The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2009 04-27 CCP Regular SessionAGENDA CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION April 27, 2009 6:00 P.M. City Council Chambers A copy of the full. City Council packet is_ available to the public. The packet ring binder is located at the front of the Council Chambers by the Secretary. 1. City Council Discussion of Agenda Items and Questions 2. Robbinsdale School District 3. Miscellaneous 4. Discussion of Work Session Agenda Items as Time Permits 5. Adjourn is 0 • CITY COUNCIL MEETING City of Brooklyn Center April 27, 2009 AGENDA 1. Informal Open Forum with City Council - 6:45 p.m. -provides an opportunity for the public to address the Council on items which are not on the agenda. Open Forum will be limited to 15 minutes} it is not televised, and it may not be used to make personal attacks, to air personality grievances, to make political endorsements, or for political campaign purposes. Council Members will not enter into a dialogue with citizens. Questions from the Council will be for clarification only. Open Forum will not be used as a time for problem solving or reacting to the comments made but, rather, for hearing the citizen for informational purposes only. 2. Invocation - 7 p.m. 3. Call to Order Regular Business Meeting -The City Council requests that attendees turn off cell phones and pagers during the meeting. A copy of the full City Council packet is available to the public. The packet ring binder is located at the front of the Council Chambers by the Secretary. 4. Roll Call • 5. Pledge of Allegiance 6. Approval of Agenda and Consent Agenda -The following items are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Councilmember so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered at the end of Council Consideration Items. a. Approval of Minutes 1. April 13, 2009 - Study Session 2. April 13, 2009 - Regular Session 3. April 13, 2009 - Work Session b. Licenses 7. Presentations/Proclamations/Recognitions/Donations a. Presentation Regarding District Court Budget, -Chief Judge James Swenson, 4th Judicial District, Hennepin County -Hennepin County Attorney Michael Freeman -Brooklyn Center Police Chief Scott Bechthold 0 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- April 27, 2009 0 8. Public Hearings a. An Ordinance Relating to Zoning and the Regulation of Adult Establishments: Amending Section 35-2182 to the Brooklyn Center Code of Ordinances -This item was first read on March 23, 2009; published in the official newspaper on April 2, 2009; and is offered this evening for second reading and Public Hearing. Requested Council Action: -Motion to open the Public Hearing. -Take public input. -Motion to close the Public Hearing. -Motion to adopt ordinance. 9. Planning Commission Items None 10. Council Consideration Items a. Resolution Receiving and Accepting the Decision Resources, LTD Summary of Findings for the 2009 City of Brooklyn Center Residential Survey Requested Council Action: -Motion to adopt resolution. . b. Resolution Accepting Bid and Awarding a Contract, Improvement Project Nos. 2009-01, 02, 03, 04, 09, 11 & 12, for the 2009 Neighborhood Street and Utility Improvements (Aldrich Area), James. Circle Watermain Relocation, Centerbrook Golf Course Watermain Improvements, and Emergency Bypass for Lift Station No. 6 Requested Council Action: -Motion to adopt resolution. C. 2009 Budget Amendments 1. Resolution Amending the 2009 General Fund Budget Requested Council Action: -Motion to adopt resolution. 2. Resolution Amending the Special Revenue Fund Budgets Requested Council Action: -Motion to adopt resolution. 3. Resolution Amending the 2009 Public Utility Fund Budgets Requested Council Action: -Motion to adopt resolution. 11. Council Report 12. Adjournment cif Agenda Item No, 6a City C OUu • 0 • MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA STUDY SESSION APRIL 13, 2009 CITY HALL - COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Study Session called to order by Mayor Tim Willson at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Tim Willson and Councilmembers Kay Lasman, Tim Roche, Dan Ryan, and Mark Yelich. Also present were City Manager Curt Boganey, Director of Fiscal & Support Services Dan Jordet, Public Works Director/City Engineer Steve Lillehaug, Director of Business and Development Gary Eitel, Police Chief Scott Bechthold, Assistant City Manager/Director of Building and Community Standards Vickie Schleuning, and Carol Hamer, TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. CITY COUNCIL DISCUSSION OF AGENDA ITEMS AND QUESTIONS Councilmember Roche requested discussion on the following section of the Work Session minutes of March 23, 2009: Page 5, first paragraph following the bullet points at the top of the page. He stated he believes the intent was that the Mississippi Regional trail bed that is pre- existing from 53rd Avenue/Lyndale Avenue, running along the river and up TH 252 be included in the final proposal. He stated there is good focus on 57 b Avenue east of Highway 100. He finds it equally critical to have an opportunity to identify the pre-existing trails on the east side of the City running parallel to the Mississippi River and to include the pre-existing trails into the final proposal. He stressed that he would like to ensure that this will happen. He pointed out that it is a nice bituminous trail that meets all the specifications of a regional trail. Mr. Boganey noted that the City is working on the agreement with the Three Rivers Park District, and that the agreement discusses the Three Rivers Park District acquiring the responsibility and the rights to maintain existing trails and to potentially extend other regional trails. He requested clarification on whether the agreement will specify the regional trails that will be improved or extended in the future. Mr. Eitel responded in the affirmative. He stated based on Council discussion at the March 23, 2009, Work Session, staff will expand discussions with the Three Rivers Park District to consider the Mississippi River Corridor Trail and will look at the 69th Avenue intersection with Shingle Creek as part of that connection. Mr. Boganey requested clarification on whether it is the Council's direction that staff insist that this connection be part of the agreement or that staff attempt to negotiate the connection into the 04/13/09 -1- DRAFT • agreement. Mayor Willson stated his position that including the connection should be strongly negotiated, rather than insisted upon. Councilmember Lasman concurred. Councilmember Yelich stated his recollection of the discussion was that staff would explore that possibility as a way to enhance the trail system. It also tied in with the TH 252 expansion topic on the work session, in that it could help leverage the whole process of being proactive in that expansion by having the Three Rivers Park District being part and parcel of the whole discussion. Councilmember Roche clarified his concern that language is missing in the minutes to acknowledge the pre-existing bituminous trail running along the City's parkland on the east side of the City from the Three Rivers Park at 53`d Avenue/Lyndale Avenue, under 694 into the Riverdale area, and running east up TH 252 to 73`d Avenue. Councilmember Lasman stressed that there should not be too many strings applied to the agreement. She questioned if the discussion relates to an at-grade pedestrian crossing or whether it is being linked to a pedestrian bridge. Councilmember Roche replied that the current discussion relates to the trail specifically. There was the component of a possible opportunity to enhance and find a funding source down the road; however, in this discussion he is not necessarily looking for that pedestrian bridge. He agrees they cannot make that type of demand, but they could make that recommendation or sincere request. Councilmember Ryan stated his support of leaving it to staff's judgment as to what can be • negotiated with the Three Rivers Park District for inclusion in the agreement. Staff should have the prerogative to proceed with the agreement negotiations and look at critical areas to enhance, reporting back to Council with recommendations. Mr. Boganey stated in terms of direction to staff, the minutes do not need to be modified. Staff clearly understands the intent of the City Council, which is to improve a regional connection that will tie in to the regional trail on the east side of TH 252. It was the majority consensus of the City Council not to amend the March 23, 2009 Work Session minutes as discussed. Councilmember Lasman requested the following correction to the Regular Session minutes of March 23, 2009: Page 5, fourth bullet point under Councilmember Lasman's report: "A Vacant Far-age Building Workshop..." It was the majority consensus of the City Council to accept the above correction the March 23, 2009, Regular Session minutes. Councilmember Lasman inquired about the status of the staff report on the prescription drug program, as noted in the March 23, 2009, Study Session minutes. Mr. Boganey replied that he will be summarizing the information that has been gathered for a report to the Council. 04/13/09 -2- DRAFT Councilmember Roche requested discussion on agenda item 7b, specifically in relation to five trees that were lost along the commercial corner of Brooklyn Boulevard next to Culvers. He inquired whether there is an opportunity to ensure that the trees will be replanted. Mr. Lillehaug stated staff will look into the referenced trees; there is a program to replace these types of trees. MISCELLANEOUS Councilmember _Lasman requested discussion on the letter from Bonnie Jude regarding Brookwood. Mr. Boganey replied that staff does not have any more information at this time and has not had an opportunity to meet with individuals from Brookwood. Staff will obtain further information and report to the Council. It was noted that the request regarding Brookwood included the potential demand for a City program to support existing homeowners with fixing up properties. The City is operating with very limited resources and something like this would need to be approached with considerable caution. However, there may be a role for the City to provide some support, possibly some resources to support the effort on the part of existing homeowners. Councilmember Lasman expressed concern that semis have been parking in the Macy's parking lot at Brookdale. Mr. Boganey stated staff will check into the situation; it is not likely that there is authorization for semis to be stored on the parking lot. Councilmember Roche relayed a thank you to staff from an individual that resides near St. _ • Alphonsus Church for the garbage bins near France and 69th Avenues and Halifax and 69th Avenues. DISCUSSION OF WORK SESSION AGENDA ITEMS AS TIME PERMITS DUSHARME DRIVE - NAME CHANGE - CITIZEN Council reviewed the staff report on the citizen request to change the name of Dusharme Drive. Councilmember Lasman stated in investigating the origin of the current name she was not able to find anything that indicated an attachment to holding the name of Dusharme Drive for perpetuity. There was discussion on whether changing the name could be viewed as private advertising. It was noted that the concern driving the request to change the street name seems to be facilitating people in finding the business located on the street. Mr. Lillehaug advised if the concern is locating the street he would suggest 48th Avenue, Abbott, or Beard, which are the north/south streets in the area. 48th Avenue would likely be the most appropriate, as the street is an extension of 48th Avenue. It was suggested that Mr. Ansari be informed that the Council is not considering changing the 18 street name to that of a business because of obvious precedence, but that Council is considering 04/13/09 -3- DRAFT . renaming the street 48th Avenue, which would be logical, and people would be able to locate the street easier. If Mr. Ansari does not wish to proceed with the name change to 48th Avenue, then the name could remain as is. If Mr. Ansari believes it would assist with his concern, the name change could proceed. ADJOURN STUDY SESSION TO INFORMAL OPEN FORUM WITH CITY COUNCIL Councilmember Roche moved and Councilmember Lasman seconded _to adjourn the Study. Session to Informal Open Forum at 6:45 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. RECONVENE STUDY SESSION Councilmember Ryan moved and Councilmember Lasman seconded to reconvene the Study Session at 6:48 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. The discussion continued on the requested name change of Dusharme Drive. It was the majority consensus of the City Council to direct staff to inform Mr. Ansari that the Council is not considering changing the street name of Dusharme Drive to that of a business • because of obvious precedence, but that Council is considering renaming the street to 481' Avenue which would be a logical number and people would be able to locate the street easier. If Mr. Ansari does not wish to proceed with the name change to 481' Avenue, the name could remain as is, and if he believes it would assist with his concern, the name change could proceed. Mr. Boganey stated staff will make contact with Mr. Ansari to inform him of the Council's direction and report back to the City Council. SURLY BREWING SALES REQUEST - CITY MANAGER Mr. Jordet provided an overview of the Surly Brewing sales request. He explained Surly has grown beyond the State set maximum production size that would allow it to continue the sale of the brewery's special beer "Darkness" in growlers from the brewery. In order for the sale of Darkness in growlers to take place during Surly's special fall event, it is possible that the City of Brooklyn Center could act as the retailer for growlers at the event site by leasing a space and opening a small retail location for the one-day event. Staff believes that a significant profit could be made running this event. The steps to take would be to assure that the appropriate legal arrangements are followed. Mr. Jordet requested discussion on whether Council supports the opportunity for the City to sell the product and make a profit for Brooklyn Center Liquor. If Council is supportive, staff will prepare the proper paperwork and Council resolutions to allow the event to take place with Brooklyn Center Liquor's participation. • 04/13/09 -4- DRAFT Councilmember Lasman stated her support of the City making a profit with the event and promoting a business in the City. Councilmember Yelich stated his support of Brooklyn Center Liquor retailing the product for the fall event, as well as consideration of an ongoing relationship of Brooklyn Center Liquor retailing Surly Brewing growlers. ADJOURNMENT Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Roche seconded to close the Study Session at 7:00 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. 0 • 04/13/09 -5- DRAFT • MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION APRIL 13, 2009 CITY HALL - COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. INFORMAL OPEN FORUM WITH CITY COUNCIL CALL TO ORDER INFORMAL OPEN FORUM The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Informal Open Forum called to order by Mayor Tim Willson at 6:45 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Tim Willson and Councilmembers Kay Lasman, Tim Roche, Dan Ryan, and Mark Yelich. Also present were City Manager Curt Boganey, Director of Fiscal & Support Services Dan Jordet, Public Works Director/City Engineer Steve Lillehaug, Director of Business and Development Gary Eitel, Police Chief Scott Bechthold, Assistant City Manager/Director of Building and Community Standards Vickie Schleuning, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, and.. Carol Hamer, TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. r Mayor Tim Willson opened the meeting for the purpose of Informal Open Forum. No one wished to address the City Council. Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Roche seconded to close the Informal Open Forum at 6:47 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. 2. INVOCATION Mayor Willson requested a moment of silence and personal reflection as the Invocation. 3. CALL TO ORDER REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Regular Session called to order by Mayor Tim Willson at 7:00 p.m. 4. - ROLL CALL Mayor Tim Willson and Councilmembers Kay Lasman, Tim Roche, Dan Ryan, and Mark Yelich. Also present were City Manager Curt Boganey, Director of Fiscal & Support Services • Dan Jordet, Public Works Director/City Engineer Steve Lillehaug, Director of Business and 04/13/09 -1- DRAFT Development Gary Eitel, Police Chief Scott Bechthold, Assistant City Manager/Director of Building and Community Standards Vickie Schleuning, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, and Carol Hamer, TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. 5. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. 6. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to approve the Agenda and Consent Agenda, as amended, with corrections to the Regular Session minutes of March 23, 2009, and the following consent items were approved: 6a. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. March 23, 2009 - Study Session 2. March 23, 2009 - Regular Session 3. March 23, 2009 - Work Session 6b. LICENSES • LIOUOR - CLASS D ON-SALE INTOXICATING AND SUNDAY, Embassy Suites 6300 Earle Brown Drive MECHANICAL Assured Htg, AC Centerpoint Energy Howell Heating Kevin's Htg & Cooling Master Mechanical, Inc. River City Sheet Metal Sedgwick Htg & AC Wenzel Htg & Air Yale Mechanical RENTAL INITL4L 3707 61St Ave N 2819 64th Ave N 6031 Colfax Ave N • 6806 Drew Ave N Passed with Weather Deferral 5120 Ewing Ave N 5737 Girard Ave N 5547 Humboldt Ave N Passed with Weather Deferral 04/13/09 334 Dean Avenue E, Champlin 9320 Evergreen Blvd, Coon Rapids 21303 Pomroy Avenue N, Scandia 6474 20th Avenue S, Hugo 1027 Gemini Road, Eagan 8290 Main Street NE, Fridley 8910 Wentworth Avenue S, Minneapolis 4145 Sibley Memorial Highway, Eagan 9649 Girard Avenue S, Minneapolis Doug Wahl Amanda Syhaketh J Thomas Equities LLC Thomas Davidson David Buth Michelle Rae Robins Gaogiang Liu -2- DRAFT 6765 Humboldt Ave N 6325 Kyle Ave N 7025 Logan Ave N 6412 Major Ave N 7030 Regent Ave N RENEWAL 7206-12 West River Rd 5124 65' Ave N 6234 Brooklyn Blvd 6613 Camden Dr 5200 Drew Ave N 5548 Dupont Ave N 7211 Girard Ave N 5344 Twin Lake Blvd E 4519 Woodbine La 6d. RESOLUTION NO. 2009-51 AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF ONE STREET SWEEPER AND TWO DUMP TRUCKS WITH ACCESSORIES SIGN HANGER Express Signs 19320 Yukon Street NW, Cedar 6c. RESOLUTION NO. 2009-50 DESIGNATING 2009 PLANTING LIST OF_ ALLOWABLE BOULEVARD TREE SPECIES 0 6e. RESOLUTION NO. 2009-52 REGARDING THE DISPOSITION OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 2008-003 SUBMITTED BY THE LUTHER COMPANY LLLP, AMENDING AND SUPERSEDING RESOLUTION NO. 2008-80 0 Motion passed unanimously. 7. PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS/RECOGNITIONS/DONATIONS 7a. PRESENTATION BY HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF RICHARD STANEK Hennepin County Sheriff Richard Stanek provided a presentation on the services provided by the Hennepin County Sheriff's Department. Moeen Masood & Shehla Alavi Rebeca Merdan Justin McGinty Jared Lundgren Doug Wahl Jason Ingbretson Joseph Okrakene Thomas Johnson Mark One Resources LLC Morris Matthews John Lindahl Tommy Vang Takasi Sibuya Benson Vang 7b. RESOLUTION NO. 2009-53 RECOGNIZING THE DESIGNATION OF BROOKLYN CENTER AS A TREE CITY USA FOR THE SEVENTEENTH CONSECUTIVE YEAR, AND A PROCLAMATION DECLARING APRIL 24, 2009, ARBOR DAY AND MAY 2009 ARBOR MONTH IN BROOKLYN CENTER 04/13/09 -3- DRAFT • Mr. Boganey introduced the item, discussed the history, and stated the purpose of the proposed resolution. Councilmember Ryan moved and Councilmember Roche seconded approval of RESOLUTION NO. 2009-53 Recognizing the Designation of Brooklyn Center as a Tree City USA for the Seventeenth Consecutive Year. - Motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded approval of a Proclamation Declaring April 24, 2009, Arbor Day and May 2009 Arbor Month in Brooklyn Center. Motion passed unanimously. 7c. PRESENTATION BY WATERSHED COMMISSIONER DELLA YOUNG Ms. Della Young provided information on the Great Shingle Creek Watershed Cleanup Week. She requested participation from the City in the cleanup event scheduled for Saturday, April 25, 2009. The event starts at the Brooklyn Center Community Center where information will be distributed on the designated areas for cleanup. Brooklyn Center City officials, commissioners and employees will be handing out pastries, trash bags, and gloves to volunteers. . 1. PROCLAMATION DECLARING APRIL 18-25, 2009, AS THE GREAT SHINGLE CREEK WATERSHED CLEANUP WEEK Councilmember Yelich moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to approve a Proclamation Declaring April 18-25, 2009, as the Great Single Creek Watershed Cleanup Week. Motion passed unanimously. 2. PROCLAMATION DECLARING APRIL 22, 2009, AS EARTH DAY IN BROOKLYN CENTER Councilmember Ryan moved and Councilmember Roche seconded to approve a Proclamation Declaring April 22, 2009, as Earth Day in Brooklyn Center. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Boganey stated the Sons of the American Legion will be providing a $200 contribution that will be used to cover food and beverages for those that participate in the event. 8. PUBLIC HEARING 8a. CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DISEASED TREE REMOVAL COSTS, DELINQUENT . WEED REMOVAL COSTS, AND DELINQUENT ABATEMENT COSTS 04/13/09 -4- DRAFT Mr. Boganey introduced the item and stated this is the continuation of a public hearing that was called on March 9, 2009, to consider certification of proposed special assessments. At the March 9, 2009, Public Hearing several individuals brought forward issues with respect to special assessments being applied against the properties in question. The Council has received a report in response to each of the property owners that came forward with questions about assessments at the March 9 h Public Hearing. Mr. Boganey stated the Council has been provided with a revised list of special assessments due to some of the individuals paying the unpaid amounts prior to tonight's meeting. Staff recommends that the Council conduct a single Public Hearing on the proposed special assessments. Following the Public Hearing, it is requested that the Council consider adopting the individual resolutions related to these particular issues. Councilmember Yelich moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to open the continued Public Hearing. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Tom Reed, 5543 Dupont Avenue N, addressed the City Council and stated he no longer lives at this address. He called the bank and they said the property was repossessed but could not tell him the date. The assessment is on the grass cutting and the City water bill and he has received another bill from the City stating the amount of money that needs to be paid. He stated they do not even have the keys to the house. He was notified by the company. replacing the meters_for _ electronic readings and he informed them that they no longer live there. He stated he does not know how to resolve the problem and that TCF should end up paying the charges. rd Ms. Hilda Herrera Garcia, 3506 53 Avenue N, addressed the City Council and stated she has a big tree in her front yard that is diseased. The inspector said she has to pay $1,500 and they will remove the tree and also said someone at her house could do it. Her husband and nephew tried to do it and they took almost the whole tree down, but they do not have the tools to remove the base of the tree. The inspector came the next day and said they would have to take down the rest of the tree. She stated they do not have money to pay this, but the inspector told them there is a special program. She expressed concern that the letter she has received states that they need to pay by tomorrow, and that they would like more time because they do not have the money. Mr. Boganey reviewed the letter referred to by Ms. Garcia. He explained the letter states if payment is not made by a certain date that interest is applied. The policy with tree removal is that payment can be made in full to avoid interest or it can be paid over five years in equal installments. Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to close the Public Hearing. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. LeFevere explained in Mr. Reed's case it is being proposed that the unpaid charges will be turned over for collection with the taxes. This is not Mr. Reed's problem unless he still has obligations to the bank under his contractual agreement with them. No proposal is being made to pursue the special assessment as a personal obligation. In regards to the property on 53r Avenue, 04/13/09 -5- DRAFT from what he has seen in the past, the contracts the City has for tree removal prices the removal • on the diameter of the tree that is a certain height above ground. If a landowner takes the smaller branches off the top it may not save them any money. The landowner would likely need to complete all of the work or pay the bill. Mayor Willson noted this is a public relations type of thing the City should do by informing the landowner about the costs. In this case the City has incurred the expense with the contractor. It was noted that well over 50% of the special assessments are to mortgage companies and banks, rather than to individuals. 1. RESOLUTION NO. 2009-54 CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DISEASED TREE REMOVAL COSTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Roche seconded to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2009-54 Certifying Special Assessments for Diseased Tree Removal Costs to the Hennepin County Tax Rolls. Motion passed unanimously. 2. RESOLUTION NO. 2009-55 CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DELINQUENT WEED REMOVAL COSTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY . TAX ROLLS Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2009-55 Certifying Special Assessments for Delinquent Weed Removal Costs to the Hennepin County Tax Rolls. Motion passed unanimously. 3. RESOLUTION NO. 2009-56 CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR ABATEMENT COSTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS . Councilmember Ryan moved and Councilmember Yelich seconded to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2009-56 Certifying Special Assessments for Abatement Costs to the Hennepin County Tax Rolls. Motion passed unanimously. 9. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS None. • 04/13/09 -6- DRAFT • 10. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEMS 10a. MAYORAL APPOINTMENT TO PLANNING COMMISSION Mayor Willson announced the appointment of Carlos Morgan to the Planning Commission with a term expiring December 31, 2009. Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to ratify- the _ Mayoral- appointment of Carlos Morgan to the Planning Commission with a term expiring December 31, 2009. Motion passed unanimously. 10b. RESOLUTION NO. 2009-57 REMOVING CERTIFIED ASSESSMENT FROM MARCH 9, 2009, UNPAID UTILITY CHARGES ASSESSMENT ROLL Mr. Boganey introduced the item, discussed the history, and stated the purpose of the proposed resolution. It was noted that the new meter reading system should alleviate the problem resulting from estimates that are needed when residents do not send in their water meter reading cards. _ • Councilmember Yelich moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2009-57 Removing Certified Assessment from March 9, 2009, Unpaid Utility Charges Assessment Roll. Motion passed unanimously. 10c. RESOLUTION NO. 2009-58 AMENDING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR THE YEARS 2009 THROUGH 2023 Mr. Boganey introduced the item, discussed the history, and stated the purpose of the proposed resolution. It was noted that the City is being proactive by making this project shovel ready for possible stimulus funds. Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2009-58 Amending the Capital Improvement Program for the Years 2009 through 2023. Motion passed unanimously. 10d. RESOLUTION NO. 2009-59 ACCEPTING THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FROM DONALD SALVERDA AND ASSOCIATES FROM THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER CITY COUNCIL AND DEPARTMENT HEADS 2009 LEADERSHIP . PLANNING AND TEAM BUILDING RETREAT AND ADOPTING A MISSION 04/13/09 -7- DRAFT . STATEMENT, VALUES STATEMENT, AND GOALS PROGRAM Mr. Boganey introduced the item, discussed the history, and stated the purpose of the proposed resolution. Councilmember Yelich moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2009-59 Accepting the Executive Summary from Donald Salverda and Associates from the City -of Brooklyn Center City_ Council and_ Department Heads 2009 Leadership Planning and Team Building Retreat and Adopting a Mission Statement, Values Statement, and Goals Program. Motion passed unanimously. 11. COUNCIL REPORT Councilmember Yelich reported on the following: ■ His attendance at the April 4, 2009, Northwest Suburban Remodeling Fair. The City of Brooklyn Center was represented in terms of home safety. ■ A joint meeting with the MPCA and the City of Brooklyn Center regarding 57th and Logan Avenues groundwater issues is scheduled for April 16, 2009, at 6:00 p.m. at the Earle Brown-Heritage Center__ Councilmember Lasman reported on her attendance at the following events: ■ March 25, 2009, Local Board of Appeal and Equalization training. It is mandatory that the City have at least one Council Member who has taken this training before the Board of Appeal and Equalization begins. There are now three members on the Council that are board certified. ■ April 9, 2009, North Hennepin Area Chamber of Commerce membership luncheon, which included a virtual tour of the new Twins baseball stadium. Councilmember Roche reported on the following: ■ His attendance at the March 26, 2009, Cultural Awareness Workshop at the Brooklyn Center Police Station, which covered cultural nuances for Hmong, Liberian, and Hispanic individuals living in Brooklyn Center. ■ His attendance at a meeting at Cross of Glory Lutheran Church to reach out to the individuals in the area relative to the man who was beaten in Brooklyn Center a couple of weeks ago. The meeting was followed up by a March 31, 2009, neighborhood meeting at Cross of Glory Lutheran Church sponsored by the Brooklyn Center Police Department with community leaders to discuss the events and actions taken. ■ His attendance at an April 9, 2009, seminar at the U of M by author John Gerzema on branding in today's economy. He was pleased to learn of the many people in the metro area that have some tie into the Brooklyn Center community. ■ A Vacant Homes and Code Enforcement workshop is scheduled for April 21, 2009, 7:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. at the Brooklyn Center Police Station. • 04/13/09 -8- DRAFT • An international family event is scheduled for April 23, 2009, 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. at the Northwest Suburban Integration School District, Earle Brown Plaza, 6860 Shingle Creek Parkway, Suite #210. Information is available at 763- 450-1332. Councilmember Ryan reported on the following: ■ His attendance at the March 26, 2009, Cultural Awareness Workshop at the Brooklyn Center Police Station with discussion on the distinct cultural norms of Latino, Hmong; and Liberian..people_ ■ His attendance at the March 31, 2009, Public Safety Meeting at Cross of Glory Lutheran Church addressing the recent home invasion and burglary event in the City. The involvement of the neighborhood was very important and the Police Department was very effective in handling the event. ■ Police Department and Crime Prevention Committee Award Ceremony for law enforcement officials, first responders, and citizens who have acted above and beyond the call of duty is scheduled for April 15, 2009, at 7:00 p.m. in Constitution Hall. ■ An informational meeting with City staff and the MPCA on the 57th and Logan Avenues Redevelopment Site is scheduled for April 16, 2009, at the Earle Brown Heritage Center, 6155 Earle Brown Drive. An open house will be held at 6:00 p.m. with a formal presentation at 7:00 p.m., followed by a question and answer session. Mayor Willson reported on his attendance at the following events: ■ March 25, 2009, Local Board of Appeal and Equalization training. ■ March 26, 2009, noon luncheon with BCBA. Thank you to Mr. Boganey for the outline of the State of the City speech. ■ March 28, 2009, Royal Lau Armed Forces Day event in Brooklyn Park. ■ March 30, 2009, Dangerous Dog Hearing. ■ April 8, 2009, attendance at the BCALL spaghetti dinner fundraiser. ■ April 10, 2009, reception for the President of Liberia where he presented the Liberian President with a key to the City and spoke with a number of the City's Liberian constituents. Chief Bechthold and staff were recognized for their work with the Liberian community. Officer Nagbe was also recognized for his diligence in becoming an officer in the City of Brooklyn Center with the Liberian community. 12. ADJOURNMENT Councilmember Yelich moved and Councilmember Lasman seconded adjournment of the City Council meeting at 8:13 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. • 04/13/09 -9- DRAFT MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA WORK SESSION APRIL 13, 2009 CITY HALL -_COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council/Economic Development Authority (EDA) met in Work Session called to order by Mayor/President Tim Willson at 8:14 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor/President Tim Willson and Councilmembers/Commissioners Kay Lasman, Tim Roche, Dan Ryan, and Mark Yelich. Also present were City Manager Curt Boganey, Public Works Director/City Engineer Steve Lillehaug, Director of Business and Development Gary Eitel, Police Chief Scott Bechthold, Assistant City Manager/Director of Building and Community Standards Vickie Schleuning, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, and Carol Hamer, TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.- SURLY BREWING SALES REQUEST - CITY MANAGER Discussion continued on the Surly Brewing sales request. The majority consensus of the City Council was support of Brooklyn Center Liquor acting as the retailer for Surly Brewing Darkness growlers at the special fall event by leasing a space at the event site and opening a small retail location for the one-day event. Councilmember Yelich encouraged staff to look into an ongoing relationship with Surly Brewing in terms of Brooklyn Center Liquor retailing growlers. Mr. Boganey stated staff will continue investigating this issue, and will hopefully come back to the Council with the necessary resolutions for approval. STRATEGIC GOALS/DESIRED OUTCOMES - CITY MANAGER Mr. Boganey provided an overview and answered questions of the Council on the 2009 Ongoing Goals as revised based on the March 23, 2009, City Council Work Session discussion. There was discussion on the following in relation to the 2009 Ongoing Goals: Goal 1: Desired outcome of Goal 4 will become desired outcome #5 under Goal 1. 0 04/13/09 4- DRAFT • Goal 2: ■ The following are to be included as performance measures of the City's financial stability: 1) City's Al bond rating; 2) City's auditor report with no significant findings; and 3) City's receipt of the Excellence in Financial Reporting Award. ■ Goal desired outcome #2 under Goal 7 to become goal desired outcome #3. ■ Goal desired outcome #3 under Goal 7 to become goal desired outcome #4. Goal 3: - It was questioned if the purpose of this goal was to maintain or lower the total cost burden to residents or to primarily focus on property taxes. Mr. Boganey stated he believes this goal focuses on property taxes as opposed to fees. He stated the resident survey gave the indication that there is an indication in the community that property taxes are high, and historically there have been comments that property taxes are excessive and too high. In relation to fees, State law and Council policy state that fees should reflect no more than the cost of delivering the service. In order to reduce fees, the cost of delivering service would need to be reduced. There are other goals that speak to efficiency and delivering service in the most efficient manner. Goal 4: ■ Evidence of achieving this goal would be City employees reporting code enforcement issues they observe. Incorporate Goal 4 into Goal 1. Goal 1 will be restated as follows: To continue to provide quality, cost effective services with limited resources. The desired outcome of • Goal 4 will become desired outcome #5 under Goal 1. Goal 5 (New Goal 4): Remove desired outcome #3 (may be a success indicator). ■ New desired outcome #3: The City will receive direct support for City needs from State, County, and Federal legislators. Goal 6 (New Goal 5): Amend as follows: To improve the City's image with citizens and others outside of the City's borders. Goal 7 (New Goal 6): ■ Incorporate Goal 7 into Goal 2. ■ Eliminate goal desired outcome #1. ■ Goal desired outcome #2 to become goal desired outcome #3 under Goal 2. ■ Goal desired outcome #3 to become goal desired outcome #4 under Goal 2 and amended as follows: The City will position itself for significant economic growth. The majority consensus of the City Council was to direct staff to revise the 2009 Ongoing Goals as discussed above. Mr. Boganey indicated that the Strategic Goals will be discussed at the next Council Work • Session. 04/13/09 -2- DRAFT • 2009 BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS -CITY MANAGER Mr. Boganey provided background information on the proposed 2009 budget adjustments. He explained that following the City Council Retreat each department went through their budgets line item by line item and was asked to find a way to reduce their budget by 10%. Based upon the information received from department heads, he and the Finance Director met with each department and tried to come up with the sets of adjustments which would have the least impact on service delivery and follow the general policy parameters that the Council established during the retreat. He stated he believes staff has come up with a reasonable set of adjustments that meet what they think is the worst case scenario for 2009 and still preserve quality service. Mr. Boganey provided an overview and answered questions of the City Council on the proposed 2009 budget adjustments. There was discussion on the following in relation to the proposed budget: Finance Department Fund transfers to the Utility Fund Police Department Defer family children services risk analysis - Deferment would be until January 1, 2010, when. additional JAG funds will be available to the Police Department. Reduce station staffing (24 hour coverage) for % of year - Staff will look further into smoothing the transition of laying off the part-time employees. Parks Maintenance Goose removal reduced/eliminated - It was noted it may not be sustainable to eliminate this line item from the budget. Staff will look into the effect of this practice on the baseball fields at Evergreen Park. Mr. Boganey stated staff anticipates it would be feasible to carry forward the vast majority of the proposed adjustments into 2010. However, if there were to be an additional $700,000 in cuts. it will be a struggle to balance the 2010 budget. The majority consensus of the City Council was agreement with the proposed 2009 budget adjustments as presented. AMERICAN LEAGUE DONATION REQUEST-BCALL The Council reviewed the staff report regarding the request for a $300 donation to the American Little League. There was discussion that funding the donation request would set a precedent and that similar organizations would also expect the same funding. The majority consensus of the City Council was to direct Mr. Boganey to draft a letter for the Mayor's signature to the Brooklyn Center American Little League informing them of the City . Council's position against funding non-profits. 04/13/09 -3- DRAFT 0 LEGISLATIVE UPDATES Mr. Boganey informed the Council that he is not aware of any legislation pending at this time that would be of alarm to the Council This item will be included on the next Work Session agenda. MISCELLANEOUS Councilmember Lasman requested discussion on the topic of a freeze on Council salary wages due to the current condition of the economy. She stated her position that this action would be appropriate if it were to be taken prior to a recommendation by the Financial Commission. It was noted that this gesture may be symbolically important, but that it is somewhat of an empty gesture. It was noted that the policy of City Council salaries being reviewed by the Financial Commission was put in place in order for the review to be conducted by an independent group of qualified volunteers that receive no pay. There was discussion on foregoing attendance at the National League of Cities Conference as a cost savings measure. It was noted that Council participation in this type of conference upgrades the knowledge of the City Council. Mayor Willson informed the Council that there is currently legislation being considered that would allow cities to use funds from hotel taxes that are currently required to be allocated to a visitors bureau as they see fix. • ADJOURNMENT Councilmember/Commissioner Lasman moved and Councilmember/Commissioner Roche seconded adjournment of the City Council/Economic Development Authority Work Session at 10:13 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. 04/13/09 -4- DRAFT City Council Agenda item -No. 6b • 0 . COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Maria Rosenbaum, Deputy f'~City Clerk DATE: April 21, 2009 ' - SUBJECT: Licenses for Council Approval Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council consider approval of the following list of licenses at its April 27, 2009, meeting. Background: The following businesses/persons have applied for City licenses as noted. Each business/person has fulfilled the requirements of the City Ordinance governing respective licenses, submitted appropriate applications, and paid proper fees. Applicants for rental dwelling licenses are in compliance with Chapter. 12 of the City Code of Ordinances, unless comments are noted below the property addresson the attached rental report. • MOTOR VEHICLE DEALERSHIP Cars with Heart 6121 Brooklyn Blvd Brookdale Metro Mitsubishi 7231 Brooklyn Blvd R.L. Brookdale Motors 6801 Brooklyn Blvd MECHANICAL Air Corps LLC Knight Heating & Cooling Louis Degidio Services M & D Plumbing & Heating Major Mechanical Schadegg Mechanical RENTAL See attached report. SIGN HANGER Signation Sign Group 3700 Annapolis Lane, Plymouth 13535 89t' Avenue NE, Otsego 21033 Heron Way, Lakeville 11050 26' Str NE, St. Michael 11201 86th Avenue N, Maple Grove 225 Bridgepoint Dr, So St Paul 6840 Shingle Creek Pkwy 0 Rental Licenses for Council Approval on April 27, 2009 InspectorClerkClerkClerkPoliceUtilitiesAssessing DwellingRenewalUnpaidUnpaid Property AddressOwnerCalls for Service Typeor InitialUtilitiesTaxes 4701 Eleanor LnSingle FamilyInitialCharles BrightNone per 12-911 OrdinanceOKOK 6412 Lee Ave NSingle FamilyInitialRebecca MerdanNone per 12-911 OrdinanceOKOK 6906 Newton Ave NSingle FamilyInitialEric SyrstadNone per 12-911 OrdinanceOKOK 3501 47th Ave N1 Bldg 11 UnitsRenewal Richard GrommesNone per 12-913 OrdinanceOKOK 3513 47th Ave N1 Bldg 11 UnitsRenewalRichard GrommesNone per 12-912 OrdinanceOKOK Willow Lane Apts2 Bldgs3 Burglary, 1 Dist Peace RenewalJason QuillingOKOK 7015 Brooklyn Blvd58 Units(.07 calls per unit per 12-913 Ordinance) 4700 Lakeview AveTwo Family - 1RenewalNancy DahlquistNone per 12-911 OrdinanceOKOK 2928 67th Ln NSingle FamilyRenewalBenjamin & Nicole TrammNone per 12-911 OrdinanceOKOK 3913 France PlSingle FamilyRenewalBetty NelsonNone per 12-911 OrdinanceOKOK 6007 Girard Ave NSingle FamilyRenewalBen DossmanNone per 12-911 OrdinanceOKOK 5636 Irving Ave NSingle FamilyRenewalBruce GoldbergNone per 12-911 OrdinanceOKOK 5307 Penn Ave NSingle FamilyRenewalBen DossmanNone per 12-911 OrdinanceOKOK Rental Licenses for Council 4 Inspector Property Address 4701 Eleanor Ln 6412 Lee Ave N 6906 Newton Ave N 350147th Ave N 3513 47th Ave N 7015 Brooklyn Blvd Willow Lane ADts 4700 Lakeview Ave 2928 67th Ln N 3913 France PI 6007 Girard Ave N 5636 Irving Ave N 5307 Penn Ave N oval on April 27, 2009 Clerk Clerk Clerk Police Dwelling Renewal Type or Initial Owner Calls for Service Single Family Initial Charles Bright ,None per 12-911 Ordinance Single Family Initial ( Rebecca Mercian (None per 12-911 Ordinance Single Family ( initial ( Eric Syrstad None per 12-911 Ordinance 1 Bldg Renewal Richard Grommes None per 12-913 Ordinance 11 Units 1 Bldg Renewal Richard Grommes None per 12-912 Ordinance 11 Units 2 Bldg Renewal Jason Quilling 3 Burglary, 1 Dist Peace 58 Units (.07 calls Der unit Der 12-913 Ordinance) JTwo Family (1) (Renewal Nancy Dahlquist (None per 12-911 Ordinance Single Family (Renewal IBenjamin & Nicole Tramm (None per 12-911 Ordinance ISingle Family (Renewal IBetty Nelson INone per 12-911 Ordinance Single Family Renewal IBen Dossman None per 12-911 Ordinance ISingle Family (Renewal IBruce Goldberg None per 12-911 Ordinance Single Family (Renewal IBen Dossman None per 12-911 Ordinance Utilities Assessing Unpaid Unpaid Utilities Taxes OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK I OK OK ( OK OK I OK OK I OK OK I OK OK OK C1tY Council Agenda Item NO. la • 0 City of Brooklyn Center O:r A Millennium Community COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM TO: City Council FROM: Curt Boganey, City Manag6 f~ - DATE: April 23, 2009 J SUBJEC T : Public Presentation - Impact of District Court Budget Reductions Recommendation: The Mayor has invited Chief Judge James Swensen and Hennepin County Attorney Michael Freemen to address issues that may affect Brooklyn Center and Citizens in general if some of the proposed changes being considered by the State legislature are enacted. The Police Chief will provide introductions and a staff perspective. Background: Budget Issues: There are no budget issues to consider. • 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430-2199 City Hall & TDD Number (763) 569-3300 FAX (763) 569-3494 ww w.cityo fbrooklyncenter. org Recreation and Community Center Phone & TDD Number (763) 569-3400 FAX (763) 569-3434 8a ncil Agenda Item NO. Cif' CO° • 0 • MEMORANDUM - COUNCIL ITEM DATE: April 21, 2009 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Gary Eitel, Director-of Business and Development Aj SUBJECT: An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35-2182 of the City Code of Ordinances Regarding Zoning and the Regulation of Adult Establishments COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: It is recommended that the City Council, following public hearing, adopt An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35-2182 of the City Code of Ordinances Regarding Zoning and the Regulation of Adult Establishments BACKGROUND: On the April 27, 2009, City Council Agenda is a second reading and public hearing for ordinances amending Chapter 35.2182 relating to zoning and the regulation of adult establishments. This matter was first read on March 23, 2009, published in the official city newspaper on April 2, 2009, and if adopted, would become effective on June 6, 2009. COUNCIL BUDGET ISSUES: There are no budget issues associated with the adoption of this ordinance. 0 • MEMORANDUM - COUNCIL ITEM DATE: March 17, 2009 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager - FROM: Gary Eitel, Director of Business and Development SUBJECT: An Ordinance Relating to Zoning and the Regulation of Adult Establishments: Amending Section 35-2182 to the Brooklyn Center Code of Ordinances COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: It is recommended that the City Council proceed with the first reading and setting of the second reading and public hearing for April 27, 2009 for an ordinance amending Chapter 35 of the City Code Regarding Adult Establishments. BACKGROUND: In 2006 the State Legislature adopted Minn. Stat. 617.242 which defined and regulated "adult establishments Cbusinesses with live performances). This statute provided requirements which prohibited the location of a new adult business from locating within 50 miles from an existing adult business, set limits on the days and hours of operation, and prohibits uses from operating within 500 feet of a residential property or within 2800 feet of a school or place of worship. The statute applies to all cities that do not have ordinances that address all of the State's regulations on adult establishments and does provide the option of opting out of this state statute. A federal district court has found that the statute's requirements relating to notice, distance, and hours of operation would likely violate the First Amendment. The City Attorney is recommending that the City amend its ordinance, exercising its right to Opt-Out of the State Statute based on the serious questions that have been raised about the constitutionality of the Statute. Attached for your reference is a copy of the staff memo discussed at the March 9, 2009 City Council Work Session. COUNCIL BUDGET ISSUES: There are no budget issues associated with the adoption of this ordinance. • CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the day of , 2009, at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an Ordinance Amending Chapter 35-2182 of the City Ordinances Regarding Zoning and the Regulation of Adult Establishments. Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the City Clerk at 763-569-3300 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 35-2182 OF THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES REGARDING ZONING AND THE REGULATION OF ADULT ESTABLISHMENTS • THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 35-2182 of the Brooklyn Center City Code of Ordinances is amended to add the following new paragraph 4: 4. Minnesota Statutes Section 617.242 shall not apply in the Citv. Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty days following its legal publication. Adopted this Mayor 0 ATTEST: Date of Publication Effective Date day of , 2009. City Clerk (Strikeouts indicate matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter.) 1 MEMORANDUM - CITY COUNCHADA WORK SESSION DATE: March 4, 2009 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Gary Eitel, Director of Business and Development 4 SUBJECT: Adult Entertainment Establishments - Discussion on the Opt-Out Option Provided within Minnesota Statute 617.242. COUNCIL ACTION REQUIRED: Provide direction to staff whether to opt out of Minnesota State Law or continue to monitor the situation regarding Adult Entertainment Establishments. BACKGROUND: June 23, 2008 City Council Work Session ADULT ENTERTAINMENT ESTABLISHMENTS This issue was brought to the Council about one year ago when the state law was passed At that time it was determined to wait and see if there are any legal challenges and to report the current status to the Council in one year. Mr. Boganey stated the City has several options in terms of whether to do anything at this time. There are certain elements of the state law that cover regulations that city ordinances do not deal with. In those particular cases, if the City does not opt out, state law would apply; if they determine to opt out, the City could adopt its own standards. Mr. Boganey requested discussion from the Council on whether this is an issue the City wants to deal with at this time. It was noted that this issue is an example of where the City should be proactive. It was suggested that a comparison be conducted of the City's ordinance with ordinances of other communities. There was discussion on the possibility of an interpretation that adult use entertainment establishments am being prohibited if limits on proximity are too restrictive. An analysis on Subdivision 3 was requested. Mr. Boganey noted that currently state regulations apply where the City does not have regulations. He suggested a review of the current City Ordinance and the State Statute, determining whether to incorporate City regulations where the state has assumed responsibility. This may help in deciding whether to opt out of the State Statute. The majority consensus of the City Council was to direct staff to present Council with comparative information and options regarding regulations on adult use establishments. Staff has contacted cities adjoining Brooklyn Center and has discovered that this issue has not been or is necessarily planned to be discussed in the foreseeable future. • A recent contact with the League of Minnesota Cities Research Division did not provide any additional information other than that previously provided by the City of Minneapolis and the City of Lakeville regarding decisions to opt-out. However, contacts to the Cities of Minnetonka and Plymouth indicated that they were considering the opt-out option at a future date. As pmt of the review the attached memorandum was prepared by the City Attorney in which she comments on the following" • Regulating Options • City's Current Ordinances • State Law • Conclusion/recommendation Attached is a copy of the June 23, 2008 staff memo; 2007.Minnesota Statute, and city codes relating to Adult Establishments. COUNCIL POLICY ISSUES: Should the City defer consideration until such time as the State Legislature examines the constitutionality of their state wide regulations relating to Adult Entertainment Establishments? Should the City proceed with an ordinance to opt-out of the State Statute based on the concerns raised on the constitutionality of the Statute? r • Mary D. Tie§ea 470 US Bank Plaza 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis MN 554M (612) 337-9277 telephow (612) 337-9310 fax mtie4en@bnnedy-gwmn.com W://www.kenu-*_-emven.coM MEMORANDUM To: Ron Warren, Planning and Zoning Specialist Gary Eitel, Community Development Director From: Mary D. Tiet en, Attorney Date: October 23, 2008 Re: Regulation of Adult Entertainment Establishments You asked that I prepare a brief summary of the City's options for regulation of adult businesses. In particular, you have asked about the effect of the current state statute and whether the City should "opt out" of that statute. 1. Reeulatorv~ Options. Cities may regulate adult uses through zoning ordinances, licensing ordinances, and through prohibitions against public nudity. Some cities opt for only zoning, while others use a combination of both zoning and licensing. Zoning ordinances either disperse adult uses or concentrate them in a particular area. Ordinances that disperse adult uses typically apply a "buffer distance" that separates adult businesses from more sensitive uses, such as residential. areas, churches, school, public parks, etc. Courts have upheld these types of zoning regulations as long as the separation or buffer requirement leaves a reasonable amount of area for an adult business to locate in the City. What is reasonable will vary from city to city and will depend, in part, on the nature and make-up of the community. Cities may also regulate adult uses by licensing them. Licensing requires caution because courts view it as a "prior restraint on free speech." Therefore, a licensing ordinance must be carefully drafted to provide narrow and objective standards that limit the discretion of the city. It must also contain certain procedural safeguards. Licensing ordinances typically contain provisions that require applicants to disclose certain information such as name, age, criminal history and allow for background checks. Many ordinances also disqualify applicants who have been convicted of certain sex crimes. Courts have upheld these types of ordinances. Cities may also prohibit public nudity. The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld city ordinances requiring dancers in adult establishments to. wear minimal clothing during performances. Cities can also prohibit liquor in establishments where there is totally nude dancing. 34174M MDT BR2914 2. City's Current Ordinance. The City's current ordinance regulates adult uses through zoning and provides some additional restrictions for performances at "adult cabarets." Under City Code section 35-330, adult establishments are permitted uses in the I-1 Industrial Park Zoning District. Section 35-2182 provides the findings for the City's adult use regulations and defines the applicable terms. Section 19-1900 defines "adult cabaret" and requires that certain conditions be met (age of dancers, distance that dancers must maintain from patrons, no tips, etc.) Section 19-1703 prohibits nudity in public places. 3. State Law. In 2006, the State Legislature adopted Minn. Stat. § 617.242. The statute defines and regulates "adult establishments" (businesses with live performances). It does not regulate other uses, such as adult theaters or adult bookstores. The statute requires written notice to a city before a business may open and allows a city to hold public hearings on the proposed adult establishment. The statute disqualifies persons convicted of certain sex crimes from operating a business. Also, under the statute, a city is not required to provide a location for an adult business if another adult business already exists within 50 Wailes of the city. Finally, the statute limits the days and hours of operation of adult uses and prohibits such uses from operating within certain distances of residential property, schools, places of worship and other adult businesses. Several of these requirements are problematic in light of the First Amendment protection adult uses receive. - A federal district court found- that the statute's requirements relating to notice, distance, and hours of operation would likely violate the First Amendment. Although the constitutionality of the statute has been called into question, it is still on the books. The statute applies in all cities that do not have ordinances regulating adult establishments. For those cities that do have ordinances, the statute will apply in areas that the ordinance doesn't cover. Subdivision 7 of the statute allows cities to "opt out" of the statute, meaning a city can adopt an ordinance providing that the statute does not apply within the city. Several cities have adopted provisions in their ordinances opting out of the state statute. 4. Conclusion. My recommendation is that the City amend its ordinances to opt out of the state statute. Serious questions have been raised about the constitutionality of the statute. Also, based on my experience in this area and defending cities in challenges by adult business owners, much of the statute is not consistent with existing law. The City already has the ability to regulate adult establishments and may do so in a way that does not violate the First Amendment, yet takes into account the specific needs and characteristics of the City. Public nudity is currently prohibited under the City's nuisance ordinance. The Council could consider additional licensing regulations for adult establishments, but should consider the additional administrative oversight and monitoring that licensing would require. Licensing is not required, of course, but is simply another alternative if the Council wishes to pursue additional regulatory control in this area. s 34174M MDT BR291-4 2 • MEMORANDUM- COUNCIL WORK SESSION DATE: June 23, 2008 -TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Vickie Schleuning, Assistant to the City Manager Ron Warren, Planning and Zoning Specialist SUBJECT: Status of Minnesota Law regarding Adult Entertainment COUNCIL. ACTION REQUIRED Provide direction to staff whether to update current ordinance, Opt Out of Minnesota State law, or continue to monitor the situation regarding Adult Entertainment Establishments. BACKGROUND In 2006, Minnesota State Laws were passed in regards to Adult Use Entertainment establishments, specifically Minnesota Statutes 5 617.242.. This statute section is provided in Attachment L This statute was challenged in federal district court and the judge issued an injunction preventing the city of Duluth from acting under this law because he felt it would most likely be found unconstitutional. At this time, no efforts to amend Minnesota Statute or resolve the constitutionality issues associated with the adult use state law have been identified The MN Statute applies to cities throughout the state as follows: 1) If a city has no ordinance regulating adult business this law applies 2) A city ordinance can be more restrictive or an ordinance can say the state law does not apply 3) Even if a city has an ordinance regulating some adult uses the state law applies to any adult uses not regulated by the city ordinance. Therefore, the League of Minnesota Cities is recommending that cities consider adopting regulations regarding adult use establishment. Cities that already have adequate regulations for adult use facilities may wish to consider adopting language opting out of the State Law. Example "opt out" language from the City of Lakeville is provided in Attachment L7 The City of Brooklyn Center Zoning Code 35-2182 regulates the zoning district for locating an adult establishment. Adult establishments are permitted in the Industrial Park (I=1) District. However, the city codes do not address other areas specified by MN State • Law including limits on days and hours bf operation; proximity to other adult • 0- entertainment establishments, residential areas, certain educational facilities and religious institutions; and restrictions on backgrounds of ownership or management. (Provided in Attachment In. Because of this language, there is a possibility that the state law would apply and create legal challenges. The City Attorney's Office would need to be consulted in implementing any decision since issues involving adult entertainment uses are legally complex. COUNCIL POLICY ISSUES • How does the City Council want to respond to the state-wide initiative regarding adult uses? • Should the City Council consider opting out of the Minnesota State law? • Is the current ordinance and regulations sufficient to protect the public health, safety and welfare? 4 i_ 2 • Att h ac ment I Minnesota Statute 617.242 2007 Minnesota Statutes 617.242 ADULT ENTERTAINMENT ESTABLISHMENTS. - Subdivision 1. Definitions. For purposes of this section: (1) "adult entertainment establishment" means a business that is open only to adults and that presents live performances that are distinguished or characterized by an emphasis on the depiction of sexual conduct or nudity; (2) "sexual conduct" has the meaning given in section 617.241; and (3) nudity has the meaning given in section 617.292, subdivision 3. Subd. 2. Notice to local government unit. A person must not operate an adult entertainment establishment at a location where this type of establishment was not previously located unless, at least 60 days before submitting a permit application for operation of the establishment or, if a permit is not required, at least 60 days before beginning operation of the establishment, the person gives written notice by certified mail to the chief clerical officer of the statutory or home rule charter city in which it will be located of the date on which the person intends to begin operation of the establishment. If the adult entertainment establishment is proposed to be located__ _ outside the boundaries of a statutory or home rule charter city the notice must be given to the clerk of the town board and the county auditor of the county in which the establishment is proposed to be located. Upon receipt of the notice, the officer must acknowledge receipt of the notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, addressed to the person, and notify the governing body or town board of the receipt of the notice. The governing body or town board may conduct hearings on the proposed operation of the adult entertainment establishment and must give written notice by ordinary mail to the operator of the establishment of any hearings. Subd. 3. Zoning; adult entertainment establishments. If an adult entertainment establishment is located within 50 miles of a statutory or home rule charter city or town, the governing body of the city or the town board is not required to provide by zoning or otherwise for a location within the city or town limits in which an adult entertainment establishment may be located. If an adult entertainment establishment is located within 50 miles of the boundaries of a county, the county board is not required to provide by zoning or otherwise for a location within the county limits in which an adult entertainment establishment may be located. Subd. 4. Proximity. An adult entertainment establishment may not operate in the same building as, or within 1,500 feet from, another adult entertainment establishment; within 500 feet of residential property, regardless of how the property is zoned; or within 2,800 feet of a public or private elementary or secondary school or a church, synagogue, mosque, or other place of worship. Distances are measured between the closest property lines. Subd. 5. Hours and days of operation. An adult entertainment establishment located in a statutory or home rule city, town, or county that does not regulate hours of operation may not be open for business before 10:00 a.m. or after 10:00 p.m. on • Monday through Saturday and may not be open for business on a Sunday or legal • holiday. Subd. 6. Restrictions on ownership or management by persons convicted of certain crimes. A person who has been convicted of one of the following offenses may not operate or manage an adult business establishment for three years after discharge of the sentence for the offense, or a similar offense in another state or jurisdiction: (1) prostitution under section 609.321; 609.324; or 6093242; (2) criminal sexual conduct under sections 609.342 to 609.3451; '(3) solicitation of children under section 609.352; (4) indecent exposure under section 617.23; (5) distribution or exhibition of obscene materials and performances under section 617.241; (6) use of a minor in a sexual performance under section 617.246; or (7) possession of pornographic work involving minors under section 617.247. Subd. 7. Local regulation allowed. If a county, town, or statutory or home rule charter city does not enact an ordinance or regulation governing adult entertainment establishments, this section applies in the county, town, or city. A county, town, or city may adopt an ordinance or regulation that is consistent with this section, that supersedes or is in whole or in part more restrictive than this section, or that provides that-this section-.does not appix in the county, town,.or city, and the county., town, or . city ordinance applies. If a county, town, or city adopts an ordinance that only regulates a portion or facet of the operation of an adult entertainment establishment, this section applies to the remainder of the operation that is not regulated by the county, town, or city ordinance, unless the ordinance provides otherwise. History: 2006 c 240 s 2 4 Attachment H- Brooklyn Center City Code Section 35-2182. ADULT ESTABLISPIlv=S. 1. Findinas and Purpose Studies conducted by the Minnesota Attorney General, the American Planning Association, and cities such as St. Paul, Minnesota; Indianapolis, Indiana; Hopkins, Minnesota; Ramsey, Minnesota; Minnetonka, Minnesota, Rochester, Minnesota; Phoenix, Arizona; Los Angeles, California; and Seattle, Washington have studied the impacts that adult establishments have in those communities. These studies have concluded that' adult establishments have adverse impacts - on the surrounding neighborhoods. These impacts include increased crime rates, lower property values, increased transiency, neighborhood blight, and potential health risks. Based on these studies and findings, the City Council concludes: a. Adult establishments have adverse secondary impacts of the types set forth above. _._b. The..adv._exs _impacts caused by adult ptablishmmts- tend to diminish if adult establishments are governed by geographic, licensing, and health requirements. C. It is not the. intent of the City Council to prohibit adult establishmentsI from having a reasonable opportunity to locate in the city. d. Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.357, allows the City to adopt regulations to promote the public health, safety, morals and general welfare. e. The public health, safety, morals. and general welfare will be promoted by the City adopting regulations governing adult establishments. 2. Definitions For purposes of this section, the following terms have the meanings given them.. a. "Adult Establishment" means a business where sexually-oriented materials are sold, bartered, distributed, leased, or furnished and which meet any of the following criteria: 1) a business where sexually oriented materials are provided for use, consumption, enjoyment, or entertainment on the business premises; 2) a business that is distinguished or characterized by an emphasis on the description or display of specified sexual activities; 3) a business that is distinguished or characterized by an emphasis on the description or display of specified anatomical areas; 4) an adult cabaret as defined in Section 19-1900, Subdivision 5) a business providing sexually oriented materials only for off-site use, consumption, enjoyment or entertainment if the portion of the business used for such purpose exceeds 25% of the retail floor area of the business or. 500 square feet, whichever is less. b. "Sexually oriented materials" means visual, printed or aural materials, objects or devices that are distinguished or characterized by an emphasis on the, depiction or description of specified anatomical areas or specified sexual activities. C. "Specified Anatomical Areas" means: 1) Less than completely and opaquely covered human genitals, pubic regions, buttocks, anuses, or female breasts below a point immediately above the top of the areola; and 2) Human male genitals in a discernable turgid state, even if completely and opaquely covered. d. "Specified Sexual Activities" means: 1) Actual or simulated: sexual intercourse; oral copulation; and intercourse; oral-anal copulation; bestiality; direct physical stimulation of unclothed genitals; flagellation or torture in the context of a sexual relationship; the use of excretory functions in the context of a sexual relationship; anilingus; buggery; coprophagy; coprophilia; cunnilingus; fellatio; necrophilia; pederasty; pedophilia; piquerism; sapphism; or zooerastia; 2) Clearly depicted human genitals in the state of sexual stimulation, arousal, or tumescence; 3) Use of human or' animal ejaculation, sodomy, oral copulation, coitus, or masturbation; 4) Fondling or touching of nude human genitals, pubic regions, buttocks, or female breasts; 5) Situations involving a person or persons, any of whom are nude, who are clad in undergarments or in sexually revealing costumes and engaged in the flagellation, torture, fettering, binding, or other physical restraint of any person; 6) Erotic or lewd touching, fondling, or other sexually oriented contact with an animal by a human being, or 7) Human excretion, urination, menstruation, or vaginal or anal irrigation. 3. Adult establishments may be located only as allowed by Section 35-330 of this • code. 6 Attachment III- Example Opt Out Language PUBLIC NOTICE ORDINANCE NO. 820 CITY OF LAKEVILLE DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA; AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 3, CHAPTER 10 ' AND TITLE 11, CHAPTER 34 OF THE LAKEVMLE CITY CODE CONCERNING SEXUALLY ORIENTED BUSINESSES AND USES - THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKEVILLE, MINNESOTA ORDAINS: SECTION 1 Title 3-10-1 of the Lakeville City Code is amended by adding subparagraph C to read: C. Minn. Stat, Section 617.242 shall not apply. SECTION 2. Title 11-34-3 of the Lakeville City Code is amended by adding subparagraph E to read: E. Minn. Stat. Section 617.242 shall not apply. SECTION 3. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication. ADOPTED this 5th day of March, 2007,by the City Council of the City of Lakeville, - Mionesota. CITY OF LAKEVILLE BY: Holly Dahl, Mayor ATTEST: Charlene Friedges, City Clerk 3/10/07 s 7 • 0 City Council Agenda Item No. 1Qa City of Brooklyn Center A Millennium Community COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM TO: City Council FROM: Curt Boganey, City Manageef~ DATE: April 23, 2009 SUBJECT: Resolution accepting 2009 Citizens Survey report Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council consider adoption of the subject resolution receiving and accepting the 2009 Brooklyn Center residential citizen survey. Background: This Citizens survey was authorized by the City Council as part of the 2009 budget. EDA and specifically approved grant funding was provided to conduct the survey. From a staff perspective the survey was recommended to meet the grant goals of establishing -an understanding of recreational needs and gaps in the community. In addition staff felt it would be helpful to establish a base line regarding citizen perceptions related to service quality. From a Council perspective the survey was seen as a tool to receive broad based feedback regarding strategic successes, needs and expectations in the community. The City Council received the results and discussed them briefly during the February goal setting retreat. In March the Council received an in depth briefing from Dr. William Morris regarding these findings and their meaning. You have received a copy of the final summary report from the survey. The City will also receive a complete in depth cross tabulated report that will include the many details that the summary is based upon. Budget Issues: There are no budget issues to consider. 04-27-09. citizensurvey.. doc • 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430-2199 City Hall & TDD Number (763) 569-3300 FAX (763) 569-3494 www. cityo fb rooklyncenter. org Recreation and Community Center Phone & TDD Number (763) 569-3400 FAX (763) 569-3434 . its adoption: Member introduced the following resolution and moved RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION RECEIVING AND ACCEPTING THE DECISION RESOURCES, LTD SUMMARY OF FINDINGS FOR THE 2009 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER RESIDENTIAL SURVEY WHEREAS, the City Council each year establishes strategic goals and plans for the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council and staff believe that Citizen input is critical to successful planning and decision making; and WHEREAS, Decisions Resources, LTD is the preeminent public survey firm in Minnesota proving Cities with scientifically valid responses from residential citizens; and WHEREAS, Decisions Resources conducted a telephone residential citizen survey involving 400 randomly selected adults in Brooklyn Center during the period of February 3 thru February 19, 2009, regarding a variety of quality of life and community need issues; and WHEREAS, the City Council and staff will utilize this feedback to enhance and . improve service delivery and policy making, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, to receive and accept the Summary of Findings and Report on the 2009 City of Brooklyn Center Residential Study as submitted by Decisions Resources, LTD. Anri127, 2009 Date ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof. and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 0 0 DECISION RESOURCES, LTD. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS 2009 City of BrooklynCenter Residential Study Residential Demographics: Brooklyn Center is a mature, highly stable community, with a significant element of transience, particularly among a segment of younger renters. The median longevity of adult residents is 17.0 years. Seventeen percent of the sample report moving to the city during the past five years, while 44% have been there over two decades. Seventeen percent of the sample expect to move out of Brooklyn Center during the next five years; in contrast, 61 % intend to remain in the community for at least ten years. The average age of respondents is 47.5 years old. While 21% of the sample fall into the 18-34 year age range, 21% are at least 65 years old. Twenty-nine -percent of the households contain seniors; in fact, 19% are composed only of senior citizens. Forty percent of the city's households report school-aged children and pre-schoolers. Sixty-seven percent own their present residence. Sixty-two percent of the households report experiencing financial stress - either "monthly expenses are exceeding income" or "monthly expenses are being met but little or no savings is being set aside." Only 36% of the city's households are "managing comfortably" or "managing very well." Caucasians compose 58% of the sample. Nineteen percent are African-American, while nine percent each are Hispanic-Latino or Asian-Pacific Islander. Women outnumber men by two percent. Residents are classified according to the precinct in which they live. Thirty-six percent reside in Precincts One, Six, and Seven - South Brooklyn Center. Thirty percent live in Precincts Two and Five -Central Brooklyn Center. Thirty-three percent reside in Precincts Three and Four - North Brooklyn Center. General Perspectives: Sixty-five percent rate the quality of life as either "excellent" or "good;" only six percent rate it as "excellent." While positive ratings are at the Metropolitan Area average, the "excellent" Page I of 8 0 City of Brooklyn Center Executive Summary April, 2009 . rating is the lowest across the Metropolitan Area suburbs. "Location" within the Metropolitan Area is the most liked feature of the city. At 29%, it outdistances all other responses. Ten percent each point to "friendly people" and "quiet and peaceful." "Strong neighborhoods" and "good schools" are next at eight percent each. In thinking about serious issues facing the city, 40% point to "rising crime." "Losing-businesses" - - is next, at 11 followed closely by"Brookdale Mall," at nine percent. Seven percent cite "high taxes," while six percent focus on "foreclosures." Seventy-five percent call Brooklyn Park "home," and 20% regard it as "just a place to live." Fifty-two percent favorably rate the strength of community and neighborliness, while 42% are more critical. Sixty-two percent feel a closer connection to their neighborhood; seventeen percent choose their school district, and 13% are closest to the City of Brooklyn Center as a whole. The City receives a mixed rating on its current direction. Forty-seven percent feel things "are off on the wrong track," -and 46% think the City is "generally headed in the right direction." Public Safety Issues: • Forty-six percent think there are areas in the City of Brooklyn Center where they do not feel safe. Particular areas of concern are "Brookdale" and "Brooklyn Boulevard." They urge "more patrolling" In nearby areas to their homes, 65% feel safe in walking in their neighborhood alone at night, while 34% disagree. Only thirty-six percent of the city's households are part of their area's Neighborhood Watch. Seventy-two percent think the amount of police patrolling in their neighborhood is "about the right amount," while 77% feel similarly about the amount of traffic enforcement by the police in their neighborhood. Twenty-nine percent think traffic speeding in their neighborhood is either "very serious" or "somewhat serious." There are four key public safety concerns facing Brooklyn Center: "youth crime and vandalism," mentioned by 25%; "violent crime," at 18%; and, "drugs" and "residential crimes, such as burglary and theft," each chosen by 15%. The specific violent crime people are most concerned about is "shooting." City Taxes and Services: Fifty-three percent think the city portion of their property taxes to be "high." Twenty-three Page 2 of 8 0 • City of Brooklyn Center Executive Summary April, 2009 percent see them as "about average" in comparison with neighboring cities. Only three percent consider them to be "low." A mixed rating occurs on the values of city services. When considering property taxes paid and the quality of city services received, 45% award them = - favorable. ratings, while 34% are more critical in their judgments. By a 55%-21% margin, residents oppose an increase in city property taxes if it were needed to maintain services at current levels. A majority of opponents think service cuts are unneeded and can be avoided by reducing waste. And, by an very large 70%-8% margin, residents oppose an increase in city property taxes to enhance current city services or offer additional city services. When evaluating specific city services, the mean approval rating is 80.7%, an average rating. Among those having opinions, over 90% rate fire protection, recycling pick-up, and emergency medical response as "excellent" or "good." Between 80% and 89% similarly rate police protection, storm drainage and flood control, and park maintenance. Between 70% and 79% rate city-sponsored recreation programs, animal control, snow plowing, and street lighting favorably. Sixty-eight percent rate city drinking water highly, and 65% o similar rate city street repair and maintenance. City Hall. A moderately large 53% feel they can have an impact on the way things are run in Brooklyn Center; but, 39% feel they cannot. A majority of Brooklyn Center residents, then, are feeling connected to their local decision-makers. Thirty-seven percent report having a "great deal" or "fair amount" of knowledge about the work of the Mayor and City Council. A large 65% either "strongly approve" or "approve" of their job, while 23% register "disapproval." Thirty-two percent report having "quite a lot" or "some" first- hand contact with the Brooklyn Center City staff. Fifty-four percent rate the staff highly, while 22% are more critical in their judgments. During the past year, 33% either contacted City Hall by telephone or in-person. Four Departments received over two-thirds of the contacts: Police Department, Public Works Department, Building Inspections, and General Information. In rating the last contact with respect to aspects of customer service, 91% rate the waiting time for the receptionist to help them as either "excellent" or "good," while 92% similarly rate the staff's courtesy highly. Finally, 87% think the ease of obtaining the service they needed is either "excellent" or "good." Page 3 of 8 City of Brooklyn Center Executive Summary April, 2009 Community and Neighborhood: When looking at their community, a majority of residents think there are "about the right number" of condominiums -or townhouses, starter homes for young families, "move-up" housing, , _ higher cost housing, affordable housing, parks and open spaces, trails and bikeways, and service establishments. But, 40% think there are "too many" affordable rental apartments and 27% rate the number of rental homes the same way. Majorities think there are "too few" retail shopping opportunities, entertainment establishments, and dining establishments. Twenty-eight percent each also think there are "too few" luxury rental apartments and senior housing. Fifty-eight percent rate the general redevelopment in the City of Brooklyn Center negatively; only 23% award it a positive rating. Two perceptions lead to these unfavorable conclusions: the City is not doing anything and Brookdale is still empty. Even so, by a significant 88%-4% margin, residents support the continued redevelopment of the community. They would like efforts focused on attracting more retail opportunities and a grocery store. They would strongly oppose attracting more apartments, low income housing, and bars. And, by an impression 80%- 11 % margin., reti,idents support the City providing financial incentives to attract, $pecifi_e types of development. Sixty-four perc nt rate the general condition and appearance of homes in the community highly; however, 36% ~re more critical. Over the past two years, 74% think the appearance of their neighborhood has remained about the same. Ten percent feel it improved, and 17% see a decline. Significant majorities believe that City code enforcement is at "about the right" level of toughness. Not worthy minorities of 28% to 36% consider the enforcement of weeds and tall grass codes, j k cars on residential property ordinances, and messy yards on residential property codes .o be "not tough enough." Fifty-three percent are aware of homes or properties in their neighborhood that are in foreclosure. The greatest worries center around "crime and vandalism" as well "poor upkeep." Community Diversity: Forty-eight per,;ent think the growing population diversity is a "good thing," while 40% see it as either a "bad thing" or "both good and bad." Reasons for seeing growing diversity as a good thing include '1 caching tolerance," "embracing diversity," "way of the world," and "brings variety to the local economy." Reasons for seeing it as a bad thing are "rising crime" and "too Page 4 of 8 0 • City of Brooklyn Center Executive Summary April, 2009 much diversity is not a good thing." Sixty-three percent think the City is either "very well" or "somewhat well" prepared to meet the growing diversity of residents; seventeen percent disagree. Disagreement is primarily based on the "need for more police," "language barriers," and "lack of school funding." Parks and Recreation Issues: Ninety percent of the users of trails, larger community parks, and smaller neighborhood parks award these facilities positive ratings. Eighty-four percent feel the same way about baseball fields, and 82% rate soccer fields highly. Seventy-six percent give "excellent" and "good" ratings to basketball courts, and 75% each rate the Community Center and football fields the same way. Seventy percent of the park users rate playground equipment highly. Sixty-seven percent post favorable ratings about the ice rinks, and 63% post similar ratings of the tennis courts. Overall, the average positive rating of Brooklyn Center park facilities is a moderately high 78.4%. Ninety-four percent feel the existing recreational facilities offered by the City meet the needs of their household. Similarly, 94% also think the current mix of City park and recreation programming meets the needs of their household. Twenty-three percent report household members participated in City park and recreation programs. The most popular are "baseball or softball," at 33%, as well as "basketball," "swimming," and "soccer," at 10% each. A nearly unanimous 99% report satisfaction with their experience. Twenty-six percent leave the city for park and recreational facilities or activities elsewhere, particularly for hiking or walking and community center offerings. The "City Newsletter," cited by 48%, is the principal source of information on parks and recreation and facilities in Brooklyn Center. The "Park and Recreation" brochure follows at 14%, and the local newspaper ranks next, at 12%. Community Center Issues: By a 53%-29% margin, residents support the remodeling of the Community Center. This level of support, however, is lower than the norm for the successful passage of a bond referendum. But, if the Community Center were remodeled, 51 % of city households are at least "somewhat likely" to use the facility. Page S of 8 0 • City of Brooklyn Center Executive Summary April, 2009 In discussing potential additions to the Community Center, more than 60% support the inclusion of four facilities: "space for teen programs," "space for senior programs," "an indoor swimming pool," and "an indoor walking/running track." The two top priorities for inclusion are "an indoor swimming pool" and "a teen center". Opposition is high against the,inclusion of__"indoor.soccer fields." Communications: The "City Newsletter," at 58%, dominates the principal sources of information about City government and activities. Twenty-two percent rely upon the "local newspaper." Fifty-seven percent prefer to receive their information through the "City Newsletter." Twenty-one percent opt for the "local newspaper." Ninety percent report receiving the "City Watch," the City's quarterly newsletter. A very high 91% report household members regularly read it. The reach of the City Newsletter is 82% across the community.. Sixty-eight percent currently subscribe to cable television. Among subscribers, 22% report at • least "occasionally" watching City Council or Planning Commission meetings. Seventy-one percent of households in the community have access to the Internet. Fifty-six percent connect to Comcast Cable High Speed Internet, 26% use DSL, and 10% have a dial-up modem. Forty-nine percent of those on the Internet accessed the City's website. Among those accessing the website, a solid 96% were able to find what they sought. Website visitors would like to see more "crime information," "redevelopment plans," and "news and events." A solid and comparatively high sixty-two percent rate the City's overall performance in communicating key local issues as either "excellent" or "good." But, 32% rate its communications efforts lower. Concluding Thoughts: In this survey, Brooklyn Center residents express a unique mixture of present concerns together with an optimism and hopefulness about the future. The two key issues troubling residents are rising crime rates and commercial/retail redevelopment. Also, these two collide when residents consider the Brookdale Mall. Even so, population shifts will not have a major impact on the city. About 17% of city residents, particularly renters, plan to leave the City of Brooklyn Center Page 6 of 8 0 City of Brooklyn Center Executive Summary April, 2009 within the next five years; but a comparatively large percentage, 61 plan to remain in the community for at least 10 years. - -1. Redevelopment, and_crime.are key issues for many residents. As axesult, residents, approve of City actions to guide redevelopment and would support using financial incentives to attract certain types of offerings. Similarly, citizens also endorse the addition of more police officers to address crime problems. As a starting point, the City should encourage greater participation in Neighborhood Watch programs, block parties, and the National Night Out to better organize neighborhoods on preventive measures. 2. The Brooklyn Center City enterprise remains very well regarded by residents. Contact levels with the City Council and City Staff are higher than suburban norms. The job evaluations of both groups are strongly positive and impressive in comparison with other first-ring suburban communities. Dissatisfaction with policy-makers and policy- implementers is very low. And, interactions with City Hall prove to be uniformly very positive. 3. Residents rated city services satisfactorily. In every case but one, ratings exceed Metropolitan Area suburban norms. At 80%, positive ratings of police protection are almost 15% lower than the suburban norm. Given current concerns, and their relationship to police efforts, the value rating of city services is a weak 45% positive to 34% negative. 6. In evaluating the status of current development in the community, residents only see "lopsidedness" with respect to the large number of affordable rental apartments. With respect to other types of housing, they see a generally good balance of various types of development. But, they would assign a greater priority to attracting retail shopping opportunities, entertainment establishments, and dining establishments. 7. Communications linkage between the City and its residents is solid. The reach of "City Watch" is 82% of the city's households, among the highest in the Metropolitan Area. A comparatively high 35% of the households accessed the City's website, while 22% watch City Council or Planning Commission Meetings at least "occasionally." The city enterprise is viewed strongly. City services are well-regarded. City government and staff are rated very positively. Residents rate their quality of life satisfactory and place a value on maintaining the diversity, sense of community, and strong neighborhoods that are a hallmark of Brooklyn Center. The City established a great reservoir of goodwill across the community in Page 7 of 8 0 • City of Brooklyn Center Executive Summary April, 2009 the past, and has clearly extended this to present; but, perceived inaction on the Brookdale Mall, has the potential in the short term to damage the connection to the community. Methodoloev: Decision Resources, Ltd., contacted 400 randomly selected households in the City of Brooklyn Center. Residents were interviewed by telephone between February P and 17", 2009. The average interview took 26 minutes. The results of this sample may be projected to the universe of all adult residents of the City of Brooklyn Center within ± 5.0% in 95 out of 100 cases. • Page 8 of 8 _ un.~ Agenda Item No. 10b city Co • • COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Steve Lillehaug, Director of Public Works S S- DATE: April 23, 2009 SUBJECT: Resolution Accepting Bid and Awarding a Contract, Improvement Project Nos. 2009-01, -02, -03, -04, -09, -11 & -12 for the 2009 Neighborhood Street and Utility Improvements (Aldrich Area), James Circle Watermain Relocation, Centerbrook Golf Course Watermain Improvements and Emergency Bypass for Lift Station No. 6. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council accept the lowest responsible bid and award a contract to Arcon Construction for Improvement Project Nos. 2008-01, -02, -03 -04, -09, -11 & -12 (2009 Neighborhood Street and Utility Improvements, James Circle Watermain • Relocation, Centerbrook Golf Course Watermain Improvements and Emergency Bypass for Lift Station No. 6), based on the bid results provided below. Background: Bids for the 2009 Residential Area Neighborhood (Aldrich Area) Street and Utility Improvements contract were received and opened on April 16, 2009. The project's bids include items pertaining to the Aldrich Neighborhood improvements and two additional 2009 Capital Improvement Program projects including the Centerbrook Golf Course Watermain Replacement and the Emergency Bypass for Lift Station 6. Also included in this project is the watermain relocation needed for the EDA owned property located along James Circle (old Cracker Barrel, Olive Garden and Days Inn sites) due to the re-platting of and preparation for the redevelopment of the property in accordance with the approved preliminary plat. The bidding results are tabulated below: Bidder Total Arcon Construction Co. $2,843,403.04 Ryan Contracting, Co.** $2,874,707.80** S.R. Weidema $2,981,213.24 Northdale Construction Co.** $3,083,793.64 Burschville Construction $3,084,663.00** Forest Lake Contracting. $3,341,907.50 Frattalone Companies $3,394,025.45 C. S. McCrossan Construction** $3,860,969.15** • 2009 Neighborhood Street and Utility Improvements - Contract Award CitY of Brooklyn Center • Results shown above for Ryan Contracting, Burschville Construction and C. S. McCrossan Construction include minor corrections in total bid amount due to mathematical error on their bid forms. Corrections do not change order of bids. Of the eight (8) bids received, the lowest bid of $2,843,403.04 was submitted by Arcon Construction Co. of Harris, Minnesota. Arcon Construction has the experience, equipment and capacity to qualify as the lowest responsible bidder for the project. Budget Issues: The bid amount of $2,843,403.04 is within the 2009 budgeted amount (see attached Resolution - Costs and Revenue tables). The total estimated budget was $3,859,000 and is amended to $3,441,915.04, an approximate 10.8 percent decrease. • • 2009 Neighborhood Street and Utility Improvements - Contract Award City ofBrookli•n Center . Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING A CONTRACT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 2009-01, -02, -03, -04, -09, -11 & -12 FOR THE 2009 NEIGHBORHOOD STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS (ALDRICH AREA), JAMES CIRCLE WATERMAIN RELOCATION, CENTERBROOK GOLF COURSE WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS, AND EMERGENCY BYPASS FOR LIFT STATION NO. 6. WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for Improvement Project Nos. 2009-01, -02, -03, -04, -09, -11 & -12, bids were received, opened, and tabulated by the City Clerk and Engineer on the 16`x' day of April, 2009. Said bids were as follows: • Bidder Arcon Construction Co. Ryan Contracting, Co.** S.R. Weidema Northdale Construction Co. Burschville Construction Forest Lake Contracting. Frattalone Companies C. S. McCrossan Construction** Total $2,843,403.04 $2,874,707.80** $2,981,213.24 $3,083,793.64 $3,084,663.00** $3,341,907.50 $3,394,025.45 $3,860,969.15** Results shown above for Ryan Contracting, Burschville Construction and C. S. McCrossan Construction include minor corrections in total bid amount due to mathematical error on their bid forms. Corrections do not change order of bids. WHEREAS, it appears that Arcon Construction Co. of Harris, Minnesota is the lowest responsible bidder. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with Arcon Construction Co. of Harris, Minnesota in the name of the City of Brooklyn Center, for Improvement Project Nos. 2009-01, -02, -03, -04, -09, -11 & -12, according to the plans and specifications therefore approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the City Engineer. 0 • RESOLUTION NO. 2. The estimated project costs and revenues are as follows: • COSTS Estimated As Amended per Low Bid Contract (Aldrich) $2,753,000.00 $ 2,492,066.92 Contract (James Circle Watermain) $ 260,000.00 $ 227,356.81 Contract (Centerbrook Watermain) $ 161,427.00 $ 109,035.81 Contract (Sanitary Lift Station Bypass) $ 86,661.00 $ 15,543.50 Lighting $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 Reforestation $ 15,000.00 $ 15,000.00 Contingency $ 327,809.00 $ 327.809.00 Subtotal Construction Cost $3,613,897.00 $ 3,196,812.04 Admin/Legal/Engr. $ 245.103.00 $ 245.103.00 Total Estimated Project Cost $3,859,000.00 $ 3,441,915.04 REVENUES Estimated As Amended per Low Bid Street Assessment (2009-01) $ 381,285.00 $ 381,285.00 Storm Drainage Assessment (2009-02) $ 114,441.00 $ 114,441.00 Sanitary Sewer Utility (2009-04) $ 331,000.00 $ 361,608.80 Sanitary Sewer Utility (2009-12) $ 102,000.00 $ 30,882.50 Water Utility Fund (2009-03) $ 338,000.00 $ 332,022.74 Water Utility Fund (2009-11) $ 190,000.00 $ 137,608.81 Storm Drainage Utility Fund (2009-02) $1 ,447,559.00 $1 ,223,047.97 Street Light Utility (2009-01) $ 12,000.00 $ 12,000.00 Street Reconstruction Fund 9209-0 1) $ 636,715.00 $ 575,661.41 Tax Increment Financing (2009-19) $ 306.000.00 $ 273.356.81 Total Estimated Revenue $3,859,000.00 $3,441,915.04 April 27. 2009 Date • ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Cl cil Agenda Item !so. lcity co"VICA Agenda Item !so. -Joe • 0 City of Brooklyn Center OMT A Millennium Community COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM TO: City Council FROM: Curt Boganey, City ManaR!O/'5 - - DATE: - April 23, 2009- SUBJECT: Budget Amendment 2009 Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council consider adoption of the enclosed budget amendment resolutions modifying the approved 2009 budgets. Within the proposed resolutions the amendments have been highlighted. Appropriations in the EDA Fund have been increased from $ 347,915 to $363,367. Likewise in the Special Revenue Fund EDA appropriations have been increased from $ 347,915 to 363,367. In the General Fund the Total budget has been reduced from $ 16,613,686 to $16,017,021. In the Public Utility Fund Revenues have been increased from $ 7,203,657to $ 7,318,534, and Appropriations have been increased from $ 7,203,657 to $ 7,343,560. The net effect of these combined changes is an $8-14,000 reduction-..in planned_ General Fund spending. Background: The State of Minnesota legislature is currently debating the manner in which it will respond to the impending multi-billion dollar budget deficit. In December 2008 the Governor removed $ 540,535 in Local Government Aid from the approved 2008 budget. This unallotment resulted in a 2008 budget deficit of $198,975. To cover this short fall General Fund reserves were reduced. In 2009 the Governor has submitted a proposed biannual budget to the legislature that would reduce certified 2009 LGA funding of $1,483,492 of Brooklyn Center by $ 706,665 in 2009 and $1,475,638 in 2010. At the 2009 Council staff retreat the Council established budget adjustment policy guidance to provide direction to staff as we prepared a response to the potential 2009 and 2010 budget cuts. The Council guidance prioritized adjustments included the following: Expenditures • Maintenance of High Strategic Goal Services • Curtail or eliminate low priority services • Reduce budget cushion • Improve efficiency • Eliminate or reduce contingency fund 0 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430-2199 City Hall & TDD Number (763) 569-3300 FAX (763) 569-3494 www.cityofbrooklyncenter.org Recreation and Community Center Phone & TDD Number (763) 569-3400 FAX (763) 569-3434 • Revenues • Increase grant use • Use reserve Funds • Transfer general fund costs to other appropriate funds • Increase fee revenue • Use non-recurring sources Following Council -direction, staff reviewed all planned expenditures and expected revenues for 2009 line item by line item and made proposed adjustments using the Council priorities as guidance. These propose budget adjustments were reviewed at the April 13th 2009 work session. The enclosed resolutions reflect the line item adjustments as proposed. The most significant impact of these proposed adjustments is the elimination of 24 hour public operation at the Police Station. Our staff research indicated that very few Cities provide 24 hour staffing of police stations for general public access. Most overwhelming majority of police stations close after normal office ours. While citizen will be able to enter the station after hours and call 91, there will not be a staff person available for immediate assistance. Seven part-time employees will -be affected -by-`ffis change-iri service levels: 'i'he effective ate will be June 1, 2009. This reduction in service level is expected to result in annual General Fund • savings of $109,000. Budget Issues: The draft budget resolutions are expected to enhance the 2009 General Fund Budget by approximately $800,000. This is accomplished primarily by a combination of cost reductions and expenditure transfers to other funds. We believe that the vast majority of these adjustments will be sustainable in 2010 as we prepare for additional LGA cuts that may be forth coming. 04.27.09.2009 budget adjustments.doc 0 • • • Comparing Governor, House and Senate 2009 and 2010 LGA and MVHC Cut Proposals House figures from House Research; Governor figures from DOR; Senate figures from Senate Fiscal Research Governor cuts are calculated as 5.05% of levyPlus aid in Pay 2009 and 10.85% of levy plus old in Pay 2010; taken tat from LGA, than from mVHC House cuts are calculated as 1.211% ofANTC in Pay 2009 and 1.889 % of ANTC in Pay 2010; taken 1st from LGA, than from MVHC (HF2020) Senate cuts occur in 2010-2012: cut is calculated as 0.7% of 20091evv olus cerli9ed ah1 anal taken 1st from LGA, then from MVHC (SF2074) House House House 2009 House 2009 1e9Y 2010 LGA 2010 Certified Est. 2009 est. 2010: 2008 LGA MVHC Cut s - cut (from MVHC C1 City name LGA MVHC MVHC 2 Curt (est) ►1 ` 0919x) ` - IBLUFFTON I 31,738 8,1321 7,932~ 1,2451 0~~~' -~1,9411 `BOCK I 16,2911 2,3521 2,2941fi ^ 7851 1,2251 BORUP 1 17,3001 1,7281 1,6862211 OFD ` : 2 3441 BOVEY 1 265,2121 30,4561 29,7071$,,, _it ^ 4,0311 OR l 1 6,2871 BOWLUS I 36,3351 5,3601 5,2281x_ 1,8581 01; .g2,8981 IBOY RIVER 1 4,2481 1,2481 1,217 m :la =31 1411 0r- Ai 2201 IBOYD 1 69,2461 5,7041 51564 4461 0 6961 BRAHAM 1 482,3191 -45,7541 44,629E%r 12,3771 Ol 1 19,3041 )BRAINERD 1 4,186,2341 375,6751 366,441 Yr s11 114,0611 ou:`Amwfj , 01 177,8961 BRANDON I 92,9751 20,3991 19,898['. 3,5591 01 'x8'062? . ; x'=:: I(1 5,5511 BRECKENRIDGE 11,287,1821 95,3561 93,012( 16,9311 0 <489~t7 26,4061 1»•" 1w-~;_.•••;; 01 69.51 BREEZY POINT 1 01 71,2531 69,502 01 69,550k BREWSTER 1 168,8461 19,3281 18,853W,,' p Te 3,0711 0[R_,a;. 4,7901 BRICELYN 1 122,8901 14,3501 13,997<•__~Sµ a 1,3601 011°G6j72*tl~f 1 2,1221 BROOK PARK I 20,3021 2,4691 2,428F„, %}+l* rt 1,0501 0 1,6381 !BROOKLYN CENTER 1 1,483,4921 589,3481 574,862F(f ,;J, 342,6841 0 . f 534,4691 BROOKLYN PARK 1 484,2391 1,250,8971 1,220,151464.2391 462,5161„ 31,; _6951 484,2391 992.3 BROOKS 1 28,9111 3,2231 3,1441~,f 3f 6191 0 Ir. >a8 " ; ;'$01 9651 ,.2 9 61 1,2401 BROOKSTON I 7,5911 1,8961 1,8497951 01r BROOTEN 1 151,6041 21,4531 20,926A_01 5,444i Of i; ObO : ?tfld 8,4911 16ROWERVILLE I 210,9401 23,5631 22,984' 4,1191 OF _.91?[2(' % , 6,4251 1BROWNS VALLEY 1 361,1541 17,1181 16,6971 14; 1,5341 Ol.' 2,3921 lBROWNSDALE 1 161,3441 27,8951 27,209;1 "3,5891 0 ...,.4`•:.Ol 5.5971 lBROWNSVILLE I 64,0741 11,0021 10,7321,=f1t+.r, ».sil 4,4701 OC6,9711 IBROWNTON 1 216,7441 42,7511 41,7001.:;,98 4,0691 0(',"r.`4Q8)„:1 6,3471 (BRUNO 18,9051 1,7251 1,683 s" 1 6381 Old z 9951 BUCKMAN 16,4741 4,0911 3,990fr3*3'21 2,5291 01? 1 3,9441 ~BUFFALO LAKE I 218,3231 2 38,910 1 225,228F~IMtI~µ 1sy.;. 188,0751 014, h 7,4161 - -45,07 ~ 4,6741 01,.; x"82. 7,2901 - 0 10751031 37,9541 I 8k 1394 1 28,132! 462.2141 ,7691 293,3331 ~BURNSVILLE I 1,046,678~~~~ 01 918518F,`a°. _sy?~':, 01 1 2,701 Wq' ~3s.A, • 4671 0;11 7281 BURTRUM BUTTERFIELD I 154,3541 18,1621 17,7161 1,7021 01 wa,`` 2,6541 1BYRON I 333,4491 108,3731 105,709 49,0741 76,5391 1CALEDONIA 1 908.2041 59,5541 58,090'.,,.,24 ,t 21,0451 01 8981 'r if 32,8221 CALLAWAY I 36,0411 4,5571 4,4451', 1,0151 0 1,5641 I`.*. (CALUMET 126,0611 15,7541 15,3671,,~.y 2.1331 0 m_ 1 ":F~fl1 3,3271 92,4891 01F 561 ;rygr-z 01 144,2511 'M 96 1 CAMBRIDGE i 801,7721 198,1751 193,304! a~,...-, CAMPBELL 4,380i:- Of'M$ • • ? 1,0211 I 55, 4901 2441 4, ~~7 w» 6551 JCANBY 1 734,8411 64,6701 630801 - 7,6381 0 l. 11,9131 > ' 111 1CANNQNFALLS I 680,8201 126,1731 123,0721 :5.`✓1 .'10 46,1061 01c;,' 71,9091 w ...,.am..„ )CANTON I 81,6661 17,3951 16,9671;,i~ € 1,8041 01<~(J880 2,8141 1CARLOS 1 40,6831 26,3361 25,6891: 8 ,.it i 3,3241 Ol"' j'S66d> K= ; A~ 5,1841 5.9531 0 X19#4,,"..rc 9,2851 ICARLTON 226.1011 21,5021 20,9731P orq.,:..,ax., ~ r w 1CARVER 1 215,9221 45,6441 44,522VMA2, 47,7881 5, 5,41 "s. °101 74,5321 ICASS LAKE 1 415,6731 13,9661 13.6231;6» ` 41 2,8331 016 ' 4,4191 v~ t 4321 0.OI 6741 ICEDAR MILLS ! 6,0321 3,1241 3,047 r » CENTER CITY 1 46,2261 6,1071 5,957154» 10,1001 0 k" ; 4,01 15,7521 ~CENTERVILLE 1 01 66,2311 64,6031 0 01 57,158 ~1i31 01 64,1 ~ '8';496 , .`v~, • p^ CEYLON I 129,7361 11.1881 10,9131, 8501 0 1,3251 'CHAMPLIN 1 221,4591 396,3451 386,603l:f . 4 , 221,4591 75,9071 221,4591 242, (CHANDLER 1 69,8551 7,9751 7,7791m 911""~ 1,4901 0 2,3241 CHANHASSEN 77,2271 224,6571 162,157 0 / 33'77 1 33,5851 818,1581 173,5 169,201 CHA 81 I CHICKAMAW BEACH I 01 3,4171 3,3336FraW "50 Oil 3111261"' 01 CHISAGO CITY 1 124,4981 59,9111 58,4361[, ' 67,6861 W. 105,5671 ICHISHOLM 1 2,901,3121 155,9171 152.0851F` n 24,2831 01'.',x;' 37,8731 1CHOKIO 1 121,0541 21,6801 21,1471:.S:! - 1,6041 01: x ..k: 2.5021 _m. (CIRCLE PINES 1 152,9601 126,0661 122,967 F~ a 57,7591 0',µ 90,0851 ~CLARA CITY 1 432,2881 62,4331 60,89814 8,2601 0 12,8831 CLAREMONT 1 159,2611 26,4231 25,774F~:• 4,1641 01 ~ 6,4941 CLARISSA 1 166,8211 22,1871 21,642i;." ~ 2,9811 or",, 4.6491 CLARKFIELD 1 344,2651 32,5421 31,7421aQ1 » 3,3591 0~ tyl 5,2401 CLARKS GROVE 1 161,0441 12,2381 11,937 (_A4 3,2411 0F„ ;~.w.. 5,0551 CLEAR LAKE 1 37,3791 19 1951 18,72304 1 6,1561 O „ » 9,6011 » M 3,9321 CLEARBROOK 1 144,9441 17,4391 17,010 2,5211 0 CLEARWATER 1 166,6971 63,4571 61,897E _ 20,7741 0 '10 . 32,4001 CLEMENTS 1 34,8431 5,9381 5,7921a M 5991 0 9 _ 9'w41 CLEVELAND 1 120,2521 31,4761 30,7029• lsws~. 5,4481 Ol'X'~ 6,4971 r....., 9441 O1,4731 CLIMAX 1 45,4861 5,6891 5,5491x'''` CLINTON 1 146,1501 9,5011 9,2671,1:.=> 1,3351 01ff."$PlY11 2,0811 ICLITHERALL I 16,1701 2,4311 2,371hp T 7,W 4861 017581 (CLONTARF 1 23,1241 6,2451 6,0921 9491 OI j 1 * V,-, 1.4801 CLOQUET 1 2,324,9211 242,6241 236,660 ..1aYA, u.• - 118,6181 01• =,S- I %4B:1,"`~`, . Y : 101 185,0031 11, COATES I 01 1,8681 1,8221);? DI 1,868k :R 0 4 8341 01 COBDEN 1 3,3801 1501 146' -A • 4011 0YQ1 6251 COHASSET I 01 41,0731 40,0631 ' " . 01 41,073EQI, ~r44'89Qa 01 40 City of Brooklyn Center Summary of Budget Amendment Resolutions 23 April 2009 Original Amended 2009 Budget 2009 Budget Change EDA Revenues: 426,289 426,289 - EDA Expenditures: 347,915 363,367 15,452 General Fund Revenues: Property Taxes 11,804,016 111804,016 - Sales Tax-Lodging Receipts 720,000 720,000 - Licenses and Permits 731,295 731,295 - Intergovernmental Revenue 2,022,332 1,425,667 (596,665) Charges for Services 719,593 719,593 - Fines and Forfeits 296,000 296,000 - Miscellaneous Revenue 320,450 320,450 - Total General Fund Revenues: 16,613,686 16,017,021 (596,665) General Fund Expenses: General Government 2,465,939 2,116,660 (349,279) - -General-Government Buildings 767,639 .765,071 __(2,568)_ Public Safety 7,652,861 7,413,081 (239,780) . Public Works 3,132,579 2,925,388 (207,191) CARS 1,450,207 11440,649 (9,558) :Community Development 995,317 1,291,971 296,654 Convention and Tourism 342,000 342,000 - Social Services 70,819 70,819 - Risk Management 205,205 197,660 (7,545) Central Services and Supplies 295,620 397,791 102,171 Reimbursement from Other Funds (839,500) (1,019,069) (179,569) Transfer Out-Miscellaneous 75,000 75,000 - Total General Fund Expenses: 16,613,686 16,017,021 (596,665) Public Utility Funds Revenues: Water Fund 1,914,838 1,954,838 40,000 Sewer Fund 3,276,320 3,276,320 - Storm Sewer Fund 1,562,462 1,562,462 - Street Lighting Fund 257,158 257,158 - Recycling Fund 267,756 267,756 - Total Public Utility Funds Revenues: 7,278,534 7,318,534 40,000 Public Utility Fund Expenses: Water Fund 1,614,401 1,657,367 42,966 Sewer Fund 2,890,405 2,925,871 35,466 Storm Sewer Fund 2,186,926 2,218,397 31,471 Street Lighting Fund 0 243,251 243,251 Recycling Fund 268,674 268,674 - Total Public Utility Funds Expenses: 71203,657 7,313,560 109,903 . Commissioner introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: EDA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FINAL BUDGET FOR THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009 WHEREAS, the Economic Development Authority of City of Brooklyn Center has adopted a final budget for Fiscal Year 2009; and WHEREAS, changes in the allocation of Local Government Aid (LGA) expected from the State of Minnesota require reallocations and amendments of various operational budgets for the 2009 fiscal year. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Economic Development Authority of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that revenues and appropriations for the Economic Development Authority for the 2009 fiscal year are hereby amended to be as follows: Economic Development Authoritv • Revenues Other Financing Sources $ 426.289 Total Economic Development Authority $ 426.289 Appropriations EDA Operations $ 363.367 Total Economic Development Authority S363.367 April 27.2009 Date President The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by commissioner and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof. and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted • Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. • RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 2009 GENERAL FUND BUDGET WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center adopted a budget for the General Fund 2009 Operations on December 8, 2008, as required by City Charter and State Statute; and WHEREAS, significant changes in the expected appropriation of Local Government Aid (LGA) from the State of Minnesota in 2009 have necessitated a change in the budget for operation of the General Fund for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2009, in order to deal with the situation in a fiscally responsible manner. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that revenues and appropriations for the General Fund shall be amended to the following amounts for the 2009 fiscal year: Revenues and Other Sources General Fund Property Taxes Sales Tax-Lodging Receipts Licenses and Permits Intergovernmental Revenue Charges for Services - Fines and Forfeits Miscellaneous, Revenue Total General Fund Revenues Oppropriations and Other Use; General Fund General Government General Government Buildings Public Safety Public Works CARS Community Development Convention and Tourism Social Services Risk Management Central Services and Supplies Reimbursement from Other Funds Transfer Out'-Miscellaneous Total General Fund Appropriations April 27, 2009 Date ATTEST: City Clerk $ 2,116,660 $ 765,071 $ 7,413,081 $ 2,925,388 $ 1,440,649 $ 1,291,971 $ 342,000 $ 70,819 $ 197,660 $ 397,791 1,019,069) $ 75.000 $ 16.017.021 Mayor The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member emd upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof. $ 11,804,016 $ 720,000 $ 731,295 $ 1,425,667 $ 719,593 _ $ 296,000 $ 320.450 $ 16.017.021 and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 2009 SPECIAL REVENUE FUND BUDGETS WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center adopted 2009 budgets for the Special Revenue Funds on December 8, 2008, as required by City Charter and State Statute; and WHEREAS, significant changes in the expected appropriation of Local Government Aid (LGA) from the State of Minnesota in 2009 have necessitated a change in the budget for operation of the General Fund for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2009, in order to deal with the situation in a fiscally responsible manner. • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that revenues and appropriations for the Special Revenue Funds shall be amended to the following amounts for the 2009 fiscal year: Revenues and Other Sources Special Revenue Funds Economic Development Authority Housing and Redevelopment Authority Community Development Block Grant TIF District #2 TIF District 43 TIF District #4 City Initiatives Grant Fund Total Special Revenue Funds Appropriations and Other Uses Special Revenue Funds Abril 27.2009 Date • ATTEST: Economic Development Authority Housing and Redevelopment Authority Community Development Block Grant TIF District #2 TIF District #3 TIF District #4 City Initiatives Grant Fund Total Special Revenue Funds City Clerk Mayor The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: $ 426,389 $ 385,289 $ 193,749 $ 752,605 $ 2,346,465 $ 301,562 $ 211.971 $ 4.61 S_030 $ 363,367 $ 385,289 $ 193,749 $ 16,000 $ 3,827,894 $ 286,484 $ 498.584 S 5.571, 67 and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. . adoption: Member introduced the following resolution and moved its RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 2009 PUBLIC UTILITY FUND BUDGETS WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center adopted an operating budget for the Public Utility Funds on December-8 2008, for the 2009 fiscal year as required by-City - Charter and State Statute; and WHEREAS, changes in the expected allotment of Local Government Aid (LGA) in 2009 from the State of Minnesota require immediate amendments to those adopted budgets in order to deal with the situation in a fiscally responsible manner. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that appropriations for the Public Utility Fund Budgets for 2009 shall be: Revenues and Other Sources Public Utility Funds - -Water Fund----- Sewer Fund Storm Sewer Fund Street Lighting Fund Recycling Fund Total Public Utility Funds Appropriations and Other Uses Public Utility Funds Water Fund (w/o Depreciation) Sewer Fund (w/o Depreciation) Storm Sewer Fund (w/o Depreciation) Street Lighting Fund (w/o Depreciation) Recycling Fund (w/o Depreciation) Total Public Utility Funds ATTEST: April 27. 2009 Date City Clerk Mayor The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof. $ 1,954;838 $ 3,276,320 $ 1,562,462 $ 257,158 $ 267.756 S 7.318,534 $ 1,657,367 $ 2,925,871 $ 2,218,397 $ 243,251 $ 268.674 S7.313.560 and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. • Work. Session Agenda Item No. 4 0 0 City of Brooklyn Center A Millennium Community MEMORANDUM - COUNCIL WORD SESSION DATE: April 8, 2009 TO: Brooklyn Center City Council FROM: Curt Boganey, City Manage* SUBJECT: 2009 Budget Adjustments COUNCIL ACTION REQUIRED The Council is being asked to review the proposed adjustments to the approved 2009 adopted budget and provided feedback and further direction. If these adjustments are deemed acceptable they will be presented at the next regular Council meeting as a general fund budget amendment. BACKGROUND thh PioPosed budget adJ'ustmeritsHive Been PreP ""aced iia aocor Caiice with the clicectitin, Provided to the staff during the February 28a' retreat. During the contingency planning session of the retreat the Council provided guidance is outline on Attachment F enclosed. Following the retreat each Department literally reviewed every program and each- line item to look for ways to adjust the budget in a manner consistent with your direction. The focus of the budget changes was to preserve high priority services while making other appropriate adjustments as outlined by the City Council. After reviewing all of the options presented by each Department, the Director of Fiscal Services and I developed the proposed budget changes which we believe represent the most sustainable adjustments over the next three to five years. We believe these adjustments can be made while maintain the high priority service levels of the City this year. We believe that the adjustments are prudent and fiscally responsible. We believe these adjustments will not lead to increases in property taxes or significant fee increases in future years. With that said, I believe it fair to say that an equal amount of adjustments in 2010 will not be as painless. Staff has already begun the process of anticipating what additional adjustments will be needed for 2010. Throughout the year we will continue to seek more cost effective service delivery methods, additional non-property tax sources and low priority service reductions. As the legislature clarifies the fiscal future we will provide an early indication of what will be needed to balance the 2010 budget. COUNCIL POLICY ISSUES Do the proposed budget adjustments reflect the policy direction of the City Council? Are there further budget adjustments required at this time? Should the 2009 general fund budget be amended? i 04.13.09.bud2et.adiustments doc 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Recreation and Community Center Phone & TDD Number Brooklyn Center, MN 55430-2199 (763) 569-3400 City Hall & TDD Number (763) 569-3300 PAX (763) 569.3434 FAX (763) 569-3494 www.cityofbrooklyncenter.org • CONTINGENCY PLANNING Exoenditure Reduction Options (Council rankings of options) 1) Curtail or eliminate low priordy services 2) Reduce the budget cushion 3) Improve operating efficiencies 4) Eliminate or reduce the contingency fund 5) Reduce the number of services provided 6) Reduce employee compensation and benefits 7) Defer capital investments Options tc 1 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) Attachment F Increase Revenues (Council rankings of options) Increase the use of grants to substitute general fund revenue Use reserve funds Transfer general fund costs to other appropriate funds Increase fee revenues Use non-recurring sources Add new ongoing revenue sources Increase the property tax levy (2010) Executive Limitations (bands Off Areas) 1) Overhead expenses related to support staff, managers, and supervisors 2) Outsources a 3) Deferring capital investments 4) If choose to use reserve funds - don't use all in one year 19 • duce ~shion Curtail/Eliminate 'Transfer to other funds Re or Ovefiea d Low Priority au A`~ Mayor/ Council too 41110 6210 300 2 000 6199 , 000 1 6301 , 6432 Total City Manager 41320 6200 300 200 6210 500 6199 200 6330 2,000 6432 500 6433 500 6434 Total City Clerk 41430 6331 170 3 000 6342 , 5o 6433 80 6434 6432 500 Total first round summary (3).xisx • Expianation -TOTAL 100 operating supplies 300 general supplies 2,000 audit/charter commis eX erases 1,000 conferences/meeting p 3,400 300 office supplies 200 operating supplies 500 general supplies 200 transportation 2,000 conferences & schools 500 meeting expenses 50o dues & subscriptions 4,200 170 parking & mileage 3,000 legal notice reductions 50 meeting expense 80 memberships advanced academy 500 training & conferences 3,800 4/9/2009 i • ~ cu~iton Cum►t~~~ ~ ~ Redu W~ Pd d or ~erhea ~ Ac ~ina'n~ 200 41520 6201 1,000 6242 200 6331 6203 600 6434 6103 6122 6125 6101 6122- 6-1215 6126 6131 61611 AOSOSin9 41560 6201 6210 6240 6320 6330 6350 6432 6433 6560 ,,,nsfer to Nnds TpTAt- meat t for equp 0", 200 office cad tC p acmen 1000 to travel frequent 4000 pS,B updates le emberships atlonal m d by utiMes 600 fewer n 15 ,help funde uilGties 400 temporal`! help funded by 18,720 1$x26 temPora~ U help funded bI ut►lit►es 1,266 x,430 tempora n c►an to utiCies 1,430 92 Tech to ut►lities 42292 4217- 2855 UB Technian to utilities 2,$65 2,621 UB Tech,' to utilities 21621 613 UB.~echnician to utilities 613 9 -~echnigan to 9,$03 utlllttes . r 3003 4 UB-tech 304 82 Totak 6g ofIce supplies lies operatin9 sump t 197 inor e(OP sts 59 52mmunicati 197 ons co 34 6 rr►llea9e 52 23 Pr►ntln9 371 207 conferences enses 51 meedng eXp lacement cost 2 3 p ov4 r chair C,P 207 1 51 Total 28) 41912009 ..,,,rnarv (3~'XIsX • Reduce Cushion CurtaiVEiiminate BU Acct or Overhead Low Priority Human Resources 41810 6219 2,000 6243 1,000 6331 200 6333 50 6351 1,000 6432 1,500 6434 500 Planning & Zoning 41910 6330 250 6342 121 6351 200 6099 Informatlon Technology 41920 6102 980 6307 2,066 6408 6,000 6432 2,000 Police 42110 6341 6432 42120 6214 42123 6307 42151 6203 6501 6103 Transfer to Other Funds TOTAL Explanation 2,000 employee recognition 1,000 minor computer equipment 200 travel expense 50 freight 1,000 printing reduced 1,500 conference & training 500 dues & subscriptions Total 6,250 250 travel & mileage 121 legal notices 200 printing 15452 15,452 staffing from EDA & foreclosure programs Total 16,023 Total 1,500 6,555 1,190 9,500 1,025 14,000 82,388 Total 980 change U on call structure 2,066 lower cost of fiber locates 6,000 traditional repair costs reflected 2,000 reflects traditional training budget 11,046 1,500 reduce position advertising 6,555 mandated training only 1,190 reduce investigator uniform purchase 9,500 defer family children services risk analysis 1,025 reduce supplies purchases 14,000 defer evidence software purchase 82,388 reduce station staffing (24 hour coverage) for 3/4 of year 116,158 first round summary (3).xlsx i 4/9/2009 • Reduce Cushion Curtail/Eliminate Transfer to BU Acct. or Overhead Low Priority Other Funds Fire 42210 6201 500 6203 3,000 6214 4,000 6217 200 6219 4,100 6243 1,000 6305 1,500 6321 2,240 6329 2,600 6331 200 6382 10,000 6421 1,200 6422 100 6432 5,000 6434 450 6443 600 Total Code Enforcement 42411 60991 5,728 Total Emergency Management 42510 6242 10,000 first round summary (3).xlsx TOTAL Explanation 500 reduce office supplies 3,000 reduce reference material frequency 4,000 turnout gear 200 reduce safety supplies purchases 4,100 lower general operating supplies 1,000 curtail mobile harware program 1,500 medical services 2,240 eliminate digital pagers 2,600 mobile air cards for computers temp shutdown 200 mileage 10,000 utilities savings in firehouses 1,200 imp ementation delay for MCD's 100 software maintenance 5,000 conferences & training 450 dues & subscriptions 600 reimbursements 36,690 5,728 decrease part-time intern help 5,728 10,000 delay siren replacement 10,000 4/9/2009 • duce cushion ar qyerhead au._--- E 9 n,~ering 43110 6101 6102 Transfer to cufialflfAiminateer Funds 1_ow_ priom---g is anat~on itai project funds ToTac etaey to cap itat project funds Dire~orl5e to cap • funds fer for r15~Cetary ~tal prof ?2,400 8,300 3,914 6103 210 6201' 305 6211 6243 6307- 6301 6351 6408 6422 6432 Streets 8,600 2,500 2,000 1?5 500 43720 6224 80 6214 500 6211 1,500 62191 200 6241 200 6242 14,000 6404 000 3 6449k , ,na{oc Control 3,000 43221, 6226 Adn►ini~ation Recreation 6x300 45114 6103 2,500 3,175 1,700 1,000 Total 30,000 Total Total 72,0o0 wage trams agger for Directo to cap benefits retarY 8,3g0 ben nsfer for Directorl fits 31914 bene office supplies fewer supplies desk units 210 r safety lace wIt do in 'house 305 few ed laptops, replace project funds or use 8 600 delete t nag9 charges to cap capital pr°. d: funds or do ~n ho , 5rp00 consultancharges to cap 175 consultant 5` 175 1ess}prin~ng 500 communications CAD licenses ewer Auto 1,700 maintain (ducation conbnuin9 1044 106r td by utilities 30,000 utility repairs & eck pbne pa 80 doth►n supplies 500 safe ices . 1`500 sr~araoo $ p 200 nent 200 mnor a Q uipravorable prices 14,000 bid savShs ift f trail maintenance 3 000 redcej 49,480 Purchase ess signagels~lping material 3,x44 1 Verage for sick & vacation days 3,000 6 300 ellminate pad hrne co 300 6, 41912g09 ,IM marl t3) XIS( 0 0 0 Reduce Cushion Curtail/Eliminate Transfer to BU Acct or overhead Low Priority Other Funds Parks Maintenance 45201 6214 100 6216 300 6217 100 6219 3,000 6223 300 6225 3,000 6227 200 6231 1,000 6233 200 6239 5,000 6241 100 6385 100 6405 200 6409 1,000 6415 200 6432 100 6449 2,000 Total Forestry 45204 62251 500 Total Insurance 48140 6307 545 6361 7,000 Total Central Supply and Support 48150 6449 3,000 6432 3,000 Total Subtotals: 122,553 152,551 218,644 TOTAL Explanation 100 reduce clothing for seasonal staff 300 chemical supplies 100 safety supplies 3,000 general supplies 300 irrigation supplies 3,000 landscape materials 200 paint supplies 1,000 athletic field supplies 200 tennis court supplies 5,000 rep' Ir & Maintenance supplies 100 sm:ll tool purchase 100 sanitary sewer costs 200 landscape services 1,000 maintenance contracts 200 equipment rental 100 training 2,000 goose removal reduced/eliminated 16,900 500 reduce tree stock 500 545 renegotiate agent fees 7,000 general liability premium 7,545 3,000 curtail deer management effort 3,000 reduce training/education funding 6,000 493,748 ► 4/9/2009 first round summary (3).xisx • Reduce cushion Curtail/Eliminate Transfer to BU Acd, or overhead Low Priority Other Funds Overall Reductions/Changes: Medical Insurance Tighten Calculation Adjust Fuel cost 40% Defer Central Garage Rate Increases Add New CDBG Dollars Subtotal: TOTAL 2009 BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS: i TOTAL. 45,000 53,000 113,089 110,000 .321,089 814,837 Explanation • 4/9/2009 first round summary (3).xlsx . EXECERPT FROM APRIL 13, 2009 MINUTES 2009 BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS - CITY MANAGER Mr. Boganey provided background information on the proposed 2009 budget adjustments. He explained that following the City Council Retreat each department went through their budgets line item by line item and was asked to find a way to reduce their budget by 10%. Based upon the information received from department heads, he and the Finance Director met with each _ department and tried to come up with the sets of adjustments which would have the least impact on service delivery and follow the general policy parameters that the Council established during the retreat. He stated he believes staff has come up with a reasonable set of adjustments that meet what they think is the worst case scenario for 2009 and still preserve quality service. Mr. Boganey provided an overview and answered questions of the City Council on the proposed 2009 budget adjustments. There was discussion on the following in relation to the proposed budget: Finance Department Fund transfers to the Utility Fund Police Department Defer family children services risk analysis - Deferment would be until January 1, 2010, • when additional JAG funds will be available to the Police Department. Reduce station staffing (24 hour coverage) for 3/4 of year - Staff will look further into smoothing the transition of laying off the part-time employees. Parks Maintenance Goose removal reduced/eliminated - It was noted it may not be sustainable to eliminate this line item from the budget. Staff will look into the effect of this practice on the baseball fields at Evergreen Park. Mr. Boganey stated staff anticipates it would be feasible to carry forward the vast majority of the proposed adjustments into 2010. However, if there were to be an additional $700,000 in cuts. it will be a struggle to balance the 2010 budget. The majority consensus of the City Council was agreement with the proposed 2009 budget adjustments as presented. 0 W ork Session Agenda • 0 AGENDA CITY COUNCIL/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY WORK SESSION April 27, 2009 Immediately Following Regular City Council and EDA Meetings Which Start at 7:00 P.M. Council Chambers City Hall A copy of the full City Council packet is available to the public. The packet ring binder is located at the front- of the -Council Chambers by the Secretary. - ACTIVE DISCUSSION ITEMS 1. Strategic Goals/Desired Outcomes - City Manager 2. Embassy Suites Link Update - City Manager 3. Banner Installation Policy - City Manager 4. Housing Program Update - City Manager PENDING LIST FOR FUTURE WORK SESSIONS 1. Center Pointe Apartments Update - City Manager • 2. TIF Districts Update - City Manager a. Brookdale Mall 3. 2011 Brooklyn Center Celebration - Status Report 4. Legislative Update 0 • work session 0 Agenda 1 Item NO. City of Brooklyn Center *=T A Millennium Community MEMORANDUM - COUNCIL WORK SESSION DATE: April 23, 2009 TO: Brooklyn Center City Council FROM: Curt Boganey, City Manqgj~5 SUBJECT: 2009 Strategic Plan Desired Outcome Statements COUNCIL ACTION REQUIRED Staff is seeking council consensus regarding revised Strategic Plan Desired Outcome Statements BACKGROUND The Staff and City Council met on Saturday February 28th in a team building and planning-retreat. During the retreat there were several exercises completed. One exercise was the development of a draft set of Strategic Goal Outcome (Key Result Area) • Statements. I have enclosed a copy of the budgeting for outcomes process so that we reviewed at the last meeting and an excerpt of the minutes from the meeting. At the last meeting we completed our first draft review of the Ongoing Goals Outcome Statements. Monday we will continue with review of the Strategic Goal Outcome Statements. I would recommend that we devote approximately 30-45 minutes to this discussion. COUNCIL POLICY ISSUES Do the draft policies enclosed, accurately reflect Council policy direction? 042709.2009strategicplan.wrk.mem.doc • 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430-2199 City Hall & TDD Number (763) 569-3300 FAX (763) 569-3494 w w w. cityo f b rookly ncenter. o rg Recreation and Community Center Phone & TDD Number (763) 569-3400 FAX (763) 569-3434 2009 Strategic Goals GOAL 1 Ensure a safe and secure community Goal Desired Outcomes .1. Th.e..threat_ and fear of crime among citizens and.. others will be reduced 2. The threat and fear of property or life loss from fire, among citizens and property owners will be reduced 3. The threat and fear among citizens and others of life loss or personal injury due to accidents, man-made or natural disaster will be minimized -4. The threat of^ -dame e, persona n'u property g j or life loss along our travel ways will be minimized 5. Citizens will feel and be safe in all public areas • 2009 Strategic Goals GOAL 2 Aggressively proceed with implementation of the City's redevelopment plans Goal Desired Outcomes 1.. Private redevelopment wi-l.I be-expanded-an-d - improved 2. Redevelopment of the "Opportunity Site" will commence 3. Redevelopment of all EDA owned properties will proceed expeditiously 4. Citizens will benefit from the identification and s marketing of potential redevelopment sites in the icy. 5. Citizens will benefit from the optimal redevelopment of the Brookdale Mall area for the community 6. Citizens and visitors to Brooklyn Center will benefit from the enhanced value and aesthetic appeal of right of way and common areas of the City 2009 Strategic Goals Goa! 3 Stabilize and Improve Residential Neighborhoods Goal Desired Outcomes 1. Ci.ti.ze.n.s:Wi11- benefit from Ii#e cycle. housing opportunities and a diverse stock of housing types and styles 2. The housing stock will be well maintained, healthy, safe, and attractive 3. Owners and occupants of housing in residential neighborhoods will comply with City codes and regulations which will be adequate to assure a safe well maintained d-and attract-lve community 4. Owner occupied housing will increase as a percentage of total housing 5. The problems associated with foreclosed residential properties will be dramatically reduced or eliminated 6. There will be attractive and desired amenities within all neighborhoods 7. Citizens will identify with and have pride in their neighborhood 8. Residential property values will improve 2009 Strategic Goals GOAD. 4 Positively address the community's demographic makeup and increasing c-.ultur-a-E.diverrsity zY- _ = _ Goal Desired Outcomes 1. All demographic groups will be represented and participate in civic, governmental, community organizations and activities 2. Youth will be adequately served by recreation and education programs and activities 3. Underse-rved- populations- v~llbe served"by and__ participate in programs/activities available to the community at large 4. The social, health and housing needs of the aging population will be met 5. The social, health care and housing concerns of low and moderate Income persons will be met 2009 Strategic Goals GOAL 5 Continue to maintain and upgrade City Infrastructure Goal Desired Outcomes 1. Citizens will benefit from the annual update and implementation of the City Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) 2. Citizens will benefit from an ongoing or accelerated neighborhood reconstruction program as outlined in the CIP 3. Travelers and citizens will benefit from improvem-eats tan- regional roadwayscompleted in--a timely manner 4. Citizens will benefit from a reduced tax burden for infrastructure projects due to the use of alternative funding sources for these projects 5. Citizens will benefit from the expedited completion of needed infrastructure projects 6. The traveling public will benefit from multi-modal transportation options fostered and provided by the City 7. Citizens -will benefit from the expansion and improvement of needed technology infrastructure as viable options become available F~ i 2009 Strategic Goals GOAL 6 Respond to increased public awareness and interest in environmental sustainability and green community issues Goal Desi red -Outc6mos f 1. Citizen and City government recycling will improve 2. Citizen and the City government energy conservation will improve I Citizens and the City government will use alternative energy sources when viable 4. The purchasing power of the City will support the goals of an environmentally sustainable environment 5. Appreciation of the environment will be enhanced and expanded 6. Harmful emissions into the air, water and soil will be reduced 7. Development and redevelopment in the City will be sensitive to the environment impact • Strategic Planning Process Outline 1. City Mission jointly developed a. City Council Approved 2. Values Statement Jointly Developed a. City Council Approved 3. Strategic Goals a. Established and approved by City Council b. Prioritized by City Council r 4 - Desire-d, O utcomes a. Established and approved by City Council b. Prioritized by City Council 5. Desired Outcome Success indicators a. Staff developed/prepared b. Council reviewed/revised c. Council approved 6. Department and Program Mission a. Staff developed b. City Manager approved 7. Program Strategies/Tactics/Performance Measures a. Staff developed b. City Manager approved 8. Budget Proposals a. Staff developed b. City Manager recommended c. Financial Commission Reviewed d. City Council Approved .-9. Performance Reports _ a. Reviewed by staff-ongoing b. Reviewed by City Manager-monthly 10. Desired Outcome Reports 11. Reviewed by City Council-quarterly 1 strategic planning process out ine.docx 2009 Ongoing Goals AS AMENDED APRIL 13TH 2009 GOAL 1 To continue to provide quality cost effective services with limited resources Goal Desired Outcome 1. The quality of service delivered by the City will consistently meet or exceed customer expectations 2. We will meet or exceed appropriate benchmark measurements of efficiency and effectiveness 3. Service delivery processes will be improved on an going basis 4. We will provide effective service for a multi-lingual population 5. The Citv will improve the cost effectiveness of service delivery on an ongoing basis a. Coordinated utilization of staff resources GOAL 2 To ensure the City's financial stability 0 Goal Desired Outcome 1. The City's funds will be secured and protected against loss 2. The City administration will provide meaningful short, intermediate and long term fiscal planning 3. The Citv will take appropriate actions to buffer essential government services against the effects of significant economic downturns 4. The Citv will position itself for economic growth • 2009 Ongoing Goals • AS AMENDED APRIL 13TH 2009 GOAL 3 To move towards maintaining or lowering, the level of the City's property taxes Goal Desired Outcome 1. Except in extraordinary circumstances the property tax levy will not increase faster than the rate of inflation 2. The City will expand the proportion of the industrial and commercial tax base to relieve the residential property tax burden 3. The inflation adjusted property taxes paid by the median family household will be stabilized or reduced over time • GOAL 4 To ensure the city's influence at the legislature by maintaining a positive partnership with State and Federal Legislators 1. State and Federal legislators will be informed regarding City needs that may be affected by legislation 2. We will maintain positive ongoing relationships with State and Federal legislators 3. Citv will receive direct sueport for citv needs from State, County and Federal legislators • 2009 Ongoing Goals • AS AMENDED APRIL 13TH 2009 GOAL 5 To improve the Citv's image with citizens and others outside of the City's borders Goal Desired Outcome 1. Citizens and others throughout the State will recognize Brooklyn Center as a safe, quality, attractive community in which to live, work, and play 04.13.2009 ongoing goals outcomes.docx 0 0 • STRATEGIC GOALS/DESIRED OUTCOMES - CITY MANAGER Mr. Boganey provided an overview and answered questions of the Council on the 2009 Ongoing Goals as revised based on the March 23, 2009, City Council Work Session discussion. There was discussion on the following in relation to the 2009 Ongoing Goals: Goal 1: Desired outcome of Goal 4 will become desired outcome #5 under Goal 1. Goal 2: The following are to be included as performance measures of the City's financial stability: 1) City's Al bond rating; 2) City's auditor report with no significant findings; and 3) City's receipt of the Excellence in Financial Reporting Award. Goal desired outcome #2 under Goal 7 to become goal desired outcome #3. Goal desired outcome #3 under Goal 7 to become goal desired outcome #4. Goal 3: It was questioned if the purpose of this goal was to maintain or lower the total cost burden to residents or to primarily focus on property taxes. Mr. Boganey stated he believes this goal focuses on property taxes as opposed to fees. He stated the resident survey gave the indication that there is an indication in the community that property taxes are high, and historically there have been comments that property taxes are excessive and too high. In relation to fees, State law • and Council policy state that fees should reflect no more than the cost of delivering the service. In order to reduce fees, the cost of delivering service would need to be reduced. There are other goals that speak to efficiency and delivering service in the most efficient manner. Goal 4: ■ Evidence of achieving this goal would be City employees reporting code enforcement issues they observe. ■ Incorporate Goal 4 into Goal 1. Goal 1 will be restated as follows: To continue to provide quality, cost effective services with limited resources. The desired outcome of Goal 4 will become desired outcome #5 under Goal 1. Goal 5 (New Goal 4): ■ Remove desired outcome #3 (may be a success indicator). ■ New desired outcome #3: The City will receive direct support for City needs from State, County, and Federal legislators. Goal 6 (New Goal 5): Amend as follows: To improve the City's image with citizens and others outside of the City's borders. Goal 7 (New Goal 6): ■ Incorporate Goal 7 into Goal 2. ■ Eliminate goal desired outcome #1. • Goal desired outcome #2 to become goal desired outcome #3 under Goal 2. . Goal desired outcome #3 to become goal desired outcome #4 under Goal 2 and amended as follows: The City will position itself for significant economic growth. The majority consensus of the City Council was to direct staff to revise the 2009 Ongoing Goals as discussed above. Mr. Boganey indicated that the Strategic Goals will be discussed at the next Council Work Session, • 0 minutes. strategic goals.docx • 0 ems°• 2 ends It Ag City of Brooklyn Center A Millennium Community MEMORANDUM - COUNCIL WORK SESSION DATE: April 23, 2009 TO: Brooklyn Center City Council FROM: Curt Boganey, City Manag SUBJECT: Embassy Suites - Link Update COUNCIL ACTION REQUIRED Monday, I will provide the City Council with a brief update regarding the status of discussion with Seth Oliver representing the owners of the Embassy Suites Hotel regarding the status of lease and the link. BACKGROUND Several weeks ago the EDA was approached by Mr. Seth Oliver regarding the Embassy • Suites project. He was specifically concerned about changes in the economy and project costs that were making it difficult to complete the link and continue with lease of the D Barn for a Spa. EDA directed staff to meet with Mr. Oliver to see if there would be way to work toward a mutually beneficial solution. Monday, I will provide the EDA with verbal update regarding our discussions to date. COUNCIL POLICY ISSUES 0 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430-2199 City Hall & TDD Number (763) 569-3300 FAX (763) 569-3494 www.cityofbrooklyncenter.org Recreation and Community Center Phone & TDD Number (763) 569-3400 FAX (763) 569-3434 • Work Session 0 ,kgenda Item N°' 3 0 MEMORANDUM -CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION DATE: April 24, 2009 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Gary Eitel, Director of Business and Development Steve Lillehaug, Public Works Director/City Engineer SUBJECT: Review of a draft banner program and policy relating to the City's streetscape improvements projects. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Provide direction to staff regarding the banner program and policy. BACKGROUND: The Xerxes Ave. Street Improvement Project, the first phase of the overall streetscape improvements planned for the Bass Lake Road/Brookdale Mall commercial area was completed in 2008. The project included the installation of 40 decorative street lights from Highway 100 to Northway Drive. The 24 street lights on the east side of Xerxes Ave. and adjacent to the Brookdale Mall were designed to include banner brackets that would provide an opportunity for the City to consider options for a future banner program. The design concept for the Bass Lake Road from Brooklyn Boulevard to Hwy 100 includes the following additional street lights: 62 streetlights within the boulevard area of this county roadway 54 street lights within the median of this divided roadway The Public Works Department has previously researched and assembled the attached research report on information relative to the acquisition of banners and equipment, available options in banner materials, color & graphic options, costs associated with installation, and projected budget expenses over a 10 year period. This information and examples of how other communities have used banner programs to identify their business community; added color and interest to their public right of way corridors; and publicizes events, activities, and community attractions have been used in the development of a street light banner program for the Xerxes Ave. commercial area and future planning of the Bass Lake Road commercial corridor. 0 Attached is a copy of the draft streetlight banner policy for your review. • City of Brooklyn Center DRAFT April 27, 2009 City Streetlight Banner Policy Purpose Streetlight banners have been used extensively as a tool to promote the City, enhance streetscape improvements, and promote special events, seasons or celebrations. it is the purpose of this policy to provide guidelines pertaining to the circumstances, character, location and other standards under which the City will use its facilities to display such streetlight banners. It is recognized that the use of streetlight poles to display banners for these purposes can be beneficial to all parties and promote a better Citywide self-image, The City has adopted and applies these policies and procedures to assure that the quality of Brooklyn Center's civic life is enhanced and preserved as follows: • To complement the aesthetic appearance and improvement of certain central points, areas or main corridors in Brooklyn Center. • To support the image of an economically vital, active and flourishing City. • To introduce color and a sense of excitement. • To assist in the promotion of cultural and civic events or themes reflecting general community interest. • To support and promote special events, bringing increased attention and awareness to the City. To create an effective administration process to-manage a high quality.municipal banner_ program. t General Provisions and Definitions Only those streetlight banners approved by the City Manager or designee that are in compliance with this policy and for the aforementioned purposes may be installed within the public right-of-way. The following are general definitions of the City's banner classifications: 1. Standard Banner- Aesthetics is the main purpose of the standard banner, which shall promote the City and/or general City area. The duration for use is typically a longer period ranging from six (6) to 12 months. Standard banners shall be provided by the City and/or donated and shall not contain a logo of any type. Replacement of standard banners is generally anticipated to be needed approximately every five (5) to 10 years, depending on use and application. 2. Seasonal Banner-The main purpose of a seasonal banner is to promote a particular time of year. The duration for use is typically a shorter period ranging from two (2) to four (4) months. Seasonal banners shall be provided by the City and/or donated and shall not contain a logo of any type. 3. Special Event Banner- The main purpose of a special event banner is to promote a community event or activity. The duration for use is typically a short period of up to two (2) months. Special event banners shall be provided by the City, donated and/or sponsored. A logo may be allowed on sponsored special event banners. The City may honor recognized special events that are held annually by reserving banner space for events such as Earle Brown Days, Dudley Nationals, Centennial Celebration, etc. Sponsored special event banners shall be funded by the sponsor prior to the installation of the banners. 0 Banner Eligibility 1. Allowable banner types include those used for civic activities identifying certain geographical boundaries of schools, not-for-profit institutions and distinct city areas. 2. Banners will be allowed on the poles adjacent to and bordering the institution, area or neighborhood in all or parts of these distinct City areas. 3. No banners with the main intent of commercial advertising or to advertise or promote political candidates, parties or issues will be allowed. 4. Advertising of a specific product or business will not be allowed and shall not be placed on standard or seasonal banners. 5. The City Manager may allow a sponsor's logo on special event banners. Allowed Locations 1. Banners shall only be installed on City-owned poles and standards. 2. Banner installation is allowed only at approved locations equipped with existing banner mounting brackets as designated and approved by the City. 3. Banners shall not be installed on any pole or standard which could create sight-distance problems for pedestrian or vehicular traffic. 4. Banner installation is allowed only on decorative streetlights in the following areas (see Exhibit A). Banner Information and Design Content 1. Banner designs-should be ar`tistle-la nature, grapfil liyarsymbol'ically representing the subject and purpose of the specified event or motif. . 2. Banners may include text for dates, activities, logos and/or title of the event. 3. The graphic design of all banners shall be reviewed and recommended by an Ad Hoc advisory committee established by the City Manager or designee in accordance with the banner policy guidelines set forth in this policy. 4. Banners shall be printed on both sides of the banner fabric. Special Event Banner Placement Special event banners may be allowed and must adhere to the following guidelines: 1. City staff shall be responsible for the supervision and coordination of the placement and retrieval of approved special event banners. 2. The City Council shall establish a charge within the City's fee schedule for the installation and retrieval of special event banners for each event. Fee scenarios shall include City staff installed, contracted installed and sponsor installed. 3. Installation fees shall be submitted to the City before placement is permitted. Sponsorship Organization 1. Sponsored special event banners must follow the established guidelines as pertains to the standard banners. 2. Sponsors must create their own respective original special event banner designs, subject to approval as indicated below. 3. Sponsors must bear the cost of the special event banner manufacture, installation, removal and storage, all subject to the policy requirements. 0 0 Manner of Installation 1. City staff will supervise and coordinate the installation and removal of all banners. Consideration must be given to increased staff workload and expense with any future expansion of this program. 2. Installation must be performed by a qualified installer, subject to approval by the City Manager or designee. 3. Installation practices must be in strict compliance with the temporary traffic control specified in the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MMUTDC). Banner Specifications Banners on decorative streetlight poles shall adhere to the following specifications and/or as otherwise determined based upon a specific showing of appropriateness and adequate structural design as approved (see below and Exhibit B). 1. No more than two (2) banners shall be installed on any decorative streetlight pole supporting a single lighting fixture. 2. Banners mounted toward the street and subject to being struck by vehicular traffic must be mounted at least 14-ft above the road surface. Banners mounted away from the road and not subject to vehicular traffic must be mounted at least 11-ft above the sidewalk. 3. Streetlight banners shall be made of marine acrylic canvas (Sunbrella) or heavy reinforced vinyl that are resistant to ultraviolet rays, mold and mildew. 4. Each-bani er shall have tW_ _O2 `double stitched reinforced hems and two 2 O grommets for-proper tie-down. S. Banners shall be 27-inches wide by 60-inches high, or as other dimensions determined necessary to fit the actual banner bracket dimension. 6. [Other specific and detailed banners e6ificaii-` will be included as appropriate includine. material. etc. These items are further beine evaluated by staff.l Approving authority 1. The City Manager as authorized by the City of Brooklyn Center City Council shall be the approving authority for all banner policy determinations including to approve the graphic designs of all banners and to determine banner placement within the designated area system. 2. An Ad Hoc advisory committee as determined and established by the City Manager on a case by case basis shall review and provide recommendations for the design of all banners to the City Manager for approval. 3. Appeals: If a banner design or a placement request is denied by the City Manager, the sponsoring organization may appeal this decision directly to the City Council by asking to be placed on the next available City Council Meeting. City Point of Contact The City's banner program shall be managed by the City as designated by the City Manager. 0 TO: FROM: -DATE: MEMORANDUM Steve Lillehaug, Director of Public Works David Peterson, Deputy Director of Public Works February 11, 2009 SUBJECT: Xerxes Avenue from Highway 100 to Northway Drive - Light Pole Banner Information In 2008, a new street and trail lighting system was completed along Xerxes Avenue from Highway 100 to Northway Drive. 40 poles were installed along the roadway, 24 that include banner attachment points. The poles with banner arms are located on the east side of Xerxes south of Bass Lake Road. No banners have currently been purchased or installed. Staff has obtained information and evaluated banner options for consideration. This information was obtained from nine other cities and six banner manufacturers and is sunmiarized below. Also attached are staff research notes and details. 1. Quantity - 24 Poles on Xerxes Avenue currently have banner attachment points 2. _ Banner Options a. ` Material.- Vinyl and fabric are available. Background color, design colors and fading potential are key determining factors in product selection. • b. Color - Banners typically can be designed using one to four different colors. c. Design - A theme or design would need to be developed, and then these would be submitted to banner manufacturers for final design and approval. d. Sponsorship - Names of sponsoring businesses or group/individual could be imprinted on or attached to the banner as an option. 3. Life Expectancy - Banners typically last 10 years if taken down seasonally. Banner life may be shorter if left up year round, depending on colors and fading effect. 4. Cost a. Material - The cost of a banner typically ranges from approximately $40.00 to $105.00 each. Total material cost for 24 banners ranges from $960 to $2,520. b. Installation - Labor and equipment would consist of three staff members, traffic control and an aerial.truck. It would take approximately eight hours to install or take down the banners, amounting to approximately $1,458 per install or takedown. c. 10-yr Cost (approximate estimate) i. One Banner season/ 10 years - $31,260 ii. Two Banner season / 10 years - $50,041 iii. Three Banner season/ 10 years - $64,621 iv. Four Banner season/ 10 years -$66,722 5. Order/Delivery Time - Order and delivery time takes approximately two weeks to four weeks. 6. Funding - A funding source has not been identified for this project. The General fund, an assessment, business association service fee, charitable contribution or a sponsorship program are several potential funding sources. Decorative improvements do not qualify for T.I.F. funding, so would not be an option. 7. Banner Policy - Staff recommends developing a policy that would outline the different banner implementation elements (funding, sponsorship options, banner options, etc.) should the City decide to implement a banner program. Light Pole Banner Research Summary, February 13, 2009 • Light Pole Banners - Detailed Research Information February 11, 2009 There are 40 new decorative street lights along Xerxes. We currently have 23 poles with the capability to hang a single .Banner on each.-We would have 24 but an auto accident took one of those poles down earlier this winter. If the replacement pole has the banner mounts on it we will have a total of 24. The remaining 16 poles have the capability of mounting the banner arms, but are generally in locations where we wouldn't locate banners (e.g. intersections). The 24 poles stand along the east side of Xerxes Ave between County 10 and Highway 100 ramp. There are 10 poles between County 10 and 56th Ave, 10 poles between 56th Ave and 55th Ave and 4 poles between 55th Ave and highway 100 ramp. I tried to contact a variety of cities near Brooklyn Center and around the metro to find out information about their banner programs, if they had one. ® Thy cities included: Anoka, Brooklyn Park, Champlin, Rogers, Egan, Edina, Burnsville and the City of Grand Rapids in northern Minnesota. I did not receive calls back from • Champlin, Anoka or Rogers. The city of Edina has a program near the 50th and France area that is primarily funded and controlled by the local business. The city allowed the program but has no responsibility as far as maintenance or funding. For the purpose of this research I've left them out along with the other cities that did not respond back. • It became apparent to me that after talking with Brooklyn Park, Burnsville and Grand Rapids that the biggest issue with the banner program as far as maintenance went was the wear and tear that the arms take over the course of time. Their banner mounts are either threaded in or are banded on the light poles. Wind and climate changes along with salt and other natural factors cause the mounting systems to loosen or break over time. I explained to them how our mounting arms slide through the pole and fasten tight on both sides of the pole. The response I heard was that we wouldn't have as many, if any, issues that they endured with the set up we have. I asked the remaining cities about their time spent installing the banners, how many workers were needed and the type(s) of equipment needed to perform the tasks. • Brooklvn Park told me that their banners were installed by a contractor and that they could not say for sure what equipment or how many workers it took. • Burnsville, on the other hand, has been installing banners for at least ten years. I spoke with Dave Grommesch who personally handles the installation. They use an aerial Light Pole Banner Research Info, February 11, 2009 Page 1 • bucket (single) with one worker in the bucket and a driver. The driver also assists from the ground when needed. They use a shadow vehicle equipped with a message board or arrow board for traffic control. They also use traffic cones and temporary traffic signs such as `utility work ahead' or'road work ahead' wherever needed. Dave said they can generally put up 70 -100 polls in -a week: That includes installing banners and wreaths on each poll for the winter themes or banners and hanging baskets with plants for summer themes. He thought that with our set up and only installing banners we would be able to put up 24 in one day. • Grand Rapids ended up being very similar to Burnsville in their installation process. The one major difference from Burnsville is the size or their banner program. They often use more than one crew and more equipment at the same time. They also install the banner and basket combinations on their light poles but not always the same combination everywhere in the city. What each city thought of the materials they use, the longevity of them and costs they paid. • • Brooklvn Park went with vinyl banners purchased from Northcott Banner. They said the average cost was approx. $70 a banner. They chose the vinyl because they were afraid of the fading possibilities of a fabric based banner. They have never taken their banners down. • Burnsville uses fabric based banners and told me they have lasted 10-12 years on average with some minimal fading. Dave told me that it's a gradual fade that almost nobody notices. He said he can tell because he still has new banners to compare them to. Burnsville changes banners seasonally so each banner is never up year round. He couldn't give me a price but said they purchased their banners through Mainstreet Design. I called Main Street Design and they quoted me approx. $70-80 for a 3-colored screen printed fabric sign. • Grand Rapids, again was very similar to Burnsville. The differences being that Grand Rapids use both vinyl and fabric based banners. I spoke with the Public Works Director, Jeff Davis. He said that each type of banner has about the same lifespan, most have lasted 10 years or so. They went with vinyl banners for some of their installations because the white background made design and color "Pop" more than a fabric banner would. He suggested that this would be the only reason to use vinyl banners. They received various samples from different manufacturers and, like Burnsville; Davies chose Light Pole Banner Research Info, February 11, 2009 Page 2 • the banner from Mainstreet Design because the vinyl was made with better quality for about the same price as the other vinyls. These are the companies that l contacted for material choices, costs, and availability/delivery time. Municipal Banners, Mainstreet Desien, Prolect Graohics. Custom Banners and Northcott Banners. • Municipal Banners, strictly deals with 13oz. gloss vinyl banners that have a mesh-filled center between 2 pieces of vinyl. All their banners are digitally printed on front and back. The two sides can be different designs at no extra charge. We can design the banners in a program such as photo shop and send it to them or they can work with us and their design center will create the banners at a rate of $65/hr. From the start of the project it would take approximately 2 weeks for the banners to be delivered. Cost breakdown- 30 banners = $67/ea. 40 banners = $56/ea. 50 banners = $51/ea. *For a different amount they said to let them know and they could give us an approximate cost. • Mainstreet Desien They are located in Ramsey, MN. Main Street design generally works with 2 materials for banners. One is a marine fabric called Sunbrella, a woven colored yarn, and the other is an 18oz. vinyl. According to them the Sunbrella will last longer than the vinyl but will endure some fading. The Sunbrella banner uses a screen printing process where the vinyl is digitally printed. They can have banners ready and delivered in approximately 2-3 weeks. If we were in a rush they said something could be worked out to get them sooner. Cost Breakdown- There is not a real difference in price between the two materials depending on the complexity of the sign. Digital images on vinyl banners are usually made with many colors where as the typical Sunbrella banner is usually screen printed with 2-4 different colors. Their art specialists would work with us to produce the banner we like at no additional cost. They would then have samples for us to preview before we made a final decision. • Light Pole Banner Research Info, February 11, 2009 Page 3 • Vinyl 25 - 2 ink banners = $85/ea. 50 - 2 ink banners = $78/ea. Sunbrella 25 - 2 ink banners = $73/ea. 50 - 2 ink banners = $66/ea. • Proiect Graphics is a company based out of Connecticut. They use a local company called Northern Lights Displav in Eden Prairie as their regional representative. Project Graphics works with the customer (City) to start a sponsorship program to go along with their banner program. Essentially it allows for business or private residents to have their name placed on or below an individual banner at a cost determined by the city. This program reflects the pride an individual or business takes in the beautification of the city and its banner program. If the program is successful it will not only pay for itself but acquire enough funds to pay for other uses. Project Graphics also uses the Sunbrella and vinyl banners. We can design our own artwork or they will do it at no additional charge. Their process from start to delivery is approximately 1 month. • Cost Breakdown- For the purpose of getting a cost quote I gave them a 40 banner count to work with. Vinyl Banners 40 -1 ink banners = $40/ea 40 - 3 ink banners = $62.85/ea. 40 - Sponsor slices = $40/ea. Sunbrella Banners 40 -1 ink banners = $55/ea. 40 - 3 ink banners = $79.50/ea. 40 - Sponsor slices = $40/ea. *Proiect Graphics along with Northern Lights Disolav sent me material that further discuss their banners and their programs .(separate information) • • Custom Banners Is located in Reedsburg, WI. They also use the Sunbrella and Vinyl banners. With our input they will have a minimum of 3 options for a design ready in about 2-3 days. After a final design is picked it would take approximately 1-2 weeks for delivery. Light Pole Banner Research Info, February 11, 2009 Page 4 • Cost Breakdown- For both types of banners there is a set up fee. The Sunbrella fee is $260 and the vinyl fee is $80. For lighter Sunbrella colors a piece of material must be sewn in between fabric so colors do not show through the other side and will incur a 10% charge. Vinyl 25 - 2 ink banners = $105/ea 51 - 2 ink banners= $96/ea Sunbrella 25 - 2 ink banners = $104/ea. 50 - 2 ink banners = $91/ea. • Northcott Banners Is located in Minneapolis, MN. They work only with the 18oz. vinyl for their outdoor banners. We would provide the art work in photo shop or their art designers can do the work for $77/hr. Once the art work is finalized the process would take-approximateir-2-weeks for detivery. - _f7'- 0 Cost Breakdown- For the purpose of a quote I asked Northcott to price out 24 banners on both sides. For 4 color printing they quoted approximately $104.29/ea. CONTACTS Municipal Banners Robyn @ 1-800-423-4371 Mainstreet Design Rich @ 763-493-9120 Proiect Graphics Jennifer @ 1-800-655-7311 Northern Lights DisDlav Custom Banners Northcott Banner • Cheryl @ 1-877-974-3205 Carolina @ 1-800-274-7001 Millie @ 612-722-1733 Light Pole Banner Research Info, February 11, 2009 Page 5 4 Work Session Agenda Item No. 0 • MEMORANDUM - CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION DATE: April 23 2009 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Gary Eitel, Director of Business and Development SUBJECT: Housing Program Update BACKGROUND INFORMATION: On January 12, 2009, the EDA adopted Resolution No. 2009-02, "A Resolution Establishing HousinLy Programs and Approving the Use of Funds from the Tax Increment District No. 3 Housing Account" which authorized the following: • The creation of the Renew Loan and Renew Grant programs. • The creation of the Remove and Rebuild program. • The use of Tax Increment District #3 Housing Funds with a budget of $1,000,000 to promote home ownership of 100 homes and $ 0.6 million to acquire and demolish approximate eight properties. • The use of the Greater Metropolitan Housing Corporation to administer the programs. The following is an update on programs activities: On March 6, 2009, the City's Home Loan Assistance Programs for vacant, registered and foreclosed homes began taking applications for the Renew Loan Program and the Renew Grant Program. At the present time, the Greater Metropolitan Housing Corporation has received 18 applications which will meet the Programs eligibility requirements. 2 of these applications have closed,1 application is scheduled to close on April 28th, 5 applications have been approved with funding reserved, 6 applications will be approved for funding upon completion of the vacant building registration, and 4 completed applications are in the review process. On February 9, 2009, the EDA approved the purchase of 5301 James Ave. N., the first home to be acquired under the Remove and Rebuild Program. The property was acquired by GMHC per our contract for consultant services and the City is considering the most economical option of proceeding with the demolition and lot restoration. • On January 26, 2009, the City Council received an update on the City's eligibility to be part of the Neighborhood Stabilization Program, a federally funded program being administered by Hennepin County to local governments with high risk foreclosure and abandonment scores to acquire and redevelop foreclosed properties that might otherwise become a source of abandonment and blight with their community. The City is waiting for final confirmation of the program requirements and funding that will be available to the City. An update on these programs and other foreclosure housing related activity will be provided at the April 27th Council Work Session. 0 •