The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutJune 7, 2004 Work SessionCITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS 590 40th Avenue N.E., Columbia Heights, MN 55421-3878 (763) 706-3600 TDD (763) 706-3692 Visit Our Website at: www. ci. columbia-heights, mn. us ADMINISTRATION NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING to be held in the CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS as follows: Mayor dulienne Wyckoff Councilrnernbers Robert A. Williams Bruce Na3vrocki Tammera Ericson Bruce Kekenberg City Manager Walt Fehst Meeting of.' Date of Meeting: Time of Meeting: Location of Meeting: Purpose of Meeting: COLUMBIA HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL JUNE 7, 2004 7:00 P.M. CONFERENCE ROOM 1 WORK SESSION AGENDA 1. Mkmeapolis Water Works: Replacement of Master Meter 2. Minor amendment to Zoning Ordinance: Park Dedication 3. Jmnboree event - Hot Air Balloon 4. Survey questions: Park/Rec. gym space, library and task force update ....... where do we go from here 5. Direction for preparation of 2005 Budget The City of Colmnbia Heights does not discrhninate on the basis of disability in the admission or access to, or treatment or employment in, its services, programs, or activities. Upon request, accommodation will be provided to allow individuals with disabilities to participate in all City of Columbia Heights' services, programs, and activities. Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request when the request is made at least 96 hours in advance. Please call the City Council Secretary at 706-3611, to make arrangements. (TDD/706-3692 for deaf or hearing impaired only) THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE ON THE BASIS OF DISABILITY IN EMPLOYMENT OR THE PROVISION OF SERVICES ~'QUAL OPPORTUNITY I--'MPLOYER CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: 6/7/04 AGENDA SECTION: WORK SESSION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER NO: PUBLIC WORKS ITEM: MINNEAPOLIS WATER WORKS-MASTER BY: K. Hans~ BY:~/;~,~_~ METER REPLACEMENT DATE: 6/2/04~t~:'/'~a DATE:--~'~ ~r~ i Background: By contract (prior and existing) with the Minneapolis Water Works (MWW), the City of Columbia Heights is responsible for the costs associated with the Master Water Meter and associated isolation valving. The City's single source of water is delivered through a 24-inch pipe from the MWW from the Hilltop Reservoirs east of Stinson and Fairway Drive in New Brighton. All water is accounted for through a single meter located on the fenced reservoir grounds. Over the last several years, the meter has been out of service more frequently and for extended periods of time. The meter was last taken out of service for repair in 2003 and the company (in California) providing service on the meter indicated they can no longer service it due to condition and age. The isolation valving is also inoperable which will requh'e their replacement. A letter from the City of Minneapolis also stating the operational problems is attached. Our records indicate that the meter was installed in 1966 with recent maintenance tfistory that details in-operation only 10 months out of the last 30. The master meter is serviced out of California with varying turn around times. Analysis/Conclusions: The vanes on either side of the meter also no longer function, requiring the reservoir to be partially drained to perform the work. The MWW has been contacted to perform the work and a copy of their letter and estimate for materials and installation is attached. The work will involve taking the reservoir out of service, replacing two 24-inch isolation valves, and installing a new 24 inch mainline meter. Mhmeapolis forces performing the work are identical to the arrangement the City had with the MWW in 1999 for the installation of a secondary water source connection through the MWW Columbia Heights Plant. It is this same connection that we will receive our water from when the meter replacement work is being conducted. The Master Meter Replacement was originally budgeted for in the 2003 Water Fund budget, but construction projects and coordination issues delayed the work until 2004. The Water Construction Fund is proposed to pay for the proposed work. Recommended Motion: Move to authorize the Minneapolis Water Works to install a new 24 inch Master Meter, two new 24 inch valves, at an estimated cost of $20,000 to 23,000, with tSmding fi'om the Water Construction Fund 651-49430-5130. r-aq.'jb Attaclxment: MWW Letter dated 1/21/04 MWW Letter dated 5/17/04 COUNCIL ACTION: Finance Department Utility Billing Office 250 South 4th Street - Room 230 Minneapolis MN 55415-1328 Januaw 21,2004 Minneapolis City of Lakes City of Columbia Heights % Mr. Kevin Hanson 590 40th Ave NE Columbia Heights, MN 55421 Re: Water Meter Replacement Dear Mr. Hanson: I'm writing to follow-up on my previous request that the City of Columbia Heights replace its master water meter. In December 2001, I wrote a letter stating my concern about the age of the meter and the fact that it was inoperable. I suggested that since the meter had to be repaired that it would be a good time to replace it with a new automatic meter. In July 2002, we met to discuss the issue. Although the meter had been repaired, concerns about its reliability and location remained unresolved. During this meeting you stated that a lack of funds prevented the replacement and relocation of the meter and that additional time was required to budget for this expense. We agreed that since the meter was working, we would wait for funds to be appropriated in the next budget year. Recently, I was informed that the meter is again inoperable. A review of our records show that since January of 2001, the meter has worked only six to seven months out of thirty-six. We need your assistance and cooperation to be able to proyide the City of Columbia Heights with accurate and timely billing. Again, I ask that you take the action required to replace the outdated meter with a new automatic meter as soon as possible. For more information on installing a new meter, please call Brian Karkula our Meter Service Supervisor at 612-661-4951. If l can answer any questions or provide further information, please call me at 612-673-2404. Sincerely, Ray Morales Utility Billing Manager City of Minneapolis www. ci,minneap01is.mn.us Affirmative Action Employer Minneapolis City of Lakes Department of Public Works Klara A. Fabry City Engineer Birector Brian J. Lokkesmoe Beputy Birector 350 South 5th Street - Room 203 Minneapolis MN 55415-1390 Office '612 673-2352 Fax 612 673-3565 TTY 612 673-2157 Management Services R. H. Smith, Director Assistant Director of Public Works 350 South 5~" St. - Room 203 Minneapolis, MN 55415-1390 (612) 673-2241 Administrative Services T. G. Molooey, Director 350 South 5~" St. - Room 203 Minneapolis, MN 55415-1390 (612) 673-3478 Engineering Services R W. Ogren, Director 309 2"~ Ave. S. - Room 300 Minneapolis, MN 55401-2268 (612) 673-2456 Field Services M. D. Kennedy, Director 350 South 5~ SL - Room 203 Minneapolis, MN 55415-1390 (612) 673-3759 Property & Equipment Services S. A, KolAe, Director 350 South 5'h St. - Room 223 Minneapolis, MN 55415-1390 (612) 673-2402 Solid Waste & Recycling S. A. Young, Director 309 2n~ Ave. S. - Room 210 Minneapolis, MN 55401-2281 (612) 673-2433 Transportation & Parking G. A. Fthstad, Director 350 South 5~ St. - Room 233 Minneapolis, MN 55415-1390 (612) 673-2411 Water Works A. J. Kramer, Director 250 South 4TM SL - Room 206 Minneapolis, MN 55415-1330 (612) 673-2418 May 17, 2004 Kevin Hanson, P.E. City Engineer City of Columbia Heights 637 - 38th Avenue N.E. Columbia Heights, MN 55421-3806 Re: New Meter and Materials for Columbia Heights Metering Chamber in New Brighton Dear Mr. Hanson: The estimated cost for installing a new 24 inch propeller meter, two butterfly valves and one 24 inch insulating coupling is $22,628. This is an estimate only, however, we will bill actual time and materials. We can order materials once we receive a letter of authorization from the City of Columbia Heights. We can proceed with the installation of the meter this fall when we take the two Hilltop reservoirs out of service for repair. While we are doing the meter installation, you will receive your water from an alternative connection installed a few years ago for the City of Columbia Heights. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (612) 661- 4902. Sincerely, Stuart Kirschbaum, P.E. Minneapolis Water Works 4300 Marshall St. N.E. Minneapolis, MN 55421 Attachment/Cost Estimate www. ci.minneapolis.mn.us Affirmative Action Employer COST ESTIMATE COLUMBIA HEIGHTS METERING CHAMBER MATERIALS 1. Two (2) - 24 inch BFV's (flanged) 2 @ $3,000 ea. 2. One (1)- 24 inch insulating coupling 3. One (1) - 24 inch flanged mainline propeller meter 4. 120 - 1¼" plated bolts and nuts 5. Miscellaneous TOTAL EQUIPMENT 1. East Yard crane for lowering materials into metering chamber, removing materials being replaced TOTAL LABOR 1. Pipe trades - 2 FTE's - 80 hours @ $41.00 2. Pipe trades - Foreman -10 hrs. @ 44.50 SUMMARY 1. Materials 2. Equipment 3. Labor Comptroller 3%% (19,875) TOTAL Contingencies 10% ($20,571) COST $6,000 $ 35o $8,ooo $ 5oo $ 5oo $15,350 $ 800 $ 800 $ 3,280 $ 445 $ 3,725 TOTAL TOTAL $15,350 $ 8oo $ 3,725 $19,875 $ 696 $20,571 $ 2,057 ESTIMATED TOTAL $22,628 Estimate does not include a new 24 inch gate valve for City of Columbia Heights. We have gate valves in our inventory. Approximate Cost $20,000. CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: 6/7/04 AGENDA SECTION: WORK SESSION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER NO: PUBLIC WORKS ITEM: FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 1470, BY: K. Hansen BY: ~/~ '~ BEING AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE DATE: 6/2/04 ' DATE:/~/~ NO. 1428 ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT-PARK DEDICATION Background: Upon a review of the text of the Zoning and Development Ordinance, staff found some inconsistencies in the text pertaining to park dedication. The text pertaining to Park Dedication from the City of Columbia Heights Zoning and Development Ordinance 1428 is attached for reference. As it currently reads, it requires a 10 percent land contribution from the Developer or a cash equivalent of 10 percent of the value of the improvements. The 'value of the improvements' segment is inaccurate in the current wording and should be replaced. For example, the estimated value of the improvements at the K-Mart Redevelopment is $50,000,000 at full build out. A ten percent contribution based upon improvements would be $5,000,000, which is not reahstic. Proposed language revising the park dedication segment is attached which requires park dedication in either a 10 percent land contribution, or a cash equivalent of 10 percent of the value of the land prior to redevelopment. The new language also provides additional clarification with respect to: · Location and suitability of land for park purposes. · Reasons for modifications of the area dedication. · Discretion of acceptance (of either area or cash equivalent) by the Council. As the ctm'ent language is not reasonable as it relates to a cash contribution, staffrecommends the mh~or amendment clarifying the park dedication language. Recommended Motion: Move to waive the reading of Ordinance No. 1470, there being ample copies available to the public. Recoirmiended Motion: Move to set the second reading of Ordinance No. 1470, being an Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 1428 Zoning and Development-Park Dedication for June 28, 2004, at approximately 7 p.m. in the Council Chambers. KH:jb Attachment: Existing/Proposed Park Dedication Language COUNCIL ACTION: ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE MINOR AMENDMENT TO: Section 9.1403 Plats and Data. Subdivision 3 Page 14-7 EXISTING: Park dedication REPLACE WITH: (proposed) (s) Park dedication· It is deemed necessary and consistent with sound City plalming to provide in each new proposed plat o r subdivision, areas for furore development of park and recreational purposes. Each plat shall hereafter provide for a dedication to the municipality, an area not less than ten percent (10%) of the total proposed area to be subdivided. (a) Such area shall consist of developable and usable land and shall be located so as to serve the present and future needs of the cmrur~mfity for recreational or park purposes. (b) The Plalming Co~mnission and the Cotmcil shall consider the proposed location in relation to existing or contemplated recreational and park sites in other parts of the COlrumunity and as to the suitability in meeting the requirements of the "City Comprehensive Plan". (c) The following properties shall not be accepted for purposes of the owner's compliance with subdivisions a or b of this section: a. land dedicated or obtained as easements for stom~ water retention, drainage, roadway and other utility purposes; (c) This requirement may be waived and/or modified by the Council, after recommendation by the Plalming Commission, for one of the following reasons: (i) The enforcement of this provision would act as an extreme hardship to the property owner, because of the size of the tract involved, the topography of the land (zoning areas involved) or the Owner has already dedicated comparable areas in other subdivisions in the City. (ii) The Owner contributes a cash equivalent to the City for the "Parks Capital hnprovement Fund" of the City. A cash equivalent shall be a sum mutually agreed upon representing 10% of the market value of the tract in an under-developed state on the date the preliminary plat is presented to the City. (d) The City, at its sole discretion, may consider a combination of an area dedication and cash contribution to total the 10 percent park dedication contribution. CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS RECREATION DEPARTMENT TO: FROM: RE: DATE: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL WALT FEHST, CITY MANGAGER KEITH WINDSCHITL, RECREATION DIRECTOR¢'b/ HOT AIR BALLOON RIDES AT JAMBOREE JUNE1,2004 This is to infoma you that "Lift High the Cross Hot Balloon Ministry" in conjunction with St. Matthew's Lutheran Church, Columbia Heights, has indicated they would like to provide hot air balloon fides as a fund raiser during the Jamboree. Attached you will find their proposal for the lift schedule along with requirements and location needed to operate the hot air balloon. Staff has concerns regarding the Saturday time due to the setting up and shooting of fireworks in Huset Park. Staff will bring additional information to the work session regarding this issue on Monday, June 7th. Questions you have will be answered at this time. Th a_n& you. LIFT HIGH THE CROSS HOT BALLOON MINISTRY Hosted by St. Matthew Lutheran Church 4101 Washington Street NE Columbia Heights, MN 55421 (763) 788-9427 Balloon Lift Schedule Friday, June 25th 7:00-9:30 p.m. ('set up begins at 6 p.m.) Saturday, June 26th 7:00-9:30 p.m. (set up begins at 6 p.m. and the bafloon will come down so that it is put away before fireworks begin) Sunday, June 27th 5:30-7:30 a.m. (set up begins at 5 a.m.) There are two primary times during the day to utilize the balloon. One flight/tether window begins at sunrise and lasts approximately 1-1/2 to 2-1/2 hours. The second flight/tether window begins approximately two hours before Sunday. When tethering, the FAA allows rifts to continue after sunset as long as fuel and wind conditions allow. Tethered Hot Air Balloon Rides The balloon is tied off (both to the ground and to five vehicles) and the pilot executes controlled ascents and descents in one location. A tether ride is approximately 5 to 7 minutes in duration at approximately 50 to 75 feet High. The cost of a Hot Air Balloon is $5/person. The gondola holds the pilot and up to three (3) passengers at a time during a tethered ride. The balloon itself is an eight-story-tall hot air balloon. Physical Requirements The minimum physical requirements for a tether is: 200 x 200 foot open fiat space No trees or shrubs can be within the area Power lines, trees, buildings, church steeples, microwave towers, etc., around perimeter of launch area are taken into consideration before scheduling. Map or photo showing location of trees, power lines, etc. is required. Lift High the Cross plans on using the West field of Huset Park for the tethered lifts. On Saturday, the balloon will be fenced off from the firework set-up to prevent any liability issues. Weather Conditions Lift High the Cross will make every effort to safely provide schedule tethered lifts. Federal Aviation Association (FAA) regulations apply. Wind conditions for tether is 7 miles an hour or less (cannot be raining or snowing). The Pilot-in Command has the final say on safe flight decision. FAA Information As a courtesy, the FAA has been provide with our tethered lift dates and times. We do not need a clearance as long as the flights are tethered. (The Pilot would need to call for clearance if they would be within 6 miles of the Minneapolis/St. Paul airports. A clearance for Class B airspace as well as an onboard radio would be required if the balloon was not tethered.) If there were a problem with the tethered lift, the FAA has requested that we contact Anoka County and Crystal airports. These numbers will be kept on-site. Insurance Lift High the Cross has insurance to cover up to one million dollars. Additional insurance is available to the city or St. Matthew for the cost of $41.00, if that is felt to be a necessity. At this point, St. Matthew does not intend to purchase this additional insurance. Trained Crew Members A minimum of 40 trained crew members are required (St. Matthew is coordinating this). All crew members are at least 14 years of age and older, with at least five participants being 21 years of age and older. All crew members must attend a two hour balloon crew training session on Thursday, June 24th at St. Matthew. Crew members will assist with: set up, inflation, tether and pack up for the entire time Lift High the Cross is in Columbia Heights. All crew members need to be available for all tethers. Lift Hiqh the Cross Balloon Staff Jay Mason - Jay is a 1997 graduate of Concordia Seminary, St. Louis. Jay has 17 years of experience as a commercial hot air balloon pilot and has logged more than 500 hours of flight experience. He has 20 years of business administration experience. Vicki Mason - Vicki is a private hot air balloon pilot and a former director of Children's ministry at Gloria Dei Lutheran in Davie, Florida. Vicki and Jay have three children. Lacey- Lacey does face painting and handles the Lift High the Cross store and is a pilot-in-training. John - John offers balloon shapes, hats, flowers and animals. He assists in all aspects of the ministry. Travis - Travis is full of enthusiasm. He helps in all aspects of the ministry whenever possible. Questions Please contact:: Heidi Bruder, Director of Christian Outreach at St. Matthew Lutheran Church. (763) 788-9427 hmbruder~.earthlink, net Janet Kendall, LHTC point person 763-572-1800 Janet227a@iuno.com FAA Contact, Pat Carston 612-713-4014 Fro :DECI$ION RESOURCES LTD. Decision Resources, Ltd. 3128 Dean Court Minneapolis, Minnesota 6]2 920 ].069 55416 06/0]/2004 09:15 F269 P,002/007 COLUMBIA HEIGHTS CITY/SCHOOLS RESIDENTIAL SURVEY REVISED VERSION Hello, I'm of Decision Resources, Ltd., a national Survey research firm located in Minneapolis. At the request of the Columbia Heights Public Schools and the City of Columbia Heights, we are speaking with a random sample of residents in the school district about issues facing the area. Even if you do not have children currently in the schools, the City and School District are interested in your opinions and suggestions. I want to assure you all responses will be strictly confidential; only summaries will be reported. 1. Approximately how many years have you lived in the Columbia Heights School District? Now, I would.like to read you a short list of statements others have told us. For each one, please tell me whether you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree. If you donWt know, just say so. 2. The Columbia Heights Public Schools Administration and Board have spent tax money effectively and efficiently. 3. The Columbia Heights School District Board and Administra- tion have spent past bond referendum and operating levy referen- dum funds responsibly. 4. Physical activity and health programs are an important part of the education of all'students, from Kindergarten to twelfth grade. ASK ONLY IN THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS: 5. The City of Columbia Heights City Council and Administration have spent tax money effectively and efficiently. 6. The condition. Of parks and recreational facilities in the city have deteriorated during the past few years. 7. The adequacy of both indoor and outdoor recreational facili- ties in the city has not kept pace with the changing population of the community. 8. There is a clear need for a new library building in the city tO better serve city residents. Movin9 on .... 9. In comparison with neighboring communities, do you consider the city portion of your property taxes to be very high, somewhat high, about average, somewhat low, or very low? From:DEOISION RESOURCES LTD, 6]2 920 ]069 06/0]/2004 09:]5 269 P.003/007 ASK EVERYONE: ~0. In comparison with other neighboring school districts, do you think the school district portion of your property taxes is very high, somewhat high, about average, somewhat Iow, or very low? %%. And, in comparison with neighboring areas, do you consider your total property taxes to be very high, somewhat high, about average, somewhat low, or very low? Changing topics .... 12. ?~ich of the following three statements best describes your feelings: A..I would vote against almost any tax increases for the schools; B. I would vote for a tax increase for the schools under some conditions, but against it under other conditions; C. I would vote for almost any tax increases for the schools. I would like to read you a short list of potential uses of addi- tional funds raised through an operating levy referendum. For each one, please tell me if you strongly agree with it, somewhat agree, somewhat disagree, or strongly disagree with it. If you have no opinion, just say so .... 13. The levy proposal .Should provide enough funds to eliminate the need for more budget cuts during the next few years. 14. The levy proposal should provide enough funds to reinstate about twenty teaching positions cut in the last series of budget reductions. 15. The levy prOpoSal should enhance technical support and provide funds to update technology and other equipment students use in school. Moving on .... The Columbia Heights School District's current operating levy authority expires in two years. Voters. could be asked to approve the district's request to renew the levy authority. Should the "operating levy not be renewed, the School District will lose more than two million dollars each year used to operate schools. If the operating levy renewal is approved, there would be no new property tax increaee as a result. 16. Would you favor or oppose the renewal of the Current operat- ing levy? (WAIT FOR RESPONSE) DO you feel strongly that way? ~pm_.= the Columbia Heights School-.,~n~=~r~C~--. _,~-~ proposed ~__ additional one million dollar operating levy whose funds would be used to avoid further reductions in educational pro,rams, rein- state about twenty teaching positions, and enhance technical support and tecknology offerings. To fund this proposal, resi- dents would be asked to approve a property tax increase for a ten From:DEOISION RE$OUROES LTD. 6]2 920 ]069 06/0]/2004 09:]5 ¢269 P.004/007 year period. An owner of a $150,000 home would see a yearly property tax increase of $209.00, while the owner of a $200,000 would have an increase of $146.00 each year. 17. Would you support or oppose a referendum for this proposal? (WAIT P0R RESPONSE) Do you feel Strongly that way? IF A POSITION IS TAKEN, ASK: 18. Could yOu tell me one or two reasons why you feel that way? Suppose the School District combined the two requests into one ballot question. The referendum proposal would ask residents to revoke the current operating levy in 2005 and replace it with new operating levy authority for an additional one million dollars. 19. Would you support or oppose this referendum proposal? FOR RESPONSE) Do you feel strongly that way? (WAIT Moving on .... 20. From what you have seen or heard, do you think Columbia Heights has not enQugh gymnasium space, too much gymnasium space or about the right amount? 21. Would you be more likely or less llkely to support new a multi-use recreation facility if they were constructed and oper- ated jointly by the SChool District and the City of Columbia Heights? (WAIT FOR RESPONSE) And do you feel much (more/less) likely or only somewhat? The School DistriCt and the City are jointly considering building and operating a new multi-use recreation facility. The new facility could include several ~%annasiums, locker rooms, an indoor walking-running track, and a fitness center to be used by all members of the School district and city.. 22. Where should any new multi-use recreation facility be locat- ed -- at the back of the Columbia Keights High School, at the old N.E.I. site on 41St and Central Avenue, near Murzyn Hall, or someplace else? (IF "SOMEPLACE ELSE," ASK:) Where would that be? 23. How much would you be willing to pay in additional property taxes for the construction and operation of new multi-use recrea- tion facility? Let's say $ per month? (CHOOSE A RANDOM STARTING POINT, MOV~ UP OR DOWN DEPENDING ON RESPONSE) How about $~ per month? (REPEAT PROCESS) (CIT~AND SCHOOL DISTRICT TO ~=ROVIDE DOLLAR A~0UNTS) MOW, let's talk about timing of these funding requests .... 24. Which of the following statements about the scheduling of referendum elections best reflects your opinion? (READ LIST) A. The SChool District operating levy and City-School Di~l~rict bond 3 From:DECISION RESOURCES LTD. 6]2 920 1069 06/0]/2004 09:]5 fl269 P.005/007 referendum should be placed on the ballot ak the same election; B. The School DiStrict operating levy should be placed on the ballot this November, then the School District-City bond referen- dum should follow at a later election; C. Neither proposals should be brought to the voters at an election. 25. If both the School DistriCt operating levy referendum and the City-School DistriCt bond referendum proposals were placed on the ballot at the same time, which of the following best de- scribes your probable vote: A. I would favor both referendum questions; B. I would vote in favor of the School District oper- atin9 levy referendum question, but against the City-School District bond referendum question; C. I would vote against the School District operating levy referendum question,'but in favor of the City-School District bond referendum question; D. I would vote against both referendum questions. ASK ONLY IN TH~ CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS: As'you may know, the City of Columbia ~eishts has been consider- ing constructing or redeveloping a number of facilities in the community, such as park and recreational, administrative, and libraries. 25. Which of the following three statements best describes your feelings: A. I would'vote against almost any tax increases for city facilities; B. I would vote for a tax increase for City facilities under some conditions, but against it under other conditions; C. Z would vote for almost any tax increases for city facilities. I'would like to read you a short llst of potential uses of addi- tional funds raised through a bond referendum. For each. one, please tell me if you strongly agree with it, somewhat agree, somewhat disagree, or strongly disagree with it. If you have no opinion, just say so .... (ROTATE) 26. A new library building? 27. Relocatin~ City Hall to a new building nearer the center of the city, at the old N.E.I. site on 41St and Central Avenue? 28. Facility and maintenance improvements at every park in the community, includlng children's wadin~ pools and athletic fields? 29. Updating and expanding city trails? In order to fund this new construction and development, city residents would be asked tO increase their property 30. ~ow much would you be willing to pay in additional property taxes for these capital improvement projects in the city? Let's say $ .. per month? (CHOOSE A RANDOM STARTING POINT, MOVE UP OR DOWN DEPENDING ON RESPONSE) ~ow about $ per month? (REPEAT PROCESS) 4 From:DECISION RESOURCES LTD. 612 920 1069 06/01/2004 09:15 ¢269 P.006/007 (CITY TO PROVIDE DOLLAR AMOUNTS) ASK EVERYONE: As yOu may know, a number of Minneapolis organizations, including Zhe YMCA, Boys and Girls Club, and community groups, have applied for a twenty million dollar private grant for the construction of a large community center on thH Northeast side. The center would include gsrmnasiums, swimming pool, ice arena, indoor walking- running track, fitness equipment and meeting rooms. The communi- ty center would be sited within one mile of Columbia Heights on either University or Central Avenues. Non-Minneapolis residents would probably be required to pay fees for use of the facilities there. 31. If Minneapolis were to build a comr~unity center, would you be more likely or less likely to suppor~ a tax increase for a new multi-use recreation facility in Columbia Heights? (WAIT FOR RESPONSE) And do you feel much (more/less) likely or.only some- what? Now, just a few more questions for demographic purposes .... 32. Which of the following categories contains your age -- 18- 34, 35-54, 55 and over? 33. What is the highest level of formal education you completed? 34. Are there infants or pre-schoolers in this household? 35. Are there school-aged children in this household? (IF "YES," ASK:) Do they attend public schools in this district, public schools in another district, parochial or private schools, charter schools, or home schools? 36. Are you employed by a public entity, such as a government agency, state or local government or a School district, a busi- ness or corporation, own a business or are self-employed, re- tired, or not working outside of the home? 37. Are you or others in your household a member Of a labor union? (IF "YES," A~K:) Are you, yourself, a union member, or someone else in your household, or both? 38. During the past year, have you or other household members visited the Columbia Heights Public Library? (IF "YES," ASK:) Would you say household members visit the library weekly or more often,' every two weeks or so, monthly, quarterly, or less fre- quently? 39. Do you or any household member belong to a private health club? 40. In what year was the last election you voted? .~ I-rom:L)I-L~I~IUN t~t-~UUNL;F~; LIP. 151~ U2~U ]USU U~/UI/:/UU4 UU; I~ ~Z~U ~'.UUl/UU/ 41. Do you own or rent your present residence? (IF "OWN," ASK:) Which of the followin~ categories contains the approximate value of your residential property -- under $150,000, $150,000- $200,000, $200,000-$250,000, or over $250,000? 42. Gender (DO NOT ASK) 43. Region of residence (DO NOT ASK) CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS DATE: MAY 27, 2004 TO: FROM: WALT FEHST CITY MANAGER WILLIAM ELRITE FINANCE DIRECTOR RE: PREPARATION OF THE 2005 CITY BUDGET At the present time it appears that our local government aid (LGA) will be reduced by an additional $544,726 in 2005. This is under the phase-in plan that the state legislature adopted in the 2003 legislative session. Under that plan our LGA will ultimately be reduced to $720,097 and will occur in 2006. This means that from the original certified LGA in 2003 to 2006 we will have lost a total of $1,931,902. To deal with this loss in aid ! am recommending that the City deviate from the norn~al budget process and look at a longer-range budget goal to manage the state aid reductions, inflation, and property tax increases. I am recommending that the City look at freezing budgets for 2005 and 2006 at the 2004 level, with no increase in expenditures over and above the 2004 level for either 2005 or 2006. And, for 2007 looking at an inflationary increase to the budget of 3%. This zero budget growth would necessitate levying in property taxes the aid cuts that the City will receive in 2005 and 2006. Under the current legislative phase-in plan this would be a $544,726 increase in our levy for 2005 and a levy increase of $338,380 for 2006. Neither of these years would see any growth in the budget. In 2007 we would be fully phased in under the state aid reduction plan and would not need a levy increase to make up for state aid reductions. In that year I propose a modest 3% inflationary increase to the budget that would result in a small property tax increase of approximately $240,000. I feel that a plan of this nature would be reasonable as it severely restricts budget growth and forces staff to absorb any inflationary costs into the current budgeting level for the next two years and then allows for only a modest inflationary increase in the third year. This plan would also insure that Columbia Heights retains its role of being the lowest or near lowest in property taxes on a median priced home in the metropolitan area. In addition to the above, I am recommending that the council continue the philosophy that was started last year of adopting a resolution in June giving staff specific direction and guidance regarding the preparation of the 2005 budget. This was done last year and it makes it much easier for staff to develop a practical budget when they know up front what the guidelines and goals are. Based on this, I have prepared the attached draft council letter and draft resolution to establish a fonrtat that the council could adopt to give the staff guidance in preparing the 2005 budget with no increase. The bottom line of my recommendation is that it starts out with a property tax increase in 2005 that is about $85,000 less than the 2004 property tax increase, and then drops into a progressively lesser increase for the next two years while at the same time maintaining a "hold the line" budget for the first two of the three years. This plan ends up with a budget in the third year, 2007, which is still $500,000 less than the 2003 budget. WE:sms 0405271CM Attachments CITY COUNCIL LETTER MEETING OF: JUNE 14, 2004 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: CITY MANAGER NO: FINANCE APPROVAL ITEM: RESOLUTION PROVIDING 2005 BY: W1LL1AM ELRITE BY: BUDGET PREPARATION GUIDELINES, ADOPTING A PROPOSED MAXIMUM DATE: MAY 27, 2004 BUDGET, AND SETTING THE PROPOSED MAXIMUM CITY LEVY FOR 2005 NO: The purpose of the attached resolution is to provide staff with guidance and direction in the preparation of the 2005 budget and to establish criteria for long-rm~ge budget planning as well as restrict property tax increases to residents of Columbia Heights. The three-year goal for budgets and property tax increases is that the budgets for 2005 and 2006 will be developed at the same level as the 2004 budget. The 2007 budget would be developed with a maximum inflationary growth factor of 3 percent. The result of this no budget growth plan means that for 2005 and 2006 the City levy would only increase by the amount of state aid reduction and for 2007 it would only increase by a 3% budget inflationary factor. In actual levy increase dollars, it is estimated that this long-range budget plan would result in a progressively smaller property tax increase for the next three years. For 2005 the increase in our property tax levy would be $544,726, for 2006 $338,380 and for 2007 $240,000. As you can see, the property tax increase goes down significantly each year and even for 2005, the property tax increase would be less than it was in 2004. The adoption of the attached resolution facilitates both budget preparation direction and certification of a proposed budget and levy. Last year this was done in the fon'n of two separate resolutions. For efficiency and cost-effectiveness I have combined both of these resolutions into one. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to waive the reading of Resolution 2004-xx there being ample copies available to the public. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to adopt Resolution 2004-xx being a resolution providing 2005 budget preparation guidelines, adopting a proposed maximum budget, and setting the proposed maximum city levy for 2005. WE:sms 0405272COUNCIL Attachment COUNCIL ACTION: (O "1- r.4D 0 LO C~ LLI(U <i:: r,... o r,,. co Ob Ob 0 I~ i~ 0 ~ > ~ '-0 0 0 ,< I-.- 0 0 >-~ (.- o 0 Z