Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDecember 3, 2001 RegularCITY 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 November 30, 2001 Mayor Gary L. Peterson Councilmembers Marlaine Szurek Julienne Wyckoff Bruce Nawrocki Robert A. Williams City Manager Walter R. Fehst The following is the agenda for the regular meeting of the City Council to be held at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, December 3, 2001 in the City Council Chambers, City Hall, 590 40th Avenue N.E., Columbia Heights, MN The City of Cohmtbia Heights does not discriminate 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 disabled persons are available upon request when the request is made at least 96 hours in advance. Please call the Deputy City Clerk at 763-706-3611, to make arrangements. (TDD/706-3692 for deaf or hearing impaired only) e CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO MEETING AGENDA (The Council, upon majority vote of its members, may make additions and deletions to the agenda. These may be items brought to the attention of the Council under the Citizen Forum or items submitted after the agenda preparation deadline.) 2002 BUDGET MEETING A) 2002 Budget Tax Levy Information Presentation by the City Manager B) Establishing 2002 Rental License Fees MOTION: Move to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2001-76, there being ample copies available to the public. c) MOTION: Move to approve Resolution #2001-76, being a Resolution Establishing Fees for Housing Inspections as authorized by Chapter 5A of City Code of 1977. Adopt the Budget for 2002, set total City Levy. collectable for 2002, and approve HRA levy MOTION: Move to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2001-79, there being ample copies available to the public. MOTION: Move to adopt resolution 2001-79, being a Resolution adopting a budget for the year 2002 and setting the total City levy collectable for the year 2002, and approving the HRA levy. 5. ADJOURNMENT Walter R. Fehst, WF/pvm THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE ON THE BASIS OF DISABILITY IN EMPLOYMENT OR THE PROVISION OF SERVICES EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of December 3, 2001 AGENDA SECTION: L[_/~ ORIGINATING CITY DEPARTMENT: MANAGER NO: Fire APPROVAL NO: DATE: November 26, 2001 DATE: Background In 1989 the City of Columbia Heights established a licensing and inspection program for rental property. The Fire Department began assisting with inspections relating to this program in 1992 and was assigned responsibility for administering the program in 1994. There currently are 558 licensed rental properties in Columbia Heights, totaling 2,044 individual rental units. Each rental property is required by Ordinance to be licensed to operate and must renew their license annually. The Fire Department conducts inspections of each individual unit, interior common areas and exteriors on a regular schedule as well as responding to complaints received. The rental inspection program is a part of the Fire Department budget. Analysis Revenue received fi.om annual rental licenses under the current fee structure is approximately $20,000. This revenue does not cover the cost of the program and the Fire Department budget has absorbed the remainder of the cost since 1994. The Fire Chief was asked to make significant cuts to the budget for 2002. With the required cuts, the Fire Department budget is no longer able to absorb the same cost of the rental-licensing program. As a part of the 2002 fire department budget proposal, the department is requesting that the rental license fees be increased substantially; revenue from licenses under the proposed fee structure would total approximately $40,000. Information is attached regarding the specifics of current rental license fees, proposed license fees and costs associated with the program. Recommended Action MOVE to waive the reading of Resolution #2001-76, there being ample copies available to the public. MOVE to approve Resolution #2001-76, Being a Resolution Establishing Fees for Housing Inspections as Authorized by Chapter 5A of City Code of 1977. Council Action: I Current (2001) Rental License Fees Adopted by Resolution #2000-11 on February 14, 2000 Item Rental License- 1 or 2 rental units Rental License - 3 or 4 rental units Rental License - 5 or more rental units Reinspection Fee- 1-3 units Reinspection Fee- 4+ units License Reinstatement after Revocation or 4% times the annual license fee Suspension Fees shall not be charged for the initial inspection concerning any violation and for any inspection in which all violations are found to be corrected. Fee $15.00 per unit $50.00 per building $50.00 for the first 4 rental units, plus$5.00 per unit over 4. $50.00 for 1't and 2nd Reinspections $100.00 for 3r~ and subsequent Reinspections $70.00 for 1'~ and 2nd Reinspections $140.00 for 3r~ and subsequent Reinspections Proposed 2002 Rental License Fees Item Rental License - 1 or 2 rental units Rental License - 3 or 4 rental units Rental License - 5 or more rental units Reinspection Fee - 1-3 units Reinspection Fee - 4+ units License Reinstatement after Revocation or 4~ times the annual license fee Suspension Fees shall not be charged for the initial inspection concerning any violation and for any inspection in which all violations are found to be corrected. Fee $30.00 per unit $100.00 per building $100.00 for the first 4 rental units, plus$10.00 per unit over 4. $50.00 for l't and 2nd Reinspections $100.00 for 3r~ and subsequent Reinspections $70.00 for l't and 2nd Reinspections $140.00 for 3~ and subsequent Reinspections Rental Licensing Program Costs Direct Expenses Salary and Fringe-Rental Licensing Clerk~ Office Supplies Postage Copier Maintenance and Supplies2 Total Direct Expenses $41,772.00 254.00 1,226.00 1,104.00 $44,356.00 Indirect Expenses Salary and Fringe-Assistant Fire ChieP Salary and Fringe-6 Full Time Inspectors4 Total Indirect Expenses $39,579.00 21,527.00 $61,106.00 Total Rental Licensing Program Expenses $105,462.00 Notes: 1 2002 budgeted salary and fringe for this position. 2 Volume of paper copies is significantly higher with the rental-licensing program than without it. Without the program there would be no justification of a copier within the fire department offices. 3 Salary and fringe listed is 50% of 2002 budget for this position. The Assistant Fire Chief is also the Housing Enforcement Official and spends approximately 50% of staff time on aspects of the inspection program. 4 The figure listed is extrapolated from total salary and fringe for 6 full time employees, which is $443,552 according to 2002 budget. They spend 70% of their shift hours working on weekdays. Of those shifts, approximately ]/3 of the hours occur during the normal 'workday' of 8-4. Inspections occur on 80% of weekdays. Based on 2000 statistics, rental-licensing inspections comprise 26% of total inspections. RESOLUTION NO. 2001-76 BEING A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING FEES FOR HOUSING INSPECTIONS AS AUTHORIZED BY CHAPTER 5A OF CITY CODE OF 1977 WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 853, City Code of 1977, pertaining to rental property licensing regulations provides for the establishing of annual license fees; and and WHEREAS, the City has authorized changes to rental property licensing fees from time to time; WHEREAS, the City finds there is a financial need to modify the rental property licensing fee at this time; and WHEREAS, modifying the rental property licensing fee will not cause the City to realize a profit from the rental property licensing program; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the rental property licensing fee structure listed below shall be adopted and effective January 1, 2002. Rental property license - 1 or 2 units Rental property license - 3 or 4 units Rental property license - 5 or more units Reinspection fee - 1 to 3 units Reinspection fee - 4 or more units License Reinstatement after Revocation/Suspension $30.00 per unit $100.00 per building $100.00 for tn'st 4 units, plus $10.00 per unit over 4 $50.00 for 1st and 2ad reinspections $100.00 for 34 and subsequent reinspections $70.00 for 1st and 2aa reinspections $140.00 for 3ra and subsequent reinspections 4 ½ times annual license fee Passed this Offered by: Seconded by: Roll Call: day of December, 2001. PaWicia Muscovitz, Deputy City Clerk Mayor Gary L. Peterson CITY COUNCIL LETTER Special Meeting off December 3 2001 AGENDA SECTION: RESOLUTIONS ORIGINATING DEgT:. CITY MANAGER NO: FINANCE ~ ,~ ~/,~r'--'-' APPROVAL ITEM: BEING A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A BY: WILLIAM-ELRITE BY: BUDGET FOR THE YEAR 2002, SETTING THE DATE: NOV. 30, 2001 DATE: TOTAL CITY LEVY COLLECTABLE FOR THE YEAR 2002, APPROVING THE HRA LEVY, AND APPROVING A TAX RATE INCREASE FOR THE YEAR 2002 On November 19, 2001, the City Council met at a work session for a final review of the 2002 budget, the 2002 levy, and to hopefully come to a consensus regarding final changes and modifications to the budget and levy. At that meeting, the City Manager and Finance Director presented a summary of the original budget and a summary of the City Manager's cuts and recommendations based on previous council work sessions for add-backs and cuts to the levy. That information is attached in a worksheet showing the City Manager's cuts and the proposed add-backs. These proposed add-backs have been included in the attached resolution. At the meeting of December 3rd it is proposed for the city council to adopt the budget and the final levy along with a tax rate increase. The following are recommended motions. If the first motion adopting the resolution is adopted it adopts the resolution in the format as presented. The alternate motion is listed here to give the council the option to make additional additions or deletions to the recommended resolution. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to waive the reading of Resolution 2001-79 there being ample copies available to the public. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to adopt Resolution 2001-79 being a resolution adopting a budget for the year 2002, setting the total City levy collectable for the year 2002, approving the HRA levy, and approving a tax rate increase. ALTERNATE MOTION: Move to adopt Resolution 2001-79 being a resolution adopting a budget for the year 2002, setting the total City levy collectable for the year 2002, approving the HRA levy, and a tax rate increase with the following changes. WE:sms 0111302COUNCIL Attachment COUNCIL ACTION: RESOLUTION 2001-79 RESOLUTION ADOPTING A BUDGET FOR THE YEAR 2002, SETTING THE CITY LEVY, APPROVING THE HRA LEVY. AND APPROVING A TAX RATE INCREASE FOR PROPERTY TAXES PAYABLE IN 2002 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA: that the following is hereby adopted by the City of Columbia Heights. Section A. The proposed budget for the City of Columbia Heights for the year 2002 is hereby approved and adopted with aoorooriations for each of the funds listed below. Expense General Fund 7,726,800 Community Development Fund 317,463 Economic Development Fund 137,015 Anoka County CDBG 377,787 Parkview Villa North 383,072 Parkview Villa South 218,587 Rental Jousing 18,481 JRA Administration 111,702 State Aid 96,713 Cable Television 212,896 Library 557,002 DARE Project 8,825 Infrastructure 144,500 Capital Improvement 289,138 Capital Equipment Replacement Funds 2,398,500 Central Garage Fund 508,803 Liquor 6,437,192 Water Utility Fund 1,586,491 Sewer Utility Fund 1,374,986 Refuse Fund 1,512,083 Storm Sewer Fund 251,114 Energy Management 101,209 Data Processing 274,592 Debt Service Fund 2,820,649 Total Expense Including Interfund Transfers 27,865,600 Section B. The estimated gross revenue to fund the budget of the City of Columbia Heights for all funds, including general ad valorem tax levies and use of fund balances, as hereinafter set forth for the year 2002: Revenue General Fund 7,826,334 Community Development Fund 317,463 Economic Development Fund 137,015 Anoka County CDBG 377,787 Parkview Villa North 383,072 Parkview Villa South 218,587 Rental Jousing 18,481 JRA Administration 111,702 State Aid 96,713 Cable Television 212,896 Library 557,002 DARE Project 8,825 Infrastructure 144,500 Capital Improvement 289,138 Capital Equipment Replacement Funds 2,398,500 Central Garage Fund 508,803 Liquor 6,437,192 Water Utility Fund 1,586.491 Sewer Utility Fund 1,374.986 Refuse Fund 1,512,083 Storm Sewer Fund 251,114 Energy Management 101,209 Data Processing 274,592 Debt Service Fund 2,820,649 Total Revenue Including Interfund Transfers 28,875,087 RESOLUTION 2001-79 RESOLUTION ADOPTING A BUDGET FOR THE YEAR 2002, SETTING THE CITY LEVY, APPROVING THE HRA LEVY. AND APPROVING A TAX RATE INCREASE FOR PROPERTY TAXES PAYABLE IN 2002 Section C. The following proposed sums of money are levied for the current year, collectable in 2002, upon the taxable property in said City of Columbia Heights, for the following purposes: Estimated Area-Wide Estimated General Estimated Library Levy Estimated EDA Fund Levy Total Proposed General Levy Special Levy for PERA Increase Capital Equipment Debt Levy Total Proposed Levy 930,000 3,206,911 565,388 137O15 4,839,314 12,033 0 4,851,347 Section D. The City Council of the City of Columbia Heights hereby approves the Housing and Redevelopment Authority Tax Levy for the fiscal year 2002 in the amount of $111,702. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, COUNTY OF ANOKA, MINNESOTA: That the county auditor is authorized to fix a property tax rate for taxes payable in the year 2002 that is higher than the tax rate calculated pursuant to Minnesota Statutes '275.078 for the city for taxes levied in 2000, collectable in 2001. The City Clerk is hereby instructed to transmit a certified copy of this resolution to the County Auditor of Anoka County, Minnesota. Approved this 3rd day of December 2001 Offered By: Seconded By: Roll Call: Ayes: Nays: Mayor Gary L. Peterson Patricia Muscovilz, Deputy City Clerk c 0 3 0 U) m m L U N W m L .r O Y U m .O m O C m m L m N L C a) T L D) cN C m m 0 Z co rn co co O c") N N + m L co L 0-• ) en C� of O L .-. w Q o 0) N E Y U C N C C O C a) 03 .0 O w r O N T ER 03 C E G qw O O 0 t+ L 4) co 0 X X Q 0 p U " 0 0 0 0 dQ'D E a) ca c ►ry W > U C " 2 m o of lL C c 5 W co w c � �, U °> > c Ix o- � c E N ° cc Z° r- >— 7 o 0 ~ d Q E Y 7 ca O� F— >+ 0) :_ 0) E o c co 'c U c°� coo coo o coo a > ca o a E > 0 ELQ 00 0 L W H WOW O O 0 co m 0 U co c C c C 7 7 7 7 0) - 3 (n >,� c E E'D E c a) ca = U O _ 4) aD ZU cUW2Of • • (D a) (D 4) W W Wwwofwof 3 rn '� c o 0 0 cn0 000 O� to O to O O A o �N00N (17 C cc H 0 W Z Z O O U N H 2�n c 0 r V W T 0 Q 4) o m c Q. Q Z) N d 0 U N m LL F- r- 0 W H 0 U m U L 0) — 7 c m ) Q 0) CD ca 0 CU QO O N v � � v cu C C .. a > U W 0 C � 0) V O O dO CL a N a) a 0 C LL d C 0 Q O r T N V) l r N Mqr Lo 0 I-- cn000 0000000 x 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ocnrn0 ocnaaaLoa CO N 00 N L cM r N N c O .N �_ ° m 0 a0i 7+ U : C N : UO C fo O) O_ O 0 N d (n C O / O O «� �+ N O a) •� 0 0— C2 LL Q a O U a o- 06 U a (n O (D .0 Q L >+ 0 r U W c > °E=c EcLwo> - cc N U a'D d) ., � Eo (n co W N v7 vW Q E cU� a) cu Q c� c (n Q in c LL CU L (D > 0 W W° c 0 3 fA o co a) co co ° m c�`o �Lu E coaior aci W Q WH U W WUJU C9 N � N cli M N co r r N M N ce) qt cn c0 cu N C C Fl- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O It Lo co O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cl Cl 0 (A NIt O 000000co O 06 r MMO 00000cd0 O r N I r N CN N r r N Lo i o t c rn o co M c") N Nt N r co L c0 r v O L M w O E Lo r N N 00 04 r 1-i t D1 N M G qw O EA � M r M r r N � i o t c rn ti U ( o u°'•)_ 0 Oo r 00 00 r co L c0 r v O L U C 0 0 2 0 cu E� U co U a) O) a) U cu c LL CD a) > L M w O E Lo r N N 00 04 a r co cg 000 Go N d r N co 0o U C 0 0 2 0 cu E� U 0) (n a) O a-i U a) O) a) U cu c LL CD a) > L O r T N M r O E Lo r O c0 r O N r N O N N N C14 C) U')_ a (°n_ O U 0 to r .i O N cc0Q cr r v e.r O c C C CO3 Q Q > c ca t3w� Z O 7. Cl O N (o O H = � �r N O N C a] M ( L C rZ3Da _ •o m w O L � C m CU a L 0. o LL N a L L y :3 U 72 L o ai 5 U^ ca 0 N -sue 0 3 L c L ~ a 4Ei 0 = (6 L t o C U C Q coi c C ti c fa a) N � cc o ., N a) o E V. cu N U .0 0j X y 0. a) c0 Cl) U r O C o ca w c O Er-cZ O N ccE ° O cu 2 M 'C N ' C d4 U w "' W N N O to ` co � O 3 N U m y N E C d o � a% L o N 7 L L >, � G c= �, c � a C � as E L U w 00 a ,ai �° o ° a° J c' N m Y v U� o ca L a a E E E� o a °'ii a v7 E rn� a cv = aai w m m °o o m w o Cl) O O cu 0) L cu o 06 �� C Q cc V Q% 0 cO > c c L)— 'a n>0 apv 5) -0 :3 v, E � 0 0 a) a cc m ca co L amm d a (L) x c w wWQ — a) a) a) 3 °o 00_ m CU c C) c° c~ v cOn 0 L r N M M f. ® 5 U m N M V N r c0 � (o N N N N N mt � N 00 O t O I � C m O (o O It O O O O O O N O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 O O (— 7 co N co M O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0) u (� 0 0 0 O O N 00 O M LO N 0 0 0 v O ►n O OD LO r C C N 1- M I'- O O L Lo Lo M O O M P- 1� n3 �� to 't ►ntn r N N g Q N 00 It O N 00 C LO 0 CD N cl� O M 0 m CL O co � p r O 00 (o Z O N 2 0 M N N (o C14 C) U')_ a (°n_ O U 0 to r .i O f� cc0Q cr r v e.r O c C C CO3 Q Q > W t3w� Z O 7. Cl O N (o O H = � �r N O N !A r U ( L W rZ3Da _ •o m Q 2 o C m CU a L 0. o LL N a L L C14 C) U')_ O (°n_ O t- 0 to r .i O f� O cr r v e.r I W C7 }� —J 0 0 tm c,c? O U N LO M O ti � r Ul O Nt O I W C7 }� g CD ti Q O 7. 000 (o N N M O coi —J 0 0 tm c,c? O U N d O LL W d O C7 }� g O 7. OO � Nv U m L) cc a- a> o cu cu o c O w m 2 LO LO UD v lqr v m c a> C co C w O O_ M t a) N N_ M d- cc c cm U) U H O M O O y cn � Q 0o c0 O co 0 0 0 m I` M M O O O 7 O .c L O m r+ '2 c >1 a > Z E U W 0 0 = J •• C o O $ — .0 cu L cow c) n 0) 0j .c E 0 c N N 'a O X W UT � o En Eo W Q 2 o c CN ®w — o .- cu c E N p :1 0 E rn le Y U 0 U U N LL F c y a Q U m m� r 3 00 vo, 0 m 3 m w ,it Lo E c 0 mcv > c 2 6�. O m �Uca C > w c a� 0 0_ c (� m a� .c °� O O c 0 m `L° _ i F L O C m WC9000�:�- <>- co ® N L Ln -� � O O O O O r (M � LO O O O O a) O O C N N O r T 0 0 0 O O O O CM � 0 O 0B 0) r � E -.4t O I— T N O O O O O O O M a LO co co w+ r r N M M LO Ln Ln Ln Ln LO LO O O It qqt O .0 ® v qt It It lqt qt It It 14, a U) N 0 co d O O N � d O O y cn � M 0o c0 O co 0 0 0 m I` M M O O ccccUQ Go LO M O m � r LO 00 LO M O (O O O M O O '2 c >1 a > Z O U W 0 0 = J •• C 1- _ Cl O 0 F = y N C O O (II O_ O 0) 0j .c E 0 c T V Q O N w f1 UT � o En Eo Q LL Q 2 o = >, o E F -o o a W co £1. O 7 {L .- cu N IL � N a I. O 0o c6 c U N LL F c y a O (W7 c 0 r O 00 E 0 m U O O M M 0o c0 O co 0 0 0 m I` M M O O c" Go LO M 0 � r LO 00 LO M O (O O O M O O O C jcu U O r 0 0 = J •• C 1- _ 0) E N CU 0) C d L O 0) 0j .c E 0 c cc :::: a = 0) cn CD ca o En Eo c rn L c a) >, . Co U 0 ca >, o E F -o o a W m 'r- 00 .- cu to � U �oWC90 I. WW� c 0) c6 c co L- e c L cc 'D a) U o U cu c O 8 C cn m c w w w w w�i W w w W 00 E cNa ,it Lo E M cn >U °'OIL C•-OV »=- � c J U W Q_ 1L rco(oa -i LnI-00co r T r T r N N c(i °0 00 00 00 00 LOO 00 00 00 I.t Ln Ln 0 M LO O Ln Ln 0 M (O N d N r 0 r r r O LO N r T M• Ax 0 03 .0 m 0 0) C L O o O E a� m o o o LO U cm N E a, a o w: 'rr L L � c F U c CD 0 W H W °o LO M N O C N a c m U) 0) F 0 CD 7 .. E o o o o o o o o o o o o o J Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z T � cr0 co N co N 0 0 o O O Cl) O Ln u) O T N N T N T 0 V to f` co O M M 0o c0 O co 0 0 0 m I` M M O O c" Go LO M O � r LO 00 LO M O (O O O M O O @0 N O r o LO N T O M 0 N r LO 0 N T o 1- r In N Ln O N (O 00 Ln O n N N M O N O O LOtn Nt M r W T N r T N N N M I,- LO Co 00 (0 r r 00 I. LO O O O 00 O O 00 0 0 0 0 I- M 00 O O co Ln M C -t T LO M Ln M O O O O M O O 000 L0(') O 0 LO M N r In LO v a N 0 M Ln ai 0 N 0o c0 N a N ti LO .Ni .ri m LO M M 00 O O 00 0 0 0 0 I- M 00 O O M Ln M (D -t T LO M Ln M O O O O M O O w Lon O LO N r 0 0 (O N T Ln CO N r 0 "t LO ai co a N 0 M Ln ai 0 N 0o c0 N a N LO N r N r r N N N M I- LO O m 0 c co 0 a) m o v) - o cn E v 0 c E E E cn >U °'OIL C•-OV »=- � c J U W Q_ 1L c W L W L O Q Q c� ° C9 a .. a� o o cn E o cn c i cc c a� 0 0_ c (� m a� .c °� O O c 0 m `L° (D d d F U 0 WC9000�:�- <>- co O N M It O O O O O r (M � LO O O O O O O O O r T 0 0 0 O O O O CM � 0 O � r T T -.4t O I— T N O O O O O O O M a+ LO co co co r r N M M LO Ln Ln Ln Ln LO LO O O It qqt v l�lqr v qt It It lqt qt It It 14, F c 0 y..r O N m a m L U m O Y U f0 a N a a C m m m l0 1 m�m AW CD C N C m m O Z Q1I ��•, •� O y L 611 E o 0 '' ca a =tea a) 0 X Co Ul) W a64 c E O C? o cc co a) O 3 US a) t cc o c ca c L r� c U ca 0 m w z z_ _ O O c/j N H ti may. = N_ O (7 T U W T a1 Q � O m ° N 0 �Na Ooo a U N eC LL Um U L (A a) cu 0a Q ca N QO O N a- N �UQ Cc U) c c V W a>i C Q a) E in 04 O_ O N -a N Co N M co ►[1 O O ao coo N O O ao Id- co c 3 LL as � c m � � J O CD LO r U) T N M IW LO O ti N O O O O O O O T Cl 0 0 0 0 M O LO L[) O N N N T N T O rn N C w L J C cts m c O `O r O O O O O M FI- N M O 0 M I,- T O P- N cct O C0 V � O M1-* w m w O O N 0 ao LO N IRt CO LO Cn N M 7o a) a3 O m C L m � � O c > LL. LL. U o O U � D' a) O m m cn c cn 'a 0 a � Q cC L co 0 .v (n a) c a) > c O L O ; rn u1 c o , O a d a) Cl) U c m O a) p) cu E o d cu @ U u) a w O J m m L 0 CL E m O co m o 0 0 U C c c c w a �v CL Es ai a) a.ww x - — m cu o W w-j aT° r- CNO O N M a? N T N 617 N T N M IW LO O ti N O O O O O O O T Cl 0 0 0 0 M O LO L[) O N N N T N T O rn N C w L J C cts m c O `O r O O O O O M FI- N M O 0 M I,- T O P- N cct O C0 V � O M1-* w m w O O N 0 ao LO N IRt CO LO Cn N M 7o O IM 0 m c c� U ai c q� L.L w a 0 a) c N c ca o L U CLC�LO 7 a) d O U c � O aS U � CD .0 i c a) E to a) L ca cn CU c N > Cc � L w � C Cn '0 O C ca > O O E O_ a) c a) 7 a) CD O cc OM C:) cn > O c � � c o• E ca a) � .L+ L O cn cc O ca C O E T a) m c 0 r+ CD U) Q) E a> a c0 Q c o) w sz CU 0 o U O O O N O a) 04 L L _ M a U) CL O a L ca cc U t L C6 Cc °� U C Co Co a) C1 � -L I5 a- a) E w ' 0 cc T G T T N M T O O O Y7 CD _- N N N c0 O L LO LO It M U') of LO O O T LL Q a- W cc CL ca U N M U a3 O m co CO CD co m � � O c > Qm LL. U o O D' W c m U c -0 c n 0 a � ° O cu � Q �°L LL LL C fL6 CL6 � � C ;-- U c c 97 O 7 N a) 0.0 p 'O m U U' U :zi C- m 2 d O IM 0 m c c� U ai c q� L.L w a 0 a) c N c ca o L U CLC�LO 7 a) d O U c � O aS U � CD .0 i c a) E to a) L ca cn CU c N > Cc � L w � C Cn '0 O C ca > O O E O_ a) c a) 7 a) CD O cc OM C:) cn > O c � � c o• E ca a) � .L+ L O cn cc O ca C O E T a) m c 0 r+ CD U) Q) E a> a c0 Q c o) w sz CU 0 o U O O O N O a) 04 L L _ M a U) CL O a L ca cc U t L C6 Cc °� U C Co Co a) C1 � -L I5 a- a) E w ' 0 cc T G T T N M T O O O Y7 CD _- N N N c0 O L LO LO It M U') of LO O O T LL Q a- W cc CL ca U N M CDCity of Columbia Heights Meeting on the 2002 Proposed Budget and Property Taxes December 3, 2001 PUBLIC MEETING ON THE 2002 PROPOSED BUDGET AND PROPERTY TAXES Table of Contents 2002 Budget Message ............................................................................. ............................1 -1 2002 Revenues by Source ...................................................................... ...........................1 -12 2002 All Budgetary Funds Expenditures By Functional Area ............... ...........................1 -13 2002 All Budgetary Funds Expenditures By Classification ................... ...........................1 -14 2002 Sources of General Fund, Library Fund, and EDA Revenue ........ ...........................1 -15 2002 General and Library Fund Expenditures by Functional Area ....... ..... ......................1 -16 Major Expenditure Increases ...... ........................................................... ...........................1 -17 Class Rate Percentages By Real Property Type .................................................... ............ 1 -18 Changesin State Aid .............................................................................. ...........................1 -19 ProposedProperty Taxes ....................................................................... ...........................1 -20 Changesin Tax Levy 2000 -2002 ............ ............................................... ...........................1 -21 Columbia Heights 2002 Property Tax Levy .......................................... ...........................1 -22 Where Your Property Taxes Go ......................................................... ............................... 1 -23 Whatwill $27 a Month Buy? ................................................................. ...........................1 -24 CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS 2002 BUDGET MESSAGE This budget message accompanies the 2002 budget document distributed to the City Council and available to the public. Budget Format Several years ago the budget format was revised in an attempt to provide more useful information to the City Council and the public in a summarized, user - friendly format. Under the new format, the budget was broken down into ten functional areas and is prepared with a summary for each of these functional areas along with a detailed budget workbook for the City Council to utilize during their budget review. The summary budget book is then again summarized into a public document that is used for the City's public budget adoption meeting and for any required truth in taxation hearings. The budget message follows the format of the overall budget and provides a narrative section summarizing each of the functional areas along with overall summary information on the budget document, total budget, property taxes, and other revenue sources. Budget Overview Budget Highlights Expenditures: As is reflected in the budget, the City Manager's overall proposed budget for tax - supported funds is down slightly for 2002 from 2001. For 2001 the total General Fund, Library Fund and EDA budgets equaled $8,674,001. For 2002 the City Manager's proposed budget is $8,660,490. The principal reason for the reduction in the budget is the new state legislation that reduced state aid to the city by $800,566. It was the state legislature's recommendation that this aid reduction be passed on to residents in the form of a property tax levy along with a property tax increase to cover inflationary costs. With these changes and reductions in state aid together with inflation and the additional financial needs of the City, it was necessary to take a hard look at all departmental budgets and make some significant reductions. As you will see in the following explanations for each functional area, these budget reductions range from the elimination of a police officer position to significant cutbacks in capital equipment purchases. To dramatize the difference in the budget preparation from 2001 to 2002, we have included the following two charts. The first chart is a reprint from last year's budget book showing the departments with the highest budgetary increases from 2000 to 2001. The second chart reflects the major budget increases from 2001 to 2002. Page 1 -1 As mentioned above, the state legislature significantly reduced state aid to the City. The following chart reflects what the City received in state aid for the years 2000 through 2002. As you can see, there was an $800,566 reduction in 2002. 2000 Budget 2001 Budget Increase /Decrease from 2000 Fire 769,507 805,299 35,792 Parks 638,648 655,869 17,221 Weed Control 8,981 24,237 15,256 Finance 549,621 563,138 13,517 Streets 638,438 643,549 5,111 Recognition /Special Events 47,528 52,220 4,692 General Government Building 125,900 130,000 4,100 Tree Trimming 42,940 46,948 4,008 Street Lighting 121,875 125,489 3,614 City Manager 388,852 391,945 3,093 Traffic Signs & Signals 67,375 70,452 3,077 Murzyn Hall 243,692 246,1661 2,474 As mentioned above, the state legislature significantly reduced state aid to the City. The following chart reflects what the City received in state aid for the years 2000 through 2002. As you can see, there was an $800,566 reduction in 2002. 2001 Budget 2002 Budget Increase /Decrease from 2001 Elections 6,823 40,548 33,725 Streets 642,019 670,812 28,793 Police 2,417,842 2,442,873 25,030 Administration & General 189,556 204,934 15,378 General Government Building 130,000 142,216 12,216 Parks 644,403 650,283 5,880 Senior Citizens 72,121 76,238 4,117 Street Lighting 124,989 128,088 3,099 City Manager 391,9451 394,341 2,396 Civil Defense 32,352 33,836 1,484 Trips & Outings 37,530 38,603 1,073 Weed Control 14,953 15,9591 1,006 As mentioned above, the state legislature significantly reduced state aid to the City. The following chart reflects what the City received in state aid for the years 2000 through 2002. As you can see, there was an $800,566 reduction in 2002. Page 1 -2 2000 Actual 2001 Budget 2002 Budget HA ',A 1,004,122 1,004,368 0 LGA 2,325,029 2,385,618 2,589,420 Total 3,329,151 3,389,986 2,589,420 Change from Prior Year 75,600 60,835 (800,566) Page 1 -2 As was recommended by the state legislature, this aid reduction was passed on to residents in the form of a property tax levy increase. It should be noted that although the city and county are having property tax levy increases as a result of state legislation, there is a significant offset to this in the fact that the state has drastically increased aid to school districts and the levy reduction by school districts should be greater than the levy increase from the city and county. The net result as projected by the state is that homes valued at approximately $120,000 should see a total property tax levy reduction of approximately $100. The following chart shows the breakdown of the city's levy for the years 1999 through 2001 and the proposed levy for 2002. As the chart reflects, the City's levy increase for the years 1999 and 2000 was very minimal. To finance expenses in these years the City relied heavily on reserves that were accumulated in the City's General Fund balance. The levy for 2001 was increased to cover expenses without using fund balance reserves, and as is reflected in the chart, the levy for 2002 has some considerable increases, primarily to cover the reduction in state aid. PROPOSED PROPERTY TAXES, 1999 - 2001 Proposed Property Taxes 1999 2000 2001 2002 Library 467,518 500,244 547,767 591,588 EDA 111,048 119,296 119,295 137,015 General Fund 2,660,059 2,676,416 2,958,490 4,110,711 Total Levy 3,238,625 3,295,956 3,6915 552 4, 839, 314 Levy Increase from Prior Year 57,331 329,596 1,213,762 Percent of Increase 1.8% 10.0% 45.0% The next major factor in the property tax formula is the state legislature's restructuring of class rate percentages for real property taxes payable in 1998 through 2002. The class rate changes made in these years will affect property taxes paid for the current and all future years. The major change was a significant shift in the tax capacity value from commercial industrial and residential non - homestead to residential homesteaded property. As you can see from the following chart, there is a slight reduction in tax capacity rates for homes over $76,000. The reduction is from 2% in 1997 to 1.65% in 2002. However, there is a more significant reduction for commercial industrial property and residential non - homestead property. The net result is that a large amount of the tq� reya0ue previously paid by commercial industrial properties and residential non - homestead properties is now picked up by homesteaded residential property. Page 1 -3 CLASS RATE PERCENTAGES BY REAL PROPERTY TYPE TAXES PAYABLE 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001 and 2002 Real Property Payable Payable Payable Payable Payable Description 1997 1998 1999 2000 and 2001 2002 Class Rate Class Rate Class Rate Class Rate Class Rate Residential homestead First $72,000 1.00% Over $72,000 2.00% First $75,000 1.00% 1.00% Over $75,000 1.85% 1.70% First $76,000 1.00% 1.00% $76,000 - $500,000 1.65% 1.00% Over $500,000 1.25% Commercial - Industrial and public utility First $100,000 Over $100,000 First $150,000 2.70% 2.45% 2.40% 1.50% Over $150,000 4.00% 3.50% 3.40% 2.00% Residential non - homestead, 1 unit First $72,000 2.30% Over $72,000 2.30% First $75,000 1.90% 1.25% Over $75,000 2.10% 1.70% First $76,000 1.20% 1.00% $76,000 - $500,000 1.65% 1.00% Over $500,000 1.25% Residential non - homestead, 2 -3 units and undeveloped land 2.30% 2.10% 1.70% 1.65% 1.50% Residential non - homestead 4 or more units 3.40% 2.90% 2.50% 2.40% 1.80% Low Income 1.00% 0.90% Economic Environment As indicated in the Moody's Municipal Credit Report for the City of Columbia Heights, our finances remain satisfactory with reasonable General Fund reserves. As a result, the City has maintained an Al bond rating. Our revenue structure is somewhat vulnerable to economic pressure since approximately 30% of our General Fund revenue base comes from state aid and 48% of our General Fund revenue base is from local property taxes. As these aids and the City's property tax revenue are received in the last six months of the year, the City has been maintaining a cash flow fund balance equal to 40% of the General Fund operating budget. Subsequently, although it may appear that we have a significant fund balance reserve, it is actually dedicated to cash flow purposes. Page 1.4 The City's primary source for increased revenue is through property tax levies. Over the past several years, the City Council has maintained a very conservative profile in increasing taxes by minimal percentages. To maintain the quality of services provided to the residents of Columbia Heights, it may be necessary to develop a policy of a slightly higher property tax increase. However, due to state imposed levy limits for the years 1998 through 2000, the City was restricted from implementing minimal property tax increases. These levy limits were removed for the year 2001 but are back in place for the year 2002. As a result of this legislative restriction, the City was forced to look at severe budget cuts and a reduction of services in the 2002 budget preparation process. At the present time it is anticipated that the property tax legislation passed in the last legislative session will only worsen the future property tax burden on cities. As part of the City's property tax revenue, the City does receive an area wide fiscal disparities tax distribution from commercial property in other communities. The basis of this area wide fiscal disparities tax distribution is to collect property taxes on commercial property throughout the metropolitan area and then redistribute this area wide property tax to communities such as Columbia Heights which has a limited commercial property tax base. Under the fiscal disparities area wide tax system, the City of Columbia Heights benefits significantly. It is projected that the City will receive over $930,000 in property taxes from the tax on commercial property in other communities. As part of the recent legislation, the City will be looking at a significant reduction in this area wide tax revenue in future years that will mean the residents of Columbia Heights will need to pick up even a larger portion of the property taxes. Page 1 -5 Significant Highlights on Expenditures by Functional Area Administration The Administration function includes Mayor, City Council, ADMINISTRATION City Manager, Assessing, and Legal budgets. The total proposed 2002 budget for this functional area is $922,698. EXPENDITURE SUMMARY This is down $37,262 from the adopted 2001 budget. The most significant areas of reduction in the budget are reductions in the Mayor /Council budget of $8,015 for contingencies, $2,500 for a facilitator on goal setting, $8,900 for membership dues in the North Metro Mayors Association, and $2,000 in advertising. The City Manager budget included reductions of $4,000 for training and education, $2,500 for membership fees, $2,000 for travel and expenses, $4,000 for staff training, and $5,000 for the reduction in employment advertising. In the Assessing budget it is 1� 2" 2W1 proposed to eliminate the Assessing Clerk position mid -year Q Personal Services ®st,pglee when the current employee retires. This will result in a ■Oftr&Mm &Charges 8CapltelOutlay partial year savings of approximately $19,000. Another ■CwtwWncm&TransWs significant area of reduction was $21,500 in projected legal fees. The most significant area of cost increases in these budgets is in the area of personnel expenses. Cost of living pay increases have required an increase to these areas. The net result of the increases and reductions is a decrease to this functional area budget of $37,261. Community Development This functional area covers all services previously provided by the Housing & Redevelopment Authority in addition to expanded services. The specific departments covered by this functional area are Building Inspections, Administration, Community Development Block Grant Parkview Villa COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT EXPENDITURE SUMMARY I I z ow,000 Economic Development Authority, Housing Redevelopment Authority, multi -use redevelopment, and some miscellaneous 1.500.000 housing programs. This functional area of the City was 1,W0,0W created in 1996 with the establishment of the EDA and the transfer of previous HRA staff to the EDA as a City 500'00° department. In recent years this budget has seen several changes and modifications with the increases and decreases to the Community Development Block Grant Housing programs, along with significant changes in the Section 8 Housing program. During the year 2000 the Section 8 program was transferred back to Metro HRA, freeing the City of any and all responsibilities for the administration of that program loan program was contracted to an outside agency to manage. Page 1 -6 1999 2000 2001 2002 Personal Services V" Supplies ■ Other Services and Charges • Capital Outlay ■ aes &Trarrrars In addition to this, the MHFA Finance Department This functional area covers Elections, Finance, Information FINALE Systems, and Utility Billing Administration for the water, EXPBDI1 URE SLKV MRY sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and refuse departments. The total budget for 2002 is $43,025 over the adopted 2001 budget. The most significant changes in this budget are in 1'200'0°0 the area of personnel. First being the cost of living increases 1,000,0m " and second being some restructuring in the Finance 800,om Department staffing. Over the years accounting and eoo,000 reporting requirements have changed significantly. a00000 However, the department has seen no restructuring since - the mid 1980's. With the current structure in the Finance 20Q00° Department it has been very difficult to maintain the level of 0 1980 71100 2001 2702 accounting and reporting that is required under current standards. Subsequently, the 2002 budget does include :m aw s a E (7(;nd11pB11o098 TI95(HS minor restructuring in the department to eliminate two current positions and create two new positions that will give the department a slightly higher level of expertise to enable us to comply with all current state and federal accounting and reporting requirements. The portion of this department that relates to information systems has seen some growth and improvement over the past two years, with greater efficiency in software, e-mail, and the expansion and improvement of the City's Web site, which is utilized as another means of providing information to the public. The most significant budget increase item for 2002 over 2001 is in the Elections Department. As the City has gone to even year elections, we no longer have odd year elections. This has resulted in a savings of approximately $30,000 to the City budget every other year. However, as 2002 is an election year, we do see an Election Department budget increase of approximately $34,000. Fire This functional area is comprised of the Fire and Civil Defense FIRE departments. The overall department proposed expenditures EXPENDITURE SUMMARY in this functional area increased by $209,000 from the adopted 2001 budget. This increase was broken down into three major areas. First, in the area of personnel, it was proposed to upgrade one position and increase part-time hours for the secretarial position. This, combined with cost of living and step increases, resulted in an additional personal services expense increase of $68,800. The next major area of increase was in capital equipment with the proposed replacement of the generator in City Hall for $50,000 and the replacement of the ambulance for $74,000. The third 1989 2000 200+ 2002 significant item was upgrading the software program in the Perso Fire Department to CityView software at a projected cost of •Others° vices& 11 Capital y ■Other Services 8 Charges !Capital Outlay $20,000 and the installation of new lockers for the firefighters ' t[ anclas&Transfers at a cost of $26,000. In the City Manager's review of this — - budget, he cut the staffing upgrades by $10,000, eliminated the purchase of new lockers for a cost savings of $26,000, delayed the purchase of the new generator for a savings of $50,000, moved the cost of purchasing new software to the Cable TV budget in the amount of $20,000, and moved the cost of the ambulance to the PERA Capital Equipment fund. Although these are reasonably significant reductions in the budget, they will not impair the services the Fire Department provides. Page 1 -7 General Government This functional area as a grouping was created new for the GENERAL 1998 budget process. It is a collection of all the departmental GOVERNMENT areas that are not specifically assigned to one division head. EXPENDITURE SUMMARY This functional area includes the following departments: General Government Buildings, Recognition /Special Events, Contingencies and Transfers, Cable Television, Refuse and 3,500,000 Hazardous Waste funds. The most significant item of note in 3,000,000 this functional area budget is under General Government 2,5W,000 Buildings. The total budget is down by $15,314 from the actual 2'000,000 expenditures in 2000. The 2002 budget also includes $25,000 1 00,0000 for additional alarm and other security items at City Hall. 500,0 Likewise, the Cable Television budget decreased by $29,500 0 from 2001 to 2002. The Refuse budgets also saw a cost ' 2000 2°°' increase. The disposal portion of the budget increased by SPers 31&rvice 13swPks $8,000 in anticipation of a 1.5% contract increase by the Trmrt£b�s •CaPRal Outlay hauler. Internal administrative and management costs of the Refuse fund increased by $6,300 and the recycling portion of the budget increased by $6,100. The Hazardous Waste disposal budget remains the same. 2002 Library The City's library is located at 820 40th Avenue. The library's main goal is to provide free access to informational and LIBRARY recreational materials for the patrons in a pleasant environment EXPENDITURE SUMMARY conducive to the acquisition of knowledge. A variety of library- related programs (e.g. storytimes, reading clubs, filmtimes, 70x000 _ - homebound delivery, etc.) are offered for patrons of all ages from preschool through senior citizen. As a city - supported 500.000 library, Columbia Heights participates in the MELSA regional 500°000 system through a contract with the Anoka County library ,O 0 3W°00 system, State -wide Borrowers Compact, and METRONET. 3W, OW This enables Columbia Heights patrons to gain access to 200,0°o special services and scholarly materials available to other 100'°00 participating libraries. For 2002, the department proposed 0 1999 2000 2001 2002 library budget is up from $597,234 to $648,002. The major a ,SwAces ®s4olw highlights of the 2002 budget are a reduction in part -time hours 8WCm*V 1a9&Tmns� '°"" Y ■ Cmtingendes &Transfers by 922 with the reduction of the Page /Choreperson job class. The supplies section includes $3,950 of computer equipment and software upgrades for the PC's used by staff. Other service charges include $3,960 for the T -1 line used by the automated circulation system and increases for other utilities. Capital requests include replacement of the ballast in the adult reading room and a new circulation desk for the main floor lobby. In the City Manager's review of this budget, he recommended reducing expert and professional services by $2,600, eliminating the budget for vandalism by $500 and delaying the replacement of the lights and the circulation desk until 2003 for a savings of $35,500. It is felt that these cuts will not impair the high level of services that the library provides to patrons. Page 1 -8 Liquor The liquor function is comprised of three liquor stores, LIQUOR Top Valu I, Top Valu II, and Heights Liquor, along with a EXPENDITURE SUMMARY capital equipment replacement fund for each of the three stores. Top Valu I is located at 4340 Central Avenue. This store opened in November of 1984 and was the City's first 9,000.000 endeavor into a large volume discount liquor operation. Since 7,000,000 it's opening it has been very successful. The City's second S0oo0m endeavor along this line was Top Valu II at 2241 37th Avenue. 5,00,000 This store follows the same concept as Top Valu I and 4,000,000 opened in April of 1994. As this store is located in a lower 3,000,000 traffic area, its growth has been slower but very steady. Each 2,000,°°° 0 year it shows a progressive increase in sales and profitability. ,,000,00 0 Heights Liquor is the third store and is located at 5225 1999 2000 200' 2002 University Avenue. This store was opened in 1964 and has tPersonalSernces 0Supplies d Other Services & charges ! Capital Outlay remained a very small, traditional liquor store. It does not a arrawem operate on a high volume discount basis. Markups are higher at this store, along with profitability, which is due primarily to taking advantage of high volume purchasing discounts based on the volume purchased at Top Valu and the lower overhead expenses of a city -owned operation. The net result is that for several years this was the most profitable liquor store in the Heights. However, with the opening of the large, new Fridley store just north of the freeway in 2000, we have seen a significant decrease in sales and profitability at this store. With this is in mind, and the fact that the store is located adjacent to a residential neighborhood, we have undertaken the project of looking for a new location for the store at 5225 University Avenue in addition to looking for a location on Central Avenue where we could build our own store. Currently we are renting on Central Avenue and the lease expires in three years. It would be highly beneficial and profitable to the City and the liquor operation to own our own store on Central Avenue and to build a new store on University Avenue. For this purpose, we have included $2,000,000 in the 2002 budget to purchase property and build a new store at one of these locations. Police This functional area is comprised of the Police Department, Animal Control, DARE, and Capital Equipment Replacement. The most significant item in this budget is personnel costs. Over the past several years department staffing has been increased from 22 sworn officers to 26 through the addition of three officers by federal grants, and one additional officer over and above the grant requirements. In 1999 all grant funding and the requirement to maintain this staffing level ended. The City Council needs to address the increased staffing level in the Police Department. Without the continued grant revenue, the addition of four sworn officers is a significant increase in the Police Department budget. The proposed Police Department budget for 2002 increased by $182,216 from the adopted 2001 budget of $2,417,842. The major portion of this increase is $151,770 in personnel costs, primarily for Page 1 -9 3,000,000 2,500.000 2.000.000 1.500.OW 1.000.000 500,000 POLICE EXPENDITURE SUMMARY 1999 2000 2001 2002 ■ Personal Services O Supplies Ii M Other Services and Charges ■ Capital Outlay ■Canton enaes&jmn&Wis employees progressing through the wage plan and cost of living increases. The other significant item in the Police Department is the capital equipment budget. The proposed 2002 capital equipment budget is for $115,100 which includes two full -sized marked squad cars, one mid -size administrative car, two replacement light bars, two laptop computers with modems and stands, and two in -squad video systems. Also included in the capital equipment budget is the third payment for the Visions Records Management system. In the Police Department the City Manager proposed cutting one CSO and one police officer position and delaying the purchase of three new police vehicles and equipment for one year. These cuts are a first level step in reducing staff in the Police Department back to the normal level prior to receiving the federal grant officers. Public Works This functional area is comprised of several departments PUBLIC WORKS crossing several funds. One of the significant advantages of EXPENDITURE SUMMARY the functional area budget format adopted in 1998 is that it shows the entire Public Works function in one area. Areas 8.000A0 covered are engineering, streets, weed control, parks, tree 7.000.000 programs, water utility, sanitary sewer utility, storm sewer utility, garage, and capital equipment replacement funds for 50°°'0°° the Public Works operation. Significant budget items in Public °°°°.°°° Works are as follows. In the area of personnel the 2002 U00A° department proposed budget for salaries and benefits is 2.000000 $1,967,449, which is an increase of $187,769 over the 2001 1.000.000 budget. This increase iS due to cost of living pay increases ° 7999 2000 2007 2002 and employees progressing through the pay scale. The ■Pers elSeNces orpoles engineering budget is down by $44,000 primarily because oOther 5erocesandCherges .ceaneioueey e CuMingenGos & Trene engineering costs have been allocated to the infrastructure fund for street projects. Although this is a cost savings to engineering, if these costs are not passed on through assessments as an administrative charge, it will have a detrimental effect on the infrastructure /street replacement fund. In the tree budget there was a proposal to eliminate the City picking up 50% of the cost on the removal of diseased trees. This would result in a savings of approximately $22,500. However, in discussions, it appears that for 2002 a better alternative would be for the City to pick up 25% of the cost of diseased tree removal, which would still result in a budget savings of $11,250. In the Parks Department a major item of consideration is eliminating from one -third to one -half of our skating rinks. In recent years several of the rinks have received minimal usage. A reduction or closing of these rinks could result in a cost savings of approximately $16,500 in seasonal employees and another $30,000 in repair, maintenance and utilities of warming houses. In the Water Department it is projected that the cost of water purchased from Minneapolis will increase by approximately $100,000 from 2001. With this increase, it will be essential to have a water rate increase in the water fund. In the sewer fund we are not anticipating any sewer disposal charge increases and subsequently may be able to forestall any sewer rate increases. In the central garage fund there is minimal change from 2001. The major goal here is to continue funding the capital outlay fund for future building improvements to the municipal service center building. In summary, several other areas of the Public Works budget saw changes that are presented in more detail in the Public Works budget document. Page 1 -10 Recreation Recreation is comprised of several departments including -- -- administration, youth athletics, youth enrichment, adult RECREATION athletics, traveling teams, Back to the Parks program, trips EXPENDITURE SUMMARY and outings, senior citizens, CHASE, and Murzyn Hall management. Over the years the recreation program has - increased in several areas. One of the most notable areas is ° °°° the Senior Citizen program due to its tremendous growth. 60.000. ' While several senior programs in other communities are 500.000. stagnant, through the excellent management of our Senior 400000 Coordinator, Karen Moeller, the program in Columbia Heights 300 has grown consistently and is well received by all seniors. z°°.°°° Other items of notable mention in the Recreation budget are 100.000 that the administrative component of the budget has °r increased by $16,878 primarily due to step and cost of living 1999 2000 2001 2002 Personal personnel increases. In the area of youth athletics the budget ■OtherServi Services ean ®Supplies ■ Other Services and Charges a Capital Outlay is relatively the same as it was in 2001. Adult Athletics has !Contingencies B Transfers seen a slight decrease of $1,187 due to the elimination of the Open Sundays program. Youth Enrichment and Traveling Athletics are essentially the same as the 2001 budget. The Back to the Parks program was designed to set $10,000 aside each year as matching money for any entity or community group that wanted to come in with matching money to do a park project. Due to virtually no activity in this area, the program has been eliminated from the 2002 budget. The Trips and Outings program that provides one day and extended trips for senior citizens, and has been very successful, saw a slight budget increase of $1,073 due to transportation costs and higher gas prices. It should be noted that this department is a fully self- sustaining department in that all of the costs for trips and outings are charged back to the participants. The Senior Citizen program has increased slightly in cost primarily due to increases in personnel services. The Murzyn Hall budget has increased by $1,306 which is primarily due to the budget for building improvements. Conclusion The above narrative should give an overview of the most salient changes and assumptions included in the budget. As much as feasible, this is a hold- the -line budget. The property tax format in the state has seen significant changes for the 2002 tax levy. With state legislation shifting local government aids from cities to school districts, taxpayers should receive a significant reduction in their school property tax levy. However, as the state significantly reduced aid to cities, there will be a slight increase in city property taxes. The net result, as projected by the state, is that a $100,000 home should see a total property tax reduction of approximately $100. However, with these changes and with the severe levy limits imposed by the state, the City's actual revenue increase is roughly equivalent to cost of living salary increases for tax - supported funds, which leaves the City with no additional funding for other areas of inflation. The budget process is a major undertaking by City staff and the City Council, which requires a great deal of work performed by all involved to bring the process to a successful conclusion. I extend my appreciation in this endeavor to all department directors and their staff, and a special thanks to Barb Kelzenberg and Sue Schmidtbauer for their time in compiling the budget and their extensive efforts in ensuring the accuracy of the entire document. This is a very trying and exhausting endeavor, and their extensive efforts are greatly appreciated. Page 1 -11 L 2002 REVENUES BY SOURCE ALL FUNDS Transfers In & Non- Taxes Rev Receipts $4,839,314 $3,060,114 Net Sales- Liquor ti Allocations $1,171,743 $80,000 Sales & Related Charges $4,045,646 Miscellaneous $1,389,950 Fines & Forfeits f L Charges For Services $115,000 $426,100 Page 1 -12 Debt Service Funds and HRA $1,287,701 Licenses & Permits $274,500 Intergovernmental $6,519,288 2002 ALL BUDGETARY F U N DS EXPENDITURES BY FUNCTIONAL AREA Public Works $6,030,293 Administration $922,698 Recreation $619,633 i Liquor $3,378,000 Page 1 -13 Library $583,202 Debt Service $2,820,649 Community Development $1,564,107 Finance $1,144,113 Fire $880,469 General Government $2,370,504 Capital $4,87 2002 All Budgetary Funds Expenditures by Classification Contingencies & Transfers $2,747,874 l & Charges $3,808,623 Page 1 -14 Personal Services $7,639,258 5 $3,767,392 SOURCES OF GENERAL FUND, LIBRARY FUND AND EDA REVENUE 2002 BUDGET Other $599,800 0 Inter- - govemmental $2,834,820 $4,839,314 Page 1 -15 2001 GENERAL FUND AND LIBRARY FUND EXPENDITURES Expenditures By Classification Contingencies and Page 1 -16 Capital Outlay W X Q F- I-- W a, 0 CL D W O a O a N Q Q N TOM 0 N N tm N a 00 �+ � C) N Lo _U O M c) M ti N Q T- 0) f` M 0 M O M C� O M r �, m N M r CD� LO (0 M N 0) I` N_ � to M ill r ti d) 00 w _ O m Lt7 m m N N M N v C0 CO c0 (D (D V 0) � ILO 0') W N N � 0) (D N [3 0 O�� 0) N ti M CD U-) V-- co N C3) M N N M N co IT U') N 0p Re C� U') O O to d) U7 r c% P. T- O 00 1. M 1` (o r- (D M 0) qe M qt � Cfl N 00 M N M CV E 0 N y- .m C N OL A w 0 N N tm N a Changes In Tax Levy 2000 - 2002 4,500,000 4,000,000 3,500,000 3,000,000 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 500,000 0 2000 * GENERAL FUND 2,676,416 ❑ LIBRARY FUND 500,244 EDA FUND 119,296 Page 1 -21 2001 2002 4,110,711 591,588 2,958,490 547,767 119,295 137,015 Columbia Heights 2002 Property Tax Levy $4,839,314 City 2001 Property Tax Levy $3,626,552 Page 1 -22 Growth $177,264 State Aid Reduction $800,566 tion ,933 WHERE YOUR PROPERTY TAXES GO Payable 2001 Miscellaneous 5% County 21% City School 23% 51% Page 1 -23 WHAT WILL $27 A MONTH BUY? (Based on 2002 Property Tax) $27 a Month Buys Quality and Quantity in the City of Columbia Heights Telephone ,� A =� `►� C� 'll f Garbage Pick -Up 9 Columbia Heights City Services Parks Streets Dinner for 4 rr Ju Police Fire Basic Cable TV Library The average home in Columbia Heights pays $27 per month in city real estate taxes. The average Columbia Heights' resident will spend $27 every month on various services and pleasures, i.e., pizza and pop for four at a local restaurant, basic cable TV for the family, monthly phone services, etc. The best value for your money in Columbia Heights is still all of the city services that $27 of your monthly property tax will buy! (Based on a $94,300 home in Columbia Heights.) CITYSERV Page 1 -24 Major Expenditure Increases Page 1 -17 2001 Budget 2002 Budget Increase /Decrease from 2001 Elections 6,823 40,548 33,725 Streets 642,019 670,812 I 28,793 Police 2,417,842 2,442,873 25,030 Administration & General 189,556 204,934 15,378 General Government Building 130,000 142,216 12,216 Parks I 644,403 650,283 5,880 Senior Citizens 72,121 76,238 4,117 Street Lighting 124,989 128,088 3,099 City Manager 391,945 394,341 21396 Civil Defense 32,352 33,836 1,484 Trips & Outings 37,530 38,603 1,073 Weed Control 14,953 15,959 1,006 Page 1 -17 CLASS RATE PERCENTAGES BY REAL PROPERTY TYPE TAXES PAYABLE 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001 and 2002 Real Property Payable Payable Payable Payable Payable Description 1997 1998 1999 2000 and 2001 2002 Class Rate Class Rate Class Rate Class Rate Class Rate Residential homestead First $72,000 1.00% Over $72,000 2.00% First $75,000 1.00% 1.00% Over $75,000 1.85% 1.70% First $76,000 1.00% 1.00% $76,000 - $500,000 1.65% 1.00% Over $500,000 1.25% Commercial - Industrial and public utility First $100,000 Over $100,000 First $150,000 2.70% 2.45% 2.40% 1.50% Over $150,000 4.00% 3.50% 3.40% 2.00% Residential non - homestead, 1 unit First $72,000 2.30% Over $72,000 2.30% First $75,000 1.90% 1.25% Over $75,000 2.10% 1.70% First $76,000 1.20% 1.00% $76,000 - $500,000 1.65% 1.00% Over $500,000 1.25% Residential non - homestead, 2 -3 J units and undeveloped land 2.30% 2.10% 1.70% 1.65% 1.50%. Residential non - homestead 4 or more units 3.40% 2.90% 2.50% 2.40% 1.80% Low Income 1.00% 0.90% Page 1 -18 W H Q Fm N Z Cl) w 0 z Q 2 U a� 0 a Q CD --. CN C4 N co vm ° v N D In 00 00 Le) o OD Go N N av w to Le) M r to tC W CD Ift 0 oft CD CD cm C7 co co w rM N t'h N N La CD Q r CD r to N N Q N N 1%- � C7 M M r N M Low tai Lm a CL E Q _ ...I H a� 0 a ~000 0000000 ~ ~ ~ O0 0000000 0 ~000 0000000 ~ ~ ~00 ~000000 0 ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~0 00000~ 0 0 '~ " U- LL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0~0~ 0 0 0000 ~00000 00000 O0 o o oooo ~ooooo ooooo oo CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS 2002 BUDGET MESSAGE This budget message accompanies the 2002 budget document distributed to the City Council and available to the public. Budget Format Several years ago the budget format was revised in an attempt to provide more useful information to the City Council and the public in a summarized, user-friendly format. Under the new format, the budget was broken down into ten functional areas and is prepared with a summary for each of these functional areas along with a detailed budget workbook for the City Council to utilize during their budget review. The summary budget book is then again summarized into a public document that is used for the City's public budget adoption meeting and for any required truth in taxation hearings. The budget message follows the format of the overall budget and provides a narrative section summarizing each of the functional areas along with overall summary information on the budget document, total budget, property taxes, and other revenue sources. Budget Overview Budget Highlights Expenditures: As is reflected in the budget, the City Manager's overall proposed budget for tax- supported funds is down slightly for 2002 from 2001. For 2001 the total General Fund, Library Fund and EDA budgets equaled $8,674,001. For 2002 the City Manager's proposed budget is $8,660,490. The principal reason for the reduction in the budget is the new state legislation that reduced state aid to the city by $800,566. It was the state legislature's recommendation that this aid reduction be passed on to residents in the form of a property tax levy along with a property tax increase to cover inflationary costs. With these changes and reductions in state aid together with inflation and the additional financial needs of the City, it was necessary to take a hard look at all departmental budgets and make some significant reductions. As you will see in the following explanations for each functional area, these budget reductions range from the elimination of a police officer position to significant cutbacks in capital equipment purchases. To dramatize the difference in the budget preparation from 2001 to 2002, we have included the following two charts. The first chart is a reprint from last year's budget book showing the departments with the highest budgetary increases from 2000 to 2001. The second chart reflects the major budget increases from 2001 to 2002. Page 1-! Increase/Decrease 2000 Budget 2001 Budget from 2000 Fire 769,507 805,299 35,792 Parks 638,648 655,869 17,221 Weed Control 8,981 24,237 15,256 Finance 549,621 563,138 13,517 Streets 638,438 643,549 5,111 Recognition/Special Events 47,528 52,220 4,692 General Government Building 125,900 130,000 4,100 Tree Trimming 42,940 46,948 4,008 Street Lighting 121,875 125,489 3,614 City Manager 388,852 391,945 3,093 Traffic Signs & Signals 67,375 70,452 3,077 Murzyn Hall 243,692 246,166 2,474 Increase/Decrease 2001 Budget 2002 Budget from 2001 Elections 6,823 40,548 33,725 Streets 642,019 670,812 28,793 Police 2,417,842 2,442,873 25,030 Administration & General 189,556 204,934 15,378 General Government Build ing 130,000 142,216 12,216 Parks 644,403 650,283 5,880 Senior Citizens 72,121 76,238 4,117 Street Lighting 124,989 128,088 3,099 City Manager 391,945 394,341 2,396 Civil Defense 32,352 33,836 1,484 Trips & Outings 37,530 38,603 1,073 Weed Control 14,953 15,959 1,006 As mentioned above, the state legislature significantly reduced state aid to the City. The following chart reflects what the City received in state aid for the years 2000 through 2002. As you can see, there was an $800,566 reduction in 2002. 2000 Actual 2001 Budget 2002 Budget HACA 1,004,122 1,004,368 0 LGA 2,325,029 2,385,618 2,589,420 Total 3,329,151 3,389,986 2,589,420 Change from Prior Year 75,600 60,835 (800,566) Page 1-2 As was recommended by the state legislature, this aid reduction was passed on to residents in the form of a property tax levy increase. It should be noted that although the city and county are having property tax levy increases as a result of state legislation, there is a significant offset to this in the fact that the state has drastically increased aid to school districts and the levy reduction by school districts should be greater than the levy increase from the city and county. The net result as projected by the state is that homes valued at approximately $120,000 should see a total property tax levy reduction of approximately $100. The following chart shows the breakdown of the city's levy for the years 1999 through 2001 and the proposed levy for 2002. As the chart reflects, the City's levy increase for the years 1999 and 2000 was very minimal. To finance expenses in these years the City relied heavily on reserves that were accumulated in the City's General Fund balance. The levy for 2001 was increased to cover expenses without using fund balance reserves, and as is reflected in the chart, the levy for 2002 has some considerable increases, primarily to cover the reduction in state aid. PROPOSED PROPERTY TAXES, 1999 - 2001 Proposed Property Taxes 1999 2000 2001 2002 Library 467,518 500,244 547,767 591,588 EDA 111,048 119,296 119,295 137,015 General Fund 2,660,059 2,676,416 2,958,490 4,110,711 Total Levy 3,238,625 3,295,956 3,625,552 4,839,314 Levy Increase from Prior Year I 57,331 329,596 1,213,762 The next major factor in the property tax formula is the state legislature's restructuring of class rate percentages for real property taxes payable in 1998 through 2002. The class rate changes made in these years will affect property taxes paid for the current and all future years. The major change was a significant shift in the tax capacity value from commercial industrial and residential non-homestead to residential homesteaded property. As you can see from the following chart, there is a slight reduction in tax capacity rates for homes over $76,000. The reduction is from 2% in 1997 to 1.65% in 2002. However, there is a more significant reduction for commercial industrial property and residential non-homestead property. The net result is that a large amount of the tax revenue previously paid by commercial industrial properties and residential non- homestead properties is now picked up by homesteaded residential property. Page 1-3 CLASS RATE PERCENTAGES BY REAL PROPERTY TYPE TAXES PAYABLE 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001 and 2002 Real Property Payable Payable Payable Payable Payable Description 1997 1998 1999 2000 and 2001 2002 Class Rate Class Rate Class Rate Class Rate Class Rate Residential homestead First $72,000 1.00% Over $72,000 2.00% First $75,000 1.00% 1.00% Over $75,000 1.85% 1.70% First $76,000 1.00% 1.00% $76,000 - $500,000 1.65% 1.00% Over $500,000 1.25% Commercial-I ndustrial and public utility First $100,000 Over $100,000 First $150,000 2.70% 2.45% 2.40% 1.50% Over $150,000 4.00% 3.50% 3.40% 2.00% Residential non-homestead, 1 unit First $72,000 2.30% Over $72,000 2.30% First $75,000 1.90% 1.25% Over $75,000 2.10% 1.70% First $76,000 1.20% 1.00% $76,000 - $500,000 1.65% 1.00% Over $500,000 1.25% Residential non-homestead, 2-3 units and undeveloped land 2.30% 2.10% 1.70% 1.65% 1.50% Residential non-homestead 4 or more units 3.40% 2.90% 2.50% 2.40% 1.80% Low Income 1.00% 0.90% Economic Environment As indicated in the Moody's Municipal Credit Report for the City of Columbia Heights, our finances remain satisfactory with reasonable General Fund reserves. As a result, the City has maintained an A1 bond rating. Our revenue structure is somewhat vulnerable to economic pressure since approximately 30% of our General Fund revenue base comes from state aid and 48% of our General Fund revenue base is from local property taxes. As these aids and the City's property tax revenue are received in the last six months of the year, the City has been maintaining a cash flow fund balance equal to 40% of the General Fund operating budget. Subsequently, although it may appear that we have a significant fund balance reserve, it is actually dedicated to cash flow purposes. Page 1-4 The City's primary source for increased revenue is through property tax levies. Over the past several years, the City Council has maintained a very conservative profile in increasing taxes by minimal percentages. To maintain the quality of services provided to the residents of Columbia Heights, it may be necessary to develop a policy of a slightly higher property tax increase. However, due to state imposed levy limits for the years 1998 through 2000, the City was restricted from implementing minimal property tax increases. These levy limits were removed for the year 2001 but are back in place for the year 2002. As a result of this legislative restriction, the City was forced to look at severe budget cuts and a reduction of services in the 2002 budget preparation process. At the present time it is anticipated that the property tax legislation passed in the last legislative session will only worsen the future property tax burden on cities. As part of the City's property tax revenue, the City does receive an area wide fiscal disparities tax distribution from commercial property in other communities. The basis of this area wide fiscal disparities tax distribution is to collect property taxes on commercial property throughout the metropolitan area and then redistribute this area wide property tax to communities such as Columbia Heights which has a limited commercial property tax base. Under the fiscal disparities area wide tax system, the City of Columbia Heights benefits significantly. It is projected that the City will receive over $930,000 in property taxes from the tax on commercial property in other communities. As part of the recent legislation, the City will be looking at a significant reduction in this area wide tax revenue in future years that will mean the residents of Columbia Heights will need to pick up even a larger portion of the property taxes. Page 1-5 Significant Highlights on Expenditures by Functional Area Administration The Administration function includes Mayor, City Council, City Manager, Assessing, and Legal budgets. The total proposed 2002 budget for this functional area is $922,698. This is down $37,262 from the adopted 2001 budget. The most significant areas of reduction in the budget are reductions in the Mayor/Council budget of $8,015 for contingencies, $2,500 for a facilitator on goal setting, $8,900 for membership dues in the North Metro Mayors Association, and $2,000 in advertising. The City Manager budget included reductions of $4,000 for training and education, $2,500 for membership fees, $2,000 for travel and expenses, $4,000 for staff training, and $5,000 for the reduction in employment advertising. In the Assessing budget it is proposed to eliminate the Assessing Clerk position mid-year when the current employee retires. This will result in a partial year savings of approximately $19,000. Another significant area of reduction was $21,500 in projected legal ADMINISTRATION EXPENDITURE SUMMARY 1999 2000 2001 2002 Ia Pemor~ Services B Supplies i O~ Sewices & Chages I Capital Ou~y I C_~nfi nge~:ies & Transfas fees. The most significant area of cost increases in these budgets is in the area of personnel expenses. Cost of living pay increases have required an increase to these areas. The net result of the increases and reductions is a decrease to this functional area budget of $37,261. Community Development This functional area covers all services previously provided by the Housing & Redevelopment Authority in addition to expanded services. The specific departments covered by this functional area are Building Inspections, Administration, Community Development Block Grant, Parkview Villa, Economic Development Authority, Housing Redevelopment Authority, multi-use redevelopment, and some miscellaneous housing programs. This functional area of the City was created in 1996 with the establishment of the EDA and the transfer of previous HRA staff to the EDA as a City department. In recent years this budget has seen several changes and modifications with the increases and decreases to the Community Development Block Grant Housing programs, along with significant changes in the Section 8 Housing program. During the year 2000 the Section 8 program was transferred back to Metro HRA, freeing the City COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT EXPENDITURE SUMMARY 1999 2(X)O 2001 2002 of any and all responsibilities for the administration of that program. In addition to this, the MHFA loan program was contracted to an outside agency to manage. Page 1-6 Finance Department This functional area covers Elections, Finance, Information Systems, and Utility Billing Administration for the water, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and refuse departments. The total budget for 2002 is $43,025 over the adopted 2001 budget. The most significant changes in this budget are in the area of personnel. First being the cost of living increases and second being some restructuring in the Finance Department staffing. Over the years accounting and reporting requirements have changed significantly. However, the department has seen no restructuring since the mid 1980's. With the current structure in the Finance Department it has been very difficult to maintain the level of accounting and reporting that is required under current standards. Subsequently, the 2002 budget does include minor restructuring in the department to eliminate two current positions and create two new positions that will give the RNANCE department a slightly higher level of expertise to enable us to comply with all current state and federal accounting and reporting requirements. The portion of this department that relates to information systems has seen some growth and improvement over the past two years, with greater efficiency in software, e-mail, and the expansion and improvement of the City's Web site, which is utilized as another means of providing information to the public. The most significant budget increase item for 2002 over 2001 is in the Elections Department. As the City has gone to even year elections, we no longer have odd year elections. This has resulted in a savings of approximately $30,000 to the City budget every other year. However, as 2002 is an election year, we do see an Election Department budget increase of approximately $34,000. Fire This functional area is comprised of the Fire and Civil Defense departments. The overall department proposed expenditures in this functional area increased by $209,000 from the adopted 2001 budget. This increase was broken down into three major areas. FirSt, in the area of personnel, it was proposed to upgrade one position and increase part-time hours for the secretarial position. This, combined with cost of living and step increases, resulted in an additional personal services expense increase of $68,800. The next major area of increase was in capital equipment with the proposed replacement of the generator in City Hall for $50,000 and the replacement of the ambulance for $74,000. The third significant item was upgrading the software program in the Fire Department to CityView software at a projected cost of $20,000 and the installation of new lockers for the firefighters at a cost of $26,000. In the City Manager's review of this FIRE EXPENDITURE SUMMARY 1900 2000 2001 [] Personal Services [] Supplies []Other:Services &Charges ICapitalOuUay · Contlngenc es & Transfers 2002 budget, he cut the staffing upgrades by $10,000, eliminated the purchase of new lockers for a cost savings of $26,000, delayed the purchase of the new generator for a savings of $50,000, moved the cost of purchasing new software to the Cable TV budget in the amount of $20,000, and moved the cost of the ambulance to the PERA Capital Equipment fund. Although these are reasonably significant reductions in the budget, they will not impair the services the Fire Department provides. Page 1-7 General Government This functional area as a grouping was created new for the 1998 budget process. It is a collection of all the departmental areas that are not specifically assigned to one division head. This functional area includes the following departments: General Government Buildings, Recognition/Special Events, Contingencies and Transfers, Cable Television, Refuse and Hazardous Waste funds. The most significant item of note in this functional area budget is under General Government Buildings. The total budget is down by $15,314 from the actual expenditures in 2000. The 2002 budget also includes $25,000 for additional alarm and other security items at City Hall. Likewise, the Cable Television budget decreased by $29,500 from 2001 to 2002. The Refuse budgets also saw a cost increase. The disposal portion of the budget increased by $8,000 in anticipation of a 1.5% contract increase by the hauler. Internal administrative and management costs of the Refuse fund increased by $6,300 and the recycling portion of GENERAL GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURE SUMMARY 1999 2000 2001 2002 i Other Sen,,Ices & Clmrges m Capltat O~ the budget increased by $6,100. The Hazardous Waste disposal budget remains the same. Library The City's library is located at 820 40th Avenue. The library's main goal is to provide free access to informational and recreational materials for the patrons in a pleasant environment conducive to the acquisition of knowledge. A variety of library- related programs (e.g. storytimes, reading clubs, filmtimes, homebound delivery, etc.) are offered for patrons of all ages from preschool through senior citizen. As a city-supported library, Columbia Heights participates in the MELSA regional system through a contract with the Anoka County library system, State-wide Borrowers Compact, and METRONET. This enables Columbia Heights patrons to gain access to special services and scholarly materials available to other participating libraries. For 2002, the department proposed library budget is up from $597,234 to $648,002. The major highlights of the 2002 budget are a reduction in part-time hours by 922 with the reduction of the Page/Choreperson job class. The supplies section includes $3,950 of computer equipment UBRARY EXPENDITURE SUMMARY i O~er Se~c.~ & Or, arg~ i Capital Ou~y and software upgrades for the PC's used by staff. Other service charges include $3,960 for the T-1 line used by the automated circulation system and increases for other utilities. Capital requests include replacement of the ballast in the adult reading room and a new circulation desk for the main floor lobby. In the City Manager's review of this budget, he recommended reducing expert and professional services by $2,600, eliminating the budget for vandalism by $500 and delaying the replacement of the lights and the circulation desk until 2003 for a savings of $35,500. It is felt that these cuts will not impair the high level of services that the library provides to patrons. Page 1-8 Liquor The liquor function is comprised of three liquor stores, Top Valu I, Top Yalu II, and Heights Liquor, along with a capital equipment replacement fund for each of the three stores. Top Valu I is located at 4340 Central Avenue. This store opened in November of 1984 and was the City's first endeavor into a large volume discount liquor operation. Since it's opening it has been very successful. The City's second endeavor along this line was Top Valu II at 2241 37th Avenue. This store follows the same concept as Top Valu I and opened in April of 1994. As this store is located in a lower traffic area, its growth has been slower but very steady. Each year it shows a progressive increase in sales and profitability. Heights Liquor is the third store and is located at 5225 University Avenue. This store was opened in 1964 and has remained a very small, traditional liquor store. It does not operate on a high volume discount basis. Markups are higher LIQUOR EXPENDITURE SUMMARY B Pe~onal Sen~ces ~ S~pplies B O~her Services & Charges · Capital Outlay · ContJn~lencies & Transfers at this store, along with profitability, which is due primarily to taking advantage of high volume purchasing discounts based on the volume purchased at Top Valu and the lower overhead expenses of a city-owned operation. The net result is that for several years this was the most profitable liquor store in the Heights. However, with the opening of the large, new Fridley store just north of the freeway in 2000, we have seen a significant decrease in sales and profitability at this store. With this is in mind, and the fact that the store is located adjacent to a residential neighborhood, we have undertaken the project of looking for a new location for the store at 5225 University Avenue in addition to looking for a location on Central Avenue where we could build our own store. Currently we are renting on Central Avenue and the lease expires in three years. It would be highly beneficial and profitable to the City and the liquor operation to own our own store on Central Avenue and to build a new store on University Avenue. For this purpose, we have included $2,000,000 in the 2002 budget to purchase property and build a new store at one of these locations. Police This functional area is comprised of the Police Department, Animal Control, DARE, and Capital Equipment Replacement. The most significant item in this budget is personnel costs. Over the past several years department staffing has been increased from 22 sworn officers to 26 through the addition of three officers by federal grants, and one additional officer over and above the grant requirements. In 1999 all grant funding and the requirement to maintain this staffing level ended. The City Council needs to address the increased staffing level in the Police Department. Without the continued grant revenue, the addition of four sworn officers is a significant increase in the Police Department budget. The proposed Police Department budget for 2002 increased by $182,216 from the adopted 2001 budget of $2,417,842. The major portion of this increase is $151,770 in personnel costs, primarily for POLICE EXPENDITURE SUMMARY 19~9 2OOO 2001 · Other Se~ices and Charges · Capital Ou~ay · Contingencies & Transfers Page 1-9 employees progressing through the wage plan and cost of living increases. The other significant item in the Police Department is the capital equipment budget. The proposed 2002 capital equipment budget is for $115,100 which includes two full-sized marked squad cars, one mid-size administrative car, two replacement light bars, two laptop computers with modems and stands, and two in-squad video systems. Also included in the capital equipment budget is the third payment for the Visions Records Management system. In the Police Department the City Manager proposed cutting one CSO and one police officer position and delaying the purchase of three new police vehicles and equipment for one year. These cuts are a first level step in reducing staff in the Police Department back to the normal level prior to receiving the federal grant officers. Public Works This functional area is comprised of several departments crossing several funds. One of the significant advantages of the functional area budget format adopted in 1998 is that it shows the entire Public Works function in one area. Areas covered are engineering, streets, weed control, parks, tree programs, water utility, sanitary sewer utility, storm sewer utility, garage, and capital equipment replacement funds for the Public Works operation. Significant budget items in Public Works are as follows. In the area of personnel the 2002 department proposed budget for salaries and benefits is $1,967,449, which is an increase of $187,769 over the 2001 budget. This increase is due to cost of living pay increases and employees progressing through the pay scale. The engineering budget is down by $44,000 primarily because engineering costs have been allocated to the infrastructure fund for street projects. Although this is a cost savings to PUBLIC WORKS EXPENDITURE SUMMARY 1999 2000 2001 2002 · Personal ~ El Supplies engineering, if these costs are not passed on through assessments as an administrative charge, it will have a detrimental effect on the infrastructure/street replacement fund. In the tree budget there was a proposal to eliminate the City picking up 50% of the cost on the removal of diseased trees. This would result in a savings of approximately $22,500. However, in discussions, it appears that for 2002 a better alternative would be for the City to pick up 25% of the cost of diseased tree removal, which would still result in a budget savings of $11,250. In the Parks Department a major item of consideration is eliminating from one-third to one-half of our skating rinks. In recent years several of the rinks have received minimal usage. A reduction or closing of these rinks could result in a cost savings of approximately $16,500 in seasonal employees and another $30,000 in repair, maintenance and utilities of warming houses. In the Water Department it is projected that the cost of water purchased from Minneapolis will increase by approximately $100,000 from 2001. With this increase, it will be essential to have a water rate increase in the water fund. In the sewer fund we are not anticipating any sewer disposal charge increases and subsequently may be able to forestall any sewer rate increases. In the central garage fund there is minimal change from 2001. The major goal here is to continue funding the capital outlay fund for future building improvements to the municipal service center building. In summary, several other areas of the Public Works budget saw changes that are presented in more detail in the Public Works budget document. Page 1-10 Recreation Recreation is comprised of several departments including administration, youth athletics, youth enrichment, adult athletics, traveling teams, Back to the Parks pregram, trips and outings, senior citizens, CHASE, and Murzyn Hall management. Over the years the recreation pregram has increased in several areas. One of the most notable areas is the Senior Citizen program due to its tremendous growth. While several senior programs in other communities are stagnant, through the excellent management of our Senior Coordinator, Karen Moeller, the program in Columbia Heights has grown consistently and is well received by all seniors. Other items of notable mention in the Recreation budget are that the administrative component of the budget has increased by $16,878 primarily due to step and cost of living personnel increases. In the area of youth athletics the budget is relatively the same as it was in 2001. Adult Athletics has seen a slight decrease of $1,187 due to the elimination of the RECREATION EXPENDITURE SUMMARY 1999 2O0O 2001 2OO2 · Personal Se~ices · Supplies · Olha' Sen~ces and Charges · Capital Outlay · Contingencies & Transfem Open Sundays program. Youth Enrichment and Traveling Athletics are essentially the same as the 2001 budget. The Back to the Parks program was designed to set $10,000 aside each year as matching money for any entity or community group that wanted to come in with matching money to do a park project. Due to virtually no activity in this area, the program has been eliminated from the 2002 budget. The Trips and Outings program that provides one day and extended trips for senior citizens, and has been very successful, saw a slight budget increase of $1,073 due to transportation costs and higher gas prices. It should be noted that this department is a fully self-sustaining department in that all of the costs for trips and outings are charged back to the participants. The Senior Citizen program has increased slightly in cost primarily due to increases in personnel services. The Murzyn Hall budget has increased by $1,306 which is primarily due to the budget for building improvements. Conclusion The above narrative should give an overview of the most salient changes and assumptions included in the budget. As much as feasible, this is a hold-the-line budget. The property tax format in the state has seen significant changes for the 2002 tax levy. With state legislation shifting local government aids from cities to school districts, taxpayers should receive a significant reduction in their school property tax levy. However, as the state significantly reduced aid to cities, there will be a slight increase in city property taxes. The net result, as projected by the state, is that a $100,000 home should see a total property tax reduction of approximately $100. However, with these changes and with the severe levy limits imposed by the state, the City's actual revenue increase is roughly equivalent to cost of living salary increases for tax-supported funds, which leaves the City with no additional funding for other areas of inflation. The budget process is a major undertaking by City staff and the City Council, which requires a great deal of work performed by all involved to bring the process to a successful conclusion. I extend my appreciation in this endeavor to all department directors and their staff, and a special thanks to Barb Kelzenberg and Sue Schmidtbauer for their time in compiling the budget and their extensive efforts in ensuring the accuracy of the entire document. This is a very trying and exhausting endeavor, and their extensive efforts are greatly appreciated. Page1-11 2002 REVENUES BY SOURCE ALL FUNDS Allocations $80,000 Transfers In & Non- Taxes Rev Receipts $4,839,314 $3,060,114 Net Sales-Liquor $1,171,743 Debt Service Funds and HRA $1,287,701 Sales & Charges $4,045,646 Miscellaneous $1,389,950 Fines & Forfeits $115,000 Charges For Services $426,100 Licenses & Permits $274,500 Intergovernmental $6,519,288 Page 1-12 2002 ALL BUDGETARY FUNDS EXPENDITURES BY FUNCTIONAL AREA Public Works $6,O3O,293 Recreation $619,633 Administration $922,698 / Debt Service $2,82O,649 Community ,pment $1,564,107 Finance ,144,113 Police $2,523,413 Liquor $3,378,OOO Library $583,202 Fire $880,469 General Government $2,370,504 Page 1-13 2002 All Budgetary Funds Expenditures by Classification Contingencies & Transfers $2,747,874 Personal Services $7,639,258 Capital Outlay $4,873,934 Other Services & Charges $3,808,623 Supplies $3,767,392 Page 1-14 SOURCES OF GENERAL FUND, LIBRARY FUND AND EDA REVENUE 2002 BUDGET Other $599,800 Services Transfers $426,100 $459,548 Inter- governmental $2,834,82O Taxes $4,839,3J4 Page 1-15 2001 GENERAL FUND AND LIBRARY FUND EXPENDITURES Expenditures By Classification Other Services and Charges 27.3% Capital Outlay Contingencies and 2.7% Transfers 2.1% Supplies 5.5% Personal Services 62.5% Page 1-16 Major Expenditure Increases 2001 2002 Increase/Decrease Budget Budget from 2001 Elections 6,823 40,548 33,725 Streets 642,019 670,812 28,793 Police 2,417,842 2,442,873 25,030 Administration & 189,556 204,934 15,378 General General 130,000 142,216 12,216 Government Building Parks 644,403 650,283 5,880 Senior Citizens 72,121 76,238 4,117 Street Lighting 124,989 128,088 3,099 City Manager 391,945 394,341 2,396 Civil Defense 32,352 33,836 1,484 Trips & Outings 37,530 38,603 1,073 Weed Control 14,953 15,959 1,006 Page 1-17 CLASS RATE PERCENTAGES BY REAL PROPERTY TYPE TAXES PAYABLE 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001 and 2002 Real Property Payable Payable Payable Payable Payable Description 1997 1998 1999 2000 and 2001 2002 Class Rate Class Rate Class Rate Class Rate Class Rate Residential homestead First $72,000 1.00% Over $72,000 2.00% First $75,000 1.00% 1.00% Over $75,000 1.85% 1.70% First $76,000 1.00% 1.00% $76,000 - $500,000 1.65% 1.00% Over $500,000 1.25% Commercial-Industrial and public utility First $100,000 Over $100,000 First $150,000 2.70% 2.45% 2.40% 1.50% Over $150,000 4.00% 3.50% 3.40% 2.00% Residential non-homestead, 1 unit First $72,000 2.30% Over $72,000 2.30% First $75,000 1.90% 1.25% Over $75,000 2.10% 1.70% First $76,000 1.20% 1.00% $76,000 - $500,000 1.65% 1.00% Over $500,000 1.25% Residential non-homestead, 2-3 units and undeveloped land 2.30% 2.10% 1.70% 1.65% 1.50% Residential non-homestead 4 or more units 3.40% 2.90% 2.50% 2.40% 1.80% Low Income 1.00% 0.90% Page 1-18 LLI LLI Changes In Tax Levy 2OOO - 2OO2 4,500,000 4,000,000 3,500,000 3,000,000 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 500,000 · GENERAL FUND [] LIBRARY FUND !· EDA FUND 119,296 119,295 137,015 Page 1-21 Columbia Heights 2002 Property Tax Levy $4,839,314 State Aid Reduction $800,566 Inflation ~235,933 City 2001 Property Tax Levy $3,626,552 Household & Construction Growth $177,264 Page 1-22 WHERE YOUR PROPERTY TAXES GO Payable 2001 Miscellaneous 5% County 21% City School 23% 51% Page 1-23 WHAT WILL $27 A MONTH BUY? (Based on 2002 Property Tax) Telephone $27 a Month Buys Quality and Quantity in the City of Columbia Heights Dinner for 4 Garbage Pick-Up Columbia Heights City Services Basic Cable TV Parks Streets Police Fire Library The average home in Columbia Heights pays $27 per month in city real estate taxes. The average Columbia Heights' resident will spend $27 every month on various services and pleasures, i.e., pizza and pop for four at a local restaurant, basic cable TV for the family, monthly phone services, etc. The best value for your money in Columbia Heights is still all of the city services that $27 of your monthly property tax will buy! (Based on a $94,300 home in Columbia Heights.) CITYSERV Page 1-24