Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995 11-13 CCP Regular Session • CITY COUNCIL AGENDA CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER NOVEMBER 13, 1995 7 p.m. 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call Dt� m K, KM K.e., 3. Opening Ceremonies 4. Council Report 5. 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\A-.7 > �L Councilmembers not present at meetings will be recorded as abstaining from the vote on the minutes. V August 21, 1995 - Special Work Session km, �(►� (I,d ��,�,� F} { 2. August 28, 1995 - Regular Session � ��3. September 11, 1995 - Regular Session E(C��'itC , k - � ov+- no � ,U,Q.t✓4. October 23, 1995 - Regular Session K�Km aA -& 5. October 28, 1995 - Special Work Session vt. October 30, 1995 - Reconvened Special Work Session1 G 7. November 2, 1995 - Special Work Session , V- 8. November 6, 1995 - Special Work Session (6 p.m.) /�i 0� � ' Ci,d b. Resolution Expressing Recognition and Appreciation of Jody Brandvoid for Her Dedicated Public Service on the Earle Brown Neighborhood Housing Advisory Committee Km,D jk ` > c. Resolution Expressing Recognition and Appreciation of Dolores Hastings for Her Dedicated Public Service on the Earle Brown Neighborhood Housing Advisory Committee mod. Resolution Expressing Recognition and Appreciation of Robert Torres for His Dedicated Public Service on the Earle Brown Neighborhood Housing Advisory Committee to • - r _ � qc)bN CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- November 13, 1995 �. e. ® Resolution Expressing Recognition and Appreciation of Everett Lindh for His Dedicated Public Service e o the Earle Brown Neighborhood Housing Advisory e Committee K.M i DN �r f. Resolution Expressing Recognition and Appreciation of Dennis Morrow for His Dedicated Public Service on the Earle Brown Neighborhood Housing Advisory Committee �t-n 1 04 -�)(3_ , ✓ g. Resolution Expressing Recognition and Appreciation of Robert Jechorek for His Dedicated Public Service on the Earle Brown Neighborhood Housing '� e Advisory Committee y<,m h. R esolution E Q res in s ec ni `Z }� Expressing Recognition and Appreciation of Johanna Mills for Her Dedicated Public Service on the Earle Brown Neighborhood Housing Advisory ✓�j� Committee �i. Resolution Expressing Recognition and Appreciation of Joyce Lindquist for )" Her Dedicated Public Service on the Earle Brown Neighborhood Housing Advisory Committee kM� Z j � - t�� j ✓ 1. Resolution Expressing R xp g ecognition and Appreciation of Nan PP . Nancy Carlson for Her Dedicated Public Service on the Earle Brown Neighborhood Housing Advisory Committee KM D4 -� Q B C -(LL k. Resolution Expressing Recognition and Appreciation of Deborah Iverson � PP so for Her Dedicated Public Service on the Earle Brown Neighborhood Housing u Advisory Committee Kn b4 -� n r&i� 1. Resolution Expressing Recognition and Appreciation of Karen Youngberg for Her Dedicated Public Service on the Earle Brown Neighborhood Housing Advisory Committee } D� "&O -e.CL " Resolution Authorizing 2 "J� . the City Manager to Write- ff Uncolle ti ble Checks g ty g c T-P11. Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Write -off Uncollectible Accounts q� Receivable kt I o. Revocation of Municipal State Aid Designation on Certain Street Segments, and Addition of Municipal State Aid Designation on Certain Street Segments I. Resolution Establishing Designation of Municipal State Aid Streets (John G Martin Drive from Shingle Creek Parkway to T.H.100 and Summit Drive from Shingle Creek Parkway to T.H.100) CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -3- November 13, 1995 4i�- A'�2. Resolution Revoking Municipal State Aid Street (62nd Avenue from Dupont Avenue North to 0.33 Miles East of Dupont Ave ue North) p. Licenses 6. Open Forum !�j �t.V /�- L`�'•- 7. Public Public Hearing: ® ?7 L) K D)4 � 0 1 � a. Public Hearing Regarding Special�Assessment F'or Nuisance Abatement at r 4746 Lakeview Avenue e'& 4) 7 Q !�` Resolution Certifying Special Assessment for Nuisance Abatement to the v) Hennepin County Tax Rolls at 4746 Lakevie Avenue IX S. Council Consideration Items a. Resolution Electing to Participate in the Local Housing Incentives Account 06 Program ,,U er the- Metropolitan Livable Communities Act �. b. Resoluon � i A pointing Auditors for th7YearEnded December 31, 1995 5 1 � � �M C. Staff Report Re: Improvement Project Nos. 1996-01, b:�, and 03, Orchard Lane East Street, .St or Drainage, and Utili Improvements �� , #Id. Resolution Amending the 1996 General Fund Budget and the Central Garage B dget d Authorizing the Purchase of Five (5) Squad Cars am c � 1�Q e. Discussion, Regarding Comprehensive Plan Update / eq e for Proposal f. Considerato Agreements with Team ters Contracts for Department Heads /Supervisors and Confidential Employees with the City of Brooklyn Center g. Report of City Manager on Propose4 Contract -GAmd 1. Items Removed from the Consent e A � v g 9. Adjournment 1)(4 `� Cm=il Mating Date 11/13/95 3 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item N.AW Request For Council Consideration • Item Description: APPROVAL OF MINUTES - August 21, 1995 Department Approval: Patti Page, Interim Adm "strative Assistant Manager's Review/Recommendation: &� No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: Approve minutes of August 21, 1995, Special Work Session Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached • At the October 23, 1995, City Council meeting the Council discussed the minutes of the August 21, 1995, special work session. At that time it was noted that Councilmember Mann would submit her recommendation for a revision to the minutes of August 21, 1995. Attached is the revision recommended by Councilmember Mann and a copy of the minutes as they were originally submitted. • i August 21, 1995 City Council Minutes EARLE BROWN HERITAGE CENTER ' after Councilmember Hilstroms statement S 1 Councilmember Mann requested that the EBHC Management study be supplied to the new councilmembers. A resident asked some questions pertaining to the budget. Staff responded. The resident then made some statements about the budget. A heated discussion then ensued between Councilmember Carmody and the resident. Councilmember Carmody threatened to bar the resident from meetings. Councilmember Mann moved to adjourn, seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom. Motion passed unanimously. i It was decided the next Budget Work Session was scheduled for Wednesday, September 6, 1995. OTHER BUSINESS EARLE BROWN HERITAGE CENTER Councilmember Hilstrom expressed concern regarding financial status of the Center. Mayor Kragness indicated she had talked with Judith Bergeland and the Director of Community Development. Both people suggested the Council hold a work session at the Center which would provide Council with an opportunity to view the Center. Councilmember Hilstrom stated Council needs to have proper information and /or futures planning in hand to make an informed vote regarding budget items for the Center. She added refusal to approve any budget until concrete ideas are provided about the Center's financial stability. ADJOURNMENT A motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 9:44 P. M. • Deputy City Clerk Mayor Recorded and transcribed by: Connie Beckman TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial ® 8/21/95 e 3 - 31 Council Meeting Date November 13, 1995 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Number • Request For Council Consideration Item Description: City Council Minutes August 21, 1995 - Special Work Session, August 28, 1995 - Regular Session, September 11, 1995 - Regular Session, October 23, 1995 - Regular Session, October 28, 1995 - Special Work Session, October 30, 1995 - Reconvened Special Work Session, November 2, 1995- Special Work Session, November 6, 1995 - Special Work Session Department Approval: ze� Deputy ity Clerk Manager's a ager s Review /Recommendation: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached • Recommended City Council Action: Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached Yes ) 1. August 21, 1995 - Special Work Session Barb Kalligher was absent from the meeting and the minutes will reflect her abstention on these minutes. 2. August 28, 1995 - Regular Session Barb Kalligher was absent from the meeting and the minutes will reflect her abstention from the vote on these minutes. 3. September. 11, 1995 - Regular Session Barb Kalligher was absent from the meeting and the minutes will reflect her abstention from the vote on these minutes. 4. October 23, 1995 - Regular Session Barb Kalligher was absent from the meeting and the minutes will reflect her abstention on these minutes. 5. October 28, 1995 - Special Work Session Barb Kalligher was absent from the meeting and the minutes will reflect her abstention from the vote on these minutes. 6. October 30, 1995 - Reconvened Special Work Session • Barb Kalligher was absent from the meeting and the minutes will reflect her abstention from the vote on these minutes. Request For Council Consideration Page 2 7. November 2, 1995 - Special Work Session • Barb Kalligher was absent from the meeting and the minutes will reflect her abstention on these minutes. 9. November 6, 1995 - Special Work Session (6 p.m.) Barb Kalligher was absent from the meeting and the minutes will reflect her abstention on these minutes. • i 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 AUGUST 28, 1995 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in regular session and was called to order by Mayor Myrna Kragness at 7 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Kathleen Carmody, Debra Hilstrom, and Kristen Mann. Also present were Interim City Manager Cam Andre, Director of Public Services Diane Spector, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, Communications Coordinator Terri Swanson, Planning and Zoning Specialist Ron Warren, and Council Secretary Connie Beckman. Councilmember Barb Kalligher was absent. OPENING CEREMONIES • A moment of silence was observed in place of the invocation. COUNCIL REPORTS Councilmember Hilstrom noted an open house to be held on Thursday, August 31, 1995, from 5:30 -8:30 p.m. at the Humboldt Substation. PRESENTATION Mayor Kragness presented a plaque of appreciation to Mr. Ed Badgley, Store Manager for the Brooklyn Center Target, on behalf of the Brooklyn Center Recreation Programs. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Mann to approve the August 28, 1995, agenda with the removal of Items 6(a), and (b) from the consent agenda and the addition of Item 9(h) under Council Consideration Items passed unanimously. RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION NO. 95 -189 Member Kathleen Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: ® 8/28/95 - 1 - RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1995 -18, NEW ELECTRIC CONTROLS AT WELLS 5, 6, AND 7, APPROVING SPECIFICATIONS, AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kristen Mann and passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 95490 Member Kathleen Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES (ORDER NO. DST 08/28/95) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kristen Mann and passed unanimously. LICENSES There was a motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Mann to approve the following list of licenses: AMUSEMENT DEVICES - OPERATOR Chuckwa g on Grill 1928 57th Ave. N. Rookies Bar & Grill 1501 Freeway Blvd. AMUSEMENT DEVICES - VENDOR Marcus Vending Inc. 1945 Lochaven Place MECHANICAL SYSTEMS LICENSE Advanced Energy Services 3650 Annapolis Lane RENTAL DWELLINGS - INITIAL Welcome Home Inc. 819 -21 55th Ave. N. Alvin J. Moline, Jr. 7106 France Ave. N. Raymond & Rosanne Marshall 5637 Northport Dr. RENTAL DWELLINGS - RENEWAL George and Ethel McMullen 2401 -03 54th Ave. N. Keith Nordby 5960 Brooklyn Blvd. George Shimshock 5900 Colfax Ave. N. Heinz Pollinger 4207 Lakeside Ave. N. #320 TOBACCO RELATED PRODUCT Value Food Market 6804 Humboldt Ave. N. 8/28/95 -2- • TAXICAB Town Taxi 2500 Washington Ave. N. i The motion passed unanimously. OPEN FORUM Mayor Kragness noted the Council had received no requests to use the open forum session this evening. PUBLIC HEARING - EARLE BROWN COMMONS The following people were introduced as being available to provide information at the public hearing this evening: Cathy Constantine (bankruptcy), Sue Van Dyke (bond attorney), Bill Jones (counsel for owners), John Persanen (counsel for bond holders), and Clark Whitmore (representing the general partners). Ms. Van Dyke said the Earle Brown Commons' bonds were first issued in 1986 and replacement bonds were issued in 1990. Original issue and current value of the bonds is estimated at $8.8 million. Owners of the Earle Brown Commons are seeking approval from the City to restructure the bonds under tax exempt status. Mayor Kragness opened the public hearing on the Earle Brown Commons at 7:13 p.m. Tim Willson, 6718 Colfax Avenue North, expressed confusion around defaulting on previous ® bonds and proposed reorganization of the bonds. Ms. Van Dyke explained the current reorganized bonds and indicated that the City would recoup back owed property taxes received in payment installments over the next ten years. Mr. Jones explained that more was owed on the Commons ($6.1 million) as compared to it's appraised value of $4.4 million requiring more dramatic measures to be taken by owners of the Commons; filing through Chapter Eleven. He added current proposed reorganization of the bonds has been designed in an assertive yet conservative enough manner to ensure success of future payments. Additionally, Mr. Jones informed Council that a payment of $186,000 in first half taxes had been made and it appears there will be enough to pay the second half taxes. Mayor Kragness inquired about changes that have been made to guarantee success of the reorganization. Mr. Jones explained the original bonds were financed on a fixed rate whereas the minimum valuation was bought down on the reorganized bonds producing a reduced and variable rate (maximum of two percent increase) to service the bond debt as well as real estate taxes. The owners have had to prove the reorganized plan is feasible and will avoid inability to pay current obligations as well as real estate taxes. 8/28/95 - 3 - In response to a question by Councilmember Hilstrom, Mr. Jones indicated there are so many other costs involved, a personal guarantee could not be made to pay the taxes, but the proposed reorganization included every intention to pay them. Councilmember Mann made reference to a statement in the Trustees Objection to Confirmation about "milking the property" and questioned what was meant by this statement. Mr. Whitmore stated he did not recall the statement to which Councilmember Mann was referring. He noted the Trustees had a lot of concerns regarding the plan and the disclosure statement. He further stated they have been clarifying what the rights of the bonds holders would be if the plan of reorganization is confirmed. Mr. Whitmore indicated that current bond holders had voted in favor of the proposed reorganization and that the value of the Commons property not designated to taxes will go towards bond debt retirement versus back tax debt retirement. Councilmember Hilstrom wondered about the repayment of $1.7 million in back taxes. The Interim City Manager said that if the property foreclosured the City would recover taxes at that time. If Council chooses to approve tax exempt status for the Commons, the proposed reorganization would go forward and the City would receive back taxes in payments over the next ten years with ten percent interest annually. Mr. Jones reiterated that under proposed reorganization, the owners would have the ability to make bond and property tax payments. He also stated the owners are not asking the City for money, but for the City's support to obtain bonds under tax exempt status, adding $11,000 per year is planned to be paid to the City in the form of an administrative fee. Councilmember Mann noted the income from the project will pay the debt but yet the project is currently in too much debt. She asked if these new bonds are going to be the sole revenue source to repay these 1990 series bonds. Mr. Jones noted they are using bankruptcy for the restructuring of the bonds so that the amount that is paid out on the bonds is more commensurate with the amount of the income that the project actually has. Councilmember Mann asked what would happen if property taxes increased by more than 3 %. Mr. Jones explained how the 3 % level was reached and noted if property taxes did increase by more than 3 % the cost would have to be absorbed by the series B bonds. He added if there are substantial increases in the property taxes it should also mean there is an inflation factor which would result in an increase in social security payments which in turn would mean the rents could increase as well. Councilmember Mann asked why the City should continually bail out this debtor. Mr. Jones stated it seems this is an economic solution that will allow this project to remain on the tax rolls at a rate where it continues to be almost entirely full and at a rate where the project will continue to pay the real estate taxes. 8/28/95 -4- • Mr. Jones said the management level has not been cited for nonpayment of back property taxes. Income of the Commons is sufficient, but problems and /or mistakes were made with the original development of the project. He added occupancy rates have been at a good level, rentals are optimal, and operating expenses are in line. Councilmember Hilstrom asked about a lockbox or third party arrangement regarding incoming funds collected on behalf of the Commons. Mr. Jones viewed a lockbox or third party situation more appropriate in a commercial setting. He further explained there is documentation for certification of funds, monthly amounts are being escrowed, and certain safeguards have been built in to ensure the Commons' ability to meet its financial obligations. Mr. Jones informed Council a disclaimer was sent to bond holders stating the City would not be fiscally responsible for the bonds based on approval of the proposed bond reorganization. Mr. Whitmore informed Council that less than 80 percent of the bond holders voted in favor of the reorganization. He also indicated that bond holders want a pledge from the Commons' owners regarding reserve funds, a lien on reserve monies, and cited there is no mechanism in place for control of monies. Mr. Whitmore also cited there are other areas of concern present which include distribution of monies to primaries (limited and /or general partners), that bond holders don't want payments made to primaries until debt retirement is complete, and concerns of courts about proceeding further with the proposed bond reorganization without obtained tax exempt status. Mayor Kragness suggested that in light of need for more information around the City's bond ® rating, Council should consider tabling any action for two weeks. Mr. Whitmore and Mr. Jones emphasized the urgency with which Council needed to move regarding tax exempt status as the courts were waiting to proceed based on Council's decision. A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to close the public hearing on the Earle Brown Commons passed unanimously. The hearing closed at 8:18 p.m. EARLE BROWN COMMONS The City Attorney stated the three options Council had: approve tax exempt status, deny tax exempt status, or table a decision for an additional two weeks. A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to table for two weeks approval of a resolution providing for the issuance of housing facilities refunding revenue bonds to provide funds for a project on behalf of Earle Brown Commons Limited Partnership 11 passed unanimously. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEMS PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 95011 8/28/95 - 5 - This application, submitted by Robert L. and Marlene A. Overpeck, and presented to Council by the Planning and Zoning Specialist was a request for preliminary plat approval to subdivide into two lots the parcel of land addressed as 5500 Emerson Avenue North. The Planning Commission had recommended approval of this application at its August 17, 1995, meeting. Councilmember Hilstrom left the meeting at 7 :31 p.m. The Planning and Zoning Specialist stated the two lots (originally known as Lots Seven and Eight, Block Two, Littell Addition) were originally joined for tax purposes and contain a large, old two -story frame house and a three -car garage. The size of the combined lot is 195 feet (along Emerson Avenue) by approximately 135.4 feet deep (a total of approximately 26,400 square feet). The proposed legal description of the new lots is Lots One and Two, Block One, Overpeck Addition. The lots would be divided as follows: Lot One (Interior) = 107.40 feet wide by 135.44 feet deep; Lot Two (Corner) = 87.60 feet wide by 135.41 feet wide. Lot Two would be approximately 2.4 feet short in required width. A decision for approval of the proposed planning application would allow the current house on the land to remain with variance issues being addressed accordingly. The Planning and Zoning Specialist also noted condition Number Eight of the Special Use Permit held by Harron Methodist Church for an off -site accessory parking lot. It is possible with the development of the corner lot for a single family home that the shrubs which serve to screen this parking lot might be removed. This would mean that the church would be responsible for screening its parking lot from this residential property. Councilmember Hilstrom returned to the meeting at 8:36 p.m. Councilmember Mann left the meeting at 8:39 p.m. . A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to approve Planning Commission Application No. 95011 submitted by Robert L. and Marlene A. Overpeck passed unanimously subject to the following conditions: 1. The final plat is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 2. The final plat is subject to the final provisions of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. Councilmember Mann was absent from the vote. PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 95012 This application, submitted by Robert L. and Marlene A. Overpeck, and presented to Council by the Planning and Zoning Specialist was a request for a variance from Section 35 -400 of the Zoning Ordinance and Section 15 -106g of the Subdivision Ordinance to create a corner lot in 8/28/95 -6- • the R -1 zoning district less than 90' in width. The Planning Commission recommended approval of this application at its August 17, 1995, meeting. Creation of Lot Two Block One Overpeck Addition would result in the creation of a corner lot less than 90 feet in width (87.60 feet wide by 135.41 feet wide). The property in question is located at the northeast corner of 55th and Emerson Avenues. Mr. and Mrs. Overpeck state it is their intention to sell this lot or place a single family residence on it. A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to approve Planning Commission Application No. 95012 submitted by Robert L. and Marlene A. Overpeck for a variance from Section 35 -400 and Section 15 -106g of the City ordinances to create a corner lot in the R -1 District less than 90 feet on the grounds that the Standards for Variance contained in the zoning and Subdivision Ordinances are met as well as the long - standing City policy for granting minor lot variances passed unanimously. Councilmember Mann was absent from the vote. COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT EXPANDING THE CITY'S INTER -CITY SEWER AGREEMENT WITH BROOKLYN PARK Three properties on Noble Avenue in Brooklyn Park, which are located south of Shingle Creek, have not previously been hooked up to city water and sewer. Since it would be cost prohibitive to extend water and sewer south across the creek to serve these three homes, Brooklyn Park proposed to extend this service from Brooklyn Center's mains at Noble Avenue and Woodbine Lane. • Brooklyn Park agrees to pay all costs associated with the extension of service; agrees to maintain the leads and services; agrees to pay hookup charges for the three properties; and guarantees that the property owners will pay water and sanitary sewer fees under the same rate structure as other Brooklyn Center utility customers. Brooklyn Park further agrees that even though the agreement stipulates that each City owns the facilities located in their communities, Brooklyn Park will be responsible for the repair and replacement, should it become necessary, of the lead all the way to its connection at Woodbine. The Director of Public Services indicated other properties which have entered into agreements such as the ones described have worked out to her knowledge with no problems. She also indicated Brooklyn Park would be responsible for it's own assessments. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -191 Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CONNECTION OF THREE PROPERTIES ON NOBLE AVENUE IN BROOKLYN PARK TO THE BROOKLYN CENTER SANITARY SEWER AND WATER SYSTEMS • 8/28/95 - 7- The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. Member Kristen Mann was absent from the vote. • Mayor Kragness declared a recess at 8:53 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 9:05 p.m. Councilmember Carmody was absent at reconvening of the meeting. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PROPOSAL AND AUTHORIZING A CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1995 -05 The Interim City Manager informed Council five City staff members evaluated all proposals individually and met as a group to jointly evaluate the proposals and narrow the field to a final selection. Based on criteria, Short, Elliott, Hendrickson, Inc. (SEH) stood out highest among all of the submittals. Further justification around selection of SEH was provided by the Interim City Manager. Councilmember Carmody returned to the meeting at 9:07 p.m. The Interim City Manager noted funds are available to complete the project. The Director of Public Services noted 69th Avenue is a Municipal State Aid street and would be funded through a combination of funding sources including MSA supported bonds. RESOLUTION NO.95 -192 Member Kristen Mann introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PROPOSAL AND AUTHORIZING A CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1995 -05, 69TH AVENUE NORTH (SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY TO DUPONT AVENUE), ROADWAY, BRIDGE, AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. MEMORANDUM FROM COUNCILMEMBER CARMODY ON TEAM BUILDING Councilmember Carmody presented a memo addressing the subject of possible team building ideas to improve communications between Council members. She explained that through facilitation of improved communications, Council could be more efficient. Councilmember Mann acknowledged what is ultimately envisioned is agreed by all Council members and felt the process of better communication amongst Council members had already begun the past week. 8/28/95 - 8 - I Mayor Kragness indicated Council should have an ongoing project and felt this would be especially appropriate once a new City Manager was hired. MEMORANDUM FROM COUNCILMEMBER HILSTROM ON COMMUNICATIONS Councilmember Hilstrom presented a memo addressing concern around communications between the Council and staff and /or commissions. She requested that Council consider developing guidelines and policies in respect to these communications being disseminated with the best information in a timely manner. A motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to direct staff to study and report to Council on possible improvements in respect to communications between the Council and staff and /or commissions passed unanimously. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL OF MINUTES JULY 31. 1995 - SPECIAL WORK SESSION Councilmember Mann felt excused and unexcused absences should be defined. The Interim City Manager will contact additional resources in order to provide further information to Council. The City Attorney provided insight relating to the City and Home Rule Charter and its Y YP g I Y • implications. He suggested Council would need to define policy pertaining to absences -- excused and unexcused - -prior to declaring any further specific absences of a Council member. He also stated instances of where and when a person could be legally removed from a given position. A motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to approve the minutes of the July 31, 1995, special work session with the deletion of "unexcused" referring to Councilmember Kalligher under Roll Call passed unanimously. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PROPOSAL AND AUTHORIZING A CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1995 -04 Lift Station Number One and associated force main are located in Garden City Park near Brooklyn Drive and 62nd Avenue. This lift station was built in 1955 and pumps approximately forty percent of the City's sanitary waste water flow. The lift station and its pumps date from 1955, are no longer replaceable, and are difficult to repair. MSA Consulting Engineers was chosen by a team of six staff members who evaluated all proposals individually and met as a group to jointly evaluate the proposals and narrow the field to two finalists. • 8/28/95 -9 - I Councilmember Mann requested clarification regarding the differences in prices and contracts by the six RFP's submitted. The Director of Public Services indicated it is difficult to project certain types of construction services. Some of those were costs associated with the following: having an inspector on site to ensure quality assurance during construction; time for having an inspector involved in the project. The Director of Public Services also offered that once an RFP is awarded, further contract details are then determined, based on a specific design selection. RESOLUTION NO.95 -193 Member Kathleen Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PROPOSAL AND AUTHORIZING A CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1995 -04, REPLACEMENT OF LIFT STATION NO. 1 AND ASSOCIATED FORCE MAIN The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kristen Mann and passed unanimously. SECRETARIAL RECORDING REQUEST PERTAINING TO AMOUNT OF INFORMATION INCLUDED IN COUNCIL MINUTES Councilmembers requested future Council minutes reflect a more abbreviated version. The City Attorney noted some information needs to remain more detailed as some circumstances (i.e. property rights) require litigation /court involvement and Council minutes are relied upon when legal decisions are made. He added Council decisions are typically stated in a resolution, • however, not having specifics reflecting reason(s) of denial is reflective in minutes which is the official document approved by Council. Upon further discussion, it was determined the City Attorney would advise the Council secretary accordingly about needed detail on a specific agenda item when appropriate. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Mann to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 9:45 p.m. Deputy City Clerk Mayor Recorded and transcribed by: Connie Beckman TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial 8/28/95 - 10 - 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 SEPTEMBER 11, 1995 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in regular session and was called to order by Mayor Myrna Kragness at 7 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Kathleen Carmody, Debra Hilstrom, and Kristen Mann. Also present were Interim City Manager Cam Andre, Director of Public Services Diane Spector, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, Communications Coordinator Terri Swanson, Director of Finance Charlie Hansen, Director of Community Development Brad Hoffman, and Council Secretary Connie Beckman. Councilmember Barb Kalligher was absent. OPENING CEREMONIES A moment of silence was observed in place of the invocation. • COUNCIL REPORTS Councilmember Mann noted a meeting to be held at Constitution Hall in Brooklyn Center on Wednesday, September 13, 1995, at 7 p.m. Interested parties from Crystal, Robbinsdale, and Brooklyn Center were encouraged to attend the meeting in order to review and /or express input regarding proposed motoring regulations for middle and upper Twin Lake. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to approve the September 11, 1995, agenda with removal of Items 6(a), (b), (d) from the consent agenda passed unanimously. RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION NO. 95 -194 Member Kathleen Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES (ORDER NO. DST 09/11/95) • 9/11/95 -1- The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Debra Hilstrom and passed unanimously. LICENSES There was a motion by Councilmember Kathleen Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Debra Hilstrom to approve the following list of licenses: MECHANICAL SYSTEMS Triple D Heating & A/C Co Inc. P.O. Box 113 RENTAL DWELLINGS Renewal: Norton Rockler 1329 63rd Lane N. Dale Wegner 5935 Dupont Ave. N. J. G. Strand 5329 Penn Ave. N. Carin L. Rudolph 5318 Queen Ave. N. Mike Hasse 5337 -39 Queen Ave. N. SIGN HANGERS Topline Advertising 1471 92nd Lane NE The motion passes unanimously. OPEN FORUM Mayor Kragness noted the Council had received no requests to use the open forum session this evening. PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING 1995 PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DISEASED TREE REMOVAL COSTS A motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Carmody to open the hearing at 7:05 p.m. passed unanimously. A motion by Councilmember Hilstrom and seconded by Councilmember Carmody to close the hearing at 7:06 p.m. passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -195 Member Kristen Mann introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DISEASED TREE REMOVAL COSTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS 9/11/95 -2- The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. • PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR WEED REMOVAL A motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to open the hearing at 7:07 p.m. passed unanimously. A motion by Councilmember Hilstrom and seconded by Councilmember Carmody to close the hearing at 7:08 p.m. passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -196 Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIALS ASSESSMENTS FOR WEED REMOVAL COSTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DELINQUENT PUBLIC UTILITY SERVICE ACCOUNTS A motion by Councilmember Hilstrom and seconded by Councilmember Carmody to open the hearing at 7:09 p.m. passed unanimously. • A motion by Councilmember Hilstrom and seconded by Councilmember Mann to close the hearing at 7:10 p.m. passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -197 Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DELINQUENT PUBLIC UTILITY SERVICE ACCOUNTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DELINQUENT PUBLIC UTILITY REPAIR ACCOUNTS A motion by Councilmember Hilstrom and seconded by Councilmember Carmody to open the hearing at 7:10 p.m. passed unanimously. A motion by Councilmember Hilstrom and seconded by Councilmember Carmody to close the hearing at 7:11 p.m. passed unanimously. 9/11/95 -3- t RESOLUTION NO. 95 -198 Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DELINQUENT PUBLIC UTILITY REPAIR ACCOUNTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEMS RESOLUTION NO. 95 -199 Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF MATTHEW ANDERLE'S EAGLE SCOUT PROJECT AT CENTERBROOK GOLF COURSE The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. RESOLUTION 95 -200 Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF JOSIAH FILSON'S EAGLE SCOUT PROJECT AT EVERGREEN PARK The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. RESOLUTIONS PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS The Director of Finance informed Council that the City had contracted with Springsted Incorporated for financial advisory service in the sale of the proposed bonds. Mr. Allen Erickson, representing Springsted Incorporated, and the Director of Finance answered questions about the proposed bond issues. Mr. Erickson and the Director of Finance addressed Council's questions and /or concerns regarding healthy indebtedness percentages, specific plans of property acquisition and corresponding dollar amounts, and assigned TIF district debt. RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF $4,560,000 TAXABLE GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BONDS, SERIES 1995A 9/11/95 -4- The Director of Finance stated monies obtained from the sale of these bonds would be used for property acquisition in the areas of Brooklyn Boulevard and 69th Avenue, and in the Lyndale area. Mr. Erickson explained maturation of the proposed bonds under tax exempt status would begin on February 1, 1999, and continue through February 1, 2011. The bonds could be called in as early as February 1, 2005. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -201 Member Kathleen Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF $4,560,000 TAXABLE GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BONDS, SERIES 1995A The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kristen Mann and passed unanimously. RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF $780,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 1995B The Director of Finance stated monies obtained from the sale of these bonds would be used for special assessment street improvements to cover construction costs in the Woodbine area. Mr. Erickson explained maturation of the proposed bonds under tax exempt status would begin • on February 1, 1997, and continue through February 1, 2006. The bonds could be called in as early as February 1, 2004. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -202 Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF $780,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 1995B The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. DISCUSSION REGARDING THE RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF HOUSING FACILITIES REFUNDING REVENUE BONDS TO PROVIDE FUNDS FOR A PROJECT ON BEHALF OF EARLE BROWN COMMONS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP II The Director of Community Development informed Council that four issues which were unresolved at the time of the August 28, 1995, Council meeting had since been resolved, and recommended Council approve the bond issuance accordingly. The four issues previously unresolved included environmental factors, annual fee to the City, property taxes, and personal guarantee of the owners. • 9/11/95 -5- Councilmember Hilstrom inquired about details of the 1992 bonding of the Commons, wondered what guarantees the City has that the present scenario will not reoccur in two years, and asked about the City's efforts to collect back taxes. The Director Community Development did not recall specifics of the 1992 bonding. In response to Councilmember Carmody, the Director of Community Development addressed the pros of Council approving the bond issuance. He indicated some of the bond holders were residents who had invested retirement monies in the Commons, and most likely disapproval of the bond issuance would result in the property going into foreclosure which would represent a possible loss of $700,000 to the City. Councilmember Mann stated concerns of approving the bond issuance which included the impression the City would be part of the chain title which would indicate a fiscal responsibility should a future fiscal default occur. The Director of Community Development responded accordingly. Sue Van Dyke of Dorsey and Whitney clarified the City could end up with the property in event of foreclosure if the City bid on the property, and was the top bidder. She was certain the City would not desire to bid on the property given its financial implications. The Director of Community Development indicated that in the event future taxes on the Commons are unpaid the property would go into foreclosure sale. Councilmembers Hilstrom and Mann expressed concerns that a number of assumptions are being made with the bond issuance and Council approval was postponing the inevitable. Bill Jones (counsel for Commons' owners) reiterated they were not asking for financial backing, but the City's support and approval of obtaining bond monies under tax exempt status. He stated there had been financial restructuring in such a manner that respective payments can be made. Councilmember Hilstrom interjected the City would be lending it's "good name" as well as tax exempt status backing to the project. Councilmember Carmody agreed with the Director of Community Development that the City would realize benefits of additional monies and it would be in the City's best interest to approve the project versus denial. Mr. Jones explained corresponding information relating to the A and B bonds and identified dollar amounts the City would receive over the next ten years in interest and administrative fees. Ms. Van Dyke outlined information regarding time lines and dollar amounts if Council approved the project. She indicated the City would not realize any monies from the project for at least two years should Council deny the bond issuance request. Councilmember Hilstrom inquired how much of the Commons' $1.7 million debt was owed to the City's General Fund. The Director of Community Development indicated about $60,000. RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF HOUSING FACILITIES REFUNDING REVENUE BONDS TO PROVIDE FUNDS FOR A PROJECT ON BEHALF OF EARLE BROWN COMMONS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP II 9/11/95 -6- • Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its denial: RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF HOUSING FACILITIES REFUNDING REVENUE BONDS TO PROVIDE FUNDS FOR A PROJECT ON BEHALF OF EARLE BROWN COMMONS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP II The motion for the denial of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Mann and failed. Members Carmody and Kragness voted against the motion. The City Attorney suggested introducing a different motion for Council consideration. Member Kathleen Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF HOUSING FACILITIES REFUNDING REVENUE BONDS TO PROVIDE FUNDS FOR A PROJECT ON BEHALF OF EARLE BROWN COMMONS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP II The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kragness and failed with Members Hilstrom and Mann voting against. CITIES WEEK/CENTRAL GARAGE OPEN HOUSE PLAN FOR OCTOBER 5 1995 A motion by Councilmember Hilstrom and seconded by Councilmember Carmody to approve the Cities Week/Central Garage Open House Plan for October 5, 1995, and that future projects related to the Cities Week Plan should be presented to Council and approved accordingly passed unanimously. REQUEST FOR CHANGE IN ORDINANCE RELATING TO PULL -TAB OPERATIONS The Interim City Manager talked about the history: behind wording of the ordinance and suggested Council approve a wording change to the ordinance as follows: delete 1700 per month" and substitute "would be allowed by state statute." A motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to approve the Request for Change in Ordinance Relating to Pull -tab Operations passed unanimously. APPOINTMENT TO HOUSING COMMISSION Mayor Kragness recommended appointment of Lloyd Deuel to the Housing Commission and stated supporting reasons for his appointment. Councilmembers Carmody and Mann stated Naomi Ische's experience as a housing inspector was more appropriate and would bring more to the position. Councilmember Hilstrom stated Mr. Deuel has expressed previous interest in service on various commissions and /or committees and felt his desire to serve the City needed to be a consideration factor. 9/11/95 -7- Councilmember Carmody felt the City needed to solicit for more information on future applications to include the extent of the applicant's desire to serve and supporting reasons. • Councilmember Hilstrom suggested each Council member personally contact the four applicants in order for Council to make an informed appointment to the Housing Commission. Mayor Kragness asked that each applicant submit a letter indicating his /her desire to serve and supporting reasons. A motion by Councilmember Hilstrom and seconded by Councilmember Mann to approve Lloyd Deuel as an Appointment to the Housing Commission failed as follows: Councilmembers Kragness and Hilstrom (yes); Councilmembers Carmody and Mann (no). RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING A CONTRACT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1995 -11 CONTRACT 1995 -E CMP SANITARY SEWER RELINING The Director of Public Services presented information to Council regarding this project and answered questions accordingly. She also indicated litigation with Lametti & Sons had been dismissed. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -203 Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING A CONTRACT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1995 -11, CONTRACT 1995 -E, CMP SANITARY SEWER RELINING • The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1995 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO PROVIDE FOR EMERGENCY REPAIR OF A GATE VALVE AT THE COMMUNITY CENTER SWIMMING POOL For the past few months, maintenance staff have been experiencing operational problems with the swimming pool's gate valve. The gate valve closes off the pool's filtration system when staff needs to backwash (clean) the filters. Closing this valve prevents dirt and debris from being washed back into the pool. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -204 Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1995 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO PROVIDE FOR EMERGENCY REPAIR OF A GATE VALVE AT THE COMMUNITY CENTER SWIMMING POOL 9/11/95 -8- The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kristen Mann and passed unanimously. • RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FOR SANITARY SEWER HOOKUP TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS The affected property owner has waived her right to a public hearing regarding this special assessment. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -205 Member Kristen Mann introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FOR SANITARY SEWER HOOKUP TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. DISCUSSION REGARDING NEW HOPE PROPOSAL ON ICE ARENA The Interim City Manager presented information on the proposal. A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Mann to decline participation in the New Hope Proposal project passed unanimously. • Mayor Kragness declared a recess at 9:30 p.m. Mayor Kragness declared the Council meeting reconvened at 9:45 p.m. DISCUSSION REGARDING PROPOSALS FOR MANAGEMENT UNION NEGOTIATOR The Interim City Manager presented Council with proposals for union negotiator and said a contract proposal from the union has been received. PROPOSALS FOR MANAGEMENT UNION NEGOTIATOR Councilmember Mann felt the hourly differences between Labor Relations Associates and attorneys were comparable and inquired whether Council could have additional time to consider information submitted. The Interim City Manager indicated he foresaw no problem with Council postponing a decision for two weeks. A motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to table for two weeks consideration of Proposals for Management Union Negotiator passed unanimously. Council will meet at 6 p.m. in Executive Session prior to its next scheduled Regular Session on September 25, 1995. • 9/11/95 -9- 1996 PRELIMINARY BUDGET AND PROPERTY TAX LEVY REPORT The following resolutions were prepared based upon the Proposed 1996 Budget as recommended • by the Interim City Manager: Resolution to Adopt the 1996 Preliminary Budget; Resolution to Authorize a Preliminary Tax Levy for 1996 Appropriations for the General Fund, the Street Improvement Debt Service Funds, the E.D.A. Fund, and the H.R.A. Fund Budgets; and A Resolution Approving a preliminary Tax Capacity Levy for tea purpose of Defraying the Cost of Operation, Providing Information Service and Relocation Assistance Pursuant to the of MSA 469 1 hr 4 47 i n Authority .00 T ou h 69.0 of the Housing and Redevelopment provisions g g P of the City of Brooklyn Center for the Year 1996. This was done so Council would see examples of the resolutions in their entirety. Councilmember Hilstrom expressed concern about any increase in the tax levy stating issues she wanted to see the City move towards were not being addressed and cited duplication of some services by the County. She indicated Council needed to approve a zero percent increase. Councilmember Mann concurred, but didn't see that a zero percent increase was enough and wanted to see an approved one percent decrease in the tax levy. Councilmember Carmody acknowledged concerns of Councilmembers Hilstrom and Mann. She added any issues should be presented to all of Council. Then, Council could direct staff to respond accordingly. She proposed each Council member present their budget ideas in .a group setting enabling Council to make decisions on cuts and /or reapportionment of City budget monies. Discu e ensued around the ros and cons and potential impressions of City onstituents P � P P Y relating to a percentage increase or decrease to the tax levy. The Interim City Manager indicated he and the Director of Finance had met and were able to identify potential areas for budget cuts equaling approximately $200,000. He also cautioned Council about unforeseen emergencies and gave examples. Councilmember Mann requested reviewal of those potential cuts and cited them accordingly. There was a motion by Councilmember Hilstrom and seconded by Councilmember Mann to set a 0 % increase. The motion failed with Mayor Kragness and Councilmember Carmody voting against the motion. The Director of Finance provided clarification to Council regarding tax rates and their represented percentages ($ 100, 000 = two percent) 9/11/95 -10 There was a motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Mann to table the following resolutions until September 13, 1995, at 5:00 p.m.: • • Resolution to Adopt the 1996 Preliminary Budget; and P �' g • Resolution to Authorize a Preliminary Tax Levy for 1996 Appropriations for the General Fund, the Street Improvement Debt Service Funds, the E.D.A. Fund, and the H.R.A. Fund Budgets; and A Resolution Approving a Preliminary Tax Capacity Levy for the Purpose of Defraying the Cost of Operation, Providing Information Service and Relocation Assistance Pursuant to the provisions of MSA 469.001 Through 469.047 of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Brooklyn Center for the Year 1996. The motion passed unanimously. SET DATES FOR TRUTH IN TAXATION PUBLIC HEARINGS A motion by Councilmember Hilstrom and seconded by Councilmember Mann to approve Setting Dates for Truth in Taxation Public Hearings failed as follows: Councilmembers Hilstrom and Mann (yes); Councilmembers Carmody and Kragness (no). A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Mann to table Setting Dates for Truth in Taxation Public Hearings passed unanimously. PROCESS TO STUDY ORGANIZED COLLECTION A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Council Mann to decline participation in the Hennepin Recycling Group (HRG) study passed unanimously. RESOLUTION REQUESTING MN /DOT FOR A LIMITED USE PERMIT TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A BICYCLE /PEDESTRIAN TRAIL ON MN /DOT RIGHT OF WAY Councilmembers indicated concern about exposure to uninsured liabilities as described by the City Attorney in a letter to the Director of Public Services dated September 6, 1995. The Director of Public Services informed Council the City has to have a limited use permit in order to complete construction of the trail. She urged Council to approve the resolution stating she did not foresee the State having a problem with the City Attorney's proposed language changes in the agreement. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -206 Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its approval contingent upon an agreement being reached that addresses the City's concerns: RESOLUTION REQUESTING MN /DOT FOR A LIMITED USE PERMIT TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A BICYCLE /PEDESTRIAN TRAIL ON MN /DOT RIGHT OF WAY 9/11/95 -11- III The motion for approval of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CO S N ENT AGENDA APPROVAL OF MINUTES AUGUST 14 1995 - REGULAR SESSION A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to table approval of the August 14, 1995, Regular Session minutes until the next Council Work Session passed unanimously. AUGUST 21 1995 - SPECIAL WORK SESSION A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to table approval of the August 21, 1995, Regular Session minutes until the next Council Work Session passed unanimously. PROCLAMATION DECLARING SEPTEMBER 17 -23 1995 AS CONSTITUTION WEEK A motion by Councilmember Hilstrom and seconded by Councilmember Carmody to approve a Proclamation Declaring September 17 -23, 1995, as Constitution Week passed unanimously. RESOLUTION AMENDING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT LEVY ROLL NOS. 13372 AND 13373 TO PROVIDE FOR THE AWARD OF ASSESSMENT STABILIZATION GRANTS FOR THE WOODBINE NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENTS • Councilmember Carmody questioned the Director of Public Services regarding deadlines for approval of such a grant. The Director of Public Services indicated May 31, 1995, was the deadline. Councilmembers Carmody and Mann suggested proposing future deadline dates be established to accommodate for project planning /completion purposes, etc. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -207 Member Kristen Mann introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT LEVY ROLL NOS. 13372 AND 13373 TO PROVIDE FOR THE AWARD OF ASSESSMENT STABILIZATION GRANTS FOR THE WOODBINE NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENTS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. 9/11/95 -12- 4 ADJOURNMENT A motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Carmody to adjourn the • meeting passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 9:56 p.m. Deputy City Clerk Mayor Recorded and transcribed by: Connie Beckman TimeSaver Ofd`' Site Secretarial I 9/11/95 -13- • 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 OCTOBER 23, 1995 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in regular session and was called to order by Mayor Myrna Kragness at 7 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Kathleen Carmody, Debra Hilstrom, Kristen Mann. Also present were Interim City Manager Cam Andre, Director of Public Services Diane Spector, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, Communications Coordinator Terri Swanson, Community Development Specialist Tom Bublitz, Financial Commission Chair Donn Escher, and Council Secretary Connie Beckman. Councilmember Barbara Kalligher was absent. • OPENING CEREMONIES Dean Nyquist offered the invocation. COUNCIL REPORT Councilmember Kristen Mann talked about the following items and /or events: • Wednesday, October 25, 1995, will be the final Rally Night. • Saturday, October 28, 1995, from 1:30 -6:30 p.m. the City Council will be conducting interviews for City Manager. • Saturday, October 28, 1995, from 1 -3 p.m. there will be a Halloween party at the Volunteer Substation on Humboldt. • Sunday, October 29, 1995, from 2 -4 p.m. there will be a Halloween party at the Community Center. Mayor Kragness announced a Council Work Session to be held on Monday, October 30, 1995, regarding Community Improvement Programs (CIP). PRESENTATION The Communications Coordinator introduced Wayne Haupt, Custodian, as City Employee of the Quarter, Third Quarter 1995 and read an excerpt from his supervisor, Mike Schlosser's, nomination. Mayor Kragness presented the award to Mr. Haupt and congratulated him accordingly. 10/23/95 -1- SOCIAL SERVICES JOINT POWERS AGREEMENTS Councilmember Carmody inquired when Council would be addressing the status of Social • Services Joint Powers Agreements. The Interim City Manager indicated information would be available for Council consideration /discussion at the November 20, 1995, Council Work Session. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to approve the October 23, 1995, agenda with the following changes passed unanimously: removal of Items 6(a)l, 2, 4, 5, 7 from the consent agenda; addition of Items 8(h) Transfer of Property from City of Brooklyn Center to Brooklyn Center Economic Development Authority, 8(I) Labor Negotiations Units, 80) Council Absences, 8(k) Brooklyn Center Community Education. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to approve minutes of the following meetings passed unanimously: September 6, 1995 - Special Work Session; October 2, 1995- Special Work Session; October 9, 1995- Special Work Session; October 10, 1995- Regular Session. PROCLAMATION DECLARING OCTOBER 28 1995 AS MAKE A DIFFERENCE DAY A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to proclaim October 28, 1995, as Make a Difference Day passed unanimously. RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION NO. 95 -230 Member Kathleen Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION REGARDING THE DISSOLUTION OF THE EARLE BROWN NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Debra Hilstrom and passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -231 Member Kathleen Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING CHANGE ORDER #2, ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED AND APPROVING FINAL PAYMENT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1994 -19, CONTRACT 1994 -J, SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY MILL & OVERLAY The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Debra Hilstrom and passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -232 10/23/95 -2- Member Kathleen Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: S RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED AND APPROVING FINAL PAYMENT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1994 -26, CONTRACT 1994 -0, MODULAR PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT AT LIONS, ORCHARD LANE, AND FIREHOUSE PARKS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Debra Hilstrom and passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -233 Member Kathleen Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED AND APPROVING FINAL PAYMENT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1994 -33, CONTRACT 1994 -P, MISCELLANEOUS REMOVALS, EXCAVATION AND CONCRETE CURBING The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Debra Hilstrom and passed unanimously. LICENSES A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to approve the following list of licenses passed unanimously: MECHANICAL SYSTEMS Ace Mechanical 5217 190th Lane Green Mechanical 8811 E. Research Ctr. Rd. K & K Heating & Plumbing 6000 Lone Oak Road RENTAL DWELLINGS Initial: Vernon Hughes 5240 Drew Ave. N. Lori Dunn 5650 Humboldt Ave. N. Morning Sun Investments 1525 Humboldt Place Morning Sun Investments 1531 Humboldt Place Renewal: James Lupient Basswood Apartments Cheryl Melich 1200 67th Ave. N. George A. Lucht 5101 Brooklyn Blvd. Byron & Nancy Mach 4807 -12 Twin Lake Ave. N. OPEN FORUM Rod Snyder, a resident of 6408 Willow Lane, addressed Council regarding three items as follows and offered suggestions on how Council members might establish a course of direction 10/23/95 -3- accordingly: "We the People" rallies and their purpose(s); ongoing continuance of Councilmember Kalligher's absences; selection of a new City Manager and accompanying qualities. In closing, Mr. Snyder encouraged Council members to concentrate on common ground they have versus personalities and /or political interests /differences. Mayor Kragness thanked Mr. Snyder for his concern regarding City business and clarified previous tie vote scenarios Council has encountered in the past. The Open Forum was closed at 7:25 p.m. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEMS RESOLUTION NO. 95 -234 Member Kathleen Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACKNOWLEDGING AND CONGRATULATING WAYNE HAUPT AS THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER EMPLOYEE OF THE QUARTER, THIRD QUARTER 1995 AND CONGRATULATING ALL THIRD QUARTER 1995 NOMINEES The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kristen Mann and passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -235 Member Kristen Mann introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION DECLARING SURPLUS PROPERTY AND AUTHORIZING THE DEVELOPMENT OF A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR DISPOSITION OF SURPLUS CITY HALL OFFICE FURNITURE The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Debra Hilstrom and passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -236 Member Kristen Mann introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION EXPRESSING APPRECIATION FOR THE EFFORTS OF METROPOLITAN COUNCILMEMBER BILL SCHREIBER AND COUNCILMEMBER ROGER SCHERER The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. Y RESOLUTION NO. 95 -237 Member Debra Hilstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: 0 10/23/95 -4- RESOLUTION EXPRESSING APPRECIATION FOR THE EFFORTS OF BROOKLYN • CENTER EMPLOYEES TAKING PART IN THE NATIONAL CITIES WEEK CENTRAL GARAGE OPEN HOUSE The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. STAFF REPORT RE: SHINGLE CREEK REGIONAL POND The Director of Public Services presented information on how the project is proposed to be a cooperative project with the City of Minneapolis, scheduled for construction in 1996 -97. There is a willingness on the part of the Minneapolis Mayor to include some funding in her 1996 Capital Budget for some of the work on the project but needs a commitment from the City of Brooklyn Center that the project is "moving along," both in terms of planning and commitment of funding. She explained it is premature on the part of Brooklyn Center to make any commitments regarding specific designs and cost sharing at this time. However, the preparation of an Environmental Assessment of the proposed improvements is an initial step. Councilmember Mann questioned the extent of the design and the Environmental Assessment, and if a separate RFP would be submitted for the concept design. The Director of Public Services indicated a certain amount of the project preliminary design would have to be completed in order to conduct an accurate Environmental Assessment and the RFP for the Environmental Assessment would include some preliminary design. In response to Mayor Kragness, the Director of Public Services indicated various funding sources might be utilized for the RFP. The Interim City Manager added that financing of the preliminary work was a first priority and addressing specific funding sources would be determined at a later time. A motion by Councilmember Hilstrom and seconded by Councilmember Carmody directing City staff to prepare an RFP for professional services to prepare an Environmental Assessment for the proposed project passed unanimously. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AUGUST 21 1995- SPECIAL WORK SESSION Councilmember Mann stated she could not approve minutes of the special work session based on the following: she did not believe Council members were deadlocked at the meeting with regard to what should happen at Council meetings; and the extent to which the special work session digressed was not reflected in the meeting minutes. Councilmember Carmody suggested Councilmember Mann submit her desired revisions for the minutes, but cautioned Councilmember Mann against portraying Council issues which could be perceived by constituents as being more political than they are. 10/23/95 -5- i Councilmember Mann will submit her proposed revisions for Council consideration. AUGUST 28 1995- REGULAR SESSION Councilmember Mann referred to pages three and four of the minutes under "Public Hearing - Earle Brown Commons." She felt there were some questions and /or comments she made which were not reflected in the minutes, and that Councilmember Carmody had also posed some questions and /or made some comments which were not reflected in the minutes and requested these questions and /or comments be reflected in the minutes prior to final approval of the minutes. Councilmember Carmody stated she was satisfied with the minutes and any questions and /or comments she had made did not need to be included in the revised version. SEPTEMBER 11. 1995- REGULAR SESSION Councilmember Mann referred to page ten, Item 9(m) titled "Resolution to Adopt the 1996 Preliminary Budget" and indicated she thought the total item had been tabled under one motion versus separate motions. SEPTEMBER 13 1995- SPECIAL SESSION A motion by Councilmember Carmody and seconded by Councilmember Mann to approve minutes of the September 13, 1995- Special Session amended as follows passed unanimously: page one, second to last paragraph, adding Councilmember Mann's statement that despite cuts in the Police Department Budget, she felt there were still enough monies to purchase a $2,000 pager. OCTOBER 7 1995- SPECIAL WORK SESSION Councilmember Mann stated Councilmember Carmody had made a racial slur which had not been reflected in the minutes. Councilmember Carmody clarified the racial statement to which Councilmember Mann was referring was not here, but she was simply conveying a statement made to her by a constituent during her campaign bid for a Council seat. Upon clarification from Councilmember Carmody, a motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to approve minutes of the October 7, 1995 - Special Work Session as written passed unanimously. COUNCILMEMBER'S PAY PLAN Councilmember Carmody presented a proposed alteration of compensation to Council members. Annual Compensation to each Council member would remain the same, but would be paid on a per diem basis for regular meetings, and members would be paid only for those regular meetings attended. Councilmember Mann felt a per diem change would establish a misrepresentation and not 10/2 - - 0 3/95 6 accurately reflect a truthful compensation to Council members. • Councilmember Hilstrom requested investigation of the implications of arriving late and /or q g leaving early from a regular meeting if a per diem compensation was enacted. As well, she requested information on what other communities were doing in regards to compensation of its council members. The Financial Commission Chair suggested Council refer the issue - -in writing - -to the Financial Commission for consideration. The City Attorney explained that the State statute regarding changes in council salary require the effective date be after an election (i.e. January 1997). Action was tabled. TRANSFER OF PROPERTY FROM CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER TO BROOKLYN CENTER ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY The Community Development Specialist presented Council with information regarding the sale of property located at 6601 Bryant Avenue to Howard Bohanon Homes, Inc. It was discovered title to the property is in the name of the City of Brooklyn Center rather than the Brooklyn Center EDA. Therefore, Council was being asked to approve conveyance of the property from the Council to the EDA. It was also noted that the buyer would be paying the EDA the full amount of the lot price at closing, eliminating the need for a contract for deed. Councilmember Mann questioned the final assessed land value of the property since previous presentation to Council by the Community Development Specialist indicated there was a $2,000 difference between the assessed value ($24,000) and the offered price ($22,000). The Community Development Specialist noted that the assessor indicated the current estimate of market value for the land was reassessed at $22,000. RESOLUTION NO. 95 -238 Member Kristen Mann introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A QUIT CLAIM DEED TO THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER FOR CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6601 BRYANT AVENUE NORTH The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Kathleen Carmody and passed unanimously. LABOR NEGOTIATIONS UNITS Councilmember Mann requested an update regarding status of the negotiations between respective parties. The Interim City Manager stated considerable progress has been made. 10/23/95 -7- COUNCIL ABSENCES Councilmember Mann requested clarification on excused absences and how the proposed resolution in hand addresses an absence and its classification. The City Attorney explained the resolution sets up an assumption a Council person's absence is excused if Council is notified accordingly. However, if any Council member feels the excused absence is not appropriate, he /she can move to have the excused absence denied. The Councilmember Hilstrom felt a specific procedure needs to be established pertaining to determination of an unexcused absence versus an excused absence. Mayor Kragness indicated a procedure had already been put into action and the recent Council approved resolution was part of that procedure. A motion by Councilmember Hilstrom and seconded by Councilmember Mann to reverse Councilmember Kalligher's absence at the October 10, 1995, Regular Session from "unexcused" to be reflected as "excused" passed unanimously. BROOKLYN CENTER COMMUNITY EDUCATION Councilmember Mann indicated there have been conflicts in various Council members' schedules precluding Council attendance at the Brooklyn Center Community Education meetings, and requested a solution be attempted to rectify the situation. Mayor Kragness acknowledged the problem and welcomed a solution. Councilmember Carmody suggested each Council member sign -up for respective meetings based on other commitments, etc. 0 Councilmember Hilstrom requested dates be discussed at the October 30, 1995, Council Work Session when all members could have their calendars at hand. ADJOURNMENT A motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to adjourn the meeting at 8:05 p.m. passed unanimously. Deputy City Clerk Mayor Recorded and transcribed by: Connie Beckman TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial 10/23/95 -8- III MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA SPECIAL WORK SESSION OCTOBER 28, 1995 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in special work session and was called to order by Mayor Kragness at 3:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Kathleen Carmody, Debra Hilstrom, and Kristen Mann. Also present were Interim City Manager Cam Andre and Kay McAloney from the League of Minnesota Cities. Councilmember Barbara Kalligher was absent. It was noted that Ms. McAloney would act as Council Secretary for this meeting. CANDIDATE INTERVIEWS The Council interviewed Ed Shukle. The City Council recessed at 4:05 p.m. and reconvened at 4:21 p.m. The Council interviewed William Craig. The City Council recessed at 5:40 p.m. and reconvened at 5:55 p.m. The Council interviewed Ryan Schroeder. There was a motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Carmody to recess the meeting until Monday,. October 30, 1995, at 6:00 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting recessed at 7:30 p.m. Deputy City Clerk Mayor 10/28/95 1 MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA RECONVENED SPECIAL WORK SESSION OCTOBER 30, 1995 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council reconvened the meeting of October 28, 1995 at 6:00 p.m. on October 30, 1995. The meeting was called to order by Mayor Pro tem Mann. ROLL CALL Mayor Pro tern Kristen Mann and Debra Hilstrom. Also present were Interim City Manager Cam Andre. Mayor Kragness, Councilmembers Carmody and Kalligher were absent. The Interim City Manager explained that the candidate scheduled for further interview was not able to attend the meeting. It was suggested a special work session be scheduled for 5 p.m. on November 2, 1995. Mayor Pro tem Mann noted the City Council meeting could not go forward due to the lack of a quorum of members. ADJOURNMENT The Brooklyn Center City Council was adjourned by Mayor Pro tem Mann at 6:05 p.m. Deputy City Clerk Mayor 10/30/95 1 MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL • OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA SPECIAL WORK SESSION NOVEMBER 2, 1995 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in special work session and was called to order by Mayor Kragness at 5:20 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Kathleen Carmody, Debra Hilstrom, and Kristen Mann. Also present was Interim City Manager Cam Andre. Councilmember Barb Kalligher was absent. CANDIDATE INTERVIEWS The Council interviewed William Craig. The City Council recessed at 6:06 p.m. and reconvened at 6:12 p.m. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Carmody to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 6:42 p.m. Deputy City Clerk Mayor 11/2/95 1 MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA SPECIAL WORK SESSION NOVEMBER 6, 1995 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in special work session and was called to order by Mayor Kragness at 6:05 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Kathleen Carmody, Debra Hilstrom, and Kristen Mann. Also present were Interim City Manager Cam Andre and Kay McAloney from the League of Minnesota Cities. Councilmember Barb Kalligher was absent. It was noted that Ms. McAloney would act as Council Secretary for this meeting. SELECTION OF CITY MANAGER The Council reviewed the attributes of the five finalists: William Craig, Carl Ramey, Bill • Ross, Ed Shukle, Jr., and Greg Withers. The Council requested that Mr. Ross be contacted in respect to his salary requirements and interest. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Councilmember Mann and seconded by Councilmember Hilstrom to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m. Deputy City Clerk Mayor e 11/6/95 1 Council Meeting Date 11/13/95 / 3 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Number Request For Council Consideration • Item Description: Resolution Expressing Recognition and Appreciation of Committee Members for Their Dedicated Public Service on the Earle Brown Neighborhood Housing Advisory Committee Department Approval: Tom Bu tz, Community Development Spe? .... Manager's Review /Recommendation: , No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: • Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached No ) Resolutions 5b through 51 provide for recognition of service for the members of the Earle Brown Neighborhood Housing Advisory Committee. • • e M mber introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION AND APPRECIATION OF JODY BRANDVOLD FOR HER DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE ON THE EARLE BROWN NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE WHEREAS, Jody Brandvold served on the Earle Brown Neighborhood Housing Advisory Committee from January 14, 1991 to October 23, 1995, and served as the chairperson of the committee from June 23, 1993 to October 23, 1995; and WHEREAS, her public service and civic effort for the betterment of the community merit the gratitude of the citizens of Brooklyn Center; and WHEREAS, her leadership and expertise have been greatly appreciated by the Earle Brown Neighborhood Housing Advisory Committee; and WHEREAS, it is highly appropriate that her service to the community should be • recognized and expressed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the dedicated public service of Jody Brandvold is hereby recognized and appreciated by the City of Brooklyn Center. Date Mayor ATTEST: Deputy Clerk 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. 5 G • Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION AND APPRECIATION OF DOLORES HASTINGS FOR HER DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE ON THE EARLE BROWN NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE WHEREAS, Dolores Hastings served on the Earle Brown Neighborhood Housing Advisory Committee from January 14, 1991 to October 23, 1995; and WHEREAS, her public service and civic effort for the betterment of the community merit the gratitude of the citizens of Brooklyn Center; and WHEREAS, her leadership and expertise have been greatly appreciated by the Earle Brown Neighborhood Housing Advisory Committee; and WHEREAS, it is highly appropriate that her service to the community should be recognized and expressed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the dedicated public service of Dolores Hastings is hereby recognized and appreciated by the City of Brooklyn Center. Date Mayor ATTEST: Deputy Clerk 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. • • Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION AND APPRECIATION OF ROBERT TORRES FOR HIS DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE ON THE EARLE BROWN NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE WHEREAS, Robert Torres served on the Earle Brown Neighborhood Housing Advisory Committee from January 14, 1991 to October 23, 1995; and WHEREAS, i S s ublic e p service and civic effort for the betterment of the community merit the gratitude of the citizens of Brooklyn Center; and WHEREAS, his leadership and expertise have been greatly appreciated by the Earle Brown Neighborhood Housing Advisory Committee; and WHEREAS, it is highly appropriate that his service to the community should be recognized and expressed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the dedicated public service of Robert Torres is hereby recognized and appreciated by the City of Brooklyn Center. Date Mayor ATTEST: Deputy Clerk 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. a Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION AND APPRECIATION OF EVERETT LINDH FOR HIS DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE ON THE EARLE BROWN NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE WHEREAS, Everett Lindh served on the Earle Brown Neighborhood Housing Advisory Committee from January 14, 1991 to October 23, 1995; and WHEREAS, his public service and civic effort for the betterment of the community merit the gratitude of the citizens of Brooklyn Center; and WHEREAS, his leadership and expertise have been greatly appreciated by the Earle Brown Neighborhood Housing Advisory Committee; and WHEREAS, it is highly appropriate that his service to the community should be recognized and expressed. • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the dedicated public service of Everett Lindh is hereby recognized and appreciated by the City of Brooklyn Center. Date Mayor ATTEST: Deputy Clerk 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. i Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION AND APPRECIATION OF DENNIS MORROW FOR HIS DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE ON THE EARLE BROWN NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE WHEREAS, Dennis Morrow served on the Earle Brown Neighborhood Housing Advisory Committee from January 14, 1991 to October 23, 1995; and WHEREAS, his public service and civic effort for the betterment of the community merit the gratitude of the citizens of Brooklyn Center; and WHEREAS, his leadership d expertise have been greatly appreciated b the Earle p P g Y pP Y Brown Neighborhood Housing Advisory Committee; and WHEREAS, it is highly appropriate that his service to the community should be recognized and expressed. • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the dedicated public service of Dennis Morrow is hereby recognized and appreciated by the City of Brooklyn Center. Date Mayor ATTEST: Deputy Clerk 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. • U • Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION AND APPRECIATION OF ROBERT JECHOREK FOR HIS DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE ON THE EARLE BROWN NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE WHEREAS, Robert Jechorek served on the Earle Brown Neighborhood Housing Advisory Committee from March 8, 1993 to October 23, 1995; and WHEREAS, his public service and civic effort for the betterment of the community merit the gratitude of the citizens of Brooklyn Center; and WHEREAS, his leadership and expertise have been greatly appreciated by the Earle Brown Neighborhood Housing Advisory Committee; and j WHEREAS, it is highly appropriate that his service to the community should be recognized and expressed. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the dedicated public service of Robert Jechorek is hereby recognized and appreciated by the City of Brooklyn Center. Date Mayor ATTEST: Deputy Clerk 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. • Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION AND APPRECIATION OF JOHANNA MILLS FOR HER DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE ON THE EARLE BROWN NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE WHEREAS, Johanna Mills served on the Earle Brown Neighborhood Housing Advisory Committee from March 8, 1993 to October 23, 1995; and WHEREAS, her public service and civic effort for the betterment of the community merit the gratitude of the citizens of Brooklyn Center; and WHEREAS, her leadership and expertise have been greatly appreciated by the Earle Brown Neighborhood Housing Advisory Committee; and WHEREAS, it is highly appropriate that her service to the community should be recognized and expressed. ® NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the dedicated public service of Johanna Mills is hereby recognized and appreciated by the City of Brooklyn Center. Date Mayor ATTEST: Deputy Clerk 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. • • Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION AND APPRECIATION OF JOYCE LINDQUIST FOR HER DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE ON THE EARLE BROWN NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE WHEREAS, Joyce Lindquist served on the Earle Brown Neighborhood Housing Advisory Committee from March 8, 1993 to October 23, 1995; and WHEREAS, her public service and civic effort for the betterment of the community merit the gratitude of the citizens of Brooklyn Center; and I WHEREAS, her leadership and expertise have been greatly appreciated by the Earle Brown Neighborhood Housing Advisory Committee; and WHEREAS, it is highly appropriate that her service to the community should be recognized and expressed. ® NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the dedicated public service of Joyce Lindquist is hereby recognized and appreciated by the City of Brooklyn Center. Date Mayor ATTEST: Deputy Clerk 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. -SJ Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION AND APPRECIATION REC ION OF NANCY CARLSON FOR HER DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE ON THE EARLE BROWN NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE WHEREAS, Nancy Carlson served on the Earle Brown Neighborhood Housing Advisory Committee from March 8, 1993 to October 23, 1995; and WHEREAS, her public service and civic effort for the betterment of the community merit the gratitude of the citizens of Brooklyn Center; and WHEREAS, her leadership and expertise have been greatly appreciated by the Earle Brown Neighborhood Housing Advisory Committee; and WHEREAS, it is highly appropriate that her service to the community should be recognized and expressed. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED b the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Y tY tY n Y Center that the dedicated public service of Nancy Carlson is hereby recognized and appreciated by the City of Brooklyn Center. Date Mayor ATTEST: Deputy Clerk 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. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION AND APPRECIATION OF DEBORAH IVERSON FOR HER DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE ON THE EARLE BROWN NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE WHEREAS, Deborah Iverson served on the Earle Brown Neighborhood Housing Advisory Committee from January 23, 1995 to October 23, 1995; and WHEREAS her ublic service and civic effort for the betterment of the community tY merit the gratitude of the citizens of Brooklyn Center; and WHEREAS, her leadership and expertise have been greatly appreciated by the Earle Brown Neighborhood Housing Advisory Committee; and WHEREAS, it is highly appropriate that her service to the community should be recognized and expressed. • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the dedicated public service of Deborah Iverson is hereby recognized and appreciated by the City of Brooklyn Center. Date Mayor ATTEST: Deputy Clerk 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. • Member introduced the followin g resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION AND APPRECIATION OF KAREN YOUNGBERG FOR HER DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE ON THE EARLE BROWN NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE WHEREAS, Karen Youngberg served on the Earle Brown Neighborhood Housing Advisory Committee from January 23, 1995 to October 23, 1995; and WHEREAS, her public service and civic effort for the betterment of the community merit the gratitude of the citizens of Brooklyn Center; and WHEREAS, her leadership and expertise have been greatly appreciated by the Earle Brown Neighborhood Housing Advisory Committee; and WHEREAS, it is highly appropriate that her service to the community should be recognized and expressed. • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the dedicated public service of Karen Youngberg is hereby recognized and appreciated by the City of Brooklyn Center. Date Mayor ATTEST: Deputy Clerk 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. i Council Meeting Date 11/13/95 3 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Numbe Request For Council Consideration • Item Description: Resolution authorizing the City Manager to write -off uncollectible checks Department Approval: a4 � Charlie Hansen, Director of Finance t J Manager's Review /Recommendation: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: Adopt the attached resolution. • Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached Yes ) The attached resolution, if adopted by the City Council, will write -off uncollectible checks received by the City in 1994. The payors' checking accounts have been closed or the checks have been presented for collection by the bank the maximum times allowable. a Attempts to locate the ors have been P pay ors All of the checks have been turned over to a collection agency which is under contract to the City. The last time the City wrote off uncollectible checks was September 12, 1994, when uncollectible checks for the year 1993 in the amount of $4,026.50 were written -off. The amount of uncollectible checks from the liquor stores for 1994 of $1,867.13 is .07% of total sales of $2,698,373. In late 1993, the Liquor Stores began using Telecheck, Inc. to verify checks before we accepted them. This is the reason the amount of checks being written off has been steadily declining. We feel that the decline in bad checks accepted, plus the unknown number of bad checks that are never presented to us because of the deterrent effect of Telecheck, more than pay for the Telecheck service. See attached list for detail of uncollectible checks. • • Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO WRITE -OFF UNCOLLECTIBLE CHECKS WHEREAS, the City Manager has reported checks totalling $1,955.68 made payable to the City of Brooklyn Center are uncollectible because the payors' checking accounts upon which they are drawn have been closed and that attempts to locate the payors have been unsuccessful. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center to authorize the City Manager to write -off from the City records as uncollectible the following amounts: $1,867.13 for the Liquor Stores Fund, $8.00 for the Golf Course Fund, and $80.55 for the General Fund for a total of $1,955.68. • Date Myrna Kragness, Mayor ATTEST: Deputy Clerk 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. • 1994 Uncollectible Checks • Payor's Check Reason for Check Name Date Return Amount Municipal Liquor Stores Fund: Almen, H.G. 07/20/94 Forgery 10.13 Anderson, Daniel 05/21/94 Forgery 12.73 Anderson, Daniel 05/21/94 Forgery 24.71 Bah, Mohamed 10/29/94 Non - Sufficient Funds 19.60 Baker, Michelle 09/22/94 Non - Sufficient Funds 4.24 Benson, Mark 05/26/94 Lost/Stolen 14.16 Bjorngjeld, Troy /Kristine 11/11/94 Forgery 28.52 Brookshaw, Curtiss 02/18/94 Account Closed 25.81 Burk, Mark 07/21/94 Non - Sufficient Funds 25.37 Calloway. Kim 12/23/94 Non - Sufficient Funds 14.70 Collins, Felia 08/26/94 Forgery 20.63 Collins, Felia 08/26/94 Forgery 43.93 Glynn, Kathleen 02/24/94 Account Closed 22.00 Goodman, Russell 03/23/94 Account Closed 24.77 Huff, Lori 04/23/94 Non - Sufficient Funds 45.86 MacDougall 08/20/94 Forgery 38.82 Marquis, Joellen 12/01/94 Refer to Maker 28.03 McHie, Lavette 09/17/94 Non - Sufficient Funds 12.84 Meldahl, Debra /David 10/17/94 Forgery 33.88 Miller, Tomesia 02115/94 Account Closed 46.93 Minikus, Heidi 11/11/94 Account Closed 14.16 Murray, Melvin 08/23/94 Account Closed 10.12 Owns, Barbara 11/19/94 Account Closed 18.17 Parkinson, Julie 10/09/94 Non - Sufficient Funds 4.35 Parkinson, Julie 10/25/94 Non - Sufficient Funds 8.70 Paulson, K. and Garcia, J. 08/12/94 Account Closed 4.24 Rachels, S. /Newbanks, A. 05/11/94 Non - Sufficient Funds 10.89 Rachels, S. /Newbanks, A. 05/14/94 Non - Sufficient Funds 11.80 Smith, Casey 01/27/94 Account Closed 7.83 Total Humboldt Liquor Store: 587.92 Alvarado, Silvia 11/26/94 Refer to maker /Forgery 36.48 Anonen, Jodi , 04/02/94 Non - Sufficient Funds 36.49 Barton, Gregory 07/18/94 Forgery 25.00 Bible, Randell 05/12/94 Non - Sufficient Funds 14.04 Boldridge, Maxine 05/20/94 Non - Sufficient Funds 10.69 Branch, Diwanda 05/11/94 Non - Sufficient Funds 8.70 Branch, Diwanda 08/22/94 Account Closed 10.01 Burt, Nancy 06/06/94 Payment Stopped 11.98 Ecklund, Dennis 04/07/94 Non - Sufficient Funds 19.38 Epps, Melvin 11/12/94 Account Closed 6.63 Fleming, Stephanie 08/24/94 Non - Sufficient Funds 9.57 Jackson, Dayna 06/16/94 Non - Sufficient Funds 10.22 Jones, Reba 11/07/94 Forgery 13.60 Laughrey, Linda 04/02/94 Forgery 63.63 Lundin, Leona 10/31/94 Forgery 29.94 Mayes, Sondra 08/13/94 Payment Stopped 9.00 McKinney, Jean 04/12/94 Account Closed 10.24 McKinney, Jean 04/15/94 Account Closed 15.89 McKinney, Jean 04/16/94 Account Closed 20.68 Medelberg, Shirley /Richard 11/14/94 Forgery 14.81 Melmer, Stephanie 01/03/94 Forgery 23.74 Miller, Sharon 06/23/94 Non - Sufficient Funds 16.06 Miller, Sharon 06/20/94 Non - Sufficient Funds 22.13 Miller, Sharon 06/29/94 Account Closed 24.43 Miller, Sharon 06/18/94 Non - Sufficient Funds 24.98 Monden, Jerry 06/24/94 Account Closed 19.93 Nelson, Lottie 09/07/94 Payment Stopped 12.46 Neraasen, Mary 05/26/94 Forgery 33.21 Neraasen, Mary 05/28/94 Forgery 33.71 Olek, Judd 07/09/94 Account Closed 15.14 Pierce, Lynda 11/07/94 Forgery 22.19 Reinke, Jane 05/13/94 Forgery 13.39 Savelkoul, Shelly 05/19/94 Payment Stopped 104.32 Synder, Rodney 11/12194 Forgery 41.26 Thomas, Beverly 10/24/94 Account Closed 20.58 Thompson, Stacy 02/16/94 Forgery 39.10 • Vaaler, Paul /Katherine 09/07/94 Forgery 64.56 Welch, Kristian 05117/94 Non - Sufficient Funds 4.95 Welch, Kristian 05/20/94 Non - Sufficient Funds 5.49 Williams, Gregory 07/07/94 Account Closed 8.49 Total Boulevard Liquor Store: 927.10 Donovan, Gregory 09/06/94 Refer to Maker 29.41 Erickson, Robby /Jana 07/07/94 Non - Sufficient Funds 16.34 Erickson, Robby /Jana 07/09194 Non - Sufficient Funds 28.84 Franzen, Brian 11/18/94 Non - Sufficient Funds 7.40 Green, Kevin 09/16/94 Account Closed 45.09 Haas, Phyllis /Kipp 07/19/94 Non - Sufficient Funds 8.96 Hardimon, Sylvia 12/06/94 Non - Sufficient Funds 13.41 Huskey, Robert/Karen 11/02/94 Forgery 21.12 Johnson, Gregory 08/13/94 Non - Sufficient Funds 13.28 Kempf, Jason 08/31/94 Non - Sufficient Funds 10.89 Lundin, Leona 10/03/94 Forgery 21.11 Olson, Richard 10/14/94 Forgery 16.76 Olson, Richard 10/14/94 Forgery 23.04 Petrick, Kathleen 01/15/94 Account Closed 8.49 Petrick, Kathleen 01/15/94 Account Closed 8.49 Pruitt, Chevelle 11/03/94 Account Closed 33.54 Reed, Christine 04/06/94 Account Closed 45.94 • Total Northbrook Liquor Store: 352.11 Municipal Liquor Stores Fund Total: 1,867.13 Golf Course Fund: • Nelson Darcy cy 06/20/94 Non Sufficient Funds 8.00 Golf Course Fund Total: 8.00 General Fund: Gruber, Daniel 03/18/94 Account Closed 12.25 Gruber, Daniel 03/18/94 Account Closed 17.30 Jacobson, Neil 04/18/94 Account Closed 7.00 Romey, Douglas /Cathy 07/02/94 Account Closed 5.50 Sargent, Damon 11/23/94 Non - Sufficient Funds 25.50 Wymore, Barbara 04/07/94 Non - Sufficient Funds 13.00 General Fund Total: 80.55 Total All Funds 1,955.68 i • Council Meeting Date 11/13/95 3 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Numbe i Request For Council Consideration • Item Description: Resolution authorizing the City Manager to write -off uncollectible accounts receivables Department Approval: Charlie Hansen, Director of Finance Manager's Review /Recommendation: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: Adopt the attached resolution. Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached No ) • The attached resolution, if adopted by the City Council, will write -off outstanding accounts receivable balances that staff has deemed uncollectible. Efforts to collect the outstanding balances have unsuccessful due to bankruptcies, change in property owners or changing address without notifying the City of a forwarding address. See attached list for detail of uncollectible accounts receivable. • A l Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO WRITE -OFF UNCOLLECTIBLE ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLES WHEREAS, the City Manager has reported the following accounts receivables are uncollectible. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center to authorize the City Manager to write -off from the City records as uncollectible the following accounts receivables: Due From Purpose Amount Vince Delisi 5th False Police Alarm $ 50.00 Timber Ridge Apartments 2nd - 7th False Fire Alarms 1,650.00 Gregory & Cheryl Stock Diseased Tree Removal 150.50 Theresa Schultz Accident Damage - Street Signs 66.86 Total 1,917.36 Date Mayor ATTEST: Deputy Clerk 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. Council Meeting Date 11/13/95 31 City of f Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Number Ser Request For Council Consideration • Item Description: Revocation of Municipal State Aid Designation on Certain Street Segments, and Addition of Municipal State Aid Designation on Certain Street Segments Department Approval: c LG! Scott•Brink, City ngineer Manager's Review /Recommendation: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: Approve two (2) separate resolutions: one establishing Summit Drive and John Martin Drive as Municipal State Aid Streets, and the other revoking Municipal State Aid Street designation for 62nd Avenue from Dupont Avenue to 0.33 miles east of Dupont Avenue (Lyndale Avenue). • Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached Yes ) At the August 14, 1995 City Council meeting, various street improvement projects were established. One of these was Improvement Project No. 1996 -05, John Martin/Earle Brown Drive Overlay. These two streets, along with Summit Drive are currently classified as commercial collectors. In order to improve the feasibility of maintaining and performing public improvements on these streets, the Council directed the City Engineer at that meeting to contact Mn/Dot and pursue designating these streets as Municipal State Aid Streets. The advantage of the MSA designation is that funds are provided from the state gas tax to assist in paying maintenance costs, and to finance construction and reconstruction. Summit Drive, John Martin Drive, and Earle Brown Drive clearly exhibit the higher use needs and traffic required of State Aid streets. The City is limited to the total amount of street mileage that can be designated under the State Aid system. In order to provide enough mileage to designate the desired streets, Staff was also given direction to revoke or "un- designate" 62nd Avenue as a State Aid Street from Dupont Avenue to 0.33miles east (Lyndale Avenue). This street no longer connects as a through street and does not meet the criteria and needs required of State Aid streets. In addition, the City retains a small amount of mileage below the allocated limit. The combination of this available mileage and the revocation of 62nd Avenue will provide just enough mileage to add Summit Drive and John Martin Drive to the State Aid system. The attached letter to Mn/Dot further describes the details regarding the mileage mathematics. It was hoped, that upon mileage verifications and completion of the "number crunching" that enough mileage would remain to at least designate a portion of Earle Brown Drive as a State Aid Street as well. • However, the maximum limitation has been reached. The Earle Brown Drive improvement would then be financed by assessments and local State Aid rather than assessments and regular State Aid. The City has received verbal confirmation from Mn/Dot that the proposed additions and deletions to the State Aid system are acceptable and approved. It is therefore recommended that the City Council approve the two attached resolutions for subsequent formal approval by the Commissioner of Transportation. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its • adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING DESIGNATION OF MUNICIPAL STATE AID STREETS (JOHN MARTIN DRIVE FROM SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY TO T.H. 100 AND SUMMIT DRIVE FROM SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY TO T.H. 100) WHEREAS, it appears to the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the streets hereinafter described should be designated as Municipal State Aid Streets under the provisions of Minnesota Laws. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that the roads described as follows, to wit: 1. Summit Drive from Shingle Creek Parkway to T.H. 100 2. John Martin Drive from Shingle Creek Parkway to T.H. 100 be, and hereby are established, located and designated as Municipal State Aid Streets of said City, subject • to the approval of the Commissioner of Transportation of the State of Minnesota. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Deputy City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to forward two certified copies of this resolution to the Commissioner of Transportation for his consideration, and that upon his approval of the designation of said roadways or portion thereof, that same be constructed, improved and maintained as Municipal State Aid Streets of the City of Brooklyn Center. Date Mayor ATTEST: Deputy Clerk 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. • Da Member introduced the following resolution and moved its • adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION REVOKING MUNICIPAL STATE AID STREET (62ND AVENUE FROM DUPONT AVENUE NORTH TO 0.33 MILES EAST OF DUPONT AVENUE NORTH) WHEREAS, it appears to the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the street segments hereinafter described as Municipal State Aid Streets under the provisions of Minnesota Laws, no longer serve the City's best interests in maintaining their designation as Municipal State Aid Streets. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that the road segments described as follows, to wit: MSAS 120 -010 That portion of 62nd Avenue North from Dupont Avenue North to 0.16 miles east. MSAS 120 -020 That portion of 62nd Avenue North from 0.16 miles East of Dupont Avenue North to 0.33 miles East of Dupont Avenue(Lyndale Avenue) be, and hereby are, revoked as Municipal State Aid Streets of said City, subject to the approval • of the Commissioner of Transportation of the State of Minnesota. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Deputy City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to forward two certified copies of this resolution to the Commissioner of Transportation for his consideration. Date Mayor ATTEST: Deputy Clerk 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. City of .Brooklyn Center A great place to start. A great place to stay. August 21, 1995 Mr. Bob Brown Metro District State Aid Engineer 1500 West County Road B2 Roseville, Minnesota 55113 RE: City of Brooklyn Center Request for revisions to the City's State Aid Street system designations Dear Mr. Brown: The City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center has authorized me to request your consideration of proposed revisions to the Municipal State Aid System within Brooklyn Center. Specifically, the Council requests consideration of the following (the attached map shows the proposed revisions): REMOVAL of the designation on 109 -120 -010, that is 62nd Avenue North from Dupont Avenue North to 0.16 miles east. • REMOVAL of the designation on 109 -120 -020, that is 62nd Avenue North from .16 miles East of Dupont Avenue North to 0.33 miles East of Dupont Avenue North (Lyndale Ave.). ADDITION of the designation of John Martin Drive, from Shingle Creek Parkway to T.H. 100. ADDITION of the designation of Summit Drive from Shingle Creek Parkway to T.H. 100. These revisions are consistent with the selection criteria detailed in Chapter 8820.0700 Subp. 3 of the State Aid Operations text. l.) Traffic volume, functional classification. Current volumes (ADT) of the streets proposed for addition to the system are as follows: A. John Martin Dr. - 5800 -6400 B. Summit Dr. - 4400 -9100 Since the completion of improvements to I -94 and T.H. 252, 62nd Avenue no longer connects to another roadway, and its traffic volume is now less than 500 ADT. Because the street is now a dead end, designation as a State Aid roadway is no longer sensible. 2.) Connects points of major traffic interest. All segments requested for addition to the system serve a major commercial and office area connecting major arterials (T.H. 100 and 1 -94) and • a high volume collector (Shingle Creek Parkway). As previously stated, the street requested for removal (62nd Avenue) lies within a residential area and is now a dead end street. 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy, Brooklyn Center, iWN 55430 -2199 - City Hall & TDD Number (612) 669 -3300 Recreation and Community Center Phone & TDD Number (612) 569 -3400 - FAX (612) 569 -3494 An Affirmative Action l Equal Opportunities Employer 3 City of Brooklyn Center A great place to start. A great place to stay. • 3.) Provides an integrated network. The re- organization of these State Aid designations will provide a more realistic, practical, and cost effective operation of the City's higher volume roadways and overall City wide system. Currently, the City's total designated MSAS mileage is 0.39 miles below the maximum amount allowed. A breakdown of the proposed revision mileage is as follows: Proposed Additions Proposed Deletions John Martin Drive 0.26 mi. 62nd Ave. N. 0.33 mi. Summit Dr. 0.45 mi. If the proposed revisions should be approved, the City's total MSAS mileage would therefore fall approximately 0.01 miles short of the maximum permitted. However, because John Martin Drive and Summit Drive both connect with T.H. 100, I am in the process of verifying these mileages. I appreciate your consideration of this request. Should you approve this request, I will obtain the proper resolutions from the City Council for the Commissioner's consideration. Please contact me at 569 -3332 if you have any questions or comments. • Sincerely, f� Scott A. Brink, P. E. CC: Diane Spector Cam Andre • 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy, Brooklyn Center, YIN 55430 -2199 • City Hall & TDD Number (612) 569 -3300 Recreation and Community Center Phone & TDD Number (612) 569 -3400 • FAX (612) 569 -3494 An Affirmative Action /Equal Opportunities Employer i r . > a' w •/• -11 . a_ .t;Uf.IC A ;� I< 1 o � W[ _AY U I N R J • X - [' [ X Q JG' < f • t 11. 3 vErl.r Aut. < �V A H + ^ [FA < C ^ AY I� '' 4 (� •r e y� / ` ` J ^� �. ... "• / - I: I f ,• ' �� - ' ••'',' N I � CiCI % �;, t lllr [ � L -� •rtl.•° ?O <'•...r 1,: . > _ Q' ny- AV. A IM ji 1� t•j b r<Jo1111•oY N x •I 1 ' �' .g J lol o y y • r 1 < n i0 [G AY 11,, 4 Z SC I <,b v p Ar) .f.Y r i:; !• aS( A .v 1 A oN 4 (t'l? !c /4 1. - �L` ?��' %'�� fl)Lf !N ° Ilcoli 1 J� i': 'Ir s�H :O[T 1.1. �• s r. .< 1CG11 AY , - _ 7 :�'q • 1 EGfNY " _n/min_ wr..w : ' :etc[ it xv iii . N Na ENT / V) IN�l.i l'tJ• uii.. , �< •p -- -� •'. .: ,'• Al A ff > IF 1 AV N 0 l M 11 n. (' • O < + D f1 R- •" 1 JAIL s AV ,o _N. I o t I_ - � Y II HHY ,DI /Al11Al1, I ,A I • , /L 'v fI NMY 1- Y [ " RRY AV a IZ Z ��• i Arr All N InvO l;•o. ^... P AflY /,V ; o X I v" _ T PCRHY tI1H�. } r i v N r', r[.+ y r011C1tARt A Y V .. a _ AV N S ' "�r • AvN AV ON IIANU r' V N ��• , : ti S tf7iAid 1 ,,n4. 4 '•, • / I! I .< ._ a J N OI c ON H x > r"I.'1 IIW. _ v t IA (l0 ASV < h • AY • N p ..�... �'�- H wAJOR A i Avr f! t4 tl / 8. �� AV l^ .IY O I,. ( r IWlnf.lA/,t AV h : r' M�DN A �w J �H,. �'1 [. • n '1 X Q v • I E : > A �. INV ' �'• I A-$ VII W A �L 'NA/OA AY if n it E 1 �Y _..�. _ . N I _ � 6 � a f!� , '�� � NI, Y - f ^D�Il: a . _ . _S . _ - / m .1� , •.��.� Y AV.� ; �; luN[ _ :_ N 1 r . I. 'I A1[IIA�ry fV r7Nfl 1 fl T.Y .Z o ai to -Ir. IA A t 1n V N 1. -; 11. N �fID + IAN AY.N 11 �__.. Z' !f. - AV - '" ti'•ji �z ____ f AV . ,v w I`} •° � >� O['Y r f}� •� /� \ � 1• 1 1J s .� IN OIA11t / !J d w .L��[SIDt fl - - -,v c < Y. IUIIr Al _AY ,1. ( �1 } N 1. Sll[AA f i+1 ►•�• Cr _. ioo > { P r NIAi vl w (r l •�..,,U _..0 w �a i L A 1�'l G 1111 ES (. { 0 }.• o Io i I z (-•. f� � ._ ... u N II A a 1 1 I .n r l _.. p o .gsOly a 1 i �.'• t z = AV n j t AANCE N x' ^ ,^, r n /" A .n .1 cYr. /Sr RANC[�_ a •. ti .. .. � I j� ... .. r _ < I u ' <.Y 4fAlR.6. DAula ,1; � y`y v � Q �j {WING_AY'° �ulu 1 Y °v �, Air l 1 I' T WIN 4Y 1 < v� mn . ,AV ,l > qq N . W 1• . n 1 .�`.• f [YII iG Ho,lr ` Dlo� I AY n (._ S. _ t. j ♦ � t i` T} O o .<. '" p/ +a O W �l5 •l Y i ONEW .•„� O w 1 NA >)1 i ~ nllt w ( AY.�: �_ l H • "' v i ►i IAuln !� ,� s p0 X' I ;c J Y t .. _. �• - y �R s` .c, l C Y I' - °_ v .2 I Z .• iiisss -, _�... u j)• ualw - }' I r AV N -,J ' k z < �9 I a < ., S 1 ° 1 AY L 1 v n < /� Pr )i1.J I_.✓.. u� o +Otll K. 2;IYU 1 IY °N �iv C r w i AIt 44 x T C IGtvCtf jl N I I 1 ' ` l ti I` [ rN .. S `„ _ I % j,LM •f1. AY.. r �rU011 �•_`• OB �S tiO•I U1 .' Q 1Q. _ 11 Y QU V V,11 P , •t rRi (�k F K ... Duv + J [ ' 'U o </ s u o 1':0'•. •er aer r xv ^ „ o AV t r 1 . r t uA D I(' oTT v �c ; OR AY ^• Q /' ' S $�� <.. ) i Hf.j rrnnLl ti i Av /� � a N•( `[ " k[• P 9 �" v, �� Y < � ([NI1 1 [•� ) • 1 t/ I,I �" � - S l - s ti" , . a 7 h� 3100 b • `+ J YI PK - r '�_ �. I !ffl AV fl 0` VH '�'RRfS 2 1 V �_ o. _'� f PIR�a- •'/'V1Tr n :+�,• 'VINCEIif AY r'S z _..- n L t < !N i a� e ] 1 ., •,b . -- - - � - 1, " l i WASIINUNN AV _ /p N y O i ♦ At 7 If PIOII r' AV 'N N i () j .- _ t rICCNI< AV� it It2 `l_�� la r IY % t lIIOMAS. �• AV to N On o (or,fPt'it, AV to I t ! „"iS ' -.1 n I 5111. It IUAfI AV N 7 z \ - �•_L .1 / :. �"� \ afi r - G �' ?aa I ( [ j ` N ,' ro nus [il• u v o 'R Y CJO n q ; ?c USS[IL w Uk C �, �eaooA ! 0110EN AV <> It x _ +�• SIIINC" l X•'`C ! r 7 m fp' :, ro •• ". fit: E -- PlNN AV fl I N At N� n 'S.i•. ��` X t 2`' C D )[ 1 1 V ale -� __ 4i.• NI a i 1 `LOIIV[R AVI= fE)YE �y _ :.(!T •--� Ay`'�� "�� i r i UI iv NI > / NLritC)Jl_J� ^ N ' �GU �� +\ I i` �FQ; ` -- - r•1- (J rn 43QQ a� NfY /tQlt. In I` In •� Y r j Jn. 1 I 11�.,DS1A PKWY ^G x A } f h i 1 µ N . . ry : b) �a I 1 MO[IGAto !Y, - 4�, y ail ry - Y `�\� Z j AtORGAN . a �Y. )(_ v CiNI< 1J y - _ t1 Q [ •n W. �l V _N GI ) HONG I AV / A la J Y < _ ; 4pGAN AY. �. !!,•, f ,, -- [ -•'�[- 1a) r '11 s S f AV' N' r 7 �� q ' 1� `I,n'_ - ' .-- - '+ - � n l ll--f• -j=1a b 110 AV R-�•I IA Y' N Cr N ,r L NOVlN DR 9 ;� <IAi.I[S m AVI A AV \ ' AV f 'a k' . > .• - _ f M ti AV Gl {AV H K = NYING z FI I F. , / r - ��.•%' �.•. 11 < . • ._ .. - IHVING -� A_V Z - N ��\ --•-�_ E �n IflVING A N 1V N �I IIIIMf10l.OT V • V ' to A N c L- '~ vy �� _7SY:. 11 -.. __�L- _ a ✓ f I 1 lIA9!]L ° cINr.9t2 t.AY_ u '' �•i j ' Lti <GIRAIfO �- Ay w 1, N I t xGIR Nl AY N YI � =y- N. ��;v II '< i `° a y �• "'• > • �� NtU0N7 ^ 1 �.r > Rf MONI AV Y '1 <_; - - _ 5 R atortr l y o. , +EMOr4T ,.� :.jT' 1 [ , ' Ii _......� <.AY <__W_ �u Inv .N � , �i.! 1f f n i, NLfl50N it soft x �' "' z M =tda z IM[1,SG,j AV N ' AY It AV N Y� m ti Ito 1gMob - - - I OUVONT a: A N - - H•o C��,�. �•4 }IP4Ui - Y_ II j �Itl C(ILFAK trAY Iz AV I< N I `ti 5- I " _- - - -Y• _ - -- - n - I q COlAX y.' - " - > _ OLFEIS Y. 1- t� Y_[1 : 3 b O A m r y _ AV p < < 1 c A BiiYAU T., p O -/__� an UNYANI ,AVx•n N < •,li, ORY fl C_ A __ ' / 1 . 1 LI At IINICII AV O N . - -,J I n LDRI _ ^ -- A Y ,_ it N- " URYAll V 9Oo t •): 1 � LOW I mo. r Y _ N 1 AY IUU Y a �I /N �< CAMUEfI AY < i l.. ° ,u N ...AY_ �N_ •, 1 SI L'! ,Y <_ N t •,[•-" .� .. 0111 _.� SSISS1Ppl' D y 'tfl* 1��u �Z <fc pwN y 5 w /fA Ram snamus ; °• - v�I/ I1DW �...- Yfitgl z t 'oI_ pl AL17 � ' I `•��`'��•� "�.. �f311StiAr�... }o_-- r „ mot .•(,` Ii ~`^ \�AIVIRDAIf 1 - ,, ••� -I ••_� • tr • 1- �� . tt'' � ,[�✓� / 5 ) : ! f /T / � f ���. n > J f.� Io �s r [ .... ----• • ' . • i ` 3t`U M , f t� � .1 S n -�_ _.G�PA \ o � '�. .. ����0 /, �itll y� ��N /\� I \ -n �r�IQrlrlrrRlff�`�.i`5 / \C-(1�i „iv; Council Meeting Date 11/13/95 3 City of Brooklyn Center Age.& Item Numbe Reque For Co uncil Consideration • Item Description: Licenses Department Approval: P)JtL Patti Page, Intenm AdOiinistrative Assistant Manager's Review /Recommendation: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: Approve attached list of licenses. • Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached Yes 31 City of Brooklyn Center Licenses to be approved by the City Council on November 13, 1995 • CHRISTMAS TREE SALES LOT Builders Square 3600 63rd Ave. N. Malmborg's Inc. 5120 N. Lilac Dr. PQT Company 5040 Brooklyn Blvd. PQT Company 5801 Xerxes Ave. N. Interim Adminikative Assistant MECHANICAL SYSTEMS Erickson Plumbing, HTGlCooling 9212 Isanti St. NE Building Official RENTAL DWELLING Initial: Paul & Sandra Henkel 3012 & 3018 51st Ave. N. Lutheran Social Service of MN 3612 55th Ave. N. Lutheran Social Service of MN 6018 Admiral Pl. Todd R. Grabow 7202 Girard Ave. N. Humboldt Properties 6737 - 6743 Humboldt Ave. N. Morning Sun Investments 1519 Humboldt Place Michael A. Haugstad 7201 Major Ave. N. Renewal: Patti R. Zoerb 5900 Camden Ave. N. Melvin & Mildred Jampsa 5619 Hillsview Rd. Swanson Investments 7240 W. River Road Director of CommunQJ Development TAXICAB Judith Marion Rankka 8477 Regent Ave. N. Deputy City Clerk General Approval: Patti Page, Interim Ad nistrative Assistant I Council Meeting Date 11/13/95 3 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Number 7 a, Request For Council Consideration • Item Description: PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FOR NUISANCE ABATEMENT AT 4746 LAKEVIEW AVENUE Department Approval: J G. Brad offinan, Director of Co unity Development Manager's Review /Recommendation: 4? A& r r No comments to supplement this report Comments below / attached Recommended City Council Action: Following the public hearing, the City Council should consider adoption of the attached resolution, which would certify the proposed special assessment for collection on the Hennepin County tax rolls. • Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached Yes PP g ) On September 25, 1995 the City Council adopted Resolution 95 -213 providing for a public hearing regarding the proposed assessment for costs for abating a public nuisance. The purpose of this resolution is to certify this assessment to the Hennepin County tax rolls at 4746 Lakeview Avenue. This property owner has been notified of the delinquent status of his nuisance abatement costs, in accordance with City ordinances. The property owner has been duly notified by certified mail of this special assessment hearing. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FOR NUISANCE ABATEMENT TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS AT 4746 LAKEVIEW AVENUE WHEREAS, the owner of record of the property served has been notified of the proposed special assessment according to legal requirements; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the provisions of City Ordinance 19 -105, Abatement of Public Nuisance and Assessment of Cost, the property owner at 4746 Lakeview Avenue was ordered and subsequently failed to abate a nuisance upon said property; and WHEREAS, Section 19 -105 provides that the cost of abating said nuisance, including legal fees, shall be certified to the county auditor as a special assessment against the property from which the nuisance has been abated; and ® WHEREAS, an assessment roll, a copy of which is attached hereto and part hereof by reference, has been prepared by the City Clerk, tabulating the property where a nuisance abatement costs is to be assessed with the amount, including interest and service charges, to be assessed; and WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for nuisance abatement costs. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. Said assessment roll of nuisance abatement costs is hereby adopted and certified as Levy No. 13432. 2. The assessment as adopted and confirmed shall be payable with ad valorem taxes in 1996, in one annual installment with interest thereon at seven (7) percent per annum, for a period of fifteen months from October 1, 1995 through December 31, 1996. 3. The owner of any property so assessed may at any time prior to the certification of the assessment to the County Auditor pay the whole of the assessment, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the RESOLUTION NO. adoption of this resolution; and he or she may, at any time thereafter, pay to the City Treasurer the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15, or interest will be charged through December 31 of the succeeding year. 4. The City Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the County Auditor to be extended on the proper tax lists of the county, and such assessment shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. Date Mayor • ATTEST: Deputy Clerk 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. • CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLL September 25, 1995 PROJECT INFORMATION LEVY INFORMATION Improvement Project No.: N/A Levy No.: 13432 Description: Public Nuisance Abatement Fund /Code No.: Levy Description: PUBLIC NUISANCE ABATEMENT Levy runs one (1) year at an interest rate of Location: 4746 Lakeview Avenue ( 7 ) percent. First payment, with property taxes payable in 1996 shall include fifteen (15) whole months' interest. Improvement Ordered On: August 8, 1994 Date of Assessment Hearing: November 13, 1995 By Resolution No.: 94 -170 Adopted On: Assessment District: N/A By Resolution No.: Method of Apportionment: Direct cost and administrative costs Corrections. Deletions, Or Deferments: Cost Summary From N/A Resolution No: TOTAL IMPROVEMENT COST: $5,356.29 Less Direct City Share: Less Other Payments: TOTAL TO BE ASSESSED: $5,356.29 City Property: Other Public Property: Private Property: $5,356.29 CITY BRCOM-YN CENTER SPECIAL A SE FICAT ON ROLL PUBLIC NUISANCE ABATEMENT 95 MUNICIPAL CODE NO. 22 Levy runs one (1) year PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER LEVY PROPERTY ADDN. Address Name NO. IDENTIFICATION NO. NO. AMOUNT Legal Description Mailing Address 13432 10- 118 -21 -32 -0027 89495 $5,356.29 4746 Lakeview Ave LEONARD MARTIN 4746 Lakeview Ave Brooklyn Center, MN 54429 $5,356.29 Council Meeting Date 11/13/95 3 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Numbe tion: Item Descri Request For Council Consideration P Resolution Electing to Participate in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program Under the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act Department Approval: Tom Bublitz, Community Development Specialist Manager's Review /Recommendation: �f No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: Recommend approval of the resolution. • Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached Yes ) BACKGROUND AND S UMMARY OF LEGISLATION The Metropolitan Livable Communities Act was passed by the 1995 legislature and is a comprehensive piece of legislation addressing affordable housing in the seven county metropolitan area. The primary goal of the Act is to provide a mechanism whereby each community in the seven county metropolitan area addresses the issue of affordable housing. The mechanism is a negotiated agreement with the Metropolitan Council on affordable housing goals for each community. The general definition of affordability used by the Metropolitan Council is that a housing unit is affordable if the mortgage or rent comprises no more than 30% of a family's income. The primary intent of the Act is to increase the amount of affordable housing in the developing suburbs. The affordability levels under the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act are as follows: ♦ The standard for single - family home affordability is $115,000. A $115,000 home is considered affordable to a family of four earning 80% of the 1994 HUD metropolitan area median income, or approximately $41,000. ♦ The standard for rental unit affordability used by the Metropolitan Council is based on 1990 census data, and specifies that a rental unit is considered affordable if the rent, in 1990 dollars, represents 30% of a four - person household's income, which is at 50% of the HUD 1990 metropolitan area median income. In 1990, 50% of median income for a four - person • household was $20,000, which makes $500 per month an affordable rent. In 1994 dollars, 50% of median income would be $25,500, and the resulting affordable rent would be $638. The Metropolitan Council has drafted a Housing Goals Agreement for each community in the seven county metro area. A copy of the draft agreement for Brooklyn Center is attached to this memorandum. The housing goals agreement specifies the "city index ", which is the current breakdown of affordable Request For Council Consideration Page 2 housing in the city, and a "benchmark ", which is the affordable housing goal recommended by the O Metropolitan Council for the city. The benchmarks or goals for affordable housing were established by the Metropolitan Council for each city in the seven county metro area using a "ring" and "sector" approach. In Brooklyn Center's case, the cities in our "ring" include New Hope, Robbinsdale and Crystal, while the cities in our "sector" include New Hope, Robbinsdale and Crystal and also the cities of Brooklyn Park, Maple Grove, Plymouth, Champlin, Dayton, Rogers, Corcoran, Medina, Loretto, Independence, Maple Plain, Rockford, Hassan and Greenfield. Brooklyn Center has the same benchmarks as New Hope, Crystal and Robbinsdale. Included in the list of attachments at the end of this memorandum is a table showing the city indices and benchmarks for the CO -OP Northwest cities of Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, Crystal, New Hope and Robbinsdale. Also included in the list of attachments is a map showing the planning areas (rings) and sectors for the entire seven county metropolitan area. According to the draft Housing Goals Agreement, the City of Brooklyn Center currently meets all the benchmark goals set forth by the Metropolitan Council with regard to affordable housing. Staff believes the city index number for affordable rental housing, set by the Metropolitan Council at 46 %, is low and should be adjusted upward. Using current (1994) income data, the City Assessor has initially determined that as many as 84% of the city's rental units could be classified as affordable. Staff will be addressing this with the Metropolitan Council staff in the city's goals agreement to be considered in December. • MUNICIPAL ACTIONS REQUIRED FOR PARTICIPATION The Metropolitan Council has been actively working with and encouraging all metropolitan cities to participate in the Livable Communities program. From a procedural standpoint, the City of Brooklyn Center, along with all other metropolitan cities, would need to address the following items in order to participate in the Livable Communities Act: ♦ By November 15, 1995, the city needs to pass a resolution of intent to participate in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act. A resolution is included with this memorandum for council consideration this evening. ♦ By December 14, 1995, the city would need to adopt a housing goals agreement with the Metropolitan Council. The draft housing goals agreement included with this memorandum would be the document used to establish our goals. As an example, one way to approach the goal setting would be to set the goal of staying within the benchmark ranges for affordable housing. The city already meets or exceeds the ranges in the benchmark goals. According to the legislation, the housing goals are negotiated on a one -time basis and are not renegotiated. As previously indicated, staff feels confident that they can justify the increase of our affordable rental index of 46% to a significantly higher number. ♦ The last part of the process would require the city to prepare an action plan by June 30, 1996. The action plan would set forth the policies and programs the city would use to reach or maintain its affordable housing goals. If the city adopts the benchmark ranges as its • goals, the action plan would be a document which would provide for the maintenance of the benchmark numbers set forth in the housing goals agreement. The action plan developed under the Livable Communities Act can also be used for the housing element in the city's comprehensive plan update. Request For Council Consideration Page 3 METROPOLITAN LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT FUNDING ACCOUNTS As an incentive for communities to participate in the Livable Communities Act, the Metropolitan • Council will be developing several funding programs to assist cities in meeting their affordable housing P g gP g g g goals and dealing with other issues in the city, such as polluted site cleanup, transit issues, etc. However, all of these programs will tie into affordable housing in some manner. The following funding accounts will be developed as an incentive for cities to participate in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act: ♦ TAX BASE REVITALIZATION ACCOUNT This program would provide grants to cities to address cleanup of contaminated land for commercial and industrial redevelopment to make it available for redevelopment, job retention, and job growth. There will be approximately $6.5 million in funds available in grants annually under this program. ♦ LIVABLE COMMUNITIES DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM The purpose of this program will be to provide grants to fund projects that create certain linkages with housing and transit, housing and employment, and other projects that involve creative mixes of land use, density, and housing value mixes. The amount of funds available under this program is approximately $4.6 million in 1996 and $4.1 million in 1997 and subsequent years. ♦ LOCAL HOUSING INCENTIVES ACCOUNT The purpose of this program is to make grants available to communities to meet negotiated affordable and life -cycle housing goals that promote the policies of the Metropolitan Council. • According to the Metropolitan Council: "The funds in this account must be distributed to municipalities that have not met their affordable and life -cycle goals and are actively funding projects designed to help meet the goals." The funds offered under this program must be matched on a dollar- for - dollar basis by the municipality receiving the funds. The funding level for this program is $1,000,000 in 1996, $500,000 in 1997, and for 1998 and each subsequent year, $1,000,000. It is clear that there is no specific funding account in the Livable Communities Program to address the rehabilitation and revitalization of affordable housing in the inner -ring suburbs or those communities that already meet or exceed their affordable housing goals. Clearly, the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act is targeting the developing suburbs and has as its priority the creation of new affordable housing. Many of the inner -ring suburbs view this as a severe shortcoming and funding gap in the program. One of the items listed under the Livable Communities criteria and guidelines in the Act itself includes "creating incentives to preserve and rehabilitate affordable housing in the fully - developed area. " Even though this is specified in the Act, there is a gap in the funding accounts to address rehabilitation in the fully- developed areas. The only funding account for which the City of Brooklyn Center has any possibility of receiving funding is the demonstration program, and then only if the project addresses one of the funding priorities which include: ♦ Linking development or redevelopment with transit. • ♦ Linking affordable housing with employment growth areas. ♦ Intensified land use that leads to more compact development or redevelopment. ♦ Involving development or redevelopment that mixes incomes of residents in housing, including introducing higher value housing in lower income areas to achieve a mix of Request For Council Consideration Page 4 housing opportunities; or • ♦ Encourage public infrastructure investments which connect urban neighborhoods and suburban communities, attract private sector redevelopment investment in commercial and residential properties adjacent to the public improvement, and provide project area residents with expanded opportunities for private sector employment. In addition to the incentives described above, the legislature will be monitoring the participation of metropolitan communities in the Livable Communities Act. In a sense, the legislature has offered this program as a "voluntary" program to address affordable housing in the metropolitan area. The passage of the Livable Communities Act was a compromise piece of legislation which was less extreme than other affordable housing programs proposed, specifically, the legislation sponsored by Representative Myron Orfield. Should the legislature find the Livable Communities is not meeting their expectations, there is always the possibility of the legislature moving towards a more mandatory and punitive approach to affordable housing. In addition to incentives set forth in the program for cities participating in the Livable Communities Act, for those cities choosing not to participate there is still a provision that those cities must spend a certain dollar amount to create affordable and life -cycle housing or to maintain existing affordable and life -cycle housing. This is called the "Affordable and Life -Cycle Housing Opportunities Amount" (ALHOA amount). This is a dollar amount established by a specified formula in the Act that a participating or nonparticipating community must spend each year to create affordable and life -cycle housing if they have not met their affordable housing goals. • BROOKLYN CENTER HOUSING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS At the September 25, 1995 City Council meeting, the City Council referred the Livable Communities Act to the city's Housing Commission for a recommendation. The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission considered the Livable Communities Act at its October meeting and recommended participation in the program but with four provisions; two of which have already been addressed in this memorandum and two additional provisions. One is the issue of distribution of affordable housing which addresses the core of the Act's intent. The Housing Commission believed the benchmark system of goals is not clear as to whether or not the Livable Communities Act was designed to influence distribution and balance of affordable housing in the metro area or to influence the creation of new affordable housing where many new jobs are being created; namely, in the developing suburbs. From reviewing the Act and meetings with Metropolitan Council representatives, it appears the Act is not aimed at achieving a balance of affordable housing in the metropolitan area so much as it is intended to influence some forward movement in creating affordable housing in those cities with relatively little affordable housing. The Housing Commission also acknowledged and endorsed the North Metro Mayors Association's efforts at analysis of the impact of the Act on the northern tier cities. A resolution drafted by the North Metro Mayors Association is also included with this memorandum. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS Even with the apparent flaws and gaps in the Livable Communities Act Program, as observed by the • city's Housing Advisory Commission, city staff and many other communities, the Housing Commission and staff are recommending participation in the Livable Communities Act. The potential negative from not participating seems to warrant city participation even though the benefits seem relatively minor at this point. A resolution approving participation in the Livable Communities Program has been prepared for Council Request For Council Consideration Page 5 consideration. Also included in the list of attachments is information prepared by the Metropolitan • Council titled, "Livable Communities: Questions and Answers" and "How to Open Doors to Affordable Housing. " Staff will be present at Monday's meeting to respond to questions. Also, representatives from the Metropolitan Council staff will also be in attendance at the meeting to respond to questions the City Council may have regarding the Act. • • List of Attachments ♦ Draft Housing Goals Agreement Metropolitan Livable Communities Act ♦ CO -OP Northwest Communities Livable Communities Act, City Indices and Benchmarks ♦ Benchmarks: Planning Areas and Sectors (Map) ♦ Housing Commission Resolution No. 95 -1 Regarding the City of Brooklyn Center Participation in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act ♦ North Metro Mayor's Association Resolution on the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act ♦ "Livable Communities Questions and Answers" and "How to Open Doors to Affordable Housing" j DRAFT HOUSING GOALS AGREEMENT METROPOLITAN LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT PRINCIPLES The city of Brooklyn Center supports: 1. A balanced housing supply, with housing available for people at all income levels. 2. The accommodation of all racial and ethnic groups in the purchase, sale, rental and location of housing within the community. 3. A variety of housing types for people in all stages of the life-cycle. 4. A community of well - maintained housing and neighborhoods, including ownership and rental housing. 5. Housing development that respects the natural environment of the community while striving to accommodate the need for a variety of housing types and costs. 6. The availability of a full range of services and facilities for its residents, and the improvement of access to and linkage between housing and employment. GOALS To carry out the above housing principles, the City of. Brooklyn Center agrees to use benchmark indicators for communities of similar location and stage of development as affordable and life -cycle housing goals for the period 1996 to 2010, and to make its best efforts, given market conditions and resource availability, to maintain an index within the benchmark ranges for affordability, life -cycle and density. • CITY INDEX BENCI�IARK =GOAL Affordability i I Ownership 99% 77% Rental 46% 4145% 'Life Cycie Type (Non- single family 37% 3441% detached) Owner /renter Mix 68/32% (64 -72) 1 (28 -36) % Density Single- Family Detached 2.9 /acre 2.4 -2.9 /acre Multifamily 11 /acre I 1 -15 /acre To achieve the above goals, the City of Brooklyn Center elects to participate in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act Local Housing Incentives Program, and will prepare and submit a plan to the Metropolitan Council by June 30, 1996, indicating the actions it will take to carry out the above goals. • CERTIFICATION Mayor Date Affordable and Life -Cycle Housing Opportunities Amount For Brooklyn Center Your ALHOA Amount for: Brooklyn Center 1996 s0 Not required 1997 (Estimate) so CO -OP NOR'T'HWEST COMMUNITIES LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT CITY INDICES AND BENCHMARKS Index Category Brooklyn Brooklyn Center Crystal New Hoe Robbinsdale Benchmark Park Benchmark Affordability Ownership' 99% 98% 92% 97% 77% 91% 63-77% Rental' 46% 48% 41% 47% 41-45% 57% 35 - 81% Life Cycle Multi - Family' 37% 24% 48% 30% 34 - 41% 44% Owner /Renter Mix 68/32% 76/24% 53/47% 71/29% 64 - 72 %/28 - 36% 66/34% 34/35% r ity Detached 4 2.9 /Acre 3.3 /Acre 2.9 /Acre 4.1 /Acre 2.4 - 2.9 /Acre 2.3 /Acre 1.9 -2.4 /Acre i -Famil 11 /Acre 15 /Acre 14 /Acre 33 /Acre 11 - 15 /Acre 12 /Acre 10 -11 Acre ' 1994 Assessor's Homestead Valuations 2 1990 U. S. Census 3 1993 Metropolitan Council Estimates y Metropolitan Council Calculations based on 1990 Land Use Data I enchmarks:., - fanning Areas and ..�� North ( DOVE °.. St. Paul S ectors North Al N Minneapolis » r Fully Developed Area R.Y.L. ArpOYlA __L LARt t UR( Developing Area .Ae Freestanding Growth OA—.. Northeast t. Paul uro LAKt.::.: Center Northwest L( IMCT WASH NG i ON Aural Area Minneapolis i CORCORAr ROCRIOAO � HE E L,,,}} O 77 ROT!'. OORLYM OATY • STtLLrAiER f PHN r RR R Lt♦ ..: z:. °.A. ( ooe 'K ['R [tR GRAMT Sector names in A": . f ttTO -:: n_ o�w wawail i YAw or [OI u ov[rOL »ct L1 - �Z Lu ' KYC: italics " L T( r[OI »A fvrour' YArtt .LAZY RO[[YtLL[ CY`Y 4 -" :. .T. OAT .:. Le »O:LAR( Tf .. ALLt. .. / �y��L TOYIr YIY RR .T. �- ap a G �py���ge KOA -- IK RO KA [T 1 C110L11 UR[Lwr Aa0 LOV - w.tER,O1Rr RY. ►AI1K _ U.O .O II.CI YOYMO ... K rAYL Southwest c ... R at (Ac. R '...... e.(raoo- -.. Minneapolis ...... A. .. ... M h[LO:� 3 Y wLY Y.COrtA O .. A..[K ..:: _ _ . OTL MTY [� RT' Southeast -..: V »Iw L.RETOVA, /� GrOE» - : - St. GI ul CA �R .A .LOOYMOTOY t a. . eY[ L AR ..... .. : -.: .N ErYAAR ... .... ♦ YO .Y[RIC..��,,LL cMA A : - -' OC[`: Oa1tLLRC» - IY . ...Yllli CwwY A : ' =R 'rOV MO .YEIRGA L RSOM .: - _,�•A .. O[. ..: LI .::..:.RO.tYOYYT........ ................. ::..... _ .... Y[ A »COCK S.r - ... Aw»G SL O ::.CAK -o cR(Q _ RYtLLIG. c.[dr OROA» 1fRWC L.R( fR EYIU'[ a Y.R IY.M Krr. :AnfE »CE '�j� �KO veftLLKIR South St. Paul South Minneapolis -T NA F' QOYLLA( BL-ELI R ARR CYR(R. G.rt[ � Rt. a (fMl[ N.rR[ »fLQ. C(OAR -1 ROCK iRl[R I Yi(.YI LL[ »f,I -QU9 r.t(R[ 0 R.wOOtI 0 10 20 30 CAf [»vAL( OT. A »OOLA Miles AAMSEY Count ST. PAUL City Ll"AfOOD Township 1. SPRING LAKE PARK 1 t. FALCON HEIGHTS 21. NOOOL.ENO 2. COLUMBIA MEK2HT3 12. LILYOAL.E =. WAYZATA S. MLLERNIE M MENOOTA 23. AIRPORT (. 5IRCHN000 IA. SUNFISH LAKE 24. U.S. OOVT. S. PINE SPRINGS 10. SPRING PARK 25. MEOICINE LAKE O. LANOFALL I& MINNETONKA BEACH 2e, ROBBINSOAU! T. MOUNoev1EW IT. MNK 5AY 27 CRYSTAL (. WMRE SEAR rWP t., fxCELdIOR 2=. New HOPE v. OEM LAKE 1[. OREENW000 29. BROOKLYN CE14TER 10. LAUOEAOALC 20, Of EPMAvEN Commissioner introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: HOUSING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 95 -1 RESOLUTION REGARDING CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PARTICIPATION IN THE METROPOLITAN LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act was enacted in June 1995 by the Minnesota Legislature and is an effort to address affordable housing issues facing the seven county metropolitan area; and WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act provides incentives for communities to participate in the act and establish goals and action plans for affordable housing in their communities; and WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council is the implementing agency for the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act; and WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council has urged all cities in the seven county metropolitan area to participate in the Metropolitan politan Livable Communities Act; and WHEREAS, participation in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act is voluntary and cities desiring to participate must pass a resolution expressing their intent to participate by November 15, 1995; and WHEREAS, the Brooklyn Center Housing Commission has been directed by the Brooklyn Center City Council to make a recommendation to the City Council regarding participation in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act; and WHEREAS, the Brooklyn Center Housing Commission has considered the provisions of the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act and has made the following observations: I. It is unclear as to whether or not the "benchmark system" of affordable housing goals, as established by the Metropolitan Council, will have any meaningful impact on the distribution of affordable housing in the metropolitan area. 2. The funding accounts provided as incentives for cities to participate in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act do not provide adequate opportunities or funding levels for maintenance of existing affordable housing. 3. The city index ranges for affordable rental housing for the City of Brooklyn Center seem too low and do not appear to accurately reflect the affordable housing market in Brooklyn Center. They should be reexamined and HOUSING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. evaluated prior to the City approving the housing goals agreement with the Metropolitan Council. 4. The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission understands that the North Metro Mayors Association has been reviewing the potential impact of the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act on its member cities and recommends that the North Metro Mayors Association further examine the potential effects of the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act on member cities and report on their findings, including any recommendations for legislative proposals relative to the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act or other issues relative to housing in the north metro communities. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Housing Advisory Commission of the City of Brooklyn Center as follows: The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission recommends that the City of Brooklyn Center pass a resolution electing to participate in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act with the provision that the four items listed above be addressed by the Brooklyn Center City Council in their approval to participate in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act. • Date Chairperson ATTEST: Deputy Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by commissioner voted in favor thereof: and upon vote being taken thereon, the following and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. • « -11 i Nov Ul) lU 26 No .001 P.02 P RA FT RESOLUTION ON THE METROPOLITAN LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT October 25, 1995 WHEREAS, the North Metro Mayors Association (Association) is comprised of the following cities: Andover Anoka Blaine Brooklyn Center Brooklyn Park Circle Pines Columbia Heights Coon Rapids Crystal Dayton 1-lam Lake Minneapolis New Brighton New Hope Oak Grove Ramsey Robbinsdale Spring Lake Park Mounds View WHEREAS, the North Metro Mayors Association endorsed and urged our legislative delegation to vote for the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act (MLCA); and WHEREAS, the Association and its member cities fully understood that the MLCA did not • provide our cities with the funding needed to deal with problems of deteriorating housing stock and lack of financial resources, much less address metropolitan social and economic imbalance; and WHEREAS, the NMMA and its member cities believed that the MLCA represented an opportunity to spotlight those metropolitan cities lacking affordable housing and prompting them to start addressing the issue; and WHEREAS, the NMMA and its member cities understood the need to address the issue of polluted lands, along with the need to stabilise and revitalize neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, the NMMA and its member cities understood that the MLCA provided limited funding incentives compared with the overall need; and WHEREAS, the NMMA and its member cities supported other legislation, unlikely to be signed by the Governor, that addressed metropolitan liscal and housing needs and metro imbalances; and WHEREAS, the NMMA and its member cities recognized that if any regional legislation had the short-term opportunity to be enacted into law it would be MT,CA, and then only as a first step in addressing regional needs; and W11};REAS, the NMMA and its member cities, many of whom are also members of the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities (AN1M), did advise AMM that they would expect their support for future legislation to address their growing housing rehabilitation needs; and • WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council is charged to administer the MLCA in the metropolitan area, and has developed a set of procedures and criteria to do so; and WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council working under a legislative deadline devised an implementation plan that divided the region by sectors rather than taking a regional approach for MLCA; and WHER 'AS, there has been minimal input from stakeholders on the Metropolitan Council's implementation plan for MLCA; and WHEREAS, the MLCA requires that municipalities must elect whether to participate in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program by November 15, 1995. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the North Metro Mayors Association to recommend that its member cities consider participating in the Local Incentives Account Program administered by the Metropolitan Council, understanding that while the MLCA does not generally address the housing needs of NMMA cities nor the existing social and economic imbalances throughout the metropolitan area, they will participate to demonstrate regional partnership, and further that NMMA shall continue to work to improve the Metropolitan Council's implementation of MLCA and pursue legislation to improve affordable housing throughout the region. C V)ATAwMMA\LPAi.MWteS 1016R.DOC i • LIVABLE COMMUNITIES QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS 1. What is the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act? The Metropolitan Livable Communities Act ( "Act ") was enacted in June 1995 and is the Legislature's attempt to address various issues facing the seven - county metropolitan area. The Act establishes a Metropolitan Livable Communities Fund which consists of three accounts: the Tax Base Revitalization Account; the Livable Communities Demonstration Account; and the Local Housing Incentives Account. Metropolitan municipalities are not required to participate in the programs under the Act, but the Act provides incentives and funding to those municipalities that do participate. r 2. What is the incentive h e to participate. The benefits are clear. Cities, towns and, in some cases, counties have access to resources that will improve their communities and neighborhoods. In addition, the legislation puts local units of govern- ment in the driver's seat. Communities can not only choose whether to participate; they also have flexibility in determining how they're going to use the resources available. 3. What is the incentive to provide lower -cost housing in our community? Affordable housing is an investment in communities and their residents. It fulfills a commitment to young families, single people and older residents that they can find a home they can afford in the com- munity of their choice. 4. What are "affordable" housing and "life- cycle" housing? • Housing is "affordable" if it costs no more than 30 percent of a family's income. For ownership hous- ing this income amount is 80 percent of median, an amount that in 1994 could 9 o Id afford a home costing approximately $115,000. For rental housing this income is 50 percent of median. In 1990 this was approximately $500 per month. "Life- cycle " housing refers to housing available for people at all stages of their lives, offering a choice and variety of housing types and cost to accommodate people's changing needs and preferences as their incomes and circumstances change. 5. What are the affordable and life -cycle housing opportunities amount? The Affordable and Life -Cycle Housing Opportunities Amount ( "ALHOA amount ") is an amount, established by formula in the Act, that a participating municipality must spend to create affordable and life -cycle housing r to maintain existing affordable g and li - e I g f cycle housing. A participating municipality's ALHOA amount is established each year 6. Does the ALHOA amount have to be a property tax levy? No The ALHOA amount can be derived f levy, v or 't fr y, i can be derived om rom another .�" fug source. Regardless of the source of funds for the municipality's ALHOA amount, a participating munici- pality that did not meet its negotiated affordable and life - cycle housing goals, and did not spend 85 percent of its ALHOA amount to create affordable and life - cycle housing opportunities in the previous year, must distribute the entire ALHOA amount to a local housing and redevelopment authority to create affordable and life -cycle housing opportunities in the municipality, or to the Metropolitan Council for distribution through the Local Housing Incentives Program. 7. If my municipality elects by November 15, 1995, to participate in the Local Housing Incen- tives Account Program, must the municipality spend an ALHOA amount in calendar year 1996? No. Because of various timing provisions in the Act, the ALHOA amount requirement does not apply until your municipality's election to participate in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program made by November 15, 1996, for calendar year 1997. 8. If my municipality elects to participate in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program by November 15, 1995, but is unable to agree on housing goals with the Metropolitan Council, • must the municipality participate in the program? No. A municipality is not participating in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program unless nvo conditions have been met: a. The municipals has elected to participate municipality p pate to the program; and b. The Metropolitan Council and the municipality have negotiated and agreed on affordable and life -cycle housing goals for the municipality. If the municipality and the Metropolitan Council do not successfully negotiate housing goals, your municipality may not participate in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program. 9. Must my municipality participate in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program? No. Participation in the program is voluntary, but a municipality that does not participate may at some later time elect to participate in the program. However, a municipality which later elects to participate must establish that it has spent or agrees to spend on affordable and life -cycle housing an amount equivalent to what it would have spent on affordable and life -cycle housing had goals been established for the period in which the municipality was not participating. 0 10. If m municipality h Q . Y p y as met its housing b oats in the previous calendar year, may my mumci- pality participate in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program? Yes. However, your municipality will not be eligible to receive grants from the Local Housing Incentives Account Program i it met it life- cycle s affordable .f ff able and lie c1e housin oats. Your m .f cY g municipality still will be goals. tY eligible for grants and loans under the Livable Communities Demonstration Account and Tax Base Revitalization Account programs. 11. What if my municipality chooses not to participate in the Local Housing incentives Ac- count Program? Municipalities that elect not to participate in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program are not eligible to participate in the Tax Base Revitalization Account and Livable Communities Demonstration Account programs under the Act. The Metropolitan Council is required by the Act to take into account your municipality's participation in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program when making • discretionary funding decisions. In addition, your municipality will not be eligible to apply for funds under the Department of Trade and Economic Development's polluted sites clean -up program if your municipality is not participating in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program. 12. If my municipality elects to Q Account Program, artici ate in the Local Hou ' P P sin Incentives b but does not have the capacity to create additional affordable and life- cycle housing opportunities, can my municipality give its ALHOA amounts to other municipalities to meet negotiated housing goals? Yes. A municipality that has negotiated housing goals, but might not have adequate resources to create or maintain affordable and life -cycle housing opportunities still could be considered a participating mu- nicipality. However, the municipality would be required to distribute its ALHOA amount to the Metro- politan Council for distribution to other participating municipalities or distribute its ALHOA amount to a local housing and redevelopment authority for creating affordable and life -cycle housing opportunities within the municipality. The Act permits municipalities to enter into agreements with adjacent municipali- ties to cooperatively provide affordable and life -cycle housing. The Metropolitan Council will work with municipalities to help municipalities create affordable and life -cycle housing opportunities and avail themselves of the incentives and funding available under the Act and from other sources. 13. If my municipality is using local resources to make payments on a mortgage for an afford- , able or life -cycle housing opportunity created prior to the Act, can these resources count toward expenditures of the municipality's ALHOA amount? Yes. As long as the use of the funds is directly related to your municipality's efforts to meet its afford- able and life -cycle housing goals, these local resources can be considered an expenditure of ALHOA amounts. 14. Are the goals for affordable and life -cycle housing, as proposed by the Metropolitan Coun- cil, achievable? The goals proposed by the Metropolitan Council are intended to be "long- term" goals. Your munici- pality will establish an action plan that identifies the steps your municipality intends to take to move toward its long -range goals. Beginning in 1998, your municipality's annual progress in meeting its negotiated affordable and life- cyclehousing goals will be measured against the annual goals your municipality sets forth its action plan. Progress toward the goals will depend on private marketplace efforts, the availability of affordable and life -cycle housing resources and the use of local controls to • create an environment to meet goals. 15. Do the Metropolitan Council and a municipality negotiate and set housing goals annually? No. The Act envisions negotiated housing goals as a one -time process. That is why the goals are long term in nature. The Metropolitan Council will propose affordable and life -cycle housing goals that encourage your municipality to address key housing benchmarks. 16. After the Metropolitan Council and a municipality negotiate and set affordable and life - cycle housing goals for the municipality, what happens next? The municipality must prepare an action plan that describes how it intends to meet its negotiated goals. The municipality h as until June 30, 1996, to submit the action plan to the Metropolitan Council. 17. Does the Metropolitan Council have to approve the action plan? The Act does not require the Metropolitan Council to approve a municipality's action plan. However, the Metropolitan Council will comment on the plan's content in relation to the negotiated goals that have been established, and it will attempt to identify potential resources available to the municipality to help the municipality meet its negotiated affordable and life -cycle housing goals. 18. What should the action plan look like? The suggested format will be modeled after the one used for the housing element of your comprehensive plan. i J 1 0 ONE How to Open Doors to Affordable Housing Many factors affect the production and cost of housing. Some ways local governments can provide more affordable housing in their communities are: Findin opportunities in land -use ordinances, fees or administrative processes to reduce the purchase price or cost of r_ew or rehabilitated housing. Authority for land -use regulation is provided to local governments in order to protect the public health, safety and welfare. Land use regulations also protect against inappropriate land use and safeguard the natural environment. Adhering to land -use objectives helps keep development costs down and allows for housing opportunities for all residents. Local governments can impose fees and exactions to recoup the costs of development. When used appropriately, this mechanism helps cities recover public costs associated with development. Review and approval processes involving subdivisions, building permits, sewer and water facilities and environmental impacts are necessary. However, short, succinct and uncomplicated procedures can help keep the cost of development down. Linking up with the financial resources to get affordable housing built: The funding environment for affordable housing has changed dramatically over the last decade. During the 1970s and early 1980s, housing was easier to produce because federal finds, such as those from the Section 8 New Construction program, were available. In addition, a favorable tax climate provided incentives for developers to produce affordable housing. Today, with most federal funding no longer available, affordable housing requires combining public and private finds in com- plex housing deals. To plan and produce affordable units, local governments need to seek out and use the fman- cial tools that are available today. Using land -use ordinances or other means to locate affordable, life -cycle housing near employment concentra- tions, or link people who live in a distant locale to jobs. Access to affordable housing in the community of their choice is a shared value of many metro area residents. Many also prefer to work in or near the community in which they live. Unfortunately, many residents are denied the option because affordable housing is not available near their place of employment or they aren t qualified for the jobs near their homes. In addition, getting to and from job sites is often a roblem due o inadequate transportation services. Providin access to employment, whether throu location of affordable housing or transportation services, is a vital link to a healthy regional — and local — economy. Educating residents on housing ssues to build commu su ort or p roposed housing developments. g �1' PP f P P g P Opposition to affordable housing by prospective neighbors and other city residents is often based on misinformation and fears. Residents may express opposition to specific types of housing, to changes in the character of the com- munity, to certain levels of growth, to any and all development, or to economic, racial or ethnic diversity. A compelling case can be made that the development is, in fact, in the city s best interest. The community needs to make the case. Suggested Actions for Local Governments These actions will help create an environment more conducive to the production of afford S cycle housing, but producing the housing is recoa able and life - �nized for what cal will. It takes resources, it is -- a diff cult task. It requires oliti- an d which have dwindled P � in meet the needs of assisted families. It takes expertise, clude not only money but support services to The Council will worm with local governments in a partnership to meet the goal of more life -cycle housing in the region. Some of the factors discussed in this section affordable and control of local government, such as land -use ordinances. In other areas, linkage directly be mneed to e m the resources to get the housing built. The Council will provide assistance to local ove ade with end. g raments tom :d this Finding opportunities in land -use ordinances, fees or administrati r-•-•- . - reduce the purchase price or cost of new or rehabilitated housing. Yew ses to Examples of Local A�ts�., ❑ Reduce required lot sizes. ❑ Encourage zero lot line development or other innovative site planning techniques. ❑ Offer density bonuses for developing at higher densities. ❑ Allow planned unit developme or mixed -use development. ❑ Allow some housing without two -car attached garages. ❑ Reduce surfacing width or depth requirements for residential streets. ❑ Implement flexible land - clearing ordinances that protect the enviro nment and are cost effective. ❑ Allow for a variety of housing Iocal zoning ordinances. mss, including manufactured and accessory housing, thro ❑ Establish criteria that ensure that fees are related and fairy proportioned Y P portioned to the need for facilities and services generated by the proposed development. ❑ Exempt or provide reduced fee schedules for affordable housing. ❑ Impose linkage ordinances which require the developer to pay a fee in housing trust fund, or make equity contributions to low -and moderate- income housing construction into a projects. ❑ Reduce or consolidate reviews by advisory bodies to the municipality s elected council or board. ❑ Implement a simplified permit process. Linking up with thefinancial resources to get affordable housing built. • Examples of Local Action: ❑ Work with the Metropolitan Council staff to make the best use of currently available programs. Identify tools available through the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency and the Department of Housing and urban Development, as well as identify local funds that may be available to develop housing opportu- nities. For more information on these and other programs, call the following organizations: Department of Housing and Urban Development (370 - 3000); Metropolitan Council housing staff (291- 6456); and the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (296- 7608). Communities can make use of such local fiscal initiatives as: • Housing Revenue Bonds *: Tax exempt bonds can be used to fund a multi - family development, providing 20- percent of the units for families at 50- percent of the median regional income. • Tax Increment Financing (TIF): TIF can be used to write down land costs. Restructions also apply. • HOME: This is a federal grant program to rehabilitate existing rental properties. • Community Development Block Grant (CDBG): These funds facilitate the development of affordable housing. r Metropolitan Council uncil Credit Enhancement Program: This program allows HRAs to back their bonds with the Metropolitan Council s AAA credit rating. • Employ Local HRA Levy. ❑ Become informed about available tools and how to use them, and look for ways to provide these opportunities to residents. Seek advice and guidance from the Metropolitan Council, Minnesota Housing Finance Agency, local banks or other experts to link complex programs in order to take full advantage of opportunities. The Minnesota Housing Finance Agency alone offers 16 different home improvements programs, 14 homeownership programs and 17 rental programs. Some of these are as follows: • Low - Income Housing Tax Credits: Offers a 10 -year reduction in tax liability to owners and investors in these categories: eligible low income, new construction, rehab or existing rental housing with rehab. • Housing Trust Fund: Provides funds for development, construction, acquisition, preservation and rehab of low- income rental housing and homeownership. • Affordable Rental Investment Fund: Provides funds for acquiring, rehabilitating or construct in new affordable rental housing. • Community Reinvestment Act Incentive Program (CRAIP): Provides set -aside of mortgage revenue bond funds (below- market interest rate first mortgage financing) to assist local v r lenders in meetin homeownership needs of their communities and their Community Reinvestment Act (CRA). • • Minnesota Communities Program (,MCP): Provides cities with spot loan set - asides of mortgage revenue bond funds (below - market interest rate first mortgage financing) for specialized homeownership projects undertaken to address locally identified housing needs. • Low - and Moderate - Income Rental: Provides for acquisition and rehab or permanent and construction financing for multifamily low- and moderate - income rental housing ( minim um of 5 units). Locating affordable housing near employment concentrations, or using reverse commute programs to link people who live in a distant locale to jobs. Examples of Local Action: ❑ Participate in or create a reverse commute program. ❑ Implement Land -use regulations that promote higher - density, affordable development close to new employment sites or public transportation. ❑ Participate in programs that may target the provision of affordable housing near job sites. • ❑ Partner with local businesses to offer training and re- training opportunities for lower- income households. Educating residents on housing issues to build community support for proposed housing developments. Examples of Local Action: ❑ Prepare materials and programs to educate residents about affordable and life -cycle housing and its benefits to the community. [, Establish housing or human services commissions or task forces to work on affordable_ and life -cycle housing issues. Member introduced the following resolution and • moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ELECTING TO PARTICIPATE IN THE LOCAL HOUSING INCENTIVES ACCOUNT PROGRAM UNDER THE METROPOLITAN LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act (1995 Minnesota Laws Chapter 255) establishes a Metropolitan Livable Communities Fund which is intended to address housing and other development issues facing the metropolitan area, including the number of affordable housing units in each city in the seven county metropolitan area; and WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Livable Communities Fund, comprising the Tax Base Revitalization Account, the Livable Communities Demonstration Account and the Local Housing Incentives Account, is intended to provide certain funding and other assistance to metropolitan area municipalities; and WHEREAS, a metropolitan area municipality is not eligible to receive grants or loans under the Metropolitan Livable Communities Fund or eligible to receive certain polluted sites cleanup funding from the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development • unless the municipality is participating in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program under Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.254; and WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act requires the Metropolitan Council to negotiate with each municipality to establish affordable and life -cycle housing goals for that municipality that are consistent with and promote the policies of the Metropolitan Council as provided in the adopted Metropolitan Development Guide; and WHEREAS, by June 30, 1996, each municipality must identify to the Metropolitan Council the actions the municipality plans to take to meet the established housing goals; and WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council must adopt, by resolution after a public hearing, the negotiated affordable and life -cycle housing goals for each municipality by January 15, 1996; and WHEREAS, a metropolitan area municipality which elects to participate in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program must do so by November 15 of each year; and WHEREAS, for calendar year 1996, a metropolitan area municipality can participate under Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.254, only if (a) the municipality elects to participate in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program by November 15, 1995; (b) the • Metropolitan Council and the municipality successfully negotiate affordable and life -cycle housing goals for the municipality; and (c) by January 15, 1996, the Metropolitan Council adopts by resolution the negotiated affordable and life -cycle housing goals for each municipality. RESOLUTION NO. • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the City of Brooklyn Center hereby elects to participate in the Local Housing Incentive Program under the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act during calendar year 1996; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED as follows: I. The recommendations and observations relative to participation in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act contained in Brooklyn Center Housing Commission Resolution No. 95 -1 are hereby adopted by the Brooklyn Center City Council and are made a part of this resolution. 2. Staff is hereby directed to submit Housing Commission Resolution No. 95 -1 to the Metropolitan Council, along with this Council resolution. 3. The provisions of the resolution titled, 'Resolution on the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act ", prepared by the North Metro Mayors Association and approved by its executive committee are hereby adopted by the Brooklyn Center City Council and are made a part of this resolution. • 4. Staff is hereby directed to submit the North Metro Mayors Association's resolution titled, "Resolution on the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act" to the Metropolitan Council, along with this Council resolution. 5. While electing to participate in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act, the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center believes there is a serious flaw in the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act Program with regard to "creating incentives to preserve and rehabilitate affordable housing in the fully- developed area," which statement is part of the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act. 6. The Brooklyn Center City Council strongly encourages the Metropolitan Council to develop funding programs under the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act which address the preservation and rehabilitation of existing affordable housing in the fully- developed communities, as defined by the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act. is Date Mayor -2- RESOLUTION NO. ATTEST: Deputy Clerk 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. e -3- Council Meeting Date 11/13/ O City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Number h Description: Item Descri P Request For Council Consideration • RESOLUTION APPOINTING AUDITORS FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1995 Department Approval: Charlie Hansen, Financ ector Manager's Review /Recommendation: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: Passage of the attached resolution. Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached Yes ) • In 1987, the City began using the firm of Deloitte & Touche for audit services. A series of multi -year contracts extended these services through the audit of the year 1993. The City Council directed that a requests for proposals be solicited from other auditing firms. An audit committee composed of Financial Commission members and staff members was formed in the summer of 1994 and reviewed proposals from six firms. The committee recommended that the City continue to receive services from Deloitte & Touche. This recommendation was accepted by the City Council and a three year extension was entered into with Deloitte & Touche. The extension provides that fees for the service can increase at no more than the rate of inflation. If the City Council were dissatisfied with the service, they could break the agreement before the start of work for an audit year, but doing so this late in the fall would make it difficult to line up another audit firm for the audit of the year ended December 31, 1995. Based on factors known to staff, Deloitte & Touche is doing excellent work, and we recommend continuing their service. �b • Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPOINTING AUDITORS FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1995 WHEREAS, Section 7.01 of the City Charter provides that the City Council shall have full authority over the financial affairs of the City, including the conduct of an annual audit; and WHEREAS, the City Council has contracted with the firm Deloitte and Touche for the conduct of these audits for the years 1987 through 1994; and WHEREAS, the City Council appointed an Audit Committee to conduct a request for proposal process in 1994 and they have recommended that Deloitte & Touche LLP be retained as the City's auditor for another three years; and WHEREAS, Deloitte and Touche has submitted a proposal to audit the City for the year 1995 at a fee of $26,600. • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that Deloitte and Touche be appointed to conduct the City audit for the year 1995 at a fee of $26,600. Date Mayor ATTEST: Deputy Clerk 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. • Deloifte & • Touche LL /\ 400 One Financial Plaza Telephone: (612) 397 -4000 120 South Sixth Street Facsimile: (612) 397 -4450 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 -1844 October 16, 1995 The City Manager and Members of the City Council City of Brooklyn Center Brooklyn Center, Minnesota Dear City Manager er and Council Members: In connection with your appointment of auditors for the City of Brooklyn Center (the City) for the fiscal year ending December 31, 1995, we are pleased to provide you with the following information regarding our services as your independent auditors. Mr. Cliff Hoffman will be the partner in charge of all work we perform for you. We believe that frequent and timely communication throughout the year reduces the problems that are often associated with an annual audit. In addition, we have found that we can often assist clients on the current problems as they arise. Hence, we hope that you will call Mr. Hoffman whenever you feel that he can be of assistance. • This letter sets forth our understanding of the terms and objectives of our engagement, the nature and scope of the services we will provide, and the related fee arrangements. We will audit the City's: • General purpose financial statements as of and for the year ending December 31, 1995 • Schedule of federal financial assistance • Compliance with laws and regulations related to federal financial assistance Our audit will be conducted in accordance with the following standards: • Generally accepted auditing standards • Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States • Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A -128, Audits of State and Local Governments, dated April 12, 1985 The objective of an audit carried out in accordance with these standards and regulations is (i) the expression of our opinion concerning hether the general purpose financial i ncial statements resent fairly, b P rP P Y> in all material respects, the financial position, results of operations, and cash flows of the organization in conformity with • generally accepted accounting principles; (ii) the expression of our opinion concerning whether the schedule of federal financial assistance is presented fairly in relation to the financial statements taken as a whole; Delo teTouche Tohmabla International The City Manager and Members of the City Council City of Brooklyn n Center October 16, 1995 Page 2 (iii) the reporting on our determination on whether the internal control structure provides reasonable assurance of compliance with federal and other laws and regulations; and (iv) the expression of an opinion on whether the organization complied with specific terms and conditions of its major federal award programs. Our audit will include tests of the accounting records of the City and such other procedures as we consider necessary to enable us to render the following reports: • Report on the City's general purpose financial statements prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles • Report on the internal control structure related to our audit of the general purpose financial statements • Report on compliance with laws and regulations related to audited general purpose financial statements • Report on the schedule of federal financial assistance • Report on the internal control structure used in administering major federal awards • Report on compliance the major federal awards identified in the • ance w e specific requirements related to J schedule of federal awards • Report on compliance with general requirements of federal awards In addition, we will render a report on findings and questioned costs, as required, depending on the results of our audit procedures. The management of the City is responsible for establishing and maintaining an internal control structure. To fulfill this responsibility, estimates and judgments by management are required to assess the expected benefits and related costs for the internal control structure to provide management with reasonable, but not absolute, assurance that assets are safeguarded against loss from unauthorized use or disposition and that transactions are executed in accordance with management's authorization and recorded properly to permit the preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. Because of inherent limitations in any internal control structure, errors or irregularities may nevertheless occur and not be detected. Also, projection of any evaluation of the structure to future periods is subject to the risk that procedures may become inadequate because of changes in conditions or that the effectiveness of the design and operation of policies and procedures may deteriorate. As part of our audit, we will consider the City's internal control structure and assess control risk, as required by generally accepted auditing standards, for the purpose of establishing a basis for determining the nature, timing, and extent of auditing procedures necessary for expressing our opinion concerning the general purpose financial statements, and not to provide assurance on the internal control structure. The report on our • understanding of the City's internal control structure and the assessment of control risk made as part of the general purpose financial statement audit will include (1) the scope of our work in obtaining an understanding of the internal control structure and in assessing the control risk; (2) the City's significant internal controls or The City Manager and Members of the City Council City of Brooklyn Center October 16, 1995 Page 3 control structure, including the controls established to ensure compliance with laws and regulations that have a material impact on the general purpose financial statements; and (3) the reportable conditions, including the identification of material weaknesses identified as a result of our work in understanding and assessing the control risk. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the general purpose financial statements and the schedule of federal financial assistance; therefore, our audit will involve judgment about the number of transactions to be examined and the areas to be tested. Also, we will plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the general purpose financial statements are free of material misstatement. However, because of the concept of reasonable assurance and because we will not perform a detailed examination of all transactions, there is a risk that material errors, irregularities, or illegal acts, including fraud or defalcations, may exist and not be detected by us. Management is also responsible for compliance with laws, regulations, contracts, and grants and for establishing and maintaining an internal control structure to assure such compliance with federal award requirements. As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the general purpose financial statements are free of r material misstatement, we will erform tests of the City's compliance with certain provisions w p y p p ns of laws, regulations, contracts, and grants. However, our objective is not to provide an opinion on overall compliance with such provisions. As part of our audit of compliance with the general requirements of federal financial assistance and specific q P� requirements of major programs, we will obtain an understanding of the City's internal control structure related to administering major federal financial assistance programs, and we will assess control risk, as required by OMB Circular A -128, for the purpose of establishing the nature, timing, and extent of auditing procedures necessary for expressing our opinion concerning compliance with laws and regulations related to major federal awards and for expressing positive assurance as to items tested and negative assurance as to items not tested for general compliance requirements. As required by OMB Circular A -128, our audit will also include tests of transactions related to federal assistance programs for compliance with applicable laws and regulations. However, because of the concept of reasonable assurance and because we will not perform a detailed examination of all transactions, there is a risk that material errors, irregularities, or illegal acts, including fraud or defalcations, may exist and not be detected by us. We will advise you, however, of any matters of that nature that come to our attention and will include such matters in the reports required for an audit in accordance with OMB Circular A -128. Our responsibility as auditors is limited to the period covered by our audit and does not extend to matters that arise during any later periods for which we have not been engaged as auditors and for which we have not performed auditing procedures. • I The City Manager and Members ® of the City Council City of Brooklyn Center October 16, 1995 Page 4 Similarly, in performing our audit, we will be aware of the possibility that illegal acts may have occurred. However, it should be recognized that our audit provides no assurance that illegal acts generally will be detected and only reasonable assurance that illegal acts having a direct and material effect on the determination of financial statement amounts will be detected. Our auditing procedures will include tests of documentary evidence supporting the transactions recorded in the accounts and may include tests of the physical existence of inventories and direct confirmation of receivables and certain other assets and liabilities by correspondence with selected individuals, creditors, and financial institutions. We will request written representations from your attorneys as part of the engagement, and they may bill you for responding to this inquiry. It is our understanding that you will provide us with the basic information required for our audit and that you are responsible for the accuracy and completeness of that information. We will advise you about accounting principles and their application and will assist in the preparation of your financial statements, but the responsibility for the financial statements remains with you. This responsibility includes the maintenance of adequate records and related internal control structure policies and procedures, the selection and application of appropriate accounting principles, and the safeguarding of assets. • As required by Government Auditing Standards, we will issue a report on our tests of compliance with applicable laws and regulations related to our audit of the general purpose financial statements and will include a description of all material instances of noncompliance. As required b OMB Circular A -12 r re 8 our report on compliance will contain our opinion on the q Y po City's P P compliance, in all material respects, with the laws and regulations that apply to its federal financial assistance programs. Because, in addition to our report on the general purpose financial statements, the scope of the engagement includes an audit in accordance with Government Auditing Standards and the requirements of OMB Circular A -128, our reports on compliance with laws and regulations, including legal compliance and reports on your systems of internal control, may be accompanied by observations (findings) on your compliance or on your systems of internal control and by a schedule of questioned costs if the results of our audit rocedures require P q such observations or questioned costs. If any observations or findings are reported to you, you must provide a written corrective action plan under the requirements of the OMB Circular A -128. Our audit is not specifically designed and cannot be relied on to disclose all reportable conditions (that is, significant deficiencies in the design or operation of the internal control structure). However, during the audit, if we become aware of such reportable conditions that affect the financial internal control systems or of ways that we believe management practices can be improved, we will communicate them to you in a separate letter. • At the conclusion of the audit, we will request that the City's management provide us with a representation letter that among other things, will confirm management's responsibility for the preparation of the financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles, and the availability of financial • The City Manager and Members of the City Council City of Brooklyn Center October 16, 1995 Page 5 records and related data, the completeness and availability of all minutes of meetings, the absence of irregularities involving management or those employees who have significant roles in the control structure and, further, will confirm management's responsibility for compliance with laws and regulations applicable to federal financial assistance programs. We understand that our reports on the internal control structure, as part of the general purpose financial statement audit and on compliance with laws and regulations, are intended for the information of the City Council, management, and others within the City. As required by Government Auditing Standards and OMB Circular A -128, we will maintain the working papers for a minimum of three years from the date of our reports. These working papers will be made available to representatives of the cognizant audit agency (or its designee), other government audit staffs, and/or the United States General Accounting Office upon their request and after they have properly notified you of their request to review the working papers. As part of our ongoing program of quality control, Deloitte & Touche l.LP provides that: • • The individuals who will be responsible for planning, directing, and reporting on the audit and who will be spending a substantial portion of the hours expended for the audit will have completed a minimum of 24 hours of continuing professional education programs in state and local government accounting, auditing, financial reporting, and related subjects during the two -year period ending December 31, 1995. • As a member of the SEC Practice Section of the AICPA Division for CPA firms, Deloitte & Touche t.t_.P submits to regular peer reviews of our accounting and auditing practice. Prior reviews have culminated in unqualified opinions regarding our quality control system. These reviews do include a representative sample of audits of governmental units performed by Deloitte & Touche u.P. A copy of our most recent peer review report has been included for your reference. Based on our prior year's experience, the fee should not exceed $26,600 for the City (last year's fee plus 2.5% inflation per our 1994 proposal). This estimate is based on anticipated cooperation from your personnel and the assumption that unexpected circumstances will not be encountered during the audit. If significant additional time is necessary, we will discuss it with you and arrive at a new fee estimate before we incur the additional costs. • The City Manager and Members of the City Council City of Brooklyn Center October 16, 1995 Page 6 We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to the City, and we believe this letter accurately summarizes the significant terms of our engagement. If you have any questions, please let us know. If you agree with the terms of our engagement as described in this letter, please sign the enclosed copy and return it to us. Yours truly, Enclosure Accepted on behalf of the City of Brooklyn Center by: Signature • Date = ERNST & YOUNG r 787 Seventh Avenue AF Pnone :12 7 3000 'New fork, New fork 1001 I • To the Partners of Deloitte & Touche We have reviewed the system of quality control for the accounting and auditing practice of Deloitte & Touche (the Firm) in effect for the year ended March 31, 1993. Our review was conducted in conformity with standards for peer reviews promulgated by' the Peer Review Committee of the SEC Practice Section of the AICPA Division for CPA Firms (the Section). We tested compliance with the Firm's quality control policies and procedures at the Firm's National Office and at selected practice offices in the United States and with the membership requirements of the Section to the extent we considered appropriate. These tests included the application of the Firm's policies and procedures on selected accounting and auditing engagements. We tested the supervision and control of portions of engagements performed outside the United States. In performing our review, we have given consideration to the general characteristics of a system of quality control as described in quality control standards issued by the AICPA. Such a system should be appropriately comprehensive and suitably designed in relation to the firm's organizational structure, its policies, and the nature of its practice. Variance in individual performance can affect the decree of compliance with a firm's prescribed quality control policies d f Th d d an procedures. Therefore, aherence to all policies and procedures in eve case ma • P P every y not be possible. As is customary in a peer review, we are issuing a letter under this date that sets forth a comment relating to certain policies and procedures or compliance with them. This matter was not considered to be of sufficient significance to affect the opinion expressed in this report. In our opinion, the system of quality control for the accounting and auditing practice of Deloitte & Touche in effect for the year ended March 31, 1993 met the objectives of quality control standards established by re the AICPA, and was being complied with during the year then provide ended to ide the Firm with 'reasonable asonable assurance of conforming with professional standards. Also, in our opinion, the Firm was in conformity with the membership requirements of the Section in all material respects. I New York, New York November 22, 1993 • Council Meeting Date 11/13/95 3 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Numbe Request For Council Consideration • Item Description: Staff Report Re: Improvement Project Nos. 1996 -01, 02, and 03, Orchard Lane East Street, Storm Drainage, and Utility Improvements Department Approval: C1 Diane Spector, Directo( ` pS Public Services Manager's Review /Recommendation: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: By motion authorize staff to develop a preliminary design for and more detailed information regarding the proposed improvements, present this information to the neighborhood at a neighborhood meeting, and bring this information to the Council for further consideration of an improvement project in this area. • Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached Yes ) On August 14, 1995 by Resolution No. 1995 -182 the City Council directed staff to prepare a preliminary feasibility report regarding the proposed Orchard Lane East street and utility improvements, to conduct a preliminary informational meeting for the neighborhood, and to discuss proposed changes to facilities at Orchard Lane Park with the Park and Recreation Commission. This report provides 1) better information regarding the magnitude of infrastructure needs in the neighborhood; 2) a summary of the informational meeting held Wednesday, November 8; 3) a recommendation from the Park and Recreation Commission regarding Orchard Lane Park for the Council to consider; and 4) ideas being discussed by a working group to coordinate the neighborhood street and utility replacement program with the goals expressed by the Discover the Center campaign. Infrastructure Needs Attached is a copy of City Engineer Scott Brink's brief report regarding infrastructure needs in the neighborhood. This was included in the packet of information which was distributed to the neighborhood with the invitation to the neighborhood meeting. One of our surprising findings is that the condition of the sanitary sewer in the neighborhood is worse than we thought. Our sewer televising shows a majority of the service connections with the mains have been infiltrated with tree roots. This is a common problem with the ungasketed clay tile pipe which was commonly used during • the period this sewer was built. There are numerous cracks and other deficiencies, none of which is overwhelmingly serious. Of more concern is the probability of groundwater infiltration into the sanitary sewer from these root - infiltrated connections. The Metropolitan Council Environmental Service (MCES, formerly MWCC) meters sewage flow at Request For Council Consideration Page 2 various meter stations in the City, and groundwater which infiltrates a sewer pipe is counted as sewage to be processed. Small leaks into the system can add up to significant excess sanitary sewer charges, which increases • everyone's sewer bills. Replacing questionable sanitary sewer pipe has the long -term benefit of eliminating groundwater infiltration and reducing the $1.4 million in sanitary sewage treatment costs the City pays MCES. Based on the televising information, if the Council decides to go ahead with the project, we would recommend replacing a considerable amount of sanitary sewer and service connections. We're still in the process of identifying all the watermain needs. After the preliminary design process, we would have a much better handle on the extent of watermain replacement needed. Regarding storm drainage, we continue to look at options regarding the cost/benefit of a wet pond at Orchard Lane Park. We still have not ruled out the possibility of getting by with a dry pond. In any case, we are still looking at substantial storm sewer improvements, including the construction of an additional trunk storm sewer on 65th Avenue, parallel with the existing trunk storm sewer. Lateral storm sewers would be extended into the neighborhood to relieve street drainage. Cost Until we enter the preliminary design stage, we won't have a better handle on the overall cost of the project; in August we estimated a street improvement cost of $1.6 million for the 4.35 miles of streets in the project area. It is likely the $1,700 street assessment rate for 1995 will have to be increased for 1996, at least for inflation, which would take it to $1,750. A year ago, in reviewing the City's assessment policy, the Council discussed accelerating the assessments to move toward charging an average 40 percent of project cost, rather than 35 percent. At that time, the discussion was to consider moving over three years to $1,700, $1,850, and then $2,000. After the preliminary design is complete, we would have a much better estimate of cost, and can provide the Council with more accurate options for financing. • Summary of Informational Meeting Attached is a summary of the information presented and the types of questions and concerns raised by the neighborhood. We also sent a questionnaire to residents, and have included a summary of that information. A third attachment is a set of brochures which we developed which provides replies to commonly asked questions. About 70 people attended the informational meeting. There were a number of questions and concerns raised about the park and ride, and its possible "spill over" effects on the neighborhood. The pond at the park and ride and the possibility of a pond at Orchard Lane Park were of concern to several residents who questioned their safety. Another issue area was traffic on 65th Avenue. Obviously many were concerned with the cost of the project and the proposed special assessments, especially the not knowing yet what the 1996 assessments would be. Many residents were interested in improving street lighting. Younger residents with families were interested in improving facilities at both Orchard Lane and Marlin parks. Several residents were interested in replacing the playground at Marlin Park. Several residents were interested in adding picnic shelters to one or both parks. One resident suggested adding a glider swing to Orchard Lane Park, similar to the swing in Garden City Park, which might be used by older residents who walk the neighborhood. At the conclusion of the meeting, by an overwhelming show of hands the residents supported going on to the next step, that is the development of preliminary plans and better cost and assessment figures. • Improvements to Orchard Lane Park The Park and Recreation Commission reviewed the proposed improvements to Orchard Lane Park. The Commission's findings were that the proposed improvements would not interfere with the use of the park property for park and recreational purposes, and recommended that the Council consider these improvements. Request For Council Consideration Page 3 Coordinating a "Neighborhood" Improvement • I have organized a working group of staff from engineering, recreation, community development, and the police department to brainstorm ideas for making this a true "neighborhood improvement." These include offering workshops for residents on landscaping their properties; which types of remodelling projects would most add value to their properties; and how to develop a neighborhood organization. We're looking at how better to coordinate neighborhood watch groups; provide more intensive code enforcement; and get information regarding existing programs, services, and statistics out to residents. Summary While several residents of the neighborhood have said they are not interested in proposed street, utility, and park improvements, at the informational meeting most of the residents approved going forward with the preparation of a preliminary design. This preliminary design would include refinement of cost estimates. Following preparation of this information, a second informational meeting would be held. If the Council and neighborhood continues to be interested in street and utility improvements, a public hearing on the proposed improvements would be held, at which the Council would take public comments and make a decision as to whether or not to order the improvements. • • City of Brooklyn Center A great place to start. A great place to stay. October 20, 1995 Dear Resident: You are invited to an informational meeting regarding proposed neighborhood improvements: Wednesday, November 8, 1995 6:30 p.m. Orchard Lane School Cafeteria Noble and 63rd Avenues North Several weeks ago you received a letter saying that your neighborhood was being considered for street, utility, and park improvements in 1996. We have completed a preliminary review of conditions in your neighborhood, and will describe in more detail our findings and our recommendations at this November 8 meeting. When considering a neighborhood improvement project, we go through a process of informational meetings with the neighborhood. After we develop a preliminary design, the City Council holds a formal public hearing at a Council meeting to take public comment and decide if the project should be done. We are still early in the process. At least one more informational meeting will be held before the City Council will decide if it will hold a public hearing to consider the project. • Background As you are aware, Brooklyn Center is a mature, developed city which is entering a phase of redevelopment and renewal. The need to stabilize the condition and value of our neighborhoods is a challenge we all face over the next several years. One of the first challenges is dealing with our aging streets and utilities. Over two thirds of the residential neighborhoods in our community were developed in the 1950's, and the streets are now around 40 years old. The expected life of pavement is 20 years. Through an extensive (and expensive) maintenance program we have extended the life of our streets, but we now need to consider replacing them. Two years ago the City began a program of neighborhood renewal. Neighborhood by neighborhood we are working our way through the, entire city rebuilding or rehabilitating our infrastructure. We are also working to coordinate public works improvements with other programs such as increased code enforcement, and new programs such as landscaping and remodelling workshops. These improvements do include special assessments (in 1995, $1,700 per property for street improvements and $725 for storm drainage improvements). This cost will only get more expensive if we wait to address these needs. It is our hope that by investing in public improvements (streets, utilities, parks, street lighting), private improvements (landscaping, remodelling, driveway replacements), and "social" improvements (eliminating problem properties, resolving traffic • complaints), we can renew a sense of community and neighborhood pride. 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 • City Hall & TDD Number (612) 569 -3300 Recreation and Community Center Phone & TDD Number (612) 569 -3400 • FAX (612) 569 -3494 An Affirmative Action /Equal Opportunities Employer Proposed Improvements Enclosed with this letter are a short report by City Engineer Scott Brink on the findings of our preliminary studies, and some maps showing the proposed project area, and storm drainage and sanitary sewer problems. As you know, the project under consideration is the reconstruction or rehabilitation, as necessary, of all the streets and utilities in the project area, an area which we call Orchard Lane East. For 1997, we propose a similar improvement in the neighborhood to the west of you, from Orchard Lane to the west city limits, an area we call Orchard Lane West. The main reason why we propose improvements in your neighborhood at this time is because of storm drainage needs. As many of you know, there are areas within your neighborhood which suffer flooding during most rainstorms. The storm drainage system for the whole "subwatershed" (the whole area of the City which drains east to Shingle Creek), of which your neighborhood is a part, is inadequate. The pond being constructed at the Park and Ride site is the first step in a whole program of improvements designed to upgrade drainage in the entire central western area of the city. As the Engineer's report briefly points out, in your neighborhood we are looking at adding additional storm sewer or replacing existing pipe with larger pipe, and constructing another detention/treatment pond at Orchard Lane Park. We have also found through sewer televising that the sanitary sewer in your neighborhood suffers from extensive root infiltration. We need to consider replacing the mains, or the problems many of you have with sewer backups will only get worse. Informational Meeting At the meeting on November 8, we will review this information in general, and discuss what kinds of improvements we think are needed. To help us gather more information about the neighborhood, we ask that you take a few minutes to fill out and return the enclosed survey form. This will help us better understand not only the physical problems, but the other types of improvements you would like to see in your neighborhood. Please return it to us by November 8, or bring it with you to the meeting. If you miss that date, or can't come to the meeting, please fill out the form and send it anyway, as this is very valuable information. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to call us in the Engineering Division at 569 -3340. I hope to see you on November 8 at Orchard Lane School in the cafeteria, at 6:30 p.m. Sincerely, Diane Spector DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SERVICES cc: Mayor Kragness and City Council Members INFORMATIONAL REPORT ORCHARD LANE EAST CONDITION ANALYSIS As part of the City-wide improvement program, we utilize a comprehensive analysis of the entire City to determine which neighborhood improvements should occur and when. I have reviewed the infrastructure in the Orchard Lane East area, and offer the following information: The Overall Infrastructure Condition in the Area The majority of the infrastructure (streets and utilities) in your neighborhood are approximately 40 years old and aging. Adequate and reliable infrastructure is paramount in providing for the health, safety, and welfare of all citizens, as well as contributing to the overall stability and quality of life of the neighborhood. Drainage and Storm Sewers Hydraulic studies and a large amount of feedback from residents during heavy rains have indicated that the existing storm sewer and drainage system in this area is not adequate. The City has received numerous calls from residents reporting flooded basements, ponding water in streets and yards, and overall poor drainage during heavier rains. Technical studies have also shown that additional storm sewer and retention ponds should be constructed to help alleviate these problems. The pond presently under construction at the future Park and Ride facility at 65th Avenue North and Brooklyn Boulevard will provide some help in reducing the problem. However, the majority of storm sewer pipes in the neighborhood are still undersized and need to be upgraded. Additional storm sewer pipe and smaller wet and dry ponds proposed at Orchard and Marlin Parks should help to eliminate flooding problems for most heavy rain events. Sanitary Sewers The City has inspected (televised) the sanitary sewer system in your neighborhood. A significant portion of these sewers are aged and showing signs of decay, and infiltration of roots and groundwater. In order to eliminate potential sewer back ups, pipe failures, and property damage, all deteriorated sewer and lateral connections should be identified and replaced. In addition, property owners are encouraged to provide to the City any additional information regarding any specific sewer problems that you may have experienced. The televising inspection has revealed a number of sewer services with root problems at the connection to the main. Water Mains Much of the water main distribution system in your neighborhood is approximately 40 years old and constructed of cast iron pipe. Cast iron pipe typically can experience significant amounts of corrosion and decay over time, and the City hasresponded to many water main failures or "breaks" in this area in recent years. Problem areas need to be identified and replaced to ensure continued water availability, quality, and fire protection. Streets The City utilizes a computerized pavement management system to inventory and program all • streets within the City. Streets are numerically rated according to the amount of surface (pavement) and subsurface distress and condition. The streets within your neighborhood are rated among the lowest in the City in terms of overall condition. The streets are nearing 40 years in age and reaching a condition where normal maintenance practices can no longer be feasible. The streets originally were not constructed to the same standards practiced today, and poor drainage in the area has contributed to the wear and tear induced by traffic and age. As part of this proposed project, the streets should be reconstructed to approximately the same width, with adequate base and structural support. Concrete curb and gutter would also be included to provide for improved drainage and long term durability. Other Infrastructure Neighborhood street improvement programs also provide opportunities for other utilities (Le, Minnegasco, NSP, U.S. West, etc.) to upgrade their facilities in conjunction with the City improvements. At this time, the City is working with these other utilities to identify any problem areas, or facilities in need of replacement. The comprehensive plan shows no new sidewalks or trails for this area, and none are currently proposed in this project. Park Improvements Playground equipment at Orchard Lane Park was recently replaced; the equipment at Marlin Park should be replaced. The proposed relocation of the ball field and skating rink at Orchard Lane Park may mean the shelter should be reconstructed in a new location. Summary While some other streets in the City may appear to be in poorer condition than your particular street, the overall age and condition of most streets in the City are relatively similar. Because of age and continued deterioration of all streets, the amount of maintenance needs have spiraled. Street O maintenance funding allocations have not kept adequate pace with these increased needs and costs. The overall condition of all streets, therefore, continues to decline. Selection of the Orchard East Area as a priority for improvements has also been elevated as a result of the serious drainage and flooding problems experienced in this area. While the storm sewer system is in need of improvement throughout the Ciry, most problems and feedback to the City during very heavy rains comes from the western part of Brooklyn Center, including the Orchard East Area. Because of property damages experienced by flooding, we recognize a responsibility to correct this problem when the opportunity arises. The condition of the sanitary sewer and water main also makes the area a higher priority.. Not only is the condition of the facilities a concern, but excessive groundwater infiltration into the sanitary sewer translates to higher waste water treatment costs for the entire City. Our overall assessment f o the infrastructure and improvement needs in your neighborhood are based upon the best information we have available. - However, as residents of the neighborhood, you may have specific experiences and/or insights and suggestions that we may not be aware o£ Your input is therefore encouraged. In summary, the Orchard East Area was chosen based upon the overall infrastructure needs and priorities in relation to other neighborhoods throughout the Ciry.. In the interest of the City at large and your neighborhood, we believe this is the most prudent and responsible course of action to take at this time. C tt City ---- _ - u � -- ----- 694 6 9 4 66TH. A X , IN � < IFINWESIEA LA. o 65TH AVE N x r z z f CITY ` I 3 64T A N PM1 Q ad R O � DR t Ilk. VTR\ .lz. PFR TELEVISED SANITARY SEWER PROBLEM AREAS J/ AREA OF 3) 08) (47) _ 4 .Bra 1161 NEW POND >s a (45) a 48X W M F� C _ � e As a part of the overall drainage (44) RELOCATED .�[ improvements in the west central 4B 8 = SKATING RINK (42) part of the City, anew storm so{r�r p e n A R water detention/treatment pond at j < •� Orchard Lane Park is being '__ considered. To fit in the pond RUDC'ATED SAT.T.RTFT.Tf (o) (3) with minimal disruption to the (_) 5337 M5 park, the pond could be located[ x� near the freeway wall, and the skating rink located next to it. b The ball field would be relocated in the area now used for skating. 6 ORCHARD LANE The shelter building may need to �'� PARK be relocated, as well as the i asu basketball court. «. . Z PLAYGItOUNJ n " (37) (m asor ssc a y 1 R R sK � mrl 1 m [SII (311 SURVEY This survey will help us better understand needs in your neighborhood. Please return this survey by November 8, 1995. You may also call us at 569 -3340 to talk about these issues. Thank you for your cooperation. ( — � Q Diane Spect r, Director of Public Services 1. Our sewer televising shows a number of sanitary sewer services with moderate to severe root infiltration. Do you think you have a problem with sanitary sewer service, such as having the service cleaned out to the street? How often? Do you have boulevard trees near your service? 2. Our evaluation of the storm drainage system is that it is undersized. Do you have a problem with flooding? In the street, your yard, your basement? 3. What kind of park improvements would you like to see? At Marlin Park, should the playground be replaced? What age of children use the playground? Would picnic shelters be good additions to either park? i 4. There are no midblock street lights on several streets. Do you think overall street lighting needs r g g improved? As art o this project, midblock lights w ould be installed. P .f P J � g S. We have been referring to this project as the "Orchard Lane East" improvement, for lack of anything better to call it. Does the neighborhood have a name for itself that you would prefer? 6. What other concerns do you have? Are there traffic problems? Specific code enforcement needs? What kinds of ideas do you have for neighborhood beautification? Are you interested in workshops on topics such as landscaping, ideas for home remodelling, etc. ? Do you need blockwatch group information? i Should you have questions or need more information, please contact the engineering department at 569 -3340. Your name: Address: • Please return by November 8, 1995 Engineering Department, 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Orchard Lane East Informational Meeting November 8, 1995 6:30 p.m. Orchard Lane School Staff attending: Director of Public Services Diane Spector, City Engineer Scott Brink, Public Services Coordinator Jim Glasoe, Public Works Superintendent Dave Peterson, Senior Engineering Technician Dave Anderson, Community Services Sergeant Dave Grass Residents: Approximately 70 An initial presentation was made covering the general philosophy of the 20 year street improvement program, the Discover the Center campaign, and how neighborhood needs could be addressed combining the two different programs. The preliminary infrastructure findings were presented, along with some cost and assessment information. Sgt. Grass presented some crime statistics which indicated that in his opinion the neighborhood was as safe or safer than most in Brooklyn Center. He also presented information about Block watch groups, and noted that there are none in this area of the City; he hoped to use this opportunity to get some organized. Following a break, the meeting was opened for questions and answers. Questions and concerns raised include the following: : g Concern about traffic problems stemming from the park and ride at 65th and Brooklyn Boulevard. Concern about the safety of ponds, especially the deep one at the park and ride site. Do ponds get stagnant? Are they breeding grounds for mosquitos? Do we need to have curb and gutter? Why can't we continue to patch and sealcoat as we have been doing? What's the difference between wet and dry ponds? Why would you need to make all these changes at Orchard Lane Park? Doesn't the skating rink act as a dry pond now? Just use that. Need to improve street lighting, add midblock lights. Very dark, can't even see to walk over to neighbor's house. Have you given any thought to improved parking at Orchard Lane Park. People are always parking in front of my house. How will contractor maintain driveway access? Concern of storm water piped under the freeway to the vicinity of Orchard Lane Park. Why are we getting other people's water? How much money is the City spending on the park and ride. How do we as residents get a say in what's done? Do we have any alternatives to ponds in parks. Is there a senior citizen special assessment rate? Traffic speed on 65th - can Stop signs be installed? Can power lines be buried underground as part of the project? How can I have my driveway redone at the same time? Can anything be done to alleviate backyard flooding north of 63rd Avenue on Indiana? What will be done to correct sanitary sewer services that have root problems. Will our new infrastructure piping prevent root and water infiltration? Will our quarterly utility rates drop if groundwater infiltration is nearly eliminated? If you're going to do an improvement, please do it right. The Village needs to do something. This is a good community, we need to keep it that way. Thanks for holding the meeting, I had my questions answered. What is happening at the Builder's Square site? At the end of the meeting, Spector reiterated the process for going forward with improvements, and asked for a show of hands on whether the neighborhood thought the City should prepare preliminary plans and better cost estimates. A majority of residents present voted yes, go ahead with preliminary plans. Spector said she would report this to the Council on Monday night. Meeting adjourned just after 9 p.m. Some Sample Comments • Orchard Lane East Initial Survey Garage sale sign codes need to be explained. The code enforcers have one set of rules one time and the next day the signs can be in the same place and it's OK. Orchard Lane Park is used by many children, young ones on the equipment. The ball diamond is used all the time in season - the basketball court is used quite often. If a detention/treatment pond is put in at Orchard Lane Park, it will definitely squeeze out some children. If you're not in organized ball and using the diamond, you will not have a place to play a pickup game. Today, with all the crime, our first concern should be for the kids - not taking away the places they can play. Possibly the treatment pond could be located somewhere else. Picnic table [at Marlin Park] would be nice. We have started a yearly neighborhood party there. Are there codes for number of recreational vehicles or cars parked per household? Workshops on landscaping would be great. Speeding - over 30 still very rampant. What desirable additions to parks would let young families know they are welcomed and valued in our community? We are concerned about traffic on 65th once the park and ride is in use. I'm concerned about the growing number of older people still in their homes and requiring assistance, especially when winter comes and driveways need to be shoveled. Any programs available to assist? What is going to happen to the old Country Store /Builder's Square sites. Can't we attract a Rainbow and some other shops that people in the area, people using the park and ride, even people off the freeway would use! Blockwatch group information would be helpful. No [flooding] problem in our house, but our yard and driveway when it rains is called Lake Eleanor. The sewer drainage is minimal and very slow. Our whole area gets flooded with water. Playground at Marlin Park should be replaced. Picnic shelters I think would be a waste. Maybe a few park benches and picnic tables. Blockwatch group info should be given to all residents. As a resident of Brooklyn Center I feel this area isn't safe anymore. I wonder why more hasn't been done to improve our City. We should be proud of where we live, it unfortunately isn't the case. We are a young couple with 2 kids and we love the area, but not the fear of living here and how things are changing because of crime and violence. Marlin Park should be upgraded. My children are 2 years and 5 months. We now must go • all the way to Orchard Lane Park when there is a facility 1 block away. There is no usable equipment at Marlin Park. The slide steps are in poor repair. Continued parking on streets overnight - even for weeks and months with never a move (extra cars). This has been going on for years in some places, and police do not follow up on these offenders. Why? We think your idea of relocating the rink is stupid - why spend more $'s to relocate away from the playground and shelter. You could move the ball field down to the present rink area and flood it in the winter, like many other cities, e.g. Crystal and Brooklyn Park. When the park and ride opens I hope you will put a Stop sign on 65th at about Kyle to slow down the traffic which is travelling way too fast for this street. Happy with area as it is. Sweep gutter of street more often. I think a good idea for beautification would be an occasional planter along Brooklyn Boulevard or perhaps some flags which extend from the light poles. I would definitely be interested in workshop topics such as landscaping and remodelling. Our street Noble Avenue is a pretty street already, but anything to make it nicer is to our benefit. Enforce speed control on 63rd. Workshop for remodelling. I don't believe curbs are needed in all areas. The areas with main streets that have the traffic possibly should have curbs but not the residents that live on the streets that mostly are travelled by residents living in that area. We have enough lighting now. What we need is to get police out of their air conditioned /heated cars and walking the streets more. s What is the • • Can't we just patch and ... Do we have to have curb and , . , Wh are you in our sealcoat the streets like we have gutter? neighborhood.? - we caii t Neighborhood been doing in the past? have the worst streets in the Improvement Curb and gutter has three major Over two - thirds of Brooklyn Center's benefits:' Program,? residential neighborhoods were built in Certainly some streets are in better the 1950's, making the streets and ■ It prolongs the life of the street. It shape than others. This can be utilities 40 years old. Pavement usually provides a structural edge to the based on the quality lasts about 20 to 30 years, but with street and it prevents vehicles and of initial regular maintenance its life can be trucks from driving over the brittle construction, traffic, he Neighborhood extended to 30 or 40 years. By that edge of the pavement and parking soils, street grades Improvement Program (NIP) is time, the underlying structure of the on the boulevard. and natural drainage, a program to systematically, street has deteriorated, and patching and sealcoatin are band- aids which last ■ and most neighborhood by neighborhood, g " " In a very flat community such as importantly the renew and reinvest in Brooklyn only one or two years. They may Brooklyn Center, it improves freeze -thaw cycle. Center's neighborhoods. The core of improve the appearance of the pavement, neighborhood drainage by directing Streets constructed the program is the rehabilitation and but cracking, breaking, and potholes will storm water flow. Without curb without curb and gutter are replacement as necessary of streets, be more frequent. The end result is an and gutter, storm water pools at the especially vulnerable to the effects utilities, and park facilities. Other unattractive, patch- covered street with edges of streets and seeps under the of the weather. important components include broken edges and rutted corners. roadway. In the spring and the P P Y P g We look at a combination of integrating the infrastructure fall, this water under the pavement things in determining which improvements expands and contracts as it freezes neighborhoods should be improved with ... Cant we wait five or ten and thaws, which makes the in any given year. Our emphasis _®r, programs that years for this improvement? pavement above crack and break during this phase of the overall help residents up. twenty year program is to focus on increase the Certainly, if the neighborhood and the neighborhoods which have values of their properties and renew City determine that would be best. ■ It improves the appearance of a significant utility needs, especially their sense of neighborhood pride and However, understand that because neighborhood giving it a neat and storm drainage needs. community: remodeling and construction costs increase every year, it finished look. Boulevards are landscaping workshops; increased will be more expensive five or ten years easier to maintain, and cars cannot code enforcement; improved street from now. In the interim, we will be doing drive over the edges of corners. lighting; and expanded neighborhood less sealcoating and intensive street watch programs. maintenance such as overlays, to try to The cost of curb and gutter is very keep down the increasing cost of maintenance. This means the streets will small compared to the benefit deteriorate even more rapidly. The bottom received. On an 80 foot lot, only $140 line is not if the streets need rehabilitation, of the $1,700 (1995 rate) assessment it's when. was for curb and gutter. ... do the proposed ... Wh am I being assessed ... W hat is the Pavement improvements have to cost for storm dra ina g e w no Management Program? me anything? Why am I storm sewer is being ? The Pavemen M bein assessed? constructed in front o� m t ana ram Management Pro s g g g Y h ouse . ? (PMP) is two things: a computer program Streets octal assessments recover which uses data about the structure of the P To keep he cost of the storm drainage e g about 35 st reet to come u with an index number percent of the cost f h P p o th street improvements as low as possible, we use -NEIGHBORHOOD improvements, with the other 65 percent showing how good or bad the street is; the combination of reconstruction of paid for by general obligation bonds. streets to proper grades, installation of and the use of that IMPROVEMENT These bonds are paid off through the computer program to curb and gutter, and installation of storm PROGRAM general property tax levy. Water and guide pavement sanitary sewer work are not assessed sewer pipe and catch basins to provide maintenance decisions. We because those utilities have a construction adequate drainage to an entire area. A private engineering could install storm sewer pipe and catch fund set aside for this. basins up and down each street, but that firm studied every street The Storm Drainage , }' . in the City. Information Utility is too new to ;_ is the most expensive solution. Your about the surface, including the amount, have built up much of property is receiving the same storm location, and type of surface distresses a construction fund. drainage improvement as it would if a such as cracking and potholing was Some of the storm storm sewer were in front of your house, recorded and entered in the PMP. Special drainage improvements, those which have but at a less expensive cost. The City's equipment was used to evaluate the C a regional or City-wide benefit, are current policy is that 35 percent of the subsurface. The surface and subsurface rL funded entirely by the Storm Drainage cost of storm drainage improvements is information was used to calculate a ' Utility. assessed, with the Storm Drainage Utility "Pavement Condition Index" (PCI) 1&1�- There are very few options for paying paying the other 65 percent. number for each street segment. 13JU am.. for street improvements. One is by About 40 miles of the just over 80 miles referendum, where taxpayers vote to sell of residential streets should be bonds to pay for street improvements. reconstructed based on their conditions State laws do allow cities to about seniors li ving g o sell bonds to today, and the other 40 miles can still pay for street improvements without a on a fixed income, or young benefit from sealeoating. referendum, but only if a portion of the families? They can't affor costs of those improvements are assessed. Another alternative would be to levy these assessments. additional property taxes to create an To help those property owners who have "Infrastructure Replacement Fund." trouble paying their assessments, the City However, to meet the needs of our aging Council created the Assessment street system, we would have to levy at Stabilization Program. Eligible property City of Brooklyn Center owners can apply for rant based on Department of Public Services least an additional $1 million per year pP y f grant Engineering Division for the next 20 years. This compares to income and family size) to help pay some 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway City of Brooklyn Center our current levy of about $6.3 million, or of the cost of the assessment. Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 A great place to start. A great place to stay. t a 16 percent increase in property taxes. (612) 569 -3340 How long would All this machinery and the Will I lose boulevard trees? construction last, and what open trenches would be a can I expect? safety hazard for children, Today we do not allow trees to be planted as close to the edge of the street wouldn't it? as many trees in this and other neighborhoods are. A few trees which are very close (within 2 -3 feet) to the oise, dirt, and inconvenience hildren are attracted to edge of the street may not survive the for most of the summer. construction machinery, and construction. Some trees are very close Generally, construction enjoy watching construction to sanitary sewer services; these will be begins about the end of May or work. The construction crews are very evaluated case by case to see if the beginning of June and lasts through safety conscious, and do their best to service can be rerouted or if the tree most of September. Construction is keep would best be removed. often staged so that it starts in one part hazardous In general, it is our philosophy to of the neighborhood and moves areas to a preserve trees wherever possible. If through, so if you live in the last part of minimum. there is some question about a tree on the neighborhood to be improved, your Trenches are the boulevard, we will discuss options street may not be torn up until August. not allowed with you before any decision is made. We do try to maintain a reasonable to be open overnight, for example, and If a tree has to be removed, we will drivable surface through construction, we encourage the contractors to backfill provide you with one or two and do not allow any open trenches areas as they are completed, rather than replacement overnight or over the weekend. When at the end of the day. Parents, too, trees to plant your driveway apron is replaced, you have to do their part and stress to elsewhere in children that they can watch but they your front yard. will not be able to use your driveway for about three days while the concrete must keep their distance from In no case will cures, and if there is utility trench work construction areas. a tree be in front of your house you may not be removed just able to get in and out of the driveway because it doesn't meet our new tree during that day. ordinance standards for distance to the edge of the street. 'What will Happen with my What about the other sanitary sewer and water utilities? services? We work closely with other utilities If our sewer televising or field 'What y ou sho kno such as Minnegasco, NSP, and King conditions show your service needs to be Videocable. They usually take the replaced, we will replace the service to the opportunity of a street construction property line, at no cost to you. If you About project to do any replacements or have had a history of sewer problems, maintenance of their own facilities. such as having your service cleaned Street frequently, we will field review the service, and plan on replacing the service Construction to the property line, again at no cost to you. If you have had past problems, it is What will Happen with my important that you let us know so we can Proj ects driveway? indicate on construction plan sheets that this service should be reviewed and The apron on every driveway will be replaced if necessary. replaced with a concrete apron and drive to the property line. If we have to How will street lighting be and r more of our d? tear u }. P p Y improve driveway to match grades, the reconstructed section will be replaced, We will be replacing all existing street at no cost to lighting with a more attractive pole and you, with the light fixture. Where residents desire same kind of ®® ® ® � midblock lighting, additional lighting will driveway as be installed if the adjoining property existing. owners agree to allow it, or if the majority Driveway aprons will be replaced at of residents on the street support its existing width, except that the minimum installation. width will be 12 feet, and the maximum Cit of Brooklyn center 24 feet. Department of Public Services Engineering Division 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway City of Brooklyn Center Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 A great place to start A great place to stay. (612) 569 -3340 Council Meeting Date City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Number U Request For Council Consideration Item Description: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1996 GENERAL FUND BUDGET AND THE CENTRAL GARAGE BUDGET AND AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF FIVE (5) SQUAD CARS Department Approval:: Scott Kline, Chief of Police Manager's Review /Recommendation: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: Approval of Resolution Amending the 1996 General Fund Budget and the Central Garage Budget and Authorizing the Purchase of Five (5) Squad Cars Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached An appropriation in the amount of $94,100 ($18,820 per car) was approved in the 1996 central garage budget for purchase of five squad cars for the police department. Since the City of Brooklyn Center is a member of the Hennepin County Cooperative Purchasing Group and the Minnesota Cooperative Purchasing Venture, the City can purchase squad cars from the contracts of these organizations. Both organizations advertised for bids for squad cars, Hennepin County received the lower bid, and Hennepin County awarded the contract to Superior Ford. The bid price for each squad car is $18,897 which is $835 more than was budgeted in the City's 1996 budget for each squad car. The cost of five squad cars using the Hennepin County contract would be $94,935. The City has been notified by Superior Ford that the Ford Motor Company is requiring all squad orders to be made before November 15, 1995 for 1996 squads in order to ensure guaranteed delivery. This mandates the fact that the order must be made now even though the delivery date will 'be in the Spring of 1996. The squads, like all other City Vehicles, are owned and maintained by the Central Garage Fund. Departments that use the vehicles pay a rental fee to the Central Garage which covers the depreciation, fuel, maintenance, insurance, and any other cost of the vehicle. When a vehicle needs replacement, the Central Garage should have accumulated enough cash to pay for the purchase of the replacement • vehicle. This may not be true due to inflation or a switch to a larger or more capable model. In those instances, the departments using the vehicle must budget for the increased purchase cost so that the Central Garage doesn't start out a new vehicle with a funding deficit. • CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS The proposal requires an increase in the 1996 general fund apropriation by $835 to be paid from the contingency appropriation. The balance ($94,100) is from the appropriation in the Central Garage Fund. To achieve the savings it is strongly recommended the purchase be approved. • • • Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1996 GENERAL FUND BUDGET AND THE CENTRAL GARAGE BUDGET AND AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF FIVE (5) SQUAD CARS WHEREAS, an appropriation of $94,100 was approved in the 1996 Central Garage Budget for the purchase of five squad cars; and WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center is a member of both the Hennepin County Cooperative Purchasing Group and the Minnesota Cooperative Purchasing Venture; and WHEREAS, the Hennepin County Cooperative Purchasing Group and the Minnesota Cooperative Purchasing Venture each have contracts for squad cars which the City could take part in thereby eliminating the need for the formal advertising and bidding process; and j WHEREAS, the Hennepin County Cooperative Purchasing Group received the lowest bid and has awarded such bid to Superior Ford at a cost of $18,987 per vehicle; and • WHEREAS, Section 7.09 of the City Charter of the City of Brooklyn Center provides for a contingency appropriation as a part of the General Fund Budget and further provides the contingency appropriation may be transferred to any other appropriation by the City Council; and WHEREAS, operating procedures adopted for the Central Garage fund require that when the purchase cost of a new vehicle exceeds the funds on hand for the purchase, the department using the vehicle must make up the shortfall as part of its budget. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that: 1. the 1996 Central Garage Budget is amended to increase the revenues for replacement charges and the appropriation for the purchase of five squad cars by $835. 2. the 1996 General Fund Budget is amended to increase the appropriation for Police Department capital outlay by $835. y 3. the 1996 General Fund Budget is amended to decrease the appropriation for Unallocated Department contingency account by $835. • 4. the purchase of five squad cars from Superior Ford using the Hennepin County Cooperative Purchasing Group contract in the amount of $94,935 is hereby approved. RESOLUTION NO. Date Mayor ATTEST: Deputy Clerk 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. • SUPERIOR Ile* FAX FLEET & GOVERNMENT SALES DEPARTMENT xfl� 9700 56TH AVE. N0. -- a PLYMOUTH, MN 55442 OF PAGES SENT P14ON£ 612- 559 -9111 FAX 512 -559 -5950 TO: DATE �l ATTN PHONE FAX YEAR 19 96 MODEL CROWN VICTORIA POLICE INTERCEPTOR COLOR -EXT iNT OPTION PRICE LIST i OPTION: ADD /OR /DELETE VINYL REAR SEAT 65.00 RUBBER FLOOR 25.00 LH SPOTLIGHT DELETE (135.00) DELETE A8S BRAKES /ADD TRACTION LOK AXLE (450.00) SP BENCH SEAT IN LIEU OF on nn .. Hr�w+ ST EREO tKirQ CASSETTE 185.00 MAP LIGHT - HEADER MOUNTED 33.00 CARPET FLOOR MATS FRONT & REAR 45.00 UNDER DECKLID L IGHTS - 4" RED LAMPS .141.00 MULTIPLE UNITS KEYED ALIKE - SINGLE KEY SYSTEM 35.04 DELETE BLOCK HEATER (20.00) / 'DELIVERY AVAILABLE - CALL FOR PRICE TOTAL $ TRADE ALLOWANCE - UNIT,$ YR MAKE /MODEL VIN + +ILEAGE THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITI—T THIS QUOTATION. o -L CALL IF YOU HAY QUESTIONS. TOTAL NET SALE AX. A LICENSE NOT l W - U ED 3ILL STUART OR CAROL HENDRICKSON, FLEET MANAGERS cgs TOTAL P.02 Council Meeting Date 1 31 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda Item Number O C Request For Council Consideration Item Description: Discussion Regarding Comprehensive Plan Update /Request for Proposal Department Approval: Q &4 G. Brad Hoffman, Community Develo men ector Manager's Review /Recommendation: , No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: • Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached Yes ) In the 1995 budget, the Council set aside money ($40,000) for updating the city's Comprehensive Plan. The updating of the plan is mandated by statute and must be completed by December 31, 1998. The new law represents a fundamental change in the relationship between zoning laws and the Comprehensive Plan. Previously, conflicts between the Comprehensive Plan and the zoning ordinances were resolved in favor of the zoning ordinances. The new requirements or mandates require our zoning ordinance to be in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, or a reverse of this previous position. As a practical matter, the comprehensive plan is the fundamental guide for the development of a community. It should be periodically reviewed and updated to assure that it still meets the needs of the community. In the past, comprehensive plans have been very technically oriented. Because of such orientation, they are often confusing and difficult for the general public to comprehend their impact or relationship to development within the community. In recent years there has been a trend in comprehensive plans to a more "user friendly" concept. Some communities have had vision statements where goals are defined or identified and the comprehensive plan flows from such goals towards their achievement. The year 2000 Statement or the current work of the "Discover the Center" campaign identify such goals. If reducing crime is a goal, then the comprehensive plan would identify elements in housing, streets, lighting, parks and so forth that, when implemented, help achieve the goal. In essence, the Comprehensive Plan would be divided along goals instead of elements such as housing. Monday evening, I would recommend the Council approve the attached draft request for qualifications. • The RFQ, if approved, would be sent out by November 15 with a recommendation by the first meeting in December for Council approval. Based upon the qualifications of the firm, Brooklyn Center would select a consultant and negotiate a specific contract for updating the Comprehensive Plan. The elements to be addressed, outside of those mandated by law and the format, would be subject to Council approval. Ron Warren and I will be available Monday evening to further discuss this matter. Request for Qualifications City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan Update Due Date: December 1, 1995 The City of Brooklyn Center is seeking Statements of Qualifications for the purpose of updating its 1979 Comprehensive Plan. The updated plan must meet the Metropolitan Council's statutory requirements, including compliance with Metropolitan Systems Statements and consistency with City zoning. The plan should take a strategic approach toward future development and redevelopment, and should also address the following specific issues: • development of a coordinated neighborhood improvement program, to include evaluation and replacement of existing infrastructure; • evaluation of existing housing stock and strategies for redevelopment and rehabilitation; • revision of land use regulations; • community image and strategies for enhancing it; • demographic change and other issues typical of a mature suburb; • public involvement and communication. The Planning Commission will oversee development of the plan and City staff will provide some assistance. Please submit 10 copies of a Statement of Qualifications, including the following elements: I . Identify firms) submitting proposal, including prime consultant and any subconsultants. 2. Identify project team, including Project Manager and other team members, supplying both a full resume and a summary resume for each, with emphasis on related experience. 3. Firm's experience and qualifications: provide an overview of the firm's experience and a more detailed summary of related experience. 4. References: supply at Ieast 3 references for previous work related to this proposal, including name and phone number of a contact person and the name of the project to which the reference pertains. All materials should be submitted to: Brad Hoffman Community Development Director City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 by December 1, 1995. If you have any questions regarding this RF g g Q, please contact Mr. Hoffman at 569 -3300. Council Meeting Date 11/13/95 3 City of Brooklyn Center Agenda hem xumber Request For Council Consideration • Item Description: Consideration of Labor Agreements with Teamsters Contracts for Department Heads /Supervisors and Confidential Employees with the City of Brooklyn Center Department Approval: Cam Andre, Interim City Manager Manager's Review/Recommendation: No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached Recommended City Council Action: Motion to approve the agreement Summary Explanation: (supporting documentation attached K The City f Brooklyn ty y Center has recently completed negotiations with Teamster on labor agreements for Department Heads /Supervisors and Confidential Employees for 1996 -1997. After lengthy negotiations by Pam Galanter of Frank Maddens office and myself we have an agreement on the contracts. Pam will be present Monday evening to discuss the Contracts with you. We have negotiated in good faith and ask that the Council approve the contracts. • Memorandum To: Mayor and Councilmembers From: Cam Andre, Interim City Manager Pamela R. Galanter, Labor Relations Consultant Date: November 9, 1995 Subject: 1996 -97 Department Head /Supervisory Unit Contract 1996 -97 Confidential /Supervisory Employee Unit Contract i We have just completed negotiations with the two new bargaining units of Department Hems /Supervisory employees and Confidential /Supervisory employees for contracts for 1996 and 1997. Both are initial contracts, and the negotiated agreements are the same except where noted in the summary below. Recommendations are as follows: 1. Article 1. Purpose of Agreement Standard language consistent with the Local 49 and LEIS contracts. 2. Article II. Recoenition Standard language consistent with the BMS certification of each of the bargaining units. 3. Article III. Definitions Standard definitions of terms, including a one year probationary period for all employees hired on or after January 1, 1996. 4. Article IV, Employer Authority Standard language consistent with the Local 49 and LELS contracts. S. Article V. Union Srcu, city Standard contract language relating to dues deductions, designation of union stewards, use of bulletin boards, etc. 6. Article VL EmolQyccRRihts- Grievance Procne • Procedure similar to that contained in both the Local 49 and LEIS contracts, with addition of an optional grievance mediation step to be used by mutual agreement of the parties. 7. Article VI . Saving ,lau e Standard contract language essentially identical to language in Local 49 and LELS contracts. 8. Article _VIIL_- Discipline Contract language similar to the other City collective bargaining agreements, providing for discipline of employees after completion of probationary period for just cause, disciplinary actions to be in writing, and removal of written reprimands after 24 months if there has been no same or similar offense. 9. Article IX. Salarics Wages 1996 and 1997: A 3.0% increase for 1996 consistent with the negotiated settlement with Local 49 for 1996. For 1997, a 3.2% increase. The 1996 across the board increases are based on the current 1995 Pay Plan salary schedules for employees in the Department Head unit and for the Assistant City Manager. For the Administrative Assistant /Deputy City Clerk, we agreed to an upgrade from the C12 to the C21 pay grade in the 1995 Pay Plan, and a 3.0% increase in 1996 on the C21 salary schedule in the 1995 Pay Plan. For the Administration Secretary /Deputy City Clerk, we agreed to an upgrade from the D21 to the D27 salary range, and a 3.0 increase in 1996 on the D27 salary schedule in the 1995 Pay Plan. These upgrades were arrived at consistent with the manner in which they have been determined in the past for other job classifications. This Article also includes language regarding merit pay similar to the provision in the 1995 Pay Plan - 10. Article X. Sick Leave Language regarding eligibility, usage, accrual and the procedures for sick leave are the same as the provisions of the Administrative Code. Language was also negotiated providing for payment of 50 of accumulated sick leave to a full-time employee who is laid off, and 33 of sick leave to a full-time employee who retires from City employment. i 2 11. Article Xi_ Jury Dulyf Court Appearance Negotiated language is consistent with the provision in the Administrative Code. 12. La. Language is similar to the 1995 Severance Benefits for Laid -Off Employees Program included as Schedule L of the 1995 Pay Plan. Some modifications were negotiated, including a 60 calendar day written notice prior to layoff, payment to the laid off employee of a sum equal to 25 of the last approved annual salary, and outplacement services of $2,500. 13. Article XII Holidays The same holidays are included as are granted to other employees, with language consistent with the Local 49 and LELS contract. An additional provision was negotiated providing that an employee will have the option to work a holiday in exchange for a floating holiday with the approval of the City Manager. 14. Article MV. Vacation The vacation schedule and the language of this article are similar to this benefit for other City employees. A modification was negotiated in the maximum accrual, establishing it at 230 hours rather than 200 hours, and employees may cash out accrued vacation at the end of each calendar year, but employees must use at least 80 hours of vacation each year. 15. Article XV. Insurance 1996: The language is consistent with the benefit provision included in Schedule G of the 1995 Pay Plan, with an employer contribution of up to $350 per month consistent with the contribution negotiated with Local 49. 1997: The language is consistent with the benefit provision included in Schedule G of the 1995 Pay Plan, with a $25.00 per month increase in the maximum monthly contribution, up to $375 per month. Long -term disability insurance: We negotiated a provision that the City will provide long -term disability insurance at 60 of the employee's base salary. The calculated cost of this benefit for employees in the two bargaining wilts Is $5,972. • 3 16. Article Ma. Leave Without_ Pay The language of this article is consistent with current benefits for the employees in these units and with benefits provided to employees in the Local 49 and LEIS units. 17. Article ?MI. Mileage Rei bursement /Cgr Allowa= The language of this article is consistent with the current level of benefits provided in Schedule I, 1995 Personnel Expense Reimbursement Policy, of the 1995 Pay Plan. For the Department Head unit, this article includes a provision regarding employees who are required to drive a City vehicle to their home, consistent with paragraph J of Schedule I of the 1995 Pay Plan. 18. Article XV111, mployee Trainin¢ The language of this article is consistent with the current level of benefits provided in Schedule J, Employee Training Policy, of the 1995 Pay Plan. 19. Article XIX Retirement Paid Hath Insurance The language of this article is consistent with the current level of benefits provided in Schedule K, Retirement -Paid Health Insurance Program, of the 1995 Pay Plan. ' A provision is included stating that this article will have no force or effect after • December 31, 1997. I 20. A.rticle_XX. Waiver This article includes standard language consistent with the language contained in the Local 49 and LEIS contracts. 21. Duration Two year agreements, effective January 1, 1996 through December 31, 1997. W recommend approval the City Council of the negotiated agreements nts reached with the We pp by ty g g Department Head /Supervisory unit and the Confidential /Supervisory unit. • 4 - 1 \VV VJ JJJ..: 1`x a..v It�rxwJr VraV `Va..r ��. �+��+ V.aV VVi VJ�'J 1 •Li Ler i..+ • L ABOR A CSR FFFNMNT BETWEEN THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER AND MINNESOTA TEAMSTERS PUBLIC AND L AW ENFORCEMENT EMPLOYEES' UNION, • LOCAL 4320 (DEPARTMENT HEADS) Effective January 1, 1996 through December 31, 1997 • . -v.. iii ii ✓.i a n ✓ vt. . i • ! J J • V t f J NOV -09 -1995 14i23 TEAMSTERS LULHL 3�2b ,SSi u r.1o�i1� TA13EE OF CONTENTS ARTI CLE PAGE I PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT 1 II RECOGNITION I lit DEFINITIONS I IV EMPLOYER AUTHORITY 2 V UNION SECURITY 2 VI EX PLOYEI: RIGHTS - GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE 3 VII SAVINGS CLAUSE 5 VIII DISCIPLINE S IX SALARIES 6 X SICK LEAVE 7 XI .TU.RY DUTY/PUBLIC DUTY g • XII LAYOFFS 8 XIII HOLIDAYS 8 XTV VACATION 4 XV NISURANCE 10 XVI "LEAVE- WITHOUT P 1 0 xvil MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT /CAR ALLOW/LNCE 1 I XVIII EMPLOYEE TRAINING I 1 XIX RETTREMENT PAID HEALTH INSURANCE 12 XX WAIVER 13 xxi DURATION 14 APPENDIX A 15 ..., .. ..• „. .. ... � r Y NUV- thy- 1�J�J5 14 ='d4 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 320 612 331 8948 P. 04/15 • ARTICLE 1. PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT This Agreament is made and entered into between the City of Brooklyn Center, hereinafter called the "EMPLOYER ", and the Minnesota Teamsters Public and Law Enforcement Employees' Union, Local No. 320, hereinafter referred to as the "UNION °, The parties hereto agree as follows: It is the intent and purpose of this Agreement to: 1.1 Establish procedures for the resolution of disputes regarding the interpretation and /or application of the provisions set forth in this Agreement; and 1.2 Express In written form an Agreement between the parties on terms and conditions of employment for the duration of the Agreement. ARTICLE 11. RECOGNITION 2.1 The Employer recognizes the Minnesota Teamsters Public and Law Enforcement Employees' Union, Local No. 320 as the exclusive representative, Of all public employees who are within the meaning of Minnesota State Statute, Section 179A.03, Subdivision 14 for all Department Heads, Assistant Department Heads and Division Heads under Bureau of Mediation Services • (BMS) Case #95 -PCE -1680 excluding Confidential employees. 2.2 in tho event the Employer and the Union are unable to agree as to the inclusion or exclusion of a new Job class, the issue shall be submitted to the Bureau of Mediation Services for determination. ARTICLE Ill. DEFINITIONS 3.1 UNION, Minnesota Teamsters Public and Law Enforcement Employees' Union Local No. 320. 3.2 UNION MEMBER: A member of the Minnesota Teamsters Public and Law Enforcement Employees' Union, Local No. 320. 3.3 EMPLOYEE: A member of the exclusively recognized bargaining unit. 3.4 EMPLOYER: The City of Brooklyn Center. 3 •5 PROBATIONARY PERIOD: Employees hired or) or after January 1, 1996 shall serve a probationary period of twelve (12) months from the date of hire. Probationary employees may use sick leave In accordance with Article X, and • 1 . rauv 107 14= L4 i tHr�s i � K5 LuLHL. .std 612 331 e94e P. 05/19 • may use vacation after six months. Probationary employees may be terminated at tho sole discretion of th© Employer, ARTICLE IV. EMPLOYER AUTHORITY 4.1 The Employer retains the full and unrestricted right to operate and manage all personnel, facilities and equipment; to establish functions and programs; to set and amend budgets; to determine the utilization of technology; to establish and modify the organizational structure, tv select, direct and determine the number of personnel; to establish work schedules; and to perform any inherent managerial functions not specifically limited by this Agreement. 4.2 Any term and condition of employment not specifically established or modified by this Agreement shall remain solely within the discretion of the Employer to modify, establish or eliminate. ARTICLE V. UNION SECURITY 5.1 The Employer shall deduct from the wages of employees who authorize such deduction in writing an amount necessary to cover monthly Union dues or a "fair share" deduction as provided by Minnesota State Statute 178A.06, Subd. 3, if the employee elects not to become a member of the Union. Such monies shall be remitted as dir • acted by the Union. 5.2 The Union may designate employees from tre bargaining unit to act as a Steward and an alternate and shall inform the Employer in writing of such choice and changes In the position of Steward and /or alternate. 5.3 The Employer shall make space available on the employee bulletin board's for Posting Union notices and announcements. 5.4 Union Steward. The Employer agrees that the employee designated Steward under Article 6.2 of this Agreement shall be allowed a reasonable amount of duty time annually to attend to Union matters as designated by the Union in addition to the other Steward activities as provided for In this Agreement. 5.5 Identified Business Agents of the Union shall have the right to enter the facilities of the Employer so long as said visits do not interfere with the job duties and responsibilities of an Employee. 5,6 The Union agrees to indemnify and hold the Employer harmless against any and all claims, suits, orders or Judgments brought or issued against the Employer as a result of any action taken or not taken by the Employer under the provisions of • 2 NtJV Idy - 1�JJ5 is :fib TEAMSTERS LOCAL 320 612 331 8548 P.06/i5 • this Article. ARTICLI= V1. EMPLOYEE RIGHTS - GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE (3.1 DEFINITION OF A GRIEVANCE. A grievance is defined as a dispute or disagreement as to the Interpretation or application of the specific terms and conditions of this Agreement. 6.2 UNION REPRESENTATIVES: The Employer will recognize representatives designated by the Union as the grievance representatives of the bargaining unit having the duties and responsibilities established by this Article. The Union shall notify the Employer In writing of the names of such Union representatives and of their successors when so designated, as provided by Section 6.2 of this Agreement, 6.3 PROCESSING OF A GRIEVANCE: It is recognized and accepted by the Union and the Employer that the processing of grievances as hereinafter provided is limited by the job duties and responsibiiities of the employee and shall, therefore, be accomplished during normal working hours only when consistent with such employee duties and responsibilities. The aggrieved employee and a Union representative shall be allowed a reasonable amount of time without loss in pay when a grievance is investigated and presented to the Employer • normal working hours provided the employee and the Union representative l have notified and received the approval of the designated supervisor who has determined that such absence is reasonable and would not be detrimental to the work of the Employer. 6.4 PROCEDURE: Grievances as defined in Section 6.1 shall be resolved in conformance with the following procedure: Stec 1 . An employee claiming a violation concerning the interpretation or application of this Agreement shall, within ten (10) calendar days after such ails ed viol 9 ton has occurred, present such grievance to the employe ®'s supervisor as designated by the Employer. The Employer- designated representative will discuss and give an answer to such Step 1 grievance within ten (10) calendar days after receipt. A grievance not resolved in Step 1 and appealed to Step 2 shall be placed in writing setting forth the nature of the grievance, the facts on which it Is based, the provision or provisions of the Agreement allegedly violated, the remedy requested, and shall be Step 2 within ten (10) calendar days after the Employer- appeal ®d to Em to Representative's final answer in Ste 1. An p y 9signated Stop y grievance not appealed in writing to Step 2 by the Union within ten (10) calendar days shall be considered waived, • 3 r•.uv -u� -i »� , .+. ,.,> 1 CHI'17 1 GN.� LUG -NL SLIO y y y bl� 3S1 d'dad N. CT / /15 • S %Z22 If appealed, the written grievance shall be presented by the Union and discussed with tho Employer - designated Step 2 Representative. The Employer - designated Representative shall give the Union the Employer's answer in writing within ten (10) calendar days after receipt of such Step 2 grievance. A grievance not resolved in Step 2 may be appealed to Step 3 within ten (10) calendar days following the Employer - designated Representative's final answer in Step 2. Any grievance not appealed in writing to Step 3 by the Union within ten 0 0) calendar days shall be considered waived. 21eP If a grievance is not resolved at Step 2 of the grievance procedure, the parties, by mutual agreement, may submit the matter to mediation with the Bureau of Mediation Services. Submitting the grievance to mediation preserves timeliness for Step 3 of the grievance procedure. Any grievance not appealed in writing to Step 3 by the Union within ten (10) calendar days of mediation shall be considered waived. to 3. A grievance unresolved In Step 2a and appealed to Step 3 by the Union shall be submitted to Arbitration subject to the provisions of the Public Employment Labor Relations Act of 1971, as amended. The selection of an arbitrator shall be made in au uui dance with the "Rules Governing the Arbitration of Grievances," as established by the Bureau of Mediation Services. 6.5 ARBITRATOR'S AUTHORITY: • a. The Arb itrator shall not have the right to amend, modify, nullify, Ignore, add to or subtract from the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The arbitrator shell consider and decide only t he he s p ecific Issues) submitted In writing by the Employer and the Union and shall have no authority to make a decision on any other issue not so submitted. b. The arbitrator shall be without power to make decisions contrary to or inconsistent with or modifying or varying in any way the application of laws, rules or regulations having the force and effect of law. The arbitrator's decision shall be submitted in writing within thirty (30) days following the close of the hearing or the submission of briefs by the parties, whichever be later, unless the parties agree to an extension. The decision shall be binding on both the Employer and the Union and shall be based solely on the arbitrator's interpretation or application of the express terms of the Agreement and to the facts of the grievance presented. C. The fees and expenses for the Arbitrator's services and proceedings shall be borne equally by the Employer and the Union provided that each party 4 I - - - -- — -�� old Jest onwo F-. vfml J. shall be responsible for compensating its own representatives and • witnesses. If either party desires a verbatim record of the proceedings it may cause such a record to be made, providing it pays for the record. if both parties desire a verbatim record of the proceedings, the cost shall be shared equally. 6.6 WAIVER: If a grievance is not presented within the time limits set forth above, it shall be considered "waived ". If a grievance is not appealed to the next step within the specified time limit or any agreed extension thereof, it shall be considered settled an the basis of the Employer's last answer. If the Employer does not answer a grievance or an appeal thereof within the specified time limits, the Union may elect to treat the grievance as denied at that step and immediately appeal the grievance to the next step. The time limit In each step may be extended by mutual written agreement of the Employer and the Union in each step, 6.7 CHOICE OF REMEDY: If, as a result of the Employer response in Step 2, the grievance remains unresolved, and if the grievance involves the suspension, demotion, or discharge of an employee who has completed the required probationary period, the grievance may be appealed either to Step 3 of Article VI or a procedure such a Civil Service, Veterans Preference or Fair Employment. If appealed to any procedure other than Step 3 of Article VI, the grievance is not subject to the arbitration procedure as provided in Step 3 of Article VI. The • aggrieved employee shall indicate in writing which procedure Is to be utilized, Step 3 of Article VI or another appeal procedure, and shall sign a statement to the effect that the choice of any other hearing precludes the aggrieved employee from making a subsequent appeal through Step 3 of Article VI. ARTICLE VII. SAVINGS CLAUSE in the event any provision of this Agreement shall be held to be contrary to law by a court of competition jurisdiction from whose final judgment or decree no appeal has been taken within the time provided, such provision shall be void. All other provisions of this Agreement shall continue In full force and effect. The voided provision may be renegotiated at the written request of either party. ARTICLE VIII. DISCIPLINE 8.1 The Employer will discipline employees who have completed the required probationary period only for just cause: a) oral reprimand, b) written reprimand, • 5 i N00 -09 -1995 14:27 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 320 612 331 6946 P.09i15 c) suspension; d) demotion; or e) discharge, 8.2 Susponsion, demotions and discharges will be in written form. 8.3 Written reprimands, notices of suspension and notices of discharge which are to become part of an employee's personnel file shall be read and acknowledged by signature of the employee. If there has been no reoccurrence of the same offense, the letter of reprimand will be removed from the employee's file after twenty -four (24) months from the date of the offense. 8.4 Employees may examine their own Individual personnel files at reasonable times under direct supervision of the Employer. 8.5 Discharges of non - veterans will be preceded by a five (5) day suspension without pay. 8.6 Employees will not be questioned concerning an investigation of disciplinary action unless the employee has had an opportunity to have a Union representative present at such questioniny. 8.7 Grievances relating to this Article shall be Initiated by the Union in Step 2 of the Grievance Procedure under Article VI, ARTICLE IX. SALARIES 9.1 Employees shall be paid In accordance with the attached salary pay schedules marked Appendix A (Salary). 9.2 in lieu of overtime payment for hours worked over 45 er week an P employee may request compensatory time o ff, 9.3 A 3.0% Cost of Living increase for 1996 and a 3.2% Cost of Living r 1997 g in cease for 9.4 An employee may receive ten (10% percent in salary bey ond ry y the range in the Pay plan base 9 YP based merit to be awarded by the City Manager. 9.5 The starting salary, sick leave and vacation shall be anywhere within the pay range for new hires with experience. • 6 rKQ11 rKHNN riNUUtn a H»uu 11. y.lyy5 1J li P. 10 NCV -09 -1995 14 TEnMSTERS LOML 320 612 331 8948 P.10 /15 ARTICLE X, SIOK LEAVE 10.1 a, Eligibility. Sick leave with pay shall be granted to probationary and permanent employees at the rate of eight hours for each calendar month Of full -time service or major fraction thereof. b. An advance of a maximum of 96 hours or sick leave which must be earned before additional hours accumulate may be granted by the City Manager to newly hired employees who have a minimum of five years of job experience which Is directly related to the position for which they are hired. 10.2 Usage, Sick leave shall be used normally for absence from duty because of Personal illness or legal quarantine of the employee, or because of serious illness in the immediate family, Immediate family shall mean brother, sister, wren p ts, arents -in -1 w P a , spuus ®, or children of the employee. Sick leave may be used for the purpose of attending the funeral of immediate family members plus brothers -in -law, sisters -in -law, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews, grandparents, grandparents -in -law, and grandchildren of the employee. 10.3 Accrual: Sick leave shall accrue at the rate of eight (S) hours per month until 960 hours have been a ccumulated. After 960 hours have been accumulated, sick leave shall accrue at the rate of four hours per month, and simultaneously vacation leave, a e, in addition to regular vacation leave accrual, shall accrue at the rate of two hours per month. Employees using earned vacation leave or sick lonve shall be considered to be working for the purpose of accumulating additional sick leave. Workers' Compensation benefits shall be credited against the compensation due employees during sick leave. 10.4 Upon layoff from the City, full -time employee would receive 50% of accumulated sick leave at current pay rate. Upon retirement from the City, full -time employee would receive 33% of accumulated sick leave at his/her current rate of pay. 10.5 Procedure: in order to be eligible for sick leave ' with a , employees mus P Y t. a. Notify their superior prior to the time set for the beginning of their normal work day. b. Keep their superior informed of their condition. C. Furnish a statement from a medical practitioner upon the request of the Employer. • 7 - _ IVu%I- YJ 1y 1 Ltz i tHM!Z i ttkti LUU L .iZD 612 X31 6940 P. 11 15 10.6 Misuse Prohibited_ Employees claiming sick leave when medically fit, except as otherwise specifically authorized in Section 10.2 shall be subject to disciplinary action up to the Including discharge. ARTICLE XI. JURY DUTYICOURT APPEARANCE 11.1 Employees summoned for jury duty or subpoenaed to testify In court on behalf of the Employer shall receive an amount of compensation which will equal the difference between the employee's regular pay and Jury duty or witness fee compensation received. ARTICLE XII. LAYOFFS 12.1 Employees who are employed in a full -time capacity as a benefits earning employee with the City of Brooklyn Center at the time of their layoff and who will riot be re- employed by the City of Brooklyn Center in another full -time position will qualify for the Severance Denefits for Lald -Off Employees Program. Employees participate in this program on a voluntary basis. 12.2 After sixty (60) calendar days prior written notice, the City Manager may lay -off permanent employees because of shortage of work or funds, abolition of positions, or other reasons outside the employee's control which do not reflect discredit on the service of the employee. Employees laid off will receive • compensation equal to 25% of the last approved annual salary, 12.3 At the Employer's expense, qualified employees may, at their choosing, Participate in the out placement service at the cost noted $2,500 or within six months of layoff, whichever Is reached first. Cut placement services consistent of a career assessment, resume development, cover letter writing assistance, interviewing skills, networking and developing job resources, all of which are provided by a professionally qualified out placement service, 12.4 The qualified employees will be allowed to continue health and life insurance coverage held at the time of layoff pursuant to COBRA law. The City will pay the portion of the premium costs for which other City employees are eligible for a period of three months after the lay -off date or earlier if other coverage is provided by another employer. ARTICLE Xlll. HOLIDAYS 13.1 The holidays shall be as follows: New Year's Day Martin Luther King Day • 8 „”' "' y �-'� �-+• cc i cHriS i txt LUI..HL J U _ 612 331 8946 P. 12 President's Day Memorial Day Independence Day labor Day Columbus Day Veteran's Day Thanksgiving Day Day after Thanksgiving Christmas Day Floater Holiday 13.2 The scheduling of a floating holiday Is subject to prior approval of the employee's supervisor. The floating holiday must be taken within the calendar year and shall not carry over from year to year. 13.3 When New Year's Day, Independence Day, Veterans Day, or Christmas Day fells an Sunday, the folbwirng day snail be observed as a holiday. When they fall or) Saturday, the preced day shall be observed as a holiday. Employees absent from work on the day following or the day preceding such a three -day holiday weekend without the express authorization of the Employer shall forfeit rights to holiday pay for that holiday. 13.4 To be eligible for holiday pay, employees must have been on paid status on the day before and the day after the holiday, Paid status Includes paid vacation or other paid leave for which the employee received prior approval. 13.5 An employee shall have the option to work a Holiday in exchange for a floater holiday with the approval of the City Manager. ARTICLE XIV. VACATION 14.1 Amount. Permanent employees snail earn vacation leave at a rate of 6.67 hours for each calendar month of full -time service or major fraction thereof. Permanent employees with five consecutive years of service through ten consecutive years of service shall earn vacation at the rate of 120 hours per year. Permanent employees with more than ten consecutive years of service shall earn vacation leave according to the following schedule: During 11 th year of service 128 hours per year During 12th year of service 136 hours per year During 13th year of service 144 hours per year During 14th year of service 152 hours per year During 15th year of service 160 hours per year Employees using earned vacation leave or sick leave shall be considered to be working for purposes of accumulating additional vacation leave, 14.2 Usage. Vacation leave may be used as earned, except that the Employer shall • 4 I _ _ IVVV- 1J7'�y�_f1 l�V= 17 tHf`1b i �MdS l,UI;H_ .sou 612 331 e343 P. 13 -'is approve the time at which the vacation leave may be taken. • 14.3 All unused va cation shall be paid out at the end of each calendar year, at the discretion of each employee. Each employee will be allowed to accumulate vacation and carry up to 230 hours from year to year, however, employees must use 80 hours vacation per calendar year unless otherwise approved by the City Manager. ARTICLE XV. INSURANCE 15.1 1996 - The City will contribute, effective with insurance premiums due January 1, 1996, payment of an amount not to exceed $350.00 per month per employee toward the cost of coverage under the Brooklyn Center group hospital/medical insurance plans and group dental Insurance as fringe benefit compensation for full -time employees and eligible dependents, Dental insurance not to exceed $30 per month. in addition, the City will provide a $10,000 group term life insuranco policy. 1 3.2 1997 - The City ill contribute, eff ec t ive Y t e with Insurance premiums due January 1, 1997, payment of an amount not to exceed $375.00 per month per employee toward the cost of coverage under the Brooklyn Center group hospital /medical insurance plans and group dental insurance as fringe benefit compensation for full -time em pioyees and eligible dependents, g p eats. pental Insurance not to ex • Geed $30 per month, In addition, the City will provide a $10,000 group term life insurance policy. 15.3 City will provide long term disability at 60% of the employee's base salary. ARTICLE XVI. LEAVE WITHOUT PAY 16.1 Loaves of absence without pay may be granted by the Employer where the best interests of the City will not be harmed, Such leav shall not exceed periods of ninety (90) calendar days unless based on disability or other good reasons. Vacation end sick leave benefits shall not accrue during periods of leaves of absence without pay. 16.2 e Ern to p yes are obligated to return to work on the first work day following the period of approved leave unless prior approval for an extension of the leave has been granted by the Employer. 16.3 All City contributions toward employee leave accruals and insurance coverages will cease for non - medical leaves without pay. Insurance benefits will continue If fully subsidized by the employee except that the City Manager may authorize the . .,,, i nn „. „ nv ✓Gn a n�� v.. . . 7. 7 7.+ 1 J Y 7 I'' Die Z31 ti 45 F.2Q.'15 continuation of the City's contribution for employee insurance premiums during a • leave of absence for medical reasons. If the employee chooses not to continue insurance coverage during a non - medical leave of absence upon return the insurance coverage will start the first day of the month following thirty days of re- employment. ARTICLE Xvll. MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT /CAR ALLOWANCE 17.1 Employees of the City who are required to drive a City vehicle to thei a keep It there while off duty to respond to emergency situations cannot use and City vehicles for their personal use. The employees who are authorized to keep a City vehicle at their home on a regular basis while off duty are as follows: 1 . Chief of Police 2. Fire Chlef S. Police Captains 4. Liquor Stores Manager 17.2 Employees who, in conduct of official City Business, are to use their personal automobiles for transportati authorized on shall be reimbursed required the rate consistent with IRS regulations for mileage incurred in the conduct of such business. An Itemized mileage expense c Mana P c must be ana subm to the City m g,.r for approval, r ARTICLE XVIII. EMPLOYEE TRAINING 18. Tho Employer will reimburse to employees attending job - related courses who have been employed by the City of Brookl C Period of at least 18 months, 60% of the cost incurred curred by the Employee for th Payment of tuition, fees, and urcha s provided the conditions p ses of textbooks required for such es cou Mons li sfed belo who employed by the City of Brooklyn Center or a full-time basis, wi have been complete years of employment will re o S with at least two (2) fees, and textbooks, provided the following condi have m f tuition, a• The course ha been approved by the City Manager prior to re is for, or participation in the course. 9 Iration b. The employee attains a grade of ” " C or better in the course: or In those cases where grades are not assigned the e ' satisfactory completion of the course. mployee must show proof of C. The employee has submitted, on forms to provided b the Y City i � 11 r 1V 1 r rtnnn • hIIPJ- 1d`d —'lyy7 17 • tcSu �.ni ,� i �..._ ... -�.._ -_- Manager's office, a written critique of the course, stated the value of the training to his /her position, and made such suggestions as may be pertinent for the conduct of future training sessions. d. The attendance of the employee at course sessions has been satisfactory, e. individuals who ai a receiving compensation or reimbursement for education costs from the federal or state government shall not be eligible for additional reimbursement from the City. 18.2 In those instances where the City Manager deems It necessary or advisable that an employee attend training sessions, the City shall pay all costs for fees, tuition and textbooks, The employee shall attend such courses or training sessions on his /her regular work tune, or if such courses are only after regular work hours, Compensatory time shall be granted to the employee. Upon completion of the training, the employee shall submit a critique of the course as required in paragraph "o" above. ARTICLE XIX. RETIREMENT PAID HEALTH INSURANCE 19.1 The Employer shall make space available to retiring employees, at their option, a quality health insurance program and that the Employer should participate In the cost of that health Insurance program for long -term employees until the retiree reaches age 65 or becomes eligible for Medicare coverage. 19.2 Qualified employees shall have the option or retaining membership in the City of Brooklyn Center's employee health insurance plan for which the City will pay the single person premium unlit such time as the retiree Is eligible for Med;care coverage or at age 65; whichever is sooner. if the retiree desires to continue the family coverage and if such coverage is available under the City's policies, the additional cost for family coverage shall be paid monthly by the retiree to the City of Brooklyn Center. in lieu of the Employer payment of the single- person premium, the qualified employee may elect to receive a lump sum payment of an amount calculated by multiplying the number of months between the date on which the employee retires and the employee's 65th birthday times the monthly average single- person premium which the Employer is paying for employees at the time of the employee's retirement. 19.3 To qualify under this program, an Employee, on the day of his /her retirement, must meet eligibility requirements for a full - retirement annuity under PERA or PERA Police without reduction of benefits because of aye, disability, or any other reason for reduction. In addition, to be eligible for this program, an • 12 employee must have been employed full time by the City of Brooklyn Center for the last ten consecutive years prior to the effective date of his /her retirement. Employees participate in this program on a voluntary basis. 19.4 Eligible employees, as described in 19.3, who become disqualified from participation under the policies of the City's health insurance carriers because of a move out of the service area of such carriers, may elect to continue participation in this program as follows: The Employee may recommend to the City an insurance carrier providing health Insurance in the area to which the employee has moved. Upon the approval of the carrier by the Employer, qualification for coverage by the employee and submission of any additional information reasonably required by the Employer, the Employer will make monthly payments to the carrier on behalf of the employee for premiums for such policy up to the amount paid by the Employer for the lowest single person premium of the Employer's employee health insurance plans at the time of payment. Any additional amount required shall be paid by the eligible employee. Eligible employees electing this option must prove residence In a non - covered geographic area and must submit a written notice of election to the City Manager on a form provided by the City. Once an eligible employee has been removed from coverage under the Employer's group health insurance plans pursuant to such an election, the employee may not thereafter re -enter the group and will not be covered under the Employer's group policies. 19,5 This Article will have no effect or force after December 31, 1997, ARTICLE XX. WAIVER 20.1 Any and all prior agreements, resolutions, practices, policies, rules and regulations regarding terms and conditions of employment, to the extent inconsistent with the provisions of this Agreement, are hereby superseded. 20.2 The parties mutually acknowledge that during the negotiations which resulted in this Agreement, each had the unlimited right and opportunity to make demands and proposals with respect to an y terms or conditions of employment not removed b law from rom bargainmg. All agreements and understandings arrived at by the parties are set forth in writing in this Agreement for the stipulated duration of this Agreement. The Employer and the Union each voluntarily and unqualifiedly waives the right to meet and negotiate regarding any and all terms and conditions of employment referred to or covered Bred in this Agreement or with respect to any term or condition of employment not specifically referred to or covered by this Agreement, even though such terms or conditions may not have been within the knowledge or contemplatiurr, of either or both parties at the time this contract was negotiated or executed. • l3 TOTAL P.02 - -- • ARTICLE XXI. DURATION The Agreement shall remain in full force and effect for a period commencing January 1. 1996 through Qecemll er 31 , 1997. In the event a new Agreement Is not in effect January 1 , 1998 all compensation, working conditions and benefits shall remain in effect as set forth in this Agreement until a successor Agreement is effected. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on this day of , 1996. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER TEAMSTERS LOCAL #320 14 o c 1 m w 1 APPENDIX. A DEPARTMENT READS S,kLARY SCHEDULE -1996 A u YEARLY RATES DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SERWES $62,034 $76,611 DIRECTOR OF FINANCE/CITY TREAS11RER $57,680 $71,235 rn CHIEF OF POLICE $56,184 S09,387 2 DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT $52,685 $65,065 m FIRE CHIEF $48,971 560,480 (n r 0 v r MONTHLY RATES ( n_ S TEP STEP R STEP C STEP D STEP 1is STmP R S-Tu C CrrY ENGiNEEP, $4,445 $4,668 $4,902 S5,024 $5,150 $5,279 $5,411 DIR- OF RECREATION $4,337 $4,555 $4,782 $4,902 $5 $5,150 55,279 ; CrIY ASSESSOR $4,231 $4,443 $4,665 $4,782 $4,902 $5,024 $5,150 POLICE CAPTAIN $4,128 $4,335 34,552 $4,665 $4,762 $4,902 $5,024 ASSISTANT DIR. OF FINANCE $4,027 $4,223 $4,440 $4,552 54,665 $4,782 S4,902 r LIQUOR STORES MANAGER $3,834 $4,025 $4,226 $4,332 54,440 $4,552 $4,665 EARLE BROWN HERITAGE CENTER MANAGER $3,560 $3,738 $3,924 $4,023 $4,123 $4,226 $4,332 PUBLIC SERVICE COORD. $3,305 $3,471 $3,644 $3,736 $3,830 $3,924 $4.023 STAFF SERVICES SUPERVISOR $2,519 $2,645 $2,778 $2,847 5'_,918 $2,991 $3,1366 I c c PAY RATES 1997 TO INCREASE BY 3a% r f r -® 1 • 1 t�D rnv �tin,n nnttu7 a n»V. it >..y7J 1JLG t'. L NOV -09 -1995 14: 42 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 320 ct� ��i o�•+u i. .� • LABOR AGRErMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER AND MINNESOTA TEAMSTERS PUBLIC AND LAW ENFORCE EMPLOYEES' UNION, LOCAL #320 (CONFIDENTIAL UNIT) Effective January 1, 1996 through Dccember 31, 1997 • J�CV - 199 5 14 TGAMSTFR LCC;HL 4" TABLE OF CONTENTS A RTICLE PAGE I PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT 1 TI RECOGNITION I III DBFINITIONS I IV EMPLO'Y'ER AUTHORITY 2 V UNION SECURITY Z VT EMPLOYEE RIGHTS - GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE 3 VII SAVINGS CLAUSE 5 VIII DISCIPLINE• 5 V SALARIES G I X SICK LEAVE 7 xi JURY DUTY/PUBLIC DUTY 8 YM LAYOFFS 8 • XIII HOLIDAYS S X1 V VACATION 9 XV INSURANCE 10 XVl LEAVE WITHOUT PAY 10 xvu MILEAGE REJMBURSEMBNT /CAR ALLOWANCE I I xvili EMPLOYEE TRAINING I I XIX RETIREMENT PAID PIL-ALTH INSURANCE 12 X7x WAIVER 13 XXI DURATION 13 APPENDIX A 15 • NOtJ -�9 -1991 14: TEAMSTERS LOCAL ARTICLE 1. PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT This Agreement Is made and entered into between the City of Brooklyn Center, hereinafter called the "EMPLOYER ", and the Minnesota Teamsters Public and Law Enforcement Employees' Union, Local No. 320, hereinafter referred to as the "UNION ", The parties hereto agree as follows: It is the intent and purpose of thls Agreement to: 1.1 Establish procedures for the resolution of disputes regarding the Interpretation and /or application of the provisions set forth in this Agreement; and 1.2 Express in written form an Agreement between the parties on the terms and conditions of employment for the duration of the Agreement. ARTICLE 11. RECOGNITION 2.1 The Employer recognizes the Minnesota Teamsters Public and Law Enforcement Employees' Union, Local No. 320 as the exclusive representative, for all public employees who are within the meaning of Minnesota State Statute, Section 179A.03, Subdivision 14, including Assistant City Manager /Personnel Coordinator, Administrative Assistant /Deputy City Clerk and Administration Secretary/Deputy City Clerk. 2.2 In the event the Employer and the Union are unable to agree as to the Inclusion or exclusion of a new or modified job class, the issue shall be submitted to the Bureau of Mediation Services for determination. ARTICLE Ill. DEFINITIONS N: Minnesota Employees' Union, nesota Teamsters Public and Law Enforcement Em to 3.1 UN10 n p Y Local No. 320, 3.2 UNION MEMBER: A member of the Minnesota Teamsters Public and Law Enforcement Employees' Union, Local No. 320. 3.3 EMPLOYEE: A member of the exclusively recognized bargaining unit. . 3.4 EMPLOYER: The City of Brooklyn Center. 3.5 PROBATIONARY PERIOD: Employees hired on or after January 1, 1996 shall serve a probationary period of twelve (12) monllis from the data of hire. Probationary employees may use sick leave in accordance with Article X, and • 1 NOU -09 -1995 14:43 TEAMSTERS LUUPL • may use vac;alion after six (6) months. Probationary employees may be terminated at the sole discretion of the Employer. ARTICLE IV. EMPLOYER AUTHORITY 4.1 The Employer retains the full and unrestricted right to operate and manage all personnel, facilities and equipment; to establish functions and programs; to set and amend budgets; to determine the utilization of technology; to establish and modify the organizational structure; to select, direct and determine the number of personnel; to establish work schedules and to perform any Inherent managerial functions not specifically limited by this Agreement. 4.2 Any term and condition of employment not specifically established or modified by this Agreement shall remain solely within the discretion of the Employer to modify, establish or eliminate. ARTICLE V. UNION SECURITY 5.1 The E=mployer shall deduct from the wages of employees who authorize such deduction in writing an amount necessary to cover monthly Union dues or a "fair share" deduction as provided by Minnesota State Statute 179A.06, Subd. 3, if the employee elects not to become a member of the Union. Such monies shall • be remitted as directed by the Union. 5.2 The Union may designate employees from the bargaining unit to act as a Steward and an alternate and shall inform the Employer in writing of such choice and changes in the position of Steward and /or alternate. 5.3 The Employer shall make space available on the employee bulletin board's for posting Union notices and announcements. 5.4 Union Steward. The Employer agrees that the employee designated Steward under Article 6.2 of this Agreement shall be allowed a reasonable amount of duty time annually to attend to Union matters as designated by the Union iri addition to the other Steward activities as provided for In this Agreement, 5.5 identified Business Agents of the Union shall have the right to enter the facilities of the Employer so long as said visits do riot Interfere with the job duties and responalbilities of an Employee. 5.5 The Union agrees to indemnify and hold the Employer harmless against any and all claims, suits, orders or judgments brought or issued against the Employer as a result of any action taken or not taken by the Employer under the provisions of • 2 NOV-09-1995 14 =44 TERMSTERS LOCAL 320 btu �t cs�ur� r. i� • thls Article. ARTICLE VI. EMPLOYEE RIGHTS - GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE 61 DEFINITION OF A GRIEVANCE: A grievance is defined as a dispute or disagreement as to the interpretation or application of the specific terms and conditions of this Agreement. 6.2 UNION REPRESENTATIVES: The Employer will recognize representatives designated by the .Union as the grievance representatives of the bargaining unit having the duties and responsibilities established by this Article. The Union shall notify the Employer in writing of the names of such Union representatives and of their successors when so designated, as provided by Section 6.2 of this Agreement. 6.3 PROCESSING OF A GRIEVANCE: It is recognized and accepted by the Union and the Employer that the processing of grievances as hereinafter provided is limited by the job duties and responsibilities of the employee and shall, therefore, be accomplished during normal working hours only when consistent with such employee duties and responsibilities. The aggrieved employee and a Union representative shall be allowed a reasonable amount of time without loss in pay when a grievance is investigated and presented to the Employer during • normal working hours provided the employee and the Union representative have notifie eived t a p p ro va l of he desi Hated s u p ervisor who has su and rec eived he t g p determined that such absence is reasonable and would not be detrimental to the work of the Employer. 6.4 PROCEDURE: Grievances as defined in Section 6.1 shall be resolved in conformance with the following procedure: Step 1 . An employee claiming a violation concerning the interpretation or application of this Agreement shall, within ten (10) calendar days after such alleged violation has occurred, present such grievance to the employee's Em ployer- des i gnated sup as desi Hated b the Employer. er. The Em to er nated d 9 Y P Y p Y 9 representative will discuss and give an answer to such Step 1 grievance within ten (10) calendar days after receipt. A grievance not resolved in Step 1 and appealed to Step 2 shall be placed in writing setting forth the nature of the grievance, the facts on which it is based, the provision or provisions of the Agreement allegedly violated, the remedy requested, and shall be appealed to Step 2 within ten (10) calendar days after the Employer - designated Representative's final answer In Step 1. Any grievance not appealed in writing to Step 2 by the Union within ten (10) calendar days shall be considered waived. • 3 ' NUV - 07 - 1777 1.4. uu 1 LPII IJ t Lll.d w....� ��� •• . Std If appealed the written grievance shall be presented by the Union and discussed with the Employer- designated Step 2 Rep rosentative. The Employer - designated Representative shall give the Union the Employer's answer in writing within ten (10) calendar days after receipt of such Step 2 grievance. A grievance not resolved in Step 2 may be appealed to Step 3 within ten (10) calendar days following the Employer - designated Representative's final answer in Step 2. Any grievance not appealed in writing to Step 3 by the Union within ten (10) calendar days shall be considered waived. Step 2a_ If a grievance is not resolved at Step 2 of the grievance procedure, the parties, by mutual agreement, may submit the matter to mediation with the Bureau of Mediation Services. Submitting the grievance to mediation preserves timeliness for Step 3 of the grievance procedure. Any grievance not appoaled in writing to Step 3 by the Union within ten (10) calendar days of mediation shail be considered waived. Stec 3 . A grievance unresolved in Step 2a and appealed to Step 3 by the Union shall be submitted to Arbitration subject to the provisions of the Public Employment Labor Relations Act of 1971, as amended. The selection of an arbitrator shall be made in aocuidance with the "Rules Governing the Arbitration of Grievances," as established by the Bureau of Mediation Services. • 6,5 ARBITRATOR'S AUTHORITY: a. The Arbitrator shall not have the right to amend, modify, nullify, Ignore, add to or subtract from the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The arbitrator shall consider and decide only the specific issue(s) submitted in writing by the Employer and the Union and shall have no authority to make a decision on any other issue not so submitted. b. The arbitrator shall be without power to make decisions contrary to or inconsistent with or modifying or varying in any way the application of laws, rules or regulations having the force and effect of law. The arbitrator's decision shall be submitted in writing within thirty (30) days following the close of the hearing or the submission of briefs by the parties, whichever be later, unless the parties agree to an extension. The decision shall be binding on both the Employer and the Union and shall be based solely on the arbitrator's interpretation or application of the express terms of the Agreement and to the facts of the grievance presented, C. The fees and expenses for the Arbitrator's services and proceedings shall be borne equally by the Employer and the Union provided that each party • 4 NOV - -1595 14:45 TEAMSTERS LOCOL S.�O • shall be responsible for compensating its own representatives and witnesses. if either party desires a verbatim record of the proceedings it may cause such a record to be made, providing it pays for the record. if both parties desire a verbatim record of the proceedings, the cost shall be shared equally. 6.6 WAIVER: if a grievance is not presented within the time limits set forth abovo, it shall be considered "waived ". If a grievance is not appealed to the next stop within the specified time limit or any agreed extension thereof, it shall be considered settled on the basis of the Employer's last answer. If the Employer does not answer a grievance ur an appeal thereof within the specified time limits, the Union may elect to treat the grievance as denied at that step and immediately appeal the grievance to the next step. The time limit in each step may be extended by mutual written agreement of the Employer and the Union in each step, 6.7 CHOICE OF REMEDY: If, as a result of the Employer response in Step 2, the grievance remains unresolved, and if the grievance involves the suspension, demotion, or discharge of an empioyae who has completed the required probationary period, the grievance may be appealed either to Step 3 of Article VI or a procedure such a Civil Service, Veterans Preference or Fair Employment. If appealed to any procedure other than Step 3 of Article Vi, the grievance Is not • subject to the arbitration procedure as provided in Step 3 of Article Vi. The aggrieved employee shall indicate in writing which procedure is to be utilized, Step 3 of Article V1 or another appeal procedure, and shall sign a statement to the effect that the choice of any other hearing precludes the aggrieved employee from making a subsequent appeal through Step 3 of Article VI, ARTICLE VII. SAVINGS CLAUSE in the event any provision of this Agreement shall be held to be contrary to law by a court of competition jurisdiction from whose final judgment or decree no appeal has been taken within the time provided, such provision shall be void. All otfler provisions of this Agreement shall continue In full force and effect. The voided provision may be renegutiated at the written request of either party, ARTICLE Vill. DISCIPLINE 8.1 The Employer will discipline employees who have completed the required probationary period only for just cause: a) oral reprimand; b) written reprimand; 5 ' IVUV�Yi7 - 177J l�•�J �nwv. -, wv. .� v.... ��� �__ • c) suspension; d) demotion; or s) discharge. 8.2 Suspension, demotions and discharges will be In written form. 8.3 Written reprimands, notices of suspension and notices of discharge which are to become part of an employee's personnel file shall be read and acknowledged by signature of the employee. If there has been no reoccurrence of the same offense, the letter of reprimand will be removed from the employee's file after six (6) months from the date of the offense. 8.4 Employees may examine their own individual personnel files at reasonable times under direct supervision of the Employer. 8.5 Discharges of non - veterans will be preceded by a five (5) day suspension without pay. 8.6 Employees will not be questioned concerning an investigation of disciplinary action unless the employee has had an opportunity to have a Union representative present at such questioning, 8.7 Grievances relating to this Article shall be initiated by the Union in Step 2 of the Grievance Procedure under Article Vil. ARTICLE IX. SALARIES 9.1 Employees shall be paid in accordance with the attached salary pay schedules marked Appendix A (Salary). 9.2 in Heu of overtime payment for hours worked over 45 per week, an employee may request compensatory time off. 9.3 A 3.0% Cost of Living increase for 1996 and an addiliunal 3.2% Cost of Living increase for the year 1997. 9.4 An employee may receive ten (10 %) percent in salary beyond the range In the Pay plan based on merit to be awarded by the City Manager. 9.5 The starting salary, sick leave and vacation shall be anywhere within the pay range for new hires with experience. • 6 NOV - 09 -1995 14:46 TERNSTERS LOCAL 320 • ARTICLE X. SICK LEAVE 10.1 a. Eligibility. Sick leave with pay shall be granted to probationary and permanent employees at the rate of eight hours for each calendar month of full -time service or major fraction thoreof. b. An advance of a maxlmum of 95 hours of sick leave which must be earned before additional hours accumulate may be granted by the City Manager to newly hired employees who have a minimum of five years of job experience which is directly related to the position for which they are hired. 10.2 Usage. Sick leave shall be used normally for absence from duty because of personal illness or legal quarantine or the employee, or because of serious illness in the immediate family. Immediate family shall mean brother, sister, parents, parents -in -law, spouse, or children of the employee. Sick leave may be used for the purpose of attending the funeral of immediate family members plus brothers -in -law, sisters -in -law, aunts. uncles, nieces, nephews, grandparonts, grandparents -in -law, and grandchildren of the employee. 10.3 Accrual: Sick leave shall accrue at the rate of eight, (S) hours per month until 960 hours have been accumulated. After 960 hours have been accumulated, sick • leave shall accrue at the rate of four hours per month, and simultemoously vacation leave, in addition to regular vacation leave accrual, shall accrue at the rate of two hours per month. Employees using earned vacation leave or sick leave shall be considered to be working for the purpose of accumulating additional sick leave. Workers' Compensation benefits shall be credited against the compensation due employees during sick leave. 10.4 Upon layoff from the City, full -time employee would receive 50% of accumulated sick leave at current pay rate. Upon retirement from the City, full -time employee would receive 33% of accumulated sick leave at his /her current rate of pay. 10,5 Procedure. In order to be eligible for sick leave with pay, ®mployecs must: a. Notify their superior prior to the time set for the beginning of their normal work day. b. Keep their superior informed of their condition. C. Furnish a statement from a medical practitioner upon the request of the Employer, • , 7 • 10.6 Misuse Prohibited. Employees claiming sick leave when medically fit, except as otherwise specifically authorized in Section 10.2 shall be subject to disciplinary action up to the including discharge. ARTICLE XI. JURY DUTY /COURT APPEARANCE 11.1 Employees summoned for jury duty or subpoenaed to testify in court on behalf of the Employer shall receive an amount of compensation which will equal the difference between the employee's regular pay wrid jury duty or witness fee compensation received. ARTICLE X11. LAYOFFS 12.1 Employees who are employed in a full -time capacity as a benefits earning employee with the City of Brooklyn Center at the time of their layoff and who will not be re- employed by the City of Brooklyn Center in another full -time position will qualify for the Severance Benefits for Laid -Off Employees Program. Employees participate In this program on a voluntary basis, 12.2 After sixty (60) calendar days prior written notice, the City Manager may lay -off permanent employees because of shortage of work or funds, abolition of positions, or other reasons outside the employee's control which do not reflect • discredit on the service of (tie employee, Employees laid off will receive compensation equal to 25% of the last approved annual salary. 12.3 At the Employer's expense, qualified employees may, at their choosing, participate in the out placement service at the cost noted $2,500 or within six months Of layoff, whichever is reached first, Out placement services consistent of a career assessment, resume development, cover letter writing assistance, interviewing skills, networking and developing job resources, all of which are provided by a professionally qualified out placement service. 12.4 The qualified employees will be allowed to continue health and life insurance coverage held at the time of layoff pursuant to COBRA law. The City will pay the portion of the premium costs for which other City employees are eligible for a period of three months after the lay -off date or earlier if other coverage is provided by another employer. ARTICLE X111. HOLIDAYS 13,1 The holidays shall be as follows. New Year's Day Martin Luther King Day • R r . 1 4 NOV -09 -1`395 14: 4'/ LVt HL_ President's Day Memorial Day Independence Day labor Day Columbus Day Veteran's Day Thanksgiving Day Day after Thanksgiving Christmas Day Floater Holiday 13.2 The scheduling of a floating holiday is subject to prior approval of the employee's supervisor. The floating holiday must be taken within the calendar year and shall not carry over from year to year. 13.3 When Now Year's Day, Independence Day, Vaterans Day, or Christmas Day falls on Sunday, the following day shall be observed as a holiday. When they fall on Saturday, the preceding clay shall be observed as a holiday, Employees absent from work on the day following or the day preceding such a three -day holiday weekend without the express authorization ur the Employer shall forfeit rights to holiday pay for that holiday. 13.4 If Christmas Eve Day or New Years Eve Day falls on a normally scheduled work day (Monday through Friday), employees will be given additional holiday pay of four (4) hours and will be able to leave at noon. 13.5 To be eligible fur holiday pay, employees must have been on paid status on the ® day before and the day after the holiday. Paid status includes paid vacation or other paid leave for which the employee received prior approval. 13.6 An employee shall have the option to work a Holiday in exchange for a floater holiday with the approval of the City Manager. ARTICLE XIV. VACATION 14.1 Amount. Permanent employees shall earn vacation leave at a rate of 6.67 hours for each calendar month of full -time service or major fraction thereof. Permanent employees with five consecutive years of service through ten consecutive years of service shall earn vacation at ttirr rate of 120 hours per year, Permanent employees with more than ten consecutive years of service shall earn vacation leave according to the following schedule: During 11 th year of service 128 hours per year During 12th year of service 136 hours per year During 13th year of service 144 hours per year During 14th year of service 152 hours per year During 15th year of service 160 hours per year • 9 Nl)V l)`j- 1�J�J5 'ly'titt Cti•�cta _n` Jcu ..... .� - _- ,_ ._- -- • Employees using earned vacation leave or sick leave shall be considered to be working for purposes of accumulating additional vacation leave. 14.2 Usage. Vacation leave may be used as earned, except that the Employer shall approve the time at which the vacation leave may be taken. 14.3 All unused vacation shall be paid out at the end of each calendar year, at the discretion of each employee. Each employee will be allowed to accumulate vacation and carry up to 230 hours from year to year, however, employees must use 80 hours vacation per calendar year unless otherwise approved by the City Manager ARTICLE XV. INSURANCE 15.1 1996 - The City will contribute, effective with insurance premiums due January 1, 1995, payment of an amount not to exceed $350.00 per month per employee toward the cost of coverage under the Brooklyn Center group hospitallmedical insurance plans and group dental insurance as fringe benefit compensation for full -time employees and eligible dependents. Dental insurance not to exceed $30 per month. In addition, the City will provide a $10,000 group term life insurance policy, • 15.2 1997 - The City wllh contribute, effective with insurance premiums due January 1, 1997, payment of an amount riot to exceed $375.00 per month per employee toward the cost of coverage under the Brooklyn Center group hospitallmedical insurance plans and group dental insurance as fringe benefit compensation for full -time employees and eligible dependents. Dental insurance not to exceed $30 per month, in addition, the City will provide a $10,000 group tern life insurance policy. 15.3 City will provide long term disability at 60% of the employee's base salary. ARTICLE XVi. LEAVE WITHOUT PAY 15.1 Leaves of absence without pay may be granted by the Employer where the best interests of the City will not be harmed. Such leaves shall not exceed periods of ninety (90) calendar days unless based on disability of other good reasons. Vacation and sick leave benefits shall not accrue during periods of leaves of absence without pay. 16.2 Employees are obligated to return to work on the first work day following the period of approved leave unless prior approval for an extension of the leave has been grantod by the Employer. • 10 16.3 All City contributions toward employee leave accruals and insurance coverages will cease for non - medical leaves without pay. Insurance benefits will continue If fully subsidized by the employee except that the City Manager may authorize the continuation of the City's coat, ibution for employee insurance premiums during a leave of absence for medical reasons. If the employee chooses not to continue Insurance coverage during a nonmedical leave of absence upon return the Insurance coverage will start the first day of the month following thirty days of re- employment. ARTICLE XVII, MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENTICAR ALLOWANCE 17.1 Employees who, in conduct of official City Business, are authorized or required to use their personal automobiles for transportation shall be reimbursed at the rate consistent with IRS regulations for mileage incurred in the conduct of such business. An itemized mileage expense claim must be submitted to the City Manager for approval, ARTICLE XV1Ii, EMPLOYEE TRAINING 18.1 The Employer will reimburse to employees attending Job - related courses who have been employed by the City of Brooklyn Center, on a full -time basis of a period of at least 18 months, 60% of the cost incurred by the Employee for the • payment of tuition, fees, and purchases of textbooks required for such courses, provided the conditions listed below are met. Employees who have been employed by the City of Brooklyn Center or a full -time basis with at least two (2) complete years of employment will receive 75% of the cost incurred for tuition, fees, and textbooks, provided the following conditions have been met: a. The course has been approved by the City Manager prior to registration for, or participation in the course. b. The employee attains a grade of "C" or better in the course: or in those cases where grades are not assigned, the employee must show proof of satisfactory completion of the course. C. The employee has submitted, on forms to be provided by the City Manager's office, a written critique of the course, stated the value of the training to his /her position, and made such suggestions as may be pertinent for the conduct of future training sessions. d. The attendance of the employee at course sessions has been satisfactory • lI NOV - - 1995 14:49 TEAMSTERS LOCHl" see i e. Individuals who are receiving compensation or reimbursement for state eligible • education costs from the fader' government shall not be or t 9 for additional reimbursement from the City. 18.2 in those instances where the City Manager deems it necessary or advisable that an employee attend training sessions, the City shall pay all costs for fees, tuition and textbooks. The employee shall attend such courses or training sessions on his /her regular work time, or if such courses are only after regular work hours, compensatory time shall be granted to the employee. Upon completion of the training, the employee shall submit a critique of the course as required in paragraph "c" above. ARTICLE XIX. RETIREMENT PAID HEALTH INSURANCE 19.1 The Employer shall make space available to retiring employees, at their option, a quality health insurance program and that the Employer should participate in the cost of that health insurance prograin for long -term employees until the retiree reaches age 65 or becomes eligible for Medicare coverage. 19.2 Qualified employees shall have the option of retaining membership in the City of Brooklyn Center's employee health insurance plan for which the City will pay the single person premium until such time as the retiree is eligible fur Medicare coverage re tiree desires to continue the a or at age 65� whichever is sooner. if he rs g 9 , • family coverage and if such coverage is available under the City's policies, the additional cost for family coverage shall be paid monthly by the retiree to the City of Brooklyn Center. In lieu of the Employer payment of the single- person p Q emp loyee p remium, the q ualified may elect to receive a lump sum payment of an p Y am ount months between the date on aunt c the number o h m c u ated by which the employee retires and the employee's 65th birthday times the monthly average single - person premium which the Employer is paying for employees at the time of the employee's retirement. 19.3 To qualify under this program, an Employee, on the day of his/her retirement, ° must meet eligibility requirements for a full- retirement annuity under PERA or PERA Police without reduction of benefits because of age, disability, or any other reason for reduction. In addition, to be eligible for this program, an employee must have been employed full time by the City of Brooklyn Center for the last ten consecutive years prior to the effective dale of his /her retirement. Employees participate in this program on a voluntary basis. 19.4 Eligible employees, as described in 19.3, who become disqualified from participation under the policies of the City's health insurance carriers because of a move out of the service area of such carriers, may elect to continue • 12 - �r�Y ��� - �� 9 J 1 • 4y I Cnl IJ I1.1 \J vv. ... -�- .. ... .. v i a u participation in this program as follows: The Employee may recommend to the • City an insurance carrier providing health insurance in the area to which the employee has moved. Upon the approval of the carrier by the Employer, qualification for coverage by the employee and submission of any additional information reasonably required by the Employer, the Employer will make q monthly payments to the carrier on behalf of the employee for premiums for such policy up to the amount paid by the Employer for the lowest single person premium of the Employer's employee health insurance plans at the time of payment. Any additional amount required shall be paid by the eligible employee. Eligible employees electing this option must prove residence in a non - covered geographic area and must submit a written notice of election to the City Manager on a form provided by the City. Once an eligible employee has been removed from coverage under the Employer's group health insurance plans pursuant to such an election, the employee may not thereafter re -enter the group and will not be covered under the Employer's group policies. 19.5 This Article will have no effect or force after December 31, 1997. ARTICLE XX. WAIVER 20.1 Any and all prior agreements, resoiutlons, practices, policies, rules and regulations regarding terms and conditions of employment, to the extent inconsistent with the p rovisions of this Agreement, are hereby superseded. 20.2 The parties mutually acknowledge that during the negotiations which resulted in this Agreement, each had the unlimited right and opportunity to make demands w' r to an terms or conditions of employment not an d proposals with res n prop s p y removed by law from bargaining. Ali agreements and understandings arrived at by the parties are set forth in writing in this Agreement for the stipulated duration of this Agreement. The Employer and the Union each voluntarily and unqualifiedly waives the right to meet and negotiate regarding any and all terms and conditions of employment referred to or covered In this Agreement or with respect to any term or condition of employment not specifically referr to or covered by this Agreement, even though such terms or conditions may not have been within the knowledge or contemplation of either or both parties at the time this contract was negotiated or executed. ARTICLE XXI. DURATION The Agreement shall remain in full force and effect for a period commencing nu 1 , 1996 through December 31 , 1997. in the event a new Agreement is not ir effect January 1 , 1998 all compensation, working conditions and benefits shall remain in effect as set forth In this Agreement until a successor Agreement is effected. 13 ® IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on this day of 1 1995. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER TEAMSTERS LOCAL #320 • 14 APPENDIX A CONFIDENTIAL EMPLOYEES SALARY SCHEDULE — 199 UTLE S T A STEP )11 STEP C STEP D STEP E STEP F STEP G Assistant City Managed Personnel Coordinator 34,128 $4,335 $4,552 $4,665 $4,782 $4,902 $5,024 Administrative Assistant) Deputy Cityc1c& 53,147 53,304 53,469 33,556 $3,644 $3,736 33,830 Adra Secretary! DePuty City Clerk $15.180 $15.939 $16.736 $17.155 $18.423 $18.474 PAY RATES TO BE INCREASED BY 3.2% FOR 1997 p r^ o