Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSept 25, 1975OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL BUDGET HEARING ON 1976 CITY BUDGET September 25, 1975 -270- The Meeting was called to order at 8:03 p.m. Roll Call: Logacz, Heintz, Norberg, Land, Nawrocki-present Motion by Norberg, Seconded by Heintz to name Margo Emerson Secretary for the meeting. Roll Call: All Ayes There were 13 staff members, 1 newspaper reporter, 2 citizens, and the Council present at this meeting. Mayor Nawrocki explained that the purpose of this meeting is for the purpose of a public hearing on the 1976 budget. He encouraged those present to read the material handed out giving a brief outline on what is anticipated for the 1976 budget. A brief explanation was given on the plans for a short term bond issue as a means for various capital improvements, particularly in the park department. The bond issue is to be retired in three years. Mayor Nawrocki pointed out an assessed valuation for property in Columbia Heights as being approximately $64,000,000. He stated that the projections on the budget indicated a mill levy to be just under 20 mills. He pointed out that the levy in 1975 was 22.83 mills, so the proposal for 1976 is therefore a decrease of just under three mills from the previous year. One item in particular which the Mayor pointed out is $5,000 designated for the Bi-Centennial celebration. He explained that this expenditure would only be made upon council approval. The hand-out material was gone over in a brief detailed examination. Following this overview, questions were entertained by the Mayor. Councilman Norberg questioned whether the root cutter originally proposed for purchase in 1976, which had since been decided to purchase in 1975, had been removed from the 1976 budget. The Finance Director, John Schedler explained that the root cutter had only been discussed during the budget review sessions, but that it had never actually been included as an expenditure in the 1976 budget. Councilman Norberg also questioned an amount of $8,000 in the city planning budget proposed for expenditure for downtown development professional services. He pointed out that the Housing and Redevelopment Authority budget also has $8,000 in their budget for this same item, and he wondered if this was a duplication, or if the proposal is actually to spend $16,OOO. Mr. Bob Bentzen was present from the H.R.A. but could not answer the question, but went to call Mr. Otterson to find out. Both Mr. Schedler and Mr. Watson indicated that they felt that it meant a total expenditure of approximately $16,OOO. -271- September 25, 1975 A discussion was held on the bond issue proposed, and what would be included therein. They are: police facility, park buildings, ski tow at Memorial Park, front end loader, and possible other public improvements including streets and lighted tennis facilities. Lengthy discussion was held on the items proposed to be expended from the Revenue Sharing allotment. The list of items, as appears in the budget pages 52-54, is as follows: OSHA $ 3,000 Other Approp. 58,920 Financ. Admin. 1,850 Police Cars 14,400 Fire Equip. 2,500 Dump Truck 9,000 Downtown Devel. 6,000 Anim. Ward. Vehicle 4,300 Public Safety 45,000 Public Safety Capital 3,980 Fire Truck 40,OOO Park Improv. 30,700 Bldg. Repair 3,050 Engin. Car 1,500 Eng. Equip. 1,200 Street-PickUp 4,000 Street-Equip. 7,700 Street Signs 3,500 Library Improv. 2,500 Libr. Offic. Equip. ],600 Park-Tractor 7,300 Park-Equip. 3,500 Repair Roof of Field House 5,500 $ 261,000 Mr. Watson explained in detail the use of these Revenue Sharing funds. At this time Mr. Bentzen returned with the answer from Dean Otterson regarding the money proposed for professional services in relationship to the downtown development. He stated that $8,550 is proposed in the Housing and Redevelopment Authority budget and $8,000 in the planning budget, totaling $]6,5OO. He explained a few of theprofessiona] services anticipated in the coming year. Councilman Norberg expressed his feeling that the figure was rather high. Councilman Logacz explained that in the past year not much was spent on the downtown development in this area because the plans were in a very primitive stage. In 1976 it is hoped that plans can proceed at a greater rate of speed and more services would be needed than in the past. He pointed out the uncertainty at this stage as to what actually wi]] be needed as an expenditure in this area, because it is not known what will actually be done on the downtown development. September 25, 1975 -272- Mrs. Felix, a resident in the city, was present and asked several questions regarding the downtown development plans, and the community development funding. She was concerned that the people of the city would have no say as towhat would actually be done in the downtown area. Mayor Nawrocki answered that the people would not have a direct vote, other than by referendum after council action has been taken, but that the City Council would hold hearings on each item that is proposed, and the people would have input at these hearings. A lengthy discussion followed on the Section 8 Housing Assistance Program. Mrs. Felix stated that she had heard that there are no funds available under this program. Mayor Nawrocki explained that funds are not available for any new building projects, but that they are available for rent supplements to low and moderate income rentals. Mrs. Felix stressed her belief that the City should refurbish the present buildings in town and not bring in low income outsiders and build low rent housing and create "slums". Mayor Nawrocki pointed out to Mrs. Felix that a good percentage of people in Columbia Heights are considered to be in the low and moderate income bracket, and outsiders would not be the only ones to be considered for any of these programs. Mrs. Felix expressed her feelings that the people of Columbia Heights are not made well enough aware of what is going on in the city, and particularly in respect to the community development funds, and downtown development. Mayor Nawrocki explained efforts to get the news out to people more, and pointed out newsletters whereby it is hoped to get information out to the people of the city. He pointed out that past experience, and in particular a recent hearing on the community development funding application, has found that very few people come to the public meetings where these matters are discussed. Mayor Nawrocki spoke at length on the community development program. Councilman Land asked the Park Superintendent if the plans for 1976 are to reroof the entire Field House, and Mr. Murzyn stated that this was what is planned. Mayor Nawrocki spoke about the capital improvement areas, and the three year bond issue. He pointed out his belief that the $150,000 proposed was not enough for the police station. He questioned whether or not the Council felt more money should be placed in this capital improvement fund. The question was raised as to what is included in the General Public Improvements Section of the bond and Mr. Watson explained that about $70,000 is proposed for streets and $15,000 to $20,000 is included as a city share toward tennis facilities and some other park improvements. Mr. Watson explained the park plans for buildings to be built under the bond. -273,- September 25, 1975 Other questions were raised by the Council on various items prior to the reading of the resolution. Mr. Norberg asked if the Human Rights Commission had submitted a Formal budget, and Mr. Watson stated that they did not. The Mayor asked if he could receive a list of the inventory of every vehicle and piece of equipment the city has. Councilman Norberg spoke in opposition to using Revenue Sharing funds for personnel sa]aries, as in the po]ice department. He said a long range forecast should be made on this spending to see what Future implications this may mean. RESOLUTION #75-50 ADOPTING A BUDGET FOR THE YEAR 1976 AND LEVYING TAXES was Fead at this time, OFfeFed by Land, Seconded by Logacz Following the reading of the resolution a RECESS was called at 10:00 p.m. Meeting reconvened at ]0:20 p.m. Following the recess discussion was held on the resolution under consideration. This discussion centered around the proposed bond issue, Mayor Nawrocki again stated that he felt it should be increased to be sure that enough moneys are available for the new police Facility. Councilman Norberg spoke in opposition to using any city funds For street work. He expressed concern that this would set an undesirable precedence, tie pointed out that in the past all such work was paid by special assessment, and to have the city pay part on Future projects would be an extreme deviation from past po]icy. Lengthy discussion held on these comments by Councilman Norberg. Mr. Heintz pointed out that even if the moneys were availab]e in the bond for contribution to street construction, it would not mean it would actually be done. It would still be for the Council to decide. Mr. Her'ringer was present at this time and asked if this would mean that when the bond issue is retired, would the city still pay the difference between what was actually assessed in the past and the rise in cost, or would it go back to assessing the Full cost. Mayor Nawrock. i explained this briefly, and pointed out that not one single dollar has been committed to paying any part of the street construction work, but that it is only a consideration For the Future, and the moneys will be available should the council decide to actually help Finance street construction in order to keep the costs to the people down. September 25, 1975 -274- Councilman Norberg expressed his desire to have a resolution passed to make sure that this money is not to be paid for other assessable projects than street and curbs. He felt that this might cause the city to I'help financeI' other assessable projects besides street and curb and this would not be desirable. Mayor Nawrocki again pointed out that no money is committed to anything at this time. Motion by Heintz, Seconded by Logacz to increase the bond and interest in the 1976 budget to $300,000 with the increase to be attached to the capital improvement fund. Roll Call: Logacz, Heintz, Land, Nawrocki-Aye Norberg-Nay RESOLUTION #75~50--ROLL CALL ON RESOLUTION AS AMENDED: ALL AYES Resolution was adopted. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS as follows: SECTION A. The budget for the City of Columbia Heights for the year 1976 is hereby approved and adopted with appropriations for each of the departments to be as follows: GENERAL FUND Mayor-Council $ 65,075 Executive 55,830 Finance-Assessing-General 168,445 building Legal 32,900 Planning 27,850 Public Safety 789,980 Public Works 442,425 Sanitation 226,300 Library 97,285 Parks and Recreation 262,825 Unallocated and Transfers 160,450 $ 2,329,365 SECTION B. The estimated gross revenue of the City of Columbia Heights from all sources, including general ad valorem tax levies as hereinafter set forth for the year 1976, the same being more fully detailed in the City Manager's official copy of the 1976 Budget, are hereby found and determined to be as follows: GENERAL FUND $ 2,330,070 REVENUE SHARING 171,000 SECTION C. There is hereby levied upon all taxable property in the City of Columbia Heights a direct ad valorem tax in the year 1975 -2'75- September 25, 1975 payable in 1976 for the following purposes and in the following amounts: PURPOSE AMOUNT GENERAL FUND (including Recreation) POi. ICE PENSION FIRE PENSION BOND AND INTEREST CIVIL DEFENSE $ 896,270 66,000 47,000 300,000 20,240 $ 1,329,510 Provision has been made in the General Fund for payment of the City's Contributory Share to Public Employees' Retirement Association in the amount of S68,740. Provision has also been made in the General Fund revenues for receip[ of the State Sales and Excise Tax local government aid distribution. SECTION D. A certified copy of this resolution shall be transmitted to the County Auditor. RESOLUTION #75-51 CONFIRMING TAX LEVY BY THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY FOR 1976 AS ADOPTED SEPTEMBER 16, 1975 Resolution was read. Offered by Logacz, Seconded by Heintz Following the reading of the resolution Councilman Norberg asked several questions regarding the proposed Housing and Redevelopment Authority budget for 1976. On page 13, under fees for professional services, showing $],0OO, he pointed out tha~ as explained on page 19 of the budget, this is incc, me from "providing services to other agencies" and Mr. Norberg asked whether this included the City of Columbia Heights as one of the agencies. Mr. Otterson explained that these services are for he]ping other Housing and Redevelopment Authorities in other cities. It is recognized by the H.R.A. that at times the know]edge one H.R.A. director might have on a certain topic might be of help to another H.R.A. in another city, and this fund recognizes this cooperative effort between Housing Authorities. This is the purpose of the fund. Councilman Norberg then proceeded to other questions which he had. He noted that the H.R.A. ]975 operations are expected to yield a surplus of Sl3,500 and asked if that was correct. He stated that adding this surplus to the Levy Fund surplus on page 29, by this appears that the H.R.A. is expected to have a surplus at the end of 1975 of about $102,000. Again, he asked if this was correct. Mr. Otterson briefly explained this surplus. September 25, 1975 -276- In his explanation Mr. Otterson, along with Mayor Nawrocki, brought up the fact that this surplus includes $65,000 which was donated to the H.R.A. by the City Council for improvements to the high-rise. Councilman Norberg then asked how the $65,000 managed to find its way into the H.R.A. Levy Fund. He asked if this shouldn't be held in a separate capital improvements fund for the high-rise, rather than in the levy fund. Mayor Nawrocki reiterated the fact that this money will not be spent by the H.R.A. until the actual expenditure has been ultimately approved by the City Council. It was originally intended for use in the hi-rise on the fire safety system, but was ultimately not needed for this purpose. In the meantime, the moneys are being held by the H.R.A. until an appropriate use can be found. Mr. Otterson assured the Council that this is how the H.R.A views the money as well. Next Mr. Norberg noted that on page four in the H.R.A. payroll, after eliminating all items pertaining to the Senior Citizens' High-Rise, it appears that the increase is by 77%, and he asked if this wasn't a bit unusual. He also pointed out that if the increases due to the high-rise were included, the payroll would be increased by over 2½ times. Councilman Norberg asked the following question: "Does the H.R.A. agree that this budget is not a precise statement of what is to be spent and where, but an "economic game plan?" (as stated on page one of the budget) Mr. Otterson answered by pointing out that no budget is precise, but is rather an estimate on how the money is to be spent in the coming year. At this time there was no further discussion on the Resolution and a Roll was taken as follows: Logacz, Heintz, Land, Nawrocki-Aye Norberg-Nay Resolution #75-51 was adopted. Councilman Norberg stated that his reason for voting Nay is because "Any public body that has over $102,OO0 of the public's money in its coffers and not allocated doesn't need another $24,000" Resolution #75-51 reads as follows: BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, that WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Columbia Heights, Minnesota has adopted a budget as shown on the attached document entitled: "Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Columbia Heights, Minnesota 1976 Budget", and WHEREAS, said authority has also resolved that a spec!al tax be levied of $21,390. upon all taxable property, both real and personal, in the City of Columbia Heights, and -2]77- September 25, 1975 WHEREAS, Section 462.545, Subdivision 6 of the Minnesota Statutes requires approval by the governing body of the municipality in and for which said authority was created. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Columbia Heights approves and consents to the levy of $21,390 tax levy upon all taxable property, both real and personal, in the City of Columbia Heights, by said authority, as special taxing district, for- use for the purpose of the redevelopment provisions of Section 464.711 of the Minnesota Statutes. After the formal items on the special meeting agenda were completed, Mayor Nawrocki pointed out and discussed a couple other items. He stated that the Civil Defense recognition dinner is set for Sunday, October 26, 1975. He then referred to a copy of a resolution passed by the Charter Commission regarding the possible consideration of the appointment of a public safety director for the City. The Charter Commission asks that no action be taken on appointing new Chiefs for the Police Dept. and the Fire Dept. until such time as a public hearing can be held on the concept of establishing the position of Public Safety Director, and they offered their services to hold such hearing. Mayor Nawrocki suggested that this would be more appropriately handled by the Police and Fire Civil Service Commission as they are more directly responsible to consider this item more closely. Gerry Herringer was present from the Police and Fire Civil Service Commission and stated that he feels that the commission is not truly the appropriate body either. They would do as directed by the City Council. At this time Councilman Land pointed out that the City Council is the one to actually decide whether to go the route of a public safety director and they would only need a recommendation from others on which to act. He felt that the Council should be the ones to "think on this and come to a decision on the desirable course of action." Councilman Norberg pointed out that the Fire Chief will be retiring on January 31, and if the decision making the process for the possibility of appointing a public safety director will take beyond that time, then something temporary should be done in the meantime. Mr. Land reiterated his feelings that if the Council does want a public safety director, this decision should be made and then the next steiD taken from there. Councilman Heintz stated his feeling that the Charter Commission should hold a hearing on this, as it would require a charter change. September 25, 1975 -278- Councilman Logacz stated that research should be done before any hearing to see how well the use of a public safety director, as opposed to a Police Chief and a Fire Chief, works in other communities. Councilman Norberg stated that he felt that the City Council should be the ones to hold the hearing on a public safety director. Motion by Heintz, Seconded by Norberg to adjourn at ll :34 p.m. Roll Call: All Ayes Secretary