The URL can be used to link to this page

2001-11-07o AGENDA MOUND CITY COUNCIL BUDGET WORKSHQP Call Meeting to Order & Opening Comments - Mayor Pat Meisel Visit from Ben Whitthart, representing Gillespie Center/Westonka Seniors Additional Information Council Discussion Survey "Speak up and be heard" from Oct 2001 City Contact Letter from Phyllis Jessen Charges from Kennedy and Graven Communication Costs July 2001 Use Report from LMCC Minutes and Documentation on Water Patrol Funding Cost Allocations for Administrative/Finance/Computer Park Department Maintenance on Docking Areas Amended Docks Budget A. General Fund Budgets B. Levy C. Fund Balance Final Discussion Closing Comments - Mayor Pat Meisel 7. Adjourn September 4, 2001 CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364-1687 PH: (952) 472-0600 FAX: (952) 472-0620 WEB: www. cityofmound.com Peter: In response to your questions: Skate Park: What are the $ numbers I asked you for? Total City. Cost at City Hall site: Are these items in the 2002 budget (infrastructure, storm sewer extension, and other city needs, costs, staff)? These costs are being calculated by John Cameron and will be presented when Gene H is ready with his work. The City is not being expected to pick up total costs. Volunteers plan to raise the money. There is $3,000 in the 2002 proposed budget. There is $3,000 in the 2001 budget, which we have exceeded. Are 2001 budgeted $'s still available for community skating rink? I am not familiar with money reserved for funding ice skating. Sheriff's Water Patrol - 2001 and 2002 budgeted $'s for two additional patrol? 2001 charges went against the Police Department. There has been no request for funding, so no amount is contained in the 2002 budget. Process to increase proposed water rates - Increased this fall? Explain why $64,000 deficit projected for 2002. We review water charges in similar size and area cities. This year we are proposing a 5% increase, which is reflected in the Water Fund budget. Impacts causing a deficit include: a portion of a secretary ($14-15,000), capital equipment additions ($40,000), and normal inflationary factors. With the 5% increase, the fund will recover over time. What is the total of gallons of water pumped from city wells annually the last 10 years? See attached spreadsheet. I strongly oppose charitable gambling proceeds as a revenue source for city budget. See attached spreadsheet on charitable gambling proceeds. This is a policy matter and totally up to the decision makers. J I am concerned about the low fund balance - 15%. Staff is concerned about the low fund balance as well, making a sizable increase in the levy critical if operations are to continue at the same level. An option is to eliminate or cut back on some programs or level of service. Examples include: 1) not plowing until snow exceeds two inches; 2) mowing parks every 10 days; 3) eliminating life guards. 7. Where are we at with Dock Fees? See attached Dock and Commons minutes. Page: Two Date: Sept 4, 2001 Subj: Questions o Would full-time Fire Chief take over Fire Marshal Duties? The Fire Chief would act as chief, fire marshal and fire inspector. The gap over the 2001 budget is $30,000. 2002 budgeted tree removal $13,000 - Tree planting - $0. This is a policy matter, set by those who set the budget. 10. What is the cemetery plots fee structure? See attachment. Respectfully submitted, Kandis Hanson City Manager -2- ,UTILITIES Water: *?*Jori: Water Area Access Charge (due at development) 610:15 Water connection (at hook-up) $4/front foot ea. 610:25 610:35 610:40 610:40 610:60 610:45 610:65 610:45 610:45 Minimum connection fee Service contract violation Water meter Water meter test Remote meter Water turn-on Water service connection deposit Plumber violation Water availability charge Water gallonage rates Service charge User fee New account charge On/off at curb box Meter installation Meter removal Reconnection fee Sprinkler system 2 inch 4 inch 6 inch 8 inch 10 inch 12 inch Corporate cock Curb Stop $24O $35/upon turn-in $100/meter $1 O/test $20/upgrade $35/event $100/violation $125/occasion $1.35/mo/account $1.20/1,000 gals. $10 $35 $17.50 $17.50 $35 $3/mo $4/mo $6/mo $15/mo $25/mo $33/mo $12.46/connection $26.40/connection Curb boX: Greg: are box and stop the same? Stationary rod $15/connection $1500/Iot -3- WATER: LOCAL WATER CONNECTION CHARGE CITIES 0 - 2,500 Excelsior 300 Long Lake 50 Spring Park 25 Woodland WAC CITIES 2,500 - 10,000 Afton none Arden Hills 35 Bayport 450 up to 2" 900/2" or greater Circle Pines 30+.50surcharge + WAC Corcoran na East Bethel na Falcon Heights 62 for 3/4" pipe; 115 fo~' 1" pipe Farmington 60 Forest Lake 25 Ham Lake na Hugo 1,900 Inclependence na Lauderdale set by St. Paul Water Utility Little Canada 300 Mahtomedi 880 Medina 30 ' New Prague 500 Newport 300 Norwood Young A 1,500 + 125/meter Oak Grove na Oak Park Heights 4,420/acre Orono 35 Osseo 350 Rockford 1,675 Shorewood per 1997 UBC table Spring Lake Park 500ANAC St. Anthony 125 St. Francis 1,600 St. Paul Park 250 Victoria 4,500 Watertown 1,750 Wayzata 1,500/WAC CITIES 10,000 - 20,000 Andover 50 Anoka 50 Chanhassen 1,723 Chaska 980 Columbia Heights 35.50 + costs of tap if needed Hastings WAC 1,140 Hopkins 150 Lino Lakes 125 Mendota Heights 10 Mounds View permit #25 WAS 225 North St. Paul na Prior Lake 600 Ramsey 3,591/acre res 59 Robbinsdale 1,150 Rosemount 2,266/SA0 unit 1,150/SAC unit metro 1,030/SAC-city Savage 1,020 + 375 meter Shakopee 524 Stillwater 800 Vadnais Heights 22 West St. Paul na CITIES OVER 20,000 Apple Valley Blaine Bloomington Brooklyn Center Brooklyn Park Burnsville Coon Rapids Cottage Grove Crystal Eagan Eden Prairie Edina Fridley Inver Grove Hgts. Lakeville Maple Grove Maplewood Minneapolis Minnetonka New Brighton New Hope Oakdale Plymouth Richfield Roseville Shoreview South St. Paul St. Paul White Bear Lake 535 per SAC unit 613/residence 3,730/acre-commercial nf WAC 1,500 Permit fee for Wat./Sew connect new77.50 1,125 911 50.50 40 17.50 1,376 2,190 1,000 or assess. Cost of like abutting properties 25.50 + cost of meter 1,390/one time fee 2,500/unit res 1,250/unit comm- industrial 1,300 150 fee for water conn. Permit 163.88 pd by contractor 5,191.43/based on project na varies 30 + 3.75 fire surcharge + .50 state 63O 35 15.50/permit and 75/meter deposit 275 na na 3OO -4- 'WATER: RATE FOR RESIDENTIAL SALES CITIES O - 2,500 Excelsior Long Lake Spring Park Woodland 31.71/qtr for 1st 13k gal 1.62/ea add'l lk gal 2.25/lk gallons billed qtrly 12/QU/min 1.95/QU 1,000g QU 1.56/per 1,000 gallons CITIES 2,600 - 10,000 Afon Arden Hills Bayport Circle Pines Corcoran Dayton East Bethel Falcon Heights Farmington Forest Lake Ham Lake Hugo Independence Lauderdale Little Canada Mahtomedi Medina New Prague Newport Norwood Young A Oak Grove Oak Park Heights Orono Osseo Rockford Shorewood Spring Lake Park St. Anthony St. Francis St. Paul Park Victoria Watertown Wayzata none QU 2.15/lk gal winter 2.20/lk gal (summer) QU 10/1st lk gal 2.50/ea add"l lk gal MO 1.17/lk gal + 6.50 fiat fee na not set by council yet na provided by St. Paul Water Utility 10.80+1/1,000 under 25k 1.16/lk over 25k 1.65/1,000 gallons qtr na 36/qtr for 15k gal or less over 15k 1.70/thous. QU na 1.65/100 cuft winter 1.77/cu ft summer 1.98/lk gal 1st and 4thqtr. 2.05/lk gal 2nd & 3 q QU 1.28 per 100 cubic f city has detail 1.25/1,000 gallons + 3.75/month city has detail QU QU 22.50/base + 1.65/1,000 gal used na city has detail 2.03-2.81/1,000 gal + qtr charge 10 base/QU +1.10/1,000 gal above 10k gal 2.10/1,000 gallons QU 23.25/10k gal rain chg+l.50/lk 10k-50k,1.75 aft QU 27.80/lst 18k 1.22/1 k thereafter 1.07/100 cuff QU 2.65/1,000 gallons QU minimum 7.72/10,000 gallons QU 29/lst 15k gal 2.30/ea add'l lk gal 1.40/1-2000 gal 1.80/2000+ gal 3.44/base 0-3,400 gal .72/1,000 1.55/1,000gal 3400 CITIES 10,000 - 20,000 Andover QU 7.30 base rate Anoka .69/100 cuft & 4.75/mo Chanhassen 1.30/lk gal up to 25k 1.50/lk gal over 25k 60 Chaska Columbia Heights Hastings Hopkins Lino Lakes Mendota Heights Mounds View North St. Paul Prior Lake Ramsey Robbinsdale Rosemount Savage Shakopee Stillwater Vadnais Heights West St. Paul .89/lk gal for first 7k gal .73/lk thereafter Minimum 14.40/3 months & 2.07/lk gallons na 1.20/1,000 gal. QU 10/flat fee 1.63 per lk gal. na QU 4.75/mo serv chg +l.16/0-Smgal 1.31 per regal 6-25 1.40/1,000 gal 21.90/min/QU 1.46 per 1,000 gallons 1.51/lk gal + 1.12/mo surcharge 1.02/1,000 gal + fixed 8.90 QU 4.75 base + 1.95/lk gal mo city has detail 14.80/min for 10,000 gal QU QU na CITIES OVER 20,000 Apple Valley Blaine Bloomington Brooklyn Center Brooklyn Park Burnsville Coon Rapids Cottage Grove Crystal Eagan Eden Prairie Edina Fridley lnver Grove Hgts. Lakevilie Maple Grove Maplewood Minneapolis Minnetonka New Brighton New Hope Oakdale Plymouth Richfield Roseville Shoreview South St. Paul St. Paul White Bear Lake MOS.58+.85/k gal to 10 1.05/11-15 kgal, 1.15 16-35 city has detail 1.55/lk gallons QU .98/1 k gal QU 2.75/serv chg 120/2 thou 1st 50k 1.70/over50k QU4.25/base chg + 1.69/lk gal 2.11/lk gal over 50k QU 1.03/1,000 gallons 1.45/per lk gal usage from 45k to 100k gal QU 19.38 (min) or 1.49 HCF 7.70/qtr + 100/1,000 gall 1.25/lk gall. Subject to min. of 4k gal per qtr city has detail 1/lk gallons city has detail .84/thousand gals 2.75/base fee .90/1,000 gm plus 1.10/month na water supplied by other agencies 1.81 per cu fi=to 750 gallons 1.20/1,000 gallons per quarter .81 per 1,000 gallons QU 3.82/mo 1st 1,000 gal 2.05/ea add'l 1,000 gal QU 1.08/lst 35,000 1.16/36k-50k 1.26/51 k+ 3.88 base rate & varies from thero BI 1,67/1,000 gallons QU 1.77/1,000 gal QU QU .633/lk gal 1st 15k 1.116/lk next 15k 1.621rema .80/thous. 1st 30k .53/thous, Next 470k .32/above na .84/100 cubic feet -5- City of Mound Water Pumped from CityWells Last Ten Years Y._[ Gallons 1990 305,735,000 1991 256,087,000 1992 266,623,000 1993 257,930,000 1994 294,174,000 1995 273,777,000i 1996 269,604,000 1997 228,564,000 t~R 9aR na~ nnn 1999 ' 282,998,000-~ 2000 309,932,000' 09/04/2001 Gino -6- , City of Mound Do'nations Yrs 2000-2001 09/04/2001 Gino Yr 2000 Description Amount VFW ! Signage/Auditor's Road + 2,500 VFW i City Days 1,000 'Lions 'i-Cit-':" i Jaycees ' City Days ................ -~ 5,000 VFW Swenson Park Equip. -- 900 Jaycees Mound Bay Park Landscape 3,000 Legion Christmas Tree 600 Jaycees Decorations 2,200 Lions Rescue Boat Fire Department 5,000 Jaycees Pump/Grass Fires Fire Department 2,000 Total 32,200 Yr 2001 Description Amount VFW i City Days 200 i Li°~_ ....... i City Days l __J _ayc_e_e_s ....... i_C_i___~_ Days 6,000 i Ja' 'cees Adopt a Greer S ~ Lions Holiday Decorations Legion Rescue Boat Fire Department Legion Rescue Boat Fire Department ~VFW I Rescue Boat Fire Department 500 1,000 1,000 2,000 1,000 'Jaycees Rescue Boat Fire Department 1,500 Total 19,200 -7- kandishanson Page 1 of 2 From: "james fackler" <jwfackler(~hotmail.com> TO: "Kandis Hanson" <KandisHanson@msn.com>; "Sarah Smith" <sarahjsmith@att. net>; "Jon Sutherland" <jonsutherland@msn.com>; "Gino Businaro" <gbusinaro@wwc.com>; "Jodi Rahn" <JodiRahn@msn.com> Sent: Friday, August 17, 200'1 8:37 AM Subject: August DCAC Meeting MEETTNG AGENDA: Mark Hanus excused, all other members present. 1) Approval of Minutes from July; There was only two minor changes, spelling and a addition of one word to clarify a sentence. 2) Agenda Changes; None 3) 2002 Dock/Slip Fees; ~ There was a lot of discussion but in answering the 3 questions from the council, :[) Should the fees be increased on a flat vs. tiered basis they seemed to agree that a problem could arise in opening up tensions between abutting and non-abutting if not handled fairly. They want Gino there for the September 20th meeting to go over explaining Admin/computer & Audit/Financial charges. At that meeting they want to be able to go over different changes/charges to the Dock Budget to see how they would affect the fee's needed to sustain the program. **** GINO, I have some changes to the Financial Sheet you prepared. They would like it next week. 2) Review the Administrative Budget for the Dock program. This was done and discussed in conjunction with Fees. I told them that staff is meeting on Monday so there would be a updated version of the Docks Budget. 3) Decide if the Docks program should be a "For Profit" or "Self Sustaining". The majority said "NOT FOR PROFIT". They gave the reason that the dock program is a service to the community and not a liquor store. They were really hung up on administrative costs vs. income. Again ! pointed out that there has not been a increase since the mid to late 80's in fees and that admin cost rise yearly. I also threw in that had there been a cost of living factor/inflation added to the fees yearly we would not be far from the needed increase amount for a dock fee. 4) Review Budget: This was done along with the 2002 fee discussion. 5) Review Procedure Manual/Flow Chart: Frank Ahrens provided past information from City Council minutes and adopted ordinance changes to Mound City Code 320. The question from the commission is why the changes have not been done. They scheduled this for the September meeting. ****Sarah, ! put this info in the Building slot in the copy room, ion S. may have picked it up. We need to talk about this. 6) Joint Ownership of Boats in City Dock Program: The commission decided that this was not a big problem, less than 6 boats, but asked Katie to see if any of the 6 were on the city owned docks (Slip). This will come back in September. - 8 - 08/17/2001 7) ~;eptember Agenda: Public Lands Permits if any. Dock/Slip 2002 Fees. Flow Chart/Procedure Manual. Share Policy Change to City Code 437. .loint Boat Ownership on City Slips. Meeting Ended At 10 pm. Page 2 of 2 Get more from the Web, FREE MSN Explorer download: htt~,' _e_~p__l_.o_.reE;_m_s_n,_com - 9 - 08/17/2001 CEMETARY FEES Adult grave resident Adult grave non-resident Baby grave: resident Baby grave: non-resident Ash burial: resident Ash'burial: non-resident Locate 2000 $35O $650 $175 $375 $0 $o $o 2001 $600 $850 $300 $4.00 $300 $400 Actual cost -10- CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364-1687 PH: (952) 472-0600 FAX: (952) 472-0620 WEB: www.cityofmound.com November 5, 2001 Mayor Meisel Mound City Council Members 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Dear Mayor and Council, You are reminded of the 2002 Budget Workshop schedUled for 7:00 p.m., Wednesday, November 7, 2001. You are invited to bring budget materials provided earlier with you to the meeting. In addition, you are being provided with the information requested at the last two meetings and other information pertinent to these discussions. Department Heads are meeting one last time on Monday, November 5, to find places to reduce costs. One of the areas we will be talking about scaling back in is that of meetings/conferences/memberships. These and any other changes made as a result of that meeting will be distributed in the form of adjusted budgets at the meeting. Regarding Personnel In regards to personnel requests: 1) I suggest that the Administrative Assistant proposed to serve five departments stay in the budget. Hiring that person will reduce the overtime budget for the Parks Department by $1,500. It would be adequate to budget for 3/4 of a year. 2) I suggest that you fund the full-time Fire Chief; the time has come. However, I suggest that you also fund it for just 3/4 of a year, since the planning and hiring will take about 1/4 of a year. 3) I suggest eliminating the School'Resource Officer if word is not heard on the grant needed to fund it. Over the next year, I would like to thoroughly investigate the feasibility of a full-time City Engineer. Dollars currently spent with MFRA would seem to dramatically exceed the cost of an in-house person. However, adding an engineer to staff also has equipment and administrative requirements. All of this must be studied before a decision can be made. If this concept proves to be feasible, the next phase of reorganization will occur. Greg Skinner would move to Assistant Public Works Director in Charge of Operations. All of this can hopefully happen at no additional cost to the City. printed on recycled paper 1 Regarding Capital Purchases I have little or no discussion on capital purchases. Capital was pared down to a brutal minimum earlier. What is contained there now needs to stay, based on age, condition and need. Regarding Operations Each Department Head knows the cost of operating a department. In order to prevent more backsliding, it is important that the lines that represent operations are not reduced by any measure. Our charge as City officials is to provide for the health, safety and welfare of the citizens. That generally means provide for the basic needs. Other services can be thought of as quality of life measures and can oftentimes be reduced or eliminated. With that background, Council Members are asked to think in terms of "programs" when you think of reducing costs--what programs can be curtailed or eliminated with the least amount of impact. Here are some programs you could consider: --designating several parks as natural, eliminating mowing them --grass and weed trimming citywide --lifeguards --kid programs through Community Ed --beach maintenance --port-a-potties in parks --garbage pickup in parks --beach and park weed spraying --Mound City Days contribution--let the service organizations do it --Music in the Park--let service organizations do it --garbage pickup in the downtown --CBD parking program and the services which go with it --weed spraying on sidewalks and roadsides --sidewalk repair --pothole repair --signage repair, replacement and additions --PD response to car lockouts --PD response to property damage accidents --police programs, such as Triad or others (eliminating an officer) --limiting council attendance to Minnesota conferences only --closing City Hall one day per week (10 hour days), reducing utilities Regarding Revenues You will receive the revised fee schedule for approval before the end of the year. Beyond that, there is little that can be done to improve revenues for the coming year without becoming creative. Under the heading of creative financing falls these ideas, which would all require further research: --imposing required contribution levels on charitable gambling organizations licensed by the City --investigating the addition of pull-tabs in Mound Liquor 2 --financing the School Resource Officer with additional assistance from school district --increasing utility and dock rates significantly to allow for sizeable transfers, like Liquor Store --PD booking fee --PD and Fire Department false alarm policy (fee) Levy Increase The budget you are considering represents the maximum levy increase, which is 18.7%. A more accurate percentage to consider is the overall revenue increase in the General Fund, which is slightly over 10%. Even though some additional cuts will be made by Department Heads and by Council through these discussions, we suggest that you approve the levy increase at that highest possible rate. To approve a levy at a lower rate would seriously impair the City's ability to function. Approval at this rate will also help the City get back on track financially if the same approach is taken over enough years. Fund Balance As for the Fund Balance of 15%, I am not aware of an immediate solution to that. It represents a cash flow problem that will occur about April or May, which we feel we can manage. We believe that it can be offset over the next several years' time, if the above- recommended approach is taken. An immediate solution could be drawn from the suggested creative solutions. It could involve doing sizable transfers from the enterprise funds--water, sewer and docks, or increase the line item administration/finance/computer to a higher percentage. Either approach would result in the transfer of dollars into the General Fund, just as we do with the Liquor Store enterprise fund. Questions? You may email or call with your specific questions in advance so Department Heads can gather the data. Please get questions to me by 8:00 a.m., Wednesday, November 7. Email address: kandishanson~msn.com. Thanks ! Sincerely, Kandis Hanson City Manager 3 A ociation of Hetropolitan Hunicipalitics Date: To: From: Re: August 16, 2001 Mayors, managers/administrators Jim Miller, LMC executive director Gene Ranieri, AMM executive director 2001 legislative changes to property taxes, state aids MEMORANDUM With the passage of the 2001 omnibus tax bill, municipal officials need to be prepared to address the questions and concerns of taxpayers and the media. To assist city officials, the League of Minnesota Cities and the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities are working on a three-prong effort: (1) help cities understand the impacts of the tax bill; (2) to help reporters who cover city hall understand the new changes at a workshopAug. 22; (3) further explain to legislators how city financing will change and impact taxpayers.. We believe it is important for all city officials to understand that the Legislature intended for cities to levy back any loss in state aids they might experience. In their budget discussions with community members, cities should point out their spending goals, not just the tax rate changes or levy increases. Finally, it's important to consider the changes in the education levy, most notably, how the average property taxpayer's bill may be lower overall. Background The 2001 omnibus tax bill enacted several sweeping reforms to the Minnesota state/local finance system, including continuation of compression of tax classification, the state takeover of the general education property taxes for school districts, and state takeover of transit levies. The combined impact of these changes will mean that school property taxes will drop markedly while city property taxes will generally increase--in some cases dramatically. In addition to decreasing the school reliance on the property tax, the Legislature eliminated the Homestead and Agricultural Credit Aid program (HACA) -- a reduction of $200 million per year in state aid to cities. The elimination of HACA translates into an immediate increase in the city reliance on the property tax. The overall impact of the elimination of HACA on cities is partially offset by an increase in local government aid by $140 million. However, because of how the LGA formula works, cities with less property wealth will generally receive more state assistance through LGA. Although the final LGA formula compromise has drawn criticism from some legislators and some city officials, the general LGA system served as an important policy tool to geographically balance the relief being provided through the elimination of the general education levy. 4 Response ,' Most property owners will see a tax reduction in 2002; however, the city share of the typical r property tax bill will likely increase. Although this outcome will be painful for city officials, it was intentional. The Legislature expects most cities to levy back the amount of taxes lost in state aids~ Clearly, city council~*can and will choose whether and how much to levy, as you do each year. But whatever the decision,lwe believe it is important for you to explain to your community and media how these legislative changes have dramatically affected your city's Property tax levy. An important element of that explanation is city spending. After talking about the fundamental property tax changes the Legislature passed this spring and how that may increase your c!ty's levy, highlight your city spending increase (or decreasel). While these state aid changes will impact city taxpayers this year, it is city spending and budget priorities which may be of most concern to them. Finally, do not overlook the substantial reduction in property taxes most prOperty owners Will realize because of the state takeover of the general education and transit levies. The Legislature injected significant funds into the tax system, so most Minnesotans will see a decrease in their property tax bills. Educating the media Tell your city hall reporters about an opportunity to understand the new laws and how city budgets and citizens' property tax bills will change. The League and AMM will sponsor a workshop for news reporters, the morning of Wednesday, August 22, at the League offices in St. Paul, to help prepare reporters in time to cover the city budget hearings and the setting of preliminary levies. ' Helpful information ~ We included in this packet a list of frequently asked questions on these tax changes and how cities may be affected. If you have additional questions, please feel free to call Gene Ranieri at 651.215.4001 or Gary Carlson at 651.281.1255. 5 2001 Omnibus Tax Bill: Frequently Asked Questions Q: What is the policy rationale that is driving all of these changes? One way to describe the tax outcomes is that the Governor and the many legislators wanted the property tax to be more of a locally determined tax. Given that school property taxes have largely been set by the state, a state takeover of general education levies became a cornerstone of the governor's plan, the House tax bill and the final tax package. On the other hand, given that city services are primarily determined by city councils, the governor and legislature found that these services should be more fully supported by the property tax. In other words, by removing a large share of school funding from the property tax, cities and counties would be more able to tap the property tax to fund their services. Q: Isn't this rationale flawed by the existence of levy limits and the new state property tax? A: Yes, the fact that levy limits were included in the final tax package means that cities will not be able to fully exercise their discretion about service levels and property taxes. In addition, although the new state property tax is only paid by commercial, industrial and cabin property owners, it is certainly not a local tax. Q: Wasn't simplicity one of the goals of property tax reform ? A: Simplicity may have been an initial goal of tax reform but the final tax bill arguably does little to simplify the system. Q: The Legislature and Governor have estimated that most taxpayers will see their overall property tax bill reduced. Do these estimates reflect the fact that many cities will have to increase their property tax levies to replace lost state aids? A: The estimates assume that cities will replace, dollar-for-dollar, lost state aid with increased property taxes. In other words, even with these increases in the city share of the property tax bill, taxpayers are expected to see a tax reduction in 2002. Q: Will the levy limits enacted in the tax bill allow the city to replace lost state aids? A: Yes, cities covered by levy limits (those over 2,500 population) will be allowed to replace lost state aids with property taxes. In a sense, the term levy limits are somewhat of a misnomer. A more accurate term might be revenue limits. Levy limits are essentially based on the total of the city's property tax and state aids from the previous year. To the degree that state aids are reduced or eliminated, the allowable property tax levy authority increases. Conversely, if state aids increase, levy authority is reduced. Q: Won't the city property tax increases to replace lost state aids draw intense criticism from our taxpayers? A: This could happen, particularly if city officials are not prepared to explain the legislative changes enacted this year. However, due to the magnitude of the changes to the tax system, the parcel-specific notices sent to taxpayers this fall will not itemize the 2001 city taxes and the 2002 proposed city taxes. The only direct comparison on the form will be the total 2001 taxes to the proposed 2002 total taxes. This structure will hopefully avoid any unnecessary taxpayer concerns about increases in city levies due to lost state aids. Despite this one-year change in the parcel-specific notice, you will still want to be prepared to explain these changes to taxpayers. Q: Levy limits will be in place for two years. Should we levy "to the limit" so that the city preserves its levy authority for future years? A: Each city council will have to make a decision on local needs and the level of property taxes needed. Fortunately, levy limits are structured so that unused levy authority in any year is carried forward for future years. This structure was established so that cities and counties would not be encouraged to simply levy to the limit. Of course, the legislature could always change this provision but the "if you don't use it you won't lose it" structure of levy limits seems to have broad legislative support. Q: Why was HACA eliminated? A: The answer is not simple but the overall cost of the tax bill, including the state takeover of the total general education costs for schools, required the state to reprioritize its appropriations. HACA was viewed by many legislators as an undefined state aid that had little purpose largely due to the fact that there is no active formula to determine HACA distributions. The $200 million in HACA that had been distributed to cities was used to pay for the costs associated with the overall tax reform package. Q: Will the Fiscal Disparities program be affected by the significant class rate reductions contained in the tax bill? A: For 2002, the interaction of the tax reforms and fiscal disparities program will have no net impact on city finances. The fiscal disparities program is computed based upon property tax values from the previous year. Therefore, the amount of property taxes ultimately distributed to each city under the fiscal disparities program will not be affected. Q: In the future, will school districts levy any property taxes? A: Yes, school districts will still levy some property taxes including levies for community service, health and safety, integration and building leases. Many school districts also impose additional voter approved levies for operation and debt service for capital 7 projects. In fact, due to school district concerns about the level of available school revenue under the 2001 omnibus education funding bill, there are preliminary indications that many school districts may seek new or expanded voter approval for operating levies. Q: l¥on't cabins and farmers be exempt from paying for voter approved school levies? A: Yes, farm land and cabin properties have been exempted from paying for voter approved levies. This will affect existing as well as future, new voter-approved levies for schools, cities and counties. The state will offset the impact of shifts in the school taxes by using state resources to "equalize" a portion of these voter approved levies. Q: Will the state levy a property tax? A: Yes, the state will lev3' a new property tax that will be applied only to commercial, industrial and seasonal recreational (cabin) properties. The state tax will be administered just like any other local government's property tax levy and will be included as a line item on the property tax statement. The state property taxes will generally be deposited in the state's general fund and will therefore be available for general state spending. Q: The only class of property that was not granted a class rate reduction was low value homesteads. Will their taxes increase ? A: The class rate applied to the first $76,000 of homestead value will remain at 1 percent. This is the only major property class that did not receive a class rate reduction. However, at least in the short term, taxes on even these properties will likely be reduced due to two factors. First, lower value homes will receive a new market value homestead credit that effectively translates into the state paying a portion of each qualifying homeowner's tax bill. In addition, all property owners including Iow value homes will pay significantly lower taxes to schools due to the state takeover of general education costs. According to legislative estimates, the combined effect of these changes will reduce taxes for most low valued homes. Q: How does the homestead credit work? A: The credit is equal to 0.4 percent of the market value of the home up to a maximum value of $76,000. For homes valued in excess of $76,000, the credit is gradually reduced by $9 for every $10,000 of the home's market value in excess of $76,000. Therefore, the credit is entirely eliminated for homes valued in excess of $414,000. Q: Our city has a charter provision that restricts our ability to increase taxes that did not anticipate large cuts in state aids. 14'rhat can we do to replace lost state aids? A: The 2001 omnibus tax bill includes an override of city charters that in certain circumstances will allow charter cities with restrictive levy limits to replace lost state aids. 8 Q: Will the future phase-out of limited market value eventually shift taxes to homes? A: Under state statute, limited market value was due to sunset after taxes payable in 2002. The tax bill actually delays the elimination of the statute by phasing it out over a six-year period. This will increase the taxable value of homes and cabins that currently benefit from limited market value and ultimately shift property taxes to homeowners. Future legislatures will likely have to address any taxpayer fallout due to the impacts of the phase-out of limited market value. Q: Why will my city receive less LGA in 2002 despite that fact that the legislature increased the overall appropriation by $140 million? A: The governor proposed and the legislature adopted several changes to the LGA system that modify the distribution of the LGA appropriation. These changes generally provide more aid to first class cities (Minneapolis, St. Paul and Duluth) as well as outstate regional centers over 10,000 population. Although these cities will receive more state aid, their levy limitations will be lower than it would have been in the absence of the aid increase due to the interaction of levy limits and state aid. Also, at the close of the legislative session, several key lawmakers indicated that the LGA system, including the 2001 changes, would be the subject of legislative review, possibly as early as 2002. In other words, the stability of these increases could be short-lived. Q: How will tax increment financing districts be impacted? A: Many existing TIF districts will experience TIF reductions from 20 to 40 percent. These reductions are due to the combined impact of the state takeover of the general education levy and the property tax class rate changes. Future districts will generate increments largely from the city and county tax rates since a large share of the current school property tax has been eliminated. Q: Are there any mechanisms to address impacts on TIF existing districts? Q: Yes, there is the TIF grant program with a significantly increased state financial commitment, expanded pooling ~iuthority, and a new special deficit authority. Procedures and qualification requirements are fairly complex. Since impacts from this year's tax bill will not be experienced until 2002, applications for TIF grants will not be due until August 1, 2003. August 16, 2001 Page 1 of 1 Gino Businaro From: "KandisHanson" <kandishanson@email.msn.com> To: "Gino Businaro" <GinoBusinaro@att.net> Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 3:12 PM Subject: Fw: Kennedy & Graven hourly rates Include this in Oct budget packet, please. Kandis ..... Original Message ..... From: Dean, John B. To: Kandis M. Hanson (E-mail) Cc: Bonnie Ritter (E-mail) Sent: Friday, September 07, 2001 2:40 PM Subject: Kennedy & Graven hourly rates Kandis: Our hourly rates for Mound and the Mound HRA are as follows: City: Attorneys: $120/hr. Paralegals: $80/hr. Law clerks: $75/hr. Attorneys: $110/hr Paralegals: $80/hr Law clerks: $75/hr The attorney rates have not been increased for many years. In fact, the HRA rate was reduced from $120 to $110 approximately two years ago; and a separate city rate of $130 per hour for the principal attorney was eliminated by me when I became the principal attorney. Please let me know if you have any further questions. 13 9/7/2001 City 6f Mound Communication Costs Yrs 2000-2001 09/06/2001 Gino Yr 2001 Department Yr 2000 0'1-0'1/07-31 -'inance 76.55 77.54 Police 10,'106.04 3,834.13 P & I 1,018.35 903.17 Streets 3,474.21 '1,472.43 Parks 1,057.95 797.05 Fire 6,880.46 960.15 I Water 1,901.79 1,186.69 -s~e~ 2,067.98 1,088.92 I Docks 692.07 610.38 Note: Total 28,032.06 11,362.66 Payments for above costs were made to: Verizon, Nextel, Airtouch, Pagenet, Arch, Hennepin Co., Virtualphone, Ancom, At&t. 14 LAKE MINNETONKA COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 4071 SUNSET DRIVE · RO. BOX 385 · SPRING PARK, MN 55384~0385 · 952. 471-7125 · FAX 952.471-9151 July 16, 2001 DEEPHAVEN . EXCELSIOR GREEN~/OOD INDEPENDENCE Gino Businaro City of Mound 5341 Maywood Rd. Mound, MN 55364 LONG LAKE LORE'I'I'O MEDINA MINNETONKA BEACH MINNETRISTA Dear Mr. Businaro and the City of Mound: Thank you for the most recent payment of the studio usage fee. Enclosed is the studio usage report prepared by Jim Lundberg. If you have any questions please phone Jim or me and we will be happy to clarify any of the information. · The Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission appreciates the opportunity to work with Mound residents and the City of Mound in the production of local programming. ORONO ST. BONIFACIUS SHOREWOOD SPRING PARK Sincerely, sa. Administrator TONKA BAY VICTORIA WOODLAND 15 Mound Usage Report 6/30/01 Prepared by Jim Lundberg Programs Produced by Mound Producers Mound Westonka Mound Westonka Mound Westonka Mound Westonka Mound Westonka Mound Mound School Board Meeting-2:00-Jacob Gardner- 11 / 00 School Board Meeting-2:00-Jacob Gardner- 12/00 School Board Meeting-2:00-Jacob Gardner-01 / 01 School Board Meeting-2:00-Jacob Gardner-02 / 01 School Board Meeting-2:00-Jacob Gardner-03/01 Westonka School Board Meeting-2:00-Jacob Gardner-04/01 Westonka School Board Meeting-2:00-Jacob Gardner-05 / 01 Mound Westonka School Board Meeting-2:00-Jacob Gardner-06/01 Lake Minnetonka Association An Interview With Dick Osgood The Right Price':30-Val Hessburg & Westonka Schools-3/01 The Right Price-:40-Val Hessburg & Westonka Schools-6/01 Westonka Historical Society: Mysteries & Legends Of Lake Minnetonka- Lavonne Adams6 / 01 Neal Perbix: Video Slide Neal Perbix: Video Slide Neal Perbix: Video Slide Mound Westonka Video Mound Westonka Video Mound Westonka Video Mound Westonka Video Show: 16:00- 2/01 Show: 7:00- 3/01 Show: 3:00- 6/01 Yearbook- Jan-4:00 Yearbook-Feb-8:00 Yearbook-March-9:00 Yearbook-April- 19:00 Mound Westonka Video Yearbook-June-24:00 Mound Westonka Video Yearbook-July- 18:00 Programs Produced for Mound Organizations Mount Olive Mount Olive Mount Olive Mount Olive Mount Olive Mount Olive Mount Olive Mount Olive Mound City Mound City Mound City Mound City Mound City Mound City Mound City Mound Mound Mound Mound Lutheran Hour-l:00-11/00-4 total programs in November Lutheran Hour-1:00-12/00-4 total programs in December Lutheran Hour-l:00-1/01-4 total programs in January Lutheran Hour-1:00-2/01-4 total programs in February Lutheran Hour-1:00-3/01-4 total programs in March Lutheran Hour- 1:00-4/01-4 total programs in April Lutheran Hour-1:00-5/01-4 total programs in May Lutheran Hour-1:00-6/01-4 total programs in June Council- 1:00-11/00-2 total Council- 1:00-12/00-2 total Council- 1:00-1/01-2 total Council- 1:00-2 / 01-2 total Council- 1:00-3/01-2 total Council- 1:00-4 / 01-2 total Council- 1:00-5/01-2 total City Council- 1:00-6/01-2 total City Council-3:00-11/00-2 total City Council-3:00-12 / 00-2 total City Council-3:00-1/01-2 total 16 Mound City Council-3:00-2/O1-2 total Mound City Council- 1: 30-3 / 01-2 total Mound City Council- 1:30-4/01-2 total Mound City Council- 1:30-5/01-2 total Mound City Council- 1:30-6 / 01-2 total Other Programs of Direct Interest to Mound Residents LMCC Executive Committee Meeting- 1:30-12 / 00 LMCC Executive Committee Meeting- 1:30-1 / 01 LMCC Executive Committee Meeting- 1:30-3 / 01 LMCC Executive Committee Meeting-1:30-4/01 LMCC Executive Committee Meeting-1:30-6/01 LMCC Meeting-2:00-11/00 LMCC Meeting-2:00-2/01 LMCC Meeting-2:00-5/01 Starburst Dance Academy--2001 -2:00-6/01 Wes~onka ~istorical Society: 2:00-Mysteries & Legends of Lake Minnetonka M0utad Residents Signed up for or, Completed LMCC Classes Ber$ Hunt Kevin Allinger Mound City coUncil Minutes - June 25, 2001 H, Reschedule public hearings: July 24, 2001, 7:30 p.m. for RD Development: Langdon Bay (Case 01-20: slope easement vacation and , Case 01-23: Buttemut St. vacation) 3E. CONTRACT FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES WITH LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT - Brown expressed concern that more enforcement and deputies were not visible during the City Days fireworks. Hanson informed~.him that the licensing agreement called for four patrol boats, but not tha[ithey had to be sheriffs boats. MOTION by Brown, seconded by Meyer to approve the contract which expires December 31, 2001, subj~~t° the City Manager follOWing up on the Sources and i / ....~ reductions of future funding. Ayes: Brown, Anderson and Meyer..Nayes: Hanus and Meisel. Motion carried. '- 4, COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FROM CITIZENS PRESENT Dreamwood Addition Common.~ Bob Riebe appeared as a representative of the residents in Dreamwood Addition, to officially notify the Councii~.that..they have formed a lakeshore committee for settlement of the commons issue in t~eir~;area. City Manager Hanson informed him that she .is aware of a meeting scheduled at the Mound Depot for July 12, but that the city's intention is to provide assistance with the assembly of data, provide a meeting space, but not participate in the initial meetings~ John Dean indicated that Leah Weycker has been notified and is willing: to sit on these meetings and help with resolution of the issue. Mahoqany Bay Todd Warner approached the Council with questions regarding his current conditional use permit that involves blaCktOpping at his business.' Hanus suggested that with the complexity of this issue, b~ing more than one property owner involved, that it go back to Staff and the Planning Co~n-;!Ssion for their recommendation. ~,~: ,~ $. Removed. 6. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION MOTION by Brown, secended~by Meyer to adopt the following resolution. All voted in favor. Motion~carried. RESOLUTION NO. 01-$4: RESOLUTION TO DENY A MINOR SUBDIVISION AND VARIANCE ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6024 CHERRYWOOD ROAD, PID #23-117.24.34-0104, p & Z .CASE #01-06 AND #01-08. 2 18 0 ~ 0 19 2"1 CITY OF MOUND 534t MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364-1687 (612) 472-0600 FAX (612) 472-0620 November 1, 2001 TO: Mark Hanus, City Council Member FROM: Jim Fackler, Parks Director REF: Park Department Maintenance on Docking Areas. At the last Budget Work Session you had asked me to list some of the maintenance task the Parks DePartment maintenance crew has performed in relation to docking areas. In looking back over the past year I noted the following; 1) Tree removal. 2) Removal of brush dumped in docking area. 3) Trimming of branches obstructing pathways. 4) Repair/maintenance of rip rap. 5) Repair/maintenance of stairway treads. 6) Repair/maintenance of stairway handrails. 7) Repair/maintenance of erosion caused to shoreline from water run off or high lake levels. 8) Repair/maintenance of City Multiple Slip Docks decking bumpers and other miscellaneous parts. 9) Respond to citizen complaint resulting in inspection by crew to site. 10) Removal of discarded dock sections in city docking areas. 11) Installation of fencing and ramp for Avalon Park. 12) Garbage/litter pickup in docking areas. 13) Mowing of Park area such as Sunset Landing, Carlson Park, Lagoon Park that are predominately docking areas. 14) Installation of signage related to Multiple Slip Docks and dock sites. 15) Repair/maintenance of gates located at Carlson and Pembroke Multiple Slip docks. 16) Removal of bogs that float into docking areas. 17) Removal of milfoil dumped in docking areas. If you have any questions on these items please feel free to contact me. cc: Kandis Hanson, City Manager {~ Printe 2 2recycled paper .DOCKS 4350 1999 2000 2001 2002 2002 CODE ACTUAL ACTUAL APPROVED E B E _Q _U_E_S_T_ E Q REVENUE 3260-R DOCK PERMITS 62,803 63,635 65,000 109,290 3200-R LMCD FEE 5,170 5,098 5,000 5,000 3310-R FEMAGRANT 0 0 0 0 3810-R INTEREST 14,395 18,930 10,250 9,640 3895-R OTHER 0 0 1,100 1,100 TOTAL REVENUE 82.368 87.663 81.350 125,030 1000 SALARIES, REG. 0 0 0 6,170 1120 OVERTIME, REG. 0 93 0 1,800 1300 SALARIES, TEMP. 25,408 21,009 27,000 27,000 1310 UNEMPLOYMENT 3,206 3,360 3,500 0 1440 PERA/FICA 3,024 2,703 2,580 3,640 1510 HOSP./DENTAL 0 0 0 1,360 1520 LIFE INS./DISABILITY 0 0 0 30 2100 OFFICE SUPPLIES 40 183 170 560 2140 COPY MACHINE FEES 1,211 1,292 1,570 1,600 2200 OPERATING SUPPLIES 261 344 320 350 2210 MOTOR FUELS 0 0 0 0 2300 REPAIR/MAINT. SUPPLIES 49 411 500 1,500 2330 BUILDING REPAIR 0 0 0 3100 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 3,753 2,615 2,500 2,500 3105 ADMIN/COMPUTER CHARGE 0 0 8,500 8,500 3130 AUDIT AND FINANCIAL 0 0 1,040 1,040 3210 POSTAGE 1,041 569 1,000 1,100 113,620 74.80% 5,000 0.00% 0 ERR 9,640 -5.95% 1,100 0.00% 129.:360 59.02% 6,170 ~ E 1,8oo ~" ~,,'~1~ 27,000 j 0.00% 0 -100.00% 3,640 41.09% 1,360 ERR 30 ERR 560 229.41% 1,600 1.91% 350 9.38% 0 ERR 1,500 200.00% 0 ERR 500 -80.00% 0.00% 1,040 0.00% 1,100 10.00% 23 pOCKS 1999 2000 2001 2002 2002 CODE ACTUAL ACTUAL APPROVED REQUESTED ~ 3220 TELEPHONE 409 695 900 1,000 1,000 11.11% 3340 USE OF PERSONAL AUTO 237 244 300 350 350 16.67% 3510 LEGAL PUBLICATIONS 0 18 100 100 100 0.00% 3600 WORKER'S COMP. INS. 0 0 850 930 930 9.41% 3610 GEN. LIABILITY INS. 66 0 1,990 2,190 2,190 10.05% 3710 ELECTRICITY 0 0 0 0 0 ERR 3720 GAS SERVICE 0 0 0 0 0 ERR 3750 GARBAGE 0 0 0 0 0 ERR 3810 AUTO EQUIP. REPAIR 0 0 0 0 0 ERR 4100 LMCD FEES 1;101 8,300 5,000 5,000 5,000 0.00% 4110 CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 0 0 0 0 0 ERR 4120 MEETING EXPENSES 0 0 0 0 0 ERR 4130 DUES/SUBSCRIPTIONS 0 0 0 0 0 ERR 4200 OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 5,270 5,373 7,800 12,000 12,000 53.85% 5000 CAPITAL OUTLAY 25,027 15,225 21,500 400 400 -98.14% 5110 TREE REMOVAL 10,326 6,795 7,500 8,000 8,000 6.67% OTHER IMPROVEMENTS 5300 (RIP-RAP/DREDGING/STAIRS) 1.300 O 50.000 50.000 50.000~.~, 0.00% TOTAL 81.729 69.229 144.620 137.120 135.120 -6.57% 639 18,434 (63,270) (12,090) (5,760) -90.90% 237.018 237,657 205,020 192,820 192.820 -5.95% 237.657 256.091 141,750 180.730 187.060 31.96% REVENUE OVER(UNDER) EXPENDITURES FUND BALANCE - JANUARY 1 FUND BALANCE - DECEMBER 31 *MUST BE APPROVED BY COUNCIL PER PROJECT 24