ aleleJaiui -- - S£ alBis aju T E •- _ - ILI z i+, OM1!\k- l � -..,-....-.-7...-7",--.77.:,--� zi (ft IL/ �` _'.. 'Q t ! ( ..-4,.1-` '"ar ' '�+is��r� '.\ z rn m. I I .. V 'IF 1'# , �s c O.„I. ,,r I • s fiP� i • s0 ,. l N: Cl) . w� 1ht� o.. ; �`` � .`v ff( N ,--'-'-•-•.:- - ° ri). � O to-. E it -' - 7 -; - !c.�-ws �M_ �o,� 1 rf 1 1 I J s t I —z,.. c. - o _j ail • 0 :1-..,-,..Tt iS - =,4--. v - . frgi C(1. ...! T- �® is 'a .- ZtlKm O m1 r f ;„� O.o-J �9 Cl') �� ' " ,..:1''''.17'—t'' "--'-'- ---- d 'a_>b_t moi", ' ,._ ay ti. • v .p � T17jji :and �: ' 3 - m > >t r€ , aft ,�r a: 05 co> fIII ".......I _� ��> ,��i ! -� �`-- .1 llLfS.7iTr rwl r ' � • t!1 +6 f�1 rC �Ga1# J — - a .-- _ I `i.� t F , _ N I za lnmr-Q r.�-� = miD�Q mQ Enni jr 0 ' F s.,.-4,.: *Napr, _ r* fx'-- .af+. n 0 z a n ��\ z CN vo d C\0 Ca W C. —I C\ p- q N m 0 H— Eli 't: j� f• ( ► _ m Co) / oSuo� x A Long take F 2 t72,, o o = H <0 ', CI, 'r'-- '- \to,•• .--' -\.25,..? 5* 0 /(.4 C rri --' /` -, m Rice (` N of? N cn '. t _ / = n is o 0 r tier (---- // / �� �_ • 0 9 =• —6) O ^ Iss at Round Lake W A O 11 =} --i o N r • I 0 �r C.71 IC- `�- C C r yacTa. ITT p.-y a r _ -h` C CD � Ir A o r- r 0)13m Cu • z DD rn N co z tII 11 /11'1 Z m v Z om `N� FE 33 p 1Q n m cn MEMORANDUM Memo To :Mayor and Council Members s-teni 3 From :Ric Minetor, City Engineer/Director of Public Works Xlgs41:164§ Date :February 28 , 1991 Subject :Surface Water Mangement Utility Mark Lobermeir will be at the March 4th meeting to present and discuss information regarding the proposed Surface Water Management Utility and alternative methods of funding surface water projects and operations . The attached reports were previously distributed to Council . We have included them again for your convenience. I have also attached my original memo to Council discussing the utility concept for reference. • 111 I 'M. 41111 MEMORANDUM Memo To :Mayor and Council Members From :Ric Minetor, City Engineer/Director of Public Works Date :April 18, 1990 Subject :Surface Water Management Utility The Council has accepted the Surface Water Management Plan and that plan is currently under review by Rice Creek Watershed. The initial comments have been positive and we expect approval with few, if any, revisions. As we have discussed since the acceptance of the plan, financing of capital projects and maintenance of the system is a concern, especially in the current climate of levy limits and local government aid reductions. The concept of a Storm Water Utility was presented in the report we received from Short-Elliott-Hendrickson on April 2nd of this year. On that night and on April 16th, there were preliminary discussions regarding benefits of this method of financing improvements and maintenance of our surface water systems. The advantages and disadvantages were summarized on pages 7 and 8 of the report. Since the Council indicated a desire to begin the process of implementing a utility, certain policy decisions need to be made prior to beginning the public input process. The following staff suggestions cover the necessary policy decisions • and are made for discussion purposes. The title of the utility should be the Mounds View Surface Water Management Utility. If we call it a storm water utility, it could be possible to misconstrue this to pertain only to storm sewers and detention sites directly affected by storm water run-off. We know that all wetlands play a role in storm water management, even those not directly accepting significant storm water run- off. In adopting the name of a surface water management utility there would be a clear indication of the purpose of the utility. Policy issues include exemptions, credits, basis of charges, rain fall amount on which to base charges, and an appeal process. Exemptions are those parcels of land in the City that are not subject to utility charges. I suggest that the only exemptions be public road rights-of way. Collecting from Mn/DOT, Ramsey County, and ourselves would be difficult and questionable since these same rights-of-way are the location of most storm water run-off conveyance facilities (ditches, curbs, gutters, and sewers) . Credits are sometimes given for features that reduce or mitigate run-off . I suggest that no credits be given. Parcels which provide natural or man-made detention result in lower costs in constructing the system (due to smaller pipe sizes) and therefore the utility chargesare already reduced. They also cause some • 1 } 16 additional costs for maintenance . The utility would pay for • regional detention pond improvements and improvements to existing storm sewers and existing developed areas. New developments or private sewers are not a public benefit at the time of construction, and therefore these should be paid for by the developer. In the case of a new sewer or other facility in a development that will become public property, the benefit is originally to the developer to allow the development and the future maintenance and improvements will be the responsibility of the utility. The report previously presented recommended basing charges on the zoning of the parcel, not on the existing land use. This means that parcels that are under-utilized (such as residential use on a lot with commercial zoning) would be paying a higher rate than the land use may dictate. This is consistent with analyzing storm sewers and ponds for future use based on zoning rather than on existing land use. The owner also has the options of developing his parcel consistent with zoning, rezone consistent with the use, or appeal the charge. The report showed an example of using a 2 inch rain fallas the basis of charges. Due to infiltration (that portion off rain fall that soaks into the ground) the ratio of run-off between residential property and commercial property varies depending on the rain fall selected. The greater the rain fall, the less "infiltration credit" is reflected in the ratio . A 2 inch 0 rainfall would have a ratio of 2.9, commercial to residential. Basing the charge on the run-off of a 2 inch rain fall , commercial properties would pay 2 .9 times as much to the utility than would residential properties. Finally, an appeal process needs to be created. Appeals could be considered for vacant land or under-utilized land. Vacant land still produces run-off, but not in the quantity of developed land. The same is true of under-utilized land. A reduction in the charge may be appropriate in these situations, but it should be the responsibility of the property owner to ask for this reduction. The reduction could be based on the reduction in run- off due—VY—the under-utilizutiun the vac us of—the parcel. If the Council desires to proceed with the creation of a Surface Water Management Utility, Short-Elliott-Hendrickson. should be retained to prepare a final report and assist in the public information program. The final report would include a 'fee basis including recommended charges and expenditures , and a draft ordinance. 410 2 Policy decisions that need to be made at this time in order to proceed with the utility are: Name of the Utility Exemptions to be considered (such as public street rights- of-way) . Credits to be allowed, if any. Basis of charges (zoning or existing land use) . Rain fall amount for basis of charges - Rain fall Ratio (Commercial to Residential) 1"* 10.68 2" 2 .90 3" 2. 10 4" 1.75 5n 1.59 Appeal Process - Council might consider a policy to grant a reduction in charges only after an appeal and only to the extent that under-utilization or vacant land reduces the estimated run-off. Expenditures from the fund - What types of expendituresIII , would the fund cover (e.g. Capital improvement projects, maintenance costs for cleaning sewers and ditches, street sweeping costs, personnel costs, and administrative costs. I recommend that staff be authorized to enter into an agreement for services with Short-Elliott-Hendrickson for Preparation of a final report on a Surface Water Management Utility and assistance for a Public Information program for the implementation of this utility. The cost for this work is to be charges to account # 420-4121-303 . 3 zTEJVZ 4. MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: SAMANTHA ORDUNO, CITY ADMINISTRATOR ))) DATE: FEBRUARY 28, 1991 RE: DISCUSSION BY CHIEF FAGERSTROM REGARDING USE OF PRIVATE VEHCILES AS EMERGENCY VEHICLES This item was removed from the last agenda session in order for Chief Fagerstrom to have an opportunity to discuss his proposal with Chief Ramacher. Chief Ramacher and I both have concerns regarding the use of private vehicles as emergency vehicles . Chief Fagerstrom will be present at Monday's meeting to discuss in greater detail his request that the Council consider supporting legislation which would allow his private vehicle and his deputy chief's car to be used as emergency vehicles to and from a fire scene. • 110 V Zteni MEMO TO: MAYOR & COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: MARY SAARION DATE: FEBRUARY 28, 1991 SUBJECT: CABLE COMMITTEE GUIDELINES/IDEAS The Cable Committee has prepared guidelines for the implementation of Cable TV programming as requested by the City Council. The Cable Committee wishes to review the guidelines with the Council. Also the Cable Committee would like to discuss programming ideas, to receive your thoughts and opinions regarding ideas for additional programming. Also, the Cable Committee would like to solicite any programming ideas that the Council may wish the Committee to pursue. • • V f MOUNDS VIEW CABLE COMMITTEE 111 MISSION STATEMENT The mission of the Mounds View Cable Committee is to provide a communications link for Mounds View citizens that will enable them to better understand the operation and function of government and to become more active participating in community life through the use of cable television. PURPOSE The Mounds View Cable Committee is a volunteer committee of Mounds View citizens dedicated to developing awareness and understanding of community events, governmental programs and issues and information about health, recreation, the environment, security (ie. police, fire, etc. ) and community issues through the use of cable television. OBJECTIVES 111 1. To serve as a liaison to the City Council in the programming of government cable television channel 16. 2 . To provide an informational and public relations outlet through use of cable television. 3 . To develop and work towards an understanding of the benefits of cable television communications. 4 . To provide Mounds View residents the opportunity to understand their—community more fully and to pdr ticipdte more successfully the process of community life. 5 .. To produce, oversee and evaluate television programming endeavors on the government channel. 6. To communicate programming objectives to the Mounds View City Council. 7 . To develop an awareness of the government channel through continued public relation efforts through the local press, city newsletter, metro press and cable television. 8 . To encourage individual resident and institutions to make use of cable television. 1 • 9. To work in concert with the North Suburban Cable Access Corporation and the North Suburban Cable Commission to help facilitate the new approach to community programming in the ten city franchise area. 10. To help develop and initiate television programming of area wide significance in conjunction with other cities of .the North Suburban Cable Commission. GUIDELINES Any program produced by the City of Mounds View's governmental organizations may be cablecast on the government access channel. Programs produced by others about the City of Mounds View' s governmental organizations and/or its supported activities may be cablecast on this channel, subject to the approval of the Mounds View Cable Committee. Programs produced by other governmental agencies or other community organizations may be cablecast on this channel, provided they have interest and value for the citizens of Mounds View. Such programs shall also be subject to the approval of the Mounds View Cable Committee. Programs that contain, in whole or in part, any of the following subject matter will not be cablecast on the government access • channel. A. Commercial Message or Material Anything promoting a product or a service, with the primary objective of producing a monetary profit for a specific commercial organization or individual, may not air on the government access channel. This is not to preclude the incidental mention of a business or product, as part of a program where the primary purpose is to disseminate information of public benefit. Businesses, individuals and organizations may be acknowledged for assistance in the production of a program or the provision of other' means of support. B. Political Campaigning The government access channel will not be used for political campaigning by individuals or organizations seeking public office or legislation. Neither can this channel be used for solicitation of funds for political purposes. This is not to preclude the cablecasting of political debates or candidates ' meetings, provided that fairness and equal time rules are followed. Also not precluded shall be the possibility of cablecasting reports by current elected officials or community organizations regarding the status of issues and other governmental business, providing again, that fairness and equal time rules are followed where applicable. i C. Religious Material • Programming generally considered religious in nature will not be allowed. Program material that would advocate a particular religious belief will also not be allowed to air on the government access channel. Religious organizations or ideals may be mentioned as incidental information as part of a program. This rule certainly should not preclude the appearance of a clergy or individual representing a particular religion as part of a program providing general information. D. Obscenity and Defamation Every effort will be made to assure that all programs cablecast on the government access channel adheres to the rules of the Minnesota Cable Communications and community standards relative to obscenity and defamation. E. Cable Committee The Cable Committee is a working group that identifies, develops and produces television programming. This committee is comprised of either three or five resident members and technical staff as well as a department 411head facilitator and a designated City Council liaison. The members must be volunteers, having an interest and willingness to serve and assist in the production of cable programming. SCHEDULE AND PROGRAM PRIORITIES The Mounds View Cable Committee shall determine priorities for the production and cablecasting of programs in accordance with these—gu3-d-e-lines d av-alabl-ewes-ources. Responsibility for planning, budgeting and operation shall be as designated by the Cable Committee. FUNDING Funding for the operation of the government access channel will be as appropriated by the City Council from the annual franchise fees received from the operation of the cable television system in the North Suburban Cable System. Other support may be provided through services such as grants from other agencies, donations and assistance from the cable television franchise holder, as required by the franchise ordinance. _11-eYV1 6 ID MEMO TO: MAYOR & COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: MARY SAARION DATE: FEBRUARY 28, 1991 SUBJECT: FESTIVAL IN THE PARK OPTIONS Listed in this memorandum are several options for implementing a Festival in the Park without expense to the City. The activities and possible sponsors are listed. Cost of rental of the showmobile: $250.00 could be paid for with the receipts of the craft fair reservations. Twenty-five reservations at $10.00 each would pay for the rental of the showmobile. Entertainment : Westbound Band would most likely be happy to play during the later afternoon time for about a 3 hour stretch at a fee of$500.00. The money for this • expense could be solicited from local merchants working in a strategy that the merchants would benefit from advertisements. Local entertainment: Other options for local entertainment could be pursued. Such groups as the steel drum band, perhaps the high school band or part thereof, a talent show and opportunity for other local talent groups to perform could be advertised and available as an opportunity for talent display. Fireworks : The Lion's Club would be asked to contribute the_elitire_amou-nt_fo-rthe fireworks display, $5,000. Activities : Again, we could continue to encourage community groups and organizations to participate in activities as fund raisers for their particular organization. In the past, such groups have organized cake walks, carnival type games, athletic contest booths such as ball throws, food booths including pizza, queens apples, candy, hot dogs, pop, corn - on - the - cob and other specialties. Groups have also held family type games such as Bingo. These groups include the churches, PTO's, high school clubs, athletic organizations and community groups such as the Lion's and Lioness Clubs. demonstrations : Many groups are looking for places to demonstrate their skills or interests. In the past the Festival has had the Antique Car Club show their cars, a square dancing group has held a dance exhibition, aerial models have flown our skies, gymnasts have performed, and the MVCT has previewed their performances. This is free entertainment provided by the community. • Athletic Competitions : A softball tournament has been a longstanding activity during the Festival. The competition brings in families and friends as spectators as well as the players themselves. The competition provides athletic entertainment for many Festival goers. Explorers Club : The Mounds View Explorers Club has provided services such as medical services, parking services, and crowd control. This group would be one that could be asked to help in the maintenance area of the Festival if needed. Maintenance : Periodic dumping of trashcans, troubleshooting and preparations for the rope barriers for the fireworks has been performed by employees of Public Works. Community groups could be approached to provide these services on a volunteer basis. Perhaps the Jaycees, a church group, a group of Lion's members, the Explorers or others may be interested in volunteering their services if they knew that there was a need for manpower to accomplish these tasks. Staffing : Several Recreation staff members are willing to work during the Festival day without a cost burden to the City. • So far, these options have been offered without a cost to the City. As time goes on other opportunities may present themselves for no-cost benefit to the City for the expansion of this list. Staff awaits the Council's direction for the continuation or dis- continuation of the Festival in the Park celebration. 4110 Item 7 • MEMO TO: MAYOR & COUNCIL FROM: MARY SAARION DATE: FEBRUARY 28, 1991 SUBJECT: JOINT ATHLETIC FIELDS ON PROPERTY EAST OF 35W ALONG CTY RD J On February 12, I met with the area Parks and Recreation Directors to discuss athletic facilities and facilitation of area athletic organizations. At this meeting I introduced Councilmember Quick's idea for a joint athletic facility on the land owned by the U of M at the 35W and County Road J intersection. This land is very conducive to athletic field development because of it's openness and flatness and easy accessibility. Even though the need for additional athletic fields is evident in every city, the Directors expressed these reservations. 1. The City of New Brighton has put a hold on all park development until the City • has a better indication of the LGA cuts. Maurie Anderson stated that because this is not a budgeted project, it would probably not be considered at this time. 2. The City of Arden Hills is hopeful for the development of the Arsenal Ballfield project and has put it's interests into that project, hopeful for progress with the completion of the pollution tests. John Buckley was doubtful that the Arden Hills City Council would be interested in pursuing an additional athletic facility plan at this time. . - •v- ' •n i irec or or e ity of Shoreview replied that it was her understanding that at one time Mayor Wedell mentioned an interest in the possibility of developing a golf course on this property. However, the land is very valuable and the City may wish to encourage a taxable industrial development to benefit the City. 4. Here are more concerns expressed by the group: - A large amount of money needed to develop an athletic facility. It is doubtful that unbudgeted projects would be considered. • - The facility would be available for an undetermined amount of time providing unpredictability for facility users. -2- - Displacement of users once the use of the land is retracted. This situation is • occurring in White Bear Lake. - The capital costs of the facility would probably never be regained once the lease expires. It was suggested that if the cities wish to pursue this idea it would best be pursued at the Council level and perhaps placed on the agenda of the monthly Mayor's meetings. • 4110 -i-ern MEMO 8 MEMO TO: MAYOR & COUNCILMEMBERS • FROM: MARY SAARION DATE: FEBRUARY 28, 1991 SUBJECT: LAND USE PROPOSALS The City of Mounds View has received four proposals for the land use study of land located next to Sysco. A staff team has been selected to review the presentations of the firms which have favorable proposals. The review team will be comprised of City Administrator Orduno, City Engineer Minetor, and Parks & Recreation Director Saarion. It would be advantageous for a councilmember to serve on the review team. The presentations have been scheduled for Thursday, March 7 beginning at 3:00 p.m • L.i&yx /e-) 411 MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR, SAMANTHA ORD DATE: FEBRUARY 28, 1991 RE: DATE FOR SPRING CLEAN-UP DAY Before we know it, the snow will be history, the temperature will be a pleasant "lets-go-barefoot-and-wear-shorts" degree level and that sometimes feared, often dreaded, call to victims of cabin fever will be heard across the land. . . . "It's time for Spring Cleaning! " From every corner of the community, men, women and children of all ages will be eyeballing that old refrigerator that's been in the garage for 20 years and wondering, "WHEN WILL MOUNDS VIEW HOLD THE SPRING CLEAN-UP DAY?" Well, it's time to ease the minds of our residents, give them hope and calm their fears that the old tires from Uncle Buck's 411 Edsel can be disposed of in a place (and method) much safer than the "Midnight Surplus Store" . Yes, it's time to set the date, mark the calendar, spread the word, and otherwise prepare for a "Clean-Up Happening! " Last year we cleaned the town on Saturday, May 5th. If it is your pleasure to continue the May tradition, the Saturday dates are the 4th, 11th, 18th and 25th. The 25th is the Memorial Day Holiday Weekend. Please check your calendars and state your preference at • • - - his year'selean-Up Day will be an event! so/mjs • Ufvyyi /2_ TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL • FROM: SAMANTHA ORDUNO, CITY ADMINISTRATOR DATE: MARCH 27, 1991 RE: ADDENDUM TO THE JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT REGARDING SPONSORSHIP OF THE NORTHWEST SUBURBAN YOUTH AND FAMILY SERVICE BUREAU ***************************************************************** The City of Roseville has requested a minor change to the Joint Powers Agreement for the Northwest Suburban Youth and Family Service Bureau. The change is in regards to administrative services which Roseville will provide to the bureau. The other change to the Agreement provides for a duration clause which would allow for cities to terminate their participation with 60 days notice effective at the end of the year notice is given. If Council concensus with the Addendum, this item will be placed on the Consent Agenda for April 8, 1991. so/mjs IIII will have additional information at the meeting, including costs for the clean-up days in 1990 and a proposed fee schedule for 1991. SO/MJS ADDENDUM TO JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT • WHEREAS , the Cities of Arden Hills , New Brighton , Moundsview, Shoreview, North Oaks , Roseville, Little Canada , Lauderdale and Falcon Heights entered into a Joint Powers Agreement regarding sponsorship of the Northwest Suburban Youth Service Bureau in 1977; and WHEREAS, said Agreement expired by its terms on December 31, 1978; WHEREAS, notwithstanding the expiration of said Agreement, the parties have abided by it and have treated it as if it has continued in effect since its execution; WHEREAS, by this addendum to said Agreement, the parties desire to provide for a duration clause in said agreement • allowing it to continue from year to year unless otherwise modified or terminated by the parties; and WHEREAS, pursuant to paragraph 2A of the Agreement , the City of Roseville is designated to provide "accounting and auditing services" and it is the desire of the parties to amend that par ag ra a-h—o- iii-egg e e ie tit. NOW , THEREFORE , it is hereby agreed by and between the parties as follows that the Joint Powers Agreement by and between the parties establishing the North Suburban Youth Service Bureau, executed at various dates by the parties in 1977 , is amended as follows : 1. Paragraph 2 is amended to read: 2 . The City of Roseville, as the sponsoring community, shall provide administrative services to the Northwest Suburban Youth Service Bureau, as follows: A. Accounting Services B. Printing and Copying Services C. Acquisition of Supplies The City of Roseville shall be reimbursed for the above services from the operating budget of the Northwest Suburban Youth Service Bureau on the basis of the City's costs in supplying such services. 2 . Paragraph 7 is amended to read: 7. This Agreement shall continue in effect for an indefinite term, unless any party gives sixty (60) days written notice to all of the other parties, of its intent to cancel said Agreement effective December 31 of the year in which the notice is made, or unless the parties modify said 4IPAgreement in writing. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the authorized representatives of the various municipalities have executed this addendum on the dates set forth below. Dated: , 199, CITY OF ARDEN HILLS By Its: Mayor By Its: Manager Dated: , 199 CITY OF NEW BRIGHTON By Its: Mayor By Its: Manager 2 Dated: , 1990 CITY OF MOUNDSVIEW By111 Its: Mayor By Its: Manager Dated: , 1990 CITY OF SHOREVIEW By Its : Mayor By Its: Manager Dated: , 1990 CITY OF NORTH OAKS By Its: Mayor By Its: Manager Dated: , 1990 CITY OF ROSEVILLE By Its: Mayor By Its : Manager Dated: , 1990 CITY OF LITTLE CANADA By Its: Mayor By Its : Manager Dated: , 1990 CITY OF LAUDERDALE By Its : Mayor By Its : Manager Dated: , 1990 CITY OF FALCON HEIGHTS By Its : Mayor By Its : Manager 3