The URL can be used to link to this page

2002-09-05 Council Workshop September 5, 2002 Public Safety Facility Issues Proposed Agenda 1. Review Public Safety Project Timeline and Communication Activities to Date. 2. Review and Discuss Correspondence with Contract Cities, 3. Review Existing Contract Formula and Past Financial Partnership. 4. Anticipated Financial Contributions and Tax Impact on Mound Residents. 5. Identify and Discuss Issues That are Concerns of Contract Cities (i.e. Fire District, Building and Fire Department Equity). 6, Discuss Pro's and Con's of Maintaining our Service Area and Contract Fire Area. 7. Formalize a City (or Council) Position on Financial and Service Issue. Other 8. Construction Start Date and Soil Correction Cost Discussion. 8-27-02 2415 Wilshire Blvd. Mound, Minnesota 55364 MOUND FIRE STATION AND PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITY COMMUNICATION TIMELINE Date March 14, 2001 May 22, 2001 August 7, 2001 November 14, 2001 January 10, 2002 January 30, 2002 March 18, 2002 Activity MFD Informational Meeting - Including the introduction of Facility Project, Committee, and planned study. First Fire Commission Meeting - Facility Project Plans were discussed as part of agenda. Meeting minutes sent to all cities. MFD Fire Commission Meeting - Facility Project and Building Committee update as part of agenda. Meeting minutes distributed to all cities. MFD Fire Commission Meeting - Fire Station Facility "Needs Study" progress report was given as part of meeting agenda. A recap of meeting was distributed to all cities. S E H and Ehlers were present as part of agenda. Open House at Gillespie Center for all public to view and provide feedback on various Mound Public Safety Facility options. All invited. MFD Fire Commission Meeting- Update on Fire Station Project provided. Survey results and overview of potential fire facility concepts were reviewed. Minnetrista City Council Meeting presentation by Fire Chief and City Manager including Public Safety Project information. March 19, 2002 April 15, 2002 April 18, 2002 April 22, 2002 April 24, 2002 May 28, 2002 June 10, 2002 June 12, 2002 Open House at Mound City Hall for all public to view and provide feedback on various Mound Public Facility options. All invited. Spring Park City Council Meeting presentation by Fire Chief and City Manager including Public Safety Project information. Open House at Mound Fire Station for all to view and provide feedback on Public Safety Facility (selected option) and financial mechanisms. Orono City Council Workshop presentation by Fire Chief and City Manager including Public Safety Project information. MFD Fire Commission Meeting - More updates and details on Public Safety Facility Project. Project status, cost estimates, schedule, and financial impact provided. Shorewood City Council Meeting presentation by Fire Chief including Public Safety Project information. Minnetonka Beach City Council Meeting presentation by Fire Chief including Public Safety Project information. Meeting with representatives from all service area cities to discuss financial costs and support of new Public Safety Facility. July 2, 2002 July 24, 2002 August 6, 2002 Numerous Follow up meeting with all city representatives to discuss "fire district" concepts and financial participation in Public Safety Facility. MFD Fire Commission Meeting. Detailed upon on fire station project from S E H and Amcon. Reviewed draft of 2003 MFD operating budget. Meeting with all fire service area city representatives to discuss proposal on fire facility financial cost sharing and fire district plan. Conversations with Fire Commission members and City Managers or City Administrators. 8-6-02 2415 Wilshire Blvd, Mound, Minnesota 55364 It's about Public Safety and Customer Service: 4/08/02 To Our Customers, The Mound Fire Department was established almost 80 years ago in 1923 with the sole purpose of providing fire protection to the community of Mound. Since inception and to this day, the Mound fire brigade has had many dedicated members that have frequently risked their lives, spent countless hours working to improve the fire department services, and strived to become an important part of the community. All of this work has come at a minimal cost to the local citizens. All potential customers of fire department services, police services and emergency medical service (EMS) should be aware that things have changed dramatically over the past 80 years and especially over the last 25 years. The Mound Fire Department now provides a variety of services to Mound plus all (or a portion of) 5 other communities. The Mound firefighters feel fortunate and proud to provide these services to areas of Minnetrism, Orono, Spring Park, Minnetonka Beach, Shorewood and Mound. Although the Mound fire department is still a volunteer fire department, significant changes over the last 25 years have required the organization to be mn more like a business. It is well understood in any business that (as a business) you are either: a). getting better at what you do and improving or b). getting worse at what you do and worsening. Rarely if ever, do organizations remain the same for any extended period of time. Over the last 25 years the fire department responses (requests for service) have increased by approximately 400%. We have made a solid effort to improve our service in every way, and based upon the requests for our services 'Bend" we feel we must be doing Something right. It is the Mound fire department's mission to provide the best possible "Public Safety support and Customer Service' to all of our city's residents, customers, and visitors. This mission or assignment is NOT nearly as one dimensional as it was 80 years ago. The tasks we have accepted as firefighters now include auto extrication, ice and water rescue, EMS, hazardous materials response, and many, many other categories plus the still important job of firefighting. Our members have willingly accepted the challenges of today's fire service and are working diligently to be sure we meet the expected stan~ds of our customers. The citizens of Mound and surrounding communities expect and deserve the best possible "Customer Service." It is our opinion that the existing fire station facility has become a negative factor in our fire department's ability to continue our ongoing improvement goals. This will have an impact on all of our customers at some point. All of the Mound fire department members would like to invite the citizens of Mound and surrounding communities to come to our open house scheduled for Thursday April 18, 2002. This open House will be held at the Mound fire station between the hours of 4-8 p.m. Please take a few minutes and visit the fire station to evaluate the facility and issues for yourself. We think our citizens should make up their own mind based upon the real needs and facts. It's about your Public Safety and our Customer Service! Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully, The Members of the Mound Fire Department Mound Fire Department 2/27/02 Facility Issues: Overview Background: The Mound Fire department is an active west metro volunteer fire department that has been serving Mound and surrounding communities for nearly 80 years. The department has provided excellent emergency services to these communities at a very reasonable cost to the tax payer. The depar~nent provides fire, basic emergency medical service (EMS), and many other rescue services to their customers. The fire department continues to operate with a fully staffed, well trained membership that includes 37 members. One serious problem that fire departments across America face today is a large increase in call volume. The call volume for the Mound Fire department has increased by 400% over the last 25 years and now averages about two calls a day for firefighters. The fire department has handled this call volume well and continues to support the six communities that it services with an efficient cost effective operation. Issues: A major problem facing the Mound Fire department today is the lack of adequate facilities. The current fire station (in Mound) no longer supports the needs of the department. The current facility was built approximately 50 years ago (early 1950' s), and later had a one bay addition at~ached in 1980. Simply put: "This facility no longer meets the needs of the Mound Fire department and is impacting the department's ability to provide the best possible service to the citizens". The following is a list of problems or issues that need to be addressed now: Facility Issues (space related): A). Inadequate apparatus parking space B). Inadequate equipment storage space C). No maintenance or clean up space (for after fires) D). Very limited training and meeting space E). Minimal office space for sta-fle F). No records storage for documentation (fire prevention, training, fire calls, etc.) G). Inadequate restroom and shower facilities Facility Issues (structure related): ID.Facility does not meet current building codes for handicapped accessibility I). Building has several safety issues that must be addressed J). The structural integrity of the building is poor K).The building is inefficient and needs HVAC work to correct problems. L). The building needs a "Makeover". to solve numerous problems due to age Summary: Something must be done with the existing fire facility to insure that the fire department can continue to provide the best possible service to their customers. The existing facility is a detriment to the Mound Fire department and the overall operation. A detail of the effects and issues of this project are available. Mound Fire Department Areas affected by the inadequate fire station facilities are as follows: General need to upgrade for "Public Safety" reasons: The size and activity level of the Mound fire department requires that this facility be enlarged to support operations (now and in the future). The increased call volume, as well as the diversified call responses of today requires the fire department to have more equipment. The department must also have space to house fire apparatus needed to provide service to our six Communities we serve. Our five customer cities (not including Mound) currently pay approximately 50% of the department budget. We must serve their needs too! (refer to attachments on budget and call volume increases). Key points: 1).The apparatus equipment we have today does not fit into the exiting facility! 2). The department must have adequate resources to support all six cities we serve. Age of this structure reasons: The building is old and inefficient. The structure is cracking in many places, doors and windows are not at all energy efficient, and the HVAC systems are not well designed for efficiency or comfort. Maintenance and utility costs are high due to all of these issues. Lighting in the building is very poor. Key points: 1). The building does not meet handicapped accessibility code, today's building codes, or safety codes. 2). Safety within this building is a major concern that must be addressed. Mound Fire department performance reasons: The Mound fire department must respond to wide variety of emergency types, and our customers expect the best possible professional service. The department must have training space, emergency operations center (EOC) room, staff office space, apparatus and equipment space, fitness and health space, and cleanup preparedness space. The current facility space of under 9,000 sq. fL is not nearly adequate (refer to attachment on existing building space and variety of calls chart). Key points: 1). Huge changes in the fire service over the last 25 years require much more equipment and training that ever before! 2). Training space is absolutely critical to meet today's training requirements. Recruitment and retention reasons: Volunteer fire departments across America today are having major problems recruiting and retaining members. It is critical for the future to do everything possible to attract new firefighter recruits and then retain them. The Mound Fire department must be proactive in providing attractive amenities to maintain their excellent record in this area. This means having fire stations that are comfortable, have adequate work space, TV or reading lounges, fitness workout rooms, and other amenities. This is all necessary (refer to attachments on volunteers and decreasing members chart). Key point: Many, many cities around us are doing everything possible to meet the needs of the new volunteers so they can maintain fire department membership at a needed level. Plus, don't forget that the cost of a volunteer fire department is a bargain for cities! Community'support, gommunity pride, and public safety reasons: The City of' Mound citizens support the efforts of'both the fire and police departments in Mound. The recent survey of 450 residents (by Decision Resources) clearly shows the support for the fire department needs (refer to the Decision Resources survey chart and executive summary). Key point: The citizens of'Mound definitely support the fire department and want them to be successful in the community. Financial reasons: The Mound Fire department currently has an Insurance Services Organization "classification rating" # 4 which effects all residents in the city of Moond. This high rating was achieved in September 1996. Insurance Services Office, lnc (ISO) is an independent company that evaluates fire departments throughout the U.S. and then rates (or classifies) the fire department based upon capabilities. The ISO rating system ranges from I - 10, with 1 being the highest rating achievable and 10 being the lowest rating achievable. Many insurance companies then utilize the ISO rating for determining homeowners and commercial insurance rates. ISO has rated and provided insurance companies with information on over 43,000 jurisdictions in the U.S. There are several Key points here: 1). The current rating that M1H) has is based upon apparatus, equipment, personnel, water supply, training, response times, communications systems.., so it is critical that we maintain members and apparatus capabilities. 2). A rating of#4 is very, very good for a volunteer fire department. 3). Many Insurance companies utilize this rating system for determining FD capabilities and thus establishing home and business insurance premiums or rates. The better the rating, the lower the insurance premiums for all citizens. 4). In general it is to the citizen's advantage to keep the FD well equipped with all resources necessary to support this rating! (refer to attachments on ISO rating). GP 02/28/02 MOUND FIRE DEPARMENT FIRE STATION FACILITY ISSUES · Originally constructed in the 1950's · Additional Bay for Trucks added in 1980 · Structure Is In Need Of Much Work Or Repairs (windows, doors, walls, floor covering, etc.) · Building Does Not Meet Codes for safety and handicap accessibility · Old And Inefficient (VVindows, HVAC, Electricity, Lighting) causing high utility costs · Structural Integrity Is Poor (cracks in block walls) · Apparatus Floor Space Is Too Small - Crowded (11 vehicles and 2 boats won't fit) · Training Room area is not large enough for 37 members. Also not set up well for training activities · Apparatus Placement Inappropriate - size and length will not allow proper placement for sequential response thus effecting response times. · Lack Of Storage Space for hose and supplies · Minimal Attractive Amenities necessary to retain firefighters · Inefficient In Terms Of Access, Clean Up, Etc. (after a fire cleanup and preparation) · Fire and Rescue apparatus are crowded into same bay - side by side creating access and safety concerns. 5,000 square feet of apparatus floor is not at all sufficient · Location Seems To Be Good Existin.q Structure Size · Small Training Room /TV Lounge Upstairs 390 · Small Office Upstairs- Chiefs 100 · Small Storage Office Upstairs-Training/Bathroom 104 · Large Meeting / Training Room - Upstairs 750 Total Upstairs 1,344 Square Feet · Apparatus Bay- New (South Bay) 2,040 · Apparatus Bay- Old 3,430 · Office Space, Radio Room, TV Lounge 520 · Hose Tower, Mechanics Room, Storage 210 · Restrooms, Furnace Room, Storage, Air Room401 · Kitchen And Storage 484 · Work Out Room 374 Total Downstairs 7,459 Total Of All Space 8,803 o~oom CITY of ORONO Municipal Offices StrBot Address: Mailing Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Orono, MN 55356 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 July 17, 2002 Chief Cn'eg Pederson and Mound Firefighters % Kandis Hanson City Manager 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364-1627 Dear Chief Pederson and Mound Firefighter.s: As the cities served bY the Mound Fii'e'Deparmaent continue to work thrOugh issues related to the funding of the Mound fire station, as well as ad~essing issues ~:elited'' to ensuring the long term viability of volunteer fire service; it is important to clarify the City of Orono's positions and perspectives regarding the new Mound fire station, as well as regarding the long term provision of fire service to the Navarre area, and to the Lake Minnetonka area. Orono has always been, and continues to be, very satisfied with the high quality of fu'e service provided by the Mound Fire Department. We would like to continue to receive fire service from the Mound Fire Department. Orono is supportive of the Mound Fire Department getting a new fire station that meets current standards and that will meet the current and future needs of the Department. We do not want to tell 'Mound how to build its fire station. In the same vein, we do not believe Mound's decisions about its fire station should necessarily place major financial obligations on the cities who receive fire service from Mound. There has been discussion about the future need for neighborhood or first response fire'stations in both Navarre and Minnetrista. The funding of these stations should be taken into account in the continuing discussions regarding the funding plan for the new Mound fire station. 0rono has indicated that its investmem in fire facilities to serve the Mound Fire Deparmaen~ and the Navarre'area will be in the form of Pa~,ing:the' fuil'coS~ °fa rieighborho0d station'in Navarre'versus paying a share of the Mound fire station cost. Another funding option suggested by Mirmelrista is that the same cost allocation formula b~ing used for the Mound fire station be used for the Telephone (952) 249-4600 · Fax (952) 249-4616 www. ci.orono.mn.us // Chief Greg Pederson and Mound Volunteer Firefighters July 10, 2002 Page 2 neighborhood stations in Minnetrista and Navarre. The currently proposed cost sharing formula for the Mound fire station would increase Orono's costs of fire service from Mound by 65%. Although this higher cost is not necessarily too much to pay for fire service, when the costs of a municipal service increase in that magnitude, a city has an obligation to closely review the cost increase and other options for cost sharing, as well as other options for fire service delivery. As the City of Mound's financial advisor, Jim Prosser, stated: cities need to evaluate the quality and cost of fire service provided by the Mound Fire Department, including the cost of the new fire station, and determine whether it is competitive with other fire service provision options. It has been suggested that a process be initiated to pursue the option of a fire district as an altemative method of organizing for the provision of fire service. Since Orono is involved with four different fire departments, we would be interested in participating in such a process. Orono will continue to work with the City of Mound and the other fire service cities to work out a fire station funding solution, as well as to pursue the fire district concept. City Administrator l~M/lsv 03/23/2002 20:40 6124761735 OFFICE PAGE 01 TO: DATE: SLrBJE~: Mayor and Cily Council Ron Moo~se, City Adrainistrator ~ 15, 2002 Fire Servic~ Options As you know, the City is currently served by four fire departments. Early in the planning process for the Long Lake fire s~ation, a rite service consultant was asked to advise the City regarding how the plarmed fire stat/on fit into a long term plan for the provision of fire service to the City of Orono. The consultant, who is the same consultant used .by the South Lake cities, indicated that as much of the City of Orono as possible should be provided with fire service from thc Long Lake fire station. This recommendation was thc basis for Orono working through the issues with Long Lake to arrive at a fire station agreement. The key area of the City that is not covered by the Long Lake Fire Deparim~l is the Navarre area, which is covered by the Mound Fire Department. Over the past yea~ I have suggested in various forums that the numerous smalI fire departments /ri thc area should begin to think about some method of consolidation or cooperative a!Tazlge~nent that would provide long term cost e/~iciendcs thxoxlgh econol~-s of scale; Although this m~ggestion has gaine~ some stzpport as a potential long term plan, there ar~ many obstacles to accomplishing this in the short mrm. At the same time, both Mound md Maple Plain have developed fire service plans that include substantial capital expe~d/tures and substantial operating cost hacreases, wh/ch wou/d each cause subsumtial increases ha Orono's cost for fire service. The City of Mound has been involved in the planning process for anew ~ station and has asked the cities s~rvcd by thc Mound Fire Depart~ncnt to indicate whether they would be willing to make a long term comrrfitmcnt to paying a share of the costs of the new fire station. The Council h.~ d/mcted me to develop a response to thc City of Mound that is in line with a long term plan for the l~rovision of fir~ service to the City of Orono. I r~cently met w/th a second consultant, Don Beckering of the Stat~ Fire Center, to discuss options for fire service provision to the Navarr~ area, including a satellite station in Navarre that would be operat~l independent of the Mound Fire Departmer~t. The result of this discussion was to be used as one factor in developing a r~'pons¢ to Mound regarding the City's p~-ticipation i~ the cost of thc fire station. The consul~n indicated the satellite station option had sufficient potential b~nefits to merit serious consideration. Recommendation Based on the input fi'om thc two consultants, and thc plans by both Mound and Mapte Ptain Eat ~ substantia[Iy increase fire service costs ~1 thc coming years, I am recomlilcnding first, that Orono identify ways to gain more control over the provisior~ of fire set-v/ce in Orono through the reduction /n the number oil?ire Dep~tu~e~ts th= serve Orono; and seoond, that Orono seriously pursue the option of consolidating the Navarre area within the Long Lake fire serv/ce distr/ci, includ/ng thc construction and operation of a satellite station in Navarre. City o£ the 'llajye o£1 nneto=lra Beach Treasurer Jan Dahlen ,~clministrator Sara Irvine Council Members David Bergerson John Breon Jame~ M. Gasch Nell E. Mathews 2945 }F'estwood Road Mailing Address: P.O. Box 146 Minnetonka Beach, M1V 553 61 (952) 471-8878 (952) 471-7416 (_fax) Email: mtkabc~west, net Mound City Council 'i~:i~iii~ili~: . The M~aii~i~i~CC~mmission met O~!~ednesday, Ja~a~i:~iii~p92 to discu~i i~ ~rei~i~he Mound VOlunteer Fire Depa~mien~.ii~aei!i~Yi~eeds. ph.~!i~gY of Mo'd~ii~e~idents ~O~leted b~ilD~i~ion Res~gi~Ce~iil ~td. Mi~g~ Beach co~~ith th~.~pproval::~:~fi~:s for fire protectio~::at o~aD~ighty-nine pe~ ........ . t~~e 't~e best fire prote~i~h;se~i~ Minnetonka Beach~a~th~ s~~ng communities..::~: ==================================== .... : ............ . lak~A~i~e depa~6~{~:and pub~i~ewice d~Aments ' fac i~~:::an~i~:ment in ord~O reduce cOg~:~he::~:~f M'Ound :::::::::::::::::::::::::::: . ...... :: ::.:::::::: : ' .:~ Currenti:~M::~kDBeach is pos~to iSsue gen~[~:~[~!i~i~:bonds to update a:~'~d~i~Sf~b~watermain~ also co~st~a~:~e~a~li:c works .~;~;~[~essed for th~j~[~a~[~&~h~ ~:en on proP'~Y ~:; ~[~~'to a minimum. ~&~i~[~[~[~~[~'you to be fiscallY:~:~ ::~ :~s~onsible to your resident's and ~[ract cities and develop an equitable plan that distributes the cost of a new~ire station propoKionately to the ~ntract cities. As such, we trus~[~we will not be assessed any e~ra Mound City Council February $; 2002 Page Tow charges for the year 2002 as our approved budget did not include any extra funding for fire services. We appreciate the Mound Fire Department's continued dedication to the City of Minnetonka Beach and our resident's safety. Sincerely, Sara Irvine City Administrator CC Mound Fire Deparment City Manager Kandis Hanson January Jl,' 2002 CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755'C, OUNTFIY CLUB ROAD ".SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · (952) 474-3236 FAX (952) 474-0128 ,..www.~t.shorewood.mn.us · c~tyh.al @cLshorewood.mn.us Kkndis H~mson, City Manager, City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road. MOund, Minnesota 55.3:64-1627 Dear Ms. Hanson: I understand that the City of Mound is considering whether to construct a new facility for public 'Safety, and that your City Council Would like comments from ~lecied officials ha the Mound Fire Department.!s contract cities. While I have not.had a chance to speak to all of-the Shorewood City Co · ~uncil 9njthis', ~att~..r,~ i.am:co, nfident that I can represent their ,.views: We~are also going through the s~atibn,.in ~e ,8o~':Lake Minnetonkb,.,area~ and the :Shorewood,.City Council has'had unanimous · votes aI!:~ong the ~ay .... First~ however, i would lil~ to state our'apprecia~ion, with the'~long-standing relationship that Shorevcood has had with the City of Mound for fzre services on "The Islands." The City CoUncil and Islands residents have'been satisfied with the prompt,/horough, and professional :services provided by the Mound Fire Departn-ient'. All property Owners kn ShOrewood pay'the, same rate for fire services, regardless of whether they ,receive services from the Mound.,Fire Dephrtment. or the Excelsior Fire District, The Shorewood City Council prefers thatregardless 0f where One'g property_.is in Shorewood, it is served by fire departi'nents that are comparable ha the quality of facilities and equipment: What we are eurrent,ly going through,~haxrolves.,the two j0int:po, wers public safety,organizations that serve Shorewood~. The Excelsior Fire Department has fi'Oe.member cities: Deephaven, Excelsior, Greenwood, Shorewood, .and Tonka Bay: ..I am currently~serving as the chair of the EFD. The South Lake Minnetonka P6tice Departmen~ has'four member cities: all of those listed above with the exception of Deephaven, Whieh. prbvidos its own police services, unquestionably, 6ur situation is different than the. Ci~ of Mbund, which has its own police department and fire sbrvice contract area. FinanCing: Given'the complexity of relationships among the 'cities and the joint powers org .arfimtions~-.~the, requirements.of ~ referendum are unclear. ~ould"we need voter approval from each ,ci..¢( ~,e~ae~'. org~fi0,~,for, e~Xarnple.. At thiS. point;, the.. cities in the ~Os are Planning to use lease-3evenue' finaneifig'thrPfigh:the Sh0rewood Econ°mie.DeVelopment AUthority..It will be the vehicle to construct acombined fire/.police station in St~oreWOod.to serve the west side oft he Fire' IS/strict, aiid afu:e station in Deephaven to serve theeast side of the Fire District. O! PRINTED C~N RECYCLED PAPER January 31, 2002 raCeTw° Certainly the §horewood City Council, as well as the majority of members on each of the other city councils, believes that public safety services are essential. Facilities need to be provided that are modern, safe, adequate well into the future, and attractive in order to recruit and retain public safety staff (particularly paid on-call firefighters). Lease-revenue financing will assure that these critical public facilities will be built. As mayors and eouncilmembers, we believe we have had sufficient information to fulfill our responsibility: to make an informed decision on behalf of our residents and businesses on the best way to ensure that needed public safety services and facilities are provided. Levy Limit Exemption: Our cities are also pursuing lease-revenue financing at this time because, as we have been advised by bond counsel, the annual payments would not be subject to levy limits. With the major increase in taxes that will be necessary to finance the new facilities, it is important that we have flexibility with revenue sources to maintain the level and array of core services that our residents and businesses expect. In regard to the financing that the Mound City Council will pursue with its new public safety facility, the Shorewood City Council strongly prefers an arrangement that will exempt the contract cities' payments from levy_ limits. I wish you patience and success in your process to provide a new public safety facility. The Shorewood City Council and residents on The Islands are supportive of the improvements you are considering. The City of Shorewood will be pleased to provide additional comments or answer any questions you may have. Please contact City Administrator Craig Dawson at 474-3236. Woodl Mayor Love City o£ Village o£1V inne onl a 9 ach Treas. r~r Jan Dahlen Administrator Sara Irvine Council Members David Bergerson John Breon James M~ Gasch Nell E. Mathews 2945 Westwood Road' ..Mailing Address: P.-O: Box 146 Minnetonka Beach, MN 53361 (932) 471-8878 (932) 471-7415 flax) Email: rntkabc~est, net The M~i ~i~ ~mmission met (~ ~ednesday, Ja~ ~i ~2 to discu~i{~!~re!~!(he Mound VOi~{eer Fire Chi~i~~n~i~i!~ity Manger ~on ph~!!~ey of aot?.n'~!~!dents 6~leted byilDe~s~o Re~!~ii!;.td. ................... M.i~~ Beach co/+i~i~ith, th6~prova!~i~:s for fire pr'~~:~at ~~etopka Beach City ~:...~i:i':.~;~t~ taken formal t~~ ~th~ best fire prote~.~j.~ ainnetonka Beach lak~:a~m depaa~h~"and pu~e~ e d~ff~ents to~i~e ................................................... gen~Fg~;~! g]~i~D' bonds to CurrentJ~6~ka. Beach is pos~:to issue update a~/~b~i~bh~6~[~termain~ h~ also co?t~/~;h~lic works ::/~{~6ssed for th:b::[~j~~~[~h~..bG~6'en on ~S to a minimum. W$~6~~6~:6 you to be ':f~0nsible to your resident's and ~h~tract cities and develop an equi~hbie plan that distributes the cost of a n~ire station propo~ionately to the contract cities. As such, we trus.~we will not be assessed any e~ra Mound City council Febnl~r~ 5, 2002 Page Tow charges for the year 2002 as our approved budget did not include any extra funding for fire services. We appreciate the Mound Fire Department's continued dedication to the City of Minnetonka Beach and our resident's safety. Sincerely, Sara Irvine City Administrator CC Mound Fire Deparment City Manager Kandis Hanson Page 1 of l Kandis M. Hanson From: To: Sent: Subject: "Gino Businaro" <GinoBusinaro@cityofmound,com> "Kandis M. Hanson" <KandisHanson@cityofmound.com> Friday, February 01, 2002 8:33 AM Re: CC meeting Kandis, I have reviewed the Finance/Computer Budgets for 2002 and I have asked staff for their suggestions on what programs we could cut from our budget. We could not think of any program that could be taken out in Finance without jeopardizing essential functions. The operating s'upplies' budget could be on the high side by $2000; but we do no know at this time if we will need the full amount, given that we are in the process of implementing the new financial system. Gino. 02/05/2002 Page 1 of 1 Kandis M. Hanson From: To: Sent: Subject: "James W. Fackler" <JimFackler@cityofmound.com> "Kandis M. Hanson" <KandisHanson@cityofmound.com> Thursday, January 31,'2002 1:12 PM Re: CC meeting BUDGET CUTS Parks 4340-410 Rentals $4,500 Portable Toilets Parks/Beach/Mound City Days 4340-384 Garbage $1,500 Parks/Beach/Mound City Days Garbage Removal - Original Message --- From: Kandis M. Hanson To: Sarah Smith; Len Harrell; Jim Fackler; Greq Skinner; Greg Pederson; Gino Businaro; Bonnie Ritter; John Dean ;James Prosser; Mary Ippel; Jeff Anderson ; Pat Meisel Sent: VVednesday, January 30, 2002 11:07 AM Subject: CC meeting The meeting regarding public facilities has been moved to Feb 6, 7:00 p.m., Mound City Hall. Jeff Anderson is asked to notify his committee, please. Department Heads are asked to look back at their lists of programs that were considered for cutting and each submit one program you would cut. I will compile the list of options for the council's consideration, to help them with this decision. I need to mail out a memo and agenda to the Council on Friday a.m. Jim Fackler should hold another meeting of his Task Force, to bring them up to date, show them survey results, brainstorm the future of Island Park Hall, etc. VVe need to keep that group alive and part of an outcome. Thanks Kandis 02/05/2002 Page 1 of l Kandis M. Hanson From: To: Sent: Subject: "James W. Fackler" <JimFackler@cityofmound.com> "Kandis M. Hanson" <KandisHanson@cityofmound.com> Thursday, January 31, 2002 1:12 PM Re: CC meeting BUDGET CUTS Parks 4340-410 Rentals $4,500 Portable Toilets Parks/Beach/Mound City Days 4340-384 Garbage $1,500 Parks/Beach/Mound City Days Garbage Removal --- Original Message --- From: Kandis M. Hanson To: Sarah Smith; Len Harrell; Jim Fackler; Greg Skinner; Greg Pederson; Gino Businaro; Bonnie Ritter; John Dean; James Prosser; Mary Ippel; Jeff Anderson ; Pat Meisel Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2002 11:07 AM Subject: CC meeting The meeting regarding public facilities has been moved to Feb 6, 7:00 p.m., Mound City Hall. Jeff Anderson is asked to notify his committee, please. Department Heads are asked to look back at their lists of programs that were considered for cutting and each submit one program you would cut. I will compile the list of options for the council's consideration, to help them with this decision. I need to mail out a memo and agenda to the Council on Friday a.m. Jim Fackler should hold another meeting of his Task Force, to bring them up to date, show them survey results, brainstorm the future of Island Park Hall, etc. We need to keep that group alive and part of an outcome. Thanks Kandis 02/06/2002 Memo Date: 2/1/02 Re: Budget Program P,~du~on I feel very strmgly that liae police departmeat cannot afford to take any progr~n ~ons at lhis ~t We are emrently adjusting ~o continue the SRO program (combined -,~th DARE) at lhe middle school that we Having said that, I know we are in a financial crisis. If there needs to be acm from the police department I would suggest that the only possible area would be to the Community Service position. The full time position with benefits is a cost of about $28,500.00. If we were to go back to a part-time position without benefits and only 25 hours per week the cost would be approximately $14,250.00 (saving $14,250.00). Them is no guarantee that Ms. Salter would accept a reduction in hours and benefits; so we could be suffering the cost of hiring and training. Should the council choose to redu~ or eliminate the position thc impact would be seen in "Operation Clean Sweep" and animal control. Officers do not transport animals in squad cars; OSHA issue. Animals would only be a'anslmrted if there is a bite si_m_~on or a reserve is available. Citations would be issued to owners if identified. Exterior storage issues and zoning issues would be done on a complaint basis and planning would need to go back to assuming a more prominent role in enforcement ®P~I MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: John Dean Sharon Scott July 6, 2000 Council and Park Commission Actions with respect to Referendum You have asked what actions are permissible for the Mound Park Commission to take with respect to advocacy or education regarding a proposed bond referendum. There is no relevant statute and no Minnesota case law that addresses the actions of a municipal entity or municipal employees in this regard. However, the Minnesota Attorney General has considered this issue, and concluded that, in the case of a school board, public .funds and staff time may be spent in impartially educating and informing the voters about the issues in a referendum. Op. Mimt Att'y Gen'l 159a-3, May 24, t966. For example, a school board could pay the reasonable expenses of printing and mailing literature explaining a project to voters. A school board may not expend public funds or stafftime to advocate a yes or a no vote on that referendum. Id Individual members of a school board may, without expending staff time, explain and advocate a yes or a no vote on a referendum question. Id The Attorney General opinion cites Citizens to Protect Pub. Funds v. Bd of Education, 98 Afl. 2d 673, quoting: [W]hen the program represents the body's judgmem of what is required in the effective discharge of its responsibility, it is not only the fight, but perhaps the duty of the. body to 'endeavor to secure the assent of the voters thereto. The question we are considering is simply the extent to and manner in which the funds may with justice to the rights of dissenters be expended for espousal ~6f the voters' approval of the body's judgmem. Even this the body may do within fair limits. The reasonable expense, for example, of the conduct of a public forum at which all may appear and freely express their views pro and con would not be improper. The same may be said of reasonable expenses incurred for radio or television broadcasts taking the form of debates between proponents of the differing sides of the proposition. It is the expenditure of public funds in support of one side only in a manner which gives the dissenters no opportunity to present their side which is outside the pale. Id. at 677-678. I have attached to this memorandum a copy of a letter of Dave Kennedy to the City of Brooklyn Center, which addresses, in part, this issue. Guidelines for consideration by a SMSl-182798vl MU200-84 municipal entity in application of the Attorney creneral's rule are set out in that letter which seem on poim in tlm case, and I have reproduced them, slightly modifiexl, here: a) .Any expenditure of funds or staff time to fully inform the electorate about the purpose of the election, the use of the funds to be obtained by the bond sale, its potential tax impact, the relaton of the proposed projects to the City's plans and the rational of the Council's decision to ask for voter approval is permissible. b) Member of the Council and City staff are free, just as other citizens, to advocate the passage, of the proposal. c) The City may not expend public funds or utilize start'time to prepare material or circulate material prepared by itself or others urging a yes or no vote at the elecfimz d) The City may make available to others any data in its possession bearing on the issue to be decided at the election for use by any person or group in performing material or conducting a campaign for or against the proposal. e) Any doubt about the propriety of a suggested course of action relating to the dissemination of information about the election should be resolved by not taking the action; that is, a conservative approach to the questions should always be taken SMSl-182798vl MU200-84 CITY OF MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364-1687 PH: (952) 472-0800 FAX: (952) 472-0620 WEB: www.cityofmound,com MEMORANDUM August 6, 2002 TO: ALL FIRE CONTRACT CITIES FROM: KANDIS M. HANSON, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: 2003 FIRE CONTRACT BUDGET PROPOSAL Enclosed is the 2003 Fire Contract Budget Proposal. It follows the same format and approach as used since 1982, with the exception that we are now using market value instead of assessed value. Capital outlay for 2003 consists of a digital video camera, a tool box, a powered treadmill, a power point projector, and an inferred camera. Although we are not proposing the purchase of a new vehicle in 2003, we are continuing to set aside monies ($40,000), in the Fire Truck Repair Account as we have since 1991. Keeping this amount in the budget will assist in planning for future purchases of major firefighting equipment. As in past years, we have reviewed the annual increase for the Fire Relief Association. As you may recall, from 1982 until 1992, we have been collecting a 10% annual increase for this purpose. In the 1991 budget, we reduced the annual increase to 4%. In the 1992 budget, we again included a 4% increase. For 1993, a 7% increase for the fire pension contribution was approved. For 1994, a 4% increase in the contribution was approved. For 1995, we had a 4% increase in the contribution and an additional 2% in the contribution to address the unfunded liabihty issue that had been discussed within the actuarial report that the Fire Department had prepared as of 12/31/94. The Department requested a pension benefit increase in 1995 but we asked for an actuarial as of 12/31/95. That was completed in the spring of 1996 which indicated that an increase of $35 or a monthly benefit of $460 would be affordable without any increases in contributions from the cities in the fire district. The Department's request was approved by the Mound City Council effective July 1, 1996. Another actuarial was performed as of 12/31/97/99 which indicates that current investments are doing very well and that the unfunded liability issue is still a concern as we look at the future of the ~ prinfed on rec.vcled p&per fund and that based upon this actuarial, the unfunded liability amount should be "zeroed out" by December 31, 2009. On August 25, 1998 the Mound City Council passed a resolution approving an increase in monthly pension benefit for the Fire Relief Association to $510 effective September 1, 1998. For 2001, the eontribution'from the cities towards the Fire Relief Association was set at a 4% increase over the 2000 contribution. Firefighter's hourly wages, which are paid on call, have been disbursed at $7.00 per hour for 2001, an increase orS0 cents fi:om prior years. Effective January 1, 2001, the Mound City Council approved the Fire Department Relief Association's request to an increase in pension benefits to $585.00 per month. For 2002 the contribution fi:om the cities towards the Fire Relief Association was set at a 3% increase over the 2001 contribution. We feel that an additional 3% increase in pension contribution for the year 2003 is a justifiable validation of the skills which these volunteers bring to the service of the Fire Department. The extended leadership of a fire chief and the fire inspection needs are being addressed through a full time fare chief position and a full time secretary. We have budgeted $91,040 for these positions in 2003. The Fire Department is very proud of their equipment and the service that they provide. The City of Mound is proud of having such a dedicated group of individuals who volunteer their time for the safety of all of the citizens in the fire service area. Firefighting continues to be complicated and more sophisticated in many respects. More and more time is required of firefighters now than ever before. Being able to provide excellent equipment, training opportunities and financial incentives to attract and keep firefighters around for 20+ years is critically important to the future of the Mound Fire Department. The Department is at a full complement of 37 firefighters who take their firefightingjob very seriously. They do receive the full support of the entire fire district and we are very proud of what they do to protect the residents fi:om fire or other safety related hazards. Please review this information and the proposed budget and contact Greg Pederson, Fire Chief, or myself, if you have any questions. Greg Pederson, Fire Chief Giuo Businaro, Finance Director · A- MARKET VALUE MINNETONKA BEACH MINNETRISTA ORONO SHOREWOOD SPRING PARK MOUND 2002 VALUE 194,482,700 380,465,100 556,187,800 45,389,000 135,442,200 837.168.900 2,149,135.700 2001 2001 VALUE 9.05% 162,978,100 17.70% 318,877,700 25.88% .487,896,500 2.11% 38,529,800 6.30% 121,399,800 38.95% 719,291.100 100.00% 1,848.973,000 2000 pERCENTAGE 8.81% 17.28% 26.39% 2.08% 6.57% 38,90% 100.00% B - FIRE & RESCUE CALL HOURS 2001 ~000 1999 MINNETONKA BEACH 436 * MINNETRISTA 2,439 * ORONO · 2,155 * SHOREWOOD 88 * SPRING PARK 925 * MOUND 6.082 * 3.60% 392 3.25% 20.12% 1,878 15.56% 17.77% 1,593 13.20% 0.73% 130 1.08% 7.63% 771 6.39% 50.16% 7,302 60.52% 971 7.11% 2,007 14.70% 1,718 12.58% 171 1.25% 1,467 10.74% 7,320 53.61% 12.125 * 100.00% 12,066 100.00% !3,654 100.00% * The total Mutual Aid hours in 2001 v~as 347 (up 188 from 2000). C - COMBINATION OF MARKET VALUE AND FI'RE CALL HOURS MARKET 3 YEAR VALUE AVERAGE ~ FIRE CALI.$ FINAL MINNETONKA BEACH 9.05% 4.65% 6.85% MINNETRISTA 17.70% 16.79% 17.25% ORONO 25.88% 14.52% 20.20% SHOREVVOOD 2.11% 1.02% 1.57% SPRING PARK 6.30% 8.25% 7.28% MOUND 38.95% 54.76% 46,86% 100.00% 100.00% ~00,00% 2003 BUDGET RECAP OPERATING COSTS CAPITAL OUTLAY (FIRE TRUCK REPAIR) FIRI:MAN'S RELII:F PI:NSION CREDIT FROM YR. 200~ BUDGET SAVINGS TOTAL 2003 FIRE COSTS 440,380 40,000 112,340 592,720 2003 COST BREAKDOWN FOR EACH CONTRACTING CITY MINNETONKA BEACH ,592,720 X 6.85% MINNETRISTA 592,720 X 17.25% ORONO 592,720 X 20.20% SHOREWOOD 592,720 X 1.57% SPRING PARK 592,720 X 7.28% MOUND 592,720 X 46.86% 40,605 102,233 119,726 9,278 43,139 277,739 TOTAL 100.00% 592,720 2002 BUDG~=T BR~=AKDOWN RELIEF FIRE DI::PT ASSN TRUCK BUDGET CONT REPAIR 2003 COST 2002 .~OST MINNETONKA BEACH 30,169 7,696 2,740 40,605 37,694 MINNETRISTA 75,957 19,376 6,899 102,233 87,142 ORONO 88,954 22,692 8,080 119,726 109,899 SHOREWOOD 6,893 1,758 626 9,278 8,526 SPRING PARK 32,052 8,176 2,911 43,139 45,859 MOUND 206.355 52.641 18.743 277.739 259.410 440.380 112.340 40,000 592.720 548.530 AREA FIRE SERVICE FUND RECAP OF COSTS BY CITY 2003 2002 2001 2000 MINNETONKABEACH 40,605 37,694 33,191 28,663 MINNETRISTA 102,233 87,142 80,332 73,512 ORONO 119,726 109,899 100,791 96,059 SHOREWOOD 9,278 8,526 8,079 7,236 SPRING PARK 43,139 45,859 46,671 44,676 MOUND 277.739 2~9.410 240.086 229.134 592,720 548,530 509,150 479,280 AREA FIRE SERVICE FUND BALANCE BALANCI=: JANUARY 1, 2002 ESTIMATED 2002 REVENUES ESTIMATED 2002 EXPENDITURES ESTIMATED 2002 FUND BALANCE ADi~ 2003 ESTIMATED REVENUE LESS 2003 ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES PROJECTED BALANCE DECEMBER 31, 2003 280,040 429,470 (659,470) 50,040 480,380 (440,380) 90,040 lOl 170 180 185 190 121 131 134 136 200 202 210 212 216 219 217 300 307 301 305 FIRE DEPARTMENT FULL TIME SALARIES OFFICERS PAY OFFICERS & FIRE SECRETARY'S PAY DRILL PAY MAINTEI~iANCE PAY MONTHLY SALAI~ES FICA/PEP.~ HOSP/DENTAL LIFE INSJDISABILITY POST RETIREMENT OFFICE SUPPLIES COPY MACHINE & FEES OPERATING SUPPLIES MOTOR FUELS CLEANING SUPPLIES SAFETY SUPPLIEs FIRE PREVENTION (FIRE INSPECTOR) PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ADMIN/FINANCE/COMPUTER AUDIT/FINANCIAL MEDICAL SERVICES 2000 ACTUAL 24,199 24,199 18,500 87,570 2,221 0 0 1,480 228 23,370 4,808 720 13,571 2,618 999 0 0 3,009 2001 ACTUAL 37,831 8,665 86,452 3,280 0 0 2,967 331 21,546 3,O43 1,314 8,895 3,708 7,167 10,500 2,080 2,248 2002 APPROVED 0 41,300 35,400 8,880 87.730 16,140 6,790 110 1,500 480 22,800 4,500 600 9,000 2,400 1,200 10,500 2,080 2,400 2003 REQUESTED 91,040 7,200 0 8,880 14,000 92,760 20,000 12,090 28O 910 1,600 480 22,800 4,200 600 9,000 2,400 1,200 10,820 2,140 2,400 222-4.2260 2003 PROPOSED 91,040 7,200 0 8,880 14,000 92,760 20,000 12,090 28O 910 1,600 48O 22,800 4,200 600 9,000 2,400 1,200 10,820 2,140 2,400 FIRE DEPARTMENT 222-42260 2000 2001 2002 2003 2003 CODE ACTUAL ACTUAL APPROVED REQUESTED PROPOSED 390 GENERAL MAINTENANCE 2,605 '14,683 16,000 O 325 PAGERS - FIRE DEPT. 2,711 4,233 3,600 3,600 3,600 322 POSTAGE 529 620 600 600 600 321 TELEPHONE 2,025 3,069 2,700 2,760 2,760 350 PRI NTIN.G 514 1,598 600 600 600 151 WORKER'S COMP. INS. 9,243 14,860 21,060 23,170 23,170 381 GEN. LIABILITY INS. 15,646 16,642 19,860 21,850 21,850 381 ELECTRICITY 5,615 6,379 6,240 7,000 7,000 383 GAS SERVICE 5,955 7,956 4,500 9,500 9,500 , 384 GARBAGE 818 1,192 1,200 1,200 1,200 409 OTHER EQUIP, REPAIR 18,523 21,229 19,200 14,000 14,000 401 BUILDING REPAIR 15,481 6,217 7,200 1,200 1,200 418 RENTALS 2,069 2,022 12,000 10,200 10,200 430 MISCELLANEOUS 5,823 3,483 1,500 1,500 1,500 434 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 20,472 26,682 18,000 19,000 19,000 433 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 5,187 8,346 2,400 2,400 2,400 480 JANITORIAL SERVICES 0 0 0 4,000 4,000 205 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 560 816 600 600 600 500 CAPITAL OUTLAY 55,873 32,090 8,400 12,400 12,400 500 NEW ENGINE PUMPER 0 0 260,000 0 0 580 FIRE TRUCK REPAIR 0 0 40,000 40,000 40,000 600 LEASE PAYIVENTS TO HRA 0 0 0 .?. .?. TOTAL 377.141 372.144 699.470 480.380 480.380 Paragraph 1. Mound and its customer cities will study infrastructure needs (i.e. satellite stations) of all cities currently under contract for fire service with Mound. This study will include information pertaining to location, size and proposed equipment to be placed in said stations, and timelines for construction based on need. This study is to be budgeted for in the 201J4 fiscal year and must commence no later than April 15th of 2004. Paragraph 2. The funding for such infrastructure will be shared in a manner to be agreed to by the cities .... or based on the formula used by the current contract ..... or some other formula. The jurisdiction in which the infrastructure is located will be owned by that jurisdiction until such time that a fire district may be organized. Other items to consider: Customer cities and Mound could also amend the current contract with a longer- term agreement that would provide more financial stability to projects such as Mound's new facility and future facilities in other cities. 2. An exact formula for financial contributions to facility projects should be determined and specifically added into any contract amendments. 3. All facilities need to be funded in such a manner so that under levy limits cities can levy their share of the contribution via special levy. 4. We can amend the contract so that funding for Mound's facility is secured and committed to as well as funding for future facilities in the service area. JOINT COOPEI~TIVE AGREEMENT AND CONTRACT FOR, FER.E SERVICE 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36, 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 1st day of January 2001, by and between the City of Mound, a muni0ipal corporation in the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota, and the City of Orono, a municipal corporation in the County of Hermepin and State of Minnesota. W[TNESSETH: WHERE~S, The City of Orono is desirous of having fire protection service furnished by the City of Mound Fire Department, mad Wlt-E. REAS, The City of Mound has the facilities and equipment and is willing and able to provide fire protection service to the City of Orono and W.H~EREAS, The City of Mound has prepared for the City of Orono an annual financial budget covering truck bonded indebtedness, fire equipment, capital outlays, annual operating costs and Fireman' s Relief Association. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants of the parties hereto, it is agreed as follows: Section L DEFINITION' OF TERMS, For the purpose of this Agreement, the terms in this section shall have the following meanings given to them. L01. "Contract term" means a 3 year period during which fire protection services are to be rendered or were rendered to the City of Orono by the City of Mound. The contract term shall commence January 1 and temfinate after three (3) years on December 31. 1.02. "Contracting Cities" means any city which is a party to this contract for the purposes of determining total cost for services, The contracting cities are Minnetonka Beach, Minnetrista, Orono, Shorewood, and Spring Park. 1,03. "City of Mound Fire Budget" shall include all preliminary estimated and actual costs of operating the Fire Department of the City of Mound for a given contract year, including but not limited to: Officers and Fire Inspector's Pay Drill Pay Monthly Salaries FICA / PERA Office Supplies Copy Machine and Fees Operating Supplies Motor Fuel Cleaning Supplies Safety Supplies Fire Prevention Professional Services Medical Services General Maintenance Aug-g7-2002 02:07Pm From-CITY OF ORONO +g$224~4818 T-~24 P.OO3/OOT F-?Z~ 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 4tt. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69, 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. 77. 78. 79. $0. $1. 82. 83. 84. 85. 86. 87. $8. Pagers - Fire Dept. Postage Telephone Printing Worker's Comp. Innmmce General Liability Inmrance Elec~city Cr0z Service Garbage Other Equipmem Kepair Building Repair Rentals Radio Remals Miscellaneous Conferences and Schools Duos and Subscriptions Capital Outlay Fire Tmek lt. epair Fireman's Relief Association Payments 1.04. "Fire Service Area" of each contracting city shall be that area wittfin the City shown on Exhibit A attached hereto. Section 2. AREA PROTECTED. The City of Mound shall provide fire protection service for the City of Orono in the area legally described on Exlfibit A, and as shown on the Fire Service Area Map Exhibit B. Section :5, LEVEL OF SERVICE, The City of Mound, through its fire department, shall endeavor to prevent, prote~ and save life and property from the destru~on by fire in the promcted area to the same extent as it does within the City of Mound. The extent of service provided through the City of Mound Fire Department will include but not be limited to, fire inspection and prevention service through a member of the Mound Fire Department or an approved sub contractor, as well as "professional quality" f~ro and resme protection. Any fire inspection and prevention service sub contractor must be approved and supervised by the Mound Fire Dcpamnent Fire Chief.. Section 4. ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITY. The fire protection services rendered to the contra~ng cities shall be under tho solo direction of the City of Mound. The degree of services tendon'ed, the standards of performance, the hiring and discipline of the personnel assignext, and other matters relating to regulation and policies, are in tim control of tho City of Motmd. Pray disputes between the parties to this agreement as to th~ extent of functions and services to be rendered hereunder, or the level or manner of performaxme of'such service, shall be re, solved by the City Manager of'the City of Mound. If a contragting Oty disagrees with tho r,solution ortho.dispute, it may appeal, within' seven days, in writing, m the City of'Mound asking for arbitration, as provided in section 8. The City of Mound shall submit to the contracting cities a monthly repor~ of services remlered to the contracting city as well as suggestions regarding any changes that may be helpful. 2 89. 90, 91. 92. 93. 94, 95. 96, 97. 98. 99. 100. 101. 102. 103. 104. 105, 106. 107. lOg, 109. 110. 111. 112. 113. 114. 115, 116, 1t7. 118. 119. 120, 121. 122, 123. 124. 125. 126. 127. 128. 129. 130, 131, 132. 133, 134. gectlon 5. VOLIJNTEER 2FIREFIGHTERS OF ~ ~ OF MOUND. Personnel assigned to provide fire protection services in the contracting city shall be volunteer firefighter oft. he City of Mound. Mound assumes all obligations with regard to worker's compensation, Firefighter's Relief. Association, withholding tax, insurance, etc. for s, mh vohm?eer firefighter. The eontraclqng city shall not be required to furnish any of the foregoing fringe benefits or assume any other liability of employment to any employee or other person assigned to duty within the contracting city. If the contracting city employs such employee or person directly, independent of this agreement, to provide fire protection services in the contracting city, all obligations and liabilities with respect to employment of such employee or person shall be the responsibility of the contracting city. No such direct employment shall be entered into by the contracting city without first obtaining the written approval of the City Manager of the City of Momad. Section 6. TERMINATION. This agreement shall remain in fall force and effect until January 1, 2004, and be renewed automatically hereafter for a successive comract term unless cancelled by either parry by serving written notice upon the City Clerk of all contracting cities by January first of the year prior to the contract term expiration. Section 7. COST CALCULATIONS. Cost for and in consideration of rendition of Fire Protection Service under this agreement, shall be determined by the formula, as illustrated below, for each eontra~ year. 7.01. ASSESSED VALUATION OF TI]Il ~ SERVICE AREA OF EACH CONTRACTING CITY, The assessed valuation oft. he Fire Service Area of each contracting city is based on taxes due and payable f,or the year immediately preceding the budget year. The source of the assessed valuation data shall be the official figures of the Hennepin County Assessor's Department. 7.02. LEVEL OF SERVICE FOR PRIOR CALENDAR YEAR. The level of service shall be determined by the number of fire calls, rescue calls and mutual aid calls based on personnel hours. The formuta of assessed valuation and levels of service used by the contracting city will incorporate the assessed valuation of the year preceding the budget year and the three previous years average of the personnel hours provided to the contracting city. These will then be balanced equally giving each participating city its percentage share of the budget for the upcoming year. 7.03, BUDGET. By September 1 of each year, the City of'Mound shall notify each contracting city of the estimated costs for the next contract year. The final estimated cost shall be determined and all contract - cities notified by December 15 of each year, The final estimated cost shall be paid in equal quarterly installments of January 1, April 1, July 1 and October 1 of'the next contract year by the contracting city to the City of Mound. The contracting city understands and agrees that it is impossible to project with complete accuracy the actual cost for labor and equipment as well as the service to be required by each city for the forthcoming contract year, and therefore hereby agrees to a yearly audit to adjust the prior year's estimated cost of service as set Au~-ZF-ZO0~ O~:08pm From-CITY OF ORONO l~. 136, 137. 138. 139. 140. 141. 142. 1.43. 144. 145, 146. 147, 148. 149. I50. 151. 152. 153. 154. 155. 156. 157. 158. 159. 160. 161. 162. 163. 164. 165. 156. 167. 168. 169. 170. 171. 172. 173. 174. 175. 176, 177. 178. 179. 180, forth above to the actual costs incurred by the City of Mound will tabulat~ the actual cost of the Fire Department Budget for the prior contract year and will submit to each contracting city a summary of actual costs. The actual cosx of the Fire Departrncm Budget for the prior year and a summary of'the actual costs will bc submitted to all contracting cities by September 1, The actual costs set forth for the prior contract year may resuk in eitha' a credit or a debit to each contracting city. Ifa surplus is carded over from the prior year, paid monies shall be placed in a reserve fund. Said reserve fund shall be accrued until a fund balance equal to ten percent (10%) of the prior year's operating budget is arrived at. Once thc reserve fund level is established, the ~x)ntracting cities will decide whether to reduce their annual operating contribution to offset thc operating fund balance or contribute to keep it at the ten (10%) reserve fund level. Thc ftmd may be utilized to pay any increase for service if a majority of all contracting cities approve. Ifa majority does not approve, the annual cost payments shall be paid in an amount to lower the 100% of that years final estimated costs. The allocation of the credit or debit shall be made purmant to the basic cost formula set forth above. 7.04. FIRE DEPARTMENT FUNDS. In order to facilitate the accounting and reporting of all fire funds, a special Fund of the City of Mound called "Area Fire Service Fund" is hereby crated. All operating expenses shall come from this fund. Other separate funds already in e~stence include, Fire Department Capital Outlay Fund (Equipment Reserve), Firemen's Relief. Association Fund, and Fire Track Bonded Indebtedness Fuud. Repons on each of these Funds will also be provided to each contracting city by the City of Mound, annually following the contract year. Alt financial issues and reports related to these funds will be the responsibility of the City of Mound Finance Director / Treasurer. 7.05. DtlI.~IQUENT I*UNDS. If any of the above mentioned Funds, for whatever reason, shall become delinquent and require additional funds prior to the next contract year, each contracting city shall be notified of such shortage in estimated revenue and the contracting parties, by majority of all of the contracting cities shall vote to transfer fi.om the reserve fund or to pay as a part of the current year's quarterly costs set forth in paragraph 3 above. Section 8. ARBITRATION. If the contracting city is aggrieved by the determination of the City of Mound as to th, allocation of the actual eom of the prior year's service, the contracting city may appeal said determination within 30 days atter receipt of the Cky of Mound's audit. Said appeal shall be made in writing and shall be addressed to the City of Mound asking for arbitration by a Board of Arbitration. The Board of Arbitration shall consist of three persons: one to be appointed by the City of Mound; one to be appoimed by the appealing contracting city; and the third to be appointed by the two so selected. The name of each arbitrator selected shall be submitted, in writing, to the other party, la the event that the two arbitrators so selected do not appoint the tkird arbitrator within 15 days after their appointment, the Chief Judge of'the District Court of Hcmnepin County shall have jurisdiction to appoint, upon application of either the City of Mound or the appealing contracting city, the third arbitrator to the Board. The 4 ,.~,-~-~uu~ v~;uopm rrom-~ll~ ur UKUlNU +9522494616 T-924 P.OO6/OO7 F-727 181. 182, I83. 184. 185. 186. 187. 188, 189. 190. 191. 192. 193. 194, 195. 196. 197, 198. 199, 200. 20l. 202. 203, 204. 205. 206, 207. 208. 209. 210. 211. 212. 213 214 215 216 217 218 219. 220. 221. third arbitrator selected shall not be a resident of either contracting city, and shall be a City Manager or City Administrator. Thc arbitrator's expenses and fees, together with other expenses, not including counsel fees, inearred in the conduct of the arbitration, shall be divided equally between the parties to the arbitration. Arbitration shall be conducted in accordance with the Uniform Arbitration Act, Chapter 572 of the Minnesota Statutes. Said arbitration shall be binding on both parties. Section 9, CAPITAL EXPENDITURES OR INTERIM INCREASES IN Tm~ FUND. The contracting cities shall have the right to be heard regarding any proposed capital expenditures by the City of Mound which are not in the annual estimated cost budget and which exceed $25,000.00 or interim increases in the funds not otherwise included in thc annual budget. Notice of such proposed and non budgeted capital expenditures or interim increases in Funds shall be in writing to the contracting cities prior to actual expenditures for such items and the contracting cities shall thereafter have ten days in which to approve or disapprove ~he same in writing. If a contracting city does not disapprove the expenditure, it is agreed flint such proposed expenditure may be made and the cost thereof shall be included in the year's budget. Section 10. I*IRE DEPARTMENT RELIEF ASSOCIATION, The contracting cities agree that it is important that the volunteer firefighters of the City of Mound have a relief association that will provide retiremem benefits after retirement to compensate the firefighters for all the volunteer hours they contributed. The contracting cities also realize the wisdom of contributing to this fund on a pay as you go basis, The contracting cities also recognize that as retirement levels increase that additional contribution will be required beyond the present 2001 contribution level. The retirement costs paid to the Relief Association shall be considered as a part of the prior years operating costs. The contracting city's mount being paid for relief benefits will be paid until and unless a majority of the contracting cities approve increased benefits and increased contributions to the fund. Section 1I. PRIOR CONTRACT. If Mound cancels this contract under the provisions of section 6 or ifa contracting city cancels the contract for any reason, then the capital expenditure fund established to purchase any capital equipment will be evaluated and the contributing city's capital investment will be considered. Notwithstanding any language herein to the contrary, or in prior contracts between the parties, any credit or debit due to a contracting city or to the City of Mound on account of prior agreements and contracts for fire protection between the parties shall be payable in the year following pursuant to the contract currently in force. ^u~-~¢-~uu~ u~:USp$ ~ro$-CITY OF ORONO +$$ZZ494616 T-SZ4 P.OO?/OOT CITY OF ORONO CITY OF MOUND By: By: Its Mayor Its Mayor And And By: Its Cky Cl~rk By: ) Cky Manager 6 Date: .Subject: Kandis Hanson, City Manager Jim Prosser April 2, 2002 Member City Contributions for Fire Station Attached are two alternative contribution schedules for member city contributions for the Mound Fire Station debt service. Also attached is a comparison showing both methods. The steps in calculating the debt service allocation are as follows (please note that method was used for discussion purposes and is not the only option available): Total debt service for the Mound Public Safety Building was allocated on the basis of total building space divided by the Fire Department space. Shared space was divided equally. This produced an allocation of 61.22% total debt service allocation to the Fire Department. The Lease Purchase Revenue Bond debt service was used as a base of debt service allocation. There will be interest earnings on the debt service reserve for the bonds. The interest earnings will be used to decrease the debt service requirement on an annual basis. We have not credited interest earnings for the purpose of this projection. Option I allocates the debt service on the basis of 2002 member city contribution rate. This rate, in the form of a percentage is applied to the debt service for each year. The debt service does change marginally each year. Under this method this rate would be fixed for the period of the bond debt service regardless of other factors. Option II is an estimate of the debt service allocation if the debt service allocation is adjusted each year to match the budget allocation method used to distribute operating costs. As an example under this method Mound is projected to contribute .6% (six tenths of one percent) less each year. This estimate was used to project allocation over a ten year period, so Mound's contribution was decreased by .6% annually. The resulting contribution was then applied to the annual debt service. It should be noted that this method is simply an estimate of the contribution. If this method was utilized the actual allocations would be adjusted in the same manner as operating cost allocations (population and assessed value). Ehlers is prepared to develop estimates of other allocation models as directed. These methods were used to illustrate the comparative impacts of two base models. Please also note that the actual debt service cost may change depending on the results of the actual bond sale. The estimates used for this model are reasonably accurate for current market conditions. But market conditions do vary. LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE 366is":d~n{'i~'Poi~te"lS'fiv'~ ~h0ne: ~5'i ~7-8503 ~ax: 651"697-8555i To: Greg Peterson From: Jim Prosser Date: April 12, 2002 .Subject: Lease Revenue Bond Cost Provided below is the breakdown for the Lease Revenue Bonds for the Mound Public Safety Building: Item Cost Building costs 4,950,000 Indirect costs (soils, engineering, 900,000 architectural, etc. Underwriter discount 1.96% (Fee paid to 134,358 underwriter to sell bonds) Cost of issuance ((legal, finance advisor, 45,000 rating agency) Capitalized interest (interest accumulated on 241,683 bonds prior to revenue collection) 583,000 Debt service reserve (one years principal and interest. Interest on reserve will be credited to annual debt service and used to reduce payments. Last year debt service will be paid by reserve) Rounding 959 Total 6,855,000 LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE 3060 Centre Pointe Drive Phone:' '~51'69~-85i33 Fa~: 65i-697.8555 City of Mound, MN $6,855,000 Lease Revenue Bonds, Series June ~, 2002 SOURCES & USES Dated 06/01/2002 Delivered 06/0112002 SOURCES OF FUNDS Par Amount of Bonds ......................................................................... $6,855,000.00 TOTAL SOURCES ............................................................................ $6,855,000.00 USES OF FUNDS' Total Underwriter's Discount (1.960%) .............................................. 134,358.00 Costs of Issuance .............................................................................. 45,000.00 Deposit to Debt Service Reserve Fund (DSRF) ................................. 583,000.00 Deposit to Capitalized Interest (CIF) Fund ......................................... 241,682.63 Deposit to Project Construction Fund ................................................. 5,850,000.00 Rounding Amount .............................................................................. 959.37 TOTAL USES .................................................................................... $6,855,000.00 Ehlers & Associates, Inc. Leaders in Pubfic Finance since 1955 d. sf-Ser 02 1000 GROSS- SINGLE PURPOSE 3/22/2002 8.'58 AM Page 1 City of Mound, MN $&855,000 Lease Revenue Bonds, Series June ~, 2002 DEBT SERVICE SCHEDULE YIELD STATISTICS Bond Year Dollars ................................................................................................................. Average Life .......................................................................................................................... Average Coupon ................................................................................................................... Net Interest Cost (NIC) ......................................................................................................... True Interest Cost (TIC) ........................................................................................................ Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes ........................................................................................ All Inclusive Cost (AIC) ......................................................................................................... IRS FORM 8038 Net Interest Cost ................................................................................................................... Weighted Average Maturity ................................................................................................... $88,155.00 12.860 Years 5.6806472% 5.8332583% 5.8582635% 5.6293159% 5.9364589% 5.68O8472% 12.860 Years Eh/ers & Associates, Inc. Leaders in Pubfic Finance since 1955 File = Moundsf-Ser 02 1000 GROSS- SINGLE PURPOSE 3/22_,'2002 8:58 AM Page 3 City of Mound, MN $6,855,000 Lease Revenue Bonds, Series June l, 2002 NET DEBT SERVICE SCHEDULE Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I DSR CIF Net New D/S FISCAL TOTAL 6/01/2002 8/01/2002 2/01/200~ 8/01/2003 2/01/2004 210,000.00 3.250% 8/01/2004 2/01/2005 220,000.00 3.750% 8/01/2005 2/01/2006 225,000.00 4.300% 8/01/2006 2/01/2007 235,000.00 4.400% 8/01/2007 2/01/2008 245,000.00 4.650% 8/0112008 2/01/2009 255,000.00 4.850% 8/01/2009 2/01/2010 270,000.00 5.000% 8/0112010 2/01/2011 285,000.00 5.100% 8/01/2011 2/01/2012 300,000.00 5.200% 8/01/2012 2/01/2013 315,000.00 5.350% 8/01/2013 2/01/2014 330,000.00 5.450% 8/01/2014 2/01/2015 350,000.00 5.600% 8/01/2015 2/01/2016 370,000.00 5.700% 8/01/2016 2/01/2017 390,000.00 5.750% 8/01/2017 2/01/2018 410,000.00 5.800% 8/01/2018 2/01/2019 435,000.00 5.850% 8/01/2019 2/01/2020 460,000.00 5.950% 8/01/2020 2/01/2021 485,000.00 5.950% 8/01/2021 2/01/2022 515,000.00 6.000% 8/01/2022 - 2/01/2023 550,000.00 6.000% 246,528.33 184,896,25 184,896.25 181,483.75 181 483.75 177 358.75 177 358.75 172 521.25 172 521.25 167 351.25 167 351.25 161 655.00 16t 655.00 155 471.25 155 471.25 148 721.25 148 721.25 141 453.75 141 453.75 133 653.75 133 653.75 125 227.50 125 227.50 116 235.00 116 235.00 106 435.00 106 435.00 95,890.00 95,890.00 84,677.50 84,677.50 72,787.50 72,787.50 60,063.75 60,063.75 46,378.75 46,378.75 31,950.00 31,950,00 16,500.00 16,500.00 246 528.33 184 896.25 394 896.25 181 483.75 401 483.75 177 358.75 402 358.75 172 521.25 407 521.25 167 351.25 412 351.25 161 655.00 416,655.00 155,471.25 425,471.25 148,721.25 433,721.25 141,453.75 441,453.75 133,653.75 448,653.75 125,227.50 455,227.50 116,235.00 466,235.00 106,435.00 476,435.00 95,890.00 485,890.00 84,677.50 494,677.50 72,787.50 507,787.50 60,063.75 520,063.75 46,378.75 531,378.75 31,950.00 546,95O.OO 16,500.00 566,500.00 (2,900.55) (8,745.00) (8,745.00) (8,745.00) (8,745.00) (8,745.00) (8,745.O0) (8,745.00) (8,745.OO) (8,745.00) (8,745~00) (8,745.00) (8,745.00) (8,745.00) (8,745.00 (8,745.00 (8,745.00 (8,745.00 (8,745.00 (8,745.00 (8,745.00 (8,745.00 (8,745.00 (8,745.00 (8,745.00) (8,745.00) (8,745.00) (8,745.00) (8,745.00) (8,745.00) (8,745.00) (8,745.00) (8,745~00) (8,745.00) (8,745.00) (8,745.00) (8,745.00) (8,745.00) (8,745.00) (8,745.00) (8,745.00) (583,000.00) (248,528.33) (2,900.55) (8,745.OO) 176,151.25 386,151.25 172,738.75 392,738.75 168,613.75 393,613.75 163,776.25 398,77625 158,606.25 403,606.25 152,910.00 407,910.00 146,726.25 41(.726.25 139.976.25 424 976.25 132 7O8.75 432 708.75 124 908.75 439 908.75 116 482.50 446 48250 107 49000 457 490.00 97,690.00 467,69O.0O 87,145.00 477,145.00 75,932.50 485,932.50 64,04250 499,042.50 51,318.75 511,318.75 37,633.75 522,633.75 .23,205.00 538,20500 7,755.00 (16,500.00) (11,645.55) 562,302.50 565,477.50 562,227.50 562,552.50 562,212.50 560,820.O0 563,452.50 564,952.50 565,417.50 564,817.50 562,965.00 564,980.00 565,380.00 564,290.00 561,865.00 563,085.00 562,637.50 560,267.50 561,410.00 (8,745.00) Total 6,855,000.00 5,007,95Q83 11,862,950.83 (935,700.55) (246,528.33) 10,680,721.95 Ehlers & Associates, Inc. Leaders in Public Finance since 1955 File =Mound. sf-Ser 02 1000 GROSS. SINGLE PURPOSE 3/22/2002 8.'58 AM Page 4 City of Mound, MN $6,855,000 lease/Revenue Bonds, Series June 1, 2002 PROJECT .qUMMARY Dated 06~01 ~2002 Delivered 06/0112002 SOURCES OF FUNDS Par Amount of Bonds .................................................................... $6,855,000.00 TOTAL SOURCES ........................................................................ $6,855,000.00 USES OF FUNDS Total Underwriter's Discount (1.960%) ........................................ 134,358.00 Costs of Issuance ......................................................................... 45,000.00 Deposit to Debt Service Reserve Fund (DSRF) ............................ 583,000.00 Deposit to Capitalized Interes[ (CIF) Fund .................................... 241,682.63 Deposit to Project Construction Fund ........................................... 5,850,000.00 Rounding Amount ......................................................................... 959.37 TOTAL USES ................................................................................ $6,855,000.00 FLOW OF FUNDS DETAIL State and Local Government Series (SLGS) rates for .................. Date of OMP Candidates .............................................................. PROJECT CONSTRUCTION FUND SOLUTION METHOD ......... Net Funded Total Cost of Investments ............................................................. $5,850,000.00 TOTAL DRAWS ............................................................................ $5,850,00Q00 CAPITALIZED INTEREST FUND SOLUTION METHOD ............. Net Funded Original Bond Proceeds ................................................................ 241,682.63 Accrued Interest ........................................................................... Interest Earnings @ 3.000% ......................................................... 4,845.70 TOTAL DRAWS ............................................................................$246,528.33 DEBT SERVICE RESERVE FUND SOLUTION METHOD ........... Gross Funded Total Cost of Investments ............................................................. $583,000.00 Interest Earnings (~ 2.947% .........................................................352,700.55 Transfers to Debt Service Fund .................................................... (352,70055) TOTAL DRAWS ............................................................................ $583,000.00 BOND STATISTICS Average Life .................................................................................. 12.860 Years Average Coupon ........................................................................... 5.6808472% Net Interest Cost (NIC) .......... : ....................................................... 58332583% Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes ................................................ 5.6293159% True Interest Cost (TIC) ................................................................ 58582635% All Inclusive Cost (AIC) ................................................................. 5 9364589% Eh/ers & Associates, Inc. Leaders in Public Finance since 1955 File =Mound. sf-Ser 02 1000 GROSS- SINGLE PURPOSE 3/22/2002 8:58 AM Page 5 000000000000000000000 0~0~00000~0~0~00 00000000000000000000 00000000000000000000 t- O o~ Z g ~0~0~ i- ~J Z 0 City of Mound Public Safety Lease Revenue Bond Mound 2OO3 20O4 2005 2006 2O07 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 OFOQO 20O3 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Minnetrista 2003 2004 2005 Option I Option II 71,375.72 167,863.86 168,783.10 167,842.15 167,936.24 167,837.80 167,434.50 168,196.81 168,631.10 168,765.73 168,592.01 168,055.53 168,638.92 168,754.73 168,439.15 167,737.05 168,090.27 167,960.85 167,274.68 167,605.32 168,792.36 3,434,607.88 30,246.76 71,135.37 71,524.92 71,126.17 71,166.05 71,124.33 70,953.42 71,276.47 71,460.50 71,517.56 71,443.94 71,216.59 71,463.82 71,512.89 71,379.16 71,081.63 71,231.32 71,176.47 70,885.70 71,025.81 71,528.84 1,455,477.73 23,983.09 56,404.25 56,713.12 71,375.72 166,849.94 167,763.63 166,828.36 166,921.89 166,824.04 166,423.17 167,180.88 167,612.55 167 746.36 167 573.70 167 O40.45 167 620.32 167 735.43 167 421.75 166 723.90 167 074.98 166 946.35 166 264.32 166 592.96 167 772.84 3,414,293.51 30,246.76 71,592.48 71,984.53 71,583.22 71,623.35 71,581.37 71,409.36 71,734.48 71,919.70 71,977.12 71,903.03 71,674.23 71,923.04 71,972.43 71,837.84 71,538.40 71,689.04 71,633.85 71,341.20 71,482.22 71,988.48 1,464,636.15 23,983.09 57,848.91 58,165.69 City of Mound Public Safety Lease Revenue Bond Optionl 2006 56 396.95 2007 56 428.57 2008 56 395.49 2009 56 259.97 2010 56 516.12 2011 56 662.05 2012' 56 707.28 2013 56 648.91 2014 56 468.65 2015 56 664.67 2016 56 703.59 2017 56 597.55 2018 56 361.64 2019 56 480.32 2020 56 436.84 2021 56 206.27 2022 56 317.37 2023 56 716.23 1,154,068.92 Spring Park 2003 12,617.91 2004 29 675.24 2005 29 837.74 2006 29 671.40 2007 29 688.03 2008 29 670.63 2009 29 599.33 2010 29 734.10 2011 29 810.87 2012 29 834.67 2013 29 803.96 2014 29 709.12 2015 29 812.25 2016 29 832.72 2017 29 776.94 2018 29 652.82 2019 29,715.26 2020 29,692.38 2021 29,571.08 2022 29,629.53 2023 29,839.38 607,175.34 Minnetonka Beach 2003 10,369.02 2004 24,386.23 2005 24,519.77 2006 24,383.07 2007 24,396.74 2008 24,382.44 2009 24,323.85 2010 24,434.60 Optionll 57,841.42 57,873.85 57,839.93 57,7OO.94 57,963.65 58,113.31 58,159.71 58,099.84 57,914.96 58,116.01 58,155.92 58,047.16 57,805.21 57,926.93 57,882.33 57,645.87 57,759.81 58,168.89 1,183,013.41 12,617.91 29,154.31 29,313.96 29,150.54 29,166.88 29,149.78 29,079.74 29,212.14 29,287.56 29,310.94 29,280.77 29,187.60 29,288.92 29,309.03 29,254.22 29,132.28 29,193.63 29,171.15 29,051.98 29,109.41 29,315.57 596,738.34 10,369.02 24,436.96 24,570.78 24,433.80 24,447.49 24,433.16 24,374.45 24,485.43 City of Mound Public Safety Lease Revenue Bond 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017' 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Shorewood 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Option I Option II 24 497.69 24 517.25 24 492.01 24 414.07 24 498.82 24 515.65 24 469.80 24 367.81 24 419.12 24 400.32 24 300.64 24 348.67 24 521.12 498,958.68 2,339.45 5,501.99 5,532.12 5,501.28 5,504.36 5,501.13 5,487.91 5,512.90 5,527.13 5,531.55 5,525.85 5,508.27 5,527.39 5,531.19 5,520.84 5,497.83 5,509.41 5,505.17 5,482.68 5,493.51 5,532.42 112,574.38 24 548.65 24 568.25 24 542.96 24 464.86 24 549.79 24 566.65 24 520.70 24 418.50 24 469.92 24 451.08 24 351.19 24 399.32 24 572.13 499 975.07 2,339.45 5,597.86 5,628.51 5,597.13 5,600.27 5,596.99 5,583.54 5,608.96 5,623.44 5,627.93 5,622.14 5,604.25 5,623.70 5,627.56 5,617.04 5,593.63 5,605.41 5,601.09 5,578.21 5,589.23 5,628.82 114,495.14 EHLERS & A$~OGIATE$ INC Mound, MN Results of Bond Sale June 25, 2002 CITY OF MOUND $6,860,000 Public Safety. Building Lease Revenue Bonds, Series 2002 Lease Revenue Bonds Series 2002 Low Bidder U.S. Bancorp Piper Jaffray True Interest Rate 4.6863% Number of Bids 5 Rating AAA - MBIA insured Range of Bids 4.6863% - 4.7834% Total Debt Service Estimated Results of Sale Principal Amount Discount Allowance Insurance Premium Coupon Interest Exp Coupon Rates True Interest Rate $6,860,000 $6,860,000 $89,180 $89,180 $128,084 $122,231 $4,784,068 $4,521,970 2.65% - 5.5% 2.5% -5.0% 5.264% 4.6863% Council Action Adopt "Resolution Accepting Proposal for the Sale of $6,860,000 Lease Purchase Revenue Bonds and Providing for their Issuance". Total interest cost is $$262,098 less than estimated at pre-sale authorization. Estimated impact on taxpayer is approximately 14% less than projected. Attachments Bid Tabulation Revised Debt Schedule and Cash Flow Analysis Eighteen Month Graph, Bond Market N :kMinnsotahMound~Fire StationXBIDsale2002.WPD IJ.! From: Date: Subject: Greg Peterson, City of Mound Jim Prosser, Ehlers & Associates July 10, 2002 Public Safety Facility Financing Questions EHLERS & ASSOCIATES Ehlers & Associates has been requested to respond to the following questions: 1. How would the loss of Orono as a member city for fire services impact the debt impact of Mound properties if Mound assumed the full cost of thc Orono portion of debt service? 2. How would the loss of Orono as a member city for fire services impact the debt impact of Mound if the debt service for Orono was redistributed among all member cites The table below represents the estimated tax impact for various types and values of properties for specific assumptions. The increase in Mound debt service if the Orono debt service is redistributed to Mound only and not to other member cities is 18%. The increase if the Orono debt service is redistributed to all member cities (including Mound) is 10.6%. The increase to other member cities would be 25.1%. The reason the other member cities increase is greater than Mound is due to the fact that Mound's base includes the Police portion of the building, therefore the additional debt service is being spread to a larger base for Mound. Public Safety Facility Bond Issue T~x Impact from S~e of $6,860,000 ~ Revenue Bonds Taxable Previous New Estimated Estimated Estimated Impact Market Estimated Annual Annual Increase in Impact w/Orono w/Mound Value Increase in Taxes Taxes for Debt redistribution to covering Orono for Debt Service Service all member Debt service cities. Residential $63 $55 $61 $65 $100,000 Residential $94' $82 $91 $97 $150,000 Residential $125 $110 $122 $130 $200,000 Residential $157 $137 $152 $167 $250,000 Comm./Ind. $580 '$507 $561 $598 $500,000 Comm./Ind. $1206 $1055 $1167 $1245 $1,000,000 Comm./Ind. $2459 $2152 $2380 $2539 $2,000,000 LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE O From: Date: Subject: EHLER$ & ASSOCIATES INC Kandis Hanson, City Manager Cn-eg Peterson, Fire Chief Jim Prosser, Ehlers & Associates July 5, 2002 Estimate for Fire Station Prepayment without Orono Participation Provided below is the calculation for prepaymem of the fire station portion of the Mound Public Safety Building without contribution fi.om Orono. The total amount funded represents 61% of the estimated construction cost of $5.85 million. Provided on a separate spreadsheet is the debt service schedule with Orone excluded fi.om the distribution. Finally you have requested if it would be possible to extend the prepayment term to 30 or 40 years for member city contribution. Since the bonds have been issued for a twenty one year period this is not possible without increasing the City of Mound debt service contribution. Furthermore issuing bonds for over a twenty-one year project is not recommended. Investors would be less likely to want to purchase bonds for this term and the interest rate on the longer bonds would likely be much higher. City Allocation Amount Mound 59.14% $2,110,411 Orono 0 0 Minn etrista 19.87% $709,061 Spring Park 10.46% $373,265 Minnetonka Beach 8.59% $306,534 Shorewood 1.94% $69,229 Total 100% $3,568,500.00 LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE ~6~' ~Fih:~;"~;6i',:ii'~,"6'a';;2 ......................................................................................................... F~'~;;~'g.:'~'f~g~'~i'~'""'gfi~"i~i~'i~'''~ Roseville, MN 55113-1105 Email: jim@ohlors- Public Safety Facility Update City Saves $1.5 million, Reduces Tax Impact of New Facility The City saved $1.5 million in its sale of bonds in June to finance the new Public Safety Facility, reducing the tax impact on property taxpayers by 13 percent. (See table below). The savings were a result of the bond timing, a good interest rate, good financial management by the City, and taxbase growth, said Jim Prosser of Ehlers & Associates, the City's public financial consultant. The City is also continuing to work with other Fire District communities to ensure continued participation, Prosser said. While construction is taking place, the Mound Fire Station will be temporarily housed in the old Tonka Toys Building, which has temporary garage space for the City fire vehicles. The City is negotiating a one-year lease and expects to develop makeshift office and training space in the building. The Department will move in during the month of August. "We are excited about the progress we've made on identifying our temporary headquarters and we're especially pleased with the money the City saved on bonding for our new facility," said Greg Pederson, who was named Acting Full-Time Fire Chief in June. "We look forward to beginning construction soon." The City is developing construction plans and continuing to explore cost savings options to the new Public Safety building's design and construction. Demolition of the old Fire Station is expected to occur in mid-September and the new Public Safety Facility is slated for completion in June 2003. The City Council voted on April 25 to build a new Public Safety Facility because the 50- year-old Fire Station and the City Hall space allocated to the Police Department are not meeting the needs of Mound Fire and Police. The Council made its decision following a nine-month study and public process by the Facility Study Group. Public Safety Facility Bond Issue Tax Impact from Sale of $6,860,000 Lease Revenue Bonds Taxable Market Previous Estimated New Estimated Net Annual Property Value Annual Increase in Annual Increase Savings from Taxes for Debt in Taxes for Debt Bond Sale Service Only Service Only Residential $100,000 $63 $55 $8 Residential $150,000 $94 $82 $12 Residential $200,000 $125 $110 $15 Residential $250,000 $157 $137 $20 Comm./Ind. $500,000 $580 $507 $73 Comm./Ind. $1,000,000 $1206 $1055 $151 Comm./Ind. $2,000,000 $2459 $2152 $307 oooooo ..,.~o.~o,~o o o o o o o o o ~ ---,. ~ · (ID 0 "~ ~ 0 (1) 0 · I',i 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 ~ O~ 0 · I1) I0 3.JL-~5-E~02 13:5~ FROM: ?63-~?9-P183 TO:SI~ ~73 E~940 P, OE~/OE~3 July lg, 2002 I-Ionorable Mayo~ and City Cil~ of Maple Plain 1620 Maple Avenue P.O, Box 9? Maple Pl, ln, MN 55359.0097 Honorable Mayar ~nd City Council: Tho Cities of Independence, Medina and Orono ae very satisfied with th, high qua. liB' of f;.re service provid,d by ~e Maple Plain Fire Department, and are interested/n continuing to receive fire service tkrough the Maple Plain Fire Depanm~t, In 2001, Maple Plain proposed a multl-yeaz fire service agreement, at the sine tim, fl~at tc advi~,d · e cmuact~g okies ~mt ~e co~s f~ f~e se~ice wcrcprojected to incr~s~ ~b~tanQally. ~e cities expressed s~ous concerns reg~dJng a nmb~ of clements of~e pro~o~d agreement, ~d proposed a mmber of e~tges to ~o agreement ~ougb a lener dasd October 3, 2001. ~: City of Maple Plan, o~ at le~t i~ eon~I, ~ch~d ~ier, wa~ no~ open to comidefing thc ~pes of changes proposed, ~d ha~ not responded m ~e t~sues r~sed in ~e lc~er. ~ thc me~fim~, the ~is~i~ eon~aet has remained in fore,. In rec:m yea.rs, the costs of fire service Mve'inereased ~ubstantially duc to the purchase of the aerial apparatus, and due to other cost increases; although the lack of detailed annual budget or cost information hag not enabled the ¢itiea to know ,~pe¢ifically wMt is causing the cost increases. The costs to tho City of Orono have Inere~ed from $21,000 to $42,000 in ~he three year period from 1999 to 2002. This is a 100"A increase, or an average increase of 33% per year, The costs m the City of Independence have increased fi'orn $~] ,000 to $141,000 over the sm'ne period, This is a 131% inem,~se, or an average inereaae of 44% per year. JU~-~;-~O~ 1~: ~! FROM: Honorable Mayor ~d City Council, Cig o~'M~ie Plain :ruly 1'8, 2002 Page 2 The information provi, ded and discussed at the Fire Department's budget meetin8 on ~'uly I '2 rai~ed a number ofquestlons and concerr~, p ar~ieutafly ~e ~everal large"miscellaneou~" line-items which had very small ~ctual e~er~iitu~s in both 2001 and 2002. It,~ppears tMt by reducing or realt some-or ~lJ of these ~e.i~,m to mor~ closely reflect the actual level of' expenditures, thc operating budge~ ~hould be able to remain a; the 2002 level, The two substantial ~¢~s O~'laroposed expendkure increases were pension and wages. Wages were proposed to increase from $8 per c~1l/hour to $12 per call/hour, B~sed on s comparison with the wage level of the Long Lake flrefighter~, who receive $9 per call/hour, i~ appears ~e w~ge increase could be sigalficantly moderated, d necessity to manage the budget increase. A~ you, M~yor Vjgoren, ~ugg~tect, the pension ~ncrea~e c~[,I also bc r~a~ona~ly moderated. It was not cl~ar at the meeting how the equipment-related expmndlturcs would affect ~e over~{ 2003 budget. Howcwr, the i~o~ti~ pro~ded for ~e 2002 budg~ indicated ~e ~ual lea~/debt s~i~ cost ot&e new aert~ tn~k ~ Included in ~c 2002 budget. B~ed on ~ mfo~a~on, ther~ should 'not be ~ inertia ~ ~e eq~pm~at replacement po~on of ~ budget for 2003, The Cities oflnc~epeMenc¢, Medirm and Orono bcli:~ ~at given the l~g= coz ~cre~e~ in recent ye~s, ~e sub,tin, ally ov~r.~dge~ "~sce~meo~" ]ine-l~m~ in ~ 2001 ~ 2002 bu6get$, thc ~ubs~ndal ~csolved issues r~l~e~ to,h~ fire ~Joe ag~em=nt, the law [imit~ to wMch aU cities over 2300 pop~a~an ~e subject, ~d ~e va~ lmg~ budget defioi~ Facing ~e S~t=, it is impede/v: that fir~ se~c costs be held ~ check for 2003~ 2003 The cities will not renew the f~re service agreement through 2003 without written a$iuranc¢ from the City of Maple Plain that the 200~ fire service costs wi.U not exceed thc 200~. fire servlcc costs. The current fire ~¢rvtce agreement requires ;hat cities mu~ prov/d~ a written notice ~o the City Maple Plain by AUgU~ 1,2002/ffl~y intend ~o terminate the agreement as of Za.nuary 1, 2003. The citi~ are prepared to provid~ such wrtrtennotic¢ if the City of'Maple Plain has not provided a letter to each o'~ thc contracting cities listing the audited/soma] fire service eost~ allocated to eaoh city in 2001 and 2002. md sr~[ng ~here will bane cos~ increase for the 2003 contract year, I~ is important this letter be provided to each of the chle~ by July 26 to avoid uncertainty and the need for minute correspondence. Wlaile the City of Maple Plain and its contracting cities have been at an impasse in rel,rion to updating the fire service contract, ~he ci~ea ~erved by the Mound Fire Departmem have agreed ~o ~niti~e a pre. ess to pursue a f~re di~ict a~ a ~ew method of organi~ng for the p~ovision of fire ~ervice, A fire dis~'ia in this a~e~ ~uld include a number of e×[eting/'~e departments end fi~'e JU~-8S-8808 i3:~8 ~OM: T0:618 473 8940 P. 083x003 Honorable Mayor ind Cit~ Council, tit7 of Maple Plain July 18, 2002 Page 3 service ~rcas. As two of the cities served by the Mound Fire Depmment arc also served by the 1Vaple Plain FLre Department, it would be bcnoficlel for Maple Plain and {ts contracfinl: cities to participate In r. he ~e.district process, Because thc process mgazding a fire district i~ expecmfl to take up to a year or more', it mske~ sense [o renew ~he Maple Plain fire service cott~act f%: :1003 while the fire disuict concept is pursued, Thank you for your [mmediat~ attention to thi~ important issue, Sine*feb', Mayor, C,ty of Indop=nd~nce Toni Hir~oh '-- Ind~pondcn~.e Ci~ Administrator Barbara A, Peterson, Mayor, ti'q, of Oro_no~/~ R,onald j, l~oom~ ' Orono Clt~ Administrator ng Mayor, C~t7 of Medina Cheryl Fischer Mayor, Ci~ of Minnetrista Dean Lottcr Mlnnetdsta City Adminlstr~or 0 © I 0 · ~ 0 The National Volunteer Fire Council is a non-profit membership association representing the interests of the volunteer fire, EMS, and rescue services. Organized in 1976, the NVFC serves as the voice for the volunteer fire ,ervice. The NVFC is the voltmteer fire service's representative in the national policy arena and on nun~erous natior~d and international committees and organi:ations. Each state firefighter's association elects a representative to the NVFC. \Vt x~clcomc you to browse our websitc at www. nvfc.org to learn more about thc volunteer fire service and {ntormlttion regarding membership, training, legislation and meetings. This Fact Sheet was produced in order to provide an overall picture of today's volunteer fire service. · Volunteers comprise 73% of firefighters in the United States. Of the total estimated 1,064,150 volunteer and paid firefighters across the country, 777,350 are volunteer.~ · Communities served bs' Volunteer Firefigbters depend on them to bc their first line of defense for many Ix'pc> o[' t'nlergOl~Cies. Volunteer Firefighters are summoned to a wide array of emergencies across the country every day including fires, emergency medical incidents, terrorist events, natural disasters, hazardous materials incidents, water rescue emergencies, high-angle and confined space emergencies, and other general public service calls. The public relies on Volunteers to be their first tine of defense in these emergencies. Volunteers spend an enormous amount of time training to prepare for these emergencies. · The ma.ioritv of fire departments in the United States ;Irt' volurlteer. Of the total 26,354 fire departments in the country, 19,224 are all volunteer; 3,845 are mostly volunteer; 1,407 are mostly career; and 1,878 are all career.: · Service> contributed bx' \?olunteer Firefighters save localities across the country a,'~ estimated $36.8 billion per year.~ · Thc number of Volunteer Firefighters in the United States has declined 5-10% since 1983. Major factors contributing to the decline include increased time demands, more rigorous training whose members do not have time to volun~'eer. The two greatest sources of increased time demands are increased emergency calls and increased training hours to comply with training standards. Recruitment and retention of Volunteer Firefighters is one of the key issues being addressed jointly by the NVFC and U.S. Fire Administration. The NVFC and USFA have released a report entitled Recruitment and Retention in the Volunteer Fire Service: Problems and Solutions. The NVFC also has adopted the 1-800- FIRELINE recruitment campaign. Under this cam paign, individual states connect to the toll free number which prospective volunteers can call for information · Fin: department call VO1UIlleS continue t(1 increase, Mos[ (ire departments across cbc country have experi- enced a steady Increase in calls over the past decade.~ This is a major source of the increased time demands on \"olun[eer Firef-ighters. The increase m calls, coupled wi[l~ [he decline m the nurnber of Volunteer Flref'ighters, means that fire departments are havin8 to do more with less. Most of the increase is attributed to a sharp increase in the number of' emergency medical calls and false alarms. The number of. f.ire calls has actua[ly declined over the period. · Small and mid-sized communities rely heavily on Volunteer Firefighters. Small communities (those with populations under 10,000) across the United States are typically protected by all vo]unteer departments. In some cases, however, these communities have hired a few paid firefighters to assist. Mid-sized communities (those with populations above 1©,000) are typically served by combination volunteer and paid departments. Large communities (those with populations over 100,000) are most often protected by combination volunteer and paid depart- ments that consist of primarily paid staff. There are very few purely paid fire departments in the United States, but those that exist are primarily found in very urban areas. VOLUNTEER AND PAID FIREF1GHTERS IN THE U.S. BY POPULATION PROTECTED, 2000s Population Protected Under 2,500 2,500 to 4,999 5,000 to 9,999 10,000 to 24,999 25,000 to 49,999 50,000 to 99,999 100,000 to 249,999 250,000 m 499,999 500,000 to 999,999 64 of tlne 102 firefighters who died in tine lint, of duty in 2000 were. Volunteers." The leading cause of death was heart attacks, followed by vehicle accidents. Volunteer Firefighters and Emergency Medical Technicians across the country meet national and/or state training standards. Each state adopts its own training requirements that apply to Volunteer Firefighters. Many states require that volunteers meet the National Fire Protection Association's Srartd~rd i O01: Firefighter Professional Qualifications. This establishes a vet5, rigorous course of classroom and practical evolutions for basic training. This same standard is commonly used to train paid firefighters. Likewise, volunteer emergeno/medical responders are trained to the national tratnmg criteria establish by the U.S. Department of Transportation and other standards setting bodies. Volunteers invest a large amount of time serving their communities. There is no national average of the amount of tm~e a Volunteer Firefighter gives to his or her community. Volunteering in the fire and EMS service, however', ts one of the most demanding volunteer activities today. Time commitments include operational responses (often at a moment's notice), training, fund raising, vehicle and station maintenance, and various admimstrative duties. 1,000,000 or more · The cost to train and equip a firefighter is approximately $4,500. Below are average expenses associated with firefighting: Equipment Protective Clothing Self-contained Breathing Apparatus $1,000 2,500 Training Firefighter l-II Emergency Medical Technician - Basic Hazardous Materials Awareness Emergency Vehicle Operator $500 300 75 75 $ 4,450 · Firefighting and emergency medical equipment is very expensive. The cost of firefighting equipment is listed below. Equipment can range in cost depending on features and specifications. Fire pumper $150,000 - $300,000 Ladder truck $350,000 - $500,000 Ambulance $60,000- $110,000 Advanced life support medical equipment $15,000 - $ 20,000 · There are more than 2 million fires reported each year in the United StatesJ Many others go unreported, causing additional injuries and property loss. · Approximately 4,500 people die in fires in the U.S. annually.'~ An estimated 26,500 people are injured. · Direct property loss due to fires is estimated at $8.5 billion annually." · Each year fire kills more Americans than all natural disasters combined. · Fire is the third leading cause of accidental death in the home: at least 80 percent of all fire deaths occur in reside,~ces. · Volunteer Firefighters serve on the Federal Emer- gency Management Agency's National Urban Search and Rescue Teams. Several of the US&R Teams such as Fairfax County, Virginia and Montgomery County, Maryland include volunteer members. US&R Teams have been deployed to disaster scenes both nationally and internationally. CITY of ORONO Municipal Offices Street Address: Mailing Address: 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66 Orono, MN 55356 " Crystal Bay, aN 55323~066 REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FIRE SERVICE PROVISION The City of Orono is requesting proposals for the provision of fire and rescue service to the southwest quadrant of the City that includes Navarre and the Saga Hill area. The fire service area is shown in yellow on the attached map. The types of service to be provided include the following: A. Fire suppression B. Medical rescue C. Hazardous materials initial response D. Fire prevention Business Relationship The business relationship between the City of Orono and the fire service provider is to be a cooperative partnering relationship in which Orono has effective participation in decisions with significant financial implications. , Neighborhood Fire Station in Navarre Although service may initially be provided from the provider's fire station, Orono is planning to build a neighborhood fire station in Navarre. Orono will fully fund the construction of the neighborhood fire station. The service provider will assist in the design of the neighborhood station and in determining the types of apparatus and equipment needed in the station. The provider will also take the lead role in the recruitment and training of volunteer firefighters to staff the neighborhood station. Financial Partnership Elements It is important that the service arrangement facilitates the City's effective participation in decision-making processes that have financial implications. The following is a list of financial participation elements in one of Orono's key fire service agreements. The arrangement for the provision of fire service to the Navarre area must provide a si.re, ilar level of effective participation. A. Orono's participation on a fire service advisory committee. The advisory committee, Telephone (952) 249-4600 · Fax (952) 249-4616 www. cl.orono.mn.us Request for Proposals - Fire Service Provision PaGe 2 which is made up of representatives of the service provider and the service partners, reviews annual operating and capital budget proposals, as well as providing a forum for discussion and resolution of fire service issues, A substantial annual budget increase requires unanimous approval by the service partners. Without that approval, the cost increase to the service partners is limited to the average General Fund budget increase of all service partners. Co All capital expenditures must be based on a 15-year capital improvement plan/equipment replacement plan. Capital expenditures require approval by a sufficient combination of service provider and service partners to account for at least 60% of the cost, based on the cost allocation formula. Orono will maintain its own fund for capital expenditures, which will be used to pay Orono's share of capital equipment costs. Eo The ownership interest in equipment and facilities is based on the share of the cost funded by each partner. Provider Proposal Ao Cost. Please indicate the projected annual costs to Orono, over an initial three year period, and explain the method used to determine the cost level and the allocation of costs between the provider and the service partners. Bo Response time. Please indicate the response time from the provider's fire station to the following locations: 1. The intersection of County Roads 15 and 19 2. The intersection of Casco Point Road and County Road 15 3. The intersection of County Roads 19 and 51 on the western border of Orono Etluipment and apparatus available. Please indicate whether the department has apparatus and/or equipment to fully or partially equip the Navarre neighborhood station. D. Term Of agreement. Please indicate the proposed term of the service agreement. Eo Hiring and Recruiting policies. Please describe and explain your hiring, recruitment, and training policies, practices and philosophy. Fo Existing Staffing in Proximity to Navarre,. Please indicate the number of f'trefighters on your department that could respond to a Navarre neighborhood station. Request for Proposals - Fire Service Provision Page $ Service Start Date. Please indicate whether you could begin to provide service on January 1, 2003, or January 1, 2004. Fire District A broad dialog has begun among numerous cities in the Lake Minnetonka and west Hennepin County area regarding a broader arrangement for the provision of fire service. Orono plans to participate in a process to study the feasibility of this broader fire service arrangement, which has been referred to as a "fire district" concept. The partnering relationship between Orono and the service provider, for the provision of fire service to the Navarre area, needs to recognize and support the potential for a fire district. Proposal Evaluation Criteria --Service quality --Cost --Response time --Partnering approach --Support of fire district concept --Willingness to participate in the development ora recruitment plan, and to actively recruit in the Navarre area. Instructions to Proposers --Questions regarding this RFP should be directed to Ron Moorse, Orono City Administrator, P.O. Box 66, Crystal Bay, MN 55323, (952) 249-4601. --Six copies of the proposal should be submitted to Ron MoorSe, City Administrator, City of Orono, P.O. Box 66, Crystal Bay, MN 55323. Please submit proposals by 4:30 p.m. on Monday, September 23, 2b02.. N~NSLTN- News Page 1 of 4 Select a Town: Local News Local News Community Education Calendar Opinion Public Safety Seniors Obituaries Legals Election News Local Sports Sports News Sports Briefs Events/Scores MNSun Home Page Archive Classifieds Finance talc Market P I a ceiiiiiiiii?:i::i::i:::::: Net Directory NutfiUon Calc Weather Contact Us How to Advertise Jobs At Sun Sun Slots Special Sections Who's WhO Mature Lifestyles Education Excellence NET DIRECTory Local News Orono sends out RFP for fire service in Navarre By Anne Wilbur Sun Newspapers (Created 8/21/02 8:58:09 AM) 'It would be a terrible precedent for Orono to have no ownership interest in a property that we pay for and to provide capital without having any input.' - Jim Murphy, Orono City Council member The city of Orono has sent out requests for proposals (RFP) from area fire stations for delivery of fire services to the Navarre area. Construction of fire new Long Lake fire station is progressing on schedule. V~th that building All In progress, Orono is studying payn~nt for another new station in Mound. The city of (::)reno is ~e~ved ,by four fire departments: Long Lake, Maple Plain, IMound and Wayzata. (Craig Lassigl Sun ;Newspapers) After a discussion of the new lire station in Mound, the Orono City Council asked City Administrator Ron Moorse to send out the RFP. The coundl has taken no action on the new lire station in Mound, but voiced concerns about the costs and lack of input from Omno on the building. The Mound Fire Department provides excellent service, said Moorse. The Orono Council is concemed about the costs of the new Mound lire station, however. The council, at press time, had never seen the architectural plans for the building, said Councilmember Jim Murphy in a phone conversation. The council discussed the construction and cost of the new fire station in Mound at its regular City Council meeting Aug. 12. Orono is sen/ed by four fire departments: Long Lake, Maple Plain, Mound and ~ Tuesday, Aug. 27, 2002 Part of the TwinCitles.com http://www.mnsun.com/story.asp?city=wayzata&story=94509 8/27/2002 MNSUN - News Page 2 of 4 De,lin;; Wit~ Afford~ bie Housin;i Forms In Memon/Of Let It Be Known Sport Shots St~rk Report Pdv~te P-rty Ad Form ~rch The Web Powered by: Wayzata. The city contracts with each dty for the services. Last year the city agreed to a joint ownemhip agreement and the Long Lake Fire Department. The new Long Lake fire station is now under construction and at the end of July, the city began negotiating with Maple Plain about that contract. Wayzata is building a new station at no extra cost to Orono. Over the years, the City Council has had discussions about how to keep down costs for the fire services and about the possible increase in costs if the various lire departments all needed to new lire stations. Construction of the new fire station in Mound is expected to begin this fall. Groundbreaking is planned for Sept. 17. New Mound fire station The Mound City Council approved the construction of a new fire station for its volunteer fire department this spring and has secured a bond for the construction costs, Fire Chief Greg Pederson said in an interview at the station. The Fire Department will share a new building with the Mound Police Department. The new station will be built on the same spot where the old one now stands, said Pederson. There will be three floors. The lower level will be like a walk-out basement on the west side of the building, where the Police Department will be housed, Pederson said. In the lower level, Police and Fire departments will share an Emergency Operation Center (EOC), bathrooms, a fitness room and a locker room. The Fire Department will be on the second level, facing east. Six bays are planned for the 13 fire apparatuses now used by the department. There will be some police offices on that floor. At the entrance lobby, visitors can go left to the Fire Department or right to Police Department offices. The second-level space for the Fire Department includes offices, file rooms, a dispatch room and the kitchen. That floor will also house the hose storage and hose tower. The third floor will hold the meeting and training rooms, a bunk room and a day room. All floors have their own bathrooms. The estimated cost for the entire building is $4,935,376, Pederson said. The fire station portion of that is estimated at $2,904,256.50. Orono's portion of the cost is estimated to be about $700,000, or $1,800,638 with interest over 20 years. Each city's portion of the cost is determined by the formula used for operating expanses based on the number of calls and the tax base of each city, said Mound City Administrator Kandis Hanson. Bad precedent Former Mayor and Long Lake Fire Station Committee member Gabriel Jabbour discussed the new station at the Orono City Coundl meeting. http://www.mnsun.com/story.asp?city=wayz~ta&story=94509 8/27/2002 ~,~NSUN - News Page 3 of 4 The business model that was developed by 0r0no for the Long Lake Fire Department is a "great model," Jabbour said. A task force composed of residents from Long Lake, Maple Plain and Orono worked on the plans for the Long Lake station. The Mound fire station was planned by a facilities committee comprising members of the fire station and a Mound City Council member with an architect from Short Elliot Henddckson (SEH), said Pederson. The facilities committee kept lines of communication open through four open houses, two newsletters, two brochures and updates to the Mound Fire Station Commission. The Orono City Council wanted to be more involved in the details of the planning, however, said Councilmember Jim Murphy. Orono is concerned about the new station, because they are served by four departments, said Jabbour. ~One station may not be a big deal, but four times that is." When Orono built its police station, it did not ask the Long Lake or Spring Park to pay any of those costs, said Jabbour. "Paying without ownership is a bad precedent." "We have already set two precedents," said Murphy. "We have the partnership with Long Lake, which can be a precursor to a fire district. It's a smaller model for what we could do. ~The other is Wayzata, which is building a fire station without askJng us to pay for any of it,' he said. "It would be a terrible precedent for Orono to have no ownership interest in a property that we pay for and to provide capital without having any input. We,re never even had the opportunity to see the plan. "We're not trying to play hardball, we're looking out for our taxpayer's best interest," Murphy said. Other options 'We are not dissatisfied with the fire service from Mound," Murphy said. 'But have to look at other options." Orono Council members agree a new station is probably needed in Mound. The building was built in 1955 and has only four bays. Fire service to the area has change. In 1974 fire calls averaged 180 a year. In 1999, the Mound station answered 759 calls a year. The Orono Council has said that 'we didn't think we'd sign up for the new station,' said Murphy. 'We have suggested several solutions including a new station in Navarre that we would pay for and they would service. Another option was they help us pay for a new fire station in Orono." "We just don't want to give away three-fourths of a million dollars without any ownership," said Murphy. 'At budget time we agonize over every item," said Councilmember Jim White. The increase in taxes for Orono taxpayers would be too much. http://www, mn sun. eom/story, asp? city--wayzata& story=94509 8/27/2002 MNSUN - News Page 4 of 4 "We have to keep to our principles." Mound would like Orono to continue with the fire service through the end of the 2003 contract and the 2006 contract, said Mound City Manager Hanson. Mound wants to be a part of discussions about a fire distdct for the area, she said. While building the new station, a comprehensive study of a new fire distdct could be made. If Orono decides not to participate in the building costs, the facility might be cut by one bay, said Pederson. Orono Council members expressed regret at the state of things and all agreed with Councilmember Bob Sansevere that the service from the Mound Fire Department was exceptional. The city of Mound has offered to negotiate with Orono, said Pederson. It offered Orono a financial payment plan and assistance in initiating a fire district study. "That shows Mound is willing to compromise," said Pederson. If no solution is found, the Mound Fire Service contract ends Dec. 31 of this year, but service will either continue with Mound, or Orono will contract with Long Lake or the Excelsior Fire Distdct for the Navarre area, Murphy said. This site and its contents ~2000, 2001. Sun Newspapers - Main Office: 952-829-O797 webinfoQmnsun.com - Created and maintained by Quantum Digital Interactive jcorboQquantumsite.com http ://www. m n sun. corn/story, asp? city=wayzata& story =94509 8/27/2002 Household forecasts for Twin Cities area, 2000-2030 The Metropolitan Council staff releaseO its estimates of how the number of households will change in each community in the seven- county Twin Cities area by 2030. The numbers are preliminary and some will be changed this summer after talks between council anO crt'/representatives. Some municipalities are in more than one county. Uno Lakes St. FFaFtc~s Ham Lake East Bethel 3.607 Anoka 7j262 Bums Twp. I 123 FrtJey - 11,328 Oak Grove 2.200 Centerv~e 1.077 Columbia Hgzs. 8.333 Lift, rood Twp. 1.578 Columbus Two I 328 Sonng Lake Pa'k ~parO 2,676 Orc~e Fhnes I 697 Beth~ 149 H~top 400 ~ (pa't) 6,914 Chaska 6.104 Waconia 2,568 ¥,cto,a 1.367 N o~vood Young A,m er ~.,a 1.171 Watertown 1,078 Laketow~ Twp. 637 Mayer 199 wata'tow~ Twp. 478 wacone Twp. 429 New Germany 143 Young AmeOCa Two. 267 gan FranOsco Twp. 293 Dah~re~ Twp. 479 Ho~b, wood Twp. 371 HamOurg 206 Camden Twp. 316 Chaska Tw13. 65 H ac~:~k TWP. 121 Benton TWP. 307 OAF~OTA CO~ Lake~le 13,609 A~ Valley 16.344 Rosemount 4,742 Farmr~g~on 4,169 ~nve~ Grove Hgts, 11,257 Hastangs Da~) 6.640 Eagan 23,773 Bumsvil~e 23.687 Emile Tw~ 515 South St Paul 8.123 We~t St Pa~ 8.645 MenOota Hgts. 4 178 Hampton 156 U~,~ae 338 Normfe~d Dart) 216 Ravenna Twp. 734 Eureka Tw~ 496 Verm illK:)n Twp. 395 Ve~mNion 160 CasOe Rock Two. 514 Hampton TWP. 320 N~nnger Twp. 280 Marshan Tw~ 404 Greenvaie Twp. 227 Sciota Twp. 92 RanOo~ TWP. 192 Do~s Twp. 235 W3terford TwO 193 203~ % 8.107 16.000 97% 5,906 12;500 I12% 4.857 11.000 126% 22.578 1,638 5.000 205% 4,139 · L200 ,J..:..:.i~;.:..~ ::::.~ 7,4%: 5.500 52% '9,000 :.:C ;;:: ::,;24%' 2.300 105% 12,300:¢i:.~.:.,..;:¢ :; g% 3.000 36% 1,'850 72% 8.800 10% 2,300 46% 1 750 32% 3,000 :12% 1.950 15% 1,~ 18% 200 34% 400 "~'~¢/:;:::'0~ 16~,050 50% 17,000 146% 12 000 97% 6,500 153% 4.800 237% I;8(X) ;;;:/ ;293% 2.500 113% 2;000.~'~; ~.. 86% 1.200 88% 900 :::~' ;134% 700 252% 700:'. ,: ::~46~~ 650 52% 350 ' . 145% 45O 69% 460 57% 620 29% 500 35% 300 46% 400 :27% 120 85% 170 ' /40% 34O 11% 54,260 /23% 31,500 .;' I3/% 27.500 68% I4,000': ~'.: :~:295% 12.500 200% 18,500 64% 12.500 88% 29.500. !:24% 28.500 20% 1.800 25O% 9.300 14% 9,600 *.' : :11% 5.000 20% 550 253% 650 92% 500 :~31% 1.000 36% 7 O0 41% 550 39% 650 26% 450 41% 400 43% 520 29% 34O 50% 190 I07% 280 46% 300 28% 240 24% City or towmhlp 2000 2030 % ~ ;. ;.:i;.: ~:i~; 9.389 10,500 12% Golden Valley 8.449 9.500 12% Gi*eenfleld 817 1.600 96% Hcokins 8.224 9.000 9% M~nd`r'' i; 3,982 4.750 19% Shorewooe 2.529 3.200 27% St;:;N3t~ony~3art} 2,402 3,000 25% Osseo 1,035 1.600 55% ~~!~._ : '~: :~_...~.088 1,600 47% La, Lake 756 1,200 59~ Rockford(part} 57 300 426% Excelsior 1.199 1 400 17% ,s~'~g Park: L :_,..~ .... p~3.~ ............ ;h~O~__ Deephaven 1.373 I 550 13% l~Iga'Bay: "~. i.: ~ :., :': 614 780'.:: ,~', Hanover (pa~ 113 250 121% Greenwood 285 330 16% lVled*~l~i~ 159 200 26% Woodland 173 200 16% Min~tonka Beach 215 240 12% Chanhassen (part} 0 0 F~S~e~g 0 0 He~ Co~ total 456,129 593,980 30% St. Paul 112,109 133,000 19% Arden Hills 2.959 8.000 170% Roeevt~"*:'~' 14,598 18,500' ~*~:27% Maplewood 13.758 17.500 27% ~Be~f'Lage(p~rO. '*: 9,469 11,500 21% 7.000 38% 11,500 14% 6.000 28% 5,600 28% 2 500 92% 5,200 30% 10.000 6.000 20% 1 600 24% 2.300 9% 190 37% 1,200 4% 50 4% 0 247,640 23% Vadnais Hgts. 5.064 ~:;::i i.::¢~:'~';~ 10.125 North St. Paul 4.703 UttJe oanada; 4,375 North Oaks 1.300 White Bear Twp. 4,010 New Brighton 9.013 Mounds V'~w 5.018 SL Anthony(partJ 1 295 Falcon Hgts. , 2,103 Gem Lake 139 Lauderdale 1,150 Soring Lake Park (part) 48 Blah~'Cer~ c~ ............ 0 Ran~ey C~ total 20~ 236 Prior Lake 5.645 Be~ P~aine 1.396 Jordan,! 1,349 New Market 131 ~edit River Twp. 1,242 New Prague(part) 1.160 New MarketTwp. 956 ' Spring Lake Two. 1.217 BkO 155 Cedar Lake TWP. 719 St: I:aWrence~wp. .144 Helena Two. 450 Jackson Twp. 461 Sand Creek Two. 478 Be~ P~aine Twp. 266 Louisvilie Two. 410 Blakeley Twp. 166 Scott County total 30,692 WASHINGTON COUNTY Wood~, 16,676 Cottage Grove 9.932 Hugo:,; 2,~25 Lake Elmo 2.347 ForestLake 5,433 Oakdale 10.243 24,000 218% 14,500 157% 15,000 120% 4,200 201% 4,100 204% 2.300 1656% 3,200 158% 3.000 159% 2,600 172% 2.200 81% 1,000 545% 1.400 95% 500 247% 800 78% 800 74% 750 57% 500 88% 600 46% 250 51% 81. 700 166% 35.000 110% 20,000 101% 10,000 371% 9.500 305% 12.000 121% 13.000 27% 4) c. ,,' 5)b,S 6) a. ri 7) No. is Pat Rowle No. Si 8) He places 500 r~ Vctcxia 1.367 4,600 237% N~ Y~ng~ 1,171 2,5~ 113% Laketown Twp, 637 1,200 88% 'Co~ 385: :~[:90Q~.;..: ~ii~!I~':· ;L34"4 Mayer 199 700 252% Wacon~a Twp. 429 650 52% ...... :~ New Ge~m~y ~43 :. :~ ~i.. ::!~; ,:'350:!.~i::: ..~. ,,:146% Youn8 America Twp, 267 450 69% San Franctsc~l~, 293 : '2 ..;~i~...:... ::.5.7% Dah~en Tw~. 479 620 29% H~yw(x)dTwp, 371 500 .':3,5% Hamburg 206 300 46% Camden Twp, 316 400 2?% Chaska Twp. 65 120 85% ~ Twp, 121 ;!. :'::. ~70:~'~:::i ':.~'.:" 40%' Benton Twp, 307 340 11% DAKOTA GOU~Y Lakev~iti :~.:.'" ','.','. :: 13.609' '~ A,oole Valtey 16 344 27,500 68% Ro~nount 4,742 14,000; 195% Facrni~gto~ 4,169 12,500 200% Hastt~s Dart) 6,640 :3."~, 5~:~ 23,687 28,500 20% ' ~" 515; '~: .:~::.1~800~~'~: i'250%' 8,123 9,300 14% 8,645'.: ::9;600r. ''~: :." I'~,1%' 4,178 5,000 20% 156' . ''~ .......... ~'550:~"~'~ >253% South St. Paul West St Pa~ MenOota HgLs Hamptoo Northf~M {parl) Ravenna Tw~. Eurek~ Twix Verm~ion Twp. Vem~ll~n CasOe Rock Tv~3. NinJ'~er Twp. Ma~a~_Tw~:.:, .. Rando~:~ TWP. Waterford Twp. 338 650 92% 216 ~'~'.:~' ~ !~";'1~31% 734 1.000 36% 496 700 ,'::~'41% 395 550 39% 160 300 88% 514 650 26% 320 280 400 43% 227 340 50% 192 280 ~% 193 240 24% M~ 80 120 50% ~' "~e '<: ~' '~ .... ::'"" ~3;~:'='~'~::':'~":'~"~:~'~'~'=~:~'~'2~ ~ '~ ~;~: · ;.~:.....:2~/~.~:':.L~::~f~s:~f~..;~.~f~:~::~: '~::~ .~, 64 90 41% M~::; .....,,2..': ....' ·. ~2 :~:..:::.::.. ::. ~:::: ::::6P.'. :'~:;:~ ,:" 16~ N~ T~ 31 30 ~% M~ ...':,': :~[' '~ M~Gro~ 17,532 ~.~ 94% · ~:':"' ':':¢:?:24;~:;::'[;:t.~ ~'35~:~':"'::' ::; :~ ~ ~ ~, 5~ 11,~ 612% ~ 24.820 33.5~ 35% E~ ~at~. 20,457 26,5~ 30% ~ ;~:~,~?:;~:::.':l:': ::;.:;' ~2;~;~; I5% R~fe~ 15 073 19,5~ 29% R~ 6,097 9,~ ~% Mm~t~ka 21,393 24.~ 12% Mm~S~ 1,505 4,~ 166% Edina 20.996 22,500 7% NewHope' 8,665 :'..: '. 10:;'0(~ .:~;!::;:'::~ 2':' I5% Orono 2.766 4,100 48% St~:~yl: 112.10g 133,000 lg% Arden Hills 2,959 8, 000 170% ~?..::!~ ........ 14~598 ~:8,500' 27% MaCewoo~ 13,758 17,500 27% VCnlteBe~r LakeDart3 9,469 :L1,500 21% Vadnais Hgts, 5.064 7,000 38% St~rev~w .... lo,125 ~.,500 North St. Paul 4.703 6,000 28% UttJe Canada 4,375 5,600 28% NorthOaks 1,300 2,500 92% White Bear T~4). 4,010 5,200 30% New Br~hton 9,013 10,000 Moun~ View 5,018 6,000 20% St. Antony(part) L295 1,600 Falcon H&~s. 2,103 2,300 9% Gem Lake 139 190 37% Lauderdale 1,150 1,200 4% S~'h8 Lake Park {part) 48 50 Ran~ey Co~mty total 20~ 238 247,640 23% Shako~e¢ 7,540 24,000 218% Prior Lake 5.645 14,500 ~.57% Sa~a~e 6,807 15,000 3.20% Belle Raine 1,396 4,200 201% New Market 131 2,300 Z656% ~edlt Rib, er TWP, 1,242 3,200 158% New Pra~ue{paro 1,160 3,000 159% ~:Market, Twp, 956 2,600 172% Soring Lake TWP, ~ 217 2,200 81% Bko 155 1,000 545% Cedar Lake Twp. 73.9 3.,400 95% St;: ~enceTw~ - 144 500 247 % Helena Twp. 450 800 78% J~.)~x3 '3~13: 461 800 74% Sand Creek Two, 478 750 57 % Bede Ralne Twp, 266 500 88% Louisville Tw~. 410 600 46% E~lakeley Twp. 166 250 51% Scott Count~ total 30,692 8.1. 700 3.66% WASHINGTON CO~ WoOcbury 16,676 35,000 ~10% Cott~e Grove 9,932 20,000 3.01% Ht~O":': 2,125 10,000 373.% Lake Elmo 2,347 9.500 305% I~omst..~ 5,433 1'2.000 121% Oakdale 10,243 13,000 27% 6~atet~:=~. '. 5,797 8,200 41% Mahtomedi 2,503 3,550 42% ~i': .~. 492 1,500 205% Newport 1,418 2,400 69% .Oak Park Hgts. 1,528 2,500 , 64% StJllwater Two, 833 1.700 104% Grant 1,374 2,200 60% Bayport 763 1,500 97% Ne~ Scandia Two. 1,294 1,900 47% St. Paul Park 1,829 2,400 31% West Lakeland Twp. 1,101 1,550 41% May TwO. 1,007 1,300 29% Aft. o~ 996 1,250 26% White Bear Lake{part) 149 300 101% Marine on S~ Crolx 254 400 Denmark TWP. 481 580 21% Lake:St. Crolx Beach 462 510 10% Dellwood 353 400 13% Bir~nwood 357 40~ 12% Lakeland 691 730 6% $~ ~,~s:Poht 132 170 29% W'dlemla 225 250 11% ~ild ~ · 116 130 12% Grey Cloud TWP. 117 130 3.1% Hastings {part) 2 0 -100% Landfa] 292 290 *1% Washlngtm~ Co~mty total 7/. 462 135.880 90% 7-COUNTY TOTAL 1,021,4.54 1,482.000 45% Hotmail Message Page 1 of 3 MSNHome [ My MSN [ Hotmaii I Search ) Shopping .......... i:i ~ ~i~:: x.::i:!5 i!i::. ::.:://ii ~i[::. ..x:i:!3 ]i~::. rnounciflredeptOhotm~il.com From: Todd Chdstop~rson <tchristoph@amconconslzucUon.¢om> Money I People & Chat Options Help Previous Next I Close To: "Bontrager, Sam" <sbontrager@sehinc.com>, "Britz, Miles" <mbritz@sehinc.com>, "Schull:z, Nancy" < nschultz@sehinc.com > Subject: MPS 08 19 02 Mound Public Safety Facility Consideration of Project Schedule Change Up to this point we (Amcon. SEH, and Mound Building Committee) have been aggressively pushing forward on our initial June project schedule which carls for a construction start in September 2002 and completion in June 2003. At this point, based upon the concerns of the project designers related to soft soils, we are considering delaying the project start until March 2003. The following is a list of discussion points for consideration. Search the Web Calendar Hotmail Services Free Newsletters MSN Featured Offers Rnd Message Reminders Directodes Explore MSN Free Games Personals 'Net Access Deals Share Photos Send Cash Chat Rooms Upgrade your Career Rnd Old Friends Shop AT&T Wireless Note... Pro - in favor of delaying project start until March 2003: 1. EliminaUon of "winter construction costs." These are normal costs associated with building during the winter and include such items as rental of heaters, blankets, propane fuel, temporary endosures, heated concrete, etc. These costs vary greatly depending on type of construction, time of construction, and sevedty of winter weather. We have assumed that these costs would be included in the project from the start based upon the schedule. Delaying the project would result in a savings in this area of approximately $50,000. 2. Shortening of the overall construction schedule. Our current schedule calls for a nine month construction schedule. NI projects include a cost component referred to as "general conditions" which is almost directly proportional to the duration of the on site construction work. These costs include such items as field office trailer rental, field supervision personnel (Amcon Superintendent), port-a-potties, temporary water, temporary uUlities, safety barricades, and safety fencing. By moving the construction start date to March, 2003 (and if keeping the current design/procurement schedule) about one month could be saved from the total construction duration. This would result in a cost savings of approximately $15,000 in reduced general 3. ModificaUon of the Soil CorrecUon design: SEH has indicated that the anfidpated soil correction methods are more conservative when a fall start is assumed than if a Spring Start is assumed. Their current design calls for a six foot deep layer of well draining material to be placed below the entire building pad to accommodate the fall and winter construction, ff we re-design and re-bid for Spring construction, we would anticipate a substantial reduction in the soil correction design and corresponding costs. Potential cost savings for this could be as much as $200,000. If we do move forward on this basis, the additional dollars must be taken from conUngency and/or the building must be scaled back. http://lw 15fd.law 15.hotmail.msn.com/cgi-bin/getmsg?curmbox=FO00000001 &a=b5924e6fO 1980fb7de356:... 9/3/2002 ?/ Hotmall Message Page 2 of 3 4. Ability to bid the project out as one complete bid packa.e in lieu of the currently planned 3 or 4 separate bid packages. This will greatly reduce the potential for errors in design documents due to the challenge of coordinating multiple bid packages. This is an intangible; however, we would anticipate fewer construction change orders under a single bid package than with multiple. Con - in favor of starting the project as planned in September 2002: 5. [nflaUonary costs of waiting until March to start construction will be realized in the bidding. The labor unions have all negotiated increases in their pay rates that take affect in June 2003. These increases will be seen in bidding under the new schedule even if the bids are opened this fall. These increases could be in the order of $50,000 to $100,000. 6. PoliUcal implicaUons. The owner has expressed a strong desire from the start to start this project in September and complete it by June 5 2003. Also, if construction is delayed, tax payers will be paying for the project beginning in March, without any construction started. 7. The Lease for a temporary facility needs to be considered. The space is available right now. If the lease is not signed, it may not be available in March. If it is signed up now, there is the added cost of a longer lease. The added cost is approximately $25,000 for 6 additional months. It may be possible to fie up the space until March for some amount less than $20,000. 8. The Fish Fry will be planned for the new facility in 3une 2003. In our current schedule, we are tracking toward completion by 6/6/2003; however, there is no guarantee that we will make that date. Unforeseen conditions related to soil have jeopardized the ability to meet that date. Additional schedule delays can not be ruled out (weather, strikes, etc.) Detaying the project start to March 2003 will definitely require changing the location and possibly the date of the 2003 Fish Fry. Neutral - Other Factors to Consider: 9. The Bidding market: This spring and summer has been the lightest in terms of construction activity and bidding in our region in the last 4 to 5 years. This has been reflected in favorable bid results and schedules for the projects that have gone ahead this year. This was a factor originally considered by the City of Mound in dedding to start this project in September, 2002. In recent previous years, waiting to bid in the winter for a spring start would have been advisable this time of year due to high levels of ongoing construction. This year, favorable bidding has been seen through the summer and continues. We do anticipate that a fall bidding schedule for an eady spring construction start will also yield very favorable results. If the spdng start is pursued, we will push for a schedule that puts the entire project out for bid as one bid package with a bid date in mid or late November. This will allow us to get all contractors on board, get early shop drawings completed and approved, and order long lead items such as precast concrete, steel, and others. 10. Public, City Council, Police/Fire Departments and administration have prepared for and are ready to move now. The momentum that has been generated in this process would be lost. http://lwl 5fd.lawl 5.hotmail.msn.com/cgi-bin/getmsg?curmbox=FOOOOOOOOl&a=b5924e6fO1980fb7de356:... 9/3/2002