Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDecember 17, 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. colurnbia-heights, rnn. us ADMINISTRATION December 14, 2001 Mayor Gary L. Peterson Councilmembers Marlaine Szurek Julienne Wyckoff Bruce Nawrocki Robert A. Williams City Manager ~alter 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 17, 2001 in the City Council Chambers, City Hall, 590 40th Avenue N.E., Columbia Heights, Minnesota. The City of Columbia Heights does not discriminate on the basis of disability in thc admission or access to, or trealrnent 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) Invocation: Pastor David Briley, Oak Hill Baptist Church 1. CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL 2. 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.) CONSENT AGENDA (These items are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted as part of the Consent Agenda by one motion. Items removed from consent agenda approval will be taken up as the next order of business.) A) MOTION: Move to approve the Consent Agenda items as follows: 1) Minutes for Approval a) Minutes of the November 26, 2001 City Council meeting MOTION: Move to approve the minutes of the November 26, 2001, regular City Council meeting as presented. b) Minutes of the November 27, 2001 Special Assessment Levy Heating MOTION: Move to approve the minutes of the November 26, 2001, regular City Council meeting as presented. c) Minutes of the December 3, 2001 Special Budget Meeting MOTION: Move to approve the minutes of the November 26, 2001, regular City Council meeting as presented. 2) Establish Work Session Meeting Dates for Monday, January 7, 2002 and Monday, January 21, 2002 MOTION: Move to establish Work Session meeting dates for Monday, January 7, 2002 and Tuesday, January 22, 2002, beginning at 7:00 p.m. in Conference Room 1 at City Hall. 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 Agenda December 17, 2001 Page 2 of 6 3) Adopt Resolution No. 2001-78, being a resolution establishing a new maximum income of $20,700 for Senior or Retired and Disabled Persons to be eligible for special assessment deferral. MOTION: Move to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2001-78, there being ample copies available to the public. MOTION: Move to adopt Resolution No. 2001-78, being a Resolution establishing a new maximum income of $20,700 for Senior or Retired and Disabled Persons to be eligible for special assessment deferral. 4) Authorize purchase of one subscription to the Star/Tribune on microfilm for 2002 -previously tabled MOTION: Move to authorize purchase of one subscription to the Star/Tribune on microfilm for 2002 from the authorized, proprietary company producing it for the cost of $3,092.25. 5) Adopt Resolution No. 2001-80, being a resolution regarding employer contribution to insurances for 2002 MOTION: Move to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2001-80, there being ample copies available to the public. MOTION: Move to adopt Resolution No. 2001-80, being a resolution regarding employer contribution to insurances for 2002. 6) Authorize transfer of funds and final payment to OMNI Roofs, Inc. for roof repairs and replacement on City Hall MOTION: Move to authorize final payment in the amount orS117,757 to Omni Roofs, Inc. for roof renovation and replacement on City Hall. MOTION: Move to authorize the transfer of $117,757 from the General Fund to the Capital Improvement General Government Buildings fund and appropriate such amount for roof repairs and replacement. 7) Workers' Compensation Rates MOTION: Move to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to enter into an agreement with the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust for workers' compensation coverage based on their premium quotation of $137,120. 8) Adopt Resolution No. 2001-84 being a resolution appropriating and desi~ating fund balances MOTION: Move to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2001-84, there being ample copies available to the public. MOTION: Move to Adopt Resolution No. 2001-84, being a resolution appropriating and designating fund balances. 9) Authorize agreement with Center for Energy and Environment for MHFA Discount Loan Program MOTION: Move to approve the Administrative Services Agreement between the City of Columbia Heights and Center for Energy and Environment for the MHFA Discount Loan Program extension through December 31, 2002; and authorize the City Manager and Mayor to enter into an agreement for the same. City Council Agenda December 17, 2001 Page 3 of 6 10) Adopt Resolution No. 2001-71, being a resolution Decertifying Parcels from the Central Downtown Business TIF District MOTION: Move t° waive the reading of Resolution No. 2001-71, there being ample copies available to the public. MOTION: Move to adopt Resolution 2001-71, being a resolution Decertifying Parcels 35-30-24-14- 0091 and 35-30-24-14-0092 from the Central Downtown Business TIF District. 11) Adopt J.P. Murzyn Hall 2003 rental rates and revise Management Plan discount policy MOTION: Move to adopt the 2003 Murzyn Hall rental rates and revisions to the JPM Management Plan regarding the discount policy as outlined by the Park and Recreation Commission at their meeting of November 28, 2001. 12) Approve Chase Grant of $150,000 for January 1, 2002 to December 31, 2003 MOTION: Move to accept the grant from the Department of Children, Families and Learning in the amount of $150,000 to fund the CHASE program from January 1, 2002 to December 31, 2003. 13) Authorization to obtain price quotes for printing and mailing the 2002 City newsletters MOTION: Move to authorize staffto obtain price quotes for printing and mailing the 2002 "Heights Happenings city newsletters. 14) Adopt Resolution No. 2001-82, being a Resolution adopting the 2001-2002 Snow and Ice Control Policy MOTION: Move to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2001-82, there being ample copies available to the public. MOTION: Move to adopt Resolution No. 2001-82, adopting the 2001-2002 Snow and Ice Control Policy for the City of Columbia Heights 15) Renew annual contract for GIS consulting services MOTION: Move to approve a one year extension to the GIS Joint Powers Agreement in the amount of $17,376, and authorize the Mayor and City Manager to enter into an agreement for the same. 16) Establish a Hearing Date of January 14, 2002 for Revocation or Suspension of a License to Operate a Rental Property within the City of Columbia Heights against 4023 6th St, 1300-02, 1308-10, 1316- 18, 1324-26 Circle Terrace, and 4654 Washington St. MOTION: Move to Establish a Hearing Date of January 14, 2002 for Revocation or Suspension of a License to Operate a Rental Property within the City of Columbia Heights against Renae Novak at 4023 6th Street NE. MOTION: Move to Establish a Hearing Date of January 14, 2002 for Revocation or Suspension of a License to Operate a Rental Property within the City of Columbia Heights against Edward Fragale at 1300-02, 1308-10, 1316-18, 1324-26 Circle Terrace. MOTION: Move to Establish a Hearing Date of January 14, 2002 for Revocation or Suspension of a License to Operate a Rental Property within the City of Columbia Heights against Tad Sonneman at 4654 Washington Street NE. MOTION: Move to Establish a Hearing Date of January 14, 2002 for Revocation or Suspension of a License to Operate a Rental Property within the City of Columbia Heights against Yong Kwon Yi at 4546 Tyler Street NE. City Council Agenda December 17, 2001 Page 4 of 6 17) Approve Rental Housing License Applications MOTION: Move to approve the items listed for rental housing license applications for December 17, 2001 as presented. 18) Approve Business License Applications MOTION: Move to approve the items as listed on the business license agenda for December 17, 2001 as presented, regarding the new license for 2001 and the renewals for 2002. 19) Approve Payment of Bills MOTION: Move to approve payment of the bills, as listed, out of the proper fund. 5. PROCLAMATIONS, PRESENTATIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND GUESTS A) Proclamations-none B) Presentations 1) Presentation of check - to the Library C) Introduction of New Employees - none D) Recognition - none J PUBLIC HEARINGS A) Public Heating called for Revocation/Suspension of R~ntal Housing License at 4544-4546 Fillmore Street is now in compliance MOTION: Move to Close the Public Hearing Regarding the Revocation or Suspension of the Rental License Held by Karolyn Erickson Regarding Rental Property at 4544-4546 Fillmore Street N.E. in that the Property complies with the Residential Maintenance Code. B) Public Hearing called for Revocation/Suspension of Rental Housing License at 1035-1037 43 ½ Avenue is now in compliance MOTION: Move to Close the Public Heating Regarding the Revocation or Suspension of the Rental License Held by Mike Hyska Regarding Rental Property at 1035-1037 43-1/2 Avenue in that the Property complies with the Residential Maintenance Code. c) Adopt Resolution 2001-85, being a resolution of Rental Housing License Revocation for 1206-1208 Circle Terrace Boulevard MOTION: Move to waive the reading of Resolution No.2001-85, there being ample copies available to the public. MOTION: Move to adopt Resolution No. 2001-85, being a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Columbia Heights Approving Revocation Pursuant to Ordinance Code Section 5A.408(1) of the Rental License held by David Jacobs (Conservator for Susan Loewenthal) Regarding Rental Property at 1206-1208 Circle Terrace Blvd. D) Adopt Resolution 2001-86, being a resolution of Rental Housing License Revocation for 4040-4042 Cleveland Street- previously tabled MOTION: Move to waive the reading of Resolution No.2001-86, there being ample copies available to the public. MOTION: Move to adopt Resolution No. 2001-86, being a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Columbia Heights Approving Revocation Pursuant to Ordinance Code Section 5A.408(1) of the Rental License held by David Jacobs Regarding Rental Property at 4040-4042 Cleveland Street. E) Adopt Resolution 201-87, being a resolution of Rental Housing License Revocation for 4616 Tyler Street - previously tabled City Council Agenda December 17, 2001 Page 5 of 6 MOTION: Move to available to the public. waive the reading of Resolution No.2001-87, there being ample copies MOTION: Move to adopt Resolution No. 2001-87, being a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Columbia Heights Approving Revocation Pursuant to Ordinance Code Section 5A.408(1) of the Rental License held by Syed Raza Regarding Rental Property at 4616 Tyler Street. F) Public Hearing to Adopt Resolution 2001-72, being a Resolution modifying the Downtown Central Business District and Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1. MOTION: Move to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2001-72, there being ample copies available to the public. MOTION: Move to adopt Resolution 2001-72, being a resolution modifying the Downtown Central Business District (CBD) Revitalization Plan for the CBD Redevelopment Project and the proposed modification of Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1, therein and the adoption of the modified plans therefore. ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION A) Other Ordinances and Resolutions B) Bid Considerations C) Other Business 1) Renewal of Wine/Beer License - Tycoon's Tavern & Grill - original motion denied 11-26-2001 MOTION: Move to deny the 2002 application for a wine and beer license for Ok Cha Kwon dba Tycoon's Tavern & Grill at 4952 Central Avenue based on the recommendation of the Police Department. 2) Adopt Resolution No. 2001-68, being a resolution designating official depositories and safe deposit access for the City of Columbia Heights -previously tabled MOTION: Move to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2001-68, there being ample copies available to the public. MOTION: Move to adopt Resolution 2001-68, being a resolution designating official depositories and safe deposit access for the City of Columbia Heights. 3) Adopt Resolution No. 2001-83, being a resolution approving plans for 51 st Avenue 3/4 median closing on T.H. 65 MOTION: Move to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2001-83, there being ample copies available to the public. MOTION: Move to adopt Resolution No. 2001-83, being a resolution approving construction plans prepared by the Minnesota Department of Transportation for the median modifications to Central Avenue at 51st Avenue. 4) Adopt Resolution No. 2001-81, being a resolution for the acceptance of bid and award of Jackson Pond Fencing, City Project #0009 MOTION: Move to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2001-81, there being ample copies available to the public. MOTION: Move to adopt Resolution No. 2001-81, being a resolution for the acceptance of bid and award of Jackson Pond Fencing Replacement, City Project #0009, to Security Fence and Construction, Inc. of Minneapolis, Minnesota, in the amount of $25,120.00 based upon their low, City Council Agenda December 17, 2001 Page 6 of 6 qualified responsible bid to be funded from Storm Sewer Construction Fund 653-50009-5130; and, furthermore, to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to enter into an agreement for the same. 5) Approve Joint Powers Agreement with Anoka County for Assessment Services -previously tabled MOTION: Move to approve the joint powers agreement with Anoka County for assessment services, effective January 16, 2002 - January 15, 2008 and to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute the agreement. 6) Establishing 2002 Rental License Fees MOTION: Move to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2001-76, there being ample copies available to the public. MOTION: Move to adopt Resolution #2001-76, being a Resolution Establishing Fees for Housing Inspections as Authorized by Chapter 5A of City Code of 1977. 7) Authorize preparation for 2002 Anoka County Community Development Block Grant Program Application MOTION: Move to authorize staff to pursue preparation of the 2002 CDBG Program Application to remove slum and blight in the amount of $90,000 for the Industrial Park Redevelopment Planning Study; and furthermore, to submit said application to Anoka County. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS A) Report of the City Manager 1) Upcoming Work Session Items 2) Schedule mid-January date for tour of City & follow-up visioning & goal setting session B) Report of the City Attorney e GENERAL COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS A) Minutes of Boards and Commissions 1) Meeting of the December 4, 2001 Planning and Zoning Commission 10. CITIZENS FORUM (At this time, citizens have an opportunity to discuss with the Council items not on the regular agenda. Citizens are requested to limit their comments to five minutes. Please note the public may address the Council regarding specific agenda items at the time the item is being discussed.) 11. COUNCIL CORNER 12. ADJOURNMENT Walter R. Fehst, C'~ty 19l~na/ger WF/pvm OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS COLUMBIA HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING NOVEMBER 26, 2001 The following are the minutes for the regular meeting of the City Council held at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, November 26, 2001 in the City Council Chambers, City Hall, 590 40th Avenue N.E., Columbia Heights, MN. The Invocation was given by Rev. Dan Thompson, Assembly of God Church, Columbia Heights. Walt Fehst, City Manager, indicated that Reverend Thompson was one of the pastors at the Ecumenical service last weekend. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Peterson, Councilmember William,, Councilmember Nawrocki PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO MEETING AG Peterson indicated that item 6B has been revised. CONSENT AGENDA Nawrocki requested that items #2, g6, and #11 be r Fehst went through the remaining items. Motion by follows: l) Nawrocki, second by Wyckoffto appro~ Minutes for Approval Motion to approve the minutes of the iX presented. 2) Adopt Resolution 2001-68, being a Res for the City of Columbia Heights - Rem 3) Adopt Resolution 2001-70, being a Res, Refuse, Sewage Disposal and Water Su Motion to waive the reading of Resolut public. Motion to adopt Resolution No. 2001-7 Standards for Refuse, Sewage Disposal Councilmember Szurek, Councilmember Wyckoff, and NDA o~moved from the consent agenda for further discussion. re the Consent Agenda, except items number 2, 6 and 8, as vvember 13, 2001, regular City Council meeting as flution Designating Depositories and Safe Deposit Access ~ve flution Establishing Senior Citizen Eligibility Standards for ~ply Utility Rates. .on No. 2001-70, there being ample copies available to the 0, being a resolution establishing Senior Citizen Eligibility and Water Supply Utility Rates. Fehst indicated this is a yearly cost of li ving increase. About 200 residents request this service. RESOLUTION NO. 2001 - 70 RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING SENIO]~ CITIZEN ELIGIBILITY STANDARDS FOR REFUSE, SEWAGE DISPOSAL AND WATER SUPPLY UTILITY RATES City Council Minutes November 26, 2001 Page 2 of 9 WHEREAS, the City Council has previously established eligibility standards for senior citizens for Refuse Service, Disposal, and Water Supply; and WHEREAS, It has been the City's practice to maintain uniform eligibility standards whenever possible: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City of Columbia Heights as follows: 1. That anyone over 62 years of age with a maximum household income of $20,700 will be eligible for reduced rates. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the above eligibility standard be effective January 1, 2002. 4) Authorize designation of official newspaper for 2002 Motion to designate Focus News as the official City newspaper for 2002 and to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to enter into an agreement with Focus News for required publications. Fehst indicated that the Focus is published weekly, and the only other alternative would be the Star Tribune at a much higher cost. 5) Authorize Hardware Maintenance Contract for the IBM AS400 Motion to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to enter into a five-year or 60 month hardware maintenance contract with IBM Global Services at a cost not to exceed $8,139.33. Nawrocki questioned the cost of the present contract. Fehst stated the initial contract was five years for hardware and three years for software. This contract would extend the maintenance on this hardware for five years. Nawrocki questioned the original cost of the equipment, and stated you can expect to spend ten percent, per year, on a maintenance contract. Fehst indicated this system is adequate for our needs and a reasonable alternative. Fehst indicated this amount covers all five years of the contract. 6) Authorize payment for Star/Tribune microfilm - Remove 7) Authorize purchase of two laptop computers from State Grant Motion to approve the purchase of two laptop computers for $3,523.24, with funding for this purchase to come from the Police Department Contributions Fund #883, and to authorize the reimbursement of Fund #883 upon receipt of the reimbursement funds from the State of Minnesota grant. 8) Authorize to accept Juvenile Accountability Block Grant from the State of Minnesota Motion to authorize the Mayor and the City Manager to accept a grant from the State of Minnesota Department of Economic Security/Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grant in the amount of $9,640, with a match of $1,071, with the match to come from unexpended funds in the 2001 Police Department budget. 9) Establish a Hearing Date of December 17, 2001 for Revocation or Suspension of a License to Operate a Rental Property within the City of Columbia Heights against 4544-4546 Fillmore Street NE, 1206-1208 Circle Terrace, and 1035-1037 43 ½ Avenue NE Motion to Establish a Hearing Date of December 17, 2001 for Revocation or Suspension of a License to Operate a Rental Property within the City of Columbia Heights against Karolyn Erickson at 4544-4546 Fillmore St. NE. City Council Minutes November 26, 2001 Page 3 of 9 Motion to Establish a Hearing Date of December 17, 2001 for Revocation or Suspension of a License to Operate a Rental Property within the City of Columbia Heights against the estate of Susan Loewenthal at 1206-1208 Circle Terrace. Motion to Establish a Hearing Date of December 17, 2001 for Revocation or Suspension of a License to Operate a Rental Property within the City of Columbia Heights against Mike Hyska at 1035-1037 43 ½ Avenue NE. 10) Approve Rental Housing License Applications Motion to approve the items listed for rental housing license applications for November 26, 2001. 11) Approve Business License Applications - Remove 12) Approve Payment of Bills Motion to approve payment of the bills, as listed, out of the proper fund. Upon vote: All ayes. Motion carried. Item #2 Adopt Resolution 2001-68, being a Resolution Designating Depositories and Safe Deposit Access for the City of Columbia Heights Nawrocki stated that as Wells Fargo closed their branch in Columbia Heights, consideration shouM be given to a local bank such as US Bank. Motion by Nawrocki, second by Williams, to table designating depositories and safe deposit access to the next City Council meeting for further information and consideration. Upon vote: All ayes. Motion carried. #6 Authorize payment for Star/Tribune microfilm - Remove Nawrocki stated he obtained a copy of on-line resources available through the Anoka County library and the Star Tribune was one of five national newspapers available. Fehst referred to the Council letter from Becky Loader, Library Director, stating at one time the library had six such resources, which has been reduced to only this newspaper, and how the public uses it. Nawrocki questioned the justification if the resource is only used three to five times a week at a cost of $3000 a year. Wyckoff stated that she spoke to Loader, who considers this an integral part of the library and that remote access to the Anoka County site is not available at this time. Wyckoff felt this was a necessary service. Peterson indicated that Loader would not be requesting this service if it was available another way. Fehst agreed, but questioned the cost per use. Nawrocki stated is is desirable to have access to this newspaper, but also desirable to save the fees if possible. Motion by Nawrocki, second by Williams, to table purchase of the Star/Tribune on microfilm for 2002 to the next regular meeting. Wyckoff indicated that children and adults should not need to set up an account for payment, and that this service should be available. Upon vote: Williams, aye; Szurek, aye; Wyckoff, nay; Nawrocki, aye; Peterson, aye. 4 ayes - 1 nay. Motion carried. #8 Approve Business License Applications City Council Minutes November 26, 2001 Page 4 of 9 Nawrocki referred to the license request for VFW Post #230. He stated that, as he is the Commander and Signatory for the VFW,, it would not be proper for him to vote on this; therefore, he would abstain. Motion by Szurek, second by Wyckoff, to approve the items as listed on the business license agenda for November 26, 2001 and business license renewals for 2002. Upon vote: Williams, aye; Szurek, aye; Wyckoff, aye; Nawrocki, abstain; Peterson, aye. 4 ayes - 1 abstention. Motion carried. PROCLAMATIONS~ PRESENTATIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND GUESTS A. Proclamations - none B. Presentations - none C. Introduction of New Employees - none D. Recognition - none Peterson stated that the Holiday Kick Off Party held last Saturday was a hugh success, with over $2,000 raised for the library. Nawrocki indicated that the VFW fund raiser, on the same evening, for SACA raised around $1,000. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Rental Housing Revocation for 4201 6th Street Dana Alexon, Assistant Fire Chief, gave the background on attempts to re-inspect this property and the inability to obtain access to check the status of violations, therefore, recommended denial of the rental housing license. Peterson questioned if the owner was notified of this meeting. Alexon indicated the information was sent to the current address on file. Motion by Szurek, second by Wyckoff, to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2001-74, there being ample copies available to the public. Upon vote. All ayes. Motion carried. Motion by Szurek to adopt Resolution No. 2001-74, Resolution of the City Council of the City of Columbia Heights Approving Revocation Pursuant to Ordinance Code Section 5A.408(1) of the Rental License held by Tom Zarembski Regarding Rental Property at 4201 6th Street. Nawrocki thanked Alexon for information he receives on recommended revocations and asked if the tenants are aware of this action. Alexon indicated that tenants receive notice of this meeting also and that the owner has a minimum of 60 days to take correction action. Notification is by certified mail and physical posting on the property. Motion seconded by Williams. Upon vote: All ayes. Motion carried. RESOLUTION 2001-74 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS APPROVING REVOCATION PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE CODE SECTION 5A.408(1) OF THAT CERTAIN RESIDENTIAL RENTAL LICENSE HELD BY THOMAS ZAREMBSKI (HEREINAFTER "LICENSE HOLDER"). WHEREAS, LICENSE HOLDER IS THE LEGAL OWNER OF THE REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4201 6TM STREET, COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA, AND WHEREAS, PURSUANT TO COLUMBIA HEIGHTS CODE SECTION 5.104(1)(A), WRITTEN NOTICE SETTING FORTH THE CAUSES AND REASONS FOR THE PROPOSED COUNCIL ACTION City Council Minutes November 26, 2001 Page 5 of 9 CONTAINED HEREIN WAS GIVEN TO THE LICENSE HOLDER PUBLIC HEARING TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 26, 2001. ON NOVEMBER 7, 2001 OF A NOW, THEREFORE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOREGOING, AND ALL ORDINANCES AND REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS MAKES THE FOLLOWING: FINDINGS OF FACT That on August 3, 2001, Gary Gorman and John Larkin, inspectors for the City of Columbia Heights, inspected the property and noted six violations. Compliance orders listing the violations were mailed by regular mail to the owner at the address listed on the rental housing license application. That on September 26, 2001, Gary Gorman and John Larkin, inspectors for the City of Columbia Heights, reinspected the property and noted that the four violations remained unchecked by inspectors, who were unable to gain access to the house due to the owner not showing up. Compliance orders listing the violations were mailed by regular mail to the owner at the property at the address listed on the rental housing license application. That on October 17, 2001, Gary Gorman and John Larkin, inspectors for the City of Columbia Heights, reinspected the property and noted that the four violations remained unchecked by inspectors, who were unable to gain access to the house due to the owner not showing up. Compliance orders listing the violations were mailed by regular mail to the owner at the property at the address listed on the rental housing license application and copies were sent to the tenants. That on November 7, 2001, Gary Gorman and John Larkin, inspectors for the City of Columbia Heights, reinspected the property and noted that the four violations remained unchecked by inspectors, who were unable to gain access to the house due to the owner not showing up. Compliance orders listing the violations were mailed by certified mail to the owner at the property at the address listed on the rental housing license application. That on November 16, 2001, Gary Gorman and John Larkin, inspectors for the City of Columbia Heights, reinspected the property and noted that the four violations remained unchecked by inspectors, who were unable to gain access to the house due to the owner not notify the tenant of the reinspection. That based upon said records of the Enforcement Officer, the following conditions and violations of the City's Residential Maintenance Code were found to exist, to-wit: A. FAILURE TO CORRECT VIOLATION OF THE RESIDENTIAL MAINTENANCE CODE B. FAILURE TO SUBMIT REINSPECTION FEES OF $250.00 That all parties, including the License Holder and any occupants or tenants, have been given the appropriate notice of this hearing according to the provisions of the City Code Section 5A.306(1) and 5A.303(1)(d). CONCLUSIONS OF COUNCIL That the building located at 4201 6th Street is in violation of the provisions of the Columbia Heights City Code as set forth in the Compliance Order attached hereto, That all relevant parties and parties in interest have been duly served notice of this hearing, and any other heatings relevant to the revocation or suspension of the license held by License Holder. That all applicable rights and periods of appeal as relating to the license holder, owner, occupant, or tenant, as the case may be, have expired, or such rights have been exercised and completed. ORDER OF COUNCIL The rental license belonging to the License Holder described herein and identified by license number F5040 is hereby revoked/suspended (cross out one); The City will post for the purpose of preventing occupancy a copy of this order on the buildings covered by the license held by License Holder; All tenants shall remove themselves fi.om the premises within 60 days fi.om the first day of posting of City Council Minutes November 26, 2001 Page 6 of 9 this Order revoking the license as held by License Holder. Passed this 26th day of November, 2001 Offered by: Szurek Second by: Williams Roll Call: Ayes: Peterson, Szurek, Wyckoff, Williams, Nawrocki B. Rental Housing Revocation for 4600 Polk Street Mayor Peterson closed the hearing as the property is now in compliance with the Residential Maintenance Code. C. Rental Housing Revocation for 4616 Tyler Street Motion by Nawrocki, second by Szurek to waive the reading of Resolution No.2001-77, there being ample copies available to the public. Upon vote: All ayes. Motion carried. Alexon indicated he received written communication at 4 : l O p. m. today from the owner of property requesting the opportunity to pay necessary fees by installment. The violations have been corrected to the satisfaction of the Fire Department. Alexon recommended tabling action until the owner's request can be substantiated discussed with the Finance Director. Motion by Williams, second by Nawrocki, to table action on the rental housing license revocation of 4616 Tyler Street, until determined by the inspection department. Upon vote: All ayes. Motion Carried. D. Revocation/Suspension of Rental Housing License at 3849 Edgemoor Place Mayor Peterson closed the hearing as the property is now in compliance with the Residential Maintenance Code. ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION A. Other Ordinances and Resolutions - none B. Bid Considerations -none C. Other Business 1. Approve Joint Powers Agreement with Anoka County for Assessment Services Motion by Szurek, second by Williams, to approve the joint powers agreement with Anoka County for assessment services, effective January 16, 2002 to January 15, 2008, and to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute the agreement. Nawrocki questioned the residential rate increases. He asked that we talk to staff at the City of Fridley to see if there is a more cost effective way to handle this service, and to see if they would consider joining together in this service. Fehst listed other communities that handle their own assessing duties. Fehst introduced Janene Hebert, County Assessor, who was present to address questions. Hebert spoke of the County's relationship, regarding assessing, with Columbia Heights and Fridley. She stated that two individuals would be necessary to staff the office if Columbia Heights would do their own assessing. It would be the City's decision if this would be more economical for them. Hebert stated costs incurred by the County, including vehicle purchases and that of Anoka County Appraiser positions being changed from exempt to non-exempt, requiring payment of overtime. City Council Minutes November 26, 2001 Page 7 of 9 Nawrocki indicated cost increase percentages over the past several years. He stated that our assessment clerk may be retiring and the City must explore the County handling City assessments. We would lose funds by doing this and should also discuss this with the City of Fridley. Nawrocki asked that this be tabled to the first Council meeting in January, and that the City Manager speak to Fridley about this. Peterson asked for Hebert's comments on this. Hebert indicated that if the City is looking at hiring it's own staff, the County wouM like notice of that intent by the beginning of January, 2002. Fehst stated that he wouM speak to the Fridley City Manager about this and ftre services. Columbia Heights was not able to get the Hilltop fire service contract this year. Nawrocki asked for a chart from Fridley similar to the one received from the County. Fehst stated that we are very happy with the County's service. There are advantages to both ways of handling assessing duties, but he felt it would be hard to save money doing it ourselves. Nawrocki stated that his comments are not meant to be derogatory, as the County has given us good service, but a matter of what is most cost effective. Williams retracted his second of the original motion. Motion died for lack of a second. Motion by Nawrocki, second by Williams, to table the joint powers agreement with Anoka County for assessment services. Upon vote: All ayes. Motion Carried. 2. Renewal of Wine/Beer License -Tycoon Tavern and Grill Motion by Wyckoff, second by Szurek, to deny the 2002 application for a wine and beer license for Ok Cha Kwon dba Tycoon's Tavern and Grill at 4952 Central Avenue based on the recommendation of the Police Department. Police Chief Tom Johnson gave the background on Police calls to this location. He indicated the INS was contacted and the husband of the applicant is currently in jail. Johnson stated that until this situation is resolved, there should not be a renewal of the liquor license for the Tycoon bar. The license would expire midnight, December 31, 2001 after which time they would not be allowed to serve any type of alcoholic beverage. Upon vote: All ayes. Motion carried. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS A. Report of the City Manager Fehst stated that with the snowfall today, City truck~ would now be out sanding and plowing City streets. He reminded residents not to park on City streets overnight, to allow for snow removal. Fehst stated: December 3, 2001 a public meeting will be held on the proposed budget. · There will not be a work session on December 10th. · There will be a meeting with the School District, and the cities of Fridley, Hilltop and Columbia Heights from 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. on Thursday, November 29th at the Fridley Community Center · The Special Assessment Public Hearing for 2001 road improvements will be held tomorrow, November 27th at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council chambers. Fehst stated that the assessment fees would be fifteen percent less than predicted. He stated that the level of service was not totally acceptable and should be amended next year. City Council Minutes November 26, 2001 Page 8 of 9 Nawrocki stated there would be an AMM meeting next Thursday, November 29from 3:30p. m. to 5:00 p.m. Nawrocki questioned if there would be a budget meeting after the assessment hearing. Fehst stated there was not. Nawrocki stated that the notice in the paper of the budget hearing was misleading. Fehst stated that this notice was not required, but placed to assist residents. Nawrocki asked for an up date on last summer's discussion regarding the downtown development plan. Fehst stated that members have been added to the committee, but additional meetings have not been held as this falls to the new City Planner, who is currently involved in other projects. NawrocM referred to 3727 Reservoir Boulevard, and the bare condition of the back yard with dirt running into the alley. Fehst stated that the owner has been advised to put hay bales adjacent to the alley or seed the property to eliminate drainage into the alley. B. Report of the City Attorney - none GENERAL COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS Mayor Peterson listed minutes of Board and Commission meetings presented to the City Council Meeting of the October 18, 2001, Charter Commission · Meeting of the November 14, 2001, Human Services Commission · Meeting of the November 6, 2001, Library Board of Trustees · Meeting of the September 18, 2001, Housing and Redevelopment Authority · Meeting of the October 16, 2001, Economic Development Authority CITIZENS FORUM (check address) Roger Strom, 690 47 ~ Avenue, stated that his assessment was $345 less than anticipated and thanked Council for the reduced cost. He stated that on Monroe and Jefferson between 47tn ~ Avenue the street was repaired with mill and overlay. He stated that a week after the work was done a truck went down the street and left imprints in the street. Strom questioned if the street had an adequate amount of overlay on it. Fehst stated he was not aware of complaints, but would have staff look at it. Strom asked if payment was held on the project. Fehst stated that funds are reserved for up to a year. Nawrocki stated that Mr. Strom's comments should be part of the record at tomorrow night's assessment hearing. Peterson questioned if this damage was the contractor's fault or the heavy truck's fault. COUNC~ CORNER Nawrocki indicated that he has a book on Lomianki, Poland for Council to look at. Nawrocki distributed a copy of the State Statues regarding special City Council meetings. Nawrocki distributed City of Shoreview brochures, with information about their council meetings. He suggested Columbia Heights look at printing such a brochure. Nawrocki referred to the Honeywell contract approved at the last meeting, stating that he spoke to someone from the Moundsview School District regarding their association with Honeywell. They indicated that Honeywell's price to replace equipment was double other bids. Fehst agreed that their replacement costs were high, but we are pleased with their maintenance. Nawrocki stated that the school board member he spoke to did not have any knowledge of the school district again contracting Honeywell for maintenance. Nawrocki stated City Council Minutes November 26, 2001 Page 9 of 9 that Council did not receive a copy of the annual Honeywell review. Nawrocki indicated that as part of City policy, the City Manager's annual review should be done. Nawrocki indicated that the last Council included in this year's budget a review of the City Attorney's contract, which should be done. Fehst stated that staff is working with the League of Minnesota Cities to format this. Wyckoff stated that Becky Loader, Library Director, received a letter from Barnes and Noble bookstore indicating the fundraiser for the library foundation netted $1,063.00. Szurek stated that even patrons at the store who weren't aware of the fundraiser helped out by using the donation certificate. Wyckoff stated that there would be a meeting on Thursday, November 29 at Murzyn Hall to establish the Columbia Heights Historical Society. Williams encouraged citizens to attend the budget hearing on December 3rs to give their input. He felt there is a need for the City to put money into development of residential, commercial and industrial areas of the City. Referring to the property complaint on Reservoir Boulevard, Williams stated that if we check on one person we need to look at the whole alley or neighborhood for the same violation, and not single out one person. Fehst stated the Police Department responds to complaints in this manner. Peterson stated it is unfair to respond only if someone complains about a neighbor; and they should understand the surrounding area would also be checked. Nawrocki stated that we should act on complaints only. Fehst stated that the Fire Department inspectors go through the City on a region-by-region basis, as time is available, so everyone will get reviewed. Peterson encouraged residents to take their families for a drive through the community to enjoy the holiday lights and decorations. Mayor Peterson stated "Don't take too yourself to seriously, enjoy life, and do a random act of kindness for someone." ADJOURNMENT Mayor Peterson adjoumed the meeting at 8:25 p.m. Patricia Muscovitz, Deputy City Clerk OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS COLUMBIA HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL ASSESSMENT LEVY HEARING NOVEMBER 27, 2001 Mayor Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:12 p.m. 1) Roll Call/Pledge of Allegiance Present: Mayor Peterson, Councilmember Williams, Councilmember Wyckoff, Councilmember Nawrocki. Absent: Councilmember Szurek 2) Resolution No. 2001-66, being a Resolution Adopting the Assessment Roll for the following street improvements: Zone 5 Street Rehabilitation: Full Street Reconstruction, Partial Street Reconstruction, Mill and Overlay, and Seal Coating of the Bituminous City Streets Kevin Hansen, Public Works Director, referred to Council packet attachments. He listed the boundaries of the project area. Hansen listed additions to the project and deletions from the project. Nawrocki asked if the sewer work was completed on 45th. Hansen indicated it was He listed utility work completed with the project, and indicated there were three lead services were replaced. He listed areas where storm sewer work was completed. Hansen indicated that assessments are done is according to City policy. Bids for this project came in 17.5% under the engineer's original estimate. Therefore, terms for this assessment are consistent with Zones 1-4 when they ere completed. Hansen stated that sod would be checked next year, and funds have been retained to insure proper completion. He referred to calls from seal coat areas that will be checked and repaired by the contractor next spring. There was some diesel spilled on Fourth Street, which will be addressed. A settlement problem on 45th will be allowed to go through a freeze and thaw and addressed after that time. Hansen referred to a resident call about curbing on 46½, which we don't normally do unless necessary, but a judgrnent call was made to place two curbs where there was no curbing. Curbing is evaluated if it is hazardous to our plowing process. Nawrocki referred to a resident letter regarding curb cuts on 46½, asking why his curb was not replaced when his two neighbor's curbs were replaced. Fehst stated he spoke to Jim Molenero, Engineering Technician, and visited the site. He indicated that other residents on the block paid for any curb improvements they had done. The resident was informed, by Molenero, that this was a seal coat street, not mill and overlay, and curbing would not be replaced. Nawrocki stated that this was an inconsistent practice. Williams questioned the cost for seal coating. Hansen stated the fee was about $200. Williams suggested that the $200 assessment be erased for this property owner. Peterson stated that nothing more could be done this year, and suggested a determination be made next spring. Hansen clarified that we do not do driveway drops, only curbs that are hazardous. Hansen referred to ten other driveway drops in this area. Fehst stated curb replacements were a benefit to the City for channeling water. Peterson felt we must stick to our policy. Wyckoff questioned if the resident could have asked to have this done. Hansen estimated the cost to him would have been about $1,500. Fehst questioned if the two curbs we did put in should have been assessed, and asked Hansen about putting in a bituminous curb for this resident. Hansen stated that type of curb would not hold up. Nawrocki referred to drainage flow and talked about curb replacement in his zone and the mill and overlay project there. Nawrocki stated that we should commit to doing this work next year with our miscellaneous concrete contract. Hansen stated that staffwould look at the curb next spring to see if it is hazardous. Peterson stated that if staff is directed to look this curb, they should look at the other similar curbs also. Williams again suggested forgiving the assessment. Fehst suggested working with the owner next spring. Williams questioned why these residents didn't get charged for the curbing. Peterson suggested working with the resident next spring and that the resident should pay for this seal coating assessment. Hansen stated that staff is recommending the assessments as provided, and that Kathy Young, Assistant City Engineer and Jane Gleason, Assessment Clerk, are present to answer questions. Williams suggested lowering the proposed interest rate. Peterson asked what our cost is. Fehst stated that we prefer residents pay their assessments. Nawrocki indicated administrative costs are already in the assessment. Gleason stated that 1/6th of the assessments have already been paid. Williams suggested a 6.5% interest rate. Nawrocki suggested a 5% interest rate. The resident from 4510 6th Street questioned the cost differences from 46t~ Street to 45th Street. Young indicated the difference was in the type of repairs done; full reconstruction, partial reconstruction, mill and overlay or seal coating. Hansen stated that street repair requirements are determined prior to utility repair determinations. Residents from 4510 6~ Street (Phyllis Wilda), 4506 6t~ Street (Lorraine Sandretzky), and 4522 6t~ Street (Anthony Belinski) introduced themselves. Mayor Peterson closed the public hearing. Motion by Williams, second by Wyckoff, to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2001-66, there being ample copies available to the public. Upon vote: All ayes. Motion carried. Motion by Nawrocki to amend Resolution No. 2001-66, section 3, replacing eight percent interest, with five percent interest. Motion died for lack of a second. Motion by Williams to adopt Resolution No. 2001-66 being a Resolution Adopting Assessment Rolls for Zone 5 Improvements and to amend Resolution No. 2001-66, section 3, replacing eight percent interest with six and one-half percent interest. Second by Wyckoff. Nawrocki stated that six and one-half percent was still excessive Upon vote: All ayes. Motion carried. RE SOLUTIONNO. 2001-66 Adopting assessment roll according to the City Charter for the following local improvements and determining that said improvements have been made and ratifying and conforming all other proceedings, heretofore had: Special Assessments numbered P.I.R. 1046, 6t~ Street N.E., 44t~ Avenue to 45th Avenue; P.I.R. 1047, Quincy Street N.E., 4 l't Avenue to 43~d Avenue; P.I.R. 1048, Jackson Street N.E., South of42"~ Avenue to 43'a Avenue; P.I.R. 1049, 6~ Street N.E., 45t~ Avenue to 46t~ Avenue; P.I.R. 1050, 47t~ Avenue N.E., Cul-de-sac to Monroe Street; P.I.R. 1051, Monroe Street N.E., 44* Avenue to 45* Avenue; P.I.R. 1052, Quincy Street N.E., 44~ Avenue to 45t~ Avenue; P.I.R. 1053, Jackson Street N.E., 44~ Avenue to 45t~ Avenue; P.I.R. 1054, Van Buren Street N.E., 44th Avenue to 45~ Avenue; P.I.R. 1055, 7~ Street N.E., 47th Avenue to 48t~ Avenue; P.I.R. 1056, 47 '/2 Avenue N.E., Jefferson Street to Monroe Street; P.I.R. 1057, Monroe Street N.E., 46 ~ Avenue to 48~ Avenue; P.I.R. 1058, 45~ Avenue N.E., Monroe Street to Central Avenue; P.I.R. 1059, Quincy Street N.E., 43~ Avenue to 44* Avenue; P.I.R. 1060, Van Buren Street N.E., 42n~ Avenue to 43'a Avenue; P.I.R. 1061, Zone 5,4t~ & 5~ Streets N.E., 44~ Avenue to 48t~ Avenue; 6th Street N.E., 46t~ Avenue to 48* Avenue; 7th & Washington Streets N.E., 44th Avenue to 47~ Avenue; Madison Street N.E., 44t~ Avenue to Cul-de-sac north of45t~ Avenue; Monroe Street N.E., 45th to 46~ Avenues; 45~ Avenue N.E., 5a' Street to Monroe Street; 46~ Avenues N.E., University Avenue Service Drive to Monroe Street; 46 ½ & 48th Avenues N.E., Jefferson Street to Monroe Street; 47t~ Avenue N.E., University Avenue Service Drive to Jefferson Street; 48t~ Avenue N.E., University Avenue Service Drive to Washington Street. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota, met at 7:00 o'clock p.m. on the 27* day of November, 2001, in the City Council Chamber, 590 - 40th Avenue N.E., Columbia Heights, Minnesota, being the time and place set when and where all persons interested could appear and be heard by the Council with respect to benefits, and to the proportion of the cost of making the local improvements above described, a notice of such hearing having been heretofore duly published as required by law, and a notice mailed to each property owner of record, stating the proposed mount of the assessment; and, WHEREAS, this Council has heretofore estimated and fixed the cost of such local improvements and has prepared an assessment roll therefore, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS HEREBY RESOLVES: Section 1. That this Council does hereby adopt the aforesaid assessment roll known and described as "Assessment Roll for Local Improvements" numbered P.I.R. 1046, 1047, 1048, 1049, 1050, 1051, 1052, 1053, 1054, 1055, 1056, 1057, 1058, 1059, 1060, and 1061. Section 2. That this Council hereby finds and determines that each of the lots and parcels of land enumerated in said assessment roll was and is especially benefited by such improvement in an amount not less than the amount set opposite in the column headed "Original Amount". And this Council further fmcls and determines that the proper proportion of the cost of such improvements to be especially assessed against such lot or parcel of land is the amount set opposite the description of each such lot or parcel of land respectively in said assessment roll. Section 3. That said assessments may be paid in part or in full without interest on or before December 27, 2001, or in annual installments for a period of from one year to fifteen years as designated on the assessment roll, payable on or before the 15th day of September, annually, with 6.5% interest thereon. Failure to pay the annual installment renders the same delinquent and thereafter a 10% penalty and a County Fee is added and the said delinquent special assessment is certified to Anoka County for collection with the real estate tax. Section 4. That this Council did hereby determine and re-determine to proceed with said improvement, does ratify and confn-m all other proceedings heretofore had in regard to this improvement, and said improvement shall hereafter be known and numbered as Local Improvement numbered P.I.R. 1046, 1047, 1048, 1049, 1050, 1051, 1052, 1053, 1054, 1055, 1056, 1057, 1058, 1059, and 1060, all in Project g4)102, and P.I.R. 1061 Project #0101. Section 5. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage. Passed this 27th day of November, 2001. Offered by: Williams Seconded by: Wyckoff Roll Call: Ayes: Peterson, Wyckoff, Williams, Nawrocki - Absent: Szurek Motion by Nawrocki mending section 5 to state "the property at 868 46~ Street be included in next years construction project, to replace the curbing so as to be similar to the properties west of this address, and renumber the current section 5 as section 6". Motion died for lack of a second. Motion by Williams to waive the $200 special assessment charge for 868 46½ Street. Second by Nawrocki second. Nawrocki felt it more appropriate that the curb work be done. Fehst questioned assessing the neighbors for their curbing. Hansen stated that they would have had to sign a waiver of appeal. Upon vote: Williams, aye; Wyckoff, nay; Nawrocki, aye; Peterson, nay. 2 ayes - 2 nays. Motion failed. Nawrocki asked that Mr. Strom comments be added to this meeting. Peterson indicated that Strom's comments were that trucks hauling in trailer homes dragged grooves in the street. Hansen said he would call the Hilltop City Clerk on this. Peterson questioned the fence by Rainbow foods and the fence off 44th for the little park will that be done next year. Hansen stated that replacement would be with black vinyl coated fencing. Bids were taken and would be brought to the next Council meeting. Hansen stated he is still working with Rainbow Foods to improve screening along the back of their building. Wyckoffrelayed a call from Dick Dustin, regarding runoff on 38th and Hayes. Fehst stated that the owner of 2022 Hayes has a building permit. Young will look at drainage from the lot to be sure the water does mn into the neighbor's yards, and will inform the developer. Peterson suggested a little ponding area in the back. Hansen stated there are a couple spots in that area that hold water. Wyckoff referred to the home on McCloud and 42~, which is falling down. Peterson stated it is a poor design for the lot and felt it was a hazard. Eugene Erickson, 4425 4th Street asked if another sealcoating would be done. Hansen stated there would not. Teresa Kelly, 4245 Jackson, questioned the letter she received indicating her street was removed from the seal coating project. Hansen stated it would probably come up next year. Kelly stated her other charge was $2,375.00, and felt the eight percent interest was high. Gleason stated that any amount paid before December 27th will reduce the interest charged the following year. Adjournment Mayor Peterson adjourned the meeting at 8:12 p.m. Patricia Muscovitz, Deputy City Clerk OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS COLUMBIA HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL 2002 BUDGET REVIEW DECEMBER 3~ 2001 The following are the minutes of a special 2002 budget review meeting 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 CALL TO ORDER Mayor Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Peterson, Councilmember Williams, Councilmember Szurek, Councilmember Wyckoff, and Councilrnember Nawrocki, PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO MEETING AGENDA Upon vote: all ayes. Motion carded. 2002 BUDGET MEETING B. Establishing 2002 Rental License Fees Fehst requested this item be tabled until further information can be collected, such as fees charged by other cities. Fehst would like to pass this information along to local landlords at their next regular meeting on December 11th. Fehst indicated that Chief Johnson requests Councilmembers attend the February Landlords meeting. Peterson stated that the December 11th Landlords meeting wouM still be held and Council was welcome to attend. Motion by Szurek, second by Williams, to table the establishment of 2002 Rental Licensing fees to a future meeting. Upon vote: All ayes. Motion carried. 2002 Budget Tax Levy Information Presentation by the City Manager: Walt Fehst, City Manager, indicated the number of preliminary budget meetings held, and the request that division heads reduce their original budget by ten percent ($800, 000), because of the budget shortfall resulting from the change in the State tax structure. On September lOth City Council approved the preliminary levy limits as recommended. Following subsequent budget meetings, Council recommended adding back $259,000 of proposed cuts, and allowing $300,000 for community redevelopment of our downtown district. Fehst read information from the League of MN Cities summarizing the new State budget process. He stated that the funds lost from the State forced Columbia Heights and other municipalities to increase levy amounts. Fehst read a list of initial budget cuts and then read a list of items considered for addition back into the budget. Bill Elrite, Finance Director, narrated a power point presentation including the following items: · 2002 revenue by source - all funds · Expenditures of functional area · Expenditures by classification · Revenue of tax supported funds o Intergovernmental portion of revenue was reduced by the State. Ekite stated that the average savings on a Columbia Heights home should be about $150 to $200. · General fund and library fund expenditures City Council Budget Meeting December 3, 2001 Page 2 of 4 · Ten departments with major expenditure increases. The election expenditure increase is because elections are now only on even years. We save $33,725 in non-election years. · Class rate percentages of taxes payable since 1997. · Changes in State aid · Proposed property taxes from '99 to '02. Elrite explained fiscal disparities and levy increases from each year. · Changes in the tax levy from the general fund, library fund and EDA fund. · 2002 property tax levy of $4,839,314. The largest portion of increase was in state aid reduction. Elrite stated that the implicit price deflator used was 3.86% to factor our property tax levy and aid received. · Where 2001 property taxes went: 51% school, 21% county, 23% city, and 5% miscellaneous. · Where 2002 property taxes will go: 27% county, 38% city, 30% school, and 5% miscellaneous. Elrite stated that action taken by the State Legislature would result in a 10-20% reduction of preliminary tax bills. · Monthly tax break down. Fehst mentioned that tomorrow the State would announce a budget deficit, which could cause additional cut backs in State aid. Fehst stated that along with Councilmember Nawrocki, he attended the Association Metropolitan Municipalities meeting, which considered cut backs and deficits. Williams questioned what the tax difference would be on a $100,000 home. Elrite stated it would be about 15°/6 or about $120 to $170. Elrite indicated there would be a property tax increase for commercial property. Nawrocki referred to taxes for commercial properties and the proposed State deficit. Nawrocki indicated that the reference to City services costing residents $27 per month does not include utilities. Nawrocki stated that he had a difficult time following the budget process this year. He questioned specific items to determine if they were added back into the budget or deleted. Discussion included the future of the Special Assessment Department upon retirement of the current clerk. Elrite stated that duties would be distributed through various City departments and the County would be contracted to do special assessment billing with the County tax statement. Lee Stauch, 1155 Kyber Lane NE, stated that the County has indicated tax statements will be mailed on December 15. He gave his estimation of tax increases.for non-owner occupied rental property and owner occupied rental property. Bill Turner, 5240 7th Street, questioned the conflict in inflation numbers. As a senior citizen, the proposed increase is significant to the 2.6percent increase he received. Nawrocki stated there are many different "Cost of Living" figures used. Nawrocki questioned adding back $20,990 in the Fire Department budget for EMT services. Elrite indicated that part of the funding will be through budget add backs and part through other cuts. Nawrocki requested more information to understand this. Nawrocki questioned where the infrastructure cost comes from under Engineering. Fehst stated this would have been to recoup engineering costs by adding them to the project versus from the general fund. Nawrocki questioned if the City would pay 25% of private Dutch Elm removal costs. Fehst stated that they would, but would be recommended for elimination next year. City Council Budget Meeting December 3, 2001 Page 3 of 4 Nawrocki questioned recognition costs. Elrite stated this was a conglomeration of departments and items, such as the City's queen float, beautification, annual employee holiday lunch, etc. Harold Hoium 4315 5th Street, asked if general funds are invested and if we received a good interest rate. Elrite indicated recent rates have declined, but that all idle cash and funds are invested. Hoium requested that the weed ordinance be more strictly enforced. Hoium questioned what civil defense funds are used for. Nawrocki stated for the maintenance of sirens, Fehst stated for portions of fire employee wages, and Elrite stated for payment of fire training. Hoium requested that the Police Department do a better job patrolling the City, including the bus terminal. Fehst indicated that there has been a significant reduction in part one and part two crimes. Hoium stated that citizens are not informed of department actions and should received reports at each meeting. Fehst felt it would be beneficial to put this type of information in the City newsletter. Fehst suggested Mr. Hoium review the City's Annual Report. Hoium stated that street lighting in the City should have improved now that it is contracted out. Peterson asked that he take these comments to the Traffic Commission..Hoium questioned the number of different funds created by the City. Elrite estimated there are approximately 30funds. Lee Stauch asked if there was $2,000,000 in this budget for a new liquor store. Fehst stated no, but when the liquor store lease at the Rainbow center ends in three years, we will consider options for another liquor store. Nawrocki indicated that he was not ready to support this budget. Motion by Szurek, second by Williams, to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2001-79, there being ample copies available to the public. Upon vote: All ayes. Motion carried. Motion by Szurek, second by Wyckoff, 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. Nawrocki felt that the proposed Levy was the same dollar amount as the maximum levy allowed. Fehst indicated that the alternate motion recommended would lower this amount. Motion by Nawrocki to amend the $4,851,347 levy to $4,671,662 representing a 3.5 percent increase in the levy, and represents a defendable increase. Motion died for lack of a second. Williams questioned where Nawrocki proposed cutting these funds from. Nawrocki asked that the budget not be acted upon until the next meeting, to see where we stand with tonight's cuts. Williams questioned if we had the liberty to delay this budget. Peterson suggested a motion be made to include the decease of $2 7, 000. Peterson stated that the budget as proposed would allow funds to redevelop areas. Williams indicated that he wants the City to move forward with residential, commercial and industrial improvements. Williams was concerned that Nawrocki did not bring his questions forward at the last budget work session. Fehst stated that the budget must be complete by December 28. Nawrocki stated that with or without the budget increase, things like road improvements would continue to get done. Nawrocki suggested removing Values First from the budget and a less expensive style City newsletter. Williams stated that he still has questions on revenue from the liquor stores. He also stated that we have spent nothing on our parks since 1968, and we need to spend money to improve our City. Nawrocki stated that if the budget were tabled to the next Council meeting, he would have a list of proposed cuts. Peterson stated that the budget is basically a yearly repetition, and that departments do not trying to bury funds. He stated that he has a high regard for our staff and they do a good job. Peterson indicated that you have to pay for what you receive and he believes that the citizens of Columbia Heights get a good dollar City Council Budget Meeting December 3, 2001 Page 4 of 4 value. He state that this budget was gone through item by item and compromises were made. Nawrocki stated that according to the Fridley newsletter, which compared costs for providing services, Columbia Heights is on the high end. Williams felt it was important to build up City reserve funds. Wyckoff stated that Council spent a lot of time on the budget. She lobbied to retain the receptionist position and did not want to see all of the assistance for diseased tree removal dropped. Wyckoff stated that Columbia Heights was fortunate, as most cities do not have EMT personnel. She was sad to see the "Back to the Parks "fund be cut, but even though she contacted residents, the program was not utilized. Williams indicated that the city is very conservative, but felt renovation is essential. Nawrocki stated concern about the effect of this increase to our senior citizens on a limited income, and that it would be possible to cut an additional $200,000. Szurek stated that Councilmembers worked hard on this budget, and it was the same process since she has been on the council. She did not find the information difficult to understand. Szurek indicated that community redevelopment was very important to her, and our industrial area needs to be improved. Motion amendment by Szurek, to set the total levy collectable in 2002 at $4,824,130 and approving the HRA levy of $111,702. Amendment agreed to and seconded by Wyckoff. Elrite pointed out an add-on in the resolution of $12,033 for PERA increases. Upon vote of the amendment: All ayes. Motion carried. Upon vote of the original motion: Williams, aye; Szurek, aye; Wyckoff, aye; Nawrocki, nay; Peterson, aye. 4 ayes - 1 nay. Motion carried. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Peterson adjourned the meeting at 9:15 p.m. Patricia Muscovitz, Deputy City Clerk COLUMBIA HEIGHTS - CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: December 17, 2001 AGENDA SECTION: Consent ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER'S NO: 4A2 CITY MANAGER'S APPROVAL ITEM: Establish Work S essionMeeting BY: Walt Fehst 1~'~ .'~~J~ Dates for January 2002 DATE: September 24, 2001 E NO: It is recommended that Work Session meetings be scheduled for Monday, January 7, 2002 beginning at 7:00 p.m. and Tuesday, January 22, 2002 beginning at 7:00 p.m. in Conference Room 1 at City Hall. RECOMMENDED MOTION: MOTION: Move to establish Work Session meeting dates for Monday, January 7, 2002 and Tuesday, January 22, 2002, beginning at 7:00 p.m. in Conference Room 1 at City Hall. COUNCIL ACTION: CITY COUNCIL LETTER MEETING OF: DECEMBER 17, 2001 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT ORIGINATING DEPT.: CITY MANAGER NO: 4 L(_/3~-~ ASSESSING APPROVAL CITIZENS OR RETIRED & DISABLED PERSONS HARDSHIP SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DEFERRAL DATE: NOVEMBER 26, 2001 NO: In 1982, the City Council adopted a resolution allowing the deferral of assessments for senior citizens and disabled persons. The resolution established eligibility criteria including a maximum income. The income level is updated annually by resolution. The attached resolution retains the criteria in the previous resolution and updates the income eligibility amount to $20,700, the same dollar amount used for reduced rates for senior citizens utility bills. The current income eligibility amount is $17,900. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to waive the reading of the Resolution, there being ample copies available to the public. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to adopt Resolution 2001-78 being a resolution establishing a new maximum income of $20,700 for Senior or Retired and Disabled Persons to be eligible for special assessment deferral. COUNCIL ACTION: jg\files\SR Defer res & COU LTR RESOLUTION NO. 2001 - 78 BEING A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING SENIOR CITIZENS OR RETIRED AND DISABLED PERSONS HARDSHIP SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DEFERRAL Whereas, immediate payment of special assessments or installments on specia assessments cast an undue hardship on some persons owning homestead properties who are 65 years of age or older or retired by virtue of a permanent and total disability for whom it would be a hardship to make payments, and Whereas, Minnesota Statutes ~j435.193 - 435.195 makes it possible for a home role charter city to pass a resolution establishing standards and guidelines for determining the existence of a hardship and for determining the existence of a disability. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS: This deferral procedure shall apply only to assessments which are payable in five or more annual installments. This deferral procedure shall apply only to property owned and occupied by the eldedy, retired, or disabled applicant. Ownership and occupancy must be of the same nature as would quali~ the applicant for a homestead exemption for tax purposes. This deferral procedure shall apply only to homestead property owned by a person 65 years of age or older or retired by virtue of a permanent and total disability for whom it would be a hardship to make payments, Permanent and total disability shall have the same definition for purposes of assessment deferral as is used for social secudty purposes. This deferral procadure shall not be construed as to prohibit the determination of hardship on the basis of exceptional and unusual circumstances not covered by the standards and guidelines herein so long as determination is made in a nondiscriminatory manner and does not give the applicant an unreasonable preference or advantage over other applicants. In order to obtain a deferral of an assessment, the homeowner must make application on the forms prescribed by the City of Columbia Heights Assessment Clerk. 6. In granting a deferred assessment, the Council shall determine in its resolution approving the assessment roll the amount of interest, if any, to be charged on the deferred assessment. 7. The option of the homeowner to defer the payment of special assessments shall terminate and all amounts accumulated plus applicable interest shall become due and payable upon the occurrence of any of the following events: a. the death of the owner, provided that the spouse is not otherwise eligible for benefits hereunder; b. the sale, transfer or subdivision of the property or any part thereof; c. if the property should for any reason lose its homestead status; or d, if for any reason the City shall determine lhat there would be no hardship to require immediate or partial payment, 8. No deferral may be granted unless the homeowner makes application to the City Assessment Clerk within lhirty (30) days after adoption of the assessment by the Council. 9. The deferral shall apply to only 50% of the annual installment payment. If the 50% is not paid in a timely manner, the balance of the annual installment along with all future installments shall become immediately due and payable. 10. No deferral shall be granted to any owner who has a gross annual household income from all sources in excess of $20,1'00.00. 11. No deferral may be continued from year to year unless the owner shall file a renewal application before September 15th of each year. 12. No special assessment may be deferred for a period longer than the time set by the Council as the time over which the project is to be assessed. 13. Interest on deferred assessments shall be at the rate set by the Council in its resolution adopting the assessment roll, and such interest shall be added to the amount deferred and shall be paid in accordance with Minnesota Statute .~.35.195 and this Resolution. Passed this 17th day of December, 2001. Offered by: Seconded by: Roll Call: Mayor Gary L. Peterson Patricia Muscovitz, Deputy City Clerk jg\files\SR Defer res & COU LTR COLUMBIA HEIGHTS - CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of December 17, 2001 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER'S NO: t._{ _ /~ _ ~.~ Library APPROVAL BY: ' ' ' ITEM: Payment for Star/Tribune microfilm BY: M. Rebecca Loader ~..~~~ DATE: December 6, 2001 DA NO: The Library subscribes to the Minneapolis Star/Tribune on a daily basis for use by the patrons. Because of the storage problem with a daily newspaper as to space and climate regulation, the physical newspapers are only kept for two months. The Library has subscribed to the Star/Tribune on microfilm since 1971 in order to provide the patrons with access to the articles and obituaries. The microfilm is produced exclusively by one company. Patrons may access the Star/Tribune in the following ways at the Library: 1. The Star/Tribune website (http://www.startribune.com) a. Provides access to articles back to 1990. b. Any article older than 3 weeks can be searched and previewed for free. Retrieval of the whole article requires that the patron set up an account and pay $1.95 per article. 2. In-Library access to electronic database National 5 a. Provides access to full text back to 1986. b. Text only; no pictures, no charts. c. Selected name indexing fi'om 1989. d. Prints of pages are 10 cents each. 3. In-Library access to hard copy for two months 4. In-Library access to microfilm back to 1971. a. Prints of pages are 15 cents each. b. Pages are exact reproductions of newspapers. Microfilm is budgeted in line item 2188. The 2001 budget was $2,700 and the 2002 proposed budget is $2,700. The 2000 expenditure was $2,583.00 and the 2001 expenditure was $2,829.75. The cost for the 2002 subscription is $3,092.25. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to authorize purchase of one subscription to the Star/Tribune on microfilm for 2002 from the authorized, proprietary company producing it for the cost of $3,092.25. COUNCIL ACTION: CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: December 17, 2001 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT ~ A ~ ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER' NO: ' - CITY MANAGER ' S APPROVAL, J / CONTRIBUTION TO INSURANCES FOR 2002 DATE: ~^/~w0~ DA E:~ Employer contribution to insurances were previously established for 2001-2003 for eligible non-union employees, and for 2001-2003 for eligible union employees as a result of contract negotiations. As you are aware, effective January 1, 2002, health insurance premiums will be increasing 48%. At the time the employer contribution to insurances was established, neither the City or the unions anticipated this dramatic increase. Several unions have requested to reopen the insurance section of their contract. Rather than reopening the contracts, staff is recommending accelerating the effective date of the employer contribution to insurances for 2003 to 2002 for eligible non-union and union employees. For union employees, such change would be effective once a memorandum of understanding was entered into between the City and the respective union(s). The resulting change would be: EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION CURRENT PROPOSED 2001 $475.00/MONTH 2001 $475.00/MONTH 2002 $505.00/MONTH 2002 $535.00/MONTH 2003 $535.00/MONTH 2003 $535.00/MONTH The cost of such change for all affected would be $27,500. Monies were included in the 2002 adopted budget. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to waive the reading of the resolution, there being ample copies available to the public. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to adopt Resolution No. 2001- ~0, being a resolution regarding employer contribution to insurances for 2002. COUNCIL ACTION: RESOLUTION NO. 2001-80 RESOLUTION REGARDING EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION TO INSURANCES FOR 2002 WHEREAS, employer contribution to insurances for eligible union and non-union employees for 2002 were previously negotiated and established; WHEREAS, effective January 1, 2002, health insurance premiums will be increasing 48%; WHEREAS, neither the City nor the unions anticipated this dramatic an increase in insurance premiums during the course of contract negotiations for the current bargaining agreements; WHEREAS, in an effort to help lessen the impact to employees of the significant premium increase while attempting to minimize the impact on the City budget; BE IT RESOLVED, that the employer contribution to insurances for eligible union and non-union employees previously established effective January l, 2003, will become effective January l, 2002; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that such change will be effective for union employees once a memorandum of understanding is entered into between the City and the respective union(s). Passed this Offered by: Seconded by: Roll Call: __ day of December 2001. Attest: Mayor Gary L. Peterson Patricia Muscovitz, Deputy City Clerk CITY COUNCIL LETTER MEETING OF: DECEMBER 17, 2001 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: CITY MANAGER NO: L~, A-~-~' FINANCE APPRO_V~ ~ ~ PAYMENT TO OMNI ROOFS, INC. FOR ROOF DATE: DEC. 5, 2001 DATE: REPAIRS AND REPLACEMENT At the present time the contractor has completed the roof renovation and replacement. This work has been reviewed by Bill Hollman of AAC Roof Consulting, who is the consultant hired to oversee this project. He concurs that the job is complete and acceptable. Subsequently, we are requesting approval for final payment to the contractor and approval to transfer fund balance from the General Fund to fund 411 Capital Improvement General Government Buildings to cover the cost of the roof repair.. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to authorize final payment in the amount of$117,757 to Omni Roofs, Inc. for roof renovation and replacement on City Hall. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to authorize the transfer of$117,757 from the General Fund to the Capital Improvement General Government Buildings fund and appropriate such amount for roof repairs and replacement. WE:sms 0112055cotrNCIL COUNCIL ACTION: Z .. .. ~j ~.~ 0 J : ~ · uz 'jI~ ~ : = ~ 2 := ~ ~= j I fi · O l o ~ o~o/. m o ~ ~ 0 ~1~ ~ ~ o 0 ~ mi~ o~.~ · - ~9 0 .. ~<u~ : ~l ~ :-- ~ ~= I ~.= E ~ ~. ~ ~ = / · - o= c~ E c~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ k / u~cE~' ~_~ ~ I ~ O:II X TX l OO:l: l , XXq'C. ~IUrBRClAj./INDUOTRIJLL~ ~ K~:NT CT. SHOREVIEW. MN $5t26 Office: 651- 484-.31.30 Fsx: 6S1-787-0709 PROPOSAL SUBMH"FED TO: Att.: Mr. Walter Fchst - City Manager City of Columbia Heights 590 40~ Avenue NE Columbia Heights, Mn 55421 WORK TO BE PERFORMED AT: Job: Roofing Projec~ Address: 590 40~b Avenue NE City: Columbia Heights Date: October 30, 2001 (DESCRIPTION OF WORK TO BE PERFORMED) As per specifications by RHA Architects, Inc., 104 East St. Germaine Street in St. Cloud, Mirme~ota, for the roofing projecl at the City of Columbia Heights, the project is to consist of the following: F. as specified, for thc base bid sum of $108,500.00 Si~a~rt qf Acceptan~~nnager) Signature of Acceptance (Mayor) For thc removal and replacement of roof area G, as specified, and for the restoration of areas A through Date //- / Date Sincerely, (' Jerald L. Peterson President PAGE 1 OMI I ROOFS, INC. ~ KENT CT. SHOREVIEW, MN 55126 Office: 651-484-3130 Fax: 651-787-0709 PROPOSAL SUBMITTED TO: Attn: Mr. Walter Fehst - City Manager City of Columbia Heights 590 40th Avenue NE Columbia Heights, Mn 55421 WORK TO BE PERFORMED AT: Job: Roofing Project-New SheetMetal Address: 590 40th Avenue NE City: Columbia Heights Date: November 12, 2001 (DESCRIPTION OF WORK TO BE PERFORMED) NEW SHEET METAL COPING~ACIA ON AREAS A & B 1. Install new pre-finished metal to areas A&B coping/facia, as per specifications from RHA Architects. in the amount of $9257.00 Signature of Acc~ager) S'gnamre of ~cep~e (Mayor) Date Sincerely, Jerald L. Peterson President PAGE 1 CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: DECEMBER 17, 2001 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT ORIGINATING DEPT: CITY MANAGER NO: ~ - A --'~ FINANCE ~'o~ ~'-~'~'APPROVAL/. ITEM:WORKERS'COMPENSATION BY: WILLIAMELRITEC/- BD~E.~~f~ INSURANCE DATE: December 6, 2001 . NO: In January of 2001 the City changed their workers' compensation carder fi.om St. Paul Companies to Berkley Risk Administrators under the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust. The City was more or less forced to make this change because Berkley Risk Administrators operating under the League of Minnesota Cities has established a monopoly on municipal Workers' Compensation coverage in Minnesota. St. Paul Companies nationwide has exited the municipal Workers' Compensation market and no longer writes workers' compensation policies for municipalities. Subsequently, after extensive research by our insurance agent, the only altemative left for the City for workers' compensation insurance was Berkley Risk Administrators. Again, this year, our insurance agent approached other worker's compensation carders; all who declined to provide a quote due to a variety of reasons. One factor that has a significant impact on the City's workers' compensation is our experience modification ratio. An average experience modification ratio is 1. For several years the City's experience modification ratio was less than this, which resulted in a reduction of premium. Currently the League of Minnesota Cities has estimated our experience modification factor at 1.30, which means our claims under workers' compensation are 30% higher than what is considered to be normal or average. This, in mm, increases our total workers' compensation premium by 30%. However, this estimate is a decrease from last year's ratio of 1.36. Our Workers' Compensation premium increased from $120,930 for 2001 to $137,120 for 2002. The reasons for this increase are 1) The League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust implemented a 7% average rate increase 2) The League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust Managed Care Credit decreased from 5% to 3% and 3) Estimated payrolls increased for the City due to cost of living increases. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to enter into an agreement with the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust for workers' compensation coverage based on their premium quotation of $137,120. WE:sms 0112062COUNCIL Attachment COUNCIL ACTION: FROM A J G&llasher (952)944-9795 (TUE) 12. 4'01 tl:58/ST. 11:58/NO. 9760085002 P League of Minnesota cities Insurance Trust Group 8elf-ln~ured Work~m' Compensation Plan 14~ Unl1~r~ilyAl~lt~eWe~ St. Pad, MN M1~1-2044 Pheae (6~1) 216~l¶73 Self-Insured Workers' Compensation Quotation CGLtJ~IB[A HE[6HTS, CZTY CtF' Ol/O1/L~OE Ol/0! ESTIPiTEI) DEPOSIT LODE RATE PAVROLL PREMIUM STREET CDNSTRUP-TION & I~tINTEMANCE FIREFIGHTERB (~T ~~) CITY ~ & Y~RD P~KS The forcaoing quotmion ia for a deposit premium baaed on your relume ar payrolt. Your ruud actual premium will be computed after an audit of'payroll mubaequmt to the dose of yom' agreement year and will be subject to revisioM in rates, payrolls and experience modiflcafiolL While you arc a member ofthc L~CIT Workers' Compensation Plan, you will be eligible to participate in di~ributions from the Trust based upon claims experience md emnin~ of the Trust If you deaire the coverase offered above, please complem the eac]osed "Notice of Premium Options" and return h and your check ~ot the deposit premium (made payable to the LMC1T) to: Risk Administrators Company, ?0 Box 5~1517 Minneapolis, M]q 5S45L1517 FROM ^ J Gallalher (952)944-9795 (TUE) 1Z 4' 01 12:00/8T. II :58/N0. 3760085002 P 5 Novvmber 28, 2001 To: LMCIT member cities and agents From: Pete Tritz 1~: Property/casualty and work e~mp rates and dividends Here's what LMCIT member cities will see for the coming year: · Premium rates for property, liability, auto, bond, liquor liability, and most other property/casualty coverages will be unchanged for the 2001-2002 underwriting year. · Rates for excess liability covcrage may increase slightly for some cities because of incrcascd rcin~rsncc costs. · Rates for machinery breakdown coverage will increase 7% for risks other than electric utilities. For electric utilities, the situation will vary with the individual risk. · Property/casualty program members will share an $$ million dividend, which will be distributed in mid-December. By comparison, the LMClT property/casualty program returned a $5 million dividend last year. · Work comp prcmium rates will increase 7% for 2002. Thc premium credit for managed c~rc will be reduced from 5% to 3%. The LMCIT work comp program will not return a dividend this year. What's behind LMCIT's rate and dividend actions for the coming year? Property/casualty We're very pleased to be able to keep premium rates for property, liability, and auto coverages unchanged for the coming year. That's a significant accomplishment at a timc when many private insurance buyers are seeing their premiums increase 10%-30% or 8VCn IlaOre. K~"I~ ill mind, of eOlll'~, thllt eV~l~ thotll~h LMCIT IIFtes ~'t Chllll~l~l] n city's premiums may still change because of changes in the city, s exposures md/or loss exp~ri~rIlceo FROM A J Gal lasher (955)944-9795 (TUE) 12. 4' 01 12:00/8T. 11:58/N0. 3760085002 P 6 H~ are some of thc main factors that affect this year's property/casualty ~atcs and dividend: The cost of i'einsurance has increased significantly. By this summer, the reinsurance market had array become harder than it's been in over I $ years. The September 11 catastrophe resulted in enormous losses for reinsm~s- somewhere around three time~ more than the bigs~t hurricane loss ever. That financial shock made the already hard reinsurance market even harder, resulting in higher costs and more restrictive coverage terms. While LMCIT is paying more for thc r~iusurancc we purchase, we've been able to offset that cost by increasing the amount of risk that LMCIT retains. The very strong fund balance that LMCIT has built over the past 20 years makes it possible to conueortably handle that increased risk. For the past few underwriting years, municipal liability, auto liability, and auto physical damage losses have been running below what we'd projected when we set the premium rates. LMCIT rates arc designed so that when combined with invesnnent income they'd cover losses and expenses even if losses turn out to be more than projected. When losses turn out below projections, part of the loss funding and all of that safely margin become available to be returned to members as a dividend. Property losses have run somewhat above projections in several recent years. Because of this, we'd anticipated that property premium ra~e,s might need to increase further. However, as we complete the pwcess of appraising all member cities' buildings, it's resulting in higher covered values for many cities - signLficantly higher in some cases. That in turn has produced more than enough increased premium to cover the higher losses, even withoul a rate increase. Workers compensat/on LI~K~ff Work Comp Premiums Average Rate per $'i O0 I~,mll Thc 7% increase in work comp rates for 2002 is LMCIT's fu~t rate reduce rates several times in thc mid-'90's, and have held the overall $4.00 rate lcvei unchanged sinoe 1999. $2.00 Member cities' work comp loss costs have been increasi~ ove~ the ~.00 past 2-3 years, and lhose rising loss *o2 *o2 ~4 *os 98 *o7 98 9o x)o '0t costs mean that pv~niums have to increase as well. Had thc state not reduced the Special Compensation Fund assessment rate, wc would have had to increase work comp rates a year ago. FROM. A J Galla~her (952)944--9795 (TUE) 12. 4'01 12:00/ST. 11:58/NO. 9760085002 P 7 Here's what thc work comp picture looks like: Since 1999, the number of reported work comp injuries has been increasing. That is, for a given mount of payroll, we've been seeing more injuries that result in aI least some claim cost. Thz percentage ofreponod injuries resulting in lost time jumped in 2000. 5o far, the pallem in 2001 looks more like previous years than like 2000. However, we'll need to keep a close eye on how ~his develops. The average medical cost per claim is increasing. Average medical costs had been holding nearly flat for several years. That was surprising, given what we know is happening wi~h health care costs in general. However, we're now beginning to sec some increase in our average medical cost per claim. This year's analysis of.work comp managed care indicates that loss costs are somewhaI lower in cities that use managed care than in those that don't. Arguably though, there may still be some question about which is cause and which is effect. (I.e., is managed care responsible for reducing cosls, or is it that cities thai pay more attention to controlling work comp injuries, retumin8 t~nployccs to work, etc. arc more likely to enroll for managed care?) The study also shows that cities using managed care on file average have lower experience modification factors than those that don't, so they're therefor saving money on the/r prenfiums. The reduotion in the managed care premium credit is intended to avoid "over-r~-din~' the dries that use managed care, while still ma/ntlfirgng an up-front incentive for cities to use manal/ed care. While our loss picture doesn't look quite as good as it did a year ago, it's still very good by industry standards. A good measure ofthis is the experience modification that the Workers Compensation Rein.mrance Association (WCRA) calculates each year for LMCIT. The WCRA mod calculation essentially compares LMCIT's total loss experience with what would be expected for this volume and ~ of payroll according the rating association's dats. LMCIT's cun'ent experience modification is .84. In other words, member cities' combined work comp loss experience is about 16% better than what would be expecte~ for thc average Minnesota employer. What might be ~ead? Here ate a few thoughts on what we might be looking at for the future. h's possible that work comp premiums may have to increase further in the future. To minimize the effect on city 5udgets, the LMCIT Board held this year's work comp rate increase as Iow as possible. That meant squeezing the safety margin built into the rates down to a very narrow amount. If the curren! loss patterns continue, we'd 3 FROM A J Gal i aBhe~ (952)944-9795 (TUE) 1Z 4' 01 12:01/SW. 11:58/N0. 3760085002 P 8 likely need another moderate rate increase for 2003 to get that safety margin back to the levels that we've typically targeted in the past. The reinsurance market right now is chaotic and unpredictable, and there's no way to even guess what kind of reinsurance costs, terms, and availability we'll be looking at a year from now. In light of this uncertainty, the LMCIT Board has further strengthened LMCIT's financial reserves and fund balances. As a resuR, we're in a position to be able to further increase the amount of risk LMcrr retains if that's necessary or advamageous. But what the reinsurance market might look like in a year and what the ultimate effect on cities might be is anybody's guess at this point. There arc a couple liabili~ ucnds that wc nccd m keep an eye on. First, thc number of claims for litigation relating to land use regulation, development, or redevelopment bas been growing steadily. This may be partly a function of cities' greater familiarity with this coverage, and partly an actual increase in the amount of this kind of iltigafion. The legal costs make land use claims much mom e~ive than thc typical liability claim, and we've seen a few individual cases where the legal costs have been enormous. If the frequency of this type of litisation continues to increase, it could begin to significantly affect premium costs. We'll need to 10o 80 Nun-her of land use claims by calen~l~r y~ar [~AI9 mon, ....~- cunmnt ] continue to monitor this closely, and cities will need to continue to do what they can to control the amount and cost of this kind of liligation. '01 Claims relat~i to zmplo~t is another area we're watching closdy. Since the early '90's, Minnesota cities have done a superb job of improving their personnel practices and reducing the number and cost of liability claims relating to employment. However, we're now seeing the numbers of employment claims incre~/ng in thc past 13y c~len~ar year couple years. Much of the increase is in the form of EEOC complaints, rather than formal lawsu/ts, mort. --~-Curremt So far at least, the increased claim frequency hasn't resalted in significantly increased loss costs, and at this point ifs probably more something to be aware of than lo be alarmed about But it's a good reminder that cities need to continue to pay close attention to maintaining good employment personnel practices. 150 ~2 ~3 '94 '95 ~6 ~7 ~8 ~9 1)0 ~1 4 CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meetin of: DECEMBER 17, 2001 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT ORIGINATING DEPT: v CITY MANAGER ITEM: BEING A RESOLUTION APPROPRIATING BY: WILLIAM ELRITE~'~ ~' BY: AND DESIGNATING FUND BALANCES DATE: December ! 2, 2001 DATE: NO: During the year 2001 the state auditor's report on fund balances in various cities drew some attention. In this report the state auditor stated that fund balances should be appropriately designated for the purposes in which they are intended. In the state auditor's report it was apparent that several cities had accumulated significant fund balances in various funds that could have been more appropriately accounted for in funds that would designate these balances for specific purposes. An example of this would be if the City of Columbia Heights was accumulating funds for maintenance, improvement or replacement of any portion of City Hall, these funds could be accumulated in the General Fund fund balance. However, doing so could leave the City open to criticism by the state auditor that our General Fund fund balance was too high. At the same time, if these funds were accumulated in a fund designated for City Hall improvements, they very likely would not be subject to criticism. The attached resolution takes this into consideration and appropriates various fund balances from the General and Special Revenue Funds to specific capital improvement and equipment replacement funds. This action, at any time, can be reversed by the City Council and the funds appropriated in the various capital funds can be re- appropriated by the City Council at a future date for other purposes. The attached resolution, in general, covers three funds. It is transferring a portion of the General Fund fund balance that is needed for cash flow and contingencies for a rainy day to a capital improvement building fund. It is also reducing the fund balance in the Police/Fire Retirement Account by $500,000 with that amount going to a capital equipment replacement account. In essence, this fund was set up to fund future shortfalls in the Police and Fire Relief Associations. With their total consolidation into PERA, it is now projected that the balance in this fund is in excess of what will be needed to actuarially fund the City's remaining obligation in the Police Relief Association PERA Consolidated Account. The last transfer is simply taking what is currently designated for capital improvements in the Parkview Villa South Fund and setting it up in a separate capital improvement fund. Taking the above action is basically a simple accounting function to more appropriately designate and clarify the fund balances. This action should not impair day-to-day operations and all balances can be re-appropriated by the City Council at any time for other purposes in the same manner that they could be appropriated if they were left in the operating funds. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to waive the reading of Resolution 2001-84 there being ample copies available to the public. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to adopt Resolution 2001-84 being a resolution appropriating and designating fund balances. WE:sms 0112124COUNCIL Attachment COUNCIL ACTION: RESOLUTION NO. 2001-84 BEING A RESOLUTION APPROPRIATING AND DESIGNATING FUND BALANCES WHEREAS, the City of Columbia Heights has accumulated fund balances in the General Fund and Special Revenue Funds for the purpose of funding future capital improvements and capital equipment within the City, and, WHEREAS, these funds would be more appropriately accounted for in separate funds designated for the purpose in which they were accumulated, and, WHEREAS, the City has established a Capital Equipment Replacement Fund dedicated for the future replacement of equipment, and, WHEREAS, the City Council has established a Capital Improvement Fund for general government buildings dedicated for future improvements to general government buildings, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Columbia Heights City Council does hereby authorize the establishment of a Capital Improvement Fund for Parkview Villa South dedicated for the future improvement or replacement of the building, and, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the following transfers be made and appropriated for future equipment and capital improvement needs. From To Amount General Fund Capital Improvement General Government Buildings $1,400,000 Police/Fire Contingency Fund Capital Equipment Replacement Fund $ 500,000 Parkview Villa South Fund Capital Improvement Parkview Villa South $ 700,000 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that any unbudgeted, undesignated fund balance in the Capital Equipment Replacement Funds or Capital Improvement Funds shall require a four-fifl:hs vote to expend or transfer funds. Passed this day of ,2001 Offered by: Seconded by: Roll Call: Mayor Gary L. Peterson Pattricia Muscovitz, Deputy City Clerk RES2001-84COUNCIL COLUMBIA HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: December 17, 2001 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER'S NO: t-( _ ~ _ C~ Community Development APPROVAL ITEM: Approve Agreement with Center for BY: Mark Nagel BY:~-~z~ff Energy and Environment for Administrative DATE: November 20, 2001 Services of MHFA Discount Loan Program BACKGROUND: In 1999, the City of Columbia Heights entered into an agreement with the Center for Energy and Environment (CEE), an independent, non-profit 501 (C) 3 organization that works to promote responsible and efficient use of natural and economic resources, to provide comprehensive housing rehabilitation services for the residents of Columbia Heights. CEE also provides program development, marketing, loan and grant origination, inspection and/or remodeling advice to a number of private and public housing agencies, including Fridley HRA, Anoka HRA, Richfield HRA, Blaine EDA, and Anoka County HRA. The City of Columbia Heights agreement for administrative services of the MHFA Discount Loan Programs expires on December 31, 2001. At the EDA's November 20, 2001 meeting they approved a recommendation to City Council for approval of the agreement with CEE for the administrative services of the Columbia Heights MHFA Discount Loan Program for 2002. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends renewal of the one-year extension agreement with CEE for administrative services of the MHFA Discount Loan Program for 2002. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the Administrative Services Agreement between the City of Columbia Heights and Center for Energy and Environment for the MHFA Discount Loan Program extension through December 31, 2002; and authorize the City Manager and Mayor to enter into an agreement for the same. Attachments COUNCIL ACTION: h:\CL consent2001\CL CEE agreement-Deferred Loans AGREEMENT FOR ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Between CENTER FOR ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT And THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS (MHFA Discount Loan Program) The Agreement, made the 18~a day of August, 2000, by and between the CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, a public body corporate and politic under the laws of the State of Minnesota, (the "EDA"), and the CENTER FOR ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT, a 501 (c)(3) non-profit corporation, with its offices at, 211 North 1~t Street, Suite 455, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 (the "Contractor") is hereby amended. Section 6.1 of the agreement shall read: 6.1 Term and Termination Unless earlier terminated as provided in the following paragraphs, this Agreement shall become effective on August 18, 2000, and continue through December 31, 2002. All other sections of the contract shall remain as written in the original agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereunder set their hands as of the date written below: CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS By City Mayor Date CENTER FOR ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT ~eldon Strom, Executive Director Date [ [-- [-- ~ I 000327 By Date City Manager TAX ID 41-1647799 T:~,dmin\CONT'RAC~C R R\60~. Columl~a h'ts Disc ,amend 1.doc December 7, 2000 LOAN ORIGINATION AGREEMENT This LOAN ORIGINATION AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made this / ~ ~, 2000, by and between THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, With offices at 590 40 Avenue NE, Columbia Heights, MN 55421 ("CITY"), and CENTER FOR ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT, with offices at 211 North 1 st Street North, Suite 455, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 ("CEE"), '"' RECITALS Ao Bo Co Do CITY has a need for certain professional services and desires to retain CEE to provide said services, ail subject to the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. CEE is qualified to provide the desired professional services and desires to provide said services for CITY, all subject to the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. CEE has applied for and received funds from the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency. (MHFA) under the MHFA Community Revitalization Program (CRV). Funds ~ provided under the CRV shall be used to write down the interest rate on MHFA loans originated by CEE for borrowers in the City of Columbia Heights. Funds for the interest write down shall be provided by MHFA, the Metropolitan Council and the City of Columbia Heights. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and the mutual promises contained in this Agreement, the parties agree as follows: I. Services/Scope of Work CEE shall originate MHFA discount loans as described in the program description in EXHIBIT A. 2. Compensation CITY shall compensate CEE for the Services as follows: 2.1 CITY shall pay an Administrative Fee of $125.00 for each loan originated under this agreement. The Administrative Fee shall compensate CEE for the administrative costs of processing the MHFA discount loan. Mortgage filing costs shall be paid by the borrower. 2.2 CEE shall submit to CITY, on a monthly basis, invoices for services performed under this Agreement. CEE shall provide a copy of the loan note and MI-IFA Columbia Heights Discount Loan Program Agreement Page Lender's Certificate as documentation of the discount loan origination and sale with each invoice. CEE shall also provide on a monthly basis, a program activity report showing the amount of funds used through the reporting period and the remaining balance of funds available. 2.3 CITY shall pay each properly submitted invoice within thirty (30) days after submission of the invoice by CEE. CITY's Obligations 3.1 CITY shall provide up to $50,000 to write down the interest rate on MHFA loans originated by CEE. CITY shall advance $25,000.00 to CEE upon execution of this agreement. 3.2 CITY shall make reasonable efforts to respond promptly to requests from CEE for information and approvals regarding the services to be provided under this Agreement. CEE's Obligations 4.1 CEE shall use its best efforts to provide services under this Agreement in a professional manner consistent with the care and skill used by reputable members of CEE's profession. 4.2 CEE, and all of its employees or agents, shall comply with all statutes, ordinances, rules, regulations and other laws applicable to the provision of services under this Agreement. 4.3 CEE shall not engage in discriminatory employment practices against any employee or applicant for employment and shall in all respects comply with all federal, state and local laws, regulations and orders, including without limitation, Chapter 363 of the Minnesota Statutes, as amended from time to time. Failure to comply with the provisions hereof shall be deemed a material default under this Agreement. Right to Audit 5.1 CEE shall maintain accurate and detailed records, in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles consistently applied, for all loans originated under this Agreement. CITY has the right to inspect, examine and makes copies of any or all books, accounts, records and other writings of CEE relating to the loans originated under this Agreement. These audit rights shall be extended to CITY or to any representative designated by CITY. Audits shall take place at times and locations mutually agreed upon by both parties, although CEE must make the materials to be audited available within one (1) week of the request for them. Costs incurred in undertaking the audit will be borne by CITY but costs Columbia Heights .Discount Loan Program Agreement Page 2 incurred by CEE as a result of CITY exercising its right to audit will be borne by CEE. Term and Termination 6.1 Unless earlier terminated as provided in the following paragraphs, this Agreement shall become effective on _August ,2000, and continue through December 3 l, 2001. 6.2 This Agreement may be terminated by either party, for any reason or no reason, immediately upon written notice to the other party. In the event this Agreement is terminated by CEE prior to the expiration of the term set forth in paragraph 6.1, CITY shall compensate CEE for all services delivered up to the date of termination and CEE shall provide CITY with such information as CITY may request regarding the status of any ongoing project. 6.3 Upon term or termination of this agreement, CEE shall return all remaining unspent program funds to CITY. 6.4 Any termination of this Agreement shall not release either party from their respective obligations under sections 8 and 9 of this Agreement. Insurance 7.1 7.2 During the term of this Agreement, CEE shall obtain and maintain workers' compensation, comprehensive general liability, and automobile liability insurance. Comprehensive general liability insurance shall have and aggregate limit of $2,000,000. Upon request by the CITY, CEE shall provide CITY with a certificate or certificates of insurance relating to the insurance required pursuant to pai'agraph 7.1. Liability and Indemnification 8.1 CEE represents that the services to be provided under this Agreement are reasonable in scope and that CEE has the experience and ability to provide the services. 8.2 CEE shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY and its officers, directors, employees and agents from and against any and all claims, damages, losses, injuries and expenses (including attorneys' fees and damages for death, personal injury and property damage) which CITY may incur as a result of any act or omission by CEE in providing services under this Agreement. Columbia Heights Discount Loan Program Agreement Page 3 8.3 CITY shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless CEE and its officers, directors, employees and agents from and against any and all claims, damages, losses, injuries and expenses (including attorneys' fees and damages for death, personal injury and property damage) which CEE may incur as a result of any act or omission by CITY in discharging its duties under this Agreement. Confidentiality Unless otherwise agreed by CITY in writing, CEE shall maintain in confidence and not disclose to any third party any information obtained regarding CITY and/or any borrowers for which CEE is providing services; provided, however, that this obligation to maintain confidentiality shall not apply to: a) Information in the public domain at the time of disclosure; b) Information which becomes part of the public domain after disclosure through no fault of CEE; or Information which CEE can demonstrate was known by it prior to the-date of this Agreement. 10. Relationship of Parties 11. CEE will provide services as an independent contractor under this Agreement. Neither CEE, nor any of its employees or agents, shall be considered employees of CITY for any purpose, and neither shall CEE be eligible for any compensation or benefits which CITY may provide to its employees from time to time. CEE shall be solely responsible for all employment and other taxes applicable to providing services hereunder, and CITY will not withhold any taxes or contributions from the compensation payable to CEE under this Agreement. If any governmental authority (federal, state or other) claims that CITY owes taxes or contributions which alIegedly should have been withheld or made, then, to the extent permitted by law, CEE shall pay CITY the amounts claimed to be due, plus reasonable attorneys' fees and any other costs which CITY may incur in defending such claim, whether or not a lawsuit is commenced. Notices All notices, requests, demands and other communications required to be given in writing under this Agreement shall be given to the other parW in person or by mail as provided in this section. If delivered personally, notice shall be deemed to have been duly given on the date of delivery. If delivered by mail, such notice shall be sent via first class U.S. mail, postage prepaid, to the address set forth at the beginning of this Agreement or such other address as a party may otherwise request by written notice, and notice shall be deemed duly given three (3) business days after mailing. Columbia Heights Discount Loan Program Agreement Page 4 12. Assignment This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties and their respective heirs, successors and assigns; provided, however, that neither party shall assign or transfer in any manner, this Agreement or any portion hereof without the prior written consent of the other party, and any attempt to assign or transfer without prior written consent shall be void and of no effect. 13. Governing Law This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota. 14. Miscellaneous 14. I Headings and captions used in this Agreement are for convenience only and shall not affect the meaning of this Agreement. 14.2 This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the parties and supersedes.all prior agreements, discussions and representations, written or oral, concernin} the subject matter hereof. 14.3 No waiver by CITY of any term or condition of this Agreement or any document referred to herein shall, whether by conduct Or otherwise; be consUmed as a waiver or release of any other term or condition of this Agreement. 14.4 This Agreement may only be amended in a written agreement signed by both parties. 14.5 Except as expressly set forth in Section 8, the rights and benefits under this Agreement shall inure solely to the benefit of CITY and CEE, and this Agreement shall not be construed to give any rights, benefits or causes of action to any third party. 14.6 The invalidity or partial invalidity of any provision of this Agreement shaH not invalidate the remaining provisions, and the remainder shall be construed as of the invalidated portion shall have never been a part of this Agreement. 14.7 This Agreement may be signed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original and one and the same instrument. Columbia Heights Discount Loan Pr~jram Agreement Page 5 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date first written above. City of Columbia Heights By: Its: C~ty Ma~or CENTER FOR ENERGY ~D E~R~NT h~don S~om Executive Director Federal Tax Identification Number: 41-1647799 600\Rep<~r~\Col Hts Disc Loan Orig Agree.doc August 11, 2000 Columbia Heights Discount Loan Program Agreement Page 6 EXHIBIT A Terms of the Columbia Heights Discount Loan Program CEE will utilize City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota Housing Finance Agency, and Metropolitan Council funds to write down the interest rate on the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency's (MHFA) Community Fix-up Fund and Fix-up Fund Loan Programs. The intent of the program is to offer an attractive/nterest rate to encourage homeowners to make home improvements to their properties and leverage additional dollars for the .- community. 8% MHFA loans will be written down to an effective rate of 6%. Program Allocation: $100,000. ($50,000 City of Columbia Heights, $25,000 MHFA, and $25,000 Metropolitan Council). Underwriting Decision: Underwriting of these loans will follow the MHFA procedural manuals and normal and prudent underwriting criteria. 3. Loan Amount: The maximum loan amount is $35,000. Income Limit: Per MHFA guidelines, eligible borrowers must have an annual household income of less than $78,890. ._ Debt - to Income Ratio: Per MHFA guidelines, applicants must prove the ability to repay the loan and have a debt to income ratio less than 45%. Eligible Improvements: Per MI-IFA guidelines, eligible improvements are determined by the MHFA for the individual financing programs and are stated in the Procedural Manuals for each program. Eligible Properties: Eligible properties are restricted to Cape Cod and Rambler style homes constructed prior to 1970 located in the geographical boundaries of the City of Columbia Heights. 8. Loan Servicing: MHFA will be responsible for servicing the loans. Work Completion: As required by MHFA, all work must be completed within 9 months of the loan closing. 10. Disbursement of Funds: Per MI-IFA guidelines, loan funds will be disbursed to borrower upon loan closing. 11. Loan Securi~: As required by the MI-iFA, in most cases, only loans over $5,000 will be secured with a mortgage. 12. Calculation of Loan Discount: The Loan Discount shall be calculated utilizing the ratios outlined in Exhibit B of this contract. Columbia Heights Discount Loan Program Center for Energy and Environment Page 1 August 1 I, 2000 EXHIBIT B 508 509 510 511 512 513 514'-';' '- 504 ATTACHMENT TO ADDENDUM I. Programs and Interest Rates PROGRAM NAME Fix-up Fund Discount Fix-up Fund Discount Fix-up Fund Discount Fix-up Fund Discount 3% 4% 5% 6% Community Fix-up Fund Discount 3% Community Fix-up Fund Discount 4% Community Fix-up Fund Discount 5% ~Fund Discount 6% INTEREST RATE 3% 4% 5% 6% 3% 4% 5% 6% II. Purchase Price Discount Percentages 61-120 months 121-180 months 181-240 months Yield to ~ MHFA: 8% neres a e paid by Borrower 95.5 93.3 91.1 89 91.7 87.8 83.9 80 88.6 83.1 77.9 72.8 MHFA: 6% paid by B o rrowe r MHFA: 4% Rate paZd ~Yorrower 3% · 97.7 95.5 93.6 91.8 AJdcndum co PurchAse A .~..-mcnt for COLUMBIA HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: December 17, 2001 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY NO: q_ ~-t 0 Community Development MANAGER'S APPROVAL ITEM: Adopt Resolution 2001-71, BY: Randy Schumacher BY:~.~. ~,~ Decertification of Parcels 35-30-24-14-0091 DATE: December 3, 2001 and 35-30-24-14-0092 from the Central Downtown Business TIF District BACKGROUND: The Anoka County Auditors Office contacted EDA staff and advised us that when the Transition Block Redevelopment TIF District No. 9 was certified in 1999, it included two parcels of land, (the Lockshop and the Professional Bldg) that had previously been included in the Central Downtown Business TIF District. Including these parcels in Transition Block Redevelopment TIF District No. 9 was necessary for the purpose of constructing the 50 Unit Senior Assisted Living facility by Crest View ONDC 1. Based on a discussion with legal counsel Steve Bubul, a resolution removing these two parcels from the Central Downtown Business TIF District would be required. The decertification Resolution 2001- 19 was approved by the EDA at their meeting on November 20, 2001. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends City Council approval of Resolution 2001-71, a resolution Decertifying two parcels from the Central Downtown Business TIF District. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to waive the reading of Resolution 2001-71, there being ample copies available to the Public. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to adopt Resolution 2001-71, a resolution Decertifying Parcels 35-30-24-14-0091 and 35-30-24-14-0092 from the Central Downtown Business TIF District. Attachments COUNCIL ACTION: CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2001-71 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE DECERTIFICATION OF PARCELS NO. 35-30-24-14-0091 AND NO. 35-30-24-14-0092 FROM THE CENTRAL DOWNTOWN BUSINESS TIF DISTRICT BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Columbia Heights, (the "City"), as follows: Background; Findings. (a) The City is authorized, by Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.177 subdivision 12, to request the removal of certain parcels from a Tax Increment Financing District. (b) The City previously established the Central Downtown Business TIF District (the "TIF District"). (c) Parcels No. 35-30-24-14-0091 and No. 35-30-24-14-0092 (the "Parcels") are located within the TIF District. (d) The Parcels are also located within an additional TIF district, namely Transition Block Redevelopment No. 9. (e) The Columbia Heights Economic Development Authority (the "Authority") has requested that the City approve the &certification of the Parcels from the TIF District. (f) The City determines that it is in the public interest to decertify the Parcels from the TIF District so that the Parcels are no longer located within two separate TIF districts. 2. Parcels Decertified (a) The City hereby decerfifies the Parcels from the TIF District. (b) The Mayor, the City Manager, and the Authority are authorized and directed to take whatever steps are necessary to give effect to this Resolution. The Authority is also authorized and directed to execute and deliver any and all documents necessary to give effect to this Resolution. Adopted by the City Council of Columbia Heights, Minnesota on this __ 2001. day of December, Attest: Mayor - Gary Peterson City Manager - Walter Fehst DJG -204921 v 1 CL205-3 CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meetingof: December 17, 2001 AGENDA SECTION: Consent ORIGINATING DEPT.: CITY MANAGER NO: ~'~' A "~ Recreation ) ~~~/~ ITEM: Establish John P. Murzyn Hall rental rates for 2003, BY: Keith Windschitl s~, BY: and Revise John P. Murzyn Hall Management Plan discount Recreation Directo'r' policy DATE: 12/4/01 NO: BACKGROUND At the Columbia Heights Park and Recreation Commission November 28, 2001 meeting, the commission unanimously approved a 10% increase for the 2003 Murzyn Hall rental rates. The Commission also unanimously approved a revision of the JPM Management Plan discount policy for rentals. The Park and Recreation Committee members voted to reduce the 35% Columbia Heights resident discount to 20% per rental. Additionally, the Commission unanimously approved to raise the down payment to $500.00 in all main hail rentals and to maintain the $100.00 down payment for all rentals excluding the main hail. All down payments will become non-refundable. Motion by Foss, second by Mayer to approve thelO% increase for 2003, and to change the down payment policy. Motion by Foss, second by Greenhalgh to decrease the Columbia Heights resident discount to 20%. Motion by Greenhalgh, second by Niemeyer for all above said motions to be effective January 2002. All ayes, motion carried. The Park and Recreation Commission feel this will generate additional revenue for Murzyn Hall. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to adopt the 2003 Murzyn Hall rental rates and revisions to the JPM Management Plan regarding the discount policy as outlined by the Park and Recreation Commission at their meeting of November 28, 2001. COUNCIL ACTION: ADMIN~CC03RATE John P. Murzyn Hall 2002 RATES Proposed 2003 Rental Rates (10% increase) (Sun- Thurs) (Saturday) (Sun- Thurs) (Saturday) Hall/Kitchen/LaBelle Lounge $820.00 $860.00 $900.00 $950.00 Hall $580.00 $610.00 $640.00 $670.00 Kitchen $100.00 $105.00 $110.00 $115.00 LaBelle Lounge $170.00 $180.00 $190.00 $200.00 Gauvitte Room $145.00 $150.00 $160.00 $165.00 Prestemon Room $145.00 $150.00 $160.00 $165.00 Edgemoor Room $145.00 $150.00 $160.00 $165.00 Keyes Room $145.00 $150.00 $160.00 $165.00 Youth Lounge $145.00 $150.00 $160.00 $165.00 Maithaire/McKenna Room $210.00 $220.00 $230.00 $240.00 Senior/Ostrander Room $210.00 $220.00 $230.00 $240.00 Down Payment $100.00 $100.00 $500.00 $500.00 Damage Deposit $250.00 $250.00 $250.00 $250.00 Security Deposit $100.00 $100.00 $100.00 $100.00 CSO per hour $19.50 $19.50 $20.00 $20.00 Pre-Mix Deposit $100.00 $100.00 $100.00 $100.00 Pre-Mix per canister $21.00 $21.00 $22.00 $22.00 Early Entry Fee* $21.00 $21.00 $21.00 $21.00 Custodial Charge per hour $15.00 $15.00 $15.00 $15.00 CO2 System Usage Fee** $20.00 $20,00 $20.00 $20.00 Events Lasting 2 hours or less 50% 50% 50% 50% Events Lasting 4 hours or less 25% 25% 25% 25% Heights Resident Discount*** 35% 35% 20% 20% IAudioNisual equipment rental I $25.o01 $25.00 I $25.00 I $25.00 * Subject to approval by Recreation Director and/or Park & Recreation Commission. ** For use of CO2 system to tap kegs of beer. Fee waived if renter purchases pre-mix from the City or the Lion's Club provides bartending services. *** Columbia Heights Resident discount is exclusively limited to the renter or their parents, providing one is a Columbia Heights resident. CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: December 17, 2001 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ORIGINATING DEPT.: CITY MANAGER NO: k[~ A~ ~,, Recreation i 1) APrPRgVfi~L, ITEM: C.H.A.S.E. GRANT OF $150,000 FORPERIOD OF BY: Keith Windschitl'~ 1/1/02 TO 12/31/03 DATE: December 4, 2001 NO: BACKGROUND: The Department of Children, Families and Learning has awarded a fifth grant of $150,000 for the Columbia Heights After School Enrichment Program (C.H.A.S.E.) for the period of 1/1/02 to 12/31/03. CHASE has been operating for the past several years. The grants awarded are as follows: 1. 7/1/96 to 12/31/97 $ 64,764 2. 7/1/97 to 12/31/98 $ 64,764 3. 7/1/98 to 6/30/99 $ 65,000 4. 9/1/99 to 12/31/01 $177,568 5. 1/1/02 to 12/31/03 $150,000 The objective of the CHASE program is to actively reach out to youth ages 9 to 13 and engage them in a continuum of prograrns that range from enrichment to early intervention. Programs include recreational activities, skills classes, small group initiatives, service learning oppommities, mentoring, and tutoring offered at several sites throughout the community. CHASE makes services and programs as easily accessible as possible by offering programs where youth naturally congregate and to transport youth when needed. The CHASE program is designed to increase Columbia Heights' youth's connection to their community by involving them in meaningful activities that enhance self- esteem, foster positive values, and develop constructive leisure and academic skills through program strategies that develop positive assets. The youth of Columbia Heights are very fortunate to have such wonderful programs available, and they are made possible through funding such as this grant. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to accept the grant from the Department of Children, Families and Learning in the amount of $150,000 to fund the CHASE program from January 1, 2002 to December 31, 2003. COUNCIL ACTION: Admin\CC-Chasegrant99-01 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF C.h. ildren Fami s . -c. earmng 1500 HIGHWAY 36 WEST ROSI~VILLE, MN 55113-4266 T: (651} 582-8200 TTY: (651l 582-8201 http://cfl.state.mn.us November 14, 2001 Keith Windschitl Columbia Heights, City of Recreation Department 530 Mill Street NE Columbia Heights, IVlN 55421 Dear Mr. Windschitl: The Department of Children, Families and Learning is pleased to announce that your program has been recommended to receive up to $150,000 for the Afterschool Enrichment Program funding through the 2001 Prevention and Intervention process. Congratulations to you and your colleagues for rating well in such a competitive process. This award is contingent upon successful negotiation of any work plan and budget revisions and also compliance with state grantee requirements. If it is needed a grants specialist will contact you no later than Wednesday, November 21 to set up a pre-contract site visit or to discuss revisions to the work plan or budget. You may contact Mike Hughes, Grant Specialist at 651-582-8287 or email prev.intervCo3state.mn.us or call the Prevention & Intervention Hotline at 1-800-934-7113 with any questions. Up to half of this award may be spent in the first year of programming. Funding for January - December, 2003 is contingent upon the continued availability of state funds. Programs may not begin accruing costs against grant funds until after the responsible parties for both the state and the funded organization have signed a contract. Programs are expected to begin around January 1, 2002 and run through December 31, 2003. Please reserve Monday, January 14, 2002 on your calendar to attend an all day orientation workshop. Details :-'bout the workshop '-:'il! be se.ut in December. I want to welcome your program as a grantee of the Department of Children, Families and Learning. It is our honor to become your partner in improving the well being of families, children and communities. Sincerely, Karen Carlson Assistant Commissioner Office of Community Services Cc: Cindi Willprecht CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: December 17, 2001 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ORIGINATING DEPT.: CITY MANAGER NO: 1..(. A' ~ Recreation /q/n~L)~~APe V ITEM: Authorization to obtain price quotes for printing and BY: Keith Windschitl~r/~- mailing the 2002 City newsletters Recreation Direct NO: DATE: 11/26/01 BACKGROUND: Staff is seeking authorization to obtain price quotes for printing and mailing the 2002 "Heights Happenings" city newsletters. A total of 12,900 city newsletters will be printed. A total of 10,047 newsletters will be mailed to all Columbia Heights residents on a quarterly basis. Tina Foss at the Recreation Department using Microsoft Publishing software will compile the city newsletter in-house. Attached are the specifications for the 2002 city newsletters. Plans are to print and distribute 2002 city newsletters according to the following schedule: Spring newsletter - February; Summer newsletter - May; Fall newsletter - August; and Winter newsletter - November. A total of $19,000 has been budgeted in account 101- 45050-3440 for printing and $5,000 in account 101-45050-3220 for mailing city newsletters in 2002. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to authorize staff to obtain price quotes for printing and mailing the 2002 "Heights Happenings" city newsletters. COUNCIL ACTION: Htshappn\CC-Newsletterbids2002 Specifications for 2002 City Newsletter Contact Person: Keith Windschitl, Recreation Director Columbia Heights Recreation Department 530 Mill Street NE Columbia Heights, MN 55421 Phone (763) 706-3730 Fax (763) 706-3731 o ° Qualifications: Printing company must have two years of experience in the printing of newsletters or similar projects. 2002 city newsletters to be published and mailed quarterly according to the following schedule: Spring - February; Summer - May; Fall - August; Winter - November. Printing specifications: * Printed using a sheet fed method (no web press printing) * 60 lb. white 11" x 17" paper. * Folded in half (to create an 8 1/2" x 11" booklet) with two staples in the center. * Two ink print colors. * Printing to include typed text, clip art and photographs. * Printing on both sides of paper. * 12,900 newsletters to be printed. Price quotes should be submitted for newsletters of either 20 or 24 finished pages. 10,047 newsletters to be mailed to all Columbia Heights residents. The additional 2,853 newsletters to be delivered to John P. Murzyn Hall, 530 Mill St. NE, Columbia Heights, MN 55421. If there are different costs for the mailing a 20 or 24 page newsletter (due to different weights of the newsletter), these costs should be specified in the price quotes. Copy for the newsletter will be prepared on Microsoft Publisher 2000 version 6.0 and will be submitted in hard copy form. The printer will do color separation from the hard copy. Copy to be submitted to printer approximately seven business days prior to scheduled mailing dates. Additional cost for printing outside covers in three colors. Additional cost for half tone photographs. The price quotes shall include: printing costs; mailing costs (10,047 copies); sales tax; delivery costs; and any other associated costs. CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: 12/17/01 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER NO: [-'[ - A ~ [ L{ PUBLIC WORKS ITEM: RESOLUTION ADOPTING SNOW AND ICE BY: K. Hansen ~ jr BY: CONTROL POLICY 2001-2002 DATE: 12/12/01~.~ DATE: Background: The Snow and Ice Control Policy was reviewed by city staff and minor changes have been made this year. Minor changes have also been made in the assignment of plow routes to make better use of new equipment and improve salt/sand application. Based upon an October 8t~, 1998 Snow and Ice Control workshop sponsored by the League of Minnesota Cities, it is strongly recommended by attorneys at the LMC that every city have a snow and ice control policy that is reviewed by the City Council and approved by resolution. Since 1999 our policy has been reviewed with the Council annually with a resolution approving the City's Snow and Ice Control Policy. Analysis/Conclusions: The plan has been updated for the 2001/2002 year with the following changes to the policy: Incorporating the practice of sod and mailbox repair/replacement in written policy format. Additional areas of snow removal have been added: · 500 Mill Street - sidewalk and driveway · Jefferson Divide sidewalk · 828 40~ Avenue · Gateway Park, exterior and interior sidewalk Equipment changes have been added. Snow removal for 500 Mill Street, an existing residential home, has been specifically described on Page 12. Public Works recommends passage of the Resolution adopting the 2001/2002 Snow and Ice Control Policy. Recommended Motion: Move to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2001-82, there being ample copies available to the public. Recommended Motion: Move to approve and adopt Resolution No. 2001-82, adopting the 2001-2002 Snow and Ice Control Policy for the City of Columbia Heights. KH.'jb Attachment: Resolution COUNCIL ACTION: RESOLUTION NO. 2001-82 RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE SNOW AND ICE CONTROL POLICY WHEREAS, a Snow and Ice Control Policy has been developed and recommended by City staff; and WHEREAS, adoption of said policy has been determined to be in the best interest of the City of Columbia Heights, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Columbia Heights that said Snow and Ice Control Policy is hereby approved and adopted. Dated this 17th day of December, 2001. Offered by: Seconded by: Roll Call: CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS BY Mayor Patricia Muscovitz Deputy City Clerk CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SNOW AND ICE CONTROL POLICY 2001/2002 Adopted by City Council 12/17/01 MASTER PLAN FOR SNOW PLOWING, ICE CONTROL AND REMOVAL The City of Columbia Heights believes that it is in the best interest of the residents for the City to assume basic responsibility for control of snow and ice on city streets. Reasonable ice and snow control is necessary for routine travel and emergency services. The City will provide such control in a safe and cost effective manner, keeping in mind safety, budget, personnel and environmental concerns. The City will use city employees, equipment and/or private contractors to provide this service. POLICY The types of snow, wind conditions, time of day and time of the year the snow falls will affect the decision on when snow plowing and ice control operations will be performed. It has been our general policy to begin plowing snow when there is 3 inches or more of accumulation. Plowing may also be scheduled when consecutive smaller snowfalls, within a short timeframe, amount to three inches. Plowing during the parking ban has proven to be the most efficient. Generally, operations shall continue until all roads are passable. Widening and clean-up operations may continue immediately or on the following working day depending upon conditions and circumstances. Safety of the plow operators and the public is important. Therefore, snow plowing/removal operations may be terminated after 10-12 hours to allow personnel adequate time for rest. There may be instances when this is not possible depending on storm conditions and other circumstances. Operations may also be suspended during periods of limited visibility. Any decision to suspend operations shall be made by the Director of Public Works and shall be based on the conditions of the storm. The City will still provide access for emergency fire, police and medical services during a major snow or ice storm. The City will not repair/replace sod damaged due to the application of sand, salt, or other deicing chemicals. The City will repair/replace sod damaged by snow plows during snow removal operations. Public Works staff members will repair the sod damage with black dirt and grass seed. All other damage within the public right-of-way is the responsibility of the property owner including, but not limited to trees, shrubs, bushes, landscaping materials, decorative rock, brick walls, and lawn/landscaping irrigation systems. Occasionally, snow plowing will result in damage to mailboxes. The City xvill repair the damage only if the mailbox and its supporting posts are properly located behind the curb line or along the edge of the street and if damage is the result of actual contact by the snow plow. A standard design mailbox will be used for replacements (the City will not replace decorative mailboxes). Residents whose mailboxes are knocked down as a result of direct contact by City snow removal equipment may request a $75 maximum allowance, if they so choose, to replace the mailbox structures themselves, - 2 - relieving the City of any further obligation. The City property owners who install decorative materials in the right-of-way do so at their own risk. The City will not assume responsibility for damages that are caused by mailboxes that protrude into the street or are damaged simply by snow pressure. CALL-OUT PROCEDURE During non-City office business hours, the Police Department notifies the County Central Dispatcher, who in turn alerts the duty person of the conditions. In the case of a call for sanding, duty person will call out the required number of sanding trucks. In the case of an unscheduled request for plowing, the duty person notifies the Public Works Superintendent, who, in turn, makes the decision to begin plowing operations. If the Superintendent is not available, the duty person will contact the Public Works Director, Street Foreman or City Manger in that order. Should the Superintendent have any questions or concerns, the Superintendent shall confer with the Public Works Director. The Public Works Superintendent has pre-arranged a schedule of assignments for personnel and equipment. On evenings and weekends the employees are called out based on department, overtime priority and availability. PRIORITIES The following general priorities shall be observed for snow plowing, ice control and removal. Some priorities are performed simultaneously depending on conditions and existing situations. Priority #1 - Priority #2 - Main thoroughfares, low volume residential and commemial streets, Fire and Police Department ramps and accesses, alleys, cul-de-sacs, dead ends, pump and life station accesses. Municipal building parking lots and sidewalks, pedestrian bridges, designated sidewalk routes. Priority #3 - Clear intersections for visibility, walkways through parks, skating and hockey rinks, bus stops needing clearing for handicap accessibility and the Municipal Service Center walkways and stairways. Priority g4 - Ihdustrial and school hydrants. Priority #5 - Hauling snow when necessary. (Business District, parking lots, widening streets, etc.) Priority #6 - Roof maintenance JPM, Police Station, Library. Check for ice, dams and plugged drains. Priority #7 - Residential hydrants. Assist Adopt-a-Hydrant Program. - 3 - PLOWING EMERGENCY - PERSONNEL & EQUIPMENT A. Assignments by department 1. The Street Department shall do as follows: a. Assign personnel as necessary for street plowing and ice control operations. b. Remove snow from main thoroughfares and apply salt and/or sand. c. Remove snow from residential streets and alleys and apply salt and/or sand. d. Remove snow from municipal parking lots. e. Clean up alley openings,, intersections and the deposits of snow left by snowbirds. Follow up on complaints from the public and others. Any personnel that become available will be assigned to help others wherever needed. They may have to widen streets again the next day. The Sewer and Water Department shall remove snow according to the following priorities: a. Furnish personnel as necessary for street plowing operations. b. Plow entrances and areas around tower site, pump houses, and lift stations. c. Clean sidewalks and entrances at the Library before it opens and, if necessary, in the afternoon. The sidewalk snow removal will be done by personnel employed by the Library under the School Work Program, if available. Personnel can then assist others who are hand shoveling other areas. d. Personnel shall assist the Fire Department in digging out hydrants as they become available. Certain hydrants have been designated as critical and will be witnessed by reflective hydrant markers. 3. The Park Department shall remove snow according to the following priorities: go Furnish personnel as necessary for street plowing operations. Clear snow and deice all City Hall, Police Department, Fire Department and JPM sidewalks and entrances. Fire Department: For snow conditions of three inches or more the Fire Department shall initially clear all doorways, stairs, the bus shelter, and open the walks around City Hall. If there is only one person in the Fire Department, they will contact Public Works who will supply one person to help them. After all other work is accomplished, Public Works shall finish widening the walkways. JPM maintenance personnel: Responsible for clearing snow from sidewalks and entrances on weekends, holidays and evenings. If conditions warrant, they may use the snow blower from the Fire Department. - 4 - Ct Remove snow from municipal sidewalks · City Hall and parking lot · Recreation and JPM - Mill St. sidewalk · 500 Mill Street - sidewalk and driveway · Library - 40t~ Avenue sidewalk and Jackson Street sidewalk · Van Buren - parking lot and sidewalk along side Anoka County building · Jefferson Divide sidewalk d. Remove snow from miscellaneous designated sidewalks · Central Avenue between 4022 and 4024 · 49~, University to Monroe · 40t~, University bus stop, 3r~ St. to University, Central to Hayes. · 37t~ Avenue, north side, Reservoir to first alley east · 5t" Street, 47th-48th, east side sidewalk · 4601 Jefferson Street - driveway entrance · 42"d and University (walk bridge) - west side · 44z Avenue (Tyler Street to Reservoir Blvd.) · 3944 and 3955 Lookout Place · 828 40~ Avenue e. Remove snow from Park sidewalks · Jefferson Street, Huset east and west · Jackson Pond, south end sidewalk · Edgemoor Park, 2"a Street sidewalk · Ostrander Park, Tyler Street sidewalk and front entrance sidewalk · Wargo Park, exterior sidewalk · Gateway Park, exterior and interior sidewalk f. Remove snow from Park pathways · McKenna park pathway · 'Sullivan Park pathway - Note: New pathway from lift station to Central Ave. has been added. · LaBelle Park pathway · Prestemon Park pathway · Curt Ramsdell Park pathway g. Remove snow from skating areas and park parking lots. h. Roof Maintenance J-PM, Police Station, Library · Remove ice dams and unplug roof drains. i. Weekend Skating Rink Maintenance Weekend maintenance of skating rinks would be done on a call-out basis. The Park Department will be considered the home department for these call-outs. Criteria for call-out · ' NO SNOW, NO MAINTENANCE · Amount of snowfall must exceed ½" before 5:00 a.m. Saturday and/or Sunday · If snowfall exceeds 2" before 5:00 A.M. Saturday and/or Sunday. Duty man should call supervisor to coordinate rink maintenance with general plowing. - 5 · If it snow later in the day on Saturday, we will clean the rinks on Sunday moming. · If it snows later in the day on Sunday, we will clean the rinks on Monday. Call-out procedure · Duty man will call out one person from the Park Department to assist with rink maintenance. · The duty person will make the call out no later than 5:00 A.M. on Saturday and/or Sunday. Job Assignments · Duty person will shovel library on Saturday · Senior park person will be assigned to the sweeper. All rinks must be swept. · Duty person will blow snow around the hockey rinks and shovel' around the gates. · Rink maintenance operations will begin at 6:00 A.M. Saturday and/or Sunday. The Sign Department personnel shall hand shovel the pedestrian bridges and spread deicer. Furnish personnel as necessary for street plowing operations. 42nd and University (walk bridge) 49th and Central (walk bridge) The Engineering Department Techs shall remove snow and deice the walks and steps around the Municipal Service Center building, parking lots and assist the Sign Department in the removal of snow from the pedestrian bridges. Drivable Equipment Used in Snow Emergencies: Heavy_ Equipment #7 #9 #14 #104 #128 Caterpillar front end loader with plow (two stage snow blower - used for snow removal) Case front end loader with front plow and wing Caterpillar motor grader with plow JCB backhoe loader Caterpillar backhoe loader Dump Trucks #18 1 ton Ford dump truck with front plow. #19 33,000 G.V.W. GMC dump truck with front plow, underbody plow and sander (NW Quadrant) #45 33,000 G.V.W. Ford dump truck with from plow, underbody plow and sander (Alleys) #68 33,000 GVW Sterling dump truck with reversible front plow, underbody plow, wing plow and sander (SE Quadrant) #69 33,000 G.V.W. Ford dump truck with front plow, underbody plow and sander (NE Quadrant). #70 #99 #195 #218 54,000 G.V.W. Ford Tandem dump truck with reversible front plow, underbody plow, wing plow and sander (Main drags). 33,000 G.V.W. Ford dump truck with reversible front plow, underbody plow, wing plow and sander (SW Quadrant). 14,000 G.V.W. Ford dump truck with fi'ont plow. 1 ton Ford dump truck with front plow Pickups #12 4 x 4 3/4 ton Chev pickup with plow #125 4 x 4 3/4 ton Chev pickup with plow #207 4 x 4 3/4 ton Chev pickup with plow - (designated for park use) #420 4 x 4 3/4 ton Chev pickup (designated for Police use until streets are passable) Misc. Equipment #216 John Deere 260 Skid Street (with snow bucket attachment) #296 MT Trackless (with snow blower, plow and broom) Street Plowing Routes Attached are maps of main thoroughfares, quadrants, dead-end alleys and cul-de-sacs, thru alleys, parking lots and snow removal areas. 1. Main thoroughfares - Tandem dump truck and motor grader 2. Quadrants SW, NW, SE, NE - dump trucks 3. Thru-alleys - #45 dump truck with V plow 4. Dead-end alleys and cul-de-sacs - Pickups and 1 ton dump trucks 5. Parking lots - Front end loader (#7 and Backhoe Caterpillar #128) 6. MSC, SACA, Library, load sand trucks backhoe JCB #104 7. West of University, 37* Avenue to 45~ Avenue - Front end loader #9 (assist other areas as needed) When a starting time is determined, the following procedures are followed: Main Thoroughfares Tandem dump truck #70 and motor grader #14 will work together to plow: · 37~ Avenue, Central to Stinson (or) 37th Avenue, Main to Central · Main Street, 37~h Avenue to 40th Avenue. · 40~h Avenue, University to Stinson · Stinson, 40~ Avenue to 43~ Avenue · Benjamin - 43~ Avenue to 45~ Avenue · 44th Avenue, Main St. to Arthur · Arthur Street, 44~h to 45th Avenue · 45th Avenue, Arthur to Stinson · 49~ Avenue, University to Fairway Drive · Fairway Drive, Upland Crest to Fairway Drive - 7 When the main thoroughfare combined routes have been completed, the grader will proceed to NE Quadrant and assist with plowing the avenues. Tandem dump truck #70 will plow the remainder of the main thoroughfares. · 39* Avenue, 5~ Street to Central Avenue · 45th Avenue, University to McLeod · McLeod, 45* Avenue to Reservoir Blvd. · 51st Avenue, University to Central · Fillmore, 46~h Avenue to 49~ Avenue · 46* Avenue, Fillmore to Reservoir Blvd. · Reservoir Blvd., 37t~ Avenue to 46~ Avenue Chatham Road, 45* Avenue to Fairway Drive · Stinson Blvd., Fairway Drive to Silver Lake Beach · Arthur Street, 39th Avenue to 44* Avenue · Hart Blvd., 37* to 39~ Avenue The tandem will have the primary responsibility for applying salt and/or sand to the main thoroughfares. Quadrants Four dump truck plows - each operator is assigned to a specific quadrant. SW Quadrant. This area is from 37th Avenue to 45th Avenue from Main Street to Central Avenue. In this quadrant we have two main arterials we open up first. They are the Jefferson Street and University Avenue Service Road. The operator in this area will plow Jefferson and the Service Road before plowing any other streets or avenues. When these two streets have been plowed, the operator will start plowing on 37th Avenue and Van Buren Street going north and working in a westerly direction. Usually when the operator reaches University Avenue, one of the other plows from a different quadrant is finished and will help to finish the area west of University Avenue. Altemate starting points may be used each time. Note: We share the responsibility of plowing 37th Avenue from Stinson Boulevard to Main Street with th~ City of Minneapolis. 37th Ave. is divided into two segments - (1) Main St. to Central Ave. and (2) Central Ave. to Stinson Blvd. Per agreement, we alternate segments each year. The agreement period is October 1st to October 1st. For 2001-2002 Columbia Heights maintains Main Street to Central Avenue. NW Quadrant This area includes University Avenue to Central from 45th Avenue to 53rd Avenue exclusive of the City of Hilltop. Again, this quadrant has two main arterials to be plowed first, that being Jefferson Street and the University Avenue Service Road. The operator in this quadrant will start on the west end one time and the east end another time in order to equalize the complaint of always being plowed last. When the operator has finished plowing their own area, they will combine to finish whatever area is not completed Alternate starting points may be used each time. - $ - SE Quadrant. This area includes 37th Avenue to 45th Avenue between Central Avenue and Stinson Blvd. In this area the plow starts plowing Tyler Street from 37th North and then works · avenues from 37th to 44*, then streets easterly to Stinson Boulevard. When this has been accomplished, the plow will work the streets between Central Avenue and Reservoir Boulevard. When the operator has finished plowing their own area, they will combine to finish whatever area is not completed Alternate starting points may be used each time. Note: We share the responsibility of plowing 37th Avenue from Stinson Boulevard to Main Street with the City of Minneapolis. 37th Ave. is divided into two segments - (1) Main St. to Central Ave. and (2) Central Ave. to Stinson Blvd. Per agreement, we alternate segments each year. The agreement period is October 1st to October 1st. For 2001-2002 Columbia Heights maintains Main Street to Central Avenue. NE Quadrant: This area includes 45th to 51't 1/2 Avenues from Central to Stinson. We will either begin plowing Mathaire Addition or Sheffield Addition, depending on the time of day and the number of cars that could be in the Sheffield Addition. Whichever way, we will pick up the Hilltop Addition, Innsbruck Addition and the Heritage Heights Addition. When the operator has finished plowing their own area, they will combine to finish whatever area is not completed Alternate starting points may be used each time. Thru-Alleys The alley "V" plow is pushed by a dump truck. This plow usually starts on the west side of town being California Street to University Avenue, 37th to 45th Avenue and works its way east. Alternate starting points may be used each time. Equipment problems may require the use of 4-wheel drive vehicles to clear alleys, as last resort. Dead-end alleys and cul-de-sacs The 4-wheel drive vehicle operators each receive a map showing all the cul-de-sacs, dead end alleys, and hard-to-get at places. When each operator has their own designated areas finished, they will check with the other operators and will help each other finish plowing where needed. They may assist the "V" plow operator in finishing his alley routes if assigned by the Superintendent. When alleys are finished, operators will clean intersections in their assigned area. Parking'lots The plow route for #7 front end loader, #104 backhoe and #128 backhoe is as follows: 2. 3. 4. 5. Administration Building, Police & Fire lots M.S.C. Area (includes SACA driveway) JPM lot on Mill Street Library Van Buren lot south of 40th - 9 - JPM rear lot, then wherever needed, (i.e., other lots, intersections, drifted areas, etc.), priority mainly depends upon the amount of snowfall. ICECONTROL When there is any accumulation of snow or ice, it normally is necessary to salt and/or sand streets. This function begins when reports from the police indicate that slippery conditions exist. On weekends and evenings the duty person is called by the Police or County Central Dispatcher. The duty person organizes the sanding operation based on the Superintendent's standing instructions. Main thoroughfares, controlled intersections, hills, emergency routes, are given priorities. Police reports of slippery conditions are also considered. Application is limited on low volume streets and cul-de-sacs. Sanding provides for traction but is not intended to provide bare pavement during winter conditions. Salt and sand is ordered and mixed in controlled quantities, usually 300 ton at a time. The standard mix ratio will be 4 parts salt to 1 part sand. Mix ratios salt to sand may vary to maximize effectiveness. Salt sand will be furnished for residents in the designated area behind the Municipal Service Center outside the Recycling Center. The City cannot be responsible for damage to grass caused by the salt/sand mixture and therefore will not make repairs or compensate residents for salt damage to turf areas in the street right-of-way. SAND BARRELS Sand barrels are located at the following 12 locations throughout the City. They are put in place by November 15th and removed by the 15th of April. EAST SIDE Alley behind 3813-15 Pierce St. 1305 37th Ave. (NE comer of37th & Pierce) · 3850 Stinson Blvd. (by Heights Manor Northeast Senior Housing) · Across from 4088 Stinson Blvd. (by street sign) · 2 Barrels at 965 40th Ave. (High Rise) - 1 east of Bus shelter and 1 rear of building at service garage. · 45~h Avenue and Stinson Blvd. (SE comer). WEST SIDE 4707 Jefferson (by driveway north side) 951 46 1/2 Ave. (north side by pole) 4101 Washington (NE comer) 10 - 4059 Monroe (on 41st Ave. by alley by pole on west side) 590 40th (police lot by steps) Alley behind 3932 Central (attach to power pole). As we approach the end of the winter season, the Public Works Department concentrates on exposing catch basins in critical areas where early runoffmay cause serious damage. Sto .rm drains are inspected for freezing. Some steam thawing may be necessary. SNOW REMOVAL Certain actions and areas were designated by the City Council on January 11, 1982, and amended fi'om time to time, for services. These services are shown on the attached drawing #1. They specifically point out services other than normal street plowing and ice control that the City will perform. When accumulated piles of snow in the business areas, around schools, churches and public buildings indicate hazardous conditions, the Street Dept. begins loading and hauling to storage areas. Snow is to be hauled for storage to 1) Huset Park East Quincy parking lot, (Note: restricted to day time use), 2) Huset Park East Jefferson lot, and 3) Silver Lake Beach parking lot. Snow Removal at Libra~_ A. Parking Lot The Library parking lot will be cleared in accordance with the priorities established in this policy, the lot will be cleared in conjunction with the other municipal lots after snow plowing has been completed on the streets, Police and Fire areas and the pump and lift station accesses. B. Sidewalks During the work week, two members of the Sewer & Water Department will remove snow and ice from the sidewalks, stair wells and entrances to the Library before the Library opens and, if necessary, in the afternoon. The sidewalk snow and ice removal will be done by personnel employed by the Library under the School Work Program if available. The Weekend Duty Person will be responsible for cleating snow and ice from the sidewalks and entrances before opening of the Library on Saturday mornings (currently 10:00 a.m.). Library personnel are responsible for snow and ice cleating on Saturdays after opening and, if conditions warrant, may call out the weekend duty person for assistance. Note: Weekend Duty Person is not responsible for clearing snow and ice from stair wells. - 11 Snow Removal - 500 Mill Street A. Driveway The driveway is plowed with a pickup and plow with shoes to avoid removing driveway brick. The snow is back dragged from the garage doors. The pick up tums around and pushes the snow toward the street with the plow angled to the right (north). This snow removal will normally take place with normal snow removal operations on the west side of Central Avenue. B. Sidewalks, steps, ramp, deck next to garage doors The snow is removed from these areas with shovels and snow blowers. On weekdays, this maintenance is done during normal working hours by Park Department staff as part of the normal sidewalk route. During weekends and holidays, the duty person determines whether or not maintenance is needed. Maintenance is required iff 1) The snowfall is greater than ½ an inch. 2) The snowfall has ended. The duty person normally makes this determination while responding to a plowing or sanding call. Upon completion of plowing or sanding duties, the duty person is responsible for the sidewalk maintenance. - 12 - PLOWING/ICE CONTROL INFORMATION 1.. 3" ACCUMULATION REQUIRED BEFORE SNOW EMERGENCY FULL CITY PLOWING · AREAS ARE TO BE SALT/SANDED IN CONJUNCTION WITH PLOWING OPERATIONS 2. SNOW DEPTH 1" TO Y' - PLOW DRIVING LANES AND APPLY SALT/SAND 3. FIRST PRIORITY - MAIN DRAGS, ARTERIALS, AND RESIDENTIAL AREAS 4. ALLEY PLOWING: · THRU-ALLEYS PLOWED WITH "V" PLOW · DEAD END ALLEYS PLOWED WITH PICK-UPS 5. POLICE REQUEST FOR ICE CONTROL/SPECIFIC AREAS AND MAIN DRAGS · 1 OR 2 SALT SANDERS DEPENDING UPON EXISTING CONDITIONS 6. POLICE REQUEST FOR ICE CONTROL/CITY WIDE · 4 SALT SANDERS - 4 ON STREETS · ICE CONTROL OPERATIONS IN ALLEYS WILL BE CONDUCTED DURING NORMAL WORK HOURS 53RD AVENUE FROM UNIVERSITY TO CENTRAL: HEIGHTS - ICE CONTROL STINSON BLVD. FROM 37TM TO 40TM: ICE CONTROL 9. 37TH AVENUE MAINTENANCE: FRIDLEY PLOWS - COLUMBIA ST ANTHONY PLOWS - COLUMBIA HEIGHTS MAIN STREET TO CENTRAL AVENUE (2001-2002) COLUMBIA HEIGHTS CENTRAL AVENUE TO ST1NSON BLVD. (2001-2002) MINNEAPOLIS (SEGMENTS ALTERNATE EACH YEAR) 13 - ? CITY OF FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting o£: 12/17/01 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER ITEM: EXTENSION OF GIS RANGE RIDER BY: K. Hansen .~ BY: CONTRACT DATE: 12/13/01~L.L~~ DATE: Background: In 1996 Council approved a Joint Powers Agreement (Tri-City Agreement) with the cities of Andover and Fridley to hire an outside consultant to provide GIS technical assistance. The Consulting Firm of PlanSight was hired and performed work under the Tri-Cities Agreement beginning in 1997, reviewable annually. The Consulting Services Agreement terminates on December 31, 2001 unless extended by further agreement of the parties. Analysis/Conclusions: The cities of Andover, Fridiey and Columbia Heights staff are interested in continuing the contract for 2002. Continuing with PlanSight will provide the continuity we need to keep the program moving forward. The 2002 goals for the City of Columbia Heights are as follows: · Building database of utility information into City Works Utility Management Software · Preparing assessment rolls for certification to Anoka County · Providing other City departments with easy to use access to GIS database (City Sight) · Analyzing and map crime data (Police) · Link GIS to fire database/analyze and map database information (Fire) · Develop process for dealing with easements in GIS (Finance/Assessing) · Additional tasks as identified The City benefits from work done under this contract as well as from the other cities. Columbia Heights' share for the 2002 Tri-City GIS Range Rider is $17,376.00, which includes a 3% increase for 2002. This amount is budgeted in various departments of the 2002 Public Works budget. Recommended Motion: Move to approve a one-year extension to the GIS Joint Powers Agreement in the amount of $17,376.00; and, authorize the Mayor and City Manager to enter into an agreement for the same. I~q.'jb COUNCIL ACTION: CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT This Contract is made and entered into between the Tri-City GIS Joint Powers Organization, consisting of the Cities of Fridley, Columbia Heights and Andover, hereinafter "Tri-City" and PlanSight LLC., Suite 2D, 2179 Fourth Street, White Bear Lake, Minnesota, 55110, hereinafter "Contractor". WHEREAS, Tri-City requires serVices to be provided for the staffing of a GIS Range Rider to provide GIS technical assistance to the Cities of Andover, Columbia Heights and Fridley; WHEREAS, Contractor desires to and is capable of providing the necessary services. according to the terms and conditions stated herein; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and agreements contained herein the parties agree as follows: TERM 1.1 Term. The term of this Contract shall be from January 1, 2002 to and including December 31, 2002 unless earlier terminated by law or according to the provisions of this Contract. e CONTRACTOR'S OBLIGATIONS 2.1 General Description. Contractor shall provide the following services generally described as: Sixty-Six and Two-Thirds weeks (Person Hour Equivalents) of full time onsite GIS technical assistance to the communities of Fridley, Andover and Columbia Heights. The services will be in the form of one or more GIS Range Riders that would spend approximately 82 hours per month per city in Andover and Fridley, respectively, and approximately 54 hours per month in the City of Columbia Heights over the course of the Contract. 2.2 Conformance to Specification. Services provided shall meet or exceed the tasks outlined in the Tri- City GIS Technical Assistance Request for Proposal set out in Exhibit A which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. PAYMENT 3.1 Total Cost. The total amount to be paid by Tri-City pursuant to this Contract shall be: $69,504.00 (Andover-$26,064.°°, Fridley-$26,064.°°, Columbia Heights- $17,376.°°) 3.2 Invoices. Contractor shall, within fifteen (15) working days following the last day of each calendar month in which services were provided, submit an invoice and request for payment on an invoice form acceptable to Tri-City. This invoice shall itemize 1) the hours of services rendered listed by classification, 2) the date such services were provided, 3) a general description of the services provided, 4) the name of client receiving services, 5) the amount and type of all reimbursable expenses being charged to the Contract, 6) the dates of the performance period covered by the invoice. 3.3 Time of Payment. Tri-City shall make payment to Contractor within thirty-five (35) days of the date on which the invoice is received. If the invoice is incorrect, defective, or otherwise improper, Tri-City will notify 2 e 3.4 Contractor within ten (10) days of receiving the incorrect invoice. Upon receiving the corrected invoice from Contractor, Tri-City will make payment within thirty-five (35) days. Payment of Unauthorized Claims. Tri-City may refuse to pay any claim which is not specifically authorized by this Contract. Payment of a claim shall not preclude Tri-City from questioning the propriety of the claim. Tri-City reserves the right to offset any overpayment or disallowance of claim by reducing future payments. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS/STANDARDS 4.1 General. Contractor shall abide by all Federal, State or local laws, statutes, ordinances, rules and regulations now in effect or hereinafter pertaining to this Contract or to the facilities, programs and staff for which Contractor is responsible. 4.2 Minnesota Law to Govern. This Contract shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the substantive and procedural laws of the State of Minnesota, without giving effect to the principles of conflict of laws. All proceedings related to this Contract shall be venued in the State of Minnesota. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR STATUS Contractor is an independent contractor and nothing herein contained shall be construed to create the relationship of employer and employee between Tri-City and Contractor. Contractor shall at all times be free to exercise initiative, judgment and discretion as to how to best perform or provide services. Contractor acknowledges and agrees that Contractor is not entitled 3 e e to receive any of the benefits received by Tri-City employees and is not eligible for workers' or unemployment compensation benefits. Contractor acknowledges and agrees that no withholding or deduction for State or Federal income taxes, FICA, FUTA, or otherwise, will be made form the payments due Contractor and that it is Contractor's sole obligation to comply with the applicable provisions of all Federal and State tax laws. INDEMNIFICATION Any and ali claims that arise or may arise on behalf of Contractor, its agents, servants or employees as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of Contractor or its agents, servants, employees while engaged in the performance of the Contract shall in no way be the obligation or responsibility of Tri-City. Contractor shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend Tri-City, its members, officers and employees against any and all liability, loss, costs, damages, expenses, claims or actions, including attorneys' fees which Tri-City, its officers or employees may hereafter sustain, incur or be required to pay, arising out of or by reason of any negligent or willful act or omission of Contractor, its agents, servants or employees, in the execution, performance, or failure to adequately perform Contractor's obligations pursuant to this Contract. INSURANCE 7.1 General Terms. In order to protect itself and to protect Tri-City under the indemnity provisions set forth above Contractor shall, at Contractor's expense, procure and maintain policies of insurance covering the term of this Contract, as set forth below. Such policies of insurance shall apply to the extent of, but not as a limitation upon or in satisfaction of, the indemnity provisions herein. All retentions and deductibles under such policies of insurance shall be paid by Contractor. Each such 4 7.2 7.3 7.4 policy shall not be canceled by the issuing insurance company without at least ten (10) days written notice to Tri-City of intent to cancel. Coverage. The policies of insurance to be obtained by Contractor pursuant to this section shall be purchased from a licensed carrier and shall include the following: A) Professional Liability (1) A professional liability insurance policy covering personnel of Contractor, if any, who provide professional services under this Contract, which shall include the following coverages at a minimum: Personal Injury/Damage: B) Workers' Compensation $200,000 per person $600,000 per occurrence If applicable, Contractor shall procure and maintain a policy that at least meets the statutory minimum. Certificates. Prior to or concurrent with execution of this Contract, Contractor shall file certificates or certified copies of such policies of insurance with Tri-City. Failure to Provide Proof of Insurance. Tri-City may withhold payments or immediately terminate this Contractor or failure of Contractor to furnish proof of insurance coverage or to comply with the insurance requirements as stated above. 10. 7.5 Non-waiver. Nothing in this Contract shall constitute a waiver by Tri-City of any statutory limits or exceptions on liability. SUBCONTRACTING Contractor shall not enter into any subcontract for the performance of the services contemplated under this Contract nor assign any interest in the Contract without prior written consent of Tri-City. DEFAULT 9.1 Inability to perform. Contractor shall make every reasonable effort to maintain staff, facilities, and equipment to deliver the services to be purchased by Tri-City. Contractor shall immediately notify Tri-City in writing whenever it is unable to, or reasonably believes it is going to be unable to, provide the agreed upon quality of services. Upon such notification, Tri-City shall determine whether such inability requires a modification or cancellation of this Contract. 9.2 Duty to Miti~,ate. Both parties shall use their best efforts to mitigate any damages which might be suffered by reason of any event giving rise to a remedy hereunder. TERMINATION 10.1 With or Without Cause. This Contract may be terminated, with or without cause, by Tri-City upon thirty (30) days written notice. 6 11. 10.2 Notice of Default. Either party may terminate this Contract for cause by giving ten (10) days written notice of its intent. Said notice shall specify the circumstances warranting termination of this Contract. 10.3 Failure to Cure. If the party in default fails to cure the specified circumstances as described by the nOtice given under the above paragraph within the ten (10) days, or such additional time as may be authorized by the party giving notice, then the whole or any part of this Contract may be terminated by written notice. 10.4 Notice of Termination. Notice of Termination shall be made by certified mail or personal delivery to the authorized agent of the party. Notice of Termination is deemed effective upon delivery to the address of the party as stated in paragraph 12. 10.5 ' Effect of Termination. Termination of this Contract shall not discharge any liability, responsibility or right of any party which arises from the performance of or failure to adequately perform the terms of this Contract prior to the effective date of termination. CONTRACT RIGHTS/REMEDIES 11.1 Rights Cumulative. All remedies available to either party under the terms of this Contract or by law are cumulative and may be exercised concurrently or separately, and the exercise of any one remedy shall not be deemed an election of such remedy to the exclusion of other remedies. 7 11.2 Waiver. 12. Waiver for any default shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any subsequent default. Waiver or breach of any provision of this Contract shall not be construed to be modification for the terms of this Contract unless stated to be such in writing and signed by authorized representatives of Tri-city and contractor. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE Notification required to be provided pursuant to this Contract shall be provided to the following named persons and addresses unless otherwise stated in this Contract, or in a modification of this Contract. To Contractor: Andover: Jerry Happel Suite 2D 2179 Fourth Street. White Bear Lake, MN 55110 City Engineer City of Andover 1685 Crosstown Blvd Andover, MN 55304 Fridley: Director of Public Works City of Fridley 6431 University Avenue NE Fridley, MN 55432 Columbia Heights: Public Works Director City of Columbia Heights 637 - 38th Avenue NE Columbia Heights, MN 55421 8 13. 14. 15. MODIFICATIONS Any alterations, variations, modifications, or waivers of the provisions of this Contract shall only be valid when they have been reduced to writing, and signed by authorized representatives of Tri-City and Contractor. SEVERABILITY The provisions of this Contract shall be deemed severable. If any part of this Contract is rendered void, invalid, or unenforceable, such rendering shall not affect the validity and enforceability of the remainder of this Contract unless the part or parts which are void, invalid or otherwise unenforceable shall substantially impair the value of the entire Contract with respect to either party. MERGER 15.1 Final Agreement. This Contract is the final statement of the agreement of the parties and the complete and exclusive statement of the terms agreed upon, and shall supersede all prior negotiations, understandings or agreements. There are not representations, warranties, or stipulations, either oral or written, not herein contained. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Contract on the date(s) indicated below. CONTRACTOR By: Title: Date: TRI-CITY GIS ORGANIZATION By: Title: Date: By: Title: Date: By: Title: Date: 10 CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting off December 17~ 2001 AGENDA ORIGINATING CITY SECTION: L~. i~., {~o DEPARTMENT: MANAGER NO: Fire APPROVAL ITEM: Establish Hearing Dates By: Dana Alexon License Revocation, Rental Properties NO: DATE: December 11, 2001 DATE: Revocation or suspension of a license to operate a rental property within the City of Columbia Heights is requested against the following owners regarding their rental property for failure to meet the requirements of the Residential Maintenance Codes. 1. Renae Novak ................................................................. 4023 60' Street NE 2. Edward Fragale ............................................................. 1300-02, 1308-10, 1316-18, 1324-26 Circle Terrace 3. Tad Sonneman .............................................................. 4654 Washington Street NE RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to Establish a Hearing Date of January 14, 2002 for Revocation or Suspension ora License to Operate a Rental Property within the City of Columbia Heights against Renae Novak at 4023 6t~ Street NE. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to Establish a Heating Date of January 14, 2002 for Revocation or Suspension of a License to Operate a Rental Property within the City of Columbia Heights against Edward Fragale at 1300-02~ 1308-10~ 1316-18~ 1324-26 Circle Terrace. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to Establish a Heating Date of January 14, 2002 for Revocation or Suspension of a License to Operate a Rental Property within the City of Columbia Heights against Tad Sonneman at 4654 Washington Street NE. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to Establish a Hearing Date of January 14, 2002 for Revocation or Suspension ora License to Operate a Rental Property within the City of Columbia Heights against Yong Kwon Yi at 4546 Tyler Street NE. COUNCIL ACTION: CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting off December 17~ 2001 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER APPROVAL NO: '~[ ~ A ~ 13 Fire ITEM: Approval of Rental Housing License BY: Dana Alexon BY.'/_ ~. ~ Applications NO: DATE: December 12, 2001 DATE: Approval of the attached list of rental housing license applications, in that they have met the requirements of the Housing Maintenance Code. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the items as listed on the business license agenda for December 17, 2001 as presented. COUNCIL ACTION: 30083-3-71 30083-3-73 30083-3-75 30083-3-77 10041 10051 12202 12206 20300 10000 20116 20201 30009 20293 12130 12173 30038 30063 12004 10011 10025 Columbia Heights Housing Limited Partners Columbia Heights Housing Limited Partners Columbia Heights Housing Limited Partners Columbia Heights Housing Limited Parmers Troy Bradshaw 3914 Tyler Street Daniel Busse 1037 Delanza Elliot 1126 William Farrey 1110 Thomas Gromek 4340 Greg Heinen 1020 Mike Hyska 1035 Dolores Jefferies 4641 Michael Juaire 4301 Richard Lee 4600 Duncan McClellan 4422 Martin Sieger Edward Ukatu Mario Valtierrez Kimberly Wegener 5250 David Wiger 5045 Robert Witt 4222 871 41~Avenue 873 41stAvenue 875 41stAvenue 877 41stAvenue Gould Avenue 45th Avenue 43-1/2 Avenue Quincy Street 44th Avenue 43-1/2 Avenue 4th Street 3rd Street Polk Street Monroe Street 1237 43-1/2 Avenue 615 40th Avenue 3849 Edgemoor Place Washington Street 4th Street Monroe Street CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: December 17, 2001 AGENDA SECTION: kl '" ,~- I g ORIGINATING DEPT.: CITY MANAGER NO: License Department APPROVAL ITEM: License Agenda BY: Shelley Hanso~)~'~ DATE:~~ NO: DATE: December 14, 2001 BY: BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Attached is the business license agenda for the December 17, 2001 City Council meeting. This agenda consists of applications for contractor licenses for the remainder of 2001. Also included on the agenda are the renewals for calendar year 2002 that have been received and approved to date. These include renewals for Contractors, Tobacco Sales, Games of Skill, Off- Sale Beer, Wine/Beer License, Second Hand Merchant, Pet Shop, Pool Hall, Motor Vehicle Sales, Courtesy Benches, and Fuel Dispensing Devices. At the top of the license agenda you will notice a phrase stating *Signed Waiver Form Accompanied Application. This means that the data privacy form has been submitted as required. If not submitted, certain information cannot be released to the public. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the items as listed on the business license agenda for December 17, 2001 as presented, regarding the new license for 2001 and the renewals for 2002. COUNCIL ACTION: TO CITY COUNCIL December 17, 2001 *Signed Waiver Form Accompanied Application 2001 BUSINESS LICENSE AGENDA APPROVED BY BUILDING OFFICIAL CONTRACTORS *Imaginality Inc. LICENSED AT 6182 Hwy 55 Gold Valley FEES $50.00 POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE,.FIRE,BLDG FIRE POLICE, FIRE, BLDG POLICE,FIRE,BLDG POLICE 2002 BUSINESS LICENSE AGENDA TOBACCO/CIGARETTE SALES *Conoco My Tobacco Store 3955 University Ave NE 4921 Central Ave NE GAMES OF SKILL *Metro Coin Co. (VFW) *Jubilee Music (Tycoons) *Jimmy's Pro Billiards 4446 Central Ave 4952 Central Ave 4040 Central Ave POOL HALLS *Jimmy's Pro Billiards 4040 Central Ave MOTOR VEHICLE SALES *First Comm Credit Union 843 40~Ave OFF SALE BEER *Twin Cities Avanti/Oasis Mkt 4001 University Ave FUEL DISPENSING DEVICES *Conoco *Emerson's Auto 3955 University Ave 4457 University Ave WINE/BEER ON SALE Puerto Vallarta, Inc 3800 Central Avenue SECONDHAND DEALER *Unique Thrift *Junklin Jewels *Salvation Army ARC 2201 37th Ave NE 3952 Central Ave 3929 Central Ave PET SHOPS *Exotic Pets 4940 Central Ave COURTESY BENCHES $200.00 $200.00 $30.00 $75.0O $465.00 $100.00 200.00 $150.00 $100.00 $100.00 $2400 $100.00 $100.00 $100.00 $50.00 PUBLIC WKS US Bench Corp (21 benches) 3300 Snelling Ave, Mpls $525.00 BLDG CONTRACTORS LICENSES *Sharp Heating & AC Inc Wenzel Heating *Standard Heating & AC Inc *Air Mechanical Inc. *Yale Inc/Encompass MN *Total Comfort *Centraire Htg & AC *B E Mechanical *Home Energy Center Fireside Comer *Corporate Mechanical *Automatic Garage Door & Frpl *Anderson Heating & AC *Mid-City Mechanical Corp *River City Sheet Metal *South-town Refrigeration *Rouse Mechanical *Riccar Corp *Nedegaard Construction *Wellington Windows *Norblom Plumbing *Bonfe's Plumbing & Htg Serv *Richfield Plumbing Co *Randy Lane & Sons *McGuire & Sons *Lindman Plumbing Co. *Modem Roadways *Asphalt Driveway Co *Suburban Lighting Services *Signcrafters *Crosstown Sign Inc *Security Fence & Const *LeRoux Evcavating Inc *MN Petroleum Services *Hicks Concrete Construction *North Country Concrete *Holmlund Masonry *Aaspen Tree Service *The Davey Tree Experts Arbor Design Tree Service 4854 Central Ave 4131 Old Sibley Memorial Hwy 410 West Lake Street 16411 Aberdeen St NE 9649 Girard Ave So 12800 Hwy 55 7402 Washington Ave 6209 Pilgrim Ln 15200 25~ Ave N #128 Ply 2700 N. Fairview Ave, Rsv 5114 Hillsboro Ave No, New Hope 9210 Wyoming Ave N, Brk Pk 4347 Central Ave 9103 Davenport St 9928 Bluebird St NW 5610 W. 36t~ St 7320 Oxford St 2387 Commercial Blvd 4200 Central Ave 3938 Meadowbrook Rd 2905 Garfield Ave So 505 Randolph Ave 509 West 77~ St 1501 W Broadway Ave N 605 12t~ Ave So, Hopkins 12000 5Ta Ave No. 1620 Winnetka Ave N 1211 E Hwy 36 6077 Lake Elmo Ave No 7775 Main St NE 16307 Aberdeen St NE 4831 Washington St 2104 64~ Sf 7650 Hwy 65 NE 7545 Commerce St, Corcoran 7040 143~d Ave NW, Ramsey 2208 N 2na Ave So. 970 Wayzata Blvd 1500 N. Mantua St, Kent OH PO Box 290298, Brk Ctr $50.00 $50.0O $50.0O $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.0O $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 license agenda BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 12/13/2001 15:41:34 FUND RECAP: FUND DESCRIPTION 101 GENERAL 201 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUND 202 ANOKA COUNTY CDBG 203 PARKVIEW VILLA NORTH 204 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTH 212 STATE AID MAINTENANCE 213 PARKVIEW VILLA SOUTH 225 CABLE TELEVISION 235 RENTAL HOUSING 240 LIBRARY 250 COL HGHTS AFTER SCROOL ENRI 265 CONFISCATED/FORFEITED PROP 278 JUVENILE JUSTICE GRANT 402 STATE AID CONSTRUCTION 415 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT - PIR 430 INFRASTRUCTURE ~ 601 WATER UTILITY 602 SEWER UTILITY 603 REFUSE FUND 604 STORM SEWER UTILITY 609 LIQUOR 652 SEWER CONSTRUCTION FUND 653 STORM SEWER CONSTRUCT. ~UND 701 CENTRAL GARAGE 720 DATA PROCESSING 880 PERMIT SURCHARGE 881 CONTRIBUTED PROJECTS-REC 883 CONTRIBUTED PROJECTS-GEN 884 INSURANCE 885 ESCROW 886 INVES~ENT TRUST 887 FLEX BENEFIT TRUST FUND TOTAL ALL FUNDS Check History DISBURSEMENTS 95,013.92 815.30 4,075.35 6,821.98 476.97 417.47 5,186.51 1,660.74 71.91 13,606.38 358.19 92.50 58.64 137,366.36 504.07 2,747.00 11,004.00 1,031.32 105,306.67 257.73 332,135.47 26.77 241.24 9,314.81 8,053.09 134.51 589.26 3,523.24 2,771.50 434,067.74 2,025,000.00 1,566.74 3,204,297.38 CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS GL060S-V06.27 RECAPPAGE GL540R BANK RECAP: BANK NAME ................................ BANK CHECKING ACCOUNT TOTAL ALL BANKS DISBURSEMENTS 3,204,297.38 3,204,297.38 BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 12/13/2001 15 Check History 12/17 COUNCIL CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS GL540R-V06.27 PAGE 1 BANK VENDOR CHECK NUMBER AMOUNT BANK CHECKING ACCOUNT ADIRONDACK DIRECT AT & T CONSUMER LEASE GENUINE PARTS/NAPA AUTO GRIGGS-COOPER & CO HUBER/CHARLES JOHNSON BROS. LIQUOR CO. JOHNSON/THOMAS M KALLESTAD/G~Y KUETHER DIST. CO. LARKIN/JOHN MARK VII DIST. METROCALL - ATT MESSAGIN MN DEPT OF ADMINISTRATIO PRIOR WINE QWEST COMMUNICATIONS RELI~/~T ENERGY MINNEGASC ST PAUL FESTIVAL & HERIT WINDSCHITL/KEITH XCEL ENERGY (N S P) AFFINITY PLUS FEDERAL CR FIRST COMMUNITY CREDIT U ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST 45 MN CHILD Sb?PORT PAYMENT ORCHARD TRUST COMPANY PERA UNITED WAY VAN~AGEPOINT TRANSFER - WELLS FARGO - PAYROLL AC WI DEP~TMENT OF REVENUE NORTHEAST STATE BANK ANOKA COUNTY COURT ANOKA COUNTY COURT ANOKA COUNTY COURT ANOKA COUNTY COURT ANOKA COUI~ COURT ALL SAFE FIRE & SECURITY ANDRES/JEAN BECK/SHERYL SCHULTE BELLBOY CORPORATION BIELAWSKI/PAULA BRADLEY REAL ESTATES INC BRECKENITCH/LAURIE COCA-COLA BOTTLING MIDWE COL HGTS FIREFIGHTERS AS COLUMBIA HEIGHTS I COMMUNITY UNITED NETHODI EAST SIDE BEVERAGE CO 95477 2,060.00 95478 33.28 95479 321.43 95480 12,219.48 95481 235.78 95482 11,413.28 95483 250.00 95484 41.99 95485 41,145.20 95486 26.31 95487 14,381.16 95488 69.55 95489 480.87 95490 4,903.90 95491 1,512.48 95492 3,868.34 95493 325.00 95494 19.97 95495 19,318.07 95496 584.77 95497 2,605.00 95498 9,848.13 95499 673.27 95500 4,900.38 95501 25,739.38 95502 35.00 95503 200.00 95504 146,665.90 95505 344.00 95506 1,800,000.00 95507 1,650.00 95508 1,650.00 95509 5,000.00 95510 1,250.00 95511 8,250.00 95512 216.00 95513 25.53 95514 10.00 95515 3,540.78 95516 15.00 95517 11,344.47 95518 70.62 95519 424.07 95520 276.00 95521 4,471.67 95522 348.19 95523 8,247.75 BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 12/13/2001 15 Check History 12/17 COUNCIL CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS GL540R-V06.27 PAGE 2 BANK VENDOR CHECK NUMBER AMOUNT BA/%TK CHECKING ACCOUNT GENUINE PARTS/NAPA AUTO GRIGGS-COOPER & CO HANSEN/KEVIN HARPER/CINDY HARVEY/ROBERT HERYLA/PETE HOHENSTEINS INC JARVI/CYNTHIA JOHXSON BROS. LIQUOR CO. JOHNSON/DEBBIE KELZENBERG/BARBARA KUETHER DIST. CO. KWON/OK CHA MARK VII DIST. MENARDS CASHWAY LUMEER-F MINNESOTA COACHES MINNESOTA CROWN DtSTRIBU MX NURSERY & LANDSCAPE A MX STATE TREAS BUILDING NEI COLLEGE OF TECH~OLOG NYSTROM PUBLISHING COMPA OFFICE DEPOT PETTY CASH - GARY BRAATE PETTY CASH - JOANNE BAKE PETTY CASH - KkREN MOELL PETI~ CASH - MARY DUGDAL PETTY CASH - REBECCA LOA PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS QUALITY WINE & SPIRITS QWEST DEX ROGERS/JOI{N SCHINDLER ELEVATOR CORP SCHUMACHER/RANDY SEATH/BOB TWIN CITY AREA IABOR MGM VERIZON WIRELESS WINE MERCHANTS XCEL ENERGY (N S P) AARP ALEXON/DANA ANOKA COUNTY BELLBOY CORPORATION CHISAGO LAKES DISTRIBUTI DAVIS/ARThUR DOLINA POLISH FOLK DANCE DUGDALE/MARY 95524 109.56 95525 1,771.62 95526 45.54 95527 40.00 95528 30.50 95529 228.13 95530 1,203.55 95531 209.81 95532 254.11 95533 15.00 95534 56.03 95535 4,657.90 95536 2,400.00 95537 1,246.75 95538 49.90 95539 31.74 95540 602.00 95541 66.00 95542 135.00 95543 134.51 95544 251.82 95545 4,672.57 95546 444.00 95547 123.93 95548 54.65 95549 96.61 95550 134.98 95551 28.57 95552 22,397.89 95553 2,290.86 95554 121.40 95555 15.10 95556 186.48 95557 89.70 95558 150.00 95559 150.00 95560 29.83 95561 280.06 95562 50.28 95563 150.00 95564 49.02 95565 2.00 95566 12,148.47 95567 218.15 95568 86.00 95569 220.20 95570 22.43 BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 12/13/2001 15 Check History 12/17 COUNCIL CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS GL540R-V06.27 PAGE 3 BANK VENDOR CHECK NUMBER AMOUNT BANK CHECKING ACCOUNT EAGLE WINE COMPANY EAST SIDE BEVERAGE CO EXTREME BEVERAGE GENUINE PARTS/NAPA AUTO GRAPE BEGINNINGS INC GREAT AMERICAN HISTORY T GRIGGS-COOPER & CO HAVILAND/JOHN HOHENSTEINS INC INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST JOI~SON BROS. LIQUOR CO. JO~SON/LONNIE KUE~/JEAN KUETHER DIST. CO. I~ TITLE tNC LUND/TIM MARK VII DIST. MINNESOTA CROWN DISTRIBU MN DEPT OF ADMINISTRATIO MN POLLUTION CONTROL AGE MOELLER/t{AREN NORTHEAST STATE BANK OLSON/LEONARD PETTY CASH - KAREN MOELL PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS PRIOR WINE QUALITY WINE & SPIRITS QNEST COMMUNICATIONS SPRINGSTED STAR TRIBUNE THOMPSON/CHARL IE TICH/MARY ANN UNIVANCE - ACCTS RECEIV UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA VER-TECH VERIZON WIRELESS VISA VOSS LIGHTING XCEL ENERGY (N S P) YOUNG/~ATHY AFFINITY PLUS FEDERAL CR FIRST COMMUNITY CREDIT U HEALTH PARTNERS ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST 45 JEFFERSON PILOT MN CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENT ORCHARD TRUST COMPANY 95571 4,336.69 95572 33,005.10 95573 320.00 95574 199.51 95575 73.00 95576 159.00 95577 42,346.60 95578 43.02 95579 366.40 95580 1,925.00 95581 15,925.85 95582 16.28 95583 57.89 95584 27,283.45 95585 948.53 95586 44.59 95587 6,095.15 95588 1,223.00 95589 455.36 95590 69.00 95591 211.13 95592 225,000.00 95593 75.00 95594 43.57 95595 7,125.69 95596 3,299.48 95597 17,392.79 95598 553.08 95599 150.00 95600 492.94 95601 231.95 95602 11.00 95603 25.39 95604 388.00 95605 57.83 95606 256.87 95607 5,652.00 95608 93.04 95609 9,011.58 95610 368.04 95611 584.77 95612 2,355.00 95613 41,123.77 95614 9,726.89 95615 611.54 95616 674.70 95617 4,900.38 BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 12/13/2001 15 Check History 12/17 COUNCIL CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS GL540R-V06.27 PAGE 4 BANK VENDOR CHECK NUMBER AMOUNT BANK CHECKING ACCOUNT PERA 95618 25,220.26 PUBLIC MANAGERS ASSOCIAT 95619 40.00 UNION 320 95620 1,030.92 UNITED WAY 95621 35.00 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER - 95622 200.00 WELLS FAROO - PAYROLL AC 95623 143,933.81 WI DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 95624 298.73 A & C SMALL ENGINE 95625 38.16 ACE HARDWARE 95626 490.59 ACE SUPPLY COMPANY INC 95627 18.00 AISH/MATT 95628 31.94 ALL SA~E FIRE & SECURITY 95629 2,081.30 AMERIPRIDE 95630 120.68 ANDERSON'S NEW CARPET DE 95631 2,049.74 ANOKA COUNTY ELECTIONS 95632 6,822.62 ANORA CTY - CENTRAL COMM 95633 61.27 ASPEN MILLS, INC. 95634 920.50 ASSOC CONSTRUCTION PUBLI 95635 241.24 AUDIO EDITIONS 95636 130.75 B & D SERVICE CENTER 95637 544.51 B & K AUTO TRIM INC 95638 435.58 BAKER & TAYLOR CONT. SER 95639 1,326.71 BAKER & TAYLOR ENTERTAIN 95640 13.31 BANCROFT CA~ COMPANY 95641 688.09 BARNA GUZY & STEFFEN LTD 95642 17,289.20 BATTERY CITY INC 95643 58.42 BCA FORENSIC SCIENCE LAB 95644 400.00 BEARCOM 95645 1,490.10 BELLBOY BAR SUPPLY 95646 43.60 BELLBOY CORPORATION 95647 1,538.25 BFI/WOODLAKE SANITARY SE 95648 102,219.96 BIFF' S, INC. 95649 542.08 BLUEMELS TREE SERVICE 95650 2,489.25 BOOK WHOLESALERS INC 95651 45.25 BOOKMEN INC/THE 95652 112.25 BOYER TRUCK PARTS 95653 35.53 BRAUN INTERTEC CORP 95654 2,747.00 BROCK WHITE CO. 95655 72.42 BRODART 95656 41.20 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS, INC 95657 1,526.39 BUILDING FASTENERS 95658 43.18 CAMDEN PET HOSPITAL 95659 1,523.00 CCP INDUSTRIES 95660 272.52 CDW-G 95661 3,310.04 CENTER FOR ENERGY/ENVIRO 95662 250.00 CHISAGO lAKES DISTRIBUTI 95663 4,027.40 CIGNA BEHAVIORAL HEALTH 95664 532.53 BRC FIN CIAL SYSTEM 2/13/2001 15 Check History 12/17 COUNCIL CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS GL540R-V06.27 PAGE 5 BANK VENDOR CHECK NUMBER AMOUNT BANK CHECKING ACCOUNT CITIES 97 95665 2,340.00 CITY WIDE LOCKSMITHING 95666 147.74 CLARK PRODUCTS INC 95667 598.16 COCA-COLA BOTTLING MIDWE 95668 620.90 COLUMBIA HGTS-FRIDLEY KI 95669 500.00 COMO ENVIRONMENTAL DIVIS 95670 127.50 CONSOLIDATED PLASTICS CO 95671 55.53 CREIGHTON BRADLEY GUZZET 95672 1,181.42 CREST VIEW CORPORATION 95673 385.37 CSC CREDIT SERVICES 95674 25.00 DALCO ROOFING & SHEET ME 95675 250.00 D~2f~A 95676 27.00 DAVIES-NORTHERN WATER WK 95677 152.34 DELEGARD TOOL CO. 95678 4.77 DEMCO 95679 62.92 DINSMORE CLEANER 95680 139.60 DOYLE LOCK SUPPLY 95681 11.04 E L REIN}{ARDT COMPANY IN 95682 48.55 EAGLE WINE COMPANY 95683 498.85 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE CO 95684 976.60 ECONO-CLAD BOOKS 95685 73.87 EMP 95686 145.05 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS INC 95687 79.02 FIDELITY SERVICES INC 95688 4,590.49 FIRST CALL FOR HELP 95689 22.00 FLEX COMPENSATION, INC 95690 157.50 FOCUS NEWSPAPERS 95691 519.48 FRIDLEY-COLU~IA HEIGHTS 95692 500.00 G & K SERVICES 95693 619.45 GALE GROUP/THE 95694 1,195.00 GALLAGHER & COMPANY OF M 95695 2,719.00 GENUINE PARTS/NAPA AUTO 95696 274.80 GRIGGS-COOPER & CO 95697 839.02 GROSSE/PAUL 95698 46.79 H & L MES~I 95699 687.89 ~ INC 95700 5,654.50 }{ACH COMP;~Y 95701 831.64 HAPPEL DBA PLANSIGHT/JER 95702 13,145.38 HARVEST INTERIORS 95703 728.50 HASSAN SAND & GRAVEL 95704 1,039.41 HEIGHTS ELECTRIC INC. 95705 458.25 HOHENSTEINS INC 95706 204.55 HOME DEPOT #2802 95707 217.46 HOSPITkLITY SUPPLY COMPA 95708 19.85 HOUCHEN BINDERY LTD 95709 94.65 IKON OFFICE SOLUTION 95710 121.43 INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST 95711 1,000.00 BRC FINAMCIAL SYSTEM 12/13/2001 15 Check History 12/17 COUNCIL CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS GL540R-V06.27 PAGE 6 BANK VENDOR CHECK NUMBER AMOUNT BANK CHECKING ACCOUNT INSTRUMENTAL RESEARCH IN 95712 115,00 INTEGRATED LOSS CONTROL 95713 602.00 IPC PRINTING 95714 325.07 J H LARSON ELECTRIC COMP 95715 309.08 JINDRA/PATRICIA 95716 70,00 JOSTEN YEARBOOK PROCESSI 95717 25.03 KMART 95718 118,96 KATH FUEL OIL SERVICE 95719 44.63 KEEP INC/THE 95720 73.89 KIWANIS CLUB 95721 35.00 LITERACY VOLUNTEERS OF A 95722 136.15 LITTLE FALLS MACHINE INC 95723 553.21 LYLE SIGNS INC 95724 153.15 MAC QUEEN EQUIPMENT CO. 95725 825.14 MARQUIS ~O'S WHO 95726 564.38 MARTIN-MCALLISTER 95727 300.00 MAUMA 95728 30.00 MCI WORLDCOM COMM SERVIC 95729 6.02 MC~'S LAMP RECYCLING 95730 624.40 MEDTOX LABORATORIES, INC 95731 28.50 MENARDS CASHWAY LUMBER-F 95732 416.70 MERIT RECOGNITION 95733 10,25 METRO CHIEFS OFFICER FIR 95734 100.00 METROCALL - ATT MESSAGIN 95735 14.14 MID AMERICA METER INC 95736 210.35 MIDWAY FORD 95737 161.99 MIDWEST ASPHALT CO, 95738 1,331.68 MIDWEST TAPE 95739 299.82 MILLAR ELEVATOR SERVICE 95740 128.28 MINITEX - AT?N MARY GARC 95741 399.00 MN COMM PAGING 95742 7.88 MN DEPT OF ~DMINISTRATIO 95743 37.00 MN SOCIETY OF ARBORICULT 95744 20.00 MN UTILITY CONTRACTORS A 95745 300.00 MORRELL & MORRELL INC 95746 663.00 MTI DISTRIBUTING 95747 173.88 NATOA 95748 460.00 NETWORK ASSOCIATES 95749 874.42 NEWQUIST & EKSTRUM, CHAR 95750 80.00 NORTH CENTRAL AMBULANCE 95751 33.00 NORTHERN TOOL & EQUIPMEN 95752 122,45 NORTHLAND ELECTRIC S~PL 95753 97.11 O'GARA/ANDREW 95754 50.00 OFFICE DEPOT 95755 557.34 OLSON'S PLUMBING 95756 6,057.90 ONE-CALL CONCEPT-GOPHER 95757 164.30 ONVOY 95758 51,02 BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 12/13/2001 15 BANK VENDOR Check History 12/17 COUNCIL CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS GL540R-V06.27 PAGE 7 CHECK NUMBER AMOUNT BANK CHECKING ACCOUNT OSI ENVIROMENTAL 95759 525.00 PARKVIEW VILLA RESIDENT 95760 951.25 PC SOLUTIONS 95761 7,539.90 PEPSI-COLA-7 UP 95762 105.00 PERSONNEL DECISIONS INC 95763 2,434.61 PETTY CASH - REBECCA LOA 95764 20.21 PIONEER PRESS 95765 26.00 PLUNKETT'S, INC 95766 73.71 RADIO SHACK 95767 10.64 RAILCRAFTUSA INC 95768 1,452.06 RAPID GRAPHICS & MAILING 95769 91.06 RAPIT PRINTING - FRIDLEY 95770 67.98 ROSEDALE CHEV 95771 143.33 RUETTIMANN/ROBERT 95772 35.00 RUPFRIDGE-JOHNSON EQUIP. 95773 154.19 RYAN PLUMBING & HEATING 95774 142.50 SCHELEN GRAY ELECTRIC 95775 82.28 SCHINDLER ELEVATOR CORP 95776 186.48 SHINY METALS INC 95777 104.37 SIGNS BY TOMMORROW 95778 110.00 STANWAY EXCAVATING 95779 340.80 STAR TRIBUNE 95780 112.58 STREICHER'S GUN'S INC/DO 95781 3,142.39 SUBURBAN LAWN CENTER INC 95782 51.06 SUN PUBLICATION 95783 198.00 SblqRAM CONSTRUCTION INC 95784 83,770.87 SYSTEMS SUPPLY INC. 95785 259.82 TARGET STORES-ACCTS REC 95786 8.51 TASER INTERNATIONAL 95787 195.00 TECHIFAX BUSINESS SYSTEM 95788 10.00 TELEPHONE ANSWERING CENT 95789 151.70 TKDA 95790 499.93 TRANS-AI~2~M INC 95791 261.76 TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO 95792 104.17 TWIN CITY TRANSPORT & RE 95793 72.42 U S POSTAL SERVICE 95794 125.00 UNITED RENTALS 95795 121.05 URS BRW INC 95796 32,531.64 US FILTER/WATER PRO 95797 782.72 VALLEN SkFETY SUPPLY COM 95798 75.54 VAN-O-LITE 95799 175.24 VECTOR INTERNET SERVICES 95800 150.00 VERIZON WIRELESS 95801 606.69 VIKING INDUSTRIAL CENTER 95802 64.00 VOSS LIGHTING 95803 94.25 WALL STREET JOURNAL/THE 95804 99.00 WATSON APPRAISAL 95805 1,800.00 BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 12/13/2001 15 Check History 12/17 COUNCIL CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS GL540R-V06.27 PAGE 8 BANK VENDOR CHECK NUMBER AMOUNT BANK CHECKING ACCOUNT WILLAMETTE INDUSTRIES IN 95806 600.51 WW GRAINGER 95807 130.50 XPECT FIRST AID 95808 106.55 ZAHL EQUIPMENT 95809 42.94 3,204,297.38 *** CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of December 17~ 2001 AGENDA '~u_[,l ia I'~.a,; ~-q ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER SECTION:'~ Fire APPROVAL NO: Rental License Revocation DATE: Decmeber 11, 2001 DATE: NO: The matter of the revocation of the license to operate a rental unit(s) within the City of Columbia Heights against Karolyn Eriekson regarding rental property at 4544-4546 Fillmore Street N.E. for failure to meet the requirements of the Residential Maintenance Codes was previously scheduled to commence at the City Council meeting of December 17, 2001. The public hearing on this property may now be closed in that the owner has brought the property/building into compliance with the Residential Maintenance Code. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to Close the Public Hearing Regarding the Revocation or Suspension of the Rental License Held by Karolyn Erickson Regarding Rental Property at 4544-4546 Fillmore Street N.E. in that the Property complies with the Residential Maintenance Code. COUNCIL ACTION: Close Hearing Council Letter CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of December 17, 2001 AGENDA ~jol ;c_. ~\ ec~.¥;~-,_.~ ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER SECTION: Fire APPROVAL NO: ~t> ~ Rental License Revocation DATE: December 10, 2001 DATE: NO: The matter of the revocation of the license to operate a rental unit(s) within the City of Columbia Heights against Mike Hyska regarding rental property at 1035-1037 43-1/2 Avenue for failure to meet the requirements of the Residential Maintenance Codes was previously scheduled to commence at the City Council meeting of December 17, 2001. The public hearing on this property may now be closed in that the owner has brought the property/building into compliance with the Residential Maintenance Code. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to Close the Public Hearing Regarding the Revocation or Suspension of the Rental License Held by Mike Hyska Regarding Rental Property at 1035-1037 43-1/2 Avenue in that the Property complies with the Residential Maintenance Code. COUNCIL ACTION: Close Hearing Council Letter CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of December 17, 2001 AGENDA SECTION: Resolutions/Ordinances ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER Fire APPROVAL ITEM: Adopt Resolution For Revocation BY: Dana Alexon BY: y/~~ 2001- ~, h' DATE: December 10, 2001 DATE: NO: Revocation of the license to operate a rental unit within the City of Columbia Heights is requested against David Jacobs (Conservator for Susan Loewenthal) regarding rental property at 1206-1208 Circle Terrace Blvd. for failure to meet the requirements of the Residential Maintenance Codes. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to waive the reading of Resolution No.2001-$5", there being ample copies available to the public. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to adopt Resolution No. 2001- 8 .fi, Resolution of the City Council of the City of Columbia Heights Approving Revocation Pursuant to Ordinance Code Section 5A.408(1) of the Rental License held by David Jacobs (Conservator for Susan Loewenthal) Regarding Rental Property at 1206-1208 Circle Terrace Blvd. COUNCIL ACTION: RESOLUTION 2001-~ 5-- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS APPROVING REVOCATION PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE CODE SECTION 5A.408(1) OF THAT CERTAIN RESIDENTIAL RENTAL LICENSE HELD BY DAVID JACOBS (CONSERVATOR FOR SUSAN LOEWENTHAL) (HEREINAFTER "LICENSE HOLDER"). WHEREAS, LICENSE HOLDER IS THE LEGAL OWNER OF THE REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1206-1208 CIRCLE TERRACE BLVD, COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA. AND WHEREAS, PURSUANT TO COLUMBIA HEIGHTS CODE SECTION 5.104(1)(A), WRITTEN NOTICE SETTING FORTH THE CAUSES AND REASONS FOR THE PROPOSED COUNCIL ACTION CONTAINED HEREIN WAS GIVEN TO THE LICENSE HOLDER ON NOVEMBER 13, 2001 OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO BE HELD ON DECEMBER 17, 2001. NOW, THEREFORE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOREGOING, AND ALL ORDINANCES AND REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS MAKES THE FOLLOWING: FINDINGS OF FACT That on June 28, 2001, Rich Hindchs, inspector for the City of Columbia Heights, inspected the property and noted three violations. Compliance orders listing the violations were mailed by regular mail to the owner at the address listed on the Rental Housing License Application. That on August 29, 2001, Dana Alexon, Housing Code Enforcement Official for the City of Columbia Heights, granted the license holder an extension of time to complete the repairs. That on October 11, 2001, Gary Gorman and John Larkin, inspectors for the City of Columbia Heights, reinspected the property and noted that three violations remained not corrected. Compliance orders listing the violations were mailed by regular mail to the owner of the property at the address listed on the rental housing license application. That on November 13, 2001, Gary Gorman and John Larkin, inspectors for the City of Columbia Heights, reinspected the property and noted that the two violations remained uncorrected. Compliance orders listing the violations were mailed by regular mail to the owner at the property at the address listed on the Rental Housing License Application and copies were sent to the tenants. o That on November 28, 2001, Gary Gorman and John Larkin, inspectors for the City of Columbia Heights, reinspected the property and noted that the two violations remained uncorrected. Compliance orders listing the violations were mailed by certified mail to the owner at the property at the address listed on the Rental Housing License Application. That based upon said records of the Enforcement Officer, the following conditions and violations of the City's Residential Maintenance Code were found to exist, to- wit: FAILURE TO CORRECT VIOLATION OF THE RESIDENTIAL MAINTENANCE CODE Shall repair entrance gate door that is broken. Shall replace missing, shall repair broken boards on wall in back yard (they should also be painted to match). B. FAILURE TO SUBMIT REINSPECTION FEES OF $100.00 o That all parties, including the License Holder and any occupants or tenants, have been given the appropriate notice of this hearing according to the provisions of the City Code Section 5A.306(1) and 5A.303(1)(d). CONCLUSIONS OF COUNCIL That the building located at 1206-1208 Circle Terrace Blvd. is in violation of the provisions of the Columbia Heights City Code as set forth in the Compliance Order attached hereto, That all relevant parties and parties in interest have been duly served notice of this hearing, and any other hearings relevant to the revocation or suspension of the license held by License Holder. That all applicable fights and periods of appeal as relating to the license holder, owner, occupant, or tenant, as the case may be, have expired, or such rights have been exercised and completed. ORDER OF COUNCIL The rental license belonging to the License Holder described herein and identified by license number F4871 is hereby revoked/suspended (cross out one); ° The City will post for the purpose of preventing occupancy a copy of this order on the buildings covered by the license held by License Holder; All tenants shall remove themselves from the premises within 60 days from the first day of posting of this Order revoking the license as held by License Holder. PASSED THIS DAY OF ,2001 MOTION BY: SECOND BY: ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: NAYS: ATTEST: CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA PATTY MUSCOVITZ DEPUTY CITY CLERK GARY PETERSON MAYOR REVISIONS TO 12-17-2001 AGENDA Item #6D Rental License Revocation 4040-4042 Cleveland St. - close hearing/property in compliance Item #6E Rental License Revocation 4616 Tyler Street - close hearing/property in compliance REVISED CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of December 17, 2001 AGENDA Public Hearings ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER SECTION: Fire APPROVAL 6D NO: ITEM: Close Hearing BY: Dana Alexon BY: Rental License Revocation DATE: December 17, 2001 DATE: NO: UPDATED The matter of the revocation of the license to operate a rental unit(s) within the City of Columbia Heights against David Jacobs (Conservator for Susan Loewenthal's estate) regarding rental property at 4040-42 Cleveland Street for failure to meet the requirements of the Residential Maintenance Code was scheduled to commence at the City Council meeting of December 17, 2001. The public heating on this property may now be closed in that the owner has brought the property/building into substantial (but not complete) compliance with the Residential Maintenance Code. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to Close the Public Hearing Regarding the Revocation or Suspension of the Rental License Held by David Jacobs (Conservator for Susan Loeweuthal's estate) Regarding Rental Property at 4040-42 Cleveland Street in that the Property is in Substantial Compliance with the Residential Maintenance Code. COUNCIL ACTION: REVISED CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of December 17, 2001 AGENDA ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER SECTION: Fire APPROVAL 6E NO: ITEM: Close Hearing BY: Dana Alexon BY: Rental License Revocation DATE: December 17, 2001 DATE: NO: UPDATE The matter of the revocation of the license to operate a rental unit(s) within the City of Columbia Heights against Syed Raza regarding rental property at 4616 Tyler Street NE for failure to meet the requirements of the Residential Maintenance Codes was previously scheduled to commence at the City Council meeting of December 17, 2001. The public hearing on this property may now be closed in that the owner has brought the property/building into compliance with the Residential Maintenance Code. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to Close the Public Heating Regarding the Revocation or Suspension of the Rental License Held by Syed Raza Regarding Rental Property at 4616 Tyler Street NE in that the Property complies with the Residential Maintenance Code. COUNCIL ACTION: CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of December 17, 2001 AGENDA SECTION: Resolutions/Ordinances ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER NO: ~ ~ Fire APPROVAL ITEM: Adopt Resolution For Revocation BY: Dana Alexon BY: ~/~ 2001-~& DATE: December 11, 2001 DATE: NO: This matter, initially brought in front of the City Council at the November 26, 2001 regular meeting, the Housing Maintenance Code Official is recommending the revocation of the license to operate a rental unit within the City of Columbia Heights against David Jacobs (Conservator for Susan Loewenthal) regarding rental property at 4040-4042 Cleveland Street for failure to meet the requirements of the Residential Maintenance Codes. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to waive the reading of Resolution No.2001- g~, there being ample copies available to the public. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to adopt Resolution No. 2001- $~ , Resolution of the City Council of the City of Columbia Heights Approving Revocation Pursuant to Ordinance Code Section 5A.408(1) of the Rental License held by David Jacobs Regarding Rental Property at 4040-4042 Cleveland Street. COUNCIL ACTION: RESOLUTION 2001 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS APPROVING REVOCATION PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE CODE SECTION 5A.408(1) OF THAT CERTAIN RESIDENTIAL RENTAL LICENSE HELD BY DAVID JACOBS (CONSERVATOR FOR SUSAN LOEWENTHAL) (HEREINAFTER "LICENSE HOLDER"). WHEREAS, LICENSE HOLDER IS THE LEGAL OWNER OF THE REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 40404042 CLEVELAND STREET, COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA, AND WHEREAS, PURSUANT TO COLUMBIA HEIGHTS CODE SECTION 5.104(1)(A), WRITTEN NOTICE SETTING FORTH THE CAUSES AND REASONS FOR THE PROPOSED COUNCIL ACTION CONTAINED HEREIN WAS GIVEN TO THE LICENSE HOLDER ON SEPTEMBER 19, 2001 OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 13, 2001. NOW, THEREFORE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOREGOING, AND ALL ORDINANCES AND REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OF cOLUMBIA HEIGHTS, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS MAKES THE FOLLOWING: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. That on May 4, 2000, Steve Kolosky and Dan O'Brien, inspectors for the City of Columbia Heights, were at the property on a reinspection and noted one violation. Compliance orders listing the violations were mailed by regular mail to the owner at the address listed on the Rental Housing License Application. 2. That on June 27, 2000, Steve Kolosky and Dan O'Brien, inspectors for the City of Columbia Heights, reinspected the property and noted that the one violation remained uncorrected. Compliance orders listing the violations was mailed by regular mail to the owner at the address listed on the Rental Housing License Application. 3. That on August 21, 2000, Steve Kolosky and Dan O'Brien, inspectors for the City of Columbia Heights, reinspected the property and noted that the one violation remained uncorrected. Compliance orders listing the violations and a letter advising of the City Council action and revocation hearing was mailed by regular mail to the owner at the property at the address listed on the Rental Housing License Application and copies of the notices were mailed by certified mail to the tenants. 4. That on September 7, 2000, Steve Kolosky and Dan O'Brien, inspectors for the City of Columbia Heights, reinspected the property and noted that the one violation remained uncorrected. Compliance orders listing the violations and a letter advising of the City Council action and revocation hearing was mailed by certified mail to the owner at the property at the address listed on the Rental Housing License Application. 5. That on October 2, 2000, Dana Alexon, Housing Enforcement Officer for the City of Columbia Heights, granted an extension to the operators of the rental property to correct the noted one violation that remained uncorrected. A letter listing the next reinspection date was mailed by regular mail to the owner at the address listed on the Rental Housing License Application. 6. That on September 19, 2001, Steve Kolosky and Dan O'Brien, inspectors for the City of Columbia Heights, reinspected the property and noted that the one violation remained uncorrected. Compliance orders listing the violations and a letter advising of the City Council action and revocation hearing was mailed by regular mail to the owner at the property at the address listed on the Rental Housing License Application and copies of the notices were mailed by certified mail to the tenants. 7. That on October 31, 2001, Steve Kolosky and Dan O'Brien, inspectors for the City of Columbia Heights, reinspected the property and noted that the one violation remained uncorrected. Compliance orders listing the violations and a letter advising of the City Council action and revocation hearing was mailed by certified mail to the owner at the property at the address listed on the Rental Housing License Application. 8. That on November 6, 2001, Steve Kolosky, inspector for the City of Columbia Heights, reinspected the property and noted that the one violation remained uncorrected. Compliance orders listing the violations and a letter advising of the City Council action and revocation hearing was mailed by certified mail to the owner at the property at the address listed on the Rental Housing License Application. 9. That based upon said records of the Enforcement Officer, the following conditions and violations of the City's Residential Maintenance Code were found to exist, to-wit: Ae Be FAILURE TO CORRECT VIOLATION OF THE RESIDENTIAL MAINTENANCE CODE (Violations listed below) Shall scrape/paint soffit on house FAILURE TO SUBMIT REINSPECTION FEES OF $250.00 10. That all parties, including the License Holder and any occupants or tenants, have been given the appropriate notice of this hearing according to the provisions of the City Code Section 5A.306(1) and 5A.303(1)(d). CONCLUSIONS OF COUNCIL 1. That the building located at 4040-40402 Cleveland Street is in violation of the provisions of the Columbia Heights City Code as set forth in the Compliance Order attached hereto, 2. That all relevant parties and parties in interest have been duly served notice of this hearing, and any other hearings relevant to the revocation or suspension of the license held by License Holder. 3. That all applicable rights and periods of appeal as relating to the license holder, owner, occupant, or tenant, as the case may be, have expired, or such rights have been exercised and completed. ORDER OF COUNCIL 1. The rental license belonging to the License Holder described herein and identified by license number F4871A is hereby revoked/suspended (cross out one); 2. The City will post for the purpose of preventing occupancy a copy of this order on the buildings covered by the license held by License Holder; 3. All tenants shall remove themselves from the premises within 60 days from the first day of posting of this Order revoking the license as held by License Holder. PASSED THIS DAY OF ,2001 MOTION BY: SECOND BY: ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: NAYS: CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA ATTEST: PATTY MUSCOVITZ DEPUTY CITY CLERK GARY PETERSON MAYOR CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of December 17, 2001 AGENDA SECTION: Resolutions/Ordinances ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER NO: ~ ~ Fire APPROVAL ITEM: Adopt Resolution For BY: Dana Alexon BY: .~,~'/~ Revocation DATE: December 11, 2001 DATE: NO: 2001- 8-1 This rental license revocation heating was initially brought in front of the City Council at the November 26, 2001 regular meeting. The Housing Maintenance Code Official is recommending the revocation of the license to operate a rental unit within the City of Columbia Heights be requested against Syed Raza 0LA.M. Inc.) regarding rental property at 4616 Tyler Street for failure to meet the requirements of the Residential Maintenance Codes. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to waive the reading of Resolution No.2001-<~-1 there being ample copies available to the public. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to adopt Resolution No. 2001-% D Resolution of the City Council of the City of Columbia Heights Approving Revocation Pursuant to Ordinance Code Section 5A.408(1) of the Rental License held by Syed Raza Regarding Rental Property at 4616 Tyler Street. COUNCIL ACTION: RESOLUTION 2001-~ '~ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS APPROVING REVOCATION PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE CODE SECTION 5A.408(1) OF THAT CERTAIN RESIDENTIAL RENTAL LICENSE HELD BY SYED RAZA/Y.A.M. INC. (HEREINAFTER "LICENSE HOLDER"). WHEREAS, LICENSE HOLDER IS THE LEGAL OWNER OF THE REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4616 TYLER STREET, COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA, AND WHEREAS, PURSUANT TO COLUMBIA HEIGHTS CODE SECTION 5.104(1)(A), WRITTEN NOTICE SETTING FORTH THE CAUSES AND REASONS FOR THE PROPOSED COUNCIL ACTION CONTAINED HEREIN WAS GIVEN TO THE LICENSE HOLDER ON OCTOBER 18, 2001 OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 26, 2001. NOW, THEREFORE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOREGOING, AND ALL ORDINANCES AND REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS MAKES THE FOLLOWING: FINDINGS OF FACT That during a period from February 3, 2000 to September 10, 2001 sixteen reinspections regarding various compliance orders were performed at the property address listed above. As of October 18, 2001 none of the reinspection fees had been paid. That on October 18, 2001, Dana Alexon, Housing Enforcement Officer for the City of Columbia Heights, sent a notice detailing the list of delinquent reinspection fees by regular mail to the owner of the property at the address listed on the Rental Housing License Application. That on November 6, 2001, Dana Alexon, Housing Enforcement Officer for the City of Columbia Heights, sent a statement of cause notice by certified mail to the owner of the property at the address listed on the Rental Housing License Application. That based upon said records of the Enforcement Officer, the following conditions and violations of the City's Housing Maintenance Code were found to exist, to-wit: A. FAILURE TO SUBMIT A REINSPECTION FEE OF $1,120.00 o That all parties, including the License Holder and any occupants or tenants, have been given the appropriate notice of this hearing according to the provisions of the City Code Section 5A.306(1) and 5A.303(1)(d). CONCLUSIONS OF COUNCIL That the building located at 4616 Tyler Street is in violation of the provisions of the Columbia Heights City Code as set forth in the Compliance Order attached hereto; That all relevant parties and parties in interest have been duly served notice of this hearing, and any other hearings relevant to the revocation or suspension of the license held by License Holder. o That all applicable rights and periods of appeal as relating to the license holder, owner, occupant, or tenant, as the case may be, have expired, or such rights have been exercised and completed. ORDER OF COUNCIL The rental license belonging to the License Holder described herein and identified by license number F5037 is hereby revoked/suspended (cross out one); The City will post for the purpose of preventing occupancy a copy of this order on the buildings covered by the license held by License Holder; All tenants shall remove themselves from the premises within 60 days from the first day of posting of this Order revoking the license as held by License Holder. PASSED THIS DAY OF , 2001 MOTION BY: SECOND BY: ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: NAYS: ATTEST: CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA PATTY MUSCOVITZ CITY COUNCIL SECRETARY GARY PETERSON MAYOR CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of December 17, 2001 AGENDA ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER SECTION: Fire APPROVAL NO: ITEM: Close Hearing BY: Dana Alexon BY: Rental License Revocation DATE: Decmeber 11, 2001 DATE: NO: The matter of the revocation of the license to operate a rental unit(s) within the City of Columbia Heights against Karolyn Erickson regarding rental property at 4544-4546 Fillmore Street N.E. for failure to meet the requirements of the Residential Maintenance Codes was previously scheduled to commence at the City Council meeting of December 17, 2001. The public hearing on this property may now be closed in that the owner has brought the property/building into compliance with the Residential Maintenance Code. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to Close the Public Hearing Regarding the Revocation or Suspension of the Rental License Held by Karolyn Erickson Regarding Rental Property at 4544-4546 Fillmore Street N.E. in that the Property complies with the Residential Maintenance Code. COUNCIL ACTION: Close Hearing Council Letter COLUMBIA HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: December 17, 2001 AGENDA SECTION: Public Hearing ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER'S NO: l.a - ~' Community Development APPROVAL ITEM: Resolution 2001-72, Modification of BY: MarkNagel~) BY:~~-'~/~ TIF District No. 1 DATE: December 13, 2001 BACKGROUND: On May 27, 1997, the Columbia Heights City Council approved a scattered site redevelopment TIF District to facilitate redevelopment of substandard single-family homes throughout the City in order to improve the City's housing stock, increase property values, and prevent the spread of blight. Tax increments from the 56 properties listed in the District were to be used to finance land acquisition, demolition, relocation, and related development costs. During a meeting August 7th with Shelly Eldridge, Ehlers and Associates, reviewing progress in TIF District 1 and 2, it was determined that the City needs to show activity and any modifications need to be completed on each of the 56 parcels in the District by September 8, 2002, or they will be dropped from the District. This would reduce the potential TIF revenue generated for the above purposes. Finally, all projected funds generated by the District need to be obligated by that date. Based on discussions with the Consultant and further analysis of Housing Redevelopment TIF District No. 1, the following steps have been taken: 1) add 10 parcels to the District to increase the revenue stream; 2) Ehlers and Associates complete a projection of funds that could be expended, then recovered over the remaining 21 years of the District based on the new TIF laws; 3) expend the projected funds for the purposes listed above within the District prior to the September 8, 2002 deadline; 4) any City funds that have been spent in the past 4 years on the 56 parcels, such as 4401 Quincy Street NE, will be reimbursed by the District and spent on other housing activities within the District. All of the necessary documentation was prepared after the EDA gave the "go ahead" at their September meeting and City Council set the Public Heating at their meeting of October 8th. On December 4th, Planning Commission passed a Resolution finding the Modified Plans were in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. The EDA was to consider a Resolution approving these Modified Plans prior to their Public Heating. Fiscal Consultant, Shelly Eldridge, Ehlers and Associates will be at the meeting to assist staff in answering any questions from the City Council and/or public. RECOMMENDATION: Recommendation to Adopt Resolution 2001-72, a resolution for the proposed modification of Housing Redevelopment of TIF District No. 1. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to close the Public Hearing. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to waive the reading of Resolution 2001-72, there being ample copies available to the public. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to Adopt Resolution 2001-72, a resolution modifying the Downtown Central Business District (CBD) Revitalization Plan for the CBD Redevelopment Project and the proposed modification of Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1, therein and the adoption of the modified plans therefore. Attachments :\TIF2001\ TIF #1 Modification CL 12-17-2001 RESOLUTION NO. 2001-72 RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MODIFICATION TO THE DOWNTOWN CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT (CBD) REVITALIZATION PLAN FOR CBD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AND ADOPTING THE MODIFIED PLAN FOR HOUSING REDEVELOPMENT TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1 THEREIN. BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota (the "City"), as follows: Section 1. Recitals. 1.01. The Board of Commissioners (the "Board") of the City of Columbia Heights Economic Development Authority (the "EDA") has heretofore established the Central Business District (CBD) Redevelopment Project and adopted the Downtown CBD Revitalization Plan therefor and established Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 and adopted the Tax Increment Financing Plan therefor. It has been proposed that the City adopt a Modification to the Downtown CBD Revitalization Plan (the "Downtown CBD Revitalization Plan Modification") for the CBD Redevelopment Project and adopt a Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "Tax Increment Financing Plan Modification" or together with the Downtown CBD Revitalization Plan Modification, the "Modifications") for Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 (the "District "), all pursuant to and in conformity with applicable law, including Minnesota Statutes, 469.090 through 469.1082, and Sections 469.174 to 469.179, inclusive as amended (the "Act"), all as reflected in the Modifications, and presented for the Council's consideration. 1.02. The Council has investigated the facts related to the Modifications and has caused the Modifications to be prepared. 1.03. The EDA and City have performed all actions required by law to be performed prior to the adoption and approval of the proposed Modifications, including, but not limited to, notification of Anoka County and Independent School District No. 13 having taxing jurisdiction over the property included in the District, a review of and written comment on the Modified Plans by the City Planning Commission, and the holding of a public hearing upon published notice as required by law. 1.04. Certain written reports (the "Reports") relating to the Modified Plans and to the activities contemplated therein have heretofore been prepared by staff and made a part of the City and EDA files and proceedings on the Modified Plans. The Reports include data, information and/or substantiation constituting or relating to the bases for the other findings and determinations made in this resolution. The Council hereby confirms, ratifies and adopts the Reports, which are hereby incorporated into and made as fully a part of this resolution to the same extent as if set forth in full herein. 1.05. The City is not modifying the boundaries of the CBD Redevelopment Project. 1.06. The City is not modifying the term of the District. Section 2. Findings for the Approval of the Modifications 2.01. The Council hereby finds that the Modified Plans, are intended and, in the judgment of this Council, the effect of such actions will be, to provide an impetus for development in the public purpose and accomplish certain objectives as specified in the Modified Plans, which are hereby incorporated herein. Section 3. Findings for the Tax Increment Plan Modification 3.01. The Council hereby reaffirms the original findings for the District, namely that the when the District was established, it was established as a "redevelopment district" under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subd. 10 (a)(1). 3.02. The Tax Increment Plan Modification conforms to the general plan for development or redevelopment of the City as a whole. The reason for supporting this finding is that the Tax Increment Plan Modification will generally complement and serve to implement policies adopted in the City's comprehensive plan. 3.03. The Tax Increment Plan Modification will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development or redevelopment of the CBD Redevelopment Project by private enterprise. The reason for supporting this finding is that the development activities are necessary so that development and redevelopment by private enterprise can occur within the CBD Redevelopment Project. 3.04. The development and redevelopment efforts, in the opinion of the City, would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and therefore, the use if tax increment financing is deemed necessary. 3.05. The City of Columbia Heights elects to continue to calculate fiscal disparities for the District in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.177, subdivision 3, clause a, which means the fiscal disparities contribution would be taken from outside the District. Section 4. Public Purpose 4.01. The adoption of the Modifications conform in all respects to the requirements of the Act and will help fulfill a need to develop an area of the State which is already built up, to improve the tax base and to improve the general economy of the State and thereby serves a public purpose. Section 5. Approval and Adoption of the Modifications; Filing. 5.01. The Modifications, as presented to the Council on this date, including without limitation the findings and statements of objectives contained therein, are hereby approved, ratified, established, and adopted and shall be placed on file in the office of the Deputy Clerk. Approval of the Modifications does not constitute approval of any project or a development agreement with any developer. 5.02. The staffofthe City, the City's advisors and legal counsel are authorized and directed to proceed with the implementation of the Modifications and to negotiate, draft, prepare and present to this Council for its consideration all further plans, resolutions, documents and contracts necessary for this purpose. 5.03 The Auditor of-Anoka County is requested to certify the original net tax capacity of the expansion parcels, as described in the Modifications, and to certify in each year thereafter the amount by which the original net tax capacity has increased or decreased; and the City of Columbia Heights is authorized and directed to forthwith transmit this request to the County Auditor in such form and content as the Auditor may specify, together with a list of all properties within the District, for which building permits have been issued during the 18 months immediately preceding the adoption of this resolution. 5.04. The Deputy Clerk is further authorized and directed to file a copy of the Modified Plans with the Commissioner of Revenue. Dated: December 17, 2001 Passed this __ day of December 2001 Offered by: Second by: Roll Call: Attest: Mayor Gary L. Peterson Mayor Patricia Muscovitz, Deputy City Clerk (Seal) EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2001-72 The reasons and facts supporting the findings for the adoption of the Modified Plan for Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1, as required pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subdivision 3 are as follows: 1. Finding that Modified Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 is a redevelopment district as defined in M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. lO(afrO. The expansion of the District consists of 10 parcels, with plans for redevelopment of the housing stock in the area. The expansion to the district is a scattered site expansion and each parcel in the expansion is occupied by buildings, utilities, or other improvements of greater than 15percent and more than 50 percent of the buildings on each parcel in the expansion of the district, not including outbuildings, are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance (See Appendix D of the TIF plan). Finding that the proposed development, in the opinion of the City Council, would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and that the increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase in the market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 permitted by the Plan. The proposed development, in the opinion of the City, would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future: This finding is supported by the fact that the redevelopment proposed in this plan meets the City's objectives for redevelopment. Due to the high cost of acquisition and redevelopment on the parcels currently occupied by substandard buildings, the limited amount of residential property for expansion adjacent to the existing properties, and the cost of financing the proposed improvements, this project is feasible only through assistance, in part, from tax increment financing. The increased market value of the properties that could reasonable be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase in market value estimated to result from the proposed redevelopment after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of the TIF District permitted by the Plan: The City supported this finding on the grounds that the cost of site acquisition and site improvements add to the total redevelopment cost. Historically, acquisition and site improvement costs in this area have made redevelopment infeasible without tax increment assistance. The City reasonably determines that no other redevelopment of similar scope is anticipated on these properties without substantially similar assistance being provided for redevelopment. A comparative analysis of estimated market values both with and without the inclusion of the additional parcels within the District and the use of tax increments has been performed as described above. If all development which is proposed, with respect to the expansion parcels, to be assisted with tax increment were to occur in the District, the total increase in market value would be up to $1,620,000. The present value of tax increments from the expansion parcels within the District is estimated to be $144,674. It is the Council's finding that no development with a market value of greater than $819,126 would occur without tax increment assistance in this district within 19 years. This finding is based upon evidence from general past experience with the high cost of acquisition and site improvements in the general area of the District (see Cashflow in Appendix C of the TIF Plan). Finding that the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 conforms to the general plan for the development or redevelopment of the municipality as a whole. The Planning Commission reviewed the Plan and found that the Plan conforms to the general development plan of the City. Finding that the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development or redevelopment of CBD Redevelopment Project by private enterprise. The project to be assisted by the District will result in the renovation of substandard properties, increased tax base of the State and add a high quality development to the City. Through the implementation of the Plan, the City will increase the availability of safe and decent life-cycle housing in the City. SCHEDULE OF EVENTS COLUMBIA HEIGHTS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS FOR THE MODIFICATION OF THE DOWNTOWN CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT (CBD) REVITALIZATION PLAN FOR THE CBD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AND THE MODIFICATION OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR HOUSING REDEVELOPMENT TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1 (a redevelopment district) As of October 3L 2001 October 8,2001 City Council calls for public hearing on the modification to the Downtown CBD Revitalization Plan for the CBD Redevelopment Project and the modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1. October 30, 2001 Project information, property, identification numbers, and maps sent to Ehlers and Associates for drafting documentation. November 2, 2001 Project information submitted to the County Board for review of county road impacts (at least 45 days prior to public hearing). November 6, 2001 Letter received by County Commissioner giving notice of potential redevelopment tax increment financing district (at least 30 days prior to publication of public hearing notice). November 16, 2001 Fiscal/economic implications received by School District and County Board (at least 30 days prior to public hearing). November 20, 2001 EDA approves the Modified Plans. November 20, 2001 Ehlers confirms with the City whether building permits have been issued on the property to be included in the TIF District. December 4, 2001 Planning Commission finds Modified Plans to be in compliance with Ci.ty's comprehensive plan. December 6, 2001 Date of publication of hearing notice and map (at least 10 days but not more than 30 days prior to hearing). [Focus News publication deadline Friday, November so, 2oo:] December 17, 2001 City Council holds public hearing on the modification to the Downtown CBD Revitalization Plan for the CBD Redevelopment Project and the modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1, and passes resolution approving the Modified Plans. [Council packet information sent by December 3, 2001.] January 3 I, 2002 Ehlers certifies Modified Plans with county and state. *The TIF Plan was forwarded to the County 45 days prior to the public hearing. The County Board, by law, has 45 days to review the plan to determine if any county roads will be impacted by the development. Please be aware that the County Board could claim that tax increment should be used for county roads, even after the public hearing. OEHLERS EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC November 7, 2001 BY FAX AND BY REGULAR MAIL Commissioner Jim Kordiak, Board Vice-Chair Anoka County Board of Commissioners 2100 3~ Avenue Anoka, MN 55303-2265 Re: City of Columbia Heights/Columbia Heights EDA and the Proposed Modification of Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 Dear Commissioner Kordiak: The City of Columbia Heights and the Columbia Heights Economic Development Authority CEDA") are considering a proposal to modify Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 (the "District"). The District is a scattered-site redevelopment tax kicrement financing district. Tax increments collected from the District are proposed to be used to facilitate demolition of blighted property and the construction of single family homes. The location of the District is within the Downtown Central Business District and is indicated on the attached maps. The City Council has scheduled a public hearing on this matter, pursuant to the bIinnesota Tax Increment Financing Act, on December 17, 2001, at approximately 7:00 P.M. The Act requires the City notify the County Board member representing the affected area at least 30 days prior to publishing the notice of public hearing on the establishment or modification of a housing or a redevelopment tax increment district. To meet this requirement, the notice was due in your office on November 6, 2001. The notification was inadvertently not transmitted to your office. Subsequently, we are transmitting the notice to your office today, which is 29 days pr/or to the publication date of public hearing notice. MS. 469.175, Subdivision 2a, provides for the waiving of the 30-day requirement if the county commissioner of the affected district submits written comments on the proposal and any modification of the proposal to the authority after receipt of the information. The City of Columbia Heights is requesting that Anoka County Commissioner Kordiak waive the 30-day notification requirement for holding a public hearing on the modification of the tax increment financing district. LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE Eaual O01~ortunily ~:mlHoyer Charier Member of the National Association ol IncleDenden! Pubhc Finance Advisors 3060 Centr.e Pointe Drive. goseville, MN 55112-1105 651.697.8500 lax 651.697.8555 ',wvw.ehlers.inc.com Commissioner .rim Kordiak, Anoka County Board of Commissioners Page 2 November 7, 2001 We have attached a statement which would suffice for this purpose or, if you would prefer, a letter indicating your willingness to waive the 3 O-day notification would also be sufficient. We apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused. Please address your written comment to the Columbia Heights Economic Development Authority and the City of Columbia Heights. We have enclosed a self-addressed, postage-paid envelope for your convenience. A complete draft of the tax increment financing plan will be sent to the County no later than November 16, 2001. We would like to solicit your comments and offer to meet with you at your convenience, if you so desire. In addition, we invite you to attend the public hearing on the modification of Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1. Again, we reget any inconvenience the request for the 30-day notification wavier may have caused. Please direct any comments or questions that you may have to Mark NageI (City of~olumbia Heights) at 763.-706- 3600 or to me at 651-697-8504. Sincerely, EHLERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. Shelly Eldridge Financial Advisor Acting for and on behalf of the City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota Enclosure cc: Mark Nagel, City of Columbia HeiSts Dan Greensweig, Kennedy & Graven, Chartered STATEMENT I, Jim Kordiak, County Commissioner of Anoka County, received the letter notifying me of the proposed Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. I, a redevelopment district that will facilitate demolition of blighted property and the construction ofsin~e family homes. The Plan is to be considered by the City Council of the Ci.ty of Columbia Heights on December 17, 2001. As County Commissioner of District 4, please consider this statement my personal waiver of the required 30-day notification prior to the publication of the public hearing notice. Dated: November ,2001 Jim Kordiak, Anoka County Commissioner Attest: IllllJllllllllllllJ]] IlllllJllllllllllJJ, J.J ,I. j I ! jJ llll I I IIIIII JJ, J.J,JJII l IIIIIIIIII f [,llll[I[InilllH ,l[t[I I IIIIIl[l~ I[llfll __ [~flf~ Illl I I I tlf"illl Illll~,ll I111 I I Ifil __ IIIItJltl Ii IIIIIIJJlllllllllll IIIill IIII1 I ~ __l Draft as °f December 12, 2001 Draft-for City council/EDA Review I .... II Il' I ' 'rll I' I MODIFICATION TO THE DOWNTOWN CENTRAL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT (CBD) REVITALIZATION PLAN for the CBD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT and the MODIFICATION TO THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN for HOUSING REDEVELOPMENT TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1 (a redevelopment district) COLUMBIA HEIGHTS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS ANOKA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Established: May 27, 1997 Public Hearing Expansion Modification: December 17, 2001 Expansion Modification Adopted: EHLERS & ASSOCIATES iNC Prepared by: EHLERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, Minnesota 55113-1105 651-697-8500 fax: 651-697-8555 www.ehiers-inc.com TABLE OF CONTENTS (for reference purposes only) MODIFICATION TO THE DO WNTO WN CENTRAL BUSINESS D IS TRICT (CB D) REVITALIZATION PLAN FOR THE CBD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT ................. 1-1 Subsection C Description of the Project ....................................... 1-1 MODIFICATION TO THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR HOUSING REDEVELOPMENT TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1 .......... 2-1 Subsection 2-1. Subsection 2-2. Subsection 2-3. Subsection 2-4. Subsection 2-5. Subsection 2-6. Subsection 2-7. Subsection 2-8. Subsection 2-9. Subsection 2-10. Subsection 2-11. Subsection 2-12. Subsection 2-13. Subsection 2-14. Subsection 2-15. Subsection 2-16. Subsection 2-17. Subsection 2-18. Subsection 2-19. Subsection 2-20. Subsection 2-21. Subsection 2-22. Subsection 2-23. Subsection 2-24. Subsection 2-25. Subsection 2-26. Subsection 2-27. Subsection 2-28. Subsection 2-29. Subsection 2-30. Forward ....................................................... 2-1 Statutory Authority ............................................... 2-1 Statement of Objectives ........................................... 2-1 Central Business District Revitalization Plan Overview .................. 2-2 Legal Description of Property in Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 ........................................... 2-2 Classification of Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 ........................................... 2-2 Original Tax Capacity and Tax Rate ................................. 2-3 Estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity Value/Increment .................. 2-4 Property To Be Acquired .......................................... 2-5 Uses of Funds ................................................... 2-5 Sources of Revenue/Bonded Indebtedness ............................. 2-7 Duration of Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 ........................................... 2-8 Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions ........................ 2-8 Modifications to Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 ........................................... 2-9 Administrative Expenses ......................................... 2-10 Limitation of Increment .......................................... 2-11 Use of Tax Increment ............................................ 2-12 Notification of Prior Planned Improvements ......................... 2-12 Excess Tax Increments ........................................... 2-13 Requirements for Agreements with the Developer ..................... 2-13 Assessment Agreements .......................................... 2-14 Administration of Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 .......................................... 2-14 Financial Reporting Requirements .................................. 2-14 Municipal Approval and Public Purpose ............................. 2-16 Fiscal Disparities Election ........................................ 2-17 Other Limitations on the Use of Tax Increment ........................ 2-18 State Tax Increment Financing Aid ................................. 2-19 County Road Costs .............................................. 2-20 Supporting Documentation ........................................ 2-20 Summary ...................................................... 2-20 APPENDIX A BOUNDARY MAPS OF CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AND HOUSING REDEVELOPMENT TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. ! .. A-1 APPENDIX B LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY TO BE INCLUDED IN CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AND HOUSING REDEVELOPMENT TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1 ....... B-1 APPENDIX C ESTIMATED CASH FLOW FOR HOUSING REDEVELOPMENT TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1 ....... C-1 APPENDIX D REDEVELOPMENT QUALIFICATIONS FOR HOUSING REDEVELOPMENT TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1 ....... Dml MODIFICATION TO THE DOWNTOWN CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT (CBD) REVITALIZATION PLAN FOR THE CBD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Introduction The Central Business District ("CDB") Redevelopment Project is administered by the Columbia Heights Economic Development Authority (the "EDA"). Previously, the CBD Redevelopment Project was established and administered by the City of Columbia Heights (the "City") and the Columbia Heights Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA"). The CBD Redevelopment Project previously included property in the downtown area. On July 18, 1994, the Sheffield Neighborhood Redevelopment and Housing Development Project was consolidated with the CBD Redevelopment Project by the I-IRA. On January 8, 1996, the HRA transferred its authority to the EDA, which currently administers the CDB Redevelopment Project. (As Modified December 17, 2001) On May 27, 1997, the CBD Redevelopment Project was modified to expand the project area to include the entire City. Concurrently, Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 ("District No. 1") within the CBD Redevelopment Project was established. As District No. 1 is a scattered site redevelopment tax increment financing district, the property to be included in District No. 1 is found throughout the City, thus necessitating the expansion of the boundaries of the CBD Redevelopment Project. Subsection C Description of the Project The City of Columbia Heights and the Columbia Heights Economic Development Authority are hereby modifying the boundaries of the Central Business District Redevelopment Project to be coterminous with the corporate limits of the City. A map of the new boundaries of the Central Business District Redevelopment Project can be found in Appendix A. Columbia Heights EDA Modification to the Downtown Central Business District (CBD) Revitalization Plan for the CBD Redevelopment Project 1-1 MODIFICATION TO THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR HOUSING REDEVELOPMENT TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1 Subsection 2-1. Forward The City of Columbia Heights ("City"), the Columbia Heights Economic Development Authority (the "EDA"), staff and consultants have prepared the following information for the expedition and establishment of Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 ("District No. 1"), a redevelopment tax increment financing district, located in Central Business District Redevelopment Project. Subsection 2-2. Statutory Authority Within the City, there exist areas where public involvement is necessary to cause development or redevelopment to occur. To this end, the City and EDA have certain statutory powers pursuant to Minnesota Statutes ("M.S. "), Sections 469. 001 through 469. 04 7 and 469. 090 through 469.1081, inclusive, as amended, and M.S., Sections 469.174 through 469.179, inclusive, as amended (the "Tax Increment Financing Act" or "TIF Act"), to assist in financing public costs related to this project. This Section contains the Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "Plan") for District No. 1. Other relevant information is contained in the Modified Revitalization Plan for Central Business District Redevelopment Project. Subsection 2-3. Statement of Objectives District No. 1 currently consists of 55 parcels of land and adjacent and internal rights-of-way. District No. 1 is created to facilitate construction of a scattered site housing project in the City of Columbia Heights. For plan purposes, the values of new homes are assumed to be $147,000. It is expected that the value of many homes will be less. This plan is expected to achieve many of the objectives outlined in the Modified Revitalization Plan for Central Business District Redevelopment Project. The activities contemplated in the present Modified Revitalization Plan and the Tax Increment Financing Plan do not preclude the undertaking of other qualified development or redevelopment activities. These activities are anticipated to occur over the life of District No. 1 and Central Business District Redevelopment Project. (As Modified December 17, 2001) The modification to District No. 1 proposes to add 10 parcels to the district. However, a number of the original parcel will be "knocked down", according to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 6, due to lack of qualifying activity for taxes payable in 2003. It is proposed that a number of the parcels will be purchased by the E.D.A. and/or City, the existing structures demolished, the land cleared for resale and reconstruction of a single family, owner occupied homes. It is anticipated that the new market value of the newly constructed units will range from $130,000 to $135,00 each. Other renovation and rehabilitation of some the properties within the district is also anticipated. Subsection 2-4. Central Business District Revitalization Plan Overview Property to be Acquired - All property located within District No. 1 may be acquired by the City or EDA and is further described in this Plan. Columbia Heights EDA Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 2-1 Relocation - Complete relocation services are available pursuant to M.S., Chapter 117 and other relevant state and federal laws. Upon approval ora developer's plan relating to the project and completion of the necessary legal requirements, the City or EDA may sell to a developer selected properties that they may acquire within District No. 1 or may lease land or facilities to a developer. o The City or EDA may perform or provide for some or all necessary acquisition, construction, relocation, demolition, and required utilities and public streets work within District No. 1. Subsection 2-5. Leual Description of Property in Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 District No. 1 encompasses all property and adjacent rights-of-way identified by the parcels listed in Appendix B. Please see the map in Appendix A for further information on the location of District No. 1. (As Modified December 17, 2001) 10 properties and adjacent rights-of-ways are being added through this modification to District No. 1 and are listed in Appendix B. Please see the map in Appendix A for further information on the location of District No. 1. Subsection 2-6, Classification of Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 The City and EDA, in determining the need to create a tax increment financing district in accordance with M.S., Sections 469.174 to 469.179, as amended, inclusive, find that Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1, to be established, is a redevelopment district pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174, Subd lO(a)(1) as defined below: "Redevelopment district" means a type of tax increment financing district consisting ora project, or portions of a project, within which the authority finds by resolution that one of the following conditions, reasonably distributed throughout the district, exists: parcels consisting of 70 percent of the area in the district are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, or other improvements andmore than 50percent of the buildings, not including outbuildings, are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance; or The property consists of vacant, unused, underused, inappropriately used, or infrequently used raily~trds, rail storage facilities or excessive or vacated railroad rights-of-way. For purposes of this subdivision, "structurally substandard" shall mean containing defects in structural elements or a combination of deficiencies in essential utilities and facilities, light and ventilation, fire protection including adequate egress, layout and condition of interior partitions, or similar factors, which defects or deficiencies are of sufficient total significance Columbia Heights EDA Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. ! 2-2 to justify substantial renovation or clearance. A building is not structurally substandard if it is in compliance with the building code applicable to new buildings or could be modified to satisfy the building code at a cost of less than 15percent of the cost of constructing a new structure of the same square footage and type on the site. The municipality may find that a building is not disqualified as structurally substandard under the preceding sentence on the basis of reasonably available evidence, such as the size, type, and age of the building, the average cost of plumbing, electrical, or structural repairs or other similar reliable evidence. If the evidence supports a reasonable conclusion that the building is not disqualified as structurally substandard, the municipality may make such a determination without an interior inspection or an independent, expert appraisal of the cost of repair and rehabilitation of the building... For purposes of this subdivision, aparcel is not occupied by buildings, streets, utilities or other improvements until 15 percent of the area of the parcel contains improvements. In meeting the statutory criteria described above, the City and EDA rely on the following facts and findings: District No. 1 is a redevelopment district consisting of 55 parcels. The parcels are noncontiguous scattered sites as shown in Appendix A and listed in Appendix B. All parcels in District No. 1 are occupied as defined in the TIF Act. An inspection of the buildings located within District No. 1 finds that each noncontiguous parcel is occupied by a single-family home or two-family home that is structurally substandard as defined in the TIF Act. (See Appendix D) Subsection 2-7. Original Tax Capacity and Tax Rate Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 7 and M. S., Section 469.177, Subd. 1, the Original Net Tax Capacity (ONTC) as certified for District No. 1 is based on the market values placed on the property by the assessor in 1998 for taxes payable 1999. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subds. 1 and 2, the County Auditor shall certify in each year (beginning in the payment year 1999) the amount by which the original value has increased or decreased as a result of: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. change in tax exempt status of property; reduction or enlargement of the geographic boundaries of the district; change due to adjustments, negotiated or court-ordered abatements; change in the use of the property and classification; change in state law governing class rates; or change in connection with previously issued building permits. In any year in which the current Net Tax Capacity value of District No. 1 declines below the ONTC, no value will be captured and no tax increment will be payable io the City or EDA. The original local tax rate for District No. 1 will be the local tax rate for taxes payable 1997. The Original Tax Capacity and the Original Local Tax Rate for District No. 1 appear in the table on the next page. Columbia Heights EDA Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. I 2-3 Original Tax Capacity Value Percent Retained by EDA Original Local Tax Rate $13,750 100% 1.47752 (As Modified December 17, 2.001) The original local tax rate for the proposed expansion parcels in District No. 1 will be the local tax rate for taxes payable 2002, assuming the request for certification is made before June 30, 2002. The Original Tax Capacity and the Original Local Tax Rate for the parcels in proposed expansion of District No. 1 appear in the table below. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174 SubtL 4 and M. S., Section 469.177, SubtL 1, 2, and4, the estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity of the proposed expansion parcels in District No. 1. The City requests 100 percent of the available increase in tax capacity for repayment of its obligations and current expenditures, beginning in the tax year payable 2003. The tax rate and values are based on the most current information available at the time the plan was prepared, which were for taxes payable in 2001. Original Tax Capacity Value Percent Retained by EDA Original Local Tax Rate $6,628 100% 111.935% Subsection 2-8. Estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity Value/Increment Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174 Subd 4 and M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 1, 2, and 4, the estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity (CTC) of District No. 1, within Central Business District Redevelopment Project, upon completion of the project, will annually approximate tax increment revenues as shown in the table below. The City and EDA request 100 percent of the available increase in tax capacity for repayment of its obligations and current expenditures, beginning in the tax year payable 1999. The project tax capacity listed is an estimate of values when the project is completed. Project Estimated Tax Capaci~ upon Completion of Project (PTC) Original Estimated Net Tax Capacity (ONTC) Estimated Captured Tax Capacity (CTC) Estimated Annual Tax Increment (CTC x Local Tax Rate) 108,150 13,750 94,400 $139,478 (As Modified December 17, 2001) The project tax capacity listed is an estimate of values of the proposed expansion parcels if and when Columbia Heights EDA Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. I 2-4 all of the projects are completed. The tax rate and values are based on the most current information available at the time the plan was prepared, which were for taxes payable in 2001. Upon completion of the project, the proposed expansion parcels will annually generate approximate tax increment revenues as shown in the table below. Project Esti_mated Tax Capacity upon Completion of Project (PTC) 20,808 Original Estimated Net Tax Capacity (ONTC) 6,628 Estimated Captured Tax Capacity (CTC) 15,872 Estimated Annual Tax Increment (CTC x Local Tax Rate) $23,291 Subsection 2-9. Property To Be Acquired The City or EDA may acquire any parcel within District No. 1 including interior and adjacent street rights of way. Any properties identified for acquisition will be acquired by the City or EDA only in order to accomplish one or more of the following: provide land for needed public streets, utilities and facilities; carry out land acquisition, site improvements, clearance and/or development to accomplish development of new or renovate housing and other objectives set forth in this plan. (As Modified December 17, 2001) The District encompasses all property and adjacent rights-of-way identified in Appendix B as amended See the map in Appendix A for further information on the location of District No. 1 and the Central Business District Redevelopment Project. The City may acquire any parcel within District No. 1, or any property located within the Central Business District Redevelopment Project area, including interior and adjacent street rights of way. Any properties identified for acquisition will be acquired by the E.D.A. and/or City only in order to accomplish one or more of the following: carry out land acquisition, site improvements, clearance and/or redevelopment to accomplish the uses and objectives set forth in this plan. The City may acquire property by gift, dedication, condemnation or direct purchase from willing sellers in order to achieve the objectives of this Plan. Such acquisitions will be undertaken only when there is assurance of funding to finance the acquisition and related costs. The EDA plans to acquire some of the parcels that are being added to the District. Subsection 2-10. Uses of Funds Currently under consideration for District No. 1 is a proposal to facilitate construction of a scattered site housing project. The City and EDA have determined that it will be necessary to provide assistance to the project for certain costs. The EDA has conducted a feasibility study for the development or redevelopment of property in and around District No. 1. To facilitate the establishment and development or redevelopment of District No. 1, this Plan authorizes the use of tax increment financing to pay for the cost of certain eligible expenses. The estimate of public costs and uses of funds associated with District No. 1 is outlined in the table on the following page. These figures have been prepared based on high estimates, for purposes of this Columbia Heights EDA Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. I 2-5 Plan only. Uses of Funds Per Unit Total Acquisition $72,000 $3,960,000 Demolition 10,000 550,000 Soil Correction 2,000 110,000 Relocation 2,000 110,000 Interest 6,215 341,825 Administrative Costs (up to 10%) 10,240 563,200 TOTAL $102,455 5,635,025 The costs above are estimates only, and may be increased or decreased within the listed categories, so long as the total amount does not exceed the total amount listed above. Estimated costs associated with Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 are subject to change. The cost of all activities to be considered for tax increment financing will not exceed, without formal modification, the budget above pursuant to the applicable statutory requirements. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.1763, Subd. 2, no more than 25 percent of the tax increment paid by property within District No. 1 will be spent on activities related to development or redevelopment outside of District No. 1 but within the boundaries of Central Business District Redevelopment Project, (including administrative costs, which are considered to be spent outside of District No. 1) subject to the limitations as described in this Plan. (As Modified December 17, 2001) The costs associated with the addition of the proposed expansion parcels does not anticipate an increase in costs beyond the already authorized budget. Due to the lack of activity in the original district, the existing budget is substantially higher than the expected costs. The estimated sources of funds for the District are contained in the table below. The costs have NOT increased but have been restated according the current reporting requirements of the Office of the State Auditor. USES OF FUNDS Land/Building Acquisition Demolition Soil Correction Relocation Site Improvements (renovation & renewal) Interest Administrative Costs (up to 10%) TOTAL $3,000,000 $550,000 $110,000 $110,000 $960,000 $341,825 $563~00 PRO.IF~C.T COURTS TOTAII Interfund Loans Transfers Bond Principal Columbia Heights EDA ~-~.63~.02_~ $4,800,000 $4,800,000 $4,800,000 Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. I 2-6 Subsection 2-11. Sources of Revenue/Bonded Indebtedness Public improvements costs, acquisition, relocation, and site preparation costs and other costs outlined in the Uses of Funds will be financed primarily through the annual collection of tax increments. The City or EDA reserves the right to use other sources of revenue legally applicable to the Modified Revitalization Plan and the Plan, including, but not limited to, special assessments, general property taxes, state aid for road maintenance and construction, proceeds from the sale of land, other contributions from the developer and investment income, to pay for the Estimated Public Costs. The City or EDA reserves the right to incur bonded indebtedness as a result of the Plan. Additional indebtedness may be required to finance other authorized activities. The total amount of bonded indebtedness and other obligations related to the use of tax increment financing will not exceed $4,800,000 without an amendment to the Plan pursuant to applicable statutory requirements. This provision does not obligate the City or EDA to incur debt. The City or EDA will issue bonds or incur obligations only upon the determination that such action is in the best interest of the City. The City or EDA reserve the right to finance the activities to be undertaken pursuant to the Plan through loans from funds of the City or EDA, through an interfund loan, with general obligation tax increment financing notes, or to reimburse the developer on a "pay-as-you-go" basis for eligible activities paid for by the developer. The estimated sources of funds for District No. 1 are contained in the table below. These figures have been prepared based on high estimates, for purposes of this Plan only. Sources of Funds Per Unit Total Tax Increment $63,750 3,506,250 Land Sales 35,500 1,952,500 Local Contribution 3,205 176,275 TOTAL $102,455 $5,635,025 (As Modified December 17, 2001) The estimated sources of funds for the District are contained in the table below. They have NOT increased but have been restated according the current reporting requirements of the Office of the State Auditor. SOURCES OF FUNDS TOTAL Tax Increment Interest Revenue (replaces Local Contribution) Land Sale Proceeds $3,506,250 $176,275 $1,952,500 PROJECT REVENUES lnterfund Loans Transfers Bond Proceeds $57635~025 $4,800,O00 $4,8O0,0OO $4,800,000 Columbia Heights EDA Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. I 2-7 Subsection 2-12. Duration of Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd I, and Section 469.176, Subd 1, the duration of District No. 1 must be indicated within the Plan. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. l(b), the duration of District No. 1 will be 25 years from the date of receipt of the first increment by the City or EDA. The date of receipt by the City of Columbia Heights of the first tax increment will be approximately 1999. Thus, it is estimated that District No. 1, including any modifications of the Plan for subsequent phases or other changes, would terminate after 2023, or when the Plan is satisfied. The City or EDA does reserve the right to decertify District No. 1 prior to the legally required date. (As Modified December 17, 2001) Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Suba[ l(b), the duration of District No. 1 will be 25 years from the date of receipt of the first increment by the City or E.D.A. The date of receipt by the City of the first tax increment was 1998. Thus, it is estimated that District No. 1, including any modifications of the Plan for subsequent phases or other changes, would terminate after December 31, 2023 or when the Plan is satisfied. The City or E.D.A. reserves the right to decertify District No. 1 prior to the legal expiration date. Subsection 2-13. Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions The estimated impact on other taxing jurisdictions assumes construction which would have occurred without the creation of District No. 1. If the construction is a result of tax increment financing, the impact is $0 to other entities. Notwithstanding, the fact that the fiscal impact on the other taxing jurisdictions is $0 due to the fact that the construction would not have occurred without the assistance of the City or EDA, the following estimated impact of District No. I would be as follows if the "but for" test was not met: IMPACT ON TAX BASE Anoka County I.S.D. No. 13 City of Columbia Heights 1996/1997 Estimated Captured Total Net Tax Capacity (CTC) Percent of CTC Tax Capacity Upon Proiect Completion to Entity Total 147,999,763 94,400 0.0638% 12,947,050 94,400 0.7291% 7,960,658 94,400 1.1858% IMPACT ON TAX RATES 1996/1997 Percent Potential Extension Rates of Total CTC Taxes Anoka County 0.28000 18.95% 94,400 26,432 I.S.D. No. 13 0.84748 57.36% 94,400 80,002 City of Columbia Heights 0.29018 19.64% 94,400 27,393 Other 0.05986 4.05% 94,400 5,651 Total 1.477520 100.00% 139,478 Columbia Heights EDA Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. I 2-8 The tax rate used for the calculations on the previous page is the 1996/Pay 1997 rate. The total net capacity for the entities listed above are based on Pay 1997 figures. The tax rate at which District No. 1 will be certified will be the same Pay 1997 tax rates. (.4s Modified December 17, 2001) The estimated impact for the proposed expansion parcels in District No. 1 on other taxing jurisdictions assumes that the redevelopment contemplated by the proposed Plan would occur without the expansion of District No. 1. However, the City and E.D.A. has determined that such development or redevelopment would not occur "but for" tax increment financing and that, therefore, the fiscal impact on other taxing jurisdictions is $0. The estimated fiscal impact of propsed expansion parcels within District no. 1 would be as follows if the "but for" test was not met: IMPACT ON TAX BASE Anoka County City of Columbia Heights Columbia Heights ISD No. 13 2000/2001 Estimated Captured Total Net Tax Capacity (CTC) Percent of CTC Tax Capacity Upon Completion to Entity Total 189,341,459 14,180 0.0075% 8,818,621 14,180 0.1608% 13,857,623 14,180 0.1023% IMPACT ON TAX RATES 2000/2001 Percent Potential Extension Rates of Total CTC Taxes Anoka County 26.432% 23.61% 14,180 3,748 City of Columbia Heights 30.564% 27.31% 14,180 4,334 Columbia Heights lSD No. 13 47.452% 42.39% 14,180 6,729 Other 7.487% 6.69% 14,180 1,062 Total 111.935% 100.00% 15,872 The above impacts are based on the most current data available at the time the Plan was prepared, which is for taxes payable in 2001. Subsection 2-14. Modifications to Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No~ In accordance with M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 4, any: 1. reduction or enlargement of the geographic area of Central Business District Redevelopment Project or District No. 1; 2. increase in amount of bonded indebtedness to be incurred, including a determination to capitalize interest on debt if that determination was not a part of the original plan, or to increase or decrease the amount of interest on the debt to be capitalized; Columbia Heights EDA Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. I 2-9 increase in the portion of the captured net tax capacity to be retained by the City or EDA; increase in total estimated tax increment expenditures; or designation of additional property to be acquired by the City or EDA, shall be approved upon the notice and after the discussion, public hearing and findings required for approval of the original plan. The geographic area of District No. 1 may be reduced, but shall not be enlarged after five years following the date of certification of the original net tax capacity by the county auditor. Ifa redevelopment district is enlarged, the reasons and supporting facts for the determination that the addition to the district meets the criteria ofM. S., Section 469.174, Subd 10, paragraph (a), clauses (1) to (5), must be documented. The requirements of this paragraph do not apply if (1) the only modification is elimination of parcel(s) from Central Business District Redevelopment Project or District No. 1 and (2) (A) the current net tax capacity of the parcel(s) eliminated from District No. 1 equals or exceeds the net tax capacity of those parcel(s) in District No. l's original net tax capacity or (B) the EDA agrees that, notwithstanding MS., Section 469.177, Subd 1, the original net tax capacity will be reduced by no more than the current net tax capacity of the parcel(s) eliminated from District No. 1. The City or EDA must notify the County Auditor of any modification that reduces or enlarges the geographic area of District No. 1 or Central Business District Redevelopment Project. Modifications to Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 in the form ora budget modification or an expansion of the boundaries will be recorded in the Plan. Subsection 2-15. Administrative Expenses In accordance with M.S., Section 469.174, Subd 14, and M.S., Section 469.176, Subd 3, administrative expenses means all expenditures of the City or EDA, other than: amounts paid for the purchase of land or amounts paid to contractors or others providing materials and services, including architectural and engineering services, directly connected with the physical development of the real property in the district; relocation benefits paid to or services provided for persons residing or businesses located in the district; or amounts used to pay interest on, fund a reserve for, or sell at a discount bonds issued pursuant to M.S., Section 469.178. Administrative expenses also include amounts paid for services provided by bond counsel, fiscal consultants, and planning or economic development consultants. Tax increment may be used to pay any authorized and documented administrative expenses for District No. 1 up to but not to exceed 10 percent of the total tax increment expenditures authorized by the tax increment financing plan or the total tax increment expenditures for Central Business District Redevelopment Project, whichever is less. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 4h, tax increments may be used to pay for the county's actual administrative expenses incurred in connection with District No. 1. The county may require payment of those expenses by February 15 of the year following the year the expenses were incurred. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469. 177, Subd I1, the county treasurer shall deduct an amount equal to 0.1 percent of any increment distributed to the City or EDA and the county treasurer shall pay the amount deducted to Columbia Heights EDA Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. I 2-10 the state treasurer for deposit in the state general fund to be appropriated to the State Auditor for the cost of financial reporting of tax increment financing information and the cost of examining and auditing authorities' use of tax increment financing. Subsection 2-16. Limitation of Increment Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. l(a), no tax increment shall be paid to the City or EDA for District No. 1 after three (3) years from the date of certification of the Original Net Tax Capacity value of the taxable property in District No. I by the County Auditor unless within the three (3) year period: (a) bonds have been issued pursuant to M.S., Section 469.178, or in aid of a project pursuant to any other law, except revenue bonds issued pursuant to M.S., Sections 4~9.152 to 469.165, or (b) the City or EDA has acquired property within District No. 1, or (c) the City or EDA has constructed or caused to be constructed public improvements within District No. 1. The bonds must be issued, or the City or EDA must acquire property or construct or cause public improvements to be constructed by approximately May, 2000. The tax increment pledged to the payment of bonds and interest thereon may be discharged and may be terminated if sufficient funds have been irrevocably deposited in the debt service fund or other escrow account held in trust for all outstanding bonds to provide for the payment of the bonds at maturity or redemption date. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd 6: if, after four years from the date of certification of the original net tax capacity of the tax increment financing district pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, no demolition, rehabilitation or renovation of property or other site preparation, including qualified improvement ora street adjacent to aparcel but not installation of utility service including sewer or water systems, has been commenced on a parcel located within a tax increment financing district by the authority or by the owner of the parcel in accordance with the tax increment financing plan, no additional tax increment may be taken from that parcel and the original net tax capacity of that parcel shall be excluded from the original net tax capacity of the tax increment financing district. If the authority or the owner of the parcel subsequently commences demolition, rehabilitation or renovation or other site preparation on that parcel including qualified improvement ora street adjacent to that parcel, in accordance with the tax increment financing plan, the authority shall certify to the county auditor that the activity has commenced and the county auditor shall certify the net tax capacity thereof as most recently certified by the commissioner of revenue and add it to the original net tax capacity of the tax increment financing district. The county auditor must enforce the provisions of this subdivision... For purposes of this subdivision, qualified improvements of a street are limited to (1) construction or opening ora new street, (2) relocation of a street, and (3) substantial reconstruction or rebuilding of an existing street. Columbia Heights EDA Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing Distxict No. I 2-11 The City or EDA or a property owner must improve parcels within District No. 1 by approximately May, 2001. Subsection 2-17. Use of Tax Increment The City or EDA hereby determines that it will use 100 percent of the captured net tax capacity of taxable property located in District No. 1 for the following purposes: to pay the principal of and interest on bonds used to finance a project; to finance, or otherwise pay public redevelopment costs of the Central Business District Redevelopment Project pursuant to the MS., Sections 469. 001 to 469.047; to pay for project costs as identified in the budget; to finance, or otherwise pay for other purposes as provided in MS., Section 469.176, Subd. 4; to pay principal and interest on any loans, advances or other payments made to the City or EDA or for the benefit of Central Business District Redevelopment Project by the developer; to finance or otherwise pay premiums and other costs for insurance, credit enhancement, or other security guaranteeing the payment when due of principal and interest on tax increment bonds or bonds issued pursuant to the Plan or pursuant to M.S., Chapter 462C and M.S., Sections 469.152 to 469.165, or both; and to accumulate or maintain a reserve securing the payment when due of the principal and interest on the tax increment bonds or bonds issued pursuant to M.S., Chapter 462C and M.S., Sections 469.152 to 469.165, or both. These revenues shall not be used to circumvent any levy limitations applicable to the City nor for other purposes prohibited by M.S., Section 469.176, subd. 4. Subsection 2-18. Notification of Prior Planned Improvements The City or EDA shall, after due and diligent search, accompany its request for certification to the County Auditor or its notice of District No. 1 enlargement with a listing of all properties within District No. 1 or area of enlargement for which building permits have been issued during the eighteen (18) months immediately preceding approval of the Plan by the municipality pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 3. The County Auditor shall increase the original value of District No. 1 by the value of improvements for which a building permit was issued. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd 4, the EDA has reviewed the parcels to be included in the expansion of the Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 and found four parcels for which building permits have been issued during the 18 months immediately preceding approval of the Plan by the City and EDA, as follows: 4038 Madison Street - $13,000 garage 4542 Heights Drive - $3,000 egress window and siding 2201 45th Ave. - $9,000 siding 4825 5th St. - $5,700 TOTAL - $30,700 Columbia Heights EDA Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. I 2-12 (.ds Modified December 17, 2001) Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Suba[ 4, the City has reviewed the parcels to be included in the expansion of Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 and found three parcels for which building permits have been issued during the 18 months immediately preceding approval of the Modified Plan by the City and EDA, as follows: Parcel Number R36-30-24-22-0043 R35-30-24-21-0099 R35-30-24-21-0155 Improvement Address Amount Purpose Amount* 4435 Central Ave $3,320 New Roof $0 330 44~ Ave $2,313 New Roof $0 4328 6~ St $35,400 Room Addition $35,400 Value Increase $35,400 Subsection 2-19. Excess Tax Increments Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 2, in any year in which the tax increment exceeds the amount necessary to pay the costs authorized by the Plan, including the amount necessary to cancel any tax levy as provided in M.S., Section 475.61, Subd. 3, the City or EDA shall use the excess amount to do any of the following: 2. 3. 4. prepay any outstanding bonds; discharge the pledge of tax increment therefor; pay into an escrow account dedicated to the payment of such bond; or return the excess to the County Auditor for redistribution to the respective taxing jurisdictions in proportion to their local tax rates. In addition, the City or EDA may, subject to the limitations set forth herein, choose to modify the Plan in order to finance additional public costs in District No. 1 or Central Business District Redevelopment Project. Subsection 2-20. Requirements for Agreements with the Developer The City or EDA will review any proposal for private development to determine its conformance with the Modified Revitalization Plan and with applicable municipal ordinances and codes. To facilitate this effort, the following documents may be requested for review and approval: site plan, construction, mechanical, and electrical system drawings, landscaping plan, grading and storm drainage plan, signage system plan, and any other drawings or narrative deemed necessary by the City or EDA to demonstrate the conformance of the development with city plans and ordinances. The City or EDA may also use the Agreements to address other issues related to the development. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 5, no more than 25 percent, by acreage, of the property to be acquired in District No. 1 as set forth in the Plan shall at any time be owned by the City or EDA as a result of acquisition with the proceeds of bonds issued pursuant to MS., Section 469.178, without the City or EDA having, prior to acquisition in excess of 25 percent of the acreage, concluded an agreement for the development or redevelopment of the property acquired and which provides recourse for the City or EDA should the development or redevelopment not be completed. Columbia Heights EDA Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 2-13 Subsection 2-21. Assessment Agreements Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd 8, the City or EDA may enter into an agreement in recordable form with the developer of property within District No. 1 which establishes a minimum market value of the land and completed improvements for the duration of District No. 1. The assessment agreement shall be presented to the assessor who shall review the plans and specifications for the improvements constructed, review the market value previously assigned to the land upon which the improvements are to be constructed and, so long as the minimum market value contained in the assessment agreement appear, in the judgment of the assessor, to be a reasonable estimate, the assessor may certify the minimum market value agreement. Subsection 2-22. Administration of Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing Dist. No. ! Administration of District No. 1 will be handled by the Executive Director of the EDA of the City of Columbia Heights. Subsection 2-23. Financial Reportin~ Requirements A. Filing with State Auditor, County Auditor, County Board and School Board: Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 5, the City or EDA must file an annual disclosure report for all tax increment financing districts, including District No. 1. The report shall be filed with the County Board, County Auditor, School Board, and the State Auditor on or before July 1 of each year. The report to be filed by the City or EDA shall include the following information: 5. 6. 7. 8. the amount and source of revenue in the tax increment account; the amount and purpose of expenditures from the account; the amount of any pledge of revenues, including principal and interest, on any outstanding bond indebtedness; the original net tax capacity of District No. 1; the captured net tax capacity retained by the City or EDA; the captured net tax capacity shared with other taxing districts; the tax increment received; and any additional information necessary to demonstrate compliance with the tax increment financing plan. B. Newspaper Statement: M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 5 also provides that an annual statement shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City showing: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. o the tax increment received and expended in that year, the original net tax capacity, captured net tax capacity, amount of outstanding bonded indebtedness, the amount of District No. l's increment paid to other governmental bodies, the amount paid for administrative costs, the sum of increments paid, directly or indirectly, for activities and improvements located outside of District No. 1, and any additional information the City or EDA deems necessary. Columbia Heights EDA Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. I 2-14 C. State Auditor filing for District No. 1: Pursuant to M.S., Section ,/69.175, Subd. 6, the City or EDA must annually submit to the State Auditor, on or before July 1, a financial report which shall: provide for full disclosure of the sources and uses of the public funds in District No. 1; permit comparison and reconciliation with the City and EDA's accounts and financial reports; permit auditing of the funds expended on behal'f of District No. 1 or that is funded in pan or whole through the use ora development account funded with tax increments from other tax increment districts or with public money; and be consistent with generally accepted accounting principles. The financial report must also include the following: the original net tax capacity of District No. 1; the captured net tax capacity of District No. 1, including the amount of any captured net tax capacity shared with other taxing districts; the amount budgeted under the Plan, and the actual amount expended for, at least, the following categories (for the reporting period and for the duration of District No. 1): a. acquisition of land and buildings through condemnation or purchase; b. site improvements or preparation costs; c. installation of public utilities, parking facilities, streets, roads, sidewalks, or other similar public improvements; d. administrative costs, including the allocated cost of the city; e. public park facilities, facilities for social, recreational, or conference purposes, or other similar public improvements; and the total costs of the property to the City or EDA and the price paid the developers (for properties sold to developers); the amount of increments rebated or paid to developers or property owners for privately financed improvements or other qualifying costs, other than those reported under clause (3), that were issued on behalf of private entities for facilities located in District No. 1. D. State Auditor filing for ali Tax Increment Financing Districts: Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 6a, the City or EDA must also annually report to the State Auditor before or on July 1 of each year the following amounts for the entire City: the total principal amount of nondefeased bonds that are outstanding at the end of the previous calendar year; and the total annual amount of principal and interest payments that are due for the current calendar year on: (i) general obligation tax increment financing bonds and (ii) other tax increment financing bonds; and for each tax increment financing district within the City: the type of tax increment financing district; the date on which the district is required to be decertified; the amount of any payments and the value of in-kind benefits, such as physical improvements and the uses of building space, that are financed with revenues derived Columbia Heights EDA Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. I 2-15 from increments and are provided to another governmental unit (other than the municipality) during the preceding calendar year; the tax increment revenues for taxes payable in the current calendar year; whether the tax increment financing plan or other governing document permits increment revenues to be expended outside of each district; and any additional information that the State Auditor may require. Copies of this report must also be provided to the county and school district boards. Subsection 2-24. Municipal Approval and Public Purpos~ The reasons and facts supporting the findings for the adoption of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for District No. 1 as required pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 3 are as follows: Finding that the District No. 1 is a redevelopment district as defined in M.S., Section 469.174, Subd lO(a)(1). District No. 1 is a redevelopment district consisting of 55 parcels, and qualifies because each noncontiguous parcel is occupied by improvements, and contains on substandard single-family or two-family home. Therefore each separate parcel independently meets all the tests for a redevelopment district under MS., Section 469.174, Subd. 10 (a) (1). Finding that the proposed development, in the opinion of the City Council, wouM not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and that the increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing wouM be less than the increase in the market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of District No. 1 permitted by the Plan. Each parcel is occupied by a single family home in poor condition. Due to the high cost of renovation or clearance, such housing will continue to deteriorate. Due to the high cost of development or redevelopment on the parcels and the cost of financing, the redevelopment for new housing will occur only through assistance, in part, from tax increment financing. In most cases, significant other public and private assistance will be required as well. A comparative analysis of estimated market values both with and without establishment of Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 and the use of tax increments has been performed as described above. If all development which is proposed to be assisted with tax increment were to occur in District No. 1, the total increased market value would be up to $6,686,250. It is the Council's finding that no development with a market value of greater than $5,530,560 would occur without tax increment assistance in this district within 25 years. In fact, the Council is confident that no development of any kind would occur and market values would likely deteriorate. This finding is based upon evidence from general past experience with housing in the City (see Cashflow in Appendix C). Finding that the Tax Increment Financing Plan for District No. 1 conforms to the general plan for the development or redevelopment of the municipality as a whole. The Plan was reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission on May 6, 1997. The Planning and Columbia Heights EDA Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No, ! 2-16 Zoning Commission found that the Plan conforms to the general development plan of the City. Finding that the Tax Increment Financing Plan for District No. 1 will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development or redevelopment of Central Business District Redevelopment Project by private enterprise. The project to be assisted by Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 will result in improved private housing stock in the City and the State of Minnesota, the renovation of substandard properties, increased tax base of the State and add a high quality development to the city. Subsection 2-25. Fiscal Disparities Election Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd 3, the City or EDA may elect one of two methods to calculate fiscal disparities. If the calculations pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd 3, clause a, (outside District No. 1) are followed, the following method of computation shall apply: The original net tax capacity and the current net tax capacity shah be determined before the application of the fiscal disparity provisions of Chapter 276~1 or 473F. Where the original net tax capacity is equal to or greater than the current net tax capacity, there is no captured net tax capacity and no tax increment determination. Where the original net tax capacity is less than the current net tax capacity, the difference between the original net tax capacity and the current net tax capacity is the captured net tax capacity. This amount less any portion thereof which the authority has designated, in its tax increment financing plan, to share with the local taxing districts is the retained captured net tax capacity of the authority. The county auditor shah exclude the retained captured net tax capacity of the authority from the net tax capacity of the local taxing districts in determining local taxing district tax rates. The local tax rates so determined are to be extended against the retained captured net tax capacity of the authority as well as the net tax capacity of the local taxing districts. The tax generated by the extension of the lesser of(A) the local taxing district tax rates or (B) the original local tax rate to the retained captured net tax capacity of the authority is the tax increment of the authority. If the calculations pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 3, clause b, (within District No. 1) are followed, the following method of computation shall apply: The original net tax capacity shah be determined before the application of the fiscal disparity provisions of Chapter 276A or 473F. The current net tax capacity shah exclude any fiscal disparity commercial-industrial net tax capacity increase between the original year and the current year multiplied by the fiscal disparity ratio determined pursuant to M.S., Section 276A.06, .subdivision 7 or M.S., Section 473F. 08, subdivision 6. Where the original net tax capacity is equal to or greater than the current net tax capacity, there is no captured tax capacity and no tax increment determination. Where the original tax capacity is less than the current tax capacity, the difference between the original net tax capacity and the current net tax capacity is the captured net tax capacity. This amount less any portion thereof which the authority has designated in its tax increment financingplan, to share with Columbia Heights EDA Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. I 2-17 the local taxing districts is the retained captured net tax capacity of the authority. The county auditor shall exclude the retained capturednet tax capacity of the authority from the net tax capacity of the local taxing districts in determining local taxing district tax rates. The local tax rates so determined are to be extended against the retained captured net tax capacity of the authority as well as the net tax capacity of the local taxing districts. The tax generated by the extension of the less of (,4) the local taxing district tax rates or (B) the original local tax rate to the retained captured net tax capacity of the authority is the tax increment of the authority. The City or EDA shall submit to the County Auditor at the time of the request for certification which method of computation of fiscal disparities the City or EDA elected. As the project to be assisted is not anticipated to include commercial / industrial development, the City of Columbia Heights will not incur any fiscal disparities because of this Tax Increment Financing District. According to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd 3: The method of computation of tax increment applied to a district pursuant to paragraph (a) or (b) shall remain the same for the duration of the district, except that the governing body may elect to change its election from the method of computation in paragraph (a) to the method in paragraph (b). Subsection 2-26. Other Limitations on the Use of Tax Incremen! o General Limitations. All revenue derived from tax increment shall be used in accordance with the Plan. The revenues shall be used to finance, or otherwise pay public redevelopment costs of the Central Business District Redevelopment Project pursuant to the M.S., Sections 469. 001 to 469. 047; These revenues shall not be used to circumvent existing levy limit law. No revenues derived from tax increment shall be used for the acquisition, construction, renovation, operation or maintenance of a building to be used primarily and regularly for conducting the business of a municipality, county, school district, or any other local unit of government or the state or federal government. This provision shall not prohibit the use of revenues derived from tax increments for the construction or renovation of a parking structure, a commons area used as a public park or a facility used for social, recreational or conference purposes and not primarily for conducting the business of the municipality. Pooling Limitations. At least 75 percent of tax increments from District No. 1 must be expended on activities in District No. 1 or to pay bonds, to the extent that the proceeds of the bonds were used to finance activities within said district or to pay, or secure payment of, debt service on credit enhanced bonds. Not more than 25 percent of said tax increments may be expended, through a development fund or otherwise, on activities outside of District No. 1 except to pay, or secure payment of, debt service on credit enhanced bonds. For purposes of applying this restriction, all administrative expenses must be treated as if they were solely for activities outside of District No. 1. Five Year Limitation on Commitment of Tax Increments. Tax increments derived from District No. Columbia Heights EDA Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. I 2-18 1 shall be deemed to have satisfied the 75 percent test set forth in paragraph (2) above only if the five year rule set forth in M.S., Section 469.1763, Subd 3, has been satisfied; and beginning with the sixth year following certification of District No. 1, 75 percent of said tax increments that remain after expenditures permitted under said five year rule must be used only to pay previously committed expenditures or credit enhanced bonds as more fully set forth in M.S., Section 469.1763, Subd 5. Redevelopment District At least 90 percent of the revenues derived from tax increment from a redevelopment district must be used to finance the cost of correcting conditions that allow designation of redevelopment and renewal and renovation districts under M.S., Section 469.174. These costs include acquiring properties containing structurally substandard buildings or improvements, acquiring adjacent parcels necessary to provide a site of sufficient size to permit development, demolition of structures, clearing of the land, and installation of utilities, roads, sidewalks, and parking facilities for the site. The allocated administrative expenses of the City or EDA may be included in the qualifying costs. Subsection 2-27. State Tax Increment Financine Aid Pursuant to M.S., Section 273.1399, for tax increment financing districts for which certification was requested after April 30, 1990, a municipality incurs a reduction in state tax increment financing aid (RISTIFA) applied to the municipality's Local Government Aids (LGA) first and, Homestead and Agricultural Aid (HACA) second, in an amount equal to a formula based upon the equalized qualifying captured tax capacity (QCTC) of the tax increment financing district. Pursuant to M.S., Section 273.1399, Subd 6, the City or EDA may choose an option to the LGA-HACA penalty. District No. 1 is exempt from the LGA-HACA reduction if the City or EDA elects to make a qualifying local contribution at the time of approving the tax increment financing plan. To qualify for the exemption in each year, the City or EDA must make a qualifying local contribution to the project of a certain percentage. The local contribution for a redevelopment district is 5 percent. The maximum local contribution for all districts in the City in any year is limited to two percent of the City's net tax capacity, after which point the City or EDA must make an additional contribution equal to the lesser of(a) 0.25 percent of the City's net tax capacity or (b) 3 percent of tax increment revenues for that year. The amount of the local contribution must be made out of unrestricted money of the City or EDA, such as the general fund, a property tax levy, or a federal or state grant-in-aid which may be spent for general government purposes. The local contribution may not be made, directly or indirectly, with tax increments or developer payments. The local contribution must be used to pay project costs and cannot be used for general government purposes. The EDA elects to make the annual local contribution to the project to exempt itself from the LGA- HACA penalty. The City or EDA will pay for costs of the project described in this Plan, in an amount equal to 5 percent of annual tax increment for District No. 1, subject to the limitations described above, in any year in which such amount exceeds 2 percent of the City's net tax capacity. Such contribution may be in form of either lump sum or annual payments (in addition to tax increment payments) towards costs identified in this Plan or other costs related to that development or redevelopment. The contribution may also be made in the form of public improvements financed by the City or EDA or other unit of government with unrestricted funds. Columbia Heights EDA Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. I 2-19 (~is Modified December 17, 2001) The 2001 Legislature eliminated the provisions for a reduction in state tax increment financing aid (RISTIFA) or the alternative qualifying local contribution. Subsection 2-28. County Road Costs Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. Ia, the county board may require the City or EDA to pay for all or part of the cost of county road improvements if the proposed development to be assisted by tax increment will, in the judgement of the county, substantially increase the use of county roads requiring construction of road improvements or other road costs and if the road improvements are not scheduled within the next five years under a capital improvement plan or other county plan. In the opinion of the City and EDA and consultants, the proposed development outlined in this Plan will have little or no impact upon county roads. If the county elects to use increments to improve county roads, it must notify the City or EDA within thirty days of receipt of this Plan. (~Is Modified December 17, 2001) Subsection 2-29. Supi~ortine Documentation Pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175 Subdl, clause 7 the Plan must contain identification and description of studies and analyses used to make the determination set forth in M.S. Section 469.175 Subd3, clause (2). A list of reports and studies that support the authority's findings are on file at the E.D.A. Subsection 2-30. Summary_ The Columbia Heights EDA is establishing Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 to preserve and enhance the tax base, redevelop substandard areas, and provide employment opportunities in the City. The Tax Increment Financing Plan for Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 was prepared by Ehlers and Associates, Inc., 2950 Nor, vest Center, 90 South Seventh Street, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402-4100, telephone (612) 339-8291. (~Is Modified December 17, 2001) The Columbia Heights EDA is expanding Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. I to continue to preserve and enhance the tax base, redevelop substandard areas, and provide employment opportunities in the City. The modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 was prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc., 3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, Minnesota 55113-1105, telephone (651) 697-8500. Columbia Heighls EDA Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. ! 2-20 APPENDIX A BOUNDARY MAPS OF CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AND HOUSING REDEVELOPMENT TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1 APPEND~ A-I City of COLUMBIA HEIGHTS Ho.sing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District #t Expansion Map ID Key Additions: 1 3805 2ND ST 2 4358 3RD ST 3 4356 5TH ST 4 4328 6TH ST $ 320 44TH AVE 6 330 44TH AVE ? 3701 BUCHANAN ST 8 4435 CENTRAL AVE 9 4441 CENTRALAVE 10 3919 MAIN ST LEGEND ~ TIF District 1 Additions ~ Parcels [--~ Right-of-Way ~ City of Hilltop ~ Park Water ~ Minneapolis ~ Water Works N City Limits 0.25 0 0.25 Miles ame: TIF_DIS'TI~ CT1 _AD DFFIO NS Pro~Jt Loc~Uon: W:\DATABASE\GIS\GISDATA\PLANNING\PRO~EC-F~TZF.APR--' Date P, int=cl: 11/30/2001 - 10:42:35 AH 0 0 Illlllltllllllllllj]] 1111111111111111111[]] II ! Ill Ill IIII JJ I IIIIII Il'Il J llllllllllll j I II III I I_~1 JJ'JTJ'lllli i I III1~1 Il Jill! il ill I~ IliHIl~lITIll;I II I ij~LLllJJJJ.ttJl~ I1~1111 IIIIIlliui iii iiiill __ I IIIIIHllll Ill I I I IllllJ J __ Illlll Illllll Illin III I~1 APPENDIX B LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY TO BE INCLUDED IN CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AND HOUSING REDEVELOPMENT TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1 The legal description of the Central Business District Redevelopment Project is being modified to include all property located within the corporate limits of the City of COlumbia Heights. The legal description of property to be included in Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 includes the following properties: Address Land Value Bldg Value Total Value 3831 Main St. 23,900 33,600 57,500 4045 Main St. 22,500 30,400 52,900 4309 Main St. 19,100 33,800 52,900 4341 Main St. 19,100 32,700 51,800 3855 Main St. 19,100 26,100 45,200 3802 2nd St. 19,100 33,400 52,500 4021 2nd St. 23,900 36,000 59,900 4404 2 ½ St. 23,900 49,200 73,100 4323 3rd St. 26,700 29,700 56,400 3700 2 ½ St. 19,100 26,800 45,900 3950 Lookout Pl. 23,900 30,300 54,200 546 Summit St. 18,100 18,800 36,900 544 Summit St. 13,800 11,400 25,200 3818 Quincy St. 20,800 42,900 63,700 3913 Polk St. 20,900 37,500 58,400 3823 Polk St. 20,900 22,500 43,400 1513 37th St. 27,500 31,400 58,900 5057 University Ave. 58,500 4,400 62,900 4417 University Ave. 32,500 5,300 37,800 315 44th Ave. 22,000 5,700 27,700 4516 4th St. 23,100 38,600 61,700 4538 4th St. 23,100 28,700 51,800 4421 5th St. 19,100 36,500 55,600 4533 7th St. 21,000 32,900 53,900 APPENDIX B-I 4401 Quincy St. 22,000 46,000 68,000 4321 5th St. 32,500 37,200 69,700 4033 6th St. 18,100 35,700 53,800 4038 7th St. 19,100 29,700 48,800 4131 7th St. 21,000 29,400 50,400 4153 7th St. 19,100 38,100 57,200 4240 Jefferson St. 22,000 37,000 59,000 4038 Madison St. 19,100 37,600 56,700 4032 Madison St. 23,900 36,400 60,300 4048 Quincy St. 22,000 16,900 38,900 4145 Quincy St. 19,100 33,000 52,100 965 43rd Ave. 23,100 37,800 60,900 1032 44th Ave. 22,000 30,100 52, ! 00 1124 44th Ave. 22,000 32,500 54,500 4044 Tyler St. 25,300 37,200 62,500 4246 Polk St. 25,300 53,400 78,700 1827 41 st Ave. 20,900 40,200 61,100 4400 Stinson St. 41,800 8,800 50,600 4542 Heights Dr. 24,900 29,500 54,400 2201 45th Ave. 27,300 53,000 80,300 1331 45th Ave. 26,000 61,100 87,100 1124-26 45th Ave. 22,000 50,500 72,500 1118-16 45th Ave. 22,000 50,300 72,300 4525-27 Taylor St. 22,000 53,100 75,100 4529 -31 Taylor St. 22,000 47,000 69,000 4539 Filmore St. 22,000 43,900 65,900 4825 5th St. 23,100 30,300 53,400 4806 6th St. 21,000 42,600 63,600 4916 6th St. 21,000 47,200 68,200 4929 6th St. 21,000 35,000 56,000 5101 7th St. 21,000 20,300 41,300 APPENDIX B-2 (As Modified December 17, 2001) The property to be included in Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 is being modified to add the following properties: Parcel Number Key Address Land Bidg Total Limited Number Value Value Value Mkt Val R35-30-24-33-0025 00264065 3805 NE 2~ St 48,800 31,400 80,200 63,300 1135-30-24-21-0122 00280939 4356 NE 5~ St 39,000 41,300 80,300 67,600 1135-30-24-21-0155 00281251 4328 NE 6th St 39,000 20,600 59,600 45,300 1135 30 24 21 0104 00268007 320 NE 44~ Ave 44,900 8,600 53,500 37,900 R35-30-24-21-0099 00267954 330 NE 44th Ave 39,000 35,600 74,600 61,500 R36-30-24-34-0030 00247487 3701 NE 43,800 52,800 96,600 86,100 Buchanan St R36-30-24-22-0043 00283446 4435 NE 48,400 17,000 65,400 65,400 Central Ave RB6-30-24-22-0042 00283437 4441 NE 48,400 27,500 75,900 75,900 Central NE RB5-30-24-32-0060 00264387 3919 NE Main 46,300 39,400 85,700 71,800 St R35-30-24-22-0126 00281974 4358 NE 3rd St 46,800 18,800 65,600 51,600 APPENDIX APPENDIX C ESTIMATED CASH FLOW FOR HOUSING REDEVELOPMENT TAX INCREMENT FINANCING D/STRICT NO. 1 APPENDIX C-1 CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA HOUSING TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT #1 T.I.F. CASH FLOW ASSUMPTIONS - LOCAL MATCH Pay-As-You-Go Interest Rate: 9.000% Tax Extension Rate: Inflation Rate: BASE VALUE INFORMATION 111.935% O.OOOO% Pay 2001 Tax Total MV* Classification Capacity** 12 Pamels 656,200 Res Hst Total * All but 2 parcels are calculated using the P2002 limited market value. ** Tax capacity has been calculated using P2001 classification percentages. PROJECT VALUE INFORMATION Type of Tax Increment District: Redevelopment 6,628 Number of Units: Class Rates: 3.40% Single Family < $76,000 1.00% Single Family > $76,000 1.65% Estimated Market Value On all Projects: Estimated Total Market Value per Unit Estimated Tax Capacity per Unit Estimated Total Tax Capacity: Estimated Taxes: Estimated Taxes Per Unit: 12 1,620,000 Pay 2002 135,000 1,734 20,808 23,291 1,941 Pay 2001 Pay 2001 BUT / FOR ANALYSIS Current Market Value - Est. New Market Value - Est. Difference Present Value of Tax Increment Difference Value Likely to OCcur Without TIF is Less Than: 656,200 1,620,000 963,800 144,674 819,126 819,126 Appendix C Estimated Cashflow for Expansion Parcel List ds Modifted December 17, 2001 Ehlers and Associates, Inc. 11/12/01 CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA HOUSING TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT #1 Base Project Captured Semi-Annual *Estimated Admin Semi-Annual Years PERIOD BEGINNING Tax Tax Tax Gross Tax OSA Fee @ At Net Tax Of PERIOD ENDING Yrs. Mth. Yr. Capacity Capacity Capacity Increment 0.50% 10.00% Increment Increment Yrs. Mlh. Yr. 0.0 08-01 1996 0i 0.0 0.0 02-01 1997 0.0 02-01 1997 0 0.0 0.0 08-01 1997 0.0 08-O1 1997 6,628 6,628 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 02-01 1998 0.5 02-01 1998 6,628 6,628 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.5 08-01 1998 1.0 08-01 1998 6,628 6,628 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1.0 02-O1 1999 1.5 02-01 1999 6,628 6,628 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 1.5 08-01 1999 2.0 08-01 1999 6,628 6,628 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 2.0 02-01 2000 2.5 02-01 2000 6,628 6,628 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 2.5 08-01 2000 3.0 08-01 2000 6,628 6,628 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 3.0 02-01 2001 3.5 02-01 2001 6,628 6,628 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 3.5 08-01 2001 4.0 08-01 2001 6,628 6,628 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 4.0 02-01 2002 4.5 02-01 2002 6,628 6,628 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 4.5 08-01 2002 5.0 08-01 2002 6,628 6,628 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 5.0 02-01 2003 5.5 02-01 2003 6,628 6,628 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 6.0 08-01 2003 6.0 08-01 2003 6,628 6,628 0 0 0 0 0, 0.0 6.5 02-01 2004 6.5 02-01 2004 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (790 7,107 0.5 7.0 08-01 2004 7.0 08-01 2004 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (790 7,107 1.0 7.5 02-01 2005 7.5 02-01 2005 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (790 7,107 1.5 8.0 08-01 2005 8.0 08-01 2005 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (790) 7,107 2.0 8.5 02-01 2006 8.5 02-01 2006 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (790' 7,107 2.5 9.0 08-01 2006 9.0 08-01 2006 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (790 7,107 3.0 9.5 02-01 2007 9.5 02-01 2007 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (79(: 7,107 3.5 10.0 08-01 2007 10.0 08-01 2007 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (79(; 7,107 4.0 10.5 02-01 2008 10.5 02-01 2008 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (796 7,107 4.5 11.0 0801 2008 11.0 08-01 2008 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (790 7,107 5.0 11.5 02-01 2009 !11.5 02-01 2009 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (790 7,107 5.5 12.0 08-01 2009 12.0 08-01 2009 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (790 7,107 6.0 12.5 02-01 2010 12.5 02-01 2010 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (790 7,107 6.5 13.0 08-01 2010 13.0 08-01 2010 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (790 7,107 7.0 13.5 02-01 2011 13.5 02-01 2011 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (790 7,107 7.5 14.0 08-01 2011 14.0 08-01 2011 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (790) 7,107 8.0 14.5 02-01 2012 14.5 02-01 2012 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (790' 7,107 8.5 15.0 08-01 2012 15.0 08-01 2012 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (790' 7,107 9.0 15.5 02-01 2013 15.5 02-01 2013 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (79(; 7,107 9.5 16.0 08-01 2013 16.0 08-01 2013 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (79C 7,107 10.0 16.5 02-01 2014 16.5 02-01 2014 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (79C 7,107 10.5 17.0 08-01 2014 17.0 08-01 2014 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (790 7,107 11.0 17.5 02-01 2015 17.5 02-01 2015 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (790 7,107 11.5 18.0 08-01 2015 18.0 08-01 2015 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (790 7,107' 12.0 18.5 02-01 2016 18.5 02-01 2016 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (790) 7,107 12.5 19.0 08-01 2016 19.0 08-01 2016 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (790 7,107 13.0 19.5 02-01 2017 19.5 02-01 2017 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (790) 7,107 13.5 20.0 08-01 2017 20.0 08-01 2017 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (790 7,107 14.0 20.5 02-01 2018 20.5 02-01 2018 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (790' 7,107 14.5 21.0 08-01 2018 21.0 08-01 2018 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (79C 7,107 15.0 21.5 02-01 2019 21.5 02-01 2019 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (79(3 7,107 15.5 22.0 08-01 2019 22.0 08-01 2019 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (790~ 7,107 16.0 22.5 02-01 2020 22.5 02-01 2020 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (790 7,107 16.5 23.0 08-01 2020 23.0 08-01 2020 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40} (790 7,107 17.0 23.5 02-01 2021 23.5 02-01 2021 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (790 7,107 17.5 24.0 08-01 2021 24.0 08-01 2021 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (790 7,107 18.0 24.5 02-01 2022 24.5 02-01 2022 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (790 7,107 18.5 25.0 0801 2022 25.0 08-01 2022 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (790 7,107 19.0 25.5 02-01 2023 25.5 02-01 2023 6,628 20,808 14,180 7,936 (40) (790 7,107 19.5 26.0 08-01 2023 Totals 309,511 (1,548) (30,81£ 277,154 Present Values 144,674 (723) (14,401 129,549 * OSA Fee is subiect to chanoe annualtv Appendix C Estimated Cashflow for Expansion Parcel List As Modified December 17, 2001 Ehlers and Associales, Inc. 11/12-J01 CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA HOUSING TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT #1 T.I.F. CASH FLOW ASSUMPTIONS - LOCAL MATCH Pay-As-You-Go Interest Rate: 9.000% Tax Extension Rate: Inflation Rate: BASE VALUE INFORMATION 1.47752 0.000O% Vadous MV Per Unit # Units Market Value 25,000 55 1,375,000 Tax Capacity 13,750 Total PROJECT VALUE INFORMATION Type of Tax Increment District: 13,750 Number of Units: Class Rates: Apt. >4 units Market Single Family <$72k Single Family >$72k Estimated Market Value On all Projects: *assumes each new house worth at least $72,000 Estimated Total Market Value per Unit Estimated Additonal Market Value Per Unit: Estimaled Tax Capacity: Estimated Taxes: Estimated Taxes Per Unit: 3.4000% 1.oooo% 2.0000% f BUT / FOR ANALYSIS Current Market Value - Est. New Market Value - Est. Difference resent Value of Tax Increment Difference alue Likely lo Occur Withoul TIF is Less Than: Housing 55 147,000 122,000 94,400 139,478 2,536 13,75o] 6,7oo,oooj 6,686,25oj 1,155,69o~ 5,530,560! IMPACT ANALYSIS TAX CAPACITIES Anoka County 147,999,763 94,400 0~064~; I.S.D. No. 13 12,947,050 94,400 0.729% .City of Columbia Heiqhts 7,960,658 94,400 1.186% Anoka County 0.280000 94,400 26,432 LS.D. No. 13 0.847480 94,400 80,002 .~ity of Columbia Heighls 0.290180 94,400 27,393 ~her 0.059860 94,400 5,651 1.477520 139,478 Pay 1996 Pay 99 Pay 99 Appendix C Estimated Cashflow for Original Parcels Ehlers and Associates, Inc. 05/27/97 Page 1 CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA HOUSING TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT #1 Base Project TAX INCREMENT CASH FLOW Captured Semi-Annual Admin. Semi-Annual PERIOD BEGINNING Tax Tax Tax Gross Tax at Net Tax Yrs. Mth. Yr. Capacity Capacity Capacity Increment 10.10% Increment 0.0 08-01 1996 0.0 02-01 1997 0.0 08-01 1997 13,750 13,750 0 0 0 0.5 02-01 1998 13,750 13,750 0 0 0 0 1.0 08-01 1998 13,750 13,750 0 0 0 0 1.5 02-01 1999 13,750 13,750 0 0 0 0 2.0 08-01 1999 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,944) 62,695 2.5 02-01 2000 13,750 108,150 94,408 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 3.0 08-01 2000 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 3.5 02-01 2001 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 4.0 08-01 2001 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 4.5 02-01 2002 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 5.0 08-01 2002 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 5.5 02-01 2003 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 6.0 08-01 2003 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 6.5 02-01 2004 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 7.0 08-01 2004 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 7.5 02-01 2005 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 8.0 08-01 2005 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 8.5 02-01 2006 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 9.0 08-01 2006 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 9.5 02-01 2007 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 10.0 08-01 2007 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 10.5 02-01 2008 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 11.0 08-01 2008 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 11.5 02-01 2009 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 12.0 08-01 2009 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 12.5 02-01 2010 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 13.0 08-01 2010 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 13.5 02-01 2011 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 14.0 08-01 2011 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 14.5 02-01 2012 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 15.0 08-01 2012 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 15.5 02-01 2013 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 16.0 08-01 2013 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 16.5 02-01 2014 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,944) 62,695 17.0 08-01 2014 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,944) 62,695 17.5 02-01 2015 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 18.0 08-01 2015 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 18.5 02-01 2016 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,944) 62,695 19.0 08-01 2016 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 19.5 02-01 2017 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 20.0 08-01 2017 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 20.5 02-01 2018 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 21.0 08-01 2018 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,944) 62,695 21.5 02-01 2019 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 22.0 08-01 2019 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 22.5 02-01 2020 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,944) 62,695 23.0 08-01 2020 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 23.5 02-01 2021 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 24.0 08-01 2021 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 24.5 02-01 2022 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 25.0 08-01 2022 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 25.5 02-01 2023 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 26.0 08-01 2023 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 (7,044) 62,695 26.5 02-01 2024 13,750 108,150 94,400 69,739 ~ 62,69__~ Totals 3,486,947 ~ 3,134,766 Presenl Values 1,155,690 (116,725~) 1,038,965 Local Match at 5.00% 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 3,487 174,347 57,784~ Years Of PERIOD ENDING Increment Yrs. Mlh. Yr. 0.0 0.5 02-01 1997 0.0 0.5 08-01 1997 0.0 0.5 02-01 1998 0.0 1.0 08-01 1998 0.0 1.5 02-01 1999 0.0 2.0 08-01 1999 0.5 2.5 02-01 2000 1.0 3.0 08-01 2000 1.5 3.5 02-01 2001 2.0 4.0 08-01 2001 2.5 4.5 02-01 2002 3.0 5.0 08-01 2002 3.5 5.5 02-01 2003 4.0 6.0 08-01 2003 4.5 6.5 02-01 2(X)4 5.0 7.0 08-01 2004 5.5 7.5 02-01 2005 6.0 8.0 0801 2005 6.5 8.5 02-01 2006 7.0 9.0 08-01 2006 7.5 9.5 02-01 2007 8.0 10.0 08-01 2007 8.5 10.5 02-01 2008 9.0 11.0 08-01 2008 9.5 11.5 02-01 2009 10.0 12.0 08-01 2009 10.5 12.5 02-01 2010 11.0 13.0 08-01 2010 11.5 13.5 02-01 2011 12.0 14.0 08-01 2011 12.5 14.5 02-01 2012 13.0 15.0 08-01 2012 13.5 15.5 02-01 2013 14.0 16.0 08-01 2013 14.5 16.5 02-01 2014 15.0 17.0 08-01 2014 15.5 17.5 02-01 2015 16.0 18.0 08-01 2015 16.5 18.5 02-01 2016 17.0 19.0 08-01 2016 17.5 19.5 02-01 2017 18.0 20.0 08-01 2017 18.5 20.5 02-01 2018 19.0 21.0 08-01 2018 19.5 21.5 02-01 2019 20.0 22.0 08-01 2019 20.5 22.5 02-01 2020 21.0 23.0 08-01 2020 21.5 23.5 02-01 2021 22.0 24.0 08-01 2021 22.5 24.5 02-01 2022 23.0 25.0 08-01 2022 23.5 25.5 02-01 2023 24.0 26.0 08-01 2023 24.5 26.5 02-01 2024 25.0 27.0 08-01 2024 Appendix C Estimated Cashflow for Original Parcels Ehlers and Associates. Inc. 05/27/97 Page 2 APPENDIX D REDEVELOPMENT QUALIFICATIONS FOR HOUSING REDEVELOPMENT TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1 EXPANSION PARCELS City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota - Expansion Parcles Qualifications J ............... Step One I '" pCrce~ Lot Size Occupied Type ' /'~r'b~t 'Gr~eater"f'~c~l J Ncrne Number Sq. Ft. Sq. Ft. (Approx .) Occuj~'ed Occup'ed 15% J 3805 NE 2nd S t R 35-30-24-33-0025 10, 368 1,600 Bldg Imprmts 4356 NE 5th St R35-30-24-21-0122 5,184 978 Bldg Imprints ~328 NE 6th S t R 35-30-24-21-0155 5, 184 I, 076 B 920 NE 44th Ave R35-30-24-21-0104 9,322 1,420 Bldg ~30 NE 44th Ave R35-30-24-21-0099 5,229 912 B Idg 3701 NE Buchcncn St R36-30-24-34-0030 14,571 2,329 Bldg, 4441 NE Centd Ave R36-30-24-22-0043 10,240 2,373 Bldg 4435 NE Centrd Ave R36-30-24-22-0042 10,240 1,920 Bldg 3919 NE Mdn St R35-30-24-32-0060 10,128 2,876 Bldg 4358 NE 3rd S t R 35-30-24-22-0126 9,860 2, 120 B Idg 15.43% Yes 18.87% Yes Imp'mts 20.76% Y es Imprmts 15.23% Yes Imprmts 17.44% Yes Imprmts 15.98% Yes Imprmts 23.17% y es Imprmts 18.75% Yes Imprrnts 28.40% Yes Imprmts 21,50% Y es Occupied c~n indude bullrings, pc~ king Dots, c~d utilities. ........ ~ Step Ewo F cxc~ P c~cel Number of B uildngs Percent Name Number B uil dngs S ubs tc~dcxd B lighted 3805 NE 2nd S t R35-30-2443-0025 1 1 100.00% ~356 NE 5th S t R35-30-24-21-0122 1 1 100.00% ~328 NE 6th S t R35-30~24-21-0155 1 1 100.00% 920 NE 44th Ave R35-30-24-21-0104 1 1 100.00% 330 NE 44th Ave R35-30-24-21-0099 1 1 100.00% 3701 NE B uchcnan S t R 36-30-24-34-0030 2 2 100.00% 4441 NE Centd Ave R36-30-24-22-0043 2 2 100.00% 4435 NE Centrd Ave R36-30-24-22-0042 2 2 100.00% 3919 NE Mdn S t R35-30-24-32-0060 2 2 100.00% ~1358 NE 3rd S t R 35-30-24-22-0126 2 1 50.00% Documentation verifying the interior inspections and substandard determination for the expansion parcels are on file at Offices of the City of Columbia Heights and the Columbia Heights Economic Development Authority. APPENDIX D-1 B-26-1997 12:27PM FROM COMMUNITY DEV.- CH 6127822857 CiTY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS '~0 40'rH AVENUE Id.E., COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MN 55421-3878 (612) 782-2800 TDD 782-2806 BU'rLDZNG ~INSPI~C"TZOM P. 2 Joseph Ce~r~ i tmu~ber~ Dormid G. Jotty g~ J~s ~ry L. Perers~ R~ v. ~tci~ city ~ ~tter ~. May 9, 1997 Kenneth R. Anderson Community Development Director City of Columbia Heights 590 40th Avenue N.E. Columbia Heights, MN 55421 HOUSING REDEVELOPHF, NT TAX ZNCRF, M~T Fi~CING DISTRICT NO. 1 (RND~ELOPM~T DISTRICT) Dear Mr. Anderson: In April of 1997 I conducted & visual windshield survey of residential properties in the City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota. I have identified fifty-five. (55) properties in the City with residential structures which are deemed to be structurally substandard in accordance with requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10. I hereby certify that each of the fifty-five parcels are occupied by buildings which are 'substandard based upon their size, age, building 'type, and/or condition. Furthermore, based upon my general knowledge of the area and similar types of housin~in order to bring the building(s) into compliance with current codes the average cost of plumbing, electrical, or structural repairs for each structure will exceed fifteen (15) percent of the cost of .'constructing a new structure of the same square footage and type on the site. This certification applies to each property listed in Appendix B and included in the Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 Plan. If you have other questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Mel Collova Building Official #1727 Enclosures c: File Appendix D Redevelopment Qualifications for Original Parcels EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EM]=.LO¥1~ - CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: December 17, 2001 AGENDA SECTION: Items for Consideration ORIGINATING DEPT.: CITY MANAGER NO: ~ - C.- - / License Department APPROVAL ITEM: Renewal of Wine/Beer License-Tycoon's BY: Shelley Hanson DATE: NO: DATE: December 7, 2001 BY.'~~~ BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Attached is the business license renewal of the 2002 Wine/Beer License for Ok Cha Kwon dba Tycoon's Tavern at 4952 Central Avenue NE that was considered at the November 26, 2001 meeting. Also attached for review are the minutes from the Meeting of April 23, 2001, whereby the City Council approved the Wine/Beer License for 2001. It is the recommendation of the Police Department to deny this License Renewal for 2002 based on their investigation. At the meeting of November 26~, the City Council voted to deny the renewal of the beer and wine license for Tycoon's. Attached is a copy of the letter that was sent to Ok Cha Kwon informing her of the action taken. Ms. Kwon has asked the City Council to re-consider this renewal. A refund of the $2400 fee she paid has been processed, and will be given to her if the Council decides to confirm the action already taken. At the top of the license agenda you will notice a phrase stating *Signed Waiver Form Accompanied Application. This means that the data privacy form has been submitted as required. If not submitted, certain information cannot be released to the public. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to deny the 2002 application for a wine and beer license for Ok Cha Kwon dba Tycoon's Tavern & Grill at 4952 Central Avenue based on the recommendation of the Police Department. COUNCIL ACTION: TO CITY COUNCIL November 26, 2001 *Signed Waiver Form Accompanied Application 2002 BUSINESS LICENSE AGENDA APPROVED BY FIRE,BLDG WINE/BEER ON SALE *Ok Cha Kwon dba Tycoon's Tavern & Grill 4952 Central Ave $2400.00 ****RECOMMENDED DENIAL BY POLICE DEPT**** license agenda CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS 590 40th Avenue N.E., Columbia Heights, MN 55421-3878 (763) 706-3600 TDD (763) 706-3692 Visit Our Website at: www. ci. colurnbia-heights, mn.u$ Certified: 7099 3220 0009 9464 4705 November 29, 2001 Ok Cha Kwon Tycoon's Tavern & Grill 4952 Central Avenue NE Columbia Heights, MN 55421 Re: 2002 Beer and Wine License for Tycoon's Tavern at 4952 Central Avenue NE, Columbia Heights, MN Dear Ms. Kwon: This letter is to inform you that the City Council voted to deny the renewal of your Beer and Wine Licenses for 2002, at Tycoon's Tavern located at 4952 Central Avenue NE, based on the recommendation of our Police Department. We will be refunding the $2400 fee you submitted as soon as it can be processed. You may continue serving beer and wine until December 31, 2001, at midnight under your present license. However, you will not be allowed to serve anyone after that time. If you have any questions, you may contact either me at 706-3678, or the City Manager at 706-3610. cc: Mayor/City Council City Manager Police Chief , City Attorney License File Sincerely, Shelley Hanson License Clerk THE CItY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE ON THE BASIS O~ DISABILITY IN EMPLOYMENT OR THE PROVISIOn Of SERVICES EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER City Council Minutes April 23, 2001 Page 8 of 13 Urban Development reporting requirements. Elrite stated that leased telephone lines were considered, but greater efficiency and ultimate cost savings would be realized through wireless network connections. Elrite stated that network connections would allow use of our e-mail system, and access to all programs at City Hall, such as financial information and Internet connection. Williams agreed with the staff recommendation. Nawrocki stated that there was merit to the proposal, but felt this was not of prime importance and shouM be cut to reduce spending. Elrite stated the majority of the cost would come from the high-rise budget, and the remainder from liquor operations and computer updates. Upon vote: Williams, aye, Szurek, aye; Wyckoff, aye, Nawrocki, nay; Peterson, aye. Four votes to one, Motion Carried. Item #15 - Replacement of Grounds Master Mower MOTION by Szurek, second by Williams, to authorize the purchase of one (1) new Toro Grounds Master 580-D Lawnmower, from the Minnesota State Purchasing Contract price of $69,606 less the trade-in of ($16,500) for a total purchase price of $53,106 plus sales tax, from MTI Distributing, Plymouth MN, with funding allocated from Parks Capital Equipment. Kevin Hansen, Public Works Director, described the benefits of thisl 6 foot mower, stating the current mower is five years old and beginning to have engine and hydraulic problems. He stated replacing the engine would cost $10,000. This piece of equipment was budgeted for replacement in 2001. Nawrocki stated he inspected the mower and spoke with Steve Synowczynski, Shop Foreman. He felt this mower has a low amount of hours of use and that this expenditure could be delayed. Szurek also visited the Public Works shop and spoke to the mechanics. She explained the large volume of grass cut in a short amount of time with this mower, and the safety factor that debris exits from the back of the machine versus the sides. Staff indicated the new mower would have a larger motor, better suited to this equipment. Szurek was comfortable that this mower needs to be replaced to continue the maintenance of our parks. · Williams stated thatfive years is the average life of equipment. He felt it is a majorfinancial loss if equipment breaks down and employees are idle waiting for repairs. Wyckoff stated that if the purchase is delayed the price of a new unit will increase and the trade-in value will decrease. Nawrocki stated he initially intended to vote against replacement of the mower and the truck, but after talking to Synowczynski decided to vote in favor of replacing the truck. Upon vote: Williams, aye, Szurek, aye; Wyckoff, aye, Nawrocki, nay; Peterson, aye. Four votes to one, Motion Carried. Item # 19 Approve Business License Application Jim Hoeft, City Attorney, referred to Police Chief Johnson's memo outlining the situation. Hoeft indicated Chief Johnson spoke to Immigration Services and that he spoke to the Kwon's attorney regarding Mr. Kwon 's status in the United States. Hoeft stated that more and more licensing issues containing unique situations are being presented to the Council. In this case, the spouse of the applicant is wanted for deportation issues. Hoeft had indicated to Mr. Kwon that he should pursue remedies to this situation with the INS. Hoeft stated this could be a two year process. Hoeft indicated that denial of this license could end the purchase of this property. City Council Minutes April 23, 2001 Page 9 of 13 Hoefi indicated that responses to Chief Johnson from the INS were non-committal, with no straight answer as to how we could facilitate this process. Hoeft stated an option other than denying the application would be to grant the license for this year, with the understanding that upon the annual renewal process efforts to resolve the issue with INS would be scrutinized. This would allow the sale of the property to be finalized. Hoefi reminded Council that there is no problem with the applicant, Mrs. Kwon. Szurek asked for clarification, as Chief Johnson's memo recommended denial of the application and Hoefi is now suggesting it would be an option to approve the strong beer and wine license. Hoeft stated that Chief Johnson wanted Council to know his concerns, but is not against helping a new business get started. Peterson asked that the representative of the Kwon's come forward. Woodrow Woojin Byum, Attorney for the Kwon 's, introdUced himself, listed his background and gave a handout to Council Byum questioned why the City was more concerned with the spouse than the applicant. He stated that the applicant is a permanent resident of this country, has a green card, has been fingerprinted, and has applied for permanent naturalization, which should take approximately three months. Byum questioned if it was City policy to check the citizenship of ail applicants, and if the status of 'famous" people would be checked. Byum stated that Mr. Kwon is considered "out of status ", meaning people who stay in this country longer than they should. He referred to page six of the handout which described the "Life Act" signed by President Clinton before leaving office, which allowed the 11,000, O00 persons who overstayed in this country to apply for a green card prior to April 30, 2001 without penalty. Byum listed some categories where persons are not allowed to stay because of crimes committed. He stated that Mr. Kwon does not fail into the category of immediate deportation of unreliable residents. Byum stated that Mr. Kwon has now applied for a green card, which should allow him to stay in this country until he receives a green card. He stated the couple is married and have five children, one that is theirs together. Byum stated that if Mr. Kwon were deported, the family would stay and the business would go on. Byum asked that the City be dedicated to its non-discrimination policy and approve the license to give this hardworking Korean couple a chance. He stated that this would also help the seller to move on. NaWrocki questioned if Mrs. Kwon 's holding a green card qualified her as a permanent resident, and the length of time a green card is valid. Byum stated that she is a permanent resident and the process for citizenship has begun. A green card is valid for 14 years the first time, and can be renewed every 10 years thereafter. Byum referred to page eleven which is the petition for a relative ora permanent resident which will eventually allow him to become a permanent resident, or a green card hold. Nawrocki asked if Mr. Kwon could work without a green card? Byum indicated he is not supposed to, but many of the 11,000, 000 illegal or "out of status" immigrants are working. Nawrocki stated that one party is in violation of the law, which should not be dismissed lightly, and felt the suggestion ora license for one year was not a sensible alternative. He felt that all immigration issues should be cleared up before consideration of granting this license. Wyckoff questioned their marital background and stated that any reference to racism displeased her. Nawrocki stated that all applicants are asked the same questions and indicated that a marriage relationship carries rights for ownership of property. Byum stated that Mrs. Kwon shouM not be penalized for Mr. Kwon's status. Peterson reminded everyone that the issue before Council was a strong beer and wine Hcense. He stated there was no criminal history of the person making application. Peterson stated that the City treats everyone the same. City Council Minutes April 23, 2001 Page 10 of 13 MOTION by Nawrocki, to approve the license applications as listed, with the exception of the on sale liquor license for 4952 Central Avenue. Motion seconded by Wyckoff. Upon vote; all ayes. Motion Carried. MOTION by Nawrocki that the on sale strong beer and wine license request for 4952 Central Avenue be denied on the recommendation of the Police Department. Motion died for lack of a second. MOTION by Nawrocki, that the on sale strong beer and wine license request for 4952 Central Avenue be tabled for additional information. Seconded by Williams. Hoefi advised that if the motion were tabled, no additional discussion couM be held. Upon roll call vote: Williams, nay; Szurek, nay; Wyckoff, nay; Nawrocki, aye; Peterson, nay. Four nays, one aye; Motion failed. MOTION by Wyckoffto approve the application for an on sale wine and beer license for Ok Cha Kwon at 4952 Central Avenue NE. Fehst stated that at the time of annual renewal the immigration status of the spouse would be revisited. Williams asked for Police Captain Roddy's statement. Roddy indicated that Chief Johnson and City Attorney Hoeft mainly handled this issue. Hoeft indicated that in Chief Johnson 'S last contact with the INS, he suggested they pick up Mr. Kwon, but they did not. Byum stated the INS is hesitant to move on people that are here and not violating any laws. Nawrocki stated that Mr. Kwon is violating a law being here illegally. Peterson invited members of the audience to speak. Grace Vitalinti stated that she works with the Korean Family Advocacy as a victim's advocate. She stated that Mrs. Kwon has been here since 1986, where she met, married and had a child with Mr. Kwon. They presently have a cleaning business. She would not be able to continue the cleaning business herself if her husband were deported, so she put a down payment on this business. Mrs. Kwon would continue to run this business without her husband, if necessary. Vitalinti stated that Mrs. Kwon should receive citizenship in about three months and that within one year this situation will be settled. Vitalinti asked Council to give her a chance for a year. Szurek indicated that thepresent license for this business is only for beer, and this is an upgrade request for strong beer and wine. Byum stated the upgrade request is so authentic Korean beverages may be served. Edward Vitalinti stated that he has known Mrs. Kwon since 1986 and felt the husband's case with the INS was irrelevant. He stated that she has proved her responsibility by maintaining a business. He stated they are from South Korea and that they would add to our economy, and asked Council to grant this request. Danny Peterson stated he has been married to his Korean wife for 34 years, and has known Mrs. Kwon for quite some time. He stated he understood the reason for background checks, but neither of the parties have a criminal record. Dee Logan, 1221 39th Ave NE, encouraged license approval for this new business owner on Central Avenue, versus another boarded up building. City Council Minutes April 23, 2001 Page 11 of 13 Ron Karon, the current owner, stated that the continuing problems obtaining this license were creating a hardship for him. The initial purchase agreement was signed in December of 2000. He requested the matter be settled immediately. Williams stated he was uncomfortable going against the Police Chief's recommendation. Hoefi stated the Chief's memo was presented so Council would be aware of the situation and discuss the issues. He did not want this presented and approved with the general Hcense applications. Peterson reminded Council that if the Hcense was violated, it could be withdrawn. Peterson read from the earlier proclamation allowing for the "pursuit of happiness ". Mark Wagner, 5050 6th Street, questioned if problems happen, what recourse is there besides license revocation. He felt there should be the same rules for everyone. Hoeft indicated the added scrutiny with a liquor license request. He stated that the City does review citizenship on all applicants. Fehst stated that the process is set and uniform for all associations and businesses that apply, maintaining consistency. Peterson stated that even if the INS made Mr. Kwon leave the country, that would not be cause for removal of the license. Upon vote: Williams, aye; Szurek, aye; Wyckoff, aye; Nawrocki, nay; Peterson, aye. Four aye, one nay; Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARINGS A) Close the Public Hearing for Revocation/Suspension of Rental Housing License at 4032 Van Buren Street NE Mayor Peterson closed the public hearing in that the property is now in compliance with the Residential Maintenance Code. ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION A) Other Ordinances and Resolutions B) Bid Considerations C) Other Business ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS A) Report of the City Manager Fehst stated that Washburn/McReavy would be holding a Grand Opening on Ma), 5 and 6, 2001 at their new facility on Central Avenue. There will be a public ceremony on May 5. B) Report of the City Attorney - nothing to report. GENERAL COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS A) Minutes of Boards and Commissions 1) Meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission held on April 3, 2001 2) Meeting of the Economic Development Authority held March 20, 2001 Peterson reminded everyone of the meeting on April 30, 2001 at 7:00p. m. in the City Council Chambers to discuss the proposed Zoning and Development Ordinance. He encouraged residents with concerns to attend his meeting. Wyckoff referred to the Recyclopedia sent to residents by Anoka County. }Vyckoff reminded residents that if they place an appliance at the curb for removal, they must call the hauler with this information. Wyckoff pointed out CITY COUNCIL LETTER MEETING OF: DECEMBER 17. 2001 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: CITY MANAGER NO: --~ _~/,_, . ~ FINANCE APPROVAL ITEM: DESIGNATING DEPOSITORIES FOR BY: WILLIAM ELRITE FUNDS OF THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS DATE: DECEMBER 5, 2001 NO: Each year the council passes a resolution designating depositories for city funds and for investment purposes. The attached resolution follows the general format of the resolution passed in previous years. Under this resolution, investment firms that may be used by the city must be located in the State of Minnesota, and all investments must comply with authorized investments as set forth in Minnesota statutes. The resolution also contains a section covering access to city safe deposit boxes. This resolution was originally presented at the November 26th council meeting. At that meeting the City Council had concerns that U.S. Bank, which is located in Columbia Heights, was not included as a designated depository. They also had concerns that we were using Wells Fargo Bank, which is not located in Columbia Heights. The resolution has been modified to include U.S. Bank. Wells Fargo Bank was not deleted from the resolution as that bank currently has the City payroll account. It should be noted that several years ago Norwest Bank was designated as a depository and was the most responsive to proposals to handle the City's payroll account and ACH payroll deposits. At the present time, this is the only item that is handled by Wells Fargo Bank, formerly Norwest Bank. To move our payroll account from Wells Fargo Bank to another bank would be costly due to the fact that we have approximately a one-year supply of payroll checks. Other than the payroll account, we do not have any other accounts and/or do any other business with Wells Fargo Bank. It is staff's recommendation that the City Council adopt this resolution. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to waive the reading of Resolution 2001-68 there being ample copies available to the public. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to adopt Resolution 2001-68, being a resolution designating official depositories and safe deposit access for the City of Columbia Heights. WE:sms 0111071COUNCIL Attachment COUNCIL ACTION: RESOLUTION NO. 2001- 68 RESOLUTION DESIGNATING OFFICIAL DEPOSITORIES AND SAFE DEPOSIT ACCESS FOR THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, that Northeast Bank, Wells Fargo Bank of Minnesota, N.A., and U.S. Bank are hereby designated as depositories of the funds of this corporation. IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED, that checks, drafts, or other withdrawal orders issued against the funds of this corporation on deposit with said banks shall be signed by the following: Mayor City Manager Clerk-Treasurer and that said banks are hereby fully authorized to pay and charge to the account of this corporation any checks, drafts, or other withdrawal orders. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Northeast Bank, Wells Fargo Bank of Minnesota, N.A., and U.S. Bank are designated depositories of the corporation be and it is hereby requested, authorized and directed to honor checks, drafts or other orders for the payment of money drawn in this corporation's name, including those drawn to the individual order of any person or persons whose name or names appear thereon as signer or signers thereof, when bearing or purporting to bear the facsimile signatures of the following: Mayor City Manager Clerk-Treasurer and that Northeast Bank, Wells Fargo Bank of Minnesota, N.A., and U.S. Bank shall be entitled to honor and to charge this corporation for all such checks, drafts or other orders, regardless of by whom or by what means the facsimile signature or signatures thereon may have been affixed thereto, if such facsimile signature or signatures resemble the facsimile specimens duly certified to or filed with the Banks by the City Clerk or other officer of his corporation. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that any and all resolutions heretofore adopted by the City Council of the corporation and certified to as governing the operation of this corporation's account(s) with it, be and are hereby continued in full force and effect, except as the same may be supplemented or modified by the foregoing part of this resolution. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that all transactions, if any relating to deposits, withdrawals, re-discounts and borrowings by or on behalf of this corporation with said banks prior to the adoption of this resolution be, and the same hereby are, in all things ratified, approved and confirmed. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that any bank or savings and loan located in the State of Minnesota may be used as depositories for investments purposes so long as the investments comply with authorized investments as set forth in Minnesota Statutes. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that any brokerage firm located in the State of Minnesota may be used as a depository for investment purposes so long as the investments comply with the authorized investments as set forth in Minnesota Statutes. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the signatures of any one of the following named City employees are required for access to safe deposit boxes: Finance Director City Manager Assistant Finance Director Accountant Information Systems Director Information Systems Technician Passed this Offered by: Seconded by: Roll Call: ~day of ,2001 Mayor Gary L. Peterson Patricia Muscovitz, Deputy City Clerk 0111071COUNCIL CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: 12/17/01 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER ITEM: RESOLUTION APPROVING CONSTRUCTION BY: K. Hansen'.,~_/ PLANS FOR THE MEDIAN MODIFICATIONS ON DATE: 12/12/01~/' CENTRAL AVENUE AT 51sT AVENUE BY Mn/DOT Background: The Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) is proposing to make median modifications on Central Avenue at 51~t Avenue. Mn/DOT is currently proposing an early 2002 bid letting with construction in late spring of 2002. This proposal was reviewed by the Council with Mn/DOT staffat their September 4, 2001 Work Session. Analysis/Conclusions: The work will consist of adding a "pork chop" design median on Central Avenue to prevent left mm out(s) from 51st Avenue and minor modifications to the existing median noses for the left mm lanes. A copy of the intersection layout plan is attached. Following the directions given at the 9/4/01 Work Session, staffhas mailed a notice on December 7~, 2001 to property owners in each direction along 51~t Avenue. A copy of that letter and mailing area are attached. There are no costs to the City of Columbia Heights for the proposed work. MnDOT has also received feedback from the four comer property owners representing La Casita, White Castle, Papa John's, and the Animal Hospital, and have indicated to MnDOT that they are not opposed to the proposal. Representatives from MnDOT will be attending the 12/17/01 Council meeting for any further questions from the City Council or public. From a safety perspective, Public Works/Engineering concurs with MnDOT's proposal and recommends approval of the resolution approving construction plans. Recommended Motion: Move to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2001-83, there being ample copies available to the public. Recommended Motion: Move to adopt Resolution No. 2001-83, being a Resolution approving construction plans prepared by the Minnesota Department of Transportation for the median modifications to Central Avenue at 51 ~ Avenue. rU.-jb Attachment: Resolution Map of intersection layout plan Letter to property owners dated 12/7/01 COUNCIL ACTION: RESOLUTION NO. 2001-83 BEING A RESOLUTION APPROVING CONSTRUCTION PLANS PREPARED BY THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR THE MEDIAN MODIFICATIONS ON TH 65 (CENTRAL AVENUE) AT 51 sr AVENUE FOR THE 2002 CONSTRUCTION SEASON WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation has completed a traffic analysis of the intersection of TH 65 at 51st Avenue; and, WHEREAS, the traffic analysis has shown that median modifications eliminating the left turn out(s) from 51st Avenue onto Central Avenue will improve the safety at this intersection by eliminating cross traffic turning movements; and, WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation is scheduled to let the project in January of 2002; and, WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation will provide construction contract administration for the 2002 construction season; and, WHEREAS, the Commissioner of Transportation requires a resolution from local municipalities approving the project plans. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA, THAT: the City of Columbia Heights approves the construction plans prepared by Mn/DOT dated October 10, 2000, for the median modifications bearing the general title State Project 0207-71, Dated this 17th day of December, 2001 Offered by: Seconded by: Roll Call: CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS By: Mayor, Gary Peterson Patricia Muscovitz, Deputy City Clerk PUBLIC WORKS CENTRAL GARAGE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS PAR~ 637 38TH AVENUE: Iq, E,, COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MN $542!-380~ (76;3) 70~-3700 FAX 70~-3701 December 7, 2001 Dear Property Owner: Subject: Mn/DOT Proposed Median Change to Central Avenue at 51st Avenue The Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) is proposing median modification on Central Avenue at 51st Avenue. Attached is a copy of a drawing which shows the proposed changes bolded out in black. A raised concrete center divide is proposed along with reconstructing the noses of the medians at the left turn lanes at 51st Avenue. The intent of the modifications is to improve safety by eliminating the "left turn outs"from 51 st Avenue. The left turn lanes from Central Avenue in to 51 st Avenue will remain. By eliminating the left turnouts from 51st Avenue onto Central Avenue, the turning movement crossing multiple lanes of traffic (4 or greater) is removed. Mn/DOT traffic studies have shown this to be a source of accident at this intersection. The lanes and turning movements after the proposed median changes are shown on the drawing as bold arrows. The Columbia Heights City Council will be considering Mn/DOT"s proposal at their December 17th Regular Council Meeting at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers located at 590 40th Avenue N.E. If you have any questions or comments regarding the proposal, you are invited to attend the meeting, or you may contact me at 763/706-3705. If approved, the work is planned for 2002 construction. There are no costs to Columbia Heights or property owners for the proposed work. Again, if you have any questions or concernf, or ~e unable to attend the meeting, please feel free to contact me. / S n,W Kegin ~anse-'ri;, P.E. Public' Works Director/City Engineer KH:jb CC: Mayor City Council City Manager Mn/DOT THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE ON THE BASIS OF DISABILITY IN EMPLOYMENT OR THE PROVISION OF SERVICES "SERVICE !S O!.JR BUSINESS" EQU~L OPPOrtUNiTY EMPLOY/ER TDD (763) 706-3692 Proposed Median Modifications /- - oC8 I r' 8624 ~-- Central Avenu 86,24 C~,O D4 n I N~ 1 2/7/01 5075 50655045 ' I ..... ~-~-- . ~ ~ ~ 907 ;900 ~ ~ ~$~ i~l~ ~ ~ l;. ~'~-~~ :~~~ ...... " ' ~ ".,, " ~ 1706 307 I x - 17oo',7o~<,~~~~~'~~'f= ,, ~i--~~ ~,, : CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: 12/17/01 AGENDA SECTION: BID CONSIDERATION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER NO: -'-~ ,.~,. L~ PUBLIC WORKS ,~ j~/~ ITEM: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND BY: K. Hansen BY: AWARDING OF JACKSON POND FENCING, CITY DATE: 12/12/0~ DATE: PROJECT 0009 Background: The Jackson Pond Fencing Replacement was originally part of the Zone 5 bidding package but fencing bids were rejected in May due to bids in excess of $70,000. The original Engineer's Estimate for new fencing and landscaping was $30,000. Staffwas then authorized to rebid the project. Analysis/Conclusions: A separate bidding package was prepared with plans and specs sent out to six contractors. Only one bid was received in the amount of $25,120 from Security Fence in Columbia Heights. Another quote was received in the amount of $29,968, but did not meet the bid submittal requirements and was rejected. The work will consist of removals of all barbed-wire top rails, chain link fabric, gates and comer posts. The north fence line will be moved back to the pond top slope and new black post sleeves will be installed. New comer posts, 2-14' access gates and all new 60" black vinyl coated fencing will be installed. The work has a completion date of May 31, 2002. The issue of screening the entire east fence line needs to be resolved with the current owners of the Rainbow Shopping Center. Landscaping plans have not been prepared and should have an opportunity for neighborhood comment. I would expect resolutions to both issues in the spring of 2002. Recommended Motion: Move to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2001-81, there being ample copies available to the public. Recommended Motion: Move to adopt Resolution No. 2001-81, being a Resolution for the acceptance of bid and award of the Jackson Pond Fencing Replacement, City Project 0009, to Security Fence and Construction, Inc. of Minneapolis, Minnesota, in the amount of $25,120.00 based upon their low, qualified responsible bid to be funded from Storm Sewer Construction Fund 653- 50009-5130; and, furthermore, to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to enter into an agreement for the same. KH.'jb Attachment: Bid Opening Minutes Resolution COUNCIL ACTION: RESOLUTION NO. 2001-81 BEING A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR JACKSON POND FENCING REPLACEMENT CITY PROJECTS 0009 TO SECURITY FENCE AND CONSTRUCTION INC. OF MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for City Project 0009, Jackson Pond Fencing Replacement, bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law. The following bids were received complying with the advertisement: Bidder Security Fence and Construction, Inc. Base Bid $25,120.00 WHEREAS, it appears that Security Fence and Construction, Inc., 4831 Washington Street N.E., Minneapolis, Minnesota, 55421, is the lowest responsible bidder. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA, THAT: The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with Security Fence and Construction, Inc. in the name of the City of Columbia Heights for Jackson Pond Fencing Replacement, City Project 0009, according to plans and specifications therefore approved by the Council. The City Engineer is hereby authorized and directed to return, forthwith, to all bidders, the deposits made with their bids except the deposit of the successful bidder and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until the contract has been signed. Dated this 17th day of December, 2001 Offered by: Seconded by: Roll Call: CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS By: Mayor, Gary Peterson Patricia Muscovitz, Deputy City Clerk CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS Minutes of Bid Opening on Tuesday, November 20, 2001 at 2:00 p.m. City Project No. 0009 2001 Jackson Pond Fencing Replacement Pursuant to an advertisement for bids for City Project No. 0009, an administrative meeting was held on November 20, 2001 for the purpose of bid opening. Bids were opened and read aloud. Attending the meeting were: Kathy Young, Assistant City Engineer Joanne Baker, Public Works Secretary Bids were opened and read aloud as follows: Company Security Fence & Construction Inc. Alternate Base Bid $25,120.00 Public Works Secretary CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: December 17, 2001 AGENDA SECTION: OTHER BUSINESS ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER'S NO: ~-C ~5 CITY MANAGER'S ~//~,~~//~~ APPROVAJF, f/~ ANOKA COUNTY FOR ASSESSMENT SERVICES DATE: 12-5- NO: In 1989, the City of Columbia Heights and Anoka County entered into a joint powers agreement for the County to provide for the assessment of property in Columbia Heights. In 1996, the City entered into a new six-year assessment contract with the County beginning January 16, 1996. That agreement will expire January 15, 2002. Attached is a copy of the new six-year assessment contract, which will provide assessment services, beginning with the 2003 assessment through the 2008 assessment. Cost information was presented at the budget work session of October 29, 2001, for assessment services for 1997-2003 (see attached). Janene Hebert, Anoka County Assessor, was in attendance at the council meeting of November 26, 2001, to respond to questions. This item was tabled from that meeting, and staff was requested to explore the possibility of entering into an arrangement with the City of Fridley for such services. City Manager Fehst spoke to Fridley City Manager Burns. Mr. Burns indicated Fridley would not be able to commit to such an arrangement for next year. However, he was willing to explore such an arrangement in future years. For your information, Fridley considered contracting with the County for assessing services, as it would be less expensive, but decided to continue in-house. Fridley will be spending $160,000 for 2002 assessing services. As of January 2001, Fridley has 10,033 parcels, of which over 8,000 are residential. Attached is information provided by the County on assessment billing/cost analysis for various cities, as well as a comparison of costs per parcel under the City's contract with Anoka County since 1995. The proposed contract with the County allows either party the right to terminate the agreement by providing at a minimum a two year written notice. Staff recommends approval of the joint powers agreement with Anoka County for assessment services, effective January 16, 2002 to January 15, 2008. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the joint powers agreement with Anoka County for assessment services, effective January 16, 2002 - January 15, 2008, and to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute the agreement. COUNCIL ACTION: Anoka County Contract No. JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS AND THE COUNTY OF ANOKA FOR ASSESSMENT OF PROPERTY THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this day of , 2001, by and between the City of Columbia Heights, 590 - 40th Avenue Northeast, Columbia Heights, Minnesota 55421, hereinafter referred to as the "Municipality," and the County of Anoka, a political subdivision of the State of Minnesota, 2100 Third Avenue, Anoka, Minnesota 55303, hereinafter referred to as the "County." WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 273.072, any county and city, lying wholly or partially within the county and constituting a separate assessment district, may, by agreement entered into under Minn. Stat. § 471.59, provide for the assessment of property in the city by the county assessor; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Minn. Stat. §273.03, Subd. 2, the agreement may provide for the abolition of the office of the city assessor when the assessment of the property within the city is to be made under an agreement by the county assessor; and WHEREAS, it is the wish of the County to cooperate with the Municipality to provide for a fair and equitable assessment of the property within the Municipality; and WHEREAS, said work will be carried out in accordance with the provisions of Minn. Stat. § 471.59. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained, it is agreed as follows: I. That said Municipality constitutes a separate assessment district which lies wholly within the county and that all property in the geographical boundaries of this district shall be assessed by the County Assessor of the County beginning with the assessment year 2003, provided this Agreement is approved by the Commissioner of Revenue. 11. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 273.072, Subd. 2, the office of the city assessor in the Municipality shall cease to exist on January 16, 2002, but not before the end of the term of the current city assessor, if serving for a fixed term, or when an earlier vacancy occurs; provided, however, that upon the termination of this Agreement, the office of city assessor shall be automatically reestablished and shall be filled as provided by applicable law or charter in accordance with Minn. Stat. § 273.072. 1II. The term of this Agreement shall be from January 16, 2002, through assessment services performed for the 2008 assessment for taxes payable in 2009, unless earlier terminated as provided herein. IV. In consideration of said assessment services, the Municipality shall pay to the County an annual payment as follows: 2003 Assessment services payable 2004 Assessment services payable 2005 Assessment servmes payable 2006 Assessment services payable 2007 Assessment services payable 2008 Assessment services payable on or before January 15, 2003 on or before January 15, 2004 on or before January 15, 2005 on or before January 15, 2006 on or before January 15, 2007 on or before January 15, 2008 V. For year 2003 assessment services, the Municipality shall pay the County as follows: A. Ten Dollars and 50/100s ($10.50) for each improved parcel of residential, seasonal recreational residential and agricultural type property B. Sixty Dollars and 00/100s ($60.00) for each improved and unimproved parcel of commercial, industrial and public utility type of property C. Sixty Dollars and 00/100s ($60.00) for each improved and unimproved parcel of apartment and mobile home park type property D. Three Dollars and 50/100s ($3.50) for each unimproved residential, seasonal recreational residential and agricultural type property -2- The same procedure shall be used, as described above, in the computation of the assessment payments due in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008; provided, however, that the cost for each type of parcel shall be increased according to the County Assessor's increase in operating costs, cost of living and merit adjustments established by the Anoka County Board of Commissioners for January 1 to December 31 in the year prior to the date of the assessment. VI. Notwithstanding Section Ill. above, the County and/or Municipality shall have the right to terminate this Agreement by providing, at a minimum, two years written notice by certified mail, which notice shall be sent prior to January 2 of any year to terminate assessment services to be performed two years from such date (i.e. to terminate this Agreement for assessment services in the year 2006, the party must provide written notice of termination by not later than January 2, 2004). -3- below. IN 5VITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunder set their hands on the dates written COUNTY OF ANOKA CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS By: Dan Erhart, Chairman County Board of Commissioners Dated: By: Title: Dated: ATTEST By: John "Jay" McLinden County Administrator Dated: By: Title: Dated: APPROVED AS TO FORM By: Dan Klint Assistant County Attorney Dated: By: Title: Dated: dk~contractk200 l~columbia heights-assess jpa (9/21/01) -4- ASSESSMENT BILLING/COST ANALYSIS # OF CITY PARCELS MAPLE GROVE METRO 19000 BROOKLYN PARK METRO 21100 ST. CLOUD RURAL 17491 VIRGINIA CiTY RURAL 6000 $ CITY OF ANOKA METRO 6000 $ FRIDLEY METRO 10000 ~ $ CITY OF CITY OF DULUTH RURAL 52462 $ CITY OF WILLMAR RURAL 7200 $ ALEXANDRIA RURAL 4000 $ ROBBINSDALE METRO 5500 $ CITY OF EDINA METRO 21000 $ CITY OF AUSTIN RURAL 9400 $ COON RAPIDS METRO 21180 $ CITY OF MARSHALL RURAL 4938 $ 2001 COST/ EXP. BUDGET PARCEL $ 640,000.00 $ 33.68 $ 494,870.00 $ 23.45 $ 338,200.00 $19.33 145,000.00 $ 24.17 155,900.00 $ 25.98 -~'~;. ,:,- /~,,; 683,000.00 ~ $13.02 109,700.00 $27.43*** 119,000.00 $ 21.63 616,000.00 $ 29.33 148,000.00 $15.74** 302,000.00 $14.26 148,095.00 $ 30.00 # OF STAFF 6 APPRS/3 CLERI(~ 5 APPRS/1.75 CLER 4 APPR. 1.5 CLERI( 2 APPR. 0 CLERIC 2 APPR. 0 CLERIC 2 APPR. 0 CLERIC 6 APPR. 4 TECH: 2 1/2 APPR. 1/2 CLI 1 1/2 APPR. 2 APPR. 1 CLERIC 5 APPR. 2 CL/TE(: 2 APPR 1 CLERIC, 4 APPR. 1/2 CLERK 2 APPR. 1/2 CLERK * 27% OF PARCELS ARE EXEMPT-RATE PER TAXABLE PARCEL IS $17.75 ** CITY NOT CURRENTLY BILLED FOR COMMERCIAL OR APARTMENT APPRAISALS METRO RURAL $14.26 CoonRapids $13.02 Duluth $14.92 Fridley $15.74 AUSTIN $15.74 AUSTIN $ 21.63 Robbinsdale $19.00 St. Cloud $ 23.31 AVERAGE $ 21.98 AVERAGE $ 23.92 BrooklynP~ $ 24.17 Virginia $ 25.98 Anoka $ 24.53 Willmar $ 29.33 Edina $ 27.43 Alexandria $ 33.68 MapleGrove $ 30.00 Marshall PARCELS/APPRAISER 2469 Marshall 2667 Alexandria 2750 Robbinsdale 2880 Willmar 3000 Anoka 3000 Virginia 3166 Maple Grove 4200 Edina 4220 BrooklynPark 4373 St. Cloud 4700 Austin 4809 Duluth 5000 Fridley 5295 Coon Rapids Residential Vacant 1995 $ 9.21 $ 2.43 1996 $ 9.69 5.2% $ 2.56 1997 $ 8.37 -13.6% $ 2.62 1998 $ 8.52 1.8% $ 2.76 1999 $ 8.67 1.8% $ 2.91 2000 $ 8.95 3.2% $ 3.14 2001 $ 9.46 5.7% $ 3.15 Proposed 2002 $ 9.89 4.5% $ 3.29 Estimated 2003 $ 10.50 6.2% $ 3.50 Compound Annual 1997 - 2003 3.85% Commercial/ Industrial $ 19.64 5.3% $ 20.675.2% 2.3% $ 52.23152.7% $ 5.3% $ 52.540.6% $ 5.4% $ 52.86 0.6% $ 7.9% $ 54.022.2% $ 0.3% $ 55.162.1% $ 4.4% $ 57.644.5% $ 6.4% $ 60.004.1% $ Apartment 51.18 51.65 52.11 53.92 55.16 57.64 60.00 0.9% 0.9% 3.5% 2.3% 4.5% 4.1% CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: December 17, 2001 AGENDA 0-t~-~- % ~.s: ~, e s s ORIGINATING CITY SECTION: Fire APPROV,a~3,/~, ITEM: Establishing 2002 Rental License Fees BY: Dana Alexon BY~/~ NO: DATE: December 12, 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 from 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. This issue was tabled by the City Council at their December 3, 2001 meeting. Staffwas directed to seek the opinions of the rental property owners. These opinions were heard at a meeting of landlords on December 11, 2001 and a summary of those opinions is attached as information for the City Council. Recommended Action MOVE to waive the reading of Resolution #2001-76, there being ample copies available for 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: Current and Proposed Rental License Fees (Current fees adopted by Resolution #2000-11 Febr~ Item Current Fee Proposed Fee Rental License - 1 $15.00 per unit $30.00 per unit or 2 rental units Rental License - 3 $50.00 per building $100.00 per building or 4 rental units Rental License - 5 $50.00 for the first 4 rental $100.00 for the first 4 rental or more rental units units, plus$5.00 per unit over units, plus$10.00 per unit 4. over 4. Reinspection Fee - $50.00 for 1st and 2nd $50.00 for 1st and 2nd 1-3 units Reinspections Reinspections $100.00 for 3r~ and $100.00 for 3~d and subsequent Reinspections subsequent Reinspections Reinspection Fee - $70.00 for 1st and 2nd $70.00 for 1st and 2nd 4+ units Reinspections Reinspections $140.00 for 34 and $140.00 for 3r~ and subsequent Reinspections subsequent Reinspections License 4% times the annual license 4% times the annual license Reinstatement after fee fee Revocation or Suspension Fees shall not be charged for the initial inspection conceming any violation and for any inspection in which all violations are found to be corrected. 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.OO Indirect Expenses Salary and Fringe-Assistant Fire Chief3 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 Revenue Generated from Rental Licensing Program Current Revenue: Rental Licenses Reinspection fees (approx) Total Revenue $20,440.00 5,000.00 $25,44O.OO Proposed Revenue: Rental Licenses Reinspection fees (approx) Total Revenue Notes: 1 2 4 $40,880.00 5,000.00 $45,880.00 2002 budgeted salary and fringe for this position. Volume of paper copies is significantly higher with the rental-licensing program than without it. Without the program thera would be no justification of a copier within the fire department offices. 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. 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 1/3 of the hours occur during the normal 'workday' of 9-5. Inspections occur on 80% of weekdays. Based on 2000 statistics, rental-licensing inspections comprise 26% of total inspections. Summary of Landlord Opinions The Fire Department has advised all rental property owners of the fee increase proposal by mail. In response, we have talked to 35 of the 441 rental property owners (8%) about this issue, either by telephone or at a meeting of rental property owners on December 11. What follows is a summary of the issues and opinions of the owners. 4 owners have indicated complete support for raising fees as requested. These owners indicate the city is much improved over 10 years ago, or they pay more in other communities and feel our program provides a needed service. Owners support the inspection program in most respects and believe it is beneficial for them. They also believe that all property owners in the city benefit from the inspection program and therefore feel that some part of the cost of the program should be shared with all the other property owners. Charge a fee to people using fire dept. services (at emergencies, etc). Raising rates assesses people who can't vote (owners living outside city). 1 owner felt many owner-related expenses are up and rental market is softening. Rent increases may not be an option now. 1 owner wants owner-occupied duplex fees to remain same. Another suggested smaller increases for smaller-sized rental properties and larger increases for the larger sized buildings; felt burden too significant on smaller buildings. Some other owners echoed the thought that the fee structure needs to be re-visited. Several owners indicated they felt the increase was too much at one time. Suggestion to "split the difference" in needed increase or spread increase over more time. Several owners voiced support for this idea. Citizens (homeowners) should pay for inspections related to their properties. Increase would place our fees above most other cities. Prefer that we look at service reductions and cost reductions. Suggestions to change inspection frequency from every 2 years to every 3 years to give owners some break for increased fees. (Owner's contention was that having inspectors come through is enough of a burden that decreased inspection frequency would be a significant advantage to him and he would be willing to pay more for 'less'.) Several owners voiced support for this idea. Suggestion to give "good" properties a break by decreasing inspection frequency yet continue to inspect "bad" properties at same frequency we do now. Other owners noted that varying inspection frequency would not reduce program costs since most costs are fixed. 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 first 4 units, plus $10.00 per unit over 4 $50.00 for 1st and 2nd reinspections $100.00 for 3~ and subsequent reinspections $70.00 for 1 st and 2nd reinspections $140.00 for 3rd and subsequent reinspections 4 ½ times annual license fee Passed this Offered by: Seconded by: Roll Call: __ day of December 2001. Patricia Muscovitz, Deputy City Clerk Mayor Gary L. Peterson CITY COUNCIL LETTER tv~crung oi: rJecemoer 1/, 2OOl AGENDA SECTION: Items for Consideration ORIGINATING CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: Community APPROVAL ~7] _(,}. _q Development DATE: December 12, 2001 y Council is requested to considered potential projects to incorporate in the 2002 CDBG Program application to be submitted to Anoka County on or before January 11, 2002. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: The 2002 competitive CDBG Program Application is due to Anoka County by January 11, 2002. The Council must approve the projects incorporated in the 2002 application before submission. The total grant allocation for Anoka County in 2002 is approximately $1,864,000. Of this amount, $1,114,500 is available for cities and townships, which is 55% of the total grant allocation. Each project submitted is limited to a maximum amount of $300,000. Anoka County staff held a meeting on December 4, 2001 to discuss the 2002 CDBG program and to provide information related to this program. We have attached a copy of the information summarizing the CDBG program. You will note that one of three federal objectives must be met with CDBG funds including: 1) benefit to low and moderate income persons, 2) prevention or elimination of slums and blight, and 3) urgent need. Please also review the eligible activities. Anoka County will likely only fund high priority activities as listed in their Consolidated Plan Goals and Priorities (see attached). Finally, the CDBG program is governed by a number of Federal regulations including Davis-Bacon labor standards, environmental, fair housing, relocation, lead-based paint, equal oppommity, record keeping, and auditing. L City staff offers the following Community Development Block Grant proposals for consideration by the City Council: 1) Staff would recommend a plauning study for the entire industrial park which would provide us with an inventory of existing businesses, a market analysis of these properties, and a planning study to determine the highest and best use of the land and buildings. The Project application for the Industrial Park Redevelopment Planning Study would be for approximately $65,000 - $75,000, based on planning consultant Hoisington Koegler estimate (see attached), which would not include any environmental studies. A Phase I and a Phase II could be added to the study focus. The Elimination of slums and blight would be the federal objective used in the Planning Study application. Planning grants are limited to 20% of the total grant amount. 2) Staff would ask the City Council to consider the acquisition of deteriorated/non-conforming property(s), of which the project maximum would be $300,000. The elim/nation of slmns and blight would also be used if the City Council were supportive of this type of application. However, Anoka County will be looking for projects that are based on a plan and those that have a developer in hand or have determined a furore use of the land. 3) Staff would ask the City Council to consider additional funds to support housing fix-up for a maximum of $300,000. There are currently about 10 Columbia Heights residentgrant applications in process, with an additional 5-6 on the waiting list. The City Council should keep in mind that Columbia Heights was awarded funding of $175,000 out of $300,000 for the acquisition of the Conoco Station last year, but should not necessarily expect a sLmilar funding amount for 2002. Benefit to low and moderate-income persons would be used to meet the federal objective. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends submitting a proposed planning study of the industrial park for the 2002 CDBG Program Application. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to authorize staff to pursue preparation of the 2002 CDBG Program Application to remove slum and blight in the amount of $ $90,000 for the Industrial Park Redevelopment Planning Study; and furthermore, to submit said application to Anoka County. Attachments: CDBG Program information; Anoka County Goals and Priorities Chart; Industrial Park Map Study Area; Koegler Study info COUNCIL ACTION: Community Development Goals and Priorities 2000-2005 PRIORITY COMMUNITY DEVELOPIVIENT NEEDS PUBLIC FACILITY NEEDS Neiahborhood Facilities Parks and/or Recreation Facilities Health Facilities Parking Facilities Solid Waste Disposal Improvements Asbestos Removal Non-Residential Historic Preservation Other Public Facility Needs IaNFRASTRUCTURE Water/Sewer Improvements Street Improvements Sidewalks Sewer Improvements Flood Drain Improvements Other infrastructure Needs PUBLIC SERVICE NEEDS Handicapped Services Transportation Services Substance Abuse Services Employment Training Health Services Other Public Service Needs ANTI-CRIME PROGRAMS Crime Awareness Other Anti-Crime Pro,re'ams YOUTH PROGRAMS Youth Centers Child Care Centers Youth Services Child Care Services * Other Youth Programs SENIOR PROGRAMS Senior Centers Senior Services **Other Senior Programs Priority Need Level High, Medium, Low H L L L L M M M M M L M L L H H H H H H L L H H H H H H H H Community Development Goals and Priorities Page 1 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT _ Rehab: Publicly- or Privately- Owned CI Infrastructure Development Other Conm~ercial/Industrial Improvements Micro-Enterprise Assistance ED Technical Assistance Other Economic Development PLANNING ,, Plannin~ H M H H M L H Community Development Goals and Priorities Page 2 Application Requirements Funding Request Applicants must request a minimum of $5,000 in CDBG funds and are strongly encouraged to have other funds or in-kind contributions committed to the project at the time of application. Eligible Activities Funds maY be requested for the following types of activities: · · · · · · · · Activities Related to Real Property · Acquisition · Disposition · Public facilities and improvements · Clearance and demolition Rehabilitation Activities Code Enforcement Historic Preservation Renovation of Closed Buildings Lead-Based Paint Testing and Abatement Activities Related to Economic Development Planning and Administration (restricted to 20% of the total grant) Public Services Ineligible Activities Funds may not be requested for: Paying off existing debt Acquiring equipment or fixtures which are not permanently affixed to a structure. Acquiring property or construction or rehabilitation of structures to be used for religious purposes or which will promote religious interests. Organizations which acquire or improve facilities with CDBG funds who plan to subsequently lease space to churches or other organizations using the space for religious purposes. CDBG funds for these projects may not be used to pay for agency overhead or administrative costs. The general conduct of government, general government expenses or political activities. 2002 CDBG Request for Proposal Page 2 National Objectives The project must meet one of the following National Objectives: Benefit to Iow and moderate income people (income limits attached) Aid in the prevention of slum and blight; and Meet a need having a particular urgency (urgent need). Benefit to Low and Moderate Income (LMI) Persons Under this objective, CDBG-assisted activities must benefit Iow and moderate income persons using one of the following categories: Area benefit activities: An activity that benefits all residents in a particular area, where at least 51 percent of the residenSare Iow and moderate income persons. Limited Clientele: An activity benefits a limited number of people as long as at least 51 percent of those served are Iow and moderate income. Housing Activities: Providing or improving permanent residential structures which, upon completion, at least 51 percent of the units at affordable rents (see attached Fair Market Rents) will be occupied by Iow and moderate income persons. New construction is not an eligible activity. The fUnds may be used for site acquisition or preparation, but may not be used for the construction costs. Job Creation or Retention Activities: To create or retain permanent jobs, at lease 51 percent of which will be made available to or held by Iow and moderate income persons. Elimination of Slum and Blight Under this objective, CDBG-assisted activities must help to prevent or eliminate slums and blighted conditions using one of the following categories: Area Basis: Activities that aid in the prevention or elimination of slums or blight in a designated area. Spot Basis: Activities that eliminate specific conditions of blight or physical decay on a spot basis not located in a slum or blighted area. 2002 CDBG Request for Proposal Page 3 Urgent Need Use of this category is extremely rare. It is designed only for activities that alleviate emergency conditions. Example: A coastal city is struck by a major hurricane within the last month and does not have any other resources to demolish severely damaged structures which pose a danger to occupants of neighboring structures. This activity would qualify under the Urgent Needs National Objective. County Priorities As required by the Department of Housing and Urban Development, Anoka County will fund projects that fill a high priority in our Consolidated Plan. If all high priority applications have been filled, we will then fund projects that meet a medium priority. Please see attached Housing Goals and Priorities and Community Development Goals and Priorities chart. Applicant Authorization Applications submitted by the cities must be signed by your Mayor or City Manager and authorized by your City Council. Applications submitted by nonprofit organizations or special districts must be signed by an authorized representative and authorized by your Board. A copy of the City Council or board minutes or passed resolution may be submitted after the application due date but not later than March 1, 2002. If more than one application is submitted, the City Council or Board minutes authorizing the application must indicate which is of the highest priority. Submission Requirements Submit at least two original applications (one unbound copy) of your application by the application deadline. Applications must be received, not postmarked, by the application deadline. E-mailed and faxed applications will not be accepted. Selection Criteria Community Development staff will review the applications to make sure that each project is eligible and meets a national objective. Staff will review the applications and rank the applications including but not limited to the questions below: Is the project consistent with the goals and priorities set forth in the 2000 2002 CDBG Request for Proposal Page 4 · · · · · · Consolidated Plan? Is the project implementation schedule realistic? Will the funds be able to be spent in the two-year time frame? Are there sufficient funds to complete the project? How many Iow to moderate income people with the project serve? What is the cost/benefit ration? Does the applicant have unexpended CDBG funds from 1999 or earlier? An application will be disqualified if: the project does not document that the project meets a national objective; the project is found to be an ineligible activity; the project does not fill a high or medium priority in the Consolidated Plan; the application is incomplete, missing information or cannot be obtained. Staff will then forward recommendations to the Anoka County HRA Board. The HRA Board will hold a meeting in February for applicants to present their applications and select the projects to be funded. Contract Requirements Agencies which are awarded CDBG funds will contract with the Anoka County Community Development Department. Contracts will commence on July 1, 2002 or when the environmental review has been completed, whichever date is later. Please note that costs incurred prior to the contract start date will not be reimbursed. Funding for projects must be under contract in the award year and the projects completed within two years. Contracts include conditions relating to a number of federal regulations and County policies which should be considered when planning your project. Environmental Review: Projects which are awarded CDBG funds are subject to federal environmental review requirements (24 CFR Part 58). Do not submit environmental review documents with your application. Anoka County Community Development staff will complete the necessary environmental checklist if your proposed project is awarded CDBG funds. Please note that projects with any of the following characteristics may be subject to federal regulations which require technical reports or studies: projects which affect properties listed or eligible for listing on the National Register; projects which expose users to airport, highway or industrial noise; or, project which affect species listed or proposed for listing as threatened or endangered pursuant to the Endangered Species Act. 2002 CDBG Request for Proposal Page 5 Consequently, you are strongly encouraged to obtain technical assistance from staff prior to completing your application in order to determine whether reports or studies will be required. Your application should include a sufficient amount to cover the cost of the required reports or studies. Davis-Bacon Federal Labor Standards Provisions: Projects which utilize CDBG funds for construction may be subject to Federal labor standards including Davis-Bacon wage rates. These regulations require that construction contractors paid with CDBG funds pay a minimum wage which is typically higher than those paid for projects which are not federally assisted. All construction work is covered even in instances where only a small portion of the work is actually paid with CDBG funds. Please consider this when preparing construction cost estimates and consult with the Anoka County Community Development staff if you need additional information. Local governments which hire a construction contractor for CDBG-assisted projects must ensure that the contractor pay the Federal Davis-Bacon wages. Section 3: Agencies which are awarded $200,000 or more in CDBG and/or other funds from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development will be required to comply with Section 3 regulations at 24 CFR Part 135 if any portion of the funds are used to pay for construction contracts of $100,000 or more. These regulations require that a minimum of 30% of new positions generated by the construction firm as a result of the project be filled by tow- and moderate-income persons. Competitive Procurement: Agencies which use CDBG funds to purchase good or services, including consultant services and construction services, must select the vendor, consultant or construction firm based on a competitive process and in accordance with 24 CFR Part 84 (nonprofit organizations) and 24 CFR Part 85 (local governments) Appraisals: An appraisal will be required when CDBG funds are used to acquire real property and when CDBG funds are used to improve real property leased from a private landlord. Change of Use Restrictions: CDBG-assisted properties must be used for CDBG eligible activities, as opposed to other private or even other public activities. If there is a change or reuse of the property, you must either show that the new use meets a national objective or repay the CDBG program the fair market value of the property. 2002 CDBG Request for Proposal Page 6 Use of CDBG-Assisted Facilities: A CDBG-assisted facility may be rented to another organization which serves Iow- and moderate-income persons provided that the rent charged is below the market rate for such space and is based solely on actual operating costs (for example cost of utilities, consumable goods, janitorial services). A CDBG-assisted facility may be used at times for ineligible activities, such as rentals for private parties or for activities having charges or fees, provided these guidelines: 2. 3. 4. Such uses may not be scheduled so as to displace or conflict with eligible uses; Such uses must be given a lower priority than eligible uses when scheduling use of the facility; Such uses may not comprise more than 30 percent of the facility's regular operating hours during any single quarter; and Fair market rents must be charged for use of the space. Audit: Agencies which spend $300,000 or more in federal funds in a given year must submit to Anoka County an independent audit complying with OMB Circular A-128 (local governments) or OMB Circular A-133 (nonprofit organizations). Insurance Requirements: Agencies will be required to provide evidence of general liability and property insurance coverage and the name of Anoka County · as an insured/loss payee under their policy. The following minimum amounts of coverage are required with an insurer rated A:VII or better by Best's. General Liabili~ $1 million combined single limit per occurrence by bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage, and for policies with aggregate limits, a $2 million aggregate limit · [ Property: 100% replacement value Lead Based Paint: in March, 2001, new Lead Based Paint regulations went into affect for projects funded with CDBG and HOME funds in Anoka County. The new regulations will, in certain circumstances, require the removal of lead based paint according to Safe Work Practices. If your project will include the rehabilitation of a structure built prior to 1978, please contact the Community Development Department to discuss the potential impact. Program Income: Any income generated by your program will be returned to Anoka County and added to the total grant for the following program year. 2002 CDBG Request for Proposal Page 7 Creative Solutions for Land Planning and Design December 11,200l Mr. Tim Johnson City of Columbia Heights 590 40th Street NE Columbia Heights, MN 55421-3835 Re: Industrial Area Study Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. Dear Tim: This letter outlines a preliminary scope of services for the analysis and planning of the industrial area in Columbia Heights. The purpose of the project is to examine the existing industrial area to determine redevelopment potential based on market expectations and physical planning issues. l~his proposed scope of services has been assembled to: Help the City more clearly understand the steps required to create an achievable redevelopment plan. Estimate the cost and timetable for completing a plan. Provide a framework for preparing a final work program that fits the needs of the c ty. Metho#olog~ and Scope This industrial area analysis and planning project would be conducted by.Hoisington Koegler Group Inc (HKGi) with assistance from Bonz/REA. Bonz/REA will be responsible for the market analysis tasks in the project. The firm will also assist with the financial feasibility analysis. HKGi will perform all other tasks. The following outline of tasks indicates our methodology and scope of work for the Columbia Heights Industrial Area Redevelopment Study. 1. Organize the Effort At the outset of the planning process, it will be vital for all parties to have a firm understanding of the anticipated planning activities, and to recognize now and when various project interests will be asked to participate in preparing the study. 1.1. Organize and conduct a "Kick-Off Meeting" with City representatives to introduce the HKGi team, to review the process for the work, and to confirm project goals. The "Kick- Off Meeting" will also provide an opportunity to gain initial insights into the issues and concerns with the project. 1.2. Determine approach(s) to maintain ongoing project communications and define presentation of findings at key times during completion of the work. 1.3. Create a project schedule containing meeting, dates and milestones. 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, MN 55401-1659 Ph (612) 338-0800 Fx (612) 338-6838 Preliminary, Scope of Work December 11, 2001 Page 2 2. Understand the Existing Environment Redevelopment does not occur on an empty field. Redevelopment modifies an existing built environment. The foundation of redevelopment planning is a clear understanding of the existing setting. To create this understanding, HKGi will: 2.1. Review and evaluate previous plans, land controls and other municipal information related to the project area. 2.2. Use existing data to build Geographic Information System (GIS) database and related mapping for the area. At a minimum, parcel level data will include lot configuration, rights-of-way, building size, property valuation, existing land use, comprehensive planning designation, and zoning classifications. 2.3. Determine and collect additional data needed to update and supplement existing information. 2.4. Prepare photo inventory of parcels in project area. 2.5. Review land use and development plans for adjacent areas. 3. Understand the Market Planning cannot take a "Field of Dreams" approach. "If you build it, they will come" rarely works for redevelopment. Successful redevelopment occurs within the context of economic reality. What types and quantities of development can be supported in the project area? What market forces influence the redevelopment of the project area? To create this understanding, HKGi will: 3.1. Provide an understanding of the regional economic context focusing on the economic factors that attract business and investment to this sector of the metropolitan area and the project area. This analysis will examine existing and emerging market dynamics affecting these investment flows. Specific areas of examination will include: · Regional demographic trends, profiles, and projections, focusing on local as well as regional data relating to labor, employment, and growth; · Regional and local employment trends, focusing on industry sectors and their short- term and long-term growth prospects; · Commercial development and absorption patterns, focusing on current performance indices (price/lease rates, vacancy rates, etc.), comparative performances among competing subregions, emerging development locations, likely areas for future development, tenant profiles, and other such factors. 3.2. Conduct interviews of public officials, developers, real estate brokers, property managers, landowners, and other persons possessing technical data as well as insight into current and future development conditions in the project area and nearby competitive market locations. 3.3. Investigate relevant competitive trade areas and the existing and emerging factors shaping local and regional development patterns. These analyses will focus on such Preliminary Scope of Work December l 1, 2001 Page 3 influences in the project area, as well as in the nearby locations and regions that would compete with the project area. Our analyses will examine: · Availability and quality of existing and planned public infrastructure; · Land prices in the subject area and in potentially competitive areas; · Relative proximity to various business and residential amenities; Labor force availability, characteristics, and growth potential; and · Other relevant influences that may emerge during the course of our research. 3.4. Identify the project area's sustainable competitive advantages as well as its potential vulnerabilities. 3.5. Assess the long-term (20-year) development potential in the project area. This assessment will offer insight into each of the major development sectors (residential, office, retail, industrial). For each sector, this assessment will describe the approximate volume, likely locations, and likely character (scale, ~'pes of tenant operations) of fia'ture development, while identifying alternative development opportunities that might be feasible under potential conditions that could be encouraged in the planning process. 4. Explore the Possibilities There is no single "right" approach to redevelopment. Typically, several redevelopment scenarios are possible. Each scenario possesses different strengths and weaknesses. In creating and exploring these possibilities, the HKGi team will: 4.1. 4.2. 4.3. 4.4. 4.5. Develop a list of criteria to be used for selecting redevelopment sites. The criteria will focus on factors such as community needs, market projections, economic projections, shifts in regional market dynamics and opportunities that may be enhanced by the removal of development constraints. Apply the criteria as part of a parcel-by-parcel review of the project area. For example, the review will focus on undeveloped and underdeveloped parcels as evidenced by building valuations, building condition, current users, etc. Identify sites that are expected to redevelop over the next twenty years and calculate the combined land area. Identify a list of potential long-term (2020) uses appropriate for the project area based on market data compiled and the other development goals of the City. Prepare two future land use concepts that depict the goals and probable market realities of the study in varying ways. The alternative scenarios will feature varying patterns of development and land use. The development scenarios will be framed in the realities of their potential for implementation. The feasibility of each concept will be addressed, so that the implications for implementation are considered as the desirability of the development patterns are subsequently evaluated. Preliminary Scope of Work December 1 I, 2001 Page 4 5. Analyze the Feasibility A plan will not lead to redevelopment unless it is financially feasible. Financial feasibility has both public and private elements. Redevelopment often requires public investments to remove physical and economic barriers to development. The public investments must seek to create an environment that attracts and sustains private investment in a manner desired by the City. 5.1. Identify the public actions needed to facilitate the redevelopment scenarios proposed in Task 4. These actions will include infrastructure, site assembly and site preparation. 5.2. Determine if all or part of the project area can qualify as a tax increment financing district and, if so, calculate the funding capacity of the district. 5.3. Analyze the potential applications of tax abatement and the related tax impacts. 5.4. Determine if other public finance tools, such as special assessments and special service districts, play a role in implementation and, if so, how. 5.5. Estimate and project the net new property valuation created by the redevelopment scenarios. 5.6. Conduct a prototype feasibility analysis. This analysis will analyze the financial feasibility of an example redevelopment project. The purpose of this analysis is to evaluate (1) the public assistance needed to induce development in the early years and (2) the potential reduce or eliminate public assistance for future redevelopment. 5.7. Identify the public finance tools available to the City to undertake necessary public actions and evaluate the implications of using the tools. 5.8. Compare the financial feasibility of the proposed redevelopment scenarios. 6. Recommend a Land Use Scenario Building upon the two alternate redevelopment scenarios, and the constructive comments of the City, the HKGi team will recommend a Preferred Land Use Scenario for consideration. The recommended scenario will clearly reflect the goals and objectives of the City. 6.1. Define screening criteria to be used in the assessment of the two redevelopment scenarios developed in Task 4. Screening criteria might include traffic generation, land use compatibility, environmental impacts, fiscal impacts, and infrastructure needs. Apply screening criteria to each of the concepts. 6.2. Select and refine a preferred future land use scenario. The selected alternative will include refinements so that it depicts specific patterns of land use and development, connections to transit, links to existing and new neighborhoods, connections to the community-at-large, circulation patterns, and traffic flow. Preliminary Scope of Work December I 1,2001 Page 5 7. Recommend Implementation Strategies Implementation strategies will be prepared that recommend specific steps required to realize the desired future land use scenario. The following tasks will help define appropriate implementation strategies: 7.1. Identify key public actions required for implementation and provide guidance on the preferred sequencing of actions. 7.2. Prepare an implementation strategy documenting the steps required to implement the recommended land use scenario from Task 6. The strategy will include a specific framework for achieving the strategy. 8. Prepare the Plan HKGi will compile all pertinent text, graphics and tables into a final study report. The report serves two purposes. First, and foremost, the report serves as a tool for encouraging and guiding the redevelopment of the project area. The report also records the information and findings generated through the planning process. 8.1. Assemble a draft study report for review by the City. The draft report will include progress reports, diagrams, maps, photographs, text, etc., along with an executive summary of key study recommendations regarding both "process" and "product". 8.2. Assemble the final study report incorporating changes identified in the review of the draft report. Budget Est/mates Four factors play important roles in shaping the cost of completing a redevelopment planning study: 1. Specific tasks to be performed. 2. Level of detailed information required by the City. 3. Number of meetings to attend and conduct. 4. Overall timetable for completing the plan. Based on our experience with similar projects, the City can expect a budget of $65,000 to $75,000 to complete the tasks described in this letter. A final budget amount can be set once we have additional guidance on the factors listed above. Preliminary Scope of Work December 11, 2001 Page 6 I trust that this letter provides you with the necessary information for consideration of the industrial area analysis. HKGi looks forward to our continued discussions about this exciting and important planning project. Please call me if you have any questions or need additional information. Sincerely, HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP INC R. Mark Koegler President RMK:dbm © 2001 Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. This document is the intellectual property of Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. It shall not be copied, reproduced, distributed or used in any way, except for evaluating credentials, without permission from Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. /kl o% PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 4, 2001 7:00 PM The meeting was called to order at 7:00 pm by Chairperson Ramsdell. Roll Call: Commission Members present-Ramsdell, Schmitt, and Yehle. Council Representative Marlaine Szurek Absent were Commission members Johnson and Ericson. Also present were Tim Johnson (City Planner) and Shelley Hanson (Secretary). Motion by Yehle, seconded by Schmitt, to approve the minutes from the meeting of October 2, 2001. All ayes. MOTION PASSED. PUBLIC HEARINGS NONE NEW BUSINESS A. Site Plan Review Case #2001-1217 KFC of America, A & W 5060 Central Avenue NE Planner Johnson explained this is a request for Site Plan approval to open a new KFC/A&W Fast Food Restaurant on the site of the former Udupi Caf6 at 5060 Central Avenue NE. The proposed restaurant will have dining facilities for approximately 58 patrons as well as providing drive-thru service. The site had previously been used for Udupi Caf6 until fire destroyed the building in February, 2001. The subject property is zoned GB, General Business District which does allow Fast Food Service as a permitted use within the district, subject to Specific Development Standards in Section 7, Page 7-11 (a-f). The surrounding property on the north, south and east is also zoned GB and is used commercially. The property to the west is residential and is zoned residentially. The proposed restaurant meets minimum yard and density requirements, including setbacks, parking, lighting, and height restrictions. It also meets the Specific Development Standards and will not require new curb cuts, or major alterations, as this site was previously used as a similar business. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF THE MEETING DECEMBER 4, 2001 PAGE 2 The applicant is proposing a 3,152 sq. ft. restaurant featuring both Kentucky Fried Chicken and A & W. The applicants are proposing the same type of businesses in various locations in the metro area, including one that is akeady built near Brookdale that will be opening within the next few weeks. The exterior of the building will have a smooth, sand finish stucco, awnings, familiar signage, and clear windows to provide visual aesthetics. They will also construct a new masonry enclosure that matches the building for the waste material. The applicants are proposing to erect a fi'eestanding sign measuring approximately 75 sq ft. on the existing pole in front of the building. According to the floor plan, there will be seating for 58 patrons which requires 29 parking spaces. There are a total of 36 parking spaces provided on the site plan including two handicap accessible parking spaces with an access aisle located on the north side of the building. They- also have submitted plans showing 8 existing trees on the site, as well as four additional maple trees added in front and two spruce trees. This, plus the shrubbery being proposed, exceeds the requirements· The existing fencing at the rear of the property meets the needs for screening between the commercial and residential properties. However, the fencing needs to be repaired and maintained as one of the conditions for approval· The City Comprehensive Plan designates this area for future Commercial development. The proposal should not negatively impact any nearby residential areas and will provide an appropriate reuse of an existing commercial site, so this proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The positive aspects are that it meets the minimum requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and it provides an appropriate use for a commercial site. There are not any negative aspects of the proposal assuming all conditions are met. Therefore, staff recommends Site Plan approval to allow for a KFC/A & W Restaurant in the General Business District, subject to the conditions listed in the recommended motion. These plans have been reviewed by the Fire Department and Public Works, and there appear to be no major concerns. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF THE MEETING DECEMBER 4, 2001 PAGE 3 Motion by Yehle, second by Ramsdell, to approve the Site Plan to allow the operations ora KFC/A & W Restaurant at 5060 Central Avenue NE subject to the following conditions: 2. 3. 4. o All required state and local codes, permits, license, and inspections will be met and in full compliance. All proposed signage must be submitted on the City prescribed application form and must fully comply with the Zoning Ordinance. Solid waste material shall be so located and fenced, as to be removed from public view, and shall be enclosed or contained. Landscaping materials shall be installed in conjunction with site development and prior to issuance of a final certificate of occupancy. A letter of credit or other security as acceptable to the City shall be deposited with the Zoning Administrator in an amount equal to ten (10%) of the estimated landscaping costs. Lighting for the site shall not exceed City Standards at ½ footcandle of light at any residential property line, and 3 footcandles of light at any non-residential property line or curb line. The rear screening fence must be repaired and maintained. Stan Katanic, the representative from GPD Associates, made some comments regarding this new concept of a restaurant that combines the menus of two different types of foods. He stated it is becoming quite popular throughout the country. He was asked what would happened with the current KFC site at 4901 Central Avenue NE. He stated that they will try to sell the property, but that is up to the corporate office to decide. KFC felt the new location is a better site, with better access. Ail ayes. Motion Passed. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF THE MEETING DECEMBER 4, 2001 PAGE 4 B. TIF District Modification The Columbia Heights City Council has proposed to adopt a modification to the Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Plan for Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District #1. MN State Statute 469.175, Subd. 3, requires that the Planning Commission review the modified plans to determine their conformity with the general plans for development and redevelopment of the City as described in the City Comprehensive Plan. Back in May, 1997, the Columbia Heights City Council approved a scattered site redevelopment TIF District to facilitate redevelopment of substandard single family homes throughout the City in order to improve the City's housing stock increase property values, and prevent the spread of blight. Tax increments from the 56 properties listed in the District were to be used to finance land acquisition, demolition, relocations and related development costs. During a meeting in August, it was determined that the City needs to show activity and any modifications need to be complete on each of the 56 parcels in the District by September 8, 2002, or they will be dropped from the district. This would reduce the potential TIF revenue generated for the above mentioned purposes. All project funds generated by the District need to be obligated by that date. At the EDA meeting of October 16, 2001, Commissioners approved making modifications to TIF District #1 that would add 10 parcels to the District. The modified plans were supplied for review. The EDA will be addressing this issue again in December. They need to know the Planning Commission has approved the modifications before they can formally adopt the plan. PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2001-01 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS PLANNING COMMISSION FINDING THAT THE MODIFICATION TO THE DOWNTOWN CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT (CBD) REVITALIZATION PLAN FOR THE CBD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AND THE MODIFICATION TO THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR HOUSING REDEVELOPMENT TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1 CONFORM TO THE GENERAL PLANS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF MEETING DECEMBER 4, 2001 PAGE 5 WHEREAS, the City Council for the City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota, (the "City") has proposed to adopt a Modification to the Downtown Central Business District (CBD) Revitalization Plan for the CBD Redevelopment Project and adopt a Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Housing Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 (collectively, the "Modified Plans") and has submitted the Modified Plans to the City Planning Commission (the "Commission") pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subdivision 3, and WHEREAS, the Commission has reviewed the Modified Plans to determine their conformity with the general plans for the development and redevelopment of the City as described in the comprehensive plan for the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission that the Modified Plans conform with the general plans for the development and redevelopment of the City as a whole. Motion by Ramsdell, seconded by Yehle, to adopt Resolution 2001-01, and to support the action of the Columbia Heights City Council. All Ayes. MOTION PASSED. STAFF REPORT Planner Johnson reminded the members of the Holiday Dinner scheduled for December 18 at the Shorewood Restaurant at 7 pm. Motion by Yehle , seconded by $chmitt , to adjourn the meeting at 7:25 pm. Respectfully submitted, Shelley H~s°~~n (~~~ Secretary