HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packets - 1990/07/02 MEMORANDUM
Memo To :Mayor and Council Members
From :Ric Minetor, City Engineer/Director of Public Works
Date :June 27, 1990 i('-/4_'=
Subject :County Road J Realignment Study Presentation
The consultant for the traffic study, Short-Elliott-Hendrickson,
will present an informational overview of the data collected and
initial findings at the July 2nd Agenda Session. They are
currently scheduled to present the final report at the July 23rd
Council Meeting.
.
• MEMORANDUM
Mayor and City Y Council
FROM: City Planner, Michelle Hren
DATE: June 27, 1990
SUBJECT: Dennis Richter, 8305 Fairchild, Conditonal Use Permit
(Oversized Accessory Building)
Mr. Dennis Richter has submitted a request for a Conditional Use
Permit to allow an oversized accessory building on his property
located at •8305 Fairchild.
The Zoning Code allows by Conditional Use Permit (CUP) an accessory
building up to 400 Sq. Ft. in area. Buildings under 216 Sq. Ft.
do not require any special approvals . Mr. Richter has requested
that he be allowed to build a 264 Sq. Ft. building. The requested
area is well within the limits of the Code.
• The Planning Commission reviewed the request and has recommended
to the City Council approval of the request. Attached is the
Planning Commission resolution for this request.
Staff is looking for direction regarding the appropriate resolution
to prepare for this request.
•
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION •
RESOLUTION NO. 295-90
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY DENNIS
RICHTER FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW AN OVERSIZED
ACCESSORY BUILDING ON HIS PROPERTY AT 8305 FAIRCHILD AVENUE,
PLANNING CASE NO. 301-90
WHEREAS the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed
the request of Mr. Dennis Richter for a conditional use permit to
allow an oversized accessory building (shed) in the rear yard of
his property at 8305 Fairchild Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the Zoning
Code and recognizes that the Code allows a 400 square foot
accessory building with a conditional use permit; and
WHEREAS, the proposed accessory building is 264 square
feet which is within the square footage allowed with a conditional
use permit;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View •
Planning Commission recommends to the City Council approval of the
requested Conditional Use Permit contingent upon the following:
1. The Conditional Use Permit is recorded with Ramsey
County.
2. The building shall be designed and maintained to
provide a uniform appearance with the dwelling unit.
3. The accessory building does not exceed 400 square feet.
4 . The only vehicles that may be stored in the accessory
building are licensed collector vehicles.
5. No driveway and/or apron shall be added to serve the
accessory building.
6 . The accessory building must conform with sections 40 . 04,
Subd. F and 40. 10, Subd. C(2) of the Zoning Code.
7 . Should the use for which the permit was granted be changed,
the permit shall be subject to reconsideration, revocation
or other action as regulated by Chapter 40.25 of this Code.
111
RESOLUTION NO. 295-90
•
PAGE TWO
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Planning Commission
directs Staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior
to approval of the minutes.
Adopted this 20th day of June, 1990.
ATTEST:
Chairman
(SEAL)
City Planner
•
411
MEMO TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL
FROM: MARY SAARION, DIRECTOR
PARKS, RECREATION AND FORESTRY
• DATE: JUNE 27, 1990
SUBJECT: SILVER VIEW PARK PROPOSAL
The Silver View Park proposal is intended to present a concept plan for improvements
at Silver View Park. In no way is this plan offering precise dates, costs or designs of
capital equipment, facilities or services. The Task Force was well aware that costs
change and to pinpoint costs in 1990 for improvements in 1993 is impossible. For
this reason, general estimates are given on each grid sheet. Examples of facility and
equipment were provided as a guide to the ideas discussed by the group. In addition,
ideas were offered in different scopes. For instance, a $50,000 playground facility
would be grand, but a $30,000 playground facility would suffice.
Another example of cost differences is the bridge over the narrows. As explained in
the narrative, a pedestrian bridge is recommended contingent on the fact that the
culvert is laid on the west side of the pond which would allow maintenance vehicles
to pass. If the culvert is not installed, then the bridge should allow vehicular passage.
The costs of the pedestrian and vehicular bridge are different. However, because it is
unknown what the decision will be, the higher cost bridge was inserted to be
conservative.
• The Task Force again was well aware that a plan is simply a plan and that costs are
volatile until the very time of receipt of bids and funding availability. Staff suggests
that the Council concentrate on the first ten (10) pages of the proposal which defines
the thirteen recommendations of the Task Force and Parks and Recreation
Commission.
The most important part of this whole plan is the concept plan (blob map) which
creates a distinct function of three different areas of the park and offers purpose and
intent for each area. As Ron Fagerstrom stated repeatedly at the public hearing, this
is the most important part of the proposal and all other ideas were centered around
this concept.
There are duplications in this proposal but not contradictions. The proposal was
created with each concept area planned separately. Because functions may occur in
more than one concept area (i.e. benches, pathways, trash receptacles), the same
facilities are listed in each individual concept area plan.
There are some deviations regarding a hard and fast rule on the concept plan. For
instance, the pond area is considered nature passive, and yet it is proposed that a
hard surface pathway be installed on the north side of the pond for the walking
impaired. This may be in conflict with the concept if one believes that the pathway
• will then attract active users such as bicyclist, skateboards, rollerblades, etc. However,
this deviation demonstrates that this plan is flexible and because the general concept
is defined as a guide, the plan is designed to provide opportunities to consider special
needs and requests of the community.
-2-
In conclusion, I urge the Council to view this proposal not for detail, but for concept
P
and consider approval of the thirteen recommendations with the greatest being the
•
Concept Plan, the function of the park, which provides guidelines to the improvements
of each area.
Do not become concerned about details, because this plan will be outdated in detail in
less than one year. Costs, funding sources, products, and maintenance requirements
change too quickly and for this reason firm information regarding such are suggestive
rather than definite.
My final word is a request for expediency. We are currently in dire need of facilities
on the proposal's capital items list. The picnic shelter and park has increasing use and
there is a need for purchase of decorative dumpsters and trash receptacles. Also, grills
and more picnic tables are needed. The hard surface court needs to be sealed and
color-coated. Staff is anxious to begin requesting funds for these necessary amenities
so that the facility can be as functional as possible.
MS/SL
40
i
MEMO TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
• CLERK-ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: •:
;' EMO TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCI
K-
FROM: CLER DMINISTRATOR 11,vA
DATE: OCTOBER 30, 1989
SUBJECT: CIGARETTE VENDING MACHINES
Pursuant to your direction at the October 23, 1989 Council
Meeting, staff has conducted a survey of all public
buildings in the City of Mounds View to determine the
location and number of cigarette vending machines. The
investigation has revealed the following locations and
number of machines.
Donatelles 1 machine
Perkins 1 machine
Loose Ends 3 machines
R. J. Riches 1 machine
Mermaid Lounge 3 machines
Robert ' s Off 10 1 machine
Mounds View Inn 1 machine
Pink Flower 1 machine
Town' s Edge Mobile Home Trailer Park 1 machine
Community Building that is empty and
has not been used for one year .
As you may know, the ordinance adopted by the City of White S
Bear Lake and being considered by the cities of St. Paul,
Minneapolis and Shoreview call for the regulation of vending
machines in public buildings which are accessible to
minors. In the case of the bar area at the Mermaid, Loose
Ends, Robert ' s Off 10 and the bar area at Donatelles, this
would not be the case. I hope that the above information
adequately responds to your request. Should your require
any additional information, please do not hesitate to let me
know.
DFP/MJS
7574;;;Ip
11111:71 rAl
A I 1.4°4_4 a
Association for Nonsmokers-Minnesota
1421 Park Avenue South,Minneapolis,Minnesota 55404
(612)339-1902 FAX:(612)339-4928
June 19 , 1990
Michelle Hiven
City Planner
2401 Highway 10
Mounds View, Mn 55112
Ms. Hiven:
In December you attended a conference on children's access to
tobacco products. Since that conference a whole lot has
happened. To date 18 cities have completely banned the sale of
tobacco products from vending machines . At least 22 others have
instituted lesser prohibitions. The State Legislature also got
into the act. Pushed by the tobacco/vending lobby, the
legislature considered legislation which would have pre-empted
cities from passing stronger ordinances. The pre-emption was
defeated but the State ultimately passed a very weak and largely
• unenforceable law which requires remote controlled locking devices
on some machines and placement of machines within view of an
employee in other cases . There are no enforcement provisions and
no penalties in the state law.
Since the state law passed Golden Valley has passed a total ban
and Edina and Minnetonka have passed total bans on a first
reading. Three or four of St. Paul 's northern suburbs are
forming a :joint task force to formulate a tobacco intervention plan
for their communities .
The ball is rolling on vending machines and several communities
-. E. •r ■
alternatives available to cities are:
1 . Enforcement of age-of-sales laws through tobacco license
revocation or license suspension for those caught selling tobacco
to minors;
2. Enforcement of age-of-sale laws through gross prosecutions of
vendors caught selling tobacco to minors ,
3. Variable license fees with those selling from behind the
counter receiving substantial discounts over those selling from
self-service racks (a practice with allows for easy shoplifting
by even inexperienced shoplifters) .
4. Prohibitions of billboard advertising of tobacco (and
alcohol ) .
CHARTER MEMBER •
C• :NED
OF MINNESOTA
We have model ordinances available and would be happy to send you
copies. If you would like to receive additional information 110
about vending machine ordinances or any of the alternatives
listed above, please call the ANSR office at 339--1902 or send a
stamped legal envelope ($. 45) .
We would also like to know what is happening in your
community . Has any kind of ordinance been considered? What
happened? Is there current interest on the council to consider
tobacco related ordinances? Please give us a call or drop us a
note to fill us in on any tobacco related activity in your
community .
Sim ely :.
Je ne Weigun
MEMORANDUM
Memo To :Mayor and Council Members
From :Ric Minetor, City Engineer/Director of Public Works
Date :June 25, 1990
Subject :Well #5 Preventive Maintenance - Pay Request
We have received the pay request from Mark Traut Wells for the
preventive maintenance work performed on Well #5. Attached is a
copy of the breakdown of costs. Estimated quantities were low and
some necessary items were not included in the bid price, the
total cost was $9,552; this is $2 ,162 more than the bid price of
$7, 390. The project was budgeted at $12,000 , and therefore is
still within the budgeted amount.
I recommend that Council authorize payment of $9,552 to Mark J.
Traut Wells, Inc. and this be charged to account #700-4122-515.
•
WELL # 5 PUMP AND MOTOR MAINTENANCE PAY REQUEST
BID Actual
EST. UNIT UNIT
ITEM QUANTITY PRICE TOTAL PRICE TOTAL
1. Remove, Dismantle, •
Inspect and Reinstall
Motor and Pump L.S. L.S. $2,000.00 L.S. $2,000.00
2. Test Pumping of Well 8 HR. $50.00 $400.00 $50.00 $100.00
3 . *Replace Spiders 5 EA. $40.00 $200 .00 $40.00 $320.00
4. *Replace Column Bearings 20 EA. $12.00 $240.00 $12 .00 $168.00
5. *Clean and Paint Column
Pipe Suction Pipe 100 L.F. $6.00 $600.00 $6.00 $900.00
6. *Replace Column Pipe 40 L.F. $23 .00 $920.00 $23 .00 $1,725.00
7. *Clean and Paint
Line Shaft 100 L.F. $1.00 $100.00 $1.00 $140.00
8. *Replace Line Shaft 40 L.F. $12 .00 $480.00 $12.00 $780.00
9 . Clean, Inspect, Test,
Bake and Repair Electric
Motor (Parts Excluded) L.S. L.S. $500.00 L.S. $500.00
10. Disinfect Well Prior
to Placing Back in
Service L.S. L.S. $150.00 L.S. $150 .0411
11. Draw Down Check Tube 150 L.F. $0.50 $75.00 $0.50 $71.00
12. Furnish Video Tape
Picture of Well Casing 200 L.F. $4.00 $800.00 $4 .00 $1, 388.00
13 . Motor and Pump Parts,
if Required
a) Motor Bearings EA. Ea $175.00 Ea $350.00
b) Suction Pipe 10 L.F. $12.50 $125.00 $12 .50 $125.00
** Headshaft $225.00
** Rebuild Packing Box $150.00
** Altitude Kit $80.00
** Stainless Steel Shaft Sleeves (8) $40.00 $320 .00
** Shaft Couplings (4) $15.00 $60.00
BASE BID (ITEMS 1,2,9-12) $3 ,525.00 $4,109.00
ITEMS 3-8 $2,540.00 $4,033 .00
SUB-TOTAL $6,065.00 $8,142 .00
ITEM 13a-13d $300.00 $475.00
Additional Items $835.00
TOTAL BID $6,765.00 $9,552.00
* These items were adjusted per actual findings after pump inspection.
** Additional items not included in bid. •
MEMO TO: MAYOR AND CITY CO L
"wo.:-.41P
FROM: CLERK-ADMINISTRA W
DATE: JUNE 12, 1990
SUBJECT: 1990 PAY EQUITY LEGISLATION (CHAPTER 512)
The original Pay Equity Law for Minnesota was adopted by the
Legislature in 1984 was amended in 1986 and 1988. The most
recent amendment approved by the Legislature this year,
however, clearly appears to be the most onerous for the City
since the adoption of the original legislation. The 1990
amendments change the definition of implementation, require
all cities to file an implementation report by January 31,
1992, clarify existing penalties for non-compliance, and
provide that no penlaties take effect until after the
Department of Employee Relations submits their report to the
Legislature.
A summary of the significant sections of the Pay Equity Law as
it now stands is as follows.
1. Definition. - The new definition in the Law states that
equitable compensation relationship means that, " . . .
• the compensation for female dominated classes is not
consistently below the compensation for male dominated
classes of comparable work value. "
The change in this definition will prevent cities using
corridors where wages for jobs of similar value can
have a 10 to 20 percent difference. The Law does not
require a particular line as long as the compensation
levels for jobs are fully integrated when analyzed by
gendor. The impact on the City of Mounds View is that
we will have to combine all of our employee groups
under one pay structure and fully integrate wages for
male and female jobs such that the Department of
Employee Relations will not be able to interpret that
our wage structure is inconsistent with the Law. I
will be addressing the issue of how the Department of
Employee Relations will be enforcing this Law in a
later section of this memo.
2 . Purpose. - The purpose of the Bill is to, " . . .eliminate
sex based wage disparities in public employement. "
This section states that those setting salaries should
consider comparable work value in relationship to other
employee positions within the political subdivision.
In addition, the Law does not limit the ability of the
parties to collectively bargain in good faith.
•
+ t
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
PAGE TWO
JUNE 12, 1990
The first purpose of this section is to eliminate
claims that pay equity requires adjustments to male
dominated or balanced classes. Local governments can
still make these adjustments and, in fact, may have to
make them to avoid violation of state human rights or
federal civil rights legislation. In fact, considering
that there is usually turnover with jobs and no way of
predicting whether the job will be held by a male or
female individual, it does not make sense that there
has to be an adjustment in compensation depending upon
whether a male or female is hired to fill a vacancy.
The second purpose of this section is to prevent
employers from adopting unreasonable positions in
bargaining. In fact, another section of this Law
attempts to address the issue of pay equity and
collective bargaining but only addresses it with
respect to balanced classes which are classes having a
similar percentage of male and female individuals
holding those positions.
3 . Implementation Report. - By January 31, 1992 each •
political subdivision must submit to the Commissioner
and implementation report containing current
information describing the status of its work force
with respect to implementation of pay equity. If a
subdivision fails to submit a report, the Commissioner
will find the subdivision not in compliance and will
impose penalties including notifying the Commissioner
of Revenue that the subdivision is subject to a 5%
reduction in Local Government Aid or to a fine of $100
per day whichever is greater.
4. Penalties for Failure to Im•lement Plan. - , -
Commissioner of the Department of Employee Relations
will review the implementation report submitted by each
jurisdiction and determine whether the governmental
subdivision has equitable compensation relationships.
If the Commissioner finds that the subdivision is not
in compliance, the Commissioner must notify the
subdivision of the basis for the finding. The notice
must include a description of the basis for the
finding, specific recommended actions to achieve
compliance, and how much compliance would cost. The
subdivision has the ability to appeal the determination
of the Commissioner up to and including an appeal of a
penalty to the Office of Administrative Hearings .
•
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
PAGE THREE
JUNE 12, 1990
At a recent MAMA Workshop on the pay equity law,
representatives of the Department of Employee Relations were
present and provided us with the philosophy they will be using
when evaluating pay equity plans and examples of plans that
they felt were both in compliance and out of compliance with
the Law as they interpret it. The representatives of the
Department indicated that it is not the intention of the
Department to adopt any rules that can be used as guidelines
by cities in developing their pay equity plans. Instead, the
Department will look at each city on an individual basis
taking into consideration extenuating circumstances that are
pointed out by the City such as new employees who have not
reached full wage due to probationary periods, arbitration
awards, or retention and recruitment difficulties justifying a
higher wage for a specific position. They further stated that
they will want to see that sex based wage descrimination has
been eliminated in all jurisdictions coming under the
authority of the pay equity law. The representatives also
indicated that they will pay particular attention to any
jurisdiction where complaints have been filed by an employee
and that they will take those complaints at face value when
• reviewing the pay equity program. Attached to this memorandum
please find Exhibits 1 and 2 provided by the Department of
Employee Relations. Exhibit 1 comprising two pages depicts
pay equity programs where the jurisdictions are out of
compliance or in compliance with the law as interpreted by the
Department of Employee Relations. The graphs show the
relationship between points assigned the position under the
pay equity program and wages paid for that position and
indicates whether the position is a male, female, or balanced
class. Although the Department has stated that they do not
wish to dictate that cities pay wages on a dollar per points
value system, it is clear from looking at these graphs that
those jurisdictions having a nearly straight-line pay
structure between the lowest and highest valued positions with
a clear relationship between points and pay are acceptable to
the Department.
Exhibit 2 is another two-page example provided by
representatives of the Department showing some specific cases
and how they would make their interpretation with respect to
those cases. You will note that in two cases identified as no
male comparators and "sore thumb" the Department has made
specific recommendation as to the general area to which the
wages for the female class should be moved. Essentially, this
puts the Department of Employee Relations in the position of
• dictating to cities the wages to be paid for a specific
employee or group of female employees when they feel that the
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
PAGE FOUR
JUNE 12, 1990
wage provided by the City is not consistent with the Law. The
third example on Exhibit 2 identified as, "consistently below"
provides a good example for how the Department will review a
total city's pay equity wage structure and determine whether
or not it is consistent with the Law. You will note in this
case that the Department indicates that in order to correct
the inequity that they have perceived, the jurisdiction must
increase compensation for most female classes to where they
fall within the middle of the male classes. Again, the
Department is dictating to the City the wages to be paid for
specific female employees or female job classes.
I am sure you are all wondering how this applies to the City
of Mounds View. Unfortunately, i cannot give you a definitive
answer to this question simply because without a set of rules
or guidelines from the Department of Employee Relations it is
difficult at best to predict how they will evaluate our pay
equity system. Attached for your information as Exhibit 3 is
the pay equity analysis scattergram for the City of Mounds
View. This analysis uses software provided by the Department
of Employee Relations and which they will be using to
determine whether or not our pay structure is consistent. 411
Values for these positions will likely change as a result of
reevaluations that are currently being done on those
positions. The positions are Public Works Director, Public
Works Foreman, Building Official and City Planner. Each of
these is being revalued as a result of the fact that the
positions have been significantly changed and/or the positions
were never valued in the first place and a benchmark value was
used. It is expected that the Assistant Engineer's position
will be valued at the beginning of next year after one year's
experience with this new position. I would expect that the
revaluing of the four previously mentioned positions will
likely result in eliminating any sex base wage disparities
that might result from the current valuing of those positions.
The difficulty we would experience in the review of our
current pay equity system would be with the Police Department
where all of the sworn officer positions from Police Chief
down to Patrol
Officers are clearly paid more than comparably valued female
positions. When I advised the representative of the
Department of Employee Relations that included in our wages
for police is a longevity bonus which was mandated by
arbitrators award in the late 1970 's, she indicated that it
may be a consideration for allowing the wages to be higher
than would normally be acceptable under pay equity but would •
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
411 PAGE FIVE
JUNE 12, 1990
make no commitment until our documentation was submitted. Due
to the lack of commitment on the part of the representative,
it would be my recommendation that as soon as we have
completed revaluing the previously mentioned positions, the
City begin the process of redoing the values on the Police
Department positions as well as valuing the new positions for
the Public Works Department should you approve the Labor
Agreement. It is my hope that by redoing the values on these
male dominated positions we might find that the values have
increased thus justifying the current wages under the pay
equity system and making our system consistent with the pay
equity law requirements.
Our other option for dealing with this situation would be to
go to a totally new pay equity system such as the Hay System
used by the State of Minnesota which would result in an
expenditure of anywhere from $18,000 to $25,000. I would
recommend against changing systems for several reasons but
mainly that our employees are accustomed to and have willingly
accepted the current pay and job valuing system. Any change
to this system could cause great suspicion and insecurity.
Other reasons for recommending against it are the simple cost
of redoing our valuing system, the fact that we will not be
part of a city-wide valuing system which protects us from
challenges by the sheer numbers involved, and the fact that
any change to our system has the potential for as many
problems as the current system has for us.
I look forward to discussing this matter with you in great
detail and receiving your direction in order that we can do
our best to bring our system into compliance with what the
Department of Employee Relations is perceiving the structure
should be as a result of the new pay equity law.
DFP/MJS
•
./i
5.5
5 - M
M
4.5 - •
Scattergrams Showing
4 - Jurisdictions Out Of Compliance
Tr
3.5 - M
V
c
ay M
D.0 3 - M MM I"1 161
I- M M
`. M M
2.5 - M MM 1 41 MMMM
MM
2 M MVA INMM Nikki
XA FMM F M F
City Out of
FFFFF Fk F Compliance
1 .5 - F
POINTS
1 I r I I I I I r I
30 50 70 90 110 130
3.4
M
3.2 -
3 - F M
2.8 - I"I
2.6 -
F F
2.4 -us F F
Tr
2.2 - FM M •
6
Fe County Out
a� 2 MM F FM M M of Compliance
1 .8 - F F
FF FM
1 .6 - MMM M
F
FF
1 .4- - F M
M F
1 .2 - FFFPS. F F
F
1 - F F F
F POINTS
0.8 F
I I I r I I I I I
6 40 60 80 100 120 140
5.5 - M
5 -
M
4.5 - F M
B F M 8 M
..--. 4 - F
M F
v
c
a0
3.5 - F M School District
0 Out of Compliance
F
3 - F F
2.5 - F M .
F F 54 F
2 - M M M M M F
F EFFF F
1.5 - p F F F F
F POINTS
1 r r 1 I I I 1 I I I r
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
8
M
7 -
Scattergrams Showing
•urlsdictlons In Compliance
6 -
M W
it
2 5 M
•tw M
ao Aiit+d
r=- 4 - W F
v
M14T
City In 3 - o M
Compliance Wm# M
2Mir
-
M
POINTS
1 1 I I- I I I I
40 60 80 100 120
fi ----•_�-- -- - -__ _�.._
`15 - M
5 -
•
4.5 -
•
a 4• -
') M
ounty In `v
4
Q n 3.5 - M
ompliance a o B
3 - B F M M
2.5 - F F, M
2 - M k itIM
{
MF
F F F
1 .5 - E M M M
F (N B POINTS
1 I� , T I I I I I I I I I 1 I I 1 1
8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26
4.5 ---
gi
4. - M
M d M E M
3.5 - F EMF
Pi
M F F M
k
3 - F M
M M F
School District c 2.5 - MN F
In Compliance a s M F F
CL 0 2 - M F
I. M M El
YM F FF
1 .5 - F F F
M F e
1 - M F
M
0.5 -
0 POINTS
1 I I I 1--- T----r- I 1 I I
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
PAY
• (Thousands)
p _. N tel A
(n — N N (Jt W (1t -P (n Ut
V•ZO N � s
I I I I I I I I 0 00 0 0 N
-••m A el 'O!
.
0. •d
r — ..w 7r ..r e1
n O err ••+ S
el. et 2 M =
.••S CI -d g.
O A N
7 0 5 s
=
(#.1 — 411=010
CT• et "tt
aa- K .= 9 N
a -+c m o.
es• 0
of - -t n V
o . 0 =
3 CIn 0
�• -1 N O
O O e9 5 M
V - -Ti 11e+ t9 d
ep IS�•e1
• 0o0e+
= •r•O
Ta •
3 •••
O co o
C 3 0
figtD �t -*1 C.A H
Z O TI• N
N 9.N cm
- CO CD - Ss. afi
O C► Cr IC
Z Z
r _•d V
e�
. e+ S
.-• • =' 0O
W
51
2e� 2
2
N S P►
A
— SQ
••H CI A
o at et e!
-"• •1 • N C
et e*N.71
S +a
r. e1
—
M N N
v
0
G,r1,OJT
7.
ti
O
•
•
•
•
N
L
L
4+ L
N A
••
C ai 0
+� Nr
N
0 P.
la)
L qic
A 0Q 0
ai 3 V •
4'
Z Qa • (l
30NL 0 t_
• z
O
d � 0 f•
a
L O ai
++•r-s •
N > 44
•Cr0E
a
• M.
04644 •
• C!C
4.3 ai
• L 0
O A ai .
L Lw�
s 14.. i0+'0 0 V'
L O >)
L 0 N > A
L 4+ ?!
A C r•r•
0 A N
Li ai O.C as
1 0 N
ai LiLTN `1
L O +.i
A r W L r••
= Lr I oau
i NaL3
111111
IL s d 41
mob
{- Ii r
03 NO w- N M c0t0 e1- N til OD• Co N
•
tel t� !'! M t`j tN N t 4 galm a=1.
•
siwzuesnoq
.AV •
SALARY STRUCTURE
DEMO
1.6
M
1.5 -
411 •
1.4 - MM
M
1.3 - M M M M M
M M M
M M M
n F
c 1.2 - FMo
O. 7 M M
2 1.1 - F F M M M M F M
FMMF MFM F F F M F FM F
FF M
1 - F M M
M
0.9 - M
0.8 - M
0.7 ' i t I i . I 1 1 1 i I 1 i 1
1.5 1.54 1.58 1.62 1.66 1.7 1.74 1.78
(Thousands)
POINTS
1.6
M
1.5 -
• M
1.4 - M M
1.3 - MM M M M M
M M n1a6lsac
M M
N F
Yo 1.2 - FM
a 3
2 F F MMM MM F M fEM.I! It At.
v i i M M F MEM F F F M F FM F
FF
1 - F M
0.9 -
0.8 -
0.7 1111 t 11111111111
1.5 1.54 1.58 1.62 1.66 1.7 1.74 1.78
(Thousands)
POINTS
'Consistently Below"
Although some M's mixed with F's, they are not enough to off-set large
number of M's well above F's. This system fails three tests.
1. Two-line Test: When looking at male and female lines, large gap
exists and gets worse.
2. Look-back Test: F's at the highest point level are paid less
than large number of M's with fewer points.
3. Range Test: Nearly all females compensated alike while males
show wide range and greater opportunity for higher compensation.
Correction: Increase compensation for most F's to where they fall in
the middle of the M's.
, - E:r1A1171 3
•,
„.....
,;.t.
i
. 0
, t
,
i
1 1 i
; .... ,
, .
,...... ,:::.
, ..
; .,..
1..........., i ,
......-...
; , I
„......_
...,,..
ii
• i
,......
1.,..,.,..1
t.
;:z
,
t .4
;I !
. ;
:
:..:.'
0
I at-::::--
‘.k..,-!...
i...
kt_......._ i
I
I
i
I ....
i i I I
!!.... , % ..
, I
i. I
i, I
I.1....
1 .
I
I
I
I I
I
1 i I
I
I
I
I
i
I .
i
f's? .:!: - T.::
0
2MEMO TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUN' IL Aso
41/ FROM: CLERK-ADMINISTRATclo 410
DATE: June 22, 1990
SUBJECT: 1990 USER FEE ANALYSIS
As you may recall, staff has for approximately the last four
months been performing an analysis of all user fees charged by
the City of Mounds View. Attached for your information is a
copy of the user fee analysis spreadsheet which lists the
chapter or resolution number authorizing the fees, the subject
of the fee, the current fee charged by the City, the 1989 AMM
survey median for the charge by other cities in the AMM area,
and the recommended fee.
The recommended fee column indicates what changes, if any, are
proposed by staff to currently reflect the cost experienced by
the City for issuing licenses or permits, overseeing the
regulated activities, or providing the various items such as
water meters and blueprints. Should the Council agree with
the proposed fees, it will be necessary that a public hearing
be held on the liquor license fee pursuant to state statutory
requirements before those fees could be implemented. The
other fees could be implemented by resolution of the Council.
It would be my recommendation that all fees go into place on
January 1 of 1991 which is consistent with our budget year and
would impact on all new licenses issued after that date.
Should you have any questions regarding the report in whole or
any specific fee, I would be happy to respond to your
questions or obtain additional information for you.
DFP/MJS
Attachment:
1990 USER FEE ANALYSIS
CHAPTER/RESOLUTION 1 SUBJECT CURRENT FEE 1909 RAM RECOMMENDED FEE
SURVEY MEDIAN
=:9.02/2166 Sign Pormit Valuation Tab10 N. Change
39.04 Sign Installer 1.30/year $40/year
39.14,sub.8.(9)/1570 Temporary Sign T10/21 day period No Cheng*
40.14.sub.I Temp. Mobilo Home Permit 9.20 + 3.10 RonowEi 535 4 910 Ronowal
40.29,sub.A 'Zoning Base Fees
x Rezoning
1100 9.150 No Change
x Variance 175 505 No Change
x CLIP 9.100 9.75 N. Change
X Code Appeal & Plan Review 5100 No Change
42.06.sub,1 Subdivision Base Foos
x Minor. S75 9.60 X50
w Major X.150 X200 5150 4 510/lot
45.06 Relocation of Buildings Expenses or Insp. No Change
4E:.06,sub.4 Wetland Alteration Permit 9:50 base foo No Change
58.09/2166 Swimming Fools Valuation Table No Change
59.02,(1)/2166 Building Permits Valuation Table - 5504.50/170,000 House• X"!43 No Change
60.03,sub.8/1917 Building Plan Chock Fees Valuation Table - 9.110.90/9.70,000 House X222.95 65% of Building Permit for improvements
of 510.000 or 255 of value whichever is
Contractor Licenses 530/year 540 SAO/year
X Sion Inst.allor
X Asphalt
X Excavating & Filling
x Fencing
x Gas
X Gonoral
x HVAC
X Hot Water Heating
X Masonry & Concrete
X Plaster & Stucco
PE Roofing t. Siding
X Sewer & Water
X Shoot Rock
X Swimming Pool
70.01,(2),(b)/1914 Water Availability Charge Residential - 5200/unit $375 No Change
C-I - largor of $080/acre or No Change
5200/36.000 gallons/quarter
70.01.(2).(c)/1917 Water Connection Permit _ 510 $2C. loss than 4"
540 A. or groator
70.01,(3)/1917 Water Motor S70 X35
70.06,(23/1917 Non-return of Motor Reading Card $5 No Change
70.06,(2)/1917 Leto Payment • 10% of i.il1 No Change
70.06,(33/1917 Sorvico Restoration Foe S30 during hoursX.50
550 after hours -
71.05/1917 Sower Connection Permit 9.10 S20
80.03.sub.2 Waiver of Load Limits 520/trip No Change
91.O1,sub..2/1917 Dog Lieensos S7/2 years for spayed or neutered 510 No Change
513/2 years for unspauod or urmouterod 412 No Change
91.01,sub.19,1.3)/.1917 Carmel Licenses 9.27/year, residential No Change
9.44/year. commercial No Change
93.15,(5)/1911, Multiple Dwelling Registration 55/unit or min. of X310/building./year Baso 4 15/reinspection
INTOIIICATING LIQUOR X5.000 t•GU/s ft.
106.04,sub.3,(1)/1917 On-sole without cabaret 54,400 + 555/sq.ft. over 4,000 sq.ft. 53.750 not 0t0 r'4 9S6Oood 5q.ft.
of pulic area not to excood $10,000
0,000
per year
On-sale with cabaret 54,730 + 3.82/sq.ft.. over 4,000 sq.ft. 55,000 + $85/sq.ft.
of public aro not to excood S10,000 not to exceed 510,000
per year
On-male wino X550/year $750 5750
100.04,sub.3.(2)/1917 Off-sale 9.200/year No Change
Sunday On-sale Included in On-sale License Foy No Change
Bottle Club 1,330/Veer $330 No Cheng*
100.03,rub.1/1917 Ir,vest.igation Fee Single Pot-son - S165 5250 $250
Partnership, Corporation, or Association
tJ-'61 /1 5
MEMO TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNC
FROM: CLERK-ADMINISTRAT• ' %IF
DATE: June 20, 1990 *Viv
SUBJECT: TRANSFER OF CABLE TV COMMUNITY ACCESS PROGRAMMING
FUNCTION
Attached please find a memorandum and resolutions from Mr. Tom
Creighton, Legal Counsel for the North Suburban Cable
Commission regarding the transfer of community access
programming from Cable TV North Central to the member cities
of the North Suburban Cable Commission and an amendment to the
Joint Powers Agreement. These documents would be the final
step in approving the transfer of community access programming
pursuant to the conditions that have previously been
negotiated by the Cable Commission on behalf of the ten member
cities. Your adoption of the two resolutions is recommended
and requested.
DFP\mjs
S
iv
TO: Mayor and City Council
410 FROM: Public Works Foreman Ulrich
DATE: June 27, 1990
SUBJECT: GROVELAND LIFT STATION CONTROL PANEL
You may recall that when we repaired the pumps at Groveland
lift station, I mentioned that the control panel was also in
need of replacement; so, here it is! ! ! ! !
We have receive two bids for the new panel and installation.
Consolidated Electric has bid a control panel, but they do not
have the capability of providing the computer telemetry to
adapt to the software we are currently using with the water
control system. Therefore, we have to add a remote terminal
unit (RTU) to their unit to monitor the lift station.
Automatic System has a complete unit that will operate the
pumps as well as provide us with monitoring capabilities . It
is my opinion that we should stay with one complete unit by
one vendor, rather than fit two separate components together.
We have $12,000.00 budgeted for this purpose, although
approximately $23,914 .50 (includes a 10%, $2,174. 00
contingency) will be needed. Our 730-4122-515 Account is
where this type of expenditure is budgeted. The Reserve for
• Repair Account has approximately $75,000.00 in it for future
repairs. We are requesting that $12,000.00 be transferred to
this year's budget to accommodate this repair.
Bids received are as follows:
Consolidated Electric $ 5,848 .00
(Add Monitoring Equipment) 8,583. 00
Microtel Dialer/RTU 2,295 .00
TOTAL $16,726 .00
Automatic Systems $ 6,462 .50
Monitoring Equipment 8,583.00
Microtel Dialer/RTU 2,295 . 00
TOTAL $17,340 .50
Installation on either system $ 4,400.00
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends award to Automatic Systems
for the replacement of Groveland lift station control panel
for $23,914 .50 ($17,340.50 + $4,400.00 installation +
$2, 174 . 00 project contingency) to be charged to Sewer Account
730-4122-515 and $12,000.00 to be transferred from the Reserve
for Repair Account to 730-4122-515 .
•
MEMO TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCI
CLERK-ADMINISTRAT �j�
FROM: C t� '� VIO
DATE: June 26, 1990
SUBJECT: UNDESIGNATED RESERVES
As you may recall, the Management Report submitted by Voto,
Tautges, Redpath and Company along with the 1989 Annual
Financial Report discussed on pages 17 and 18, copy attached,
the need for adequate reserves. The Report also warned that
the State was looking at basing aid cuts on the size of a
city's reserves.
What was not stated in the Report, but was discussed at the
June 18th presentation is a further warning that undesignated
reserves would confirm the premise on which this approach is
based and that is, "Cities have more money than they need. "
Undesignated reserves are surplus revenues which have not been
set aside for a specific purpose. In our case, surplus
reserves are identified as undesignated when the City's policy
on reserves has been met and the remaining funds are not
identified for some other specific purpose.
The summary of our current reserve status is on page 19 of the
• Management Report and page 20 of the Financial Report, copies
attached, show that after all requirements of our reserve
policy have been met a $342,989 undesignated reserve exists.
In order to avoid the risk of these dollars being used by the
State to penalize us, our auditors, Finance Director Brager
and I would recommend that the funds be designated for some
specific purpose(s) . Your options are many and varied and
include the following,
A. Increase current reserves for contingency or cash flow
as a buffer against the "lean" years we see coming.
B. Set aside for special long-term projects such as City
Hall expansion/remodeling, a Street Maintenance fund to
subsidize the annual cost for sealcoating and overlay,
add to the Special Projects Fund or Park Improvement
Fund, or create a new fund with a specific purpose and
intent in mind.
C. Designate for current projects or needs in the City.
The list of unmet projects/needs is probably endless,
but I have taken the liberty to have the Department
Head Team submit a list of proposed projects and
•
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
PAGE TWO
JUNE 26, 1990
prioritize them for your consideration. They are, in
priority order,
1. Cold Storage Building - an $ 75,000
unheated structure on the Public Works
garage site for storage of vehicles
and equipment and road salt/sand mix.
2 . Cafeteria Plan - an IRS approved $ 4,610
program that would allow employees
who are not insured through the City
or have single coverage to use the
unused portion of the City's
contribution for such eligible
activities as additional life
insurance, dental insurance or
disability insurance.
3. 1991 Vehicle and Equipment Fund $ 50,000
Transfer - the transfer needed in
1991 to adequately fund this program.
Use of these funds to cover the
transfer would free up monies for •
other expenses in the '91 budget.
4. Replacement of Cushman $ 12,000
- the Cushman unit is used to drag
and line ballfields and other light
park maintenance activities.
5 . Greenfield Baseball Field Phase I $ 18,000
6 . Park Maintenance Tractor $ 25,000
- an additional tractor, larger than
we currently have, to handle turf
management and field grooming chores.
7 . 2 Light Bars for Squad Cars $ 2,000
8. Computer System for P.W. Garage $ 4,000
- a second system is needed in the
garage as the current one has been
overloaded with software and data and
cannot efficiently perform all
functions.
9 . Ignition Scanner $ 1,000
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
PAGE THREE
JUNE 26, 1990
10 . Forestry Truck $ 6,000
- a replacement for the Luv which
is rusting out
11. Wheel Balancer $ 2,000
12 . Tire Machine $ 1,600
- replacement of an aging piece of
equipment.
13 . Portable Breath Tester (PBT) $ 500
14. GIS (geographical information) $ 5,000
Software - a land parcel tracking
system to tie into computer mapping
and track parcel specific activities.
15 . Small Rider Mower - a small sit down $ 4,500
mower with zero turning radius for
improved trimming around trees, etc.
16 . Skid Loader (Bobcat) $ 34,000
- a small bucket loader for use on
small jobs and tight working areas .
17 . Lambert Park Parking Lot Paving and $ 8,000+
and Curb
Total $ 254,010
I would like to reemphasize that the options listed are in no
way exclusive or complete as ideas and preferences you may
have are not necessarily covered. The only action the Council
must take is to designate these funds to avoid the risk of our
paying a penalty for having undesignated or "surplus"
reserves .
The Department Heads and I look forward to discussing with you
our suggestions and any other options at the July 2nd Agenda
Session.
DFP\mjs
•
111
City of Mounds View,Minnesota
Management Report,Page 17
Alk
glI
Avo10-Favorable bond rating indicator. 41- ma J em rar overdrafts
prior receipts.
I
•'City may study effects of
o- Supplements revenues revenue cuts before gradual
with investment earning& program reductions.
I
Benefits of
Reserves111
sir Provides the City
greater options to deal
+-Provides resources with unexpected events.
for minor projects or
feasibility reports. 1
or Avoids overburdening
of annual budgets for
certain capital outlay.
•
The amount of General Fund reserve required to meet emergency and/or unanticipated
expenditures is not readily quantifiable. Rather,the level of this requirement must be established
11
byCity the based on the history of the City and the philosophy of"adequate"reserve coverage.
The reserve requirement to deal with unforeseen intergovernmental revenue reductions is also
difficult to quantify. State and Federal legislation dealing with shared aids is somewhat
unpredictable. The City must strive to remain current on the effects of changing legislation and
budget such aids accordingly. A reserve balance in the City's General Fund will mitigate the
adverse effects of aid reductions which are received after expenditure budget commitments are11
made.
111
The State of Minnesota iapparently developing a unique view of what constitutes prudent
fiscal management for Minnesota cities. Currently,the Minnesota Department of Revenue is
exploring options for reducing LGA and HACA to cities as a method of reducing the State's
jt
budget shortfall. One method that has been under consideration for cutting aids is based upon city IP
reserve balances. Presumably,cities with"large"reserve balances would experience "large" aid .
cuts.
I
City of Mounds View,Minnesota
Management Report,Page 18
•
We recommend that the City strongly oppose this method of targeting aid reductions to cities
for the following reasons:
1. The proposed targeting would penalize those cities which do practice sound fiscal
management.
2. The proposed targeting would encourage less responsible fiscal management. This would
result in financial crisis for individual cities and ultimately affect the bond ratings of all
Minnesota cities including the City of Mounds View.
3. The targeting program would be virtually impossible to administer on a fair and equitable •
basis because financial management practices and fund structures are not consistent or
easily comparable among cities. What may appear to be a low reserve balance of a city's
General Fund may be an adequate reserve balance for such city. Examples are as follows:
• Transferring monies from the General Fund to other funds for capital acquisitions or
anticipated acquisitions.
• The use of Special Revenue Funds to account for basic services such as police,fire and
other.
• • The use of Internal Service Funds for compensated absences and other purposes.
• The reservation of General Fund balance for cash flow,compensated absences,etc.
• Transferring of reserved balance amounts to other city funds.
4. Many cities have established reserve policies and made significant fiscal management
decisions based on the established/targeted reserve policy. The effectiveness of such
planning and fiscal management would be severely hampered(if not destroyed) by reserve
balance "raiding" by the State.
5. The State is possibly seeking to pass its financial crisis on to local government. This
would be a temporary solution to apparently poor fiscal management at the State level.
6. The potentially lost reserve balance could diminish the city's bond rating and potentially
deplete a city's reserve balance pledged to secure debt service requirements.
The State has made significant attempts to improve the "equitable distribution" of State aids to
cities over the past two years. The success of the action to date is questionable. The proposed
action to "raid" reserve balances of cities would be a clear message that the objective of the State is I.
not equity among cities. The objective would be to control the local decision making process as it
41) relates to financial matters. This would result in an erosion of the independence and effectiveness
of city government. Additionally, such actions could eventually affect the bond ratings of all
Minnesota cities.
City of Mounds View,Minnesota
Management Report,Page 19
01
The City's minimum cash flow reserve requirement is measurable. For the City of Mounds
View, the minimum required surplus is$950,206 computed as follows:
1990 budgeted levy('includes Homestead Credit) $1,255,153
1990 anticipated Local Government Aid 645,260
Total $1,900,413
•
One half of total $950,2061111
The City has demonstrated that a financially sound General Fund is attainable through prudent11
fiscal planning. The City has met its cash flow required reserve and also has approximately
$477,000 of other General Fund reserves to fulfill the various other reserve requirements as
described in this report and to meet specific reserve requirements as established by formal City
policy as follows:
11
Designated for compensated absences $132,113
Designated for contingencies 271,101
Designated for committed contracts 20,283
Designated for inventory 18,943
Designated for cash flow 950,206
Total designations 1,392,646
Undesignated 342,989
Total Fund Balance-December 31,1989 $1,735,635
Without this adequate General Fund reserve,the independence and autonomy of the City may
11
the financial position of its General Fund. We commend the City for these actions and encourage
the City to continue to monitor this reserve balance. An adequate reserve structure will enable the
City to retain its financial independence and integrity during the present change in economic
environment. 1111
•
I
I
I
•
•
`• CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW,MINNESOTA I
COMBINED BALANCE SHEET-ALL FUND TYPES AND ACCOUNT GROUPS
December 31,1989
• Governmental Fund Teves
Special Debt Capital
Assets General Revenue Service Proiect
11
Cash and investments $1,186,947 $336,694 $2,284,068 $5,401,841
Investments with escrow agent
Accrued interest receivable
Accounts receivable 9,341 120,407 It
Note receivable
Due from other governmental units 24,497 25,277 387 12,742
Taxes receivable: II
Delinquent 15,484 551 1,032
Due from county 7,371 639 4,326
Special assessments receivable 24 204,453 221,601 sis
Due from other funds 601,598 6,865 74,122 509,671III
Due from developers 19,744
Inventories 18,943
Fixed assets(net of accumulated depreciation)
Amount available in Debt Service Fund It
Amount to be provided for retirement of
general long term debt
Total assets $1 874 608 S379 367 $2,568,388 $6 266 262 I
..,.....,..... .............
Liabilities and Fund Equity
Liabilities: 11
Cash overdraft $23,041 $10,920 $605,145
ccounts payable $39,925 4,222 22,957
aries payable 25,285 916
ntracts payable 20,283 1,929 329,111
Deposits payable 573
Due to other governmental units 8,529 45 41,829
Interfund loan payable
Due to other funds 28,894 190,651 518 823,803
Deferred revenue 15,484 750 149,891 215,697
Bonds payable
Lease payable
Loan payable
Deferred compensation payable
Compensated absences payable li
Total liabilities 138.973 221.554 161,329 2.038.542
Fund Equity:
Contributions from property owners II
Invested in general fixed assets
Retained earnings:
Reserved
Unreserved
Fund balance(deficit):
Reserved 2,407,059 176,000
Unreserved:
Designated 1,392,646 158,457 4,332,692 II
Undesignated 342.989 (644) (280,972)
Total fund equity 1.735.635 157.813 2.407.059 4,227.720
Total liabilities and fund equity S1 874 608 $379 367 $2.568.388 $6 266 262 11
•
II
2 0 The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.
I
�-
MEMO TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL Al
• FROM: CLERK-ADMINISTRATOR
DATE• une
J 27, 1990
SUBJECT: FALL CLEAN UP DAY
Now that we have completed all of the activities related to
Spring Clean Up Day it is time for us to begin scheduling our
Fall Clean Up Day. I have identified four dates for your
consideration for a clean up day with those dates occurring
after Labor Day and after the City's Festival In The Park.
Those dates are Saturdays, September 15 or 29, or October 6 or
13 . Your direction regarding the date of your preference
would be appreciated.
DFP\mjs
•
•
\A,,,„
• MEMORANDUM
Memo To :Mayor and Council Members
From :Ric Minetor, City Engineer/Director of Public Works
Date :June 27, 1990
Subject :County Road I Bike Trail - Joint Powers Agreement
Attached is the proposed joint powers agreement with Shoreview
for the trail adjacent to County Road I, between Quincy Street in
Mounds View and Aldine Street in Shoreview. I have reviewed the
agreement and have requested a minor change to section 5 to read
"Maintenance shall be conducted as necessary to insure safe usage
and shall include at a minimum: " . I have also requested that
section 1 be modified by adding the following sentence: "The
Cities of Shoreview and Mounds View will each review the bids and
concur in the award of a contract. "
Unless Council has other concerns, these changes will be made and
the agreement can be approved at the July 9th Council meeting.