HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packets - 2005/03/01
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL WORK SESSION AGENDA
Tuesday, March 1, 2005
7:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL: Marty, Stigney, Gunn, Flaherty, Thomas
PUBLIC COMMENT
Citizens may speak to issues not on tonight’s agenda. Before speaking, please give your full
name and address for the minutes. Also, please limit your comments to three minutes.
Agenda Items Discussed by Consensus
_______ 1. Ordinances
A. Review Charitable Gambling Ordinance
B. Garbage and Rubbish Ordinance - Reintroduce Restricting Days of
Collection
_______ 2. Maintenance and Equipment
A. City Hall Electronic Message Board
B. Replacement of the Water Tanker Truck
________ 3. Administrative
A. Police Department Supervisory Structure
B. Non-Union Salary Survey (report will be delivered separately to City
Council at a later time)
C. Employee Appreciation Event
D. Town Meeting(s)
E. 2005 Golf Course Marketing
_______ 4. Policy Review
A. Investment Policy
Next Council Work Session: Monday, April 4, 2005, 7pm
Next City Council Meeting: Monday, March 14, 2005, 7pm
Item No: 01A
Meeting Date: March 1, 2005
Type of Business: Work Session
Administrator Review: _________
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Desaree Crane, Administrative Assistant
Item Title/Subject: Review Charitable Gambling Ordinance
Staff was directed by the City Council on February 14, 2005, to have Merrick, Inc., and the
Twin Cities Chamber to further explain their proceeds to the City’s Trade Area. Attached is
the Staff Report presented at the February 14, 2005 City Council Meeting, outlining the
contributions of each of the permanent Charitable Gambling permit holders. Staff invited
each of the organizations so that the City Council can address any other questions they
may have with contributions to the Trade Area. Staff contacted Merrick, Inc., the Twin
Cities North Chamber, and the Lions. Merrick, Inc., and the Twin Cities North Chambers
were the only charitable gambling organizations that responded, and are available to
answer any questions you may have.
In addition, Staff was directed by the City Council to address the City Code pertaining to the
Charitable Gambling Code. On January 28, 2002, the City Council passed Ordinance 691
(attached), which added the additional language outlining the city’s trade area. There was
some discussion in having a City Fund in which Charitable Gambling organizations
contribute 10% of their earning into a City Fund. This was discussed in December 2001
and again in January 2002, with opposition. This City Fund would be used to fund some
city projects. Attached are the staff reports along with Minutes of 2001 and 2002. The
City of Maplewood currently has such a policy, and attached is their City Code pertaining to
the contribution. Merrick, Inc., currently gives 10% to the City of Maplewood of their profit
proceeds.
Changing the Code to require these organizations to contribute a portion of the proceeds to
the City would ensure that profits are contributed to the City. Otherwise another suggestion
is to change the City Code to reflect no trade area. In the past the City Code stated that
the charitable organizations have their headquarters in Mounds View. This was changed in
January 24, 2004 per Ordinance 691, to allow charitable organizations that do not have
their headquarters in Mounds View, but serve Mounds View Residents, the opportunity to
conduct gambling in the City.
Recommendation:
Please address any questions you may have with Merrick, Inc., and the Twin Cities
Chamber in regards to their Charitable Gambling proceeds. Staff would like guidance on
what the City Council would like addressed in the Charitable Gambling City Code.
Item No. 1B
Type of Business: WK
WK: Work Session; PH: Public Hearing;
CA: Consent Agenda; CB: Council Business
City Administrator Review City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Tracy Juell, Administrative Assistant
Item Title/Subject: Ordinance Change to Chapter 603, Garbage and
Rubbish, Section 603.06, Sub 2, Requirements and
Restrictions
Meeting Date: March 1, 2005
Background:
At the May 24, 2004 Council Meeting, Council directed Staff to make a revision to
Ordinance 603, Garbage and Rubbish, to reflect the restriction of residential garbage
collections to Wednesdays and Thursdays only.
Discussion:
Staff was informed in late January of this year that Larry’s Quality Sanitation was sold
to Waste Management, effective January 1, 2005. (It should be noted that the reason
two (2) days were chosen for garbage collections was because Larry’s Quality
Sanitation could not change their schedule due to the commitments they had in other
cities on Thursdays; therefore the Council decided on Wednesdays as well as
Thursdays. All of the other residential garbage haulers (Waste Management, Ace
Solid Waste, and BFI) collect garbage on Thursdays and it is the recommendation to
change Chapter 603 to designate Thursdays as residential garbage collection day.
I n light of this information, Chapter 603 of the City of Mounds View Municipal Code is
proposed to be amended. The proposed additions underlined and the proposed
deletions struck through to read as follows:
Additional verbiage to Ordinance 603, sub 2, Requirements and Restrictions is:
(5) Collection of garbage and rubbish materials for single family residence
shall be restricted to Wednesday’s and Thursdays only, except when
Wednesday or Thursday is a legal holiday. In the case of a holiday, the
collection will occur the following business day.
Recommendation:
To direct Staff to submit an ordinance revision to approve amending Ordinance 603
to designate Thursday only garbage pickups for single family dwellings (see attached
proposed ordinance amendment).
Respectfully Submitted:
Tracy Juell, Administrative Assistant
ORDINANCE NO. XXX
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF MOUNDS VIEW BY
AMENDING CHAPTER 603, GARBAGE AND RUBBISH
The City of Council of the City of Mounds view hereby ordains:
SECTION 1. Subd 2b of Section 603.06 is hereby amended with additions underlined
and deletions struck through to read as follows:
Subd b. Additional Restrictions for Residential Haulers: In addition to the other
requirements of this Chapter, haulers servicing residences, mobile home parks
and multiple dwellings shall comply with the following:
(1) Curbside recycling collection will be made available to all residential
and multiple dwelling customers no later than July 1, 1990. Such service shall
include an at least bi-weekly collection of all recyclable materials on the same
day as garbage and rubbish collection for residences.
(2) Collection of garbage and rubbish materials will be provided on a
weekly basis and recyclable materials will be provided on an at least bi-weekly
basis, but not necessarily on the same day, for multiple dwellings and mobile
home parks.
(3) Collection service priced on the basis of volume shall be provided. All
billings shall be itemized so as to show what individual charges are being levied.
(4) Each licensee shall separately collect and dispose of yard waste on a
regular basis for a minimum of eight (8) weeks in the spring, commencing on
April 1, and eight (8) weeks in the fall, commencing on September 15.
(5) Collection of garbage and rubbish materials for single family
residence shall be restricted to Wednesday’s and Thursday’s only, except
when Wednesday or Thursday is a legal holiday. In the case of a holiday, the
collection will occur the following business day.
SECTION 2. This ordinance shall take effect thirty days after the date of its publication.
Read by the City Council of the City of Mounds View on this 14th day of
March, 2005.
Rob Marty, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kurt Ulrich, City Administrator
(SEAL)
Approved as to form:
Mounds View City Attorney
Item No. 2A
Meeting Date: March 1, 2005
Type of Business: WK
WK: Work Session; PH: Public Hearing;
CA: Consent Agenda; CB: Council Business
City Administrator Review _______
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Tracy Juell, Administrative Assistant
Item Title/Subject: Electronic Message Board
Retrofit with a LED Lighting System
Background:
On December 13, 1999, City Council authorized the purchase of the Daktronics
electronic message board in the amount of $40,741.00 from AIM Electronics. At
the time of the purchase of the electronic message board, incandescent, white
lighting, was the industry standard and LED, red lighting, was a new lighting
technology just being introduced.
Discussion:
As with any piece of equipment, this sign requires continuous replacement parts,
such as bulbs, sockets and filters as part of its maintenance schedule.
Daktronics, the parts supplier, has increased the prices for the bulbs from .75
each to $1.25 each (there are a total of 2,156 bulbs in the sign). The reason for
the increase on parts is due to the fact that Daktronics along with the rest of the
lighting industry are concentrating their efforts on LED signs instead of
incandescent. With more organizations ordering LED lighting systems due to
their increased efficiency and lower maintenance and labor costs, more units are
produced and the unit cost is lowered. Conversely, with many companies
reducing and or eliminating their production of incandescent signs, prices
increase due to lack of supply.
Through the past 5 years the City’s electronic message board has required
moderate repairs; $5,446.07 for parts and service calls. At this time however,
numerous parts are in need of replacement in order to restore the message
board to its original functionality.
The following is a price quotation dated December 8, 2004 from AIM
Electronics to repair and restore the message board to its original
functionality:
(Option 1) Repair and Replace all Major Components:
Item Quantity Unit Price Total Price
Lamp Banks 8 $355.00 $2,840.00
Lamps (Bulbs) 2,156* $1.25 $2,695.00
Sockets 35 $.75 $26.25
Labor $990.00
Shipping & Handling $75.00
Sales Tax $426.00
Total Cost $7,052.00
*This will replace all of the bulbs in the message board. Anytime a bulb is
replaced, 2 are more than likely to go out. Also, AIM Electronics has no way of
knowing which are the old bulbs so they submitted the bid to have them all
replaced to start with a “clean slate”.
LED Lighting
As mentioned earlier, at the time of the purchase of the electronic message
board, LED lighting was just being introduced. The past 5 years have seen
dramatic improvements in LED lighting, some of which follow:
• The current incandescent bulbs have approximately 5,000 hours of life
each. Because the City operates the electronic message board 24 hours/7
days a week, 5,000 hours per bulb (approximately 29 weeks) is not
longevity. For LED lighting, the hours increase to 100,000 hours each
lamp bank. (LED are not individual bulbs like the current bulbs, instead
they are in lamp banks and instead of “burning out” they will just fade to a
lighter shade of red, thus the sign will always be readable- unless there is
a major part that needs to be replaced.)
• Power consumption is approximately 75% less than incandescent lighting
and AIM Electronics has estimated that the current message board
electricity costs are $6,500.00/year or $549.00/month.
It will cost approximately $630.00/year or $53.00/month in electricity costs
for a LED sign.
• Direct sunlight visibility will be improved with LED lighting.
• The design of the LED sign will allow for the hot air to rise and escape out
of the top instead of relying on fans (4) to keep the it cool. The result of
this design will eliminate the use of fans and filters, again reducing parts
and labor costs.
• The display will have the same features and character heights.
Staff requested AIM Electronics to supply the City with a bid to retrofit the
message board with LED lighting components. (The existing cabinet and
wiring will be utilized for this proposed retrofit.)
(Option 2) Retrofit Current 2 Line Double Sided Message Board to a
LED Lighting Display:
Item Quantity Unit Price Total
Model AF-3400-
16x64-64-2V
Red LED, two line,
double sided
message display
including software
1 $29,730.00 $29,730.00
Retrofit new
display in existing
structure including
any filler panels
and bracketing
$4,300.00
Shipping &
Handling
$425.00
Trade-in of
Existing Display*
($3,050.00)
Sales Tax $1,734.00
Total Cost $33,139.00
*AIM Electronics will recycle the parts in the sign to use for their existing
customers with incandescent lighting signs. Otherwise the sign is basically
obsolete and therefore is not of any value to other companies.
The City also has the option to enhance the electronic message board
abilities to a 3-line display and AIM Electronics supplied the following bid:
(Option 3) Retrofit Current Message Board to an LED Lighting
Display with a Three Line Double Sided Display:
Item Quantity Unit Price Total
Model AF-3400-
24x112-24-2V
Red LED, three
line, double sided
message display
including software
1 $48,038.00 $48,038.00
Retrofit new
display in existing
structure including
any filler panels
and bracketing
$4,700.00
Final Hookup and
Training (new
software training)
$800.00
Shipping &
Handling
$525.00
Sales Tax $3,514.10
Total Cost $57,577.10
*No trade-in offered for existing sign.
(Option 4)
To halt the operation of the electronic message board and remove it
from service.
Further Discussion:
AIM Electronics informed Staff of a possible rebate from Xcel Energy. The rebate
program is an incentive for businesses to reduce their electricity usage by
upgrading their equipment. Staff contacted the Business Solutions Department of
Xcel Energy and their board has determined that the City would qualify for a
rebate of $1,133.00 by switching to LED.
OPTION SUMMARY
(Option 1) Repair and Replace all Major Components: Cost $7,052
(Option 2) Retrofit Current 2 Line Double Sided Message Board to a
LED Lighting Display: Cost $33,139
(Option 3) Retrofit Current Message Board to an LED Lighting
Display with a Three Line Double Sided Display: Cost $57,577
(Option 4)
To halt the operation of the electronic message board and remove it
from service. Revenue +$3,050
As a cost saving measure and to provide an increased service level to the
citizens of Mounds View, Staff recommends Option 2. This provides a payback
period of fifty–one (51) months. It also has greater functionality with less
maintenance.
If the City Council concurs with this recommendation, Staff would be looking for
direction from the City Council as to when this should be implemented. There are
two general options; implement the retrofit to LED lights now by amending the
2005 budget or implement in 2006 with funds allocated in the 2006 budget.
The recommended Option 2 could be financed from funds from either the Special
Project Fund or Building / Maintenance in the General Fund.
Recommendation:
Staff is looking for direction from the City Council pertaining to this matter.
Specifically, Staff is looking for Council input as to; 1) what Option they would like
implemented, 2)when should it be implemented, and 3) what should be the
funding source.
Tracy Juell, Administrative Assistant
Item No: 03A
Meeting Date: 3-1-05
Type of Business:WS
Administrator Review: _____
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Chief of Police, Mike Sommer
Item Title/Subject: Police Department Supervisory Structure
Date of Report: March 1, 2005
Background:
The purpose of this staff report is to discuss the need for additional first line supervision in the
Police Department. This can be accomplished without hiring any additional staff by converting
one existing patrol officer position to that of a sergeant. In this staff report I will explain the need
for this change and cover the implementation and financing plan to accomplish it.
The administration and supervision of the Police Department is currently done through one Chief,
one Deputy Chief and two sergeants. The two sergeants are the supervisors responsible for direct
first line supervision of patrol officers. First line supervision provided by a sergeant is a critical
component to effective policing. In comparison to same or similar sized departments we have a
much broader span of supervisory control than is found in most Police Departments in Minnesota.
Consequently, there are many periods of time where we have no first line supervision available to
supervise our patrol officers. As a comparison I have listed the administrative/ supervision make
up of similar sized departments in Minnesota for you review:
Mounds View Police Department 19 total sworn officers
• 1-Chief, 1-Deputy Chief, 2 Sergeants
Centennial Lakes Police Department (Circle Pines /Lexington) 17 total sworn officers
• 1-Chief, 1- Deputy Chief, 3- Sergeants
Fergus Falls Police Department- 20 total sworn officers
• 1-Chief, 1-Captain, 5- Sergeants
Robbinsdale Police Department- 19 total sworn officers
• 1-Chief, 4 Sergeants
Rosemount Police Department- 19 total sworn officers
• 1-Chief, 1-Lieutenant, 3-Sergeants
St. Anthony Police Department 20 total sworn officers
• 1-Chief, 1- Captain, 2 Lieutenants, 2- Sergeants
Ramsey Police Department 18 total sworn officers
• 1-Chief, 1-Captain, 3-Sergeants
New Ulm Police Department 17 total sworn officers
• 1-Chief, 4 Sergeants
Fairmont Police Department 18 total sworn officers
• 1-Chief, 1-Lieutenant, 4-Sergeants
Orono Police Department 18 total sworn officers
• 1-Chief, 4-Sergeants
Virgina Police Department 20 total sworn officers
• 1-Chief, 4- Lieutenants, 2-Sergeants
Cloquet Police Department 18 total sworn officers
• 1-Chief, 4-Sergeants
As you can see by this data the Mounds View Police Department has fewer administrative/
supervisory personnel than similar sized police departments. This means that we are not able to
provide supervision to officers at many times. This has been problematic for the Mounds View
Police Department. There are many implications associated with unsupervised employees
including liability issues to the City. While it will be more expensive to pay an employee at the
rate of pay of a supervisor vs. a line officer, this additional cost could easily be offset by reducing
the risk associated with failing to provide adequate supervision to employees working in the high-
risk business of policing.
The Police Department operates a 24 hour per day, 365 days per year schedule. In this scheduling
arrangement five employees are required to have one employee on duty 24 hours a day every day of
the year. With two sergeants we are able to provide first line supervision 40% of the time. This
means 60% of the time our patrol officers are working without direct first line supervision.
Currently, nearly ½ of our patrol officers have less than one year of police experience on the
department. This is why similar sized departments usually have three or more sergeants available
to supervise their patrol officers. In addition to providing supervision, our Police Sergeants also
perform the duties of a patrol officer by responding to calls, patrolling, and carry out traffic
enforcement.
I recommend the council authorize increasing the supervision level of the department up to current
policing standards. This would be accomplished without adding additional staff; by converting one
patrol officer position into a sergeant position (subject to civil service rules). This change would
effectively increase the first line supervision of police staff to an appropriate level. The
administrative /supervisory structure would then be: 1-Chief, 1-Deputy Chief, and three Sergeants.
For the remainder of the 2005 calendar year, making this change would cost approximately
$5,500. Assuming all of the positions are at their top pay scale converting one existing patrol
officer to a sergeant position would result in a net increase of up to approximately $8,000/ annually
to the salary budget of the police department. (The difference would be less for the first several
years while the new sergeant moves through the step system.)
This can be funded from our current budget without an increase by transferring some funding into
the Mounds View Police Department that had been used in the past to subsidize the New Brighton
Police Department. In the past, we have subsidized the New Brighton Police Department to help
fund a school recourse officer they have assigned to Irondale High School. This funding is paid in
the fall of the year. This funding has been listed for the 2005 budget. I suggest reducing this
amount this year by the amount necessary to fund the Mounds View Police Sergeant position, and
reducing the funding in future years (or eliminating it) to fund the Sergeant position. The City of
New Brighton Police department has six patrol Sergeants, and recently built a $10,000,000 Police
Station, and has funding available to provide more services and police staff support positions than
the City of Mounds View can. It is imprudent to continue this subsidy to New Brighton at a time
when the necessary funding to meet our department needs is limited. In light of the current
financial situation in Mounds View, and the first line supervisory deficiency currently on the
Mounds View Police Department, it makes good financial sense to divert the budgeted money to
fund our own department needs.
Staff request council approval to proceed with converting one patrol officer position to a sergeant
position using approved Police Civil Service rules.
Respectfully submitted,
Mike Sommer, Chief of Police
Item No: 03C
Meeting Date: March 1, 2005
Type of Business: Work Session
Administrator Review: _____
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Desaree M. Crane, Administrative Assistant
Item Title/Subject: Consideration of an Employee Appreciation Breakfast
for Friday April 8, 2005 or Friday April 15, 2005
Background:
Annually, the City budgets for an Employee Appreciation event. In 2003, a breakfast was
held in October at the Community Center. In 2004, a noon luncheon Barbeque was held.
For both events, Councilmembers were invited as hosts to help prepare and serve the meal
and hand out awards.
Discussion:
Staff would propose to schedule an Employee Appreciation Breakfast for either Friday April
8, 2005 or Friday, April 15, 2005 in the morning (start serving breakfast on or about 7am),
located at the Mounds View Banquet Facility.
Another option would be to wait until June or July to hold a summer luncheon barbeque at a
date convenient to the City Council.
One of the clauses in Resolution 5617 (attached) indicates that the City will provide to
employees “gift certificates in the amount of $5 per year of service at five-year increments.”
Currently there are 4 city employees that fall under this criteria. Both the Employee
Breakfast and Gift Certificates are currently budgeted for 2005 (Budget # 100-4100-
1600).
Recommendation:
Staff would like direction on which date and format would work best for the City Council to
participate in this event.
Respectfully submitted,
Desaree M. Crane
Item No. 3E
Meeting Date: March 1, 2005
Type of Business: WS
City Administrator Review _______
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
From: Mary Burg, Golf Course Manager
Item Title/Subject: Golf Course Marketing Considerations
INTRODUCTION:
The Bridges of Mounds View Golf Course and Learning Center is the subject of intense
media focus in the recent months. The local media has enjoyed the excitement on the topic
of redevelopment. While the possibility of redevelopment at the City’s golf course is of great
interest to the community, the spin that has been cast gives reason for concern. The
impression by many is that the course is already closed.
DISCUSSION:
Based on the activities regarding the development at The Bridges of Mounds View, a
perception exists throughout the community that the golf course has permanently closed.
The local press is exacerbating the misconception by several articles written over the past
several months that undoubtedly and inappropriately promote that impression. This belief
permeates the community. The result is the concern of a negative affect on The Bridges
golf business.
This concern is brought before the council as a point of information. No specific council
action is requested. However, it is in the best interest of the residents of Mounds View to
continue the operation of the golf course as a going concern this season. The golf course
staff has every intention to function with the same attention to quality that has become our
trademark. The challenge is to balance the flow of information with the fact the golf course
will continue to operate this 2005 season.
The upcoming March/April Mounds View Matters article articulates accurate information
regarding the golf activity. The Wednesday, February 23, 2005 Star Tribune article
“Mounds View Tries to move Mountains for Medtronic” is and a fair examination of possible
development. Yet, the prior volumes of print have the attention on the development project
as a “done deal”. Attached our two examples of marketing samples. Additional support and
promotion to dispel the rumor is required.
The ongoing negotiations, and the obstacles that have yet to be overcome take time. These
undoubtedly affect the status of the proposed “The Bridges Office Park”. In the time
required for the complicating factors to be reviewed, the course will continue to be in
operation. A strong revenue flow will need to continue to achieve our goals until which time
a decision is made regarding the future of the property. A fear the golf course may suffer
irreparable damage without ongoing positive support during this time.
In addition, Staff continues to review options and every effort to create a greater saturated
level of marketing is being made. The Bridges of Mounds View is expected to see a
positive cash flow this season, but this change in paradigm has damaged the golf course’s
ability to retain our customer base in spite of our best efforts.
RECOMMENDATION:
In the best interest of the City of Mounds View residents, the Council and Staff must make
a team effort to avoid further harm to golf course image. It is our charge to operate The
Bridges of Mounds View Golf Course and Leaning Center as viable entity and golf
operation until the facility ceases to do business. The community is poised to see what may
transpire.
Respectfully Submitted,
Mary Burg, Golf Course Manager