HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 1992/10/13P~i~g~
•
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 13, 1992
7:00 P.M.
AGENDA
C.
The City Council is provided background information for agenda items in
advance by staff and appointed commissions, committees and boards.
Decisions are based on this information, as well as City policy and
practices, input from constituents and a Councilmember's personal
judgement. If you have comments, questions or information regarding an
item on the agenda, please step forward to be recognized by the Mayor
during the "Residents Requests and Comments From the Floor" item on the
agenda. Please state your name and address for the record. AZZ comments
are appreciated. A copy of all printed materials relating to the agenda
item is available for public inspection at the Recording Secretary's Table.
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. ROLL CALL -
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Linke
Wuori Quick
Rickaby Blanchard
September 28, 1992
Regular Meeting
COUNCIL ACTION: A T D
October 6, 1992
Special Meeting
COUNCIL ACTION: A T D
• AGENDA
PAGE THREE
OCTOBER 13, 1992
E. Adopt Resolution No. 4287 Ratifying the Appointment
of Election Judges for the General~Municipal
Election, Staff Report No. 92-401C
F. Approval of Position Classifications, Staff Report.
No. 92-402C
G. Licenses for Approval
Asphalt - Expires 6/30193
Bituminous Consulting and Contracting, Co., Inc. -
New
Signs - Expires 6/30/93
Schad-Tracy Signs, Inc. - New
Sign Art Company, Inc. - Renewal
Universal Sign Company - Renewal
Heating, and Air Conditioningx - Expires 6/303
Steve's Heating Service, Inc. - New
Wenzel Heating and Air Conditioning - Renewal
COUNCIL ACTION: A T D
Comments
9. COUNCIL BUSINESS:
A. Consideration of Resolution No. 4290
Approving/Denying the Sign Area Variance Request by
Paster Enterprises for the Property Located at 2577
Highway 10, Planning Case No. 350-92, Staff Report
No. 92-403C
COUNCIL ACTION: A T D
Comments:
•
AGENDA
PAGE FIVE
OCTOBER 13, 1992 .
2.' Report of Mayor Linke
3. Report of Administrator
4. Report of Staff
5. Report of Attorney
11. ADJOURNMENT•
NE%T COIINCIL WORK SESSION: NOVEMBER 2, 1992
NEST COIINCIL MEETING: OCTOBER 26, 1992
•
f
•
1
PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
CALL TO ORDER
Regular Meeting
October 13, 1992
Mounds View City Hall
2401 Hwy. 10, Mounds View, MN 55112
~he Mounds View City Council was called to order by Mayor Linke at 7:00 p.m.
n Tuesday, October 13, 1992.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Pledge of Allegiance was said.
ROLL CALL
MEMBERS PRESENT: Councilmembers Wuori, Rickaby, Quick,
Blanchard and Mayor Linke.
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
ALSO PRESENT: Samantha Orduno, City Administrator, Paul
Harrington, City Planner, Don Brager, Finance
Director, Ric Minetor, Director of Public
Works/City Engineer
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Blanchard to approve September 28, 1992 minutes
as presented.
VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
•
Mounds View City Council Page Two
~gular Meeting October 13, 1992
MOTION/SECOND: Rickaby/Wuori to approve October 6, 2992 minutes
as amended.
Councilmember Wuori stated that on the first motion Quick made the
motion and Wuori seconded it.
VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS:
a. Mayor Linke introduced and read Resolution No. 4293 Commending
Bill Hanggi and Steve Dazenski for Their Ingenuity and Efforts in
Developing a Fire Hydrant Repair Device
MOTION/SECOND: Linke/Quick to adopt Resolution No. 4293
Commending Bill Hanggi and Steve Dazenski for Their Ingenuity and
Efforts in Developing a Fire Hydrant Repair Device
VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
Mayor Linke presented Bill Hanggi and Steve Dazenski with Certificates of
Appreciation and a Gift Certificate for their efforts. Mayor Linke thanked
Mr. Hanggi and Mr. Dazenski and stated that this is an example of the fine
,employees the City of Mounds View employs.
There were no residents requests or comments.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
No public hearings had been scheduled for this meeting.
CONSENT AGENDA
Samantha Orduno, City Administrator, read the Consent Agenda.
Mayor Linke asked if there were any items the Council desired removed.
Councilmember Rickaby requested that Item F. be removed from the Consent
Agenda.
MOTION/SECOND: Wuori/Blanchard to adopt the Consent Agenda minus
Item F.
VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
Item F. Approval of Position Classifications was brought up for
consideration. Councilmember Rickaby stated that the position
reclassifications had been discussed at the last Work Session and it was her
anion that they needed more clarification and should be discussed in
-~ublic.
Mounds View City Council
\egular Meeting
Page Three
October 13, 1992
Councilmember Rickaby asked what the duties of the maintenance receptionist
were because arguments were made at the Work Session for reclassification of
this position was that the duties were greater than those of the City Hall
receptionist.
Ric Minetor, Director of Public Works/City Engineer, stated that the duties
of the maintenance receptionist were: phones, scheduling work for the
Public Works workers, schedule final readings, computer entry including
accounts payable, work accomplished reports, fuel usage and other various
reports, all secretarial work and correspondence including filing.
Samantha Orduno, City Administrator, reviewed the duties of City Hall
Receptionist as being: accepting and transferring of phone calls,
very minimal work with animal licensing, no typing or secretarial duties as
far as correspondence, and relaying information to staff members.
Minetor stated that the maintenance receptionist position is actually more
like a division secretary's position.
Orduno explained that there are criteria that have to be met in order to
reclassify a position. The positions, when compared, have to have similar
duties, tasks and responsibilities in order to be reclassified to
comparable positions. Inotherwords, if they walk like a duck, they should
e called a duck.
inetor explained that the present Public Works Foreman position is more
like a supervisor's position because he supervises many classes of people.
This position is responsible for supervising personnel in streets, water
department, sewer department, and the division secretary. This position
also works on a maintenance budget and sets maintenance project schedules.
The Public Works Foreman supervises the maintenance division and is given
main guidelines from the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. The Public
Works Foreman position is comparable to a Maintenance Supervisor in the
Stanton schedule.
Councilmember Rickaby asked Minetor what positions he supervised.
Minetor responded: supervises personnel in the Planning Department, the
Building Inspector and the Building Department Secretary.
Councilmember Rickaby stated that maybe the
engineer. This was discussed some time ago
argument was that this position would be toy
many other people would have to be hired to
stated that if the Public Works Foreman was
perhaps the City should look at turning the
half time position and not having this type
supervisor is supervising a supervisor.
City didn't need a full time
and Rickaby stated that the
~ difficult to replace as too
replace this position. Rickaby
doing supervisory work now, that
City Engineer's position into a
of bureaucracy where a
chard Oman, 8205 Groveland Road, offered that when services expand
~ersonnel shouldn't be expanded to create a bureaucracy.
Mounds View City Council Page Four
regular Meeting _ __ _ _ -- - -_ October 13, 1992
Oman suggested that the City should look for ways to streamline various
duties in order to maintain a smaller municipal government.
Mayor Linke responded that the City has looked into streamlining various
duties and not expanded personnel. Mayor Linke compared the City of Mounds
View and its number of employees to those communities in the Metro area with
the same or smaller square miles and have more employees than Mounds View.
Linke further offered that of the 39 full time employed by Mounds View, 15
of these employees are police. The City has not expanded its number of
employees. The only increase of personnel will be to add a police officer
and if the City doesn't hire one it will put at risk the health, safety and
welfare of the residents of the community.
Orduno stated that the criteria used for reclassification of a position are:
1) have the duties and responsibilities of the position substantially
changed in terms of degree of complexity and scope of diversity or, 2) are
the duties and responsibilities of the position consistent with the
complexity, diversity and accountability of a higher ranked position. There
was one position that requested reclassification that did not meet the
criteria and was not reclassified.
Richard Oman asked that the reclassifications change the pay scales and are
these change in pay scales budget for?
~rduno stated that in the past cities could pull pay scales out of the air.
In the past there was no basis for pay equity. Two categories are
considered when considering pay scales -- the market value and the internal
comparison. This is state law. These categories impact how people will be
paid.
Councilmember Rickaby stated that when the Maintenance Secretary was hired a
year ago the argument was made that some of her duties were being performed
by the Public Works Foreman and other Public Works employees. The statement
was made that it would be better to hire a lower paid person and let the
Public Works employees do other work that needed to be done. Part then of
the reclassification of the Public Works Foreman's position is that he then,
by hiring the Maintenance Secretary, had one more class to supervise.
Orduno stated that reclassifications are not based on who supervises who and
how many one supervises. The reclassification has to do with the
complexity, scope of diversity and accountability of a higher ranked
position. If a person is kept in a position that does not clearly not
reflect what they actually do, a person could appeal this to the Human
Rights Department if the work performed did not meet their job or position
description.
Councilmember Wuori stated that the word bureaucracy had been used a lot to
describe government.
ds View City Council
lar Meeting
Page Five
October 13, 1992
Wuori further stated that the intent is not to hire new people when
promoting the others. The City has no intent of hiring a new foreman to
take the place of newly promoted public works supervisor. The City of
Mounds View has a small streamlined City government. The City has many
talented employees with varying abilities to do all of their work and take
on responsibilities of other positions. This staff is a "lean mean fighting
machine."
Roger Stigney, 8400 Eastwood, stated he was not opposed to the
reclassification of the positions. Stigney stated that this state is in a
severe recession, people have lost jobs, and people have taken cuts in their
positions. The City must run a very tight ship and perhaps some cuts can be
made. The City is paying $250,000 to pay the top five salaries in the City.
Perhaps the City doesn't need a full time public works director. Before
taxpayers money is raised to pay salaries, the City should look at
consolidation.
Mayor Linke stated as he had said before, the City looks at every position.
Linke asked Mr. Stigney, a candidate for a Council position, why he hasn't
attended the budget meetings. and suggested that he would understand the
budget process better if he did. Linke stated that then Mr. Stigney would
have something to base his facts on. Linke stated that the City hires
excellent people. Linke stated if the City would pay $2.95 for an employee,
he City would get an employee capable of doing $2.95 work. The City has to
~ay what the job is worth. A person running for Council should be in
attendance at the meetings more than twice a year to understand the process
for budgeting instead of making comments.
Stigney replied that this is the
Stigney stated that nothing has
office. Stigney stated that he
including the budget hearings.
task force to reduce City funds
budget. If needed, he is still
second time he has run for City Council.
changed since the last time he ran for City
had been in attendance at several meetings
Stigney stated that he volunteered to form a
and show the City how to streamline the
available to do this.
Mayor Linke stated that the present Council from 1991 to 1992 was able to
reduce the budget by 1.5%
Stigney stated that the top five salaries cost the City $250,000 increasing
every year. Council is not addressing the problems of the City.
Orduno stated that out of the top five salaries, three of the five are below
the Stanton mean, 80-90% below the Stanton mean. Orduno also stated that
two other items are also considered when setting pay scales - Unions and Pay
Equity.
Orduno stated that she is in the top five salaries and her contract calls
for her to receive an increase when other employees receive an increase.
Orduno stated that her salary alone, based on pay equity, is far below the
~edicted pay. Orduno stated that she did not take an increase nor did she
Lorce the issue.
Mounds View City Council
~gular Meeting
Sharon Croon, Eastwood Road,
and that job classifications
managers where she is employ
the City of Mounds View take
Page Six
- - - October 13, 1992
stated that she works at a large corporation
are not worth a hill of beans. The Corporate
ed are taking pay cuts. Why can't employees of
pay cuts?
Orduno stated that Sears is not under state law. None of the private sector
business are under the state pay equity law. Orduno explained the pay
equity law.
Orduno stated that with regards to Unions in terms of negotiations an
arbitrator for police or fire would not uphold a 0~ increase. There is a
different perspective in the public sector vs. the private sector.
Croon stated that the City should start at the top and work down as far as
pay cuts. Have the cuts be across the board and deal with pay equity law.
It has to be started someplace. Other people in the community are taking
pay cuts and losing jobs.
Bill Frits, 8072 Long Lake Road, wanted to know if a job description is the
same thing as a position classification.
Orduno stated that it is a title for certain duties.
~yor Linke explained that the work that these people are doing does not fit
e job that they are doing.
Bill Frits asked how many unions the City has. Frits stated that his belief
is the City has one Union and one decertified bargaining unit which has no
force in law. Frits further stated that he doesn't support non-union
workers getting union wages. These people can be cut. Comparable worth is
comparable throughout the City. Frits stated if you cut one cut them aII
including yourself.
Rickaby stated that the Planning Technician was reclassified to City
Planner. Rickaby asked the reclassification compares with City Planners in
the past?
Orduno explained that job duties have changed. The level of accountability
and investigation issues has grown. Paul works with the City Attorney
regarding development agreements. Orduno stated that Paul is far superior
to the other City Planners that the City has employed. Orduno stated that
many things fell through the cracks. Paul's expertise is such that he has
been involved in tax increment and development agreements since he began
employment with the City. Paul is doing duties far beyond those of a
Planning Technician. Paul is also primary liaison to the Planning
Commission. Planning Technicians do not do this job nor do they get
involved with TIF or development agreements. Planning Technicians that have
been with the City in the past have not been involved to the degree that
Paul has.
r~
Mounds View City Council Page Seven
~gular Meeting October 13, 1992
Councilmember Rickaby stated that during the Council discussions regarding
the hiring of this position, it was stated that the City wasn't going to
need as much planning experience because the City's planning was nearly
completed and that is why the Gity was hiring a Planning Technician.
The City went to a lower level position and then that person gets put into a
higher level classification and receives higher pay which defeats the hiring
of a Planning Technician. Rickaby stated that she has no argument that he
does a wonderful job and she is not arguing against his reclassification.
Mayor Linke stated that Paul was hired and he grew into the reclassified
position and that tells the City that it did a good job of hiring and that
the City could watch him grow into a higher position.
Ric Minetor, Director of Public Works/City Engineer, stated that the City
has to look at the past. In the past the City tried to go with a Planning
Technician and it hasn't worked. Paul has gone beyond what the position
called for. The City benefitted from a tight job marked. Paul cannot be
cut back to Planning Technician. The City's has benefitted from Paul's
experience. Paul has done the job and gone beyond Planning Technician.
Nearly every City has a Planning Technician and a City Planner.
MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Rickaby to Approve Position Classifications
VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
COUNCIL BUSINESS:
A. Paul Harrington, City Planner, reviewed Staff Report No. 92-403
regarding approving/denying the Sign Area Variance Request by
Paster Enterprises for the Property Located at 2577 Highway 10.
Harrington stated that Paster Enterprises, representing Budget
Liquor, has made application for a variance to allow for signage
in excess of City allowed size requirements at 2577 Highway 10
(Mounds View Square).
The Mounds View Planning Commission at a special October 1, 1992
meeting, reviewed and denied the request as proposed. The applicant
is now exercising his right of appeal of that decision to the
City Council as allowed by the Municipal Code.
Paul Harrington then introduced Jim Everson, representative
from Paster Enterprises, to go over the request.
Mayor Linke stated that the Mounds View code allows for up to 100
square feet of sign area per business occupant in the form of a wall
sign. The applicant has proposed two signs each approximately 185
square feet in area to be located on the south and west sides of the
building. The plans indicate that both signs will be illuminated.
John Streeter, Paster Enterprises stated that the Budget Liquor sign
would have 42" letters instead of 36" letters as in the past.
Mounds View City Council ---- Page Eight
~gular Meeting ~ October 13, 1992
Councilmember Blanchard stated that the Planning Commission had gone
over this request and turned it down because it is not in conformance
with the City Code.
Councilmember Rickaby stated that from the City's perspective perhaps
the appearance of the shopping center is more important than the size
of the signage. If all of the tenants are in agreement and more
shoppers would be attracted to the center, the signage should not be
the City's concern. Rickaby stated that the Code should be adjusted if
sign size is too much of a barrier for allowing signage that would
bring adequate business to the shopping center.
Mayor Linke stated his concurrence with Councilmember Rickaby.
Councilmember Blanchard stated that the Planning Commission was
concerned because they are to interpret the Code as written. Blanchard
stated that until the Code is changed the signage shouldn't be allowed.
Councilmember Wuori stated that if the City wants the business
community to bring business into the City it needs to have the same
type of image as other shopping centers and perhaps it is time to
update the sign code. Wuori stated some concern with the wrap around
illuminated sign on the west side because the homeowners on that side
will have to deal with more light.
Councilmember Blanchard moved to den the si n area variance re est b
Y 9 ~ Y
Paster Enterprises for the property located at 2577 Highway 10
Motion failed due to lack of a second.
MOTION/SECOND: Rickaby/Wuori to approve Resolution No. 4290
Approving the Sign Area Variance Request by Paster Enterprises for
the Property Located at 2577 Highway 10
VOTE: 4 ayes 1 nay Motion Carried
B. MOTION/SECOND: Rickaby/Linke to approve Resolution No. 4292
Approving the Sign Area Variance Request by Paster Enterprises for the
Property Located at 2541 Highway 10 -
VOTE• 4 ayes 1 nay
Motion Carried
C. Samantha Orduno, City Administrator, reviewed the gas and electric
franchise agreements by stating that the two franchise agreements are
basically very similar to the existing franchise agreements but allow
the City more control in regards to performance stipulations both for
the City and NSP in regards to the use of public ground, relocation of
facilities and required permit procedures. Both agreements provide for
Mounds View City Council
.egular Meeting
Both agreements provide for
gross operating revenues of
fees to the City as opposed
provision of the current fr.
Page Nine
October 13, 1992
a franchise fee of no more than 4~ on the
NSP and a monthly payment schedule of the
to annual payments after one year as the
3nchise.
Mayor Linke stated that the agreements are basically the same as
in the past with the exception of the payment schedule and the
improved control over work being done in the City by NSP.
Orduno stated that there is a blank on page 6 of the gas and electric
franchise agreements that should be filled in with 4$ on both
documents.
Judy Trude, 8391 Knollwood Drive, stated her objection to having the
4~ fee in the agreement at all and wanted it removed from the
agreement. Trude asked how much revenue would be raised with the
franchise fee?
Mayor Linke explained that the franchise fee, if implemented, would
raise $277,000. Linke stated that an 8.3~ raise in property taxes
would only raise $155,000. Property taxes would have to increase by
22$ to raise the $277,000.
Trude stated that 4~ would raise $277,000. The City only needs
$155,000 to balance the budget. Is it the intention of the Council to
pass the agreement with the maximum fee? This would raise $125,000
more than the City needs to balance the budget at 4~. Trude asked the
Council what was heard from the people at the public hearing on this
subject.
Mayor Linke responded that the main speakers at the public hearing
were from the business community and it was favored to increase the
property taxes rather than implement the franchise fee.
Councilmember Rickaby stated that the residents were in attendance
one year ago and were against the franchise fee.
Trude stated that the franchise fee is an inequitable tax and that
everyone is not affected the same -- some will pay more, some ,less.
Trude suggested that the Council vote on the agreements minus the
franchise fee. Property taxes would be lower than the franchise
fee.
Councilmember Rickaby stated that was an excellent idea, leave
the 4$ out and it can be voted in anytime in the future.
Duane McCarty, 8060 Long Lake Road, stated that this franchise fee
is a revenue source for the 1993 budget. McCarty asked, if the Council
does not intend to adopt Ordinances 517 and 518, what purpose does
Ordinance 519 serve.
Mounds View City Council
~egular Meeting
Page Ten
_ October 13, 1992
Mayor Linke stated that it is an option and that staff was asked to
prepare the ordinance to include the entire package.
McCarty stated to not adopt Ordinance 519 with the franchise fee
agreements would be a moot point. McCarty stated that he has not
had a flood of phone calls relating to the gas and electric franchise
agreements. McCarty stated that the franchise agreements and
implementation of the franchise fee should have been a part of the
budget process and discussed at the hearing. McCarty suggested
that the Council table this item and make it a part of the budget
process in the future.
Charlie Hall, Mermaid, stated that the business community feels
that the 4$ fee should not be added and it should be deleted from
the agreement.
Richard Oman, stated that he does not object to the franchise, but
is in opposition to the fee because it is an inefficient way to
collect revenues and it adds on a new layer of administration costs.
Mr.~Oman stated that the residents should not pay NSP to administer
paperwork.
Mayor Linke explained that NSP cannot charge the City any
administrative costs for collecting the fee. State law doesn't
allow for that.
Richard Oman stated that the residents will also pay 6.5~ sales
tax on a revenue source for the City. If taxes are raised it
increases the property taxes but adds nothing new to the bill.
Steve Lauterbach, 8285 Knollwood Drive, stated that he is opposed to
the franchise fee. Property taxes should be increased. Residents
will pay less with the franchise fee but businesses will pay
more as well as the churches and schools. The franchise fee
should be removed from the agreement.
Russ Young, 3032 County Road I, stated that NSP when they were
to cut trees on his land asked but the City demanded the trees
be cut or the City would cut them down.
Mayor Linke stated that he did not understand the problem
with the trees. Orduno stated that Mr. Young should contact the
City tomorrow and she would be ,glad to research the problem
surrounding the cutting of the trees.
Mayor Linke stated that NSP doesn't have to inform the City
when they are working in the City.
Ruth White, 2917 County Road I, stated that in her opinion the
franchise .fee is a sneaky way to raise taxes. This franchise
Mounds View City Council Page Eleven
~gular Meeting - October 13, 1992
fee would be very hard on senior citizens. If the property taxes
are increased there is a circuit breaker that aids residents in
getting some of the money back. White suggested the franchise
fee be eliminated from the franchise agreement.
Terry Wiley, 2279 Oakwood Drive, stated that contrary to the other
25 people in the room he thinks that the residents have to pay for
services received from the City. The City needs a certain number
of dollars to run the City. The funds have to come from somewhere.
Wiley suggested leaving all options open. If the City does not
leave all options open regarding the franchise fee and the City doesn't
have options they can't use them.
Charlie Hall, Mermaid Supper Club, stated that the residents of the
community are crying out for help with regards to not implementing
the franchise fee and he hopes the Council hears them. Mr. Hall
stated that the City Administrator is a nice person to work with,
the Mayor has met with him several times and is a tribute to the
City. Mr. Hall hopes that the Council listens to the business
community and the residents and does not implement the franchise
fee.
. Chuck Miller, 2408 Laport asked about levy limits.
Mayor Linke explained that the City has no control over property
taxes. The County has control on property valuation and the State
sets how much of the rates are charged against that. This amount
affects what the City levies.
Orduno explained why the City must look for alternative means
of revenue and not be dependent on local government aids.
Mr. Miller stated that the City must adjust spending. Miller
stated that persons at his company have not had a raise in three years.
Orduno gave another example of mandates on the City -- the 6.5~
sales tax. This was not something budgeted for.
Linke stated that the City during the budget process looks into not
only property taxes but license fees and various other revenue sources
for the City. The franchise fee would be looked at during the budget
process just as the other revenues are.
Laurie Schley, Knollwood Drive stated that she objects to having
NSP collecting the franchise fee. Schley. stated that people should
pay for services. NSP treats her very well. Schley believes that
the City should not have a third party collecting funds for the
City's General Fund budget. Schley states that by having the
property tax increase it makes the residents of the City responsible
customers of the City budget.
Mounds View City Council Page Twelve
•egular Meeting October 13, 1992
Charles Miller stated that the franchise fee has been in existence
for 18 years and has never had to be used. The fee has raised its
head in the past. The property tax process is already established
and should be used. The property tax amount has already been
submitted to the State.
Councilmember Rickaby during a meeting Don Brager stated that by
increasing the property tax the City would receive more in fiscal
disparities. The fiscal disparity would not be felt that year but
the next year. Rickaby stated that whatever amount the City Council
decides to set for the franchise fee, that amount will go up with no
action on the part of the residents. Councilmember Rickaby stated that
on the survey when asked about the franchise fee, 63~ voted against it.
Charlie Hall, Mermaid, stated again that the residents are concerned
about this franchise fee and it should be deleted from the agreements.
Dave Schwartz of NSP stated that one out of 42 has a franchise fee
in affect. Mr. Schwartz stated that he has negotiated 27 franchise
agreements in the past five years. Five or six out of those have the
franchise fee provision in their agreements but none have evoked it.
Councilmember Rickaby asked how many hours Mr.Schwartz has spent
on dealing with this franchise fee in Mounds View. These hours will be
collected somehow, and it is her assumption that it will be on the
NSP bills.
Charles Miller is not in agreement with paying a sales tax on a
utility. Mr. Miller qualified the meaning of the word franchise.
The way it is used in regards to the utility obscures its meaning.
Judy Trude stated that if homeowners could not pay property taxes
it would go on the tax roll.
Dave Schwartz stated there will be accounts uncollectible. The
non-payment accounts will be deducted from the fee paid to the
City of Mounds View,
Councilmember Rickaby stated then that the franchise fee does not
have such a stable base.
Richard Oman stated that perhaps the implementation of the franchise
fee be tabled until the budget process is complete and then deal with
the franchise agreements and implementation of the fees. Oman
suggested January or February and let the franchise fee survive on its
own merits. The budget will be finished in December. Oman stated
again that the franchise fee implementation should be tabled as there
is no pressure to pass it for October, November or December of 1992.
ounds View City Council Page Thirteen
~gular Meetinq -.-- --October 13, 1992
Dave Schwartz, NSP, stated that the City's franchise agreement has a
separate fee policy which calls for a public hearing.
Trude want a clarification regarding the hearings. Trude asked
if the City would have to hold another hearing before the
implementation of the fee could be voted on.
Mayor Linke explained that a item three could be acted on tonight
as the City has met all requirements of the City Charter. The
fee could be collected. yearly instead of monthly per the existing
agreement.
Orduno clarified that the current franchise has 8 more years
to be in effect .
Charles Miller asked to hear the Council's reasons for wanting the
franchise fee and how it would be better for the City residents.
Mayor Linke stated that he has had the privilege to sit for many
years on the Council and work on many budgets. Linke stated that
he has seen the volatility of property tax increases. Linke stated
that last year the Council was able to reduce the budget by 1.5~
but had to raise taxes to make up the difference because of
. property taxes going down. The franchise fee is a revenue source
that the City can count on. The franchise fee will not fluctuate
by "whoever has a bee in their bonnet" in the legislature. The
City has had to reduce the fund balance and draw it down and loose
interest and with the franchise fee money being put in monthly the City
would earn interest on that money.
Councilmember Wuori stated that she had not made up her mind as to
how to vote on the franchise fee. Councilmember Wuori stated that
it bothered her to rely on taxes. Perhaps a sliding scale could be
looked into. The government has a habit of changing their minds and
it is done in the middle of our budget year. If something isn't done,
each year the City will fall back little by little.
Councilmember Quick stated that no one knows how much the state will
cut us this year. Quick asked where does the City make its cuts --
non-essential services, what are non-essential services -- parks,
recreation, streets, maintenance. The City has a one million dollar
payroll in Police alone. The franchise fee will help Mounds View stay
in the future. If the City doesn't do anything Mounds View could
become a part of Shoreview, New Brighton or Arden Hills. In order to
plan for the future the Council has to make tough decisions. Maybe one
of the candidates in the audience will have to deal with the $950,000
cuts next budget session.
•
unds View City Council Page Fourteen
~ular Meeting ~Jctober 13, 1992
Councilmember Blanchard stated that the franchise fee is a stable
resource for the City and is a revenue the City can depend on for
future years. The City could buy down property taxes.
Councilmember Rickaby stated that what she was hearing from the
rest of the Council is that the City Council would do a franchise
rate that would bring in $155,000 which would be the same as 8.3
percent maximum levy that can be done. The City could still
receive cuts in the middle of the year whether or not there was a
franchise fee or property tax increase. The cuts are LGA cuts
and they are very different than property taxes.
Rickaby doesn't support 8.3~ increase but with some cuts being
reinstated from the results of the survey, the City then could take
extra money and put it in the fund balance.
Rickaby further stated if the City puts the increase on the property
tax instead of the franchise fee the City could get more fiscal
disparity relief. If the City has higher taxes, it receives more fiscal
disparity relief for the next year.
Don Brager, Finance Director, explained the situation regarding
fiscal disparities.
. Last year Mayor Linke stated that Park and Recreation programs
had to be cut. These cuts were reinstated because people were
upset and the many phone calls had been received regarding these
cuts.
L. W. Stigney, 7142 Eastwood., stated that there should be a
cap on what the City is spending every year..
Mayor Linke stated that the Council has made a conscientious
effort to maintain services. There are no levy limits and the
City could raise the taxes as high as it would want to. The
hiring of a police officer is the only service that is being
added.
Don Brager, Finance Director, stated that the Council is limited
to the amount that could be raised because the amount was already
submitted and accepted. Council could lower but not raise taxes.
Councilmember Rickaby stated that Mayor Linke made comments
regarding Park and Recreation cuts in that he received phone
calls regarding those cuts.- The survey taken supported cuts
in Parks Maintenance. The City has reinstated those cuts.
The phone calls received may have been over former cuts in
children's programs.
The survey indicated discontinuing dragging and the reduction
in ice rinks. Items that the survey indicated the residents
wanted back were put back in.
Steve Lauterbach stated that the current franchise agreement
does not expire for eight years. When would the new franchise
Mounds View City Council --- --- -- - - Page Fifteen
Regular Meeting October 13, 1992
• agreement go into effect.
John Thomson stated that the present franchise fee expires
May 1, 1998. The existing franchise fee agreement allows the City
to implement a franchise fee of up to 4$ and if fee was implemented
it would be paid yearly. The City went to NSP and negotiated to have
the fee collected monthly and paid monthly to the City.
Councilmember Rickaby stated that a young man had attended a past
Council meeting and was concerned with the City~s franchise fee
because he thought more environmental issues should be written
into it. He then stated that he supported the franchise fee
because it would discourage high end users. With the sliding
scale the high energy users could decide to use more because they
could fit into a smaller rate.
MOTIONISECOND: Wuori/Quick to approve Ordinance No. 517 Granting
NSP an Electric Franchise
VOTE:
Mayor Linke - aye
Councilmember Quick - aye
• Councilmember Rickaby - no
Councilmember Blanchard - aye
Councilmember Wuori - aye
Motion Passes.
MOTION/SECOND: Quick Blanchard to approve Ordinance No. 518 Granting
NSP a Gas Energy Franchise
Mayor Linke - aye
Councilmember Quick - aye
Councilmember Rickaby - no
Councilmember Blanchard - aye
Councilmember Wuori - aye
Mayor Linke stated that in regards to Ordinance No. 519 Implementing a
Gas and Electric Franchise Fee the Council has many options. The
options were read and reviewed by Mayor Linke.
Charles Miller stated that if Perot gave us a check for $155,000
the City would still be affected by State cuts in June.
Mayor Linke stated if the City received cuts in HACA or LGA the
City would be $IOOK short: The City would then have to look into
budget -
reserves. Mayor Linke stated that the property tax increase should
have been 10 or 11~.
Charles Miller stated that the increase should be put on property tax
Mounds View City Council Page Sixteen
~gular Meeting October 13, 1992
Charles Miller stated that the increase should be put on property tax
so the franchise fee could be used to fall back on. If the franchise
fee is implemented now there will be nothing to fall back on. In an
emergency the franchise fee could be implemented for the remainder
of that year
Roger Stigney stated that in viewing the options the Council has
looked at the top users but not at the low income users. No
circuit breaker has been provided for low income users. Stigney
stated he strongly opposes the franchise fee implementation.
Wiley stated that the City is $155,000 in the hole on a proposed
budget. The City needs $155,000 to balance the budget. Wiley
stated opposition to paying 6.5$ taxes on something he doesn't
want to pay taxes on. The franchise fee is a long term solution
for $155,000. It would collect $40.00 from every resident and
commercial business. Short term solution would be to follow the
standard process. This is putting something on that doesn't go
away. The City needs a short term fix to balance the 1993 but
and then needs to get into synchronization with the State. The
Council needs have the budget year go from July to July.
• Mayor Linke stated that going July to July had been brought up
before and that there is something in the statutes that prevents
it. Most cities are on calendar years.
Wiley stated that the City needs something to fall back on for
catastrophic events. The City needs something in reserve.
Trude stated that if using Option 3, it would only raise 6~
of a $3 million budget. Is all the bad will worth it?
Charlie Hall asked the Council if they was listening to the
people. Hall stated this is a disproportionate tax as far
as commercial/industrial. The. businesses will wither and die.
Mayor Linke stated that he made an error when considering the
8.3~ property tax increase. It should have been 11 or 12~.
Barb Haake asked if the 8.3$ in property tax increase could be
amended in December.
John Thomson stated that per the Truth In Taxation Law, the City
has to input the maximum tax the City is going to levy by September 15.
Taxes can't be changed.
Mayor Linke asked if there is a penalty for increasing taxes.
Brager responded that there is no penalty provision but a change
in levy limit could reflect a reduction in the City's LGA. This
ounds View City Council Page Seventeen
~gular Meeting October 13, 1992
law may have a similar provision.
Councilmember Blanchard stated that the sliding fee option is
not fair to residents.
Councilmember made a motion to implement the 3% franchise fee
across the board with a sunset clause after five years which
would end in December of 1998.
Councilmember Rickaby asked what that would raise.
Orduno responded that it would raise $207,960.
Councilmember Wuori seconded the motion.
Councilmember Blanchard stated that with the franchise fee
of 3% across the board everyone would pay equally.
Charlie Hall stated that the Council did not listen to the
people.
Judy Trude stated that this will hurt businesses but that doing
a flat 3% is easier.
• Councilmember Rickaby stated that many business people were in
attendance and nearly unanimously, except for Charlie Hall,
preferred the property tax increase.
Charlie Hall stated that 6 to 12 business people talked to the
Mayor and Samantha. 100% of those persons favored the property
tax increase.
Councilmember Blanchard stated that she could only vote on what
she felt was best for the residents of the City..
Mayor Linke admitted an error on his part and should have went
for 22% on property tax increase limit. One option-the City could
take would be to go with a 1% increase straight across the board for
the franchise fee and an 8.3 increase in property taxes.
Charles Miller stated that the City would be giving up its 4%
buffer if it went with 1% on the franchise fee. Miller stated
it would be better to put the 8.3% on the property taxes and
save the 4% franchise fee as a buffer to use if necessary.
Miller asked if the franchise fee is implemented at 3% would there
still be an increase in property taxes.
Mayor Linke responded in his opinion there would not be.
• Barb Haake suggested the franchise fee implementation be tabled.
ounds View City Council Page Eighteen
~gular Meeting October 13, 2992
Annette L., 7971 Knollwood, stated she is opposed to the
franchise fee as she is on a very strict budget.
VOTE:
Mayor Linke - no
Councilmember Rickaby - no
Councilmember Quick - yes
Councilmember Wuori - yes
Councilmember Blanchard - yes
Motion Passes
REPORTS
Report of Mayor Linke:
Received a call from a developer who stated the City would
not provide him with his Development Agreement until he
paid his past due fees. Council concurred that the
Development Agreement would be sent when the City received
its check.
. Consensus of the Council: Quick - yes
Wuori - yes
Blanchard - yes
Rickaby - yes
Report of Councilmembers:
Blanchard - attended the Fire Department Open House on
Sunday.
Wuori - no report
Quick - no report
Rickaby - no report
Bill Frits asked what is happening with Williams Pipeline. Mr. Frits was
asked to give Ric Minetor a call tomorrow.
Report of Attorney: Regarding the property that has the boat on
Sherwood. The property is owned by the bank and the bank has
voluntarily offered to get an order to remove the boat so they are not
liable. It will take two to three weeks to get the boat moved. This is
more economical than the City having to move the boat. Also,
mentioned was the general upkeep of the property and they
agreed to take corrective action. The home will go back to HUD.
•
ounds View City Council
~egular Meeting
Page Nineteen
Jctober 13, 1992
There being no further business before the Council, Mayor Linke
adjourned the meeting at 11:50 p.m.
•
Respectfully subm'tted,
w
Mich a Severson
Recording Secretary
C7