HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997 05-22 CCP Work Session j R
T
AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
MAY 22, 1997
7:00 P.M.
CONFERENCE ROOM B
I. DISCUSSION OF 1998 BUDGET PROCESS (WITH FINANCIAL COMMISSION:
1) Draft Budget Calendar and Discussion of Issues
impact of levy limits
- impact of debt service
- impact of class rate reductions: commercial, indutrial, multi - family
2) Council issues /direction on budget & budget process
3) Joint Powers Agreements
- Council direction
4) Contractual Services
- Council direction on:
- process of request review (dates, format, and review)
($500 included in civic events narrative for Heritage Festival per Council
direction)
II. GENERAL ITEMS:
1) Commissioner Opat request
2) Future Work Session dates and topics:
A) Council Member Hilstrom: police presence at Brookdale
B) Council Member Hilstrom: discussion of State Auditor letter on Heritage
Center
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
1998 BUDGET CALENDAR
City Council Summary
May 22, 1997 Thursday City Council budget work session.
Late May 1997 Preliminary 1996 Operating Budget conference for City
Manager with city department and division heads. Budget
summary sheets, projected personnel costs, capital outlay
sheets and 1998 budget worksheets handed out.
May 30, 1997 Friday Applications for contractual services for nonprofit
organizations mailed out to past applicants.
June 30, 1997 Monday Consolidated 1998 operating budget requests and revenue
estimates forwarded from the Finance Director to the City
Manager.
June 30, 1997 Monday Multi -year budget projection worksheets handed out.
June through July Manager consults as necessary with department and division
heads as 1998 Operating Budget document is shaped.
July 7, 1997 Monday Applications for contractual services for nonprofit
organizations due.
July 18, 1997 Friday Consolidated multi -year budgets forwarded from the Finance
Director to the City Manager.
July 18, 1997 Friday Draft 1998 Capital Improvements Program due from the
Public Services Director to the City Manager.
July 31, 1997 Thursday Review of applications for contractual services for nonprofit
organizations due.
August 1997 Preliminary recommendations on Capital Improvements
Program (C.I.P.) components.
August 11, 1997 Monday Preliminary 1998 Operating Budget is delivered to the City
Council members.
August 18, 1997 Monday City Council budget work session & review of C.I.P. and
Preliminary Tax Levy
August 1997 Department of Revenue is to certify Local Government Aid
(LGA) and Homestead and Agricultural Credit Aid (HACA).
Sept 8, 1997 Monday Last regular council meeting for adoption of the
Preliminary 1998 Operating Budget and the preliminary
tax levy by the City Council. City must select initial truth
in taxation hearing date and a date for a reconvened
hearing.
Sept 15, 1997 Certify preliminary 1998 Operating Budget and preliminary
tax levy to the County. City must also inform the County of
City budget public hearing dates.
September 1997 Utility Rate Study and Utility Funds budgets presented.
Late September 1997 Proposed 1998 Operating Budget is delivered to the City
Council members.
Oct 14, 1997 Tuesday City Council adopts the Utility Rate Study and Enterprise
Funds budgets.
Oct 27, 1997 Monday Public hearing on and final approval of C.I.P.
December ? ?, 1997 City Council holds initial public hearing on the 1998
Operating Budget.
December ? ?, 1997 City Council holds reconvened public hearing on the 1998
Operating Budget. (If needed)
December 15, 1997 City Council adopts the final 1998 tax levy and final 1998
Operating Budget at a subsequent public hearing held
during the regular City Council meeting.
December 29, 1997 Tues Last day to certify final tax levy and final 1998 Operating
Budget to the County.
Revenues
Taxes (Net) $6
Est. Uncollectable ($202
Miscellaneous Taxes $437
Licenses & Permits $300,160
Intergovernmental $3,671,405
Charge for Service $21,020
Public Safety Charges $19
Recreation $450,824
Community Center Fees $41100
Court Fines $19200
Misc. Revenue $12
Interest $27000
Transfer Liquor Earnings $100,000
TOTAL $12,125,987
Taxes $6,442,436
LGA $1
HACA $1,308,130
Local Performance Aid $32,093
Revenue Increase Potential 2.50% 3.00%
$242,621 $291
Revenue as % of Taxes 3.77% 4.52%
Projected LGA increase $185 $185
v
If Aid incr. $185,000 $57 $106,145
As % of Taxes 0.89% 1.65%
Types of Expenditures 3.00%
Salaries $6,301 $189,041
Fringe Benefits $1 $44,426
Supplies $552,024 $16
Consulting $472
Communications $199,390 $5,982
Repair, rental $481 $14,432
Other Contractual $746
Central Garage $105,454 $30
Insurance $138,225 $4,147
Utilities $472,280 $14,168
Capital Outlay $245
Debt Service $230,440
Street Construction 3
4
$�9 ,197
Contingency $50
Cost of Sales $55
Administrative Service Reimburs ($699,141)
TOTAL $12,125,987 $3118 2.63%
2.5% Revenue Base Increase $242,621
2.63% Expenditure Increase $318,920
($76,299)
3% Revenue Base Increase $291
2.63% Expenditure Increase $318
($27,775)
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA
GENERALFUND
ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET
1997 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED APPROPRIATIONS AND EXPENDITURES
1996 1997 1997 1997%
Adopted Recommd Increase Increase
Approp- Approp- - Decrease - Decrease
riations riations From 1996 From 1996
BY FUNCTION AND
ORGANIZATIONAL UNIT
A. General Government 1,825,246 2,053,620 228,374 12.51%
B. Public Safety 5,049,179 5,224,169 174,990 3.47%
C. Public Works 1,545,021 1,969,690 424,669 27.49%
D. Social Services 78,547 80,000 1,453 1.85%
E. Recreation 2,450,915 2,296,742 - 154,173 -6.29%
F. Economic Development 228,000 206,570 - 21,430 -9.40%
G. Unallocated Expenses 455,986 369,700 - 86,286 - 18.92%
H. Admin Service Reimbursement - 699,141 - 699,141 100.00%
1. Transfers to Debt Service Funds 139,023 230,440 91,417 100.00%
J. Transfers to Street Const. Fund 394,197 394,197 100.00%
--------- - - - - -- --------------- ----- - - - - -- --- - - - - --
TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS 11,771,917 12,125,987 354,070 3.01%
The 1996 budget has been adjusted to include $139,023 which was levied for the Street
Improvement Debt Service Funds in order to make the 1996 budget comparable to the 1997
budget.
I
forty d\combe p2
IW-196 4:03 PM
City of Brooklyn Center
Joint Powers Agreements 5i97
Agreement Date Withdrawal $$
Anoka Hennepin EM 1/1/97 continual June 1 $ 5,500
Narcotics Violent Crime
Task Force
Fire Training Association 3/4/91 perpetual 60 days written None
Five Cities Senior 4/15/92- 4/30/97 Not specified 8,843
Transportation Project
Hennepin Recycling Group 8/1/88 continual prior to August 30 209,000
LOGIS 5/31/72 continual prior to June 15 302,845
North Metro Business 9/10/92 continual prior to August 30 7,752
Retention & Development
Commission (RDC)
North Metro Development 6/26/88 continual prior to October 15 None
Association
North Metro Mayors 6/26/88 continual prior to October 15 17,253
Association
North Suburban Regional 1/24/83 continual 30 days written
Mutual Aid Association
(Fire)
Northwest Hennepin 8/27/80 continual any time (July budget) 16,663
Human Services Council
Northwest Suburbs Cable 9/24/79 continual 30 days written None
Communications
Commission
Pets Under Police Security 9/10/90 continual prior to July 30 14,500
(PUPS)
Project PEACE 1/1/93 continual prior to August 1 43,994
Twin Lakes 1/14/91 continual prior to October 1 1,750
*North Hennepin 2/l/84 continual None 4,000
Mediation Project
*not a joint powers agreement - non - profit organization
City of Brooklyn Center
Five Cities Senior Transportation Project
-Purpose: To jointly and cooperatively plan, provide, and administer a senior
transportation program in order to reduce to the greatest practical extent the public
expenditures necessary to provide such a program.
-Participating Units: Robbinsdale, Crystal, Golden Valley, New Hope, and Brooklyn
Center
North Metro Mayors Association
-Purpose: The mission is to initiate actions, provide leadership and commit the
resources necessary to insure the equitable distribution of economic development, shared
tax resources and uniform investment in public facilities throughout the metropolitan
community.
-Participating Units: Andover, Anoka, Blaine, Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, Circle
Pines, Columbia Heights, Coon Rapids, Crystal, Ham Lake, Mounds View, New
Brighton, New Hope, Cedar, Ramsey, Robbinsdale, and Spring Lake Park
Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council
-Purpose: To coordinate the providing of human services, both publicly and privately, in
the territory of the parties.
-Participating Units: Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, Champlin, Corcoran, Crystal,
Dayton, Golden Valley, Hanover, Hassan Township, Maple Grove, New Hope, Osseo,
Robbinsdale, and Rogers
Northwest Suburbs Cable Communications Commission
-Purpose: To establish an organization to study, prepare, adopt, grant, transfer, renew,
administer, and enforce a cable communications franchise(s), and to study and make
recommendations as necessary, regarding other telecommunications issues, in member
municipalities in the Northwest Suburbs of Hennepin County, Minnesota.
-Participating Units: Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, Crystal, Golden Valley, Maple
Grove, New Hope, Osseo, Plymouth, and Robbinsdale
Twin Lakes Joint Powers Organization
-Purpose: To enable the parties jointly to exercise the powers authorized by Minnesota
Statutes 1990, Section 459.20 and jointly and cooperatively to provide for law
enforcement activities on the Lakes.
-Participating Units: Brooklyn Center, Crystal, and Robbinsdale
Social Service Requests -1997 Budget 5/22/97
1997 1997
Request Actual
$ 15,000 none Brooklyn Peacemaker Center, Inc.
Requested $15,000 for 1996
Previous agreement since 1990, not funded in 1996
$ 10,000 none CEAP
Requested $5,000 for 1996
$ 11,712 $ 8,843 Five Cities Senior Transportation
Joint Powers agreement since 1985
Withdraw: 60 day notice, full financial obligation must be met due to
transportation agreement. Transit agreement runs May 1 - April 30th
Works directly with Recreation Department
$ 5,000 $ 4,000 North Hennepin Mediation Program
Contract since 1987
Agreement runs Jan 1 - Dec 31 yearly
$ 16,663 $ 16,663 Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council
$10,254 for NWHHSC
$6,409 for CO -OP Northwest
$ 43,994 $ 43,994 Project PEACE
Joint Powers agreement with 1993
Must give notice to withdraw by August 1 st for the upcoming calendar year.
Works directly with Police Department
$ 2,000 $ 2,000 Brooklyn Center Youth Football
$ 2,500 $ 2,500 Brooklyn Center Youth Hockey
$ 2,250 $ 2,000 Brooklyn Community Band
$ 3,000 none Discover the Center
$ 112,119 $ 80,000 Totals
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
POLICY AND PROCEDURE
RELATING TO CITY CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
FOR NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS
General
The City of Brooklyn Center is aware that there are many worthwhile nonprofit
organizations serving Brooklyn Center residents, and that such organizations are supported
primarily through public and private funding. Contractual services between such
organizations and the City of Brooklyn Center, when made, will be distributed in accordance
with this policy.
Purpose
✓ To develop an effective method for receiving and considering
requests made to the City of Brooklyn Center from nonprofit
organizations.
✓ To maximize the benefits to the citizens of Brooklyn Center from
the limited resources available.
✓ To maintain objectivity and equity in granting contractual
service requests.
✓ To provide a means of monitoring and responding to community needs and
interests that may change from year to year.
General Policy Guidelines
The Brooklyn Center City Council is responsible for determining whether financial or
in -kind contractual services will be made by the City to assist nonprofit organizations. The
City Council will consider the following guidelines in determining which nonprofit
organization(s), if any, receive contractual services from the City. This policy should not be
construed to obligate the City Council to provide financial or in -kind contractual services.
1. The City Council shall offer contractual services to nonprofit organizations for one
year, with the option for contractual services after review and approval by the City
Council on an annual basis. All requests for contractual services must be submitted
to the City by June I for consideration for the following fiscal year (January 1 to
December 31).
2. The City Council will give high priority to contractual services to organizations .which
can demonstrate that the contractual
services are used to rovide services r s ices to Brooklyn
Center residents.
3. Contractual service requests will normally be considered in relation to existing City
March 1994 _ I _
commitments and the target populations served.
4. The City Council may request proposals from a variety of alternative sources.
5. Preference will be given to organizations which:
a. Have taken affirmative efforts to raise funds to support their efforts.
b. Demonstrate in their budgets that there is a continuing concentration on
minimization of administrative and overhead costs.
I
c. Cannot be effectively or fully funded through other sources.
d. Sponsor programs which have verifiable benefits to the community at large; for
example, programs that enhance the effectiveness of City programs.
e. Make effective use of volunteer skills and in -kind contributions to reduce the cost
of program /service delivery.
6. Final approval of requests are subject to the City's public hearing and budget approval
process.
Contractual Service Request Guidelines
The completion of the following procedures is the responsibility of the City Council.
1. A letter specifying the required information for consideration for contractual services
and the deadline for
application will be sent to the organizations which have
P previously
provied contractual services to the City. This information will be available to other
interested parties upon request.
I All written requests for contractual services must be submitted prior to June 1 for
consideration for the following fiscal year (January 1 to December 31). An application
for contractual services form must be filled out com letel and submitted P y e as p art of
the written request.
I The City Council may request an oral explanation of the written request from each
applicant.
=1. The City Council may designate an appropriate City advisory commission to research
and monitor groups requesting and /or receiving City contractual services. At the
request of the City Council, the designated commission shall monitor and /or evaluate
the requesting organization by methods available at the time of assessment.
5. City staff may make contractual service recommendations to the City Council based
upon use of the evaluation form for requests.
March 1994 _ _
APPLICATION FOR CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
(FOR NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION/ PROGRAiv1 /AGENCY)
Date Submitted:
(Deadline is June 1 for consideration for the following fiscal year, January 1 to
December 31.)
Applicant Organization /Program /Agency Name:
Address-
City, State, Zip
Phone Number
Contact Person:
PROGRAM OVERVMW
1. Generally describe the organization, including its mission, date established, services, and
goals.
_. Explain the areas of expertise of the organization, including a description of the range
of staff capability.
3. Describe the target group for services of the organization.
-1- March 1994
4. Describe how the organization is marketed, and to what geographical and
demographical areas.
5. Discuss the methodology employed in measuring the effectiveness of the organization.
BUDGET
Current Budget Yr. Requested
Year — Actual Budget Year
DOLLAR AMOUNT REQUESTED FROM CITY S S
TOTAL ORGANIZATION BUDGET S S
CITY AMOUNT AS % OF TOTAL BUDGET % %
o OF TOTAL BUDGET FOR OVERHEAD
AND ADMINISTRATION COSTS % %
6. List specific" secured and anticipated sources of contributions available to the applicant.
SECURED (S)
OR
SOURCE AMOUNT ANTICIPATED (A)
7. List all other funding organizations explored and the outcome.
-2- March 1994
8. List in -kind items requested from the City.
9. Describe use of all in -kind contributions, and include estimated value of each in -kind
contribution.
10. a. Describe use of volunteers.
b. Describe how the use of volunteers affects or reduces your budget.
COIafUNITY NEED
11. Explain the community need for the proposed service.
12. Explain the community benefits including what you do for groups with special needs in
the proposed service (if applicable).
-3- March 1994
13. Describe how Brooklyn Center benefits from the services provided.
14. a. Discuss possible alternative sources for those services available within the
community.
b. Describe why those alternative services are not fulfilling the current needs.
15. State the total numbers of people from all communities who participate or receive
direct benefits, and describe how these numbers were determined.
PROJECTED TOTAL
TOTAL SERVED TO BE SERVED
LAST YEAR NEXT YEAR
16. a. State the numbers of residents from Brooklyn Center only who are served, and
describe how these numbers were determined.
PROJECTED TOTAL
TOTAL SERVED TO BE SERVED
LAST YEAR NEXT YEAR
b. What percent of the total residents served are from Brooklyn Center?
-4- March 1994
ORGANIZATION NEED
17. What would be the consequences to your organization of not receiving the amount
requested?
The following supporting documentation must accompany this application. If any item is
not enclosed, please explain why not.
I. Financial statement for the preceding fiscal year.
2. Proposed budget for the upcoming fiscal year.
3. Data (backup documentation) substantiating the need for this service in Brooklyn
Center.
4. Proof of nonprofit status.
5. List of current Board of Directors.
6. Job descriptions and resumes of key personnel.
7. Statistical or other data measuring effectiveness of the organization.
Signature Date
Title
-5- March 1994
EVALUATION FORM FOR CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
City Commission Conducting Evaluation:
Date of Evaluation:
Applicant Organization /Program /Agency Name:
Address -
City, State, Zip
Contact Person:
Phone Number -
Date Application Submitted:
Budget Year Requested -
Score each statement based on the maximum points listed in parentheses next to each item.
The higher the score, the more the actual request is equated to the statement. A total of
100 points is possible. For YIN responses, select Y for yes or N for no.
A. PROGRAM OVERVIEW (20)
(YIN) 1. _ The application and supporting documents were submitted in a
timely fashion for inclusion in the annual budget.
(5) 2-- The applicant has a realistic view of its resources and the
organization is limited to its level of competence. The
applicant indicates the availability of an effective staff, if
applicable.
(5) 3. The applicant has demonstrated the ability effectively to reach
its target/demographical and geographical areas.
(5) 4. The methodology employed to measure the organization's
effectiveness is effective, clear, and concise.
B. BUDGET (30)
(10) 1. The total amount requested from the City of Brooklyn Center
is reasonable given the overall organization's budget.
(10) 2. The budget request is reasonable given the objectives of the
proposal for the contractual services.
(10) 3. The administrative and program service costs are in reasonable
balance.
(Y /N) 4. The use of volunteers is reasonable and cost effective.
(Y /N) 5. Other funding sources have been explored.
C. COv.L- VfUNITY NEED (35)
(10) 1. The applicant is meeting an important community need.
(10) 2. The extent of this service does not overlap with services
provided elsewhere in the community.
(15) 1 The number of Brooklyn Center residents served is high in
relation to the amount requested.
D. ORGANIZATION NEED (20)
(10) 1. The program is not viable without local government support.
(5) 2. There are few, if any, alternate sources of funding available to
the applicant.
(5) 3. The organization's request does not create an ongoing demand
for funding in future budgets.
TOTAL SCORE
March 1994
MIKE OPAT - -� 612- 348 -7881
COMMISSIONER _�` FAX-348-8701
f ✓�
� vssa
BOARD OF HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
A -2400 GOVERNMENT CENTER
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55487 -0240
May 12, 1997
Mayor Myrna Kragness
City of Brooklyn Center
6301 Shingle Creek Parkway
Brooklyn Center, MN 55430
Dear Mayor Kragness:
On November 25, 1996 the Brooklyn Center City Council took an extraordinary
action when it elected to postpone the initiation of previously supported
roadway and streetscape improvements along Brooklyn Boulevard. In taking
such action, the City Council expressed.a willingness to surrender $500,000
in federal ISTEA funding for roadside streetscape improvements, and
indicated it was unable to support the related roadway improvement because of
uncertainties in right -of -way acquisition costs and the environmental
condition of various properties required along the corridor. The City's
decision to withdraw from the active pursuit of the roadway improvement
places a related $1.6 million.ISTEA award to the County in jeopardy. In
addition to the effective surrender of $2.1 million in ISTEA funding for
corridor improvements, the City Council sought an interim roadway
improvement, consisting of a pavement mill and overlay, from the County.
Upon receipt of the City's notification that it could not support the
Brooklyn Boulevard impro=vement, County staff presented to me a number of
short -term and long -term corridor treatment options. During our discussions,
it was noted that the Hennepin County Board had already authorized the
appropriation of $758,000 in the 1997 Capital Budget for right -of -way
acquisition related to the roadway improvement, and had scheduled an
additional $1.46 million appropriation for 1998. In addition, I was advised
that the estimated pavement mill and overlay cost is $140,000. From my
perspective, the City Council has elected to- surrender $2.1 million in
federal funds and $0.75 million to $2.218 million in County funds, and seek
a $0.14 million temporary investment in-the hope that present uncertainties
can be clarified and more federal funds can be garnered to finance a project
whose cost was seriously underestimated by both the City and County in the
early 1990's.
At my request, County staff has discussed with their Minnesota Department of
Transportation (Mn /DOT) counterparts the potential postponement of both the
roadway and streetscape project funding appropriations so the environmental
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
Mayor Myrna Kragness
May 12, 1997
Page 2
uncertainties can be clarified. Although both projects are scheduled for
ISTEA fund appropriations in 1998 under the region's proposed 1998 -2000
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), a Mn /DOT representative has
indicated postponement of funding to 2000 may be supported because of the
previously unforeseen environmental issues.
Given the information provided, I am inclined to support the postponement of
ISTEA funding to 2000 instead of its surrender and reapplication for greater
funding in 2001/2002. If ISTEA funding remains programmed, I will be in a
better position to garner the support of my fellow Board members when we
discuss the year 2000 appropriation of the $1.46 million now scheduled for
1998. If the ISTEA funds are surrendered, I cannot affirm that the
previously appropriated $758,000 or the scheduled $1.46 million will be
available for corridor improvements in 2001/2002.
Regardless of the year in which a corridor improvement can occur, the project
postponement from 1998 necessitates a $140,000 pavement restoration
investment by the County. This work has been tentatively scheduled for this
summer. While the County is dedicated to this investment, we do so
reluctantly because we normally expect a 10- to 15 -year service life return
on such investments (instead of a 3- to 5 -year service time in this
instance).
In order for me to better serve your community, I must know that your City
Council understands the implications of ISTEA/County
p fund a ro
appropriation
P
postponement and surrender. Accordingly, I ask that this issue again be
9 Y,
I � 9
discussed by the Council 'and that I be allowed to offer my perspectives. An
immediate response to my request is imperative, as an ISTEA funding
solicitation (for 2001/2002) is imminent.
I look forward to hearing from you soon.
Since e ,
Mike p
Commissio
cc: Vern Genzlinger