HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990 10-29 CCP Regular Session f ,Y G
d
0 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
OCTOBER 29, 1990
7 p.m.
1. Call to order
2. Roll Call
3. Invocation
4. Open Forum
5. Approval of Consent Agenda
-All items listed with an asterisk 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 in its normal sequence on the agenda.
6. Final Plat Approval:
*a. E & H Properties Addition
7. Proclamation:
*a. Declaring October 30, 1990, as Fred G. Capshaw Day in
Brooklyn Center
8. Resolutions:
*a. Expressing Recognition of and Appreciation for the
Dedicated Public Service of Tom Slupske
*b. Approving Purchase Agreements for 69th Avenue Right -of-
Way, Improvement Project No. 1990 -10
C. Accepting Proposal from SEH, Inc. to Provide
Professional Design Services Relating to Replacement of
Lift Station No. 2, Improvement Project No. 1990 -05
*d. Accepting Bids and Awarding Contract for Removal of Six
Houses on 69th Avenue North, Improvement Project No.
1990 -21, Contract 1990 -K
*e. Accepting Bid and Awarding Contract for Construction of
Wellhouse No. 10, Improvement Project No. 1990 -16,
Contract 1990 -G
*f. Declaring a Public Nuisance and Ordering the Removal of
Diseased Shade Trees (Order No. DST 10/19/90)
9. Planning Commission Item: (7:15 p.m.)
a. Planning Commission Application No. 90027 submitted by
Johnson Controls, Inc. requesting site and building
plan approval to construct a 6,666 sq. ft. addition to
the existing 10,000 sq. ft. Johnson Controls building
located at 1801 67th Avenue North.
-This item was recommended for approval by the Planning
Commission at its October 18, 1990, meeting.
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- October 29, 1990
10. Ordinance:
a. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances
Regarding the Zoning of Certain Land
-This amendment involves the rezoning from R -5 to C2
and Cl of certain land owned by Mr. Howard Atkins,
located at the southeast quadrant of T.H. 252 and 66th
Avenue North. This rezoning was approved by the City
Council under Planning Commission Application No. 90003
on April 9, 1990. This item is offered this evening
for a first reading.
11. Discussion Items:
a. Storm Drainage Utility Proposal
1. An Ordinance Adding Chapter 16 to the City Code of
the City of Brooklyn Center Establishing a Storm
Drainage Utility and Providing for the
Establishment of Rates and Charges for the Use and
Availability of the System
-This item is offered this evening for a first
reading.
b. Review of New Design Concepts for Proposed Interchange
at T.H. 100 and France Avenue
-City staff will present and review suggested design
revisions as developed by SEH, Inc.
C. Canvassing Municipal Election
d. Charter Commission Recommendation Regarding Changes to
Section 2.05 Vacancies in the Council and Section 3.01
Council Meetings
e. Association of Metropolitan Municipalities (AMM)
Policies and Legislative Proposals
*12. Licenses
13. Adjournment
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date la4z04-00
Agenda Item Number
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
ITEM DESCRIPTION:
FINAL PLAT APPROVAL - E & H PROPERTIES ADDITION
DEPT. APPROVAL:
SY KNAPP, D[RECTOK OF PUBLIC WORKS
MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION:
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached Yes )
The applicant, Mr. Howard Atkins, seeks approval of the final plat of E & H
PROPERTIES ADDITION.
Previous Council Action
The Council on April 9, 1990, approved the preliminary plat, subject to the
conditions outlined on the attached memorandum.
It is noted that the Council, by Resolution No. 90 -78, also approved rezoning the
subject property. The first reading of the proposed ordinance is scheduled for this
Council meeting, as a separate item.
Staff Recommendation
This plat is recommended for approval, subject to the conditions as stated in the
attached memorandum.
•
CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY
OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430
: TELEPHONE: 569 -3300
C ENTER FAX: 561 -0717
EMERGENCY - POLICE - FIRE
911
TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager
FROM: Mark Maloney, City Engineer
DATE: October 23, 1990
SUBJ: Final Plat - E & H PROPERTIES ADDITION
Conditions for release of this plat, as adopted by the City Council at its
April 9, 1990 meeting, are as follows:
1. The final plat is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer.
2. The final plat is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the City
Ordinances.
The Council has also approved the request for rezoning, and the ordinance will
be presented for a first reading at the regular meeting scheduled for Monday,
October 29, 1990.
I recommend approval of the final plat, subject to the above - mentioned
conditions.
Respectfully submitted,
Mark J. Maloney, P.E.
City Engineer
cc: E & H PROPERTIES ADDITION
�c
19B6ALLAMF�CA IXiY
7
2�
•- :'sue- ,ci���'�,.�`
H', n PNOPERTIES ADDITIO
i r . -' ,rl l� - -_ x393 �q<`•r
r n "tE-nt Or lot -
^19500- NBO•nT 11 4te
N.LINE.Pf - LDIS T1L Trl. t +a[N[nT 00 Y 1`n+l
- .. ALE IN FEET
U,
t
N {fb.l7 1b3.6fZS"w - __. I I " e 1
r
0 50 EO 90 r20
25 KEEI
OF 1 I Io O.o 0
'< ,.
10.51 °0)058 I.Ca0UT11 I LINF. Oi NORTI — .I/ I a!ix"a OxoaC rl J1 ! ONIENTATION OF TIIIS BEARING SYSTEM
lif +a xon °ri nd'w L 0 2 � � ( I ,r0 111• 15 DASLOON ASSUMED OATUM
+ 1 n O.Ot NOTE S IRON MONUMLNT 11111 CA(' STAMPED NLS In DNY
2y11'N1 y') Wes• \ l I I - 'OENOfES IRON MONUMENT FOUND
II
DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS ARE SHOWN THUS:
u
_ � P --�_— ._ ..._ r. ''.�•• ..r. I I I n n �lh ' _�J _Ja I
r
1.,
Try - ' �, 50 11CIN0 b rccT IN wlDTrr M11 Ell UN11 RW IC u011'D,
A NO ADjoIwNG LOT LINES, ANO UE1r.G IV REt If'
o ro' .y - O I •I v ,� wronr,un it' s 0-1, RwISE NOte n, nr,o nDTOlrnnc
.'- .a - -• —_ _ , * IIIGI1f-O—AY LOT LINES, AS SHOWRON'LAI.
SE [OR. �.�
� ^ / LOT 5= - - -'10 .�_' �i
. r . i I C I I I — — — ... .... • `1 � ". ; `_ --
&ASSOCIAI FS
Sul L1 2 01 2 :-11 15
r
PROCLAMATION
DECLARING TUESDAY, OCTOBER 30 1990 AS DR FRED G CAPSHAW DAY
WHEREAS, in 1967, the City of Brooklyn Center was one of the cities in the
Northwest Metro area to actively support the Junior College site on
85th Avenue North and West Broadway Avenue in Brooklyn Park; and
WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center was one of the cities in the Northwest
Metro area to also make a substantial financial contribution to the
acquisition of the site at that location; and
WHEREAS, in 1973, under State law all Junior Colleges were redesignated as
Community Colleges; and
WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center and its residents have benefited
immensely from the progressive programs directed to meet the current
ongoing education needs; and
WHEREAS, Dr. Fred G. Capshaw was appointed the new President of North
Hennepin Community College on August 1, 1990; and
WHEREAS, Dr. Capshaw has committed North Hennepin Community College to
continue to develop curriculum to meet the changing needs of this
Northwest Metro area; and
WHEREAS, the Capshaw Family, after due consideration, selected the City of
Brooklyn Center in which to reside.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, AS MAYOR OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, State of
Minnesota, do hereby proclaim that the City Council of the City of Brooklyn
Center on behalf of the Citizens of Brooklyn Center:
1. warmly welcome Dr. Fred G. Capshaw and his family to the City of
Brooklyn Center; and
2. congratulate him as being selected the President of North Hennepin
Community College; and
3. pledge the further cooperation of the City of Brooklyn Center to
help promote the mutual interests of the City and North Hennepin
Community College; and
4. declare Tuesday, October 30, 1990, as Dr. Fred G. Capshaw Day in the
City of Brooklyn Center; and
5. this proclamation be presented to Dr. Capshaw at the October 30,
1990, meeting of the Brooklyn Center Rotary Club.
Date Mayor
Attest:
Clerk
(Seal)
f
Member introduced the following
resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF AND APPRECIATION FOR
THE DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE OF THOMAS SLUPSKE
WHEREAS, Thomas Slupske served on the Brooklyn Center
Earle Brown Days Committee from 1985 to 1990; and
WHEREAS, Thomas Slupske served as Earle Brown Days
Chairperson for the 1985 and 1986 festivals; 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 has been greatly
appreciated by the Brooklyn Center Earle Brown Days 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 Thomas
Slupske is hereby recognized and appreciated by the City of
Brooklyn Center.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
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 Council Meeting Date 10/29/ 90
Agenda Item Number
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
ITEM DESCRIPTION:
RESOLUTION APPROVING PURCHASE AGREEMENTS FOR 69TH AVENUE RIGHT -OF -WAY, IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT NO. 1990 -10
DEPT. APPROVAL:
sYXNAPP, D(R CTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION:
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached )
Evergreen Land Services has negotiated purchase agreements with the property owners
at 3512, 4100, and 4108 69th Avenue North and 6900 France Avenue North.
These agreements are based on appraised values of: Jeffrey and Carol Gaunitz, 3512
69th Avenue - $74,000; Lyle and Pam Blaido, 4100 69th Avenue - $75,000; Russell J.
Mah, 4108 69th Avenue - $79,100; and Sylvia Kenney, 6900 France Avenue - $72,000.
These offers are acceptable to the property owners, and they have signed the
agreements. The dates of closings are: Mah, October 30; Blaido, November 8 and
Gaunitz, November 28. The date of closing on the Kenney property has not yet been
established. The City Attorney is working with Evergreen and Public Works staff to
review and finalize all details.
Previous Council Action
The Council on May 7, 1990, approved a resolution which provided for the negotiated
purchase of real property for project 1990 -10. This resolution authorized the City
Manager to negotiate with the owners of the properties to be acquired for this
project, and directed him to offer to the owners the amount determined by appraisal
and review appraisal. Such purchase agreements are subject to approval and
ratification by the City Council.
City Council Recommendation
As all parties agree to the sale of the properties for their appraised value, a
resolution is provided that approves and ratifies the purchase agreements.
Member introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION APPROVING PURCHASE AGREEMENTS FOR 69TH AVENUE
RIGHT -OF -WAY, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1990 -10
WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 90 -66 adopted on March 26, 1990, the City
Council ordered the reconstruction of 69th Avenue between Noble Avenue North
and Shingle Creek Parkway, Improvement No. 1990 -10; and
WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 90 -84 adopted on April 23, 1990, the City
Council approved a right -of -way plan depicting properties to be acquired for
the project; and
WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 90 -95 adopted on May 7, 1990, the City
Council authorized the City Manager to negotiate the purchase of these
properties, and directed the City Manager to offer to the property owners the
amount determined by appraisal and review appraisal; and
WHEREAS, the owners of the property at 3512 69th Avenue have accepted
the City Manager's offer of the appraised value, and have executed a purchase
agreement to that effect; and
WHEREAS, the owners of the property at 4100 69th Avenue have accepted
the City Manager's offer of the appraised value, and have executed a purchase
agreement to that effect; and
WHEREAS, the owner of the property at 4108 69th Avenue has accepted
the City Manager's offer of the appraised value, and has executed a purchase
agreement to that effect; and
WHEREAS, the owner of the property at 6900 France Avenue North has
accepted the City Manager's offer of the appraised value, and has executed a
purchase agreement to that effect; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that:
1. The terms of the purchase agreements are hereby approved.
2. The City Manager is directed to proceed with the purchase of the
properties at 3512, 4100 and 4108 69th Avenue North and 6900
France Avenue North.
3. The City Manager and Mayor are authorized to execute the purchase
agreements.
RESOLUTION NO.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
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 Council Meeting Date 10/29/
Agenda Item Number
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
ITEM DESCRIPTION:
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PROPOSAL FROM SEH, INC. TO PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL DESIGN SERVICES
RELATING TO REPLACEMENT OF LIFT STATION NO. 2, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1990 -05
DEPT. APPROVAL:
SY KNAPP, DIRE TOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION:
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached Yes )
On August 13 the City Council received and discussed a report from SEH, Inc.
regarding improvements to sanitary sewer Lift Station No. 2 located on Lyndale
Avenue at 55th Avenue North. In their report, SEH described two rehabilitation
Alternates (A and B) and one Alternate (C) for construction of a totally new
station. After discussion, the City Council selected Alternate C for which SEH had
submitted the following cost estimate:
Construction contract cost = $437,700
Design legal & admin. (@ 15 %) = 65,700
Construction engineering services = 43,800
Estimated Total Project Cost = $547,200
During the past two months City staff and SEH have discussed this project with the
Metropolitan Waste Control Commission staff (MWCC) and with staff members of the
Hennepin Parks. Based on those discussions, we can now report that:
• MWCC has requested that the City's project include the design and construction
of a metering station based on an agreement that the MWCC reimburse the City
for those costs. A formal agreement for this purpose will be prepared for
Council consideration in the near future.
• Hennepin Parks staff has reviewed our preliminary request for use of a portion
of the property south of the existing lift station which they recently
purchased, and have indicated their support of this proposal. We have now
submitted a formal request for use of this property for consideration by the
Park Board.
City staff also reviewed the scope of the City's project needs in considerable
detail with SEH, Inc., then requested them to submit a proposal for engineering
services based on those needs. A copy of their proposal is submitted for Council
review. Based on staff review of this proposal, we believe it covers the scope of
project needs to the full extent that those needs can be anticipated at this time.
A review of SEH's fee proposal for those services (Schedules A through A -4)
indicates the following:
• Schedule A provides that the "Basic Services" will be performed on a "cost
plus fixed fee" basis, with a not -to- exceed maximum of $114,780. This
includes an estimate of $8700 which will be reimbursed to the City by MWCC.
• Schedule A -1 indicates the direct salary costs which SEH pays its employees.
• Schedule A -2 shows details of SEH's overhead costs ( Note : although their FY
1990 overhead costs calculated to 174.8%, their proposal provides that the
rate charged under this proposal would be 170.9% which is equal to their FY
1989 overhead costs).
• Schedules A -3 and A -4 show their equipment rental rates and Basic Service Cost
summary. It is noted that the "Net Fixed Fee" (which represents their
anticipated profit for this project) is $12,982.00, and represents 15% of
their estimated payroll and overhead costs.
• Schedule A also provides the basis of payment for "Extra Services" and
"Reimbursement Expenses" as defined on pp. 3 through 5 of the proposal. We
have reviewed these services in detail with SEH and we estimate that the total
cost for these services will be in the range of $10,000 to $13,000. However,
we must note that these costs may vary considerably due to the uncertainty of
work needed: to get all required agency approval, to deal with unforeseen
site problems, and to deal with possible contract administration problems
(these may vary greatly, depending on the contractor).
• Accordingly, the total cost for all project related engineering services as
proposed by SEH, Inc. is estimated at $127,780 to $130,780.
Following is our analysis of this fee proposal:
Estimated total fees = $127,780 to $130,780
Less: MWCC participation = $8,700
Net City Cost $199,080 to $122,080
SEH's estimate of fees as
contained in their
August, 1990 report
($65,700 + $43,800) _ $109,500
Increased cost estimate = $9580 to $12,580
Our detailed review of this cost increase indicates that it is attributable to the
following factors:
• The earlier estimate was based on doing most of the design work
during 1990, while the current estimate anticipates much of the
work will be done in 1991, resulting in payroll cost increases of ...... $3000
• The current estimate anticipates considerable work by a landscape
architect, to satisfy Hennepin Parks requirements and the
Critical Rivers Area requirements ............. .........................$4500
• City staff has requested that SEH prepare a detailed "Operation
and Maintenance Manual" to assure that design concepts and
considerations are documented for the use and benefit of future
operators ..... ............................... ..........................$3000
• The estimate for extra services includes an allowance for more
than normal construction supervision ... ............................... 2500
Total $13,000
In summary, it is our opinion that the proposal submitted by SEH, Inc. is complete
and that their fee proposal is fair and proper. Because of the City's excellent
experience with this firm on a number of projects, and because of their detailed
knowledge of the City's needs for this project, we recommend that their proposal be
accepted.
• City Council Action Required
A resolution accepting SEH's proposal is submitted for consideration by the City
Council.
J 7
Member introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PROPOSAL FROM SEH, INC. TO PROVIDE
PROFESSIONAL DESIGN SERVICES RELATING TO REPLACEMENT OF
LIFT STATION NO. 2, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1990 -05
WHEREAS, it is the opinion of the City Council that sanitary sewer
Lift Station No. 2, located on Lyndale Avenue at 55th Avenue North, should be
replaced with a new lift station; and
WHEREAS, the City has received a proposal from Short- Elliott-
Hendrickson, Inc. (SEH) to provide the professional services needed during the
design and construction of this proposed improvement based on the following
fee schedule:
Payment for Basic Services ...on a cost plus a fixed fee basis,
with total payments not to exceed
$114,780
Payment for Extra Services ...based on a salary times a multiple
of 3.12, plus the actual cost of
services of subconsultants and other
direct costs
and the Director of Public Works has advised the City Council that he
estimates the total cost for extra services will be in the range of $10,000 to
$13,000, and that the proposed services cover the City's needs for this
project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that:
1. The proposal submitted by SEH, Inc. is hereby accepted.
2. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to
enter into a contract with SEH, Inc. to provide the required
services on the basis of that proposal.
3. All costs for this improvement shall be charged to the Public
Utility Fund.
RESOLUTION NO.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
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.
® 4
ENGINEERS ■ARCHITECTS ■ PLANNERS 3535 VADNAIS CENTER DRIVE, SL PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110 612490-2000
October 10 1990
Mr. Sy Knapp, P.E.,
Director of Public Works
City of Brooklyn Center
6301 Shingle Creek Parkway
Brooklyn Center Minnesota 55430
Dear Mr. Knapp:
Enclosed is the Engineering/ Architectural Services proposal and draft contract
l for the Brooklyn Center Lift Station No. 2 Project. The proposal includes:
Standard Agreement for Professional Consulting Services:
Exhibit A - Scope of Work
Schedule A - Payments to the Consultant
A -1 Direct Salary Rate Range
A -2 Overhead Costs
A -3 Equipment Rental Rates
T A -4 Cost Summary
Exhibit B - Certificate of Insurance
Exhibit C - Electrical /Mechanical Engineering Services Proposal
Exhibit D - Geotechnical Proposal
Exhibit E - Work -Hour Estimate
In estimating he engineering
g services cost, we have used a total overhead rate
lower than shown on Schedule A -2 Overhead Costs. We believe that some
extraordinary costs and indirect labor were incurred as a result of SEH's move in
Fiscal Year 1990 and therefore have r 1 h
a e used a total overhead rate equal to that
experienced in Fiscal Year 1989.
Exhibit E is our estimate of the work effort necessary to accomplish the project in
accordance with our discussions with you.
SHORT ELLIOTT ST PAUL, CHIPPEWA FALLS,
t HENDRICKSON INC. MINNESOTA WISCONSIN
_ Mr. Sy Knapp, P.E.
October 10, 1990
Page 2
We hope you find the proposal satisfactory. We will be happy to meet with you to
discuss the proposal and are looking forward to working with the City on this
project.
Sincerely,
Y
Short- Elliott- Hendrickson, Inc.
John H. Stodola, P.E.
Manager Environmental Department
Standard Agreement
For
Professional Consulting Services
THIS AGREEMENT made this day of , by and
between the CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, hereinafter called or referred to as the City,
and SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON, INC., hereinafter called or referred to as the
Consultant.
WITNESSETH, the CITY requires professional engineering services for the
preparation of plans and specifications for Lift Station No. 2 located near the intersection
of Lyndale and 55th Avenue, referred to as the Project, and for services during the
bidding and construction phases of the Project and
WHEREAS, it is intended that this contract shall govern the terms of employment
and compensation of the Consultant and all the conditions thereof, and the City desires
to engage the services of the Consultant in connection with said Project.
NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION of this Agreement as set forth herein, it is
agreed by and between the parties as follows:
1. The City hereby employs the Consultant to furnish and perform the professional
services as described in the Scope of Work " on attached Exhibit "A", and to pay
the Consultant as compensation therefore the fees in the manner and subject to
the conditions noted herein; and the Consultant agrees to render and perform
engineering services in connection with the above mentioned Project, and to
accept as payment of its compensation the fees for such work, or any part thereof,
_ in the manner and subject to the conditions noted herein.
2. Copyright or Patent Infringement: The Consultant shall defend actions or claims
charging infringement of any copyright or patent by reason of the use or adoption
of any designs, drawings or specifications supplied by Consultant, and shall hold
harmless the City from loss or damage resulting therefrom, providing however,
that the City within five (5) days after receipt of any notice of infringement or of
summons in any action therefore shall have forwarded the same to the Consultant
in writing.
3. Consultant shall be an independent contractor and not an agent or employee for
the City. Neither Consultant or any of its employees shall be employees of the
City for purposes of social security, state or federal income tax withholding,
workers compensation, unemployment compensation or any other purpose.
Short- Elliott - Hendrickson, Inc. Page 1
3
i
} 4. Insurance: The Consultant shall secure and maintain insurance as will protect
Consultant from claims under the Worker's Compensation Acts and from claims
for bodily injury, death, or property damage and professional liability which may
arise from the performance of services under this Agreement.
5. The Consultant, upon direction of the City, agrees to perform the following
Engineering Services:
A. General: The Consultant shall serve as the City's professional representative in
the design of the Project, and shall give consultation and advice to the City
during the performance of such services.
1, B. Basic Services of the Consultant to be performed:
On the basis of the approved Alternate C in the report entitled Evaluation of
Lift Station No. 2 dated August 9 1990 the Consultant shall p repare all
g P P
contractual documents and perform Project related services including the
following items:
a. Furnish to the City, engineering data. If requested, the Consultant shall
provide copies of its design calculations to the City.
b. Advise the City of any adjustment of the cost estimate for the Project
caused by changes in scope, design requirements or construction costs, and
furnish a revised cost estimate for the Project based on the completed
' drawings and specifications.
c. Prepare and furnish the contract documents consisting of construction
agreement forms, general conditions, special provisions, up to 20 copies of
the detailed construction drawings, specifications and proposal forms for
bidding purposes by the contractors. Consultant shall confer with the
City's engineer and shall use, subject to modification as agreed to by the
City and Consultant, any general forms, conditions or specifications
prepared and normally used by the City as outlined in this section.
d. Assist the City in obtaining and evaluating bids and awarding contracts for
the construction of the Project.
e. Review samples, catalog data, schedules, shop drawings, laboratory, shop
` and mill tests of materials and equipment and other data which the
contractor is required to submit, for conformance with the design concept
of the Project and compliance with the information given by the contract
documents, and assemble written guarantees which are required by the
contract documents.
r�
Short- Elliott - Hendrickson, Inc. Page 2
Such review shall not extend to means, methods, sequences, techniques or
procedures of construction or to safety precautions and programs
incidental thereto.
f. Consult with and advise the City and prepare routine change orders as
required for City Council approval. All Change Orders shall be approved
by the City before they are issued to the contractor.
C. Extra Services of the Consultant shall include the following when authorized
by the City's representative:
(1) Revisions to drawings and specifications previously approved and
preparation of necessary documents for alternate proposals and change
orders.
(2) Construction field g
surve in and staking.
surveying
(3) Review and coordination of work accomplished by other Consultants for
work related to the Project (e.g., hydrographic surveys or other special
consultation).
(4) Services During Construction:
a. Make periodic visits to the site to observe the progress and quality of the
executed work and to determine if the work is proceeding in accordance
with the contract documents; and during such visits, and on the basis of its
on -site observations as experienced and qualified professional engineers,
Consultant will keep the City informed of the progress of the work, will
guard the City against defects and deficiencies in the work of contractors,
and shall notify the City of work failing to conform to the contract
documents that the Consultant observes or that is brought to the
Consultant's attention by the City's representative.
r The Consultant shall not be required to make exhaustive or continuous on-
! site inspections to check the quality and quantity of such work. The
Consultant shall not be responsible for the means, methods, techniques,
sequences or procedures of construction selected by the contractor or the
safety precautions and programs incidental to the work of the contractor.
b. Based on on -site observations as experienced and qualified professional
- engineers and on review of the contractors' applications for payment,
Consultant shall assist the City to determine the amount owing to the
contractors; such recommendations of payment to constitute a
representation to the City, based on such observations and review and the
data comprising such applications, that the work has progressed to the
Short- Elliott - Hendrickson, Inc. Page 3
point indicated and that the quality of the work is generally in accordance
with the contract documents, subject to the results of any subsequent test
called for in the contract documents and any qualifications stated in
Consultant approval.
' c. Conduct, in company with the City's representative, a final inspection of
the Project for conformance with the design concept of the Project and
compliance with the information given by the contract documents, and
recommend in writing final payment to the contractor.
d. Resident Project inspection of construction.
(5) Observation of Extraordinary Materials Testing.
{ (6) Assist the City in arranging the continuation of the work should the
t contractor default for any reason.
(7) Work performed in connection with preparation of legal descriptions or
acquisit -
of easements or rights-of-way that are required for the Protect.
Preparation of environmental site acquisition audits (for site /soil
contamination).
Assist in the preparation of the required documents to secure approval of
such governmental authorities as have jurisdiction over design criteria
applicable to the Project.
(8) Inspections prior to Expiration of the Guaranty Period of the Project and
preparation of a written report listing observed discrepancies between
guarantees and performance.
(9) Preparation of operations and maintenance manuals.
(10) Record Drawings: If requested by the City, the Consultant shall prepare
l within 90 days after completion of the Project record drawi showin
� y P Project, g g
changes in the work authorized during construction based on field
inspection and survey reports and shall submit a set of mylar reproducibles
and one set of prints to the City.
i (11) Preparation of applications and supporting documents for government
_ grants, loans or advances in connection with the Project.
(12) Additional services due to significant changes in general scope of the Project
g g g P 7
or its design including but not limited to, change of size, complexity of
character or of construction.
f
Short- Elliott - Hendrickson, Inc. Page 4
(13) Providing services after issuance to the City of the final Certificate for
Payment.
(14) Serving as an expert witness for the City in any litigation or other
proceedings involved in the Project.
(15) Preparation of EAWs or EISs.
(16) Additional services in connection with the Project not other wise provided
for in this Agreement.
D. Reimbursable Expenses
The following reimbursable expenses representing actual expenditures made by
{ the Consultant, its employees, or its professional Consultants specifically for the
1, Project are not included in the Basic Services.
(1) When authorized in writing by the City's representative, transportation and
subsistence of principals and employees for extraordinary trips; long
distance telephone and telegraph calls as required to expedite the work of the
contractor, reproduction of drawings and specifications over and above those
specified in Article 5.Bc of this Agreement.
(2) Fees paid for, in the name of the City, for securing approval of authorities
having jurisdiction over the Project.
6. The City agrees to provide the Consultant with complete information concerning
the scope of the Project and to perform the following services:
A. Access to the Work: The City shall guarantee access to and make all
provisions for the Consultant to enter upon public and private lands as
required for the Consultant to perform such work as surveys and inspections
'. in the development of the Project.
B. Consideration of the Consultant: The City shall give thorough consideration
-- to all reports, sketches, estimates, drawings, specifications, proposals, and
other documents presented by the Consultant, and inform the Consultant of
all decisions within a reasonable time so as not to delay the Consultant.
C. Legal Requirements: The City shall hold promptly all required special
meetings, serve all required public and private notices, receive and act upon
all protests and fulfill all requirements necessary in the development of the
Project, and pay all costs incidental thereto.
f�
i
Short- Elliott - Hendrickson, Inc. Page 5
D. Proposals: The City shall advertise for Proposals from Bidders, open the
Proposals at the appointed time and place and pay all costs incidental thereto.
E. Standards: The City shall furnish the Consultant with a copy of any design
and construction standards it shall require the Consultant to follow in the
preparation of contract documents for the Project.
F. City's Representative: The Director of Public Works of the City of Brooklyn
Center shall act as the City's representative with respect to the work to be
performed under this Agreement. He shall have complete authority to
transmit instructions, receive information, interpret and define City's policy
and decisions, with respect to the materials, equipment, elements and system
pertinent to the Project covered by this Agreement.
7. City's Payment for Project Work done by the Consultant:
A. Progress Payments: Once each month the City shall pay the Consultant upon
submission of invoices for professional services performed under this
Agreement in proportion to services performed during the period.
B. Payments for Basic Services of the Consultant: The City shall pay the
Consultant for the basic services described in Article 5.B of this Agreement, on
an hourly basis in accordance with Schedule "A ". Said payments shall not
exceed a maximum amount as indicated in Schedule "A ".
C. Payment for Extra Services of the Consultant: For Extra Services defined in
Article 5.0 the City shall pay the Consultant on an hourly basis in accordance
with the attached Schedule "A ". If requested, the Consultant shall provide a
maximum cost to accomplish the work, said costs shall not be exceeded
without written consent of the City's representative.
D. Payments for Consultant's Reimbursable Services: The Consultant shall be
reimbursed at cost for the reimbursable services outlined under Article 5.D.
8. The City and Consultant further agree to the following conditions:
A. Arbitration Arbitration of all questions in dispute under this Agreement may
be arbitrated in accordance with rules of the American Arbitration
Association, if mutually agreeable to both parties. This Agreement shall be
specifically enforceable under the prevailing arbitration law and judgement
upon the award rendered may be entered in the court of the forum, state or
federal, having jurisdiction. The decision of the arbitrators shall be a condition
precedent to the right of any legal action, but shall not be considered as
precluding an appeal to the courts by the City or Consultant to the arbitrators
decision.
Short- Elliott - Hendrickson, Inc. Page 6
B. Ownership of Documents: The completed tracings and master specification
sheets shall become the property of the City. The Consultant shall provide the
City with mylar reproducible copies of any plans, specifications or documents
already completed at the time of termination necessary for completion of said
Project at no additional expense to the City.
C. The Consultant shall indemnify, defend and save harmless the City, its
appointed and /or elected officials, commission members, employees, agents,
and each of them from and against any and all suits, actions, legal or
administrative proceedings, claims, damages, liabilities, interest, reasonable
attorneys' fees, cost and expenses of any character brought for or on account of
any injuries or damages to the extent such injuries or damages are attributable
to the negligent or otherwise wrongful act or omission of any of its
subcontractors, employees or agents.
9. Successors and Assigns: This Agreement and all of the covenants thereof shall inure
to the benefit of and be binding upon the City and the Consultant respectively and
its partners, successors, assigns and legal representatives. Neither the City nor the
Consultant shall have the right to assign, transfer or sublet its interest or obligations
hereunder without written consent of the other party.
10. Termination: The City may terminate this Agreement at any time at its option, but
the Consultant shall not terminate except upon thirty (30) days written notice to the
City.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement the day and
year first above written.
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER SHOR LLIOTT HE DRI ON, C.
BY (SEAL) BY
TITLE TITLE President
BY BY 049
TITLE TITLE Manager, Environmental D ept.
:
WITNESSETH
,t WITNESSETH:
Short- Elliott - Hendrickson, Inc. Page 7
10 CORPORATE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
COUNTY OF RAMSEY )SS.
On this day of j !I�ir,.GC�`z 19_� before me, a Notary Public
within and for said County personally appeared D - c��.�i��
and �7_ to. me personally known, who, being each by me
duly sworn did _ say that they are respectively the
the corporation named in the
foregoing instrument, and that the seal affixed to said instrument is
the corporate seal of said corporation, and that said instrument was
signed and sealed in behalf of said corporation by authority of its
Board of Directors and said and
acknowledged said instrument to be the
free act and deed of said corporation.
T .
7
's �,'2I+. " > "_ ndYL^!'PJ'.; y'�%V'Y °J'. ^!nf`�V V: ^,'L F ✓J'"
MUNICIPAL ACKNOWLEDGMENT
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)SS.
On this day of 19 before me, a Notary Public
within and for said County personally appeared
and
to me personally known, who, being each by me duly sworn did say that
they are respectively the and the
of the municipal corporation named in the
foregoing instrument and that the seal affixed to said instrument is the
seal of said municipalities, and that said instrument was signed and
sealed in behalf of said municipality, by authority of its Council and
said and
4 acknowledged said instrument to the free act and deed of said
municipality.
Short- Elliott - Hendrickson, Inc. Page 8
I
EXHIBIT "A"
SCOPE OF WORK
I. General Project Scope
The scope of Consultant services includes preparation of plans and specifications,
bidding and award services and construction- related services for construction of Lift
Station No. 2 near L dale and 55th Avenue. The lift station shall be designed based on
Yn g
Alternate C in the report on the Evaluation of Lift Station No. 2 dated August 9, 1990.
Alternate C provided for the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission (MWCC) to
design and construct a metering station for wastewater pumped from Lift Station No. 2.
The scope of services for this Agreement is developed on the basis that the City of
Brooklyn Center and MWCC have a joint - services agreement. That agreement provides
for the MWCC meter station to be designed and constructed by the City as part of the
Lift Station No. 2 project. The meter station will consist of a separate vault structure
adjacent to the lift station and include a magnetic flow meter, pipe coupling for
removing the meter, piping and access, and the required MWCC controls. Engineering
services (cost) related to the design, bidding and construction of the MWCC meter
station shall be identified or invoiced separately by the Consultant to allow the City to
obtain reimbursement from MWCC. The bid form shall include a separate line item on
which the contractor will identify the cost related to construction of the meter station to
allow the City to receive reimbursement from the MWCC.
The landscaping as shown on Figure No.'s 7, 8, and 9 in the report are considered
preliminary and the scope will include assisting the City in developing a final landscape
plan. This effort will include meeting with City staff and representatives of the Hennepin
County Parks Board to develop a final landscape plan. It is intended that the lift station
and landscaping comply with the Critical Rivers Area planning and regulations.
Although an odor control syst will n i Pr will
g of be a part of th � ct, be
made during the design to permit future addition of an odor control system.
II. Project Schedule
The City has identified that it desires to proceed with construction of the Project in 1991.
- Completion of the design effort necessary to commence spring 1991 construction will
require cooperation and timely decisions and reviews by the City of Brooklyn Center.
j The following schedule is anticipated:
j_
Begin Design October, 1990
_ Complete Design February, 1991
Receive Bids March, 1991
Start Construction April, 1991
Complete Construction December, 1991
I Short- Elliott - Hendrickson, Inc. Page 9
III. Basic Services of the Engineer
A. General:
The engineer agrees to perform professional services including design and construction
services in connection with the Project as hereinafter stated.
B. Design Phase:
The design shall include preparing plans and specifications for Lift Station No. 2 and
includes the following:
1. General and Architectural Drawings
a. Lift station building plans and details.
b. Building elevations.
c. Building wall sections and details.
d. Floor and roofing plans, sections and details.
e. Door and window details.
f. Plans and sections of um s, piping, valves, and other accessory
P P Y
equipment.
g. Screenings equipment details.
h. Exterior piping and centerlines for connecting to the new station and new
station discharge forcemain.
i. MWCC meter station including structure, meter, piping /coupling and
details.
j. Demolition plan and sections of the existing lift station.
- k. Site adin plan showing existing and final contours, fencing, retaining
Sr g P g g tou s, g g
wall, and access roadway.
` 1. Plan and profile for access roadway.
m. Landscaping plans and details showing landscape structures, plantings,
seeding nd sodding.
. g
2. Structural Drawings for Lift Station and MWCC Meter Station
r
Short- Elliott- Hendrickson, Inc. Page 10
a. Drawings including plan views, sections, elevations, and standard details
showing reinforcement bar layout and structural steel members.
b. Foundation and footing plan and section details.
c. Roof and floor framing plan, sections and details.
3. Electrical Drawings
a. Electrical plan drawing including general circuitry, lighting design, and
equipment layout.
b. Service entrance and automatic transfer design and drawings.
c. Motor control center design, one -line diagrams and schematics.
d. Electrical details, generator set installation details.
e. MWCC metering station controls/ telemetry, design and drawings.
- f. Details for continued use of existing Motorola alarm system.
4. Mechanical Drawings
a. Heating and ventilation system layouts including duct work and details.
b ". Fuel storage tank and piping design and details.
5. Specifications
a. Specifications will be written in the CSI (Construction Specification
Institute) format using the CSI's three part presentation format for each
technical specification section.
b. Specification sections shall be written for all equipment or materials to be
furnished and installed.
c. Specification section shall be written identifying the need to by -pass or
maintain operation of the existing lift station until the new Lift Station No.
2 and the MWCC meter station are operating and providing a sequencing
schedule for the construction.
- C. Bid Phase
1. Prepare the proposal form and Advertisement for Bids and assist the City in
preparation of contract documents.
2. Prepare an estimate of cost based upon the final plans and specifications.
Short- Elliott- Hendrickson, Inc. Page 11
3. Answer contractors questions prior to bids and prepare an addendum if
necessary.
4. Assist the City in obtaining and evaluating bids.
D. Construction Services
Construction related services include review of all shop drawing data and the general
engineering coordination of the Project.
l
The construction services identified under Sections 5C (4) a, b, c, and d of the Standard
Agreement may be performed by the City, by the Consultant or a combination of both.
The level of Consultant involvement shall be determined by the City.
Short- Elliott- Hendrickson, Inc. Page 12
Schedule cc A »
Payments To The Consultant
A. Method Of Payment - Basic Services
The City shall compensate the Consultant for his services on a monthly basis in
accordance with the terms of Standard Agreement: The monthly payments shall be equal
to the sum of Paragraphs A.1 - A.5 however, shall not exceed the total payments
P Ym
outlined in Paragraph A.6.
1. The direct costs incurred by the Consultant shall include the cost of salaries and
wages paid to principals and employees engaged directly on the Project,
including, but not limited to, engineers, surveyors, technicians, drafters,
specification writers, estimators, and clerks. (See Schedule A -1, Direct Salary Rate
Range).
2. Fringe benefits and indirect costs incurred at the indirect overhead rate of 170.9
percent of the direct salary costs. Fringe benefits include, but are not limited to,
Social Security contributions, unemployment, excise and payroll taxes,
Workmen's Compensation,- health and retirement benefits, incentive
compensation, sick leave, vacation and holiday pay applicable thereto. (See
Schedule A -2, Overhead Costs.)
The total overhead rate (170.9 %) is lower than the total overhead rate (174.8 %)
identified in Schedule A -2. During FY 90, some extraordinary costs and indirect
labor were incurred due to the Consultant's office move. Therefore, a total
overhead rate of 170.9 %, which is equal to that experienced in FY 89, is used.
3. The actual costs incurred by the Consultant in retaining the services of
subconsultants for disciplines which are not available within the Consultant's
firm and are necessary to accomplish the work.
4. Other direct costs incurred to the extent that they are properly allocable to the
_ Project, which may include but are not limited to; travel, special equipment
(computers, electronic survey equipment, etc.), materials, plans and
specifications, printing and reproduction, bid document mailing, and supplies as
outlined in Schedule A -3.
5. A fixed fee in addition to the aforesaid costs in the amount of $12,982.00. It is
understood that the fixed fee will be aid in r
p proportion to the Project progress
and will be subject to adjustment in case of change of scope of work,
abandonment of the Project prior to its completion, or deletion of specific tasks as
presently anticipated.
Short- Elliott - Hendrickson, Inc. Page 13
1 6. The total payments to the Consultant shall not exceed $114,780.00. This includes
an estimated Consultant services cost of $8,700.00 for the MWCC meter station.
- The Consultant shall not perform any services that would cause the above
amount to be exceeded unless the Consultant has been authorized by the City
under amendment to this Agreement. It shall be the responsibility of the
Consultant to originate all requests for additional compensation and amendments
to this Agreement.
B. Method of Payment - Extra Services
The City shall pay the Consultant monthly for extra services performed based on the
total time expended by personnel assigned to the Project at the rates shown in Schedule
A -1 times a multiplier of 3.12, which includes fringe benefits, indirect costs and profit,
plus the actual cost of services of subconsultants and other direct costs as defined in
Paragraphs A3 and A4. The hourly rates for the various labor categories of personnel
assigned to the Project shall be adjusted on approximately April 15, annually.
r
r
'
Short- Elliott- Hendrickson, Inc. Page 14
a
SCHEDULE A -1
Direct Salary Rate Range
by Classification (1)
Classification Actual Rate
Office Staff
Principal Engineer $38.00 - $41.00
31.00
Project Manager 18.75 -
l g $ $
Project Engineer /Architect /Planner $14.90 - $21.75
Design Engineer /Architect /Planner $10.00 - $19.25
Lead Technician $12.50 - $17.75
t
Technician $11.00 - $15.50
Associate Technician $7.00 - $9.40
1
Word Processor $7.25 - $11.10
General Clerical $6.25 - $10.15
i
Field Staff
Lead Project Representative $12.50 - $17.90
Sr. Project Representative $9.90 - $14.25
Project Representative $7.90 - $11.00
Survey Party Chief $10.50 - $18.00
Survey Assistant $7.00 - $9.65
_ (1) The actual rate charged is dependent upon the hourly rate of the employee assigned to
the project. The rates shown are subject to change.
Issued: April 2,1990
Expires: April 1, 1991
i
Short- Elliott - Hendrickson, Inc. Page 15
i
-
SCHEDULE A -2
Overhead Costs
SHORT- ELLIOTT- HENDRICKSON, INC.
OVERHEAD COSTS
Y/E 6/30/90
� To
Direct
Gross Net Labor
Direct Labor $3,290,749
Salary Overhead
Payroll Taxes 430,204 295,550 9.0%
Paid Leaves 470,955 323,546 9.8
Group Ins and Wk Comp 229,489 157,659 4.8
PST & 401(K) 457,087 314,019 9.6
Incentive Compensation 414,067 284,464 8.6
Misc. Empl. Benefits 143,126 98,327 3.0
Total Salary Overhead 2,144,928 1,473,565 44.8%
General & Administrative O.H.
Indirect Labor 1,499,473 45.6%
Salary O.H. - Indirect 671,362 20.4
Office Rent 422,356 12.8
General Insurance 280,874 8.5
l Telephone 90,036 2.7
Equipment Repair and Rent 100,021 3.0
( Postage 35,539 1.1
Dues, Fees, Subscriptions 32,115 1.0
Supplies 157,355 4.8
Management Meetings 7,399 •
Project Development 56,653 1.7
Professional Services 149,349 4.5
Employment Costs 44,761 1.4
Data Processing (403,102) (12.2)
Depreciation 521,342 15.8
Property Taxes 12,246 .4
Corp. Income Tax - Minnesota 25,000 •8
Corp. Income Tax - Wisconsin 12,000 •
Auto Expenses 145,557 4.4
Project Warranty 72,486 2.2
Miscellaneous 665 -
Facilities Capital Cost 116,980 3.6
Advertisement and Entertainment 45,616 1.4
Bad Debts 40,257 1.2
Donations /Contributions 11,955 •
Interest Expense 128,919 3.
Total General & Administrative 4,277,214 130.0%
TOTAL OVERHEAD 5,750,779 174.8%
Short- Elliott- Hendrickson, Inc. Page 16
I
3
SCHEDULE A -3
Equipment Rental Rates
SUN 3861 $18.00 /HR
IBM -PC COMPUTER $10.00 /HR
HP -9816 COMPUTER $18.00 /HR
GEODIMETER $22.00 /HR
HP PLOTTER $20.00 /HR
WORD PROCESSING COMPUTERS $5.00 /HR
ELECTRONIC DISTANCE MEASURING $50.00 /DAY
NUCLEAR DENSITY TESTER $200.00 /WEEK
FLOW METERS W /FLUME $75.00 /WEEK
VIDEO CAMERA $4.00 /1-iR +TAPE
SURVEY VAN $3.00/HR + $0.30/MILE
NOTE:
Equipment charges are for equipment only. Staff time involved in use, setup or
maintenance of equipment is to be invoiced to the client separately.
$ Short- Elliott- Hendrickson, Inc. Page 17
t
SCHEDULE A -4
Cost Summary
1. Direct Labor Cost
Direct Labor
Labor Category Hours Rate Cost
Project Manager 206 $27.1505 $5,593.00
Project Engineer 512 $20.5977 $10,546.00
Structural Engineer 61 $22.3770 $1,365.00
Landscape Architect 116 $15.6207 $1,812.00
Lead Technician 546 $17.7216 $9,676.00
Technician 138 $14.3623 $1,982.00
Survey Crew 8 $27.00 $216.00
Word Processor 64 $9.7188 $622.00
General Clerical 16 $8.625 $138.00
Subtotal Direct Labor Cost: $31,950.00
2. Overhead On Direct Labor Costs (44.8 %) $14,313.00
f
3. General And Administrative Overhead On
Direct Labor (126.1 %) $40,289.00
4. Subtotal; Item No.'s 1, 2, And 3 $86,552.00
5. Net Fixed Fee 15% Of Item No. 4 $12,982.00
6. Estimated Direct Expenses
A) Geodimeter $125.00
B) Computer $400.00
C) Survey Van $24.00
D) Travel $240.00
E) Reproductions $1,275.00
F) Photos $158.00
G) Word Processor $285.00
H) Bid Document Mailing $200.00
I) Elec. /Meth. Subconsultants $10,139.00
J) Soil Borings (Estimated) $2,400.00
Total Estimated Direct Expenses: $15,246.00
7. Item No.'s 4, 5, And 6
Total Estimated Cost Plus Fixed Fee: $114,780.00
s
Short- Elliott - Hendrickson, Inc. Page 18
Exhibit B
Certificate of Insurance
A Certificate of Insurance has been forwarded to the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota
by our insurance carrier.
Short- Elliott- Hendrickson, Inc. Page 19
Exhibit C
Electrical /Mechanical Engineering
Services Proposal
Short- Elliott - Hendrickson, Inc. Page 20
y
I
Kaeding and Associates. Inc.
7300 France Avenue South
Suite 330
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55435
(612) 831 -0317
MEMORANDUM
TO: John.Stodola: SEH
FROM: Sheldon Sorensen
DATE: October 8, 1990
RE: Brooklyn Center, Minnesota
Lift Station #2
Per our telephone conversation today, we have revised our hours
breakdown for design and construction phase services for the
referenced project. Additional hours have been included for
design related to the MWCC metering and telemetry systems.
TASK HOURS
Enar Tech Draft Sec
Design Phase
1. Electrical plan drawing 8 12 2 -
including general circuitry,
lighting design, equipment
layout
2. Service entrance and automatic 4 4 - -
transfer design and drawings
3. Motor control center design, 10 16 8 -
one -line diagrams, and
schematics
4. Electrical details, generator 8 12 4 -
set installation details
5. Mechanical plan drawing and 4 - 10 -
details for heating and
ventilation systems
y
i
n-,..., 7n7n
i Mr. John Stodola
October 8, 1990
Page 2
TASK HOURS
'
Design Tech Draft Sec
n Phase Cont )
g (
6. Fuel tank and piping 6 12 - -
design /drawing
7. Division 15 mechanical 5 - - 4
specification
8. Division 16 electrical 6 - - 4
specification
9. Metering and telemetry 6 - - 4
specification
10. Meeting with City and MWCC 4 - - 2
to define MWCC flowmetering
requirements
11. Metering station design /drawings 6 8 - -
12. Interim review meeting with 6 - - 1
City; and SEH
Bid Phase
1. Respond to Contractor 6 - - 2
questions, prepare addenda
Construction Phase
1. Mechanical shop drawing review 2 - - 1
2. Electrical shop drawing review 8 - - 2
3. General assistance hone - -
P 8 2
calls, etc.
Total Hours 97 64 24 22
Rate SS $55 $44 $37.5 $32.5
CW $
Subtotal $10,039.00
i
Expenses (mileage, film, developing, etc.) 100.00
Total $10
Page 20B
Mr. John Stodola
October 8, 1990
Page 3
As we discussed, the scope and quantity of site trips during con -
struction is not clearly defined. Site trips have not been in-
cluded in this breakdown, but can be provided as an extra service
at our customary hourly rates.
The hourly rates indicated are reviewed and updated annually ef-
fective January 1st. Project hours billed in 1991 will reflect
revised rates.
Please call if you should have any questions.
Page 20C
Exhibit D
Geotechnical Proposal
Short- Elliott - Hendrickson, Inc. Page 21
AMERICAN CO\SULTASFS
• GEOTECH\ICAL
ENGINEERI \G • MATERIALS
TESTIIG, IN C. R � �
-- CS I VT D
SHORT EU' 1OTT HE,NORIOKSON, INC.
September 26, 1990 SEP 218
199,9
Mr. John Stodola S1 PAU
Short, Elliott, Hendrickson, Inc.
3535 Vadnais Center Drive
St. Paul, MN 55110
RE: Geotechnical Services Proposal
Proposed Lift Station
55th Avenue North and Lyndale Avenue North
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota
Dear Mr. Stodola:
American Engineering Testing, Inc. is pleased to present this
proposal for conducting subsurface exploration and providing
geotechnical engineering services for your above - referenced
project. Our proposal responds to your phone request of September
25, 1990. The proposal is intended to define a work scope,
schedule and estimated costs for our services.
American Engineering Testing, Inc. is very interested in your
project and is well qualified to provide this service to you. We
have experience on a number of projects similar to yours and also
have experience in the general area of your site.
Project Information
We understand your proposed project consists of designing and
constructing a sewer lift station. The structure will be about
22' x 44' in plan dimensions and the structure will extend about
52' to 24' below final exterior grade, which will be lowered about
5' below present ground surface at the site. Although we have no
structural loading information at this time, we anticipate bearing
pressures may be in the range of 3000 to 4000 psf.
Anticipated Subsurface Conditions
Based on our previous projects in the site vicinity, we anticipate
the subsurface soils will be variable river valley sediments. The
uppermost bedrock is expected to be the Prairie Du Chien formation
at a depth of over 100'. Ground water is expected within 40' of
the present ground surface.
Purpose of Study
The purpose of our work is to obtain subsurface information to
assist you in planning and design of the lift station. Considering
the rather large plan dimensions and depth of your proposed
structure, the subsurface conditions are very significant to the
I
Page 21A
2102 Universitv Ave. W. St. Paul..NI:N 55114 Phone 612 -659 -9001 Fn 612- 659 -1379
Mr. John Stodola
September 26, 1990
Page 2
design and construction. Our planned approach to this work is to
pay particular attention not only to the soil types and density or
stiffness, but to the presence of gravel, cobbles, boulders,
impervious layers and water which are important considerations for
the construction process. Our work is not intended to provide
general subsurface information concerning possible chemical
contamination
on the site. For that purpose, a different work
approach would be used.
Scope of Services
In order to accomplish the above purpose, we propose the following
work scope:
• Coordinate utility locations in the soil boring areas through
the Gopher State One -Call system and private property owners,
if applicable.
• Drill 3 soil borings, each to a depth of 41', at locations
suggested by you. The borings are accessible to truck - mounted
equipment and will be sampled by the split -spoon method in
accordance with ASTM:D1586.
• Perform a nominal amount of laboratory soil testing to assist
in properly classifying the soils, including the OSHA system
for soil retention systems. We allowed $100 in the
geotechnical services budget for these laboratory tests.
• Provide a formal report, including the results of the borings
and laboratory tests, as well as geotechnical engineering
recommendations for the following:
- Bearing capacity and settlement estimates for soils
present at and below the bottom of the proposed structure
-
Lateral earth pressures and excavation retention
considerations
Construction ground water control
Potential soil - related construction problems
Proiect Direction
Services we perform on your project will be done under the
direction of an experienced geotechnical engineer registered in the
State of Minnesota.
- Insurance
For the mutual protection of the owner, Short, Elliott,
Hendrickson, and American Engineering Testing, we maintain both
general and professional liability insurance. Certificates of such
insurance can be provided at your request.
Page 21B
I
Mr. John Stodola
September 26, 1990
Page 3
Fees
Our fee for the services will be charged on a time and materials
basis in accordance with our current schedule of fees, which is
attached. For the work scope described above, the estimated
maximum cost is $2400. These fees remain in effect through October
1990.
Conditions
If different subsurface conditions than those described above
are encountered which we feel warrant additional work beyond the
scope described above, we would propose to perform such work at
additional cost. If this situation arises, we will discuss the
additional work with you and receive your approval before
proceeding. The attached sheets entitled "General Conditions for
Field Work" and "Special Conditions for Test Borings, Monitoring
Wells and Piezometers" are part of this proposal.
Performance Schedule
Weather permitting, we plan to begin field work within three
working days after receiving notification to proceed. Our report
will be completed within one week after completion of the field
work, which we expect will require two days to complete.
Acceptance
Please indicate your acceptance of this proposal by endorsing both
this original and the attached copy. Please return the copy to us.
American Engineering Testing, Inc. appreciates the opportunity of
being considered for this work and looks forward to providing
services to you on your project. If you have any questions, or
need additional information, please contact me at 659 -1300.
Very truly yours,
�An g tc�
Donovan K. Stormoe, PE
Principal
DKS /sk
Attachments
PROPOSAL ACCEPTED BY:
Signature:
Company:
Date:
Page 21C
AMERICAN CONSULTANTS
• GEOTECHNICAL
l ENGINEERI \G • MATERIALS
TESTING, I \ C.
FEE SCHEDULE
(Effective April 1, 1990)
GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES
Soil and rock drilling, sampling and testing. Engineering consultation and
analysis. Experience since 1971 includes buildings, bridges, dams, roadways,
utilities, impoundments, harbor facilities, construction dewatering, and
hazardous waste sites.
Description Unit Rate
I. Engineering /Technical Personnel Rates
A. Drill Crew Person, Engineering Tech. I per hour $ 36.00
B. Engineering Technician II per hour 42.00
C. Drill Crew Chief per hour 48.00
D. Senior Engineering Technician III per hour 48.00
E. Engineering Assistant per hour 58.00
F. Engineer I, Geologist I per hour 60.00
G. Senior Engineering Assistant, Engineer II per hour 68.00
H. Senior Engineer, Geologist per hour 78.00
I. Principal Engineer per hour 95.00
J. Principal of Firm per hour 120.00
K. Litigation Preparation per hour 125.00
L. Deposition or Court Time (4 -hour minimum) per hour 150.00
The rates presented are portal to portal, with vehicle mileage, expenses
and equipment rentals being additional. Reduced rates may be negotiated
for long -term projects.
Overtime charged at above cost lus 20% for over 8 hours per da
P P Y or
Saturday; and at above cost plus 35% for Sundays or Holidays. Hazardous
work charged at above cost plus 20%
II. Vehicle Mileage (personnel time and rental extra)
A. Personal Automobile /Truck per mile $ 0.35
B. 3/4 -ton Truck /Van per mile 0.45
C. 1 -ton or 2 -ton Rig Auxiliary Truck per mile 0.60
— D. 1 -ton Truck with Drill Rig per mile 0.65
E. 22 -ton Truck with Drill Rig per mile 0.75
F. Tractor /Lowboy Trailer per mile 1.00
Page 21D
2102 University Ave. W. St. Paul, AI\ 6611.1 Phone 612- 659 -9001 Fax 612- 659 -1379
Description Unit Rate
*III. Site Exploration Equipment Rental /Services
A. Drilling Services (Includes drill rig, carrier
and 2- person crew. Auxiliary vehicle extra.)
1. Rotary Drill on 4WD 1 -ton Truck per hour $ 110.00
2. Rotary Drill on 2WD 22 -ton Truck per hour 120.00
3. Rotary Drill on 4WD 22 -ton Truck per hour 127.00
4. Rotary Drill on All- Terrain Vehicle per hour 152.00
5. Portable, Non - rotary Rig per hour 120.00
B. Rig Auxiliary Vehicle Rental
1. 3/4 -ton Truck per hour 8.00
2. 1 -ton or 2 -ton Truck per hour 15.00
C. Geotechnical Related.Equipment Rental
1. Vane Shear per day 125.00
2. Static Cone Penetrometer per day 100.00
3. Inclinometer Reading Equipment per reading 116.00
4. Pneumatic Transducer Reading Equipment
(pore pressure, settlement or earth
pressure) per reading 122.00
5. Bore Home Permeability
a) Open End Casing Method per day 50.00
b) Pressure Testing Using packers per day 320.00
�. D. Environmental Related Equipment Rental /Service
1. Steam Cleaning Service (includes rental)
a) Drill Rig /Tools per clean 275.00
b) Down Hole Drill Tools Only per clean 175.00
2. Steam Cleaner Rental er day 90.00
P Y
3. H -Nu Photoionizer per day 75.00
4. Water Sampling, Field Filtration Supplies per sample 15.00
5. Pumps quoted per job
6. Personnel Protection at Hazardous Waste
Sites
a) Level A quoted per job -
b) Level B quoted per job
C) Level C quoted per job
d) Level D quoted per job -
f Page 21E
Description Unit Rate
a
E. Miscellaneous Drilling Charges
1. Thin - walled Tube Samples Taken & Extruded per tube $ 20.00
2. Surcharge for 44" I.D. Hollow Stem Auger per hour 15.00
3. Surcharge for 64" i.d. Hollow Stem Auger per hour 20.00
4. Bit Wear
a) Carbide Bit per foot 3.00
b) Diamond Bit per foot 6.00
IV. Laboratory Tests of Soil
A. Moisture Content per test 10.00
B. Moisture Content and Density 'per test 25.00
C. Atterberg Limits (ASTM:D4318)
1. Plasticity Index per test 45.00
2. Liquid Limit or Plastic Limit Separately per test 27.00
D. Shrinkage Limit (ASTM:D427) per test 40.00
E. Sieve Analysis per test 55.00
F. Hydrometer Analysis (sieve analysis extra) per test 45.00
G. Specific Gravity (ASTM:D854)
1. Mineral Soil per test 62.00
2. Organic Soil per test 76.00
H. Hand Penetrometer /Torvane per test 9.00
I. Unconfined Compression per test 38.00
J. Consolidation - Primary Consolidation Curve
up to 32 tsf (ASTM:D2435) quoted per job -
K. Direct Shear Test quoted per job -
L. Triaxial Compression Test quoted per job -
M. Permeability Tests quoted per job -
N. Tests of Expansive Soils quoted per job -
O. Electrical Resistivity per test 41.00
P. Organic Content of Soil per test 35.00
Q. R -value (Hveem Stabilometer) per test 275.00
R. California Bearing Ratio per test 400.00
S. Miscellaneous
1. Sample Preparation See Section I
2. Sample Storage quoted per job -
3. Specialty Testing, including Rock Cores quoted per job --
V. Earthwork Observation and Testing
A. Field Engineering Services See I, II, VI
B. Field Density Tests, Trip Basis
1. Trip Charge (Time and Mileage) See I, II, VI
2. Test Charge, Nuclear and Sand -Cone per test 18.00
3. Test Taken on Weekends or Holidays per test 24.00
Page 21F
Description Unit Rate
C. Full-Time Density Test Monitoring
1. Engineering Technician, per 40 -hr. week per week $1400.00
2. Sr. Engineering Technician, per 40 -hr. per week 1550.00
week
3. Nuclear Gauge Rental per day 20.00
D. Compaction Laboratory Testing
1. Standard Proctor, "
r, (Method A) per test 60.00
2. Standard Proctor, 4" (Method B, C, D) per test 70.00
3. Modified Proctor, 4" (Method A) per test 70.00
4. Modified Proctor, 6" (Method B, C, D) per test 80.00
5. Preparation of Clay Proctor Sample per test 15.00
6. One Point Proctor Check per test 45.00
7. Relative Density of Cohesionless Soils per test 95.00
VI. Expenses
A. Direct Project Ex pens inc out-of-town
7 p includes out of town
per diem, plowing and towing; special equipment,
materials and supplies; special travel,
transportation and freight; subcontracted
services and miscellaneous costs Cost -0.8
B. Equipment Replacement when Abandonment is
more feasible than recovering Cost
C. Equipment Recovery when required by Regulatory
Agencies or Project Specifications Cost -0.8
VII. Clerical /Drafting Services
A. Personnel Rates
1. Typist per hour $ 30.00
2. Draftsperson per hour 35.00
B. Report Reproduction
1. Minimum (copying additional) per report 50.00
2. Copying per sheet .35
C. Facsimile Transmitting /Receiving per page 1.00
Pa je 21G
E
i
Page 1 of 2
AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC.
GENERAL CONDITIONS FOR FIELD WORK
RIGHT OF ACCESS
Right -of- access to sites must be obtained by Client (or others) . Unless
informed otherwise, AET will assume that right -of- access has been obtained
and will proceed accordingly.
COST ESTIMATES AND PAYMENT TERMS
Any estimate of cost shall not be considered as a firm figure unless
specifically stated otherwise.
If Client has any dispute, question, or disagreement about an invoice, Client
should so inform AET within 15 days of date of invoice. Payment is past due
thirty days from date of invoice. A finance charge of one and one -half
percent per month or the maximum rate allowable by law will be applied to
past due amounts.
INSURANCE
AET is protected by Worker's Compensation, Public Liability, Property Damage,
V nd Professional Liability insurance. AET will furnish certificates of
nsurance to Client upon request.
Insurance is not available to AET (and similar firms) to protect against
liability arising out of the actual, alleged, or threatened discharge,
dispersal, release, or escape of pollutants. Accordingly, Client and /or
property owner may be liable for any such claims.
WARRANTY
AET warrants that its work will be done in accordance with methods and
procedures ordinarily exercised by reputable practitioners under similar
conditions, times, and locations.
POLLUTANTS
A pollutant is defined as any solid, liquid, gaseous or thermal irritant or
contaminant, including smoke, vapor, soot, fumes, acids, alkalis, chemicals
and waste.
In the event that a pollutant is encountered during the course of work: 1)
AET will take measures to protect its personnel and equipment and to comply
with government regulations, at current fee schedule rates, and 2) The report
may state that parties with controlling interest or ownership of land in
Minnesota are required to report pollution on their land or underground
(suspected, possible or real) to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency.
Page 21H
Page 2 of 2
LIMITATIONS ON LIABILITY
Client agrees to limit liability against AET on account of design defects,
breach of contract, errors, omissions, or negligence to a sum not to exceed
$50,000 or the amount of AET's fee, whichever is greater. Alternatively, if
Client does not wish to limit AET's liability, Client must so inform AET
before the field work is started and Client agrees to pay an additional 10%
of the total fee.
AET is not responsible or liable for the accuracy or reliability of work done
by others.
In general, AET provides work and services on properties not owned by AET.
AET is responsible for its work and services, but (except as indicated
herein) it is not responsible for the property and any structures, materials,
contents, etc., in the air, on the ground, or underground at the property.
Page 21I
i
Page 1 of 2
AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC.
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
FOR TEST BORINGS, MONITORING WELLS, AND PIEZOMETERS
INTRODUCTION
Unless indicated otherwise and agreed to in writing (or initialed) by
American Engineering Testing, Inc. (AET) and the Client, the following
conditions apply to the contract.
UNDERGROUND FACILITIES
An underground facility is an underground line, facility, system, and its
appurtenances used to produce, store, convey, transmit, or distribute
communications, data, electricity power, heat, gas, oil, petroleum products,
water including storm water, steam, sewage, and other similar substances.
If Client determines boring locations, it is Client's responsibility to
ocate underground facilities, and to select bore hole locations accordingly.
AET will drill bore holes at locations designated by Client, and AET is not
responsible for any damages arising out of striking underground facilities at
those locations.
If requested b Client AET may assume
Y , y responsibility for locating certain
underground facilities at current fee schedule rates. AET will notify the
Gopher State One -Call System. (At least 48 hours notification is required
for utility location.) They in turn will notify their subscribing utility
operators (electric, gas, telephone, cable TV, sewer, water, etc.) to check
out the site and the immediate vicinity. AET assumes the utilities will be
marked or cleared. the utility operators (usually) do not locate service
lines on private property. The Client should stake out or mark the locations
of any such service known to them. AET is not responsible or liable for
damages resulting from encountering "non- located" or incorrectly located
underground facilities.
AET will inform Client of apparent or indicated locations of underground
. facilities in the vicinity of proposed bore holes, and the Client must adjust
and designate bore hole locations accordingly. AET will inform Client if it
not practical to locate some underground facilities. If AET is then directed
to proceed, AET is not responsible for liability arising out of striking
those underground facilities.
Minimum distances must be maintained between utility lines (or the indicated
ocation of same) and borings. If requested, AET will provide minimum
D istance information.
Page 211
q
Page 2 of 2
POLLUTANTS AND CONTAMINATION
Materials containing pollutants will be disposed of (in accordance with
governmental regulations) or will be placed in containers, both at current
fee schedule rates. The containers will be sealed, labeled, and left at the
site. (Alternatively, the materials will be disposed of in accordance with
- government regulations).
Materials containing pollutants include drill cuttings, drilling fluids,
cleaning liquids, well development water, soil and rock samples, protective
clothing and equipment,etc., which are exposed to or may contain pollutants.
If we detect materials or odors that may indicate contamination or pollution
in the borings,this is indicated on boring logs and in the report. The
report may also contain a statement to the effect that parties with
controlling interest or ownership of land in Minnesota are required to report
contamination or pollution of the land (suspected, possible, or real) to the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency.
INCLEMENT WEATHER
In general, drilling is not done: 1) when the wind -chill temperature is
lower than -30° F. or greater than 100° F.; 2) in heavy snow or rain; and 3)
w ring lightning. Work delays result from this.
SOIL SAMPLES
Samples of soil will be retained for at least 45 days after completion of the
work, and then will be discarded. If requested by Client, samples will be
stored longer or delivered at current fee schedule rates.
BACRFILLING BORE HOLES
Geoenvironmental bore holes should be backfilled with material of lesser
permeability than the adjacent soil /material. This generally is done using
a neat cement grout.
LOST EQUIPMENT
Lost equipment may be required to be retrieved by government agencies. Any
costs related to retrieving such equipment will be at fee schedule rates.
~ LIMITATIONS ON LIABILITY
Subsurface conditions vary from those encountered in borings. Any
conclusions and recommendations developed by AET are based on the information
available. Such conditions and recommendations may have to be modified
because of variances in subsurface conditions.
Page 21K
Exhibit E
Work -Hour Estimate
Short- Elliott - Hendrickson, Inc. Page 22
f
Brooklyn Center Lift Station No.2
c4 y U
C U N `
Exhibit E
W c�a c V 0 o U
U
Work -Hour Estimate
v� e� a Z C:
� c
2 0 2 o
a d (n W J H !n J Q (�
Project Initiation
Meet with City staff 3 3 2
Review proposed design 2 2 2
Review existing data 1 .1
Review site and existing station 2 2 2 2
Soil Borings
Develop boring scope 1 0.5 0.5
Stake boring locations 0.5 2
Interpret boring logs 1 1
Survey
Benchmark survey 2
Structure location 0.5
Critical cross sections 2
Topography 1
Reduce /plot data 8 0.5
Planning Considerations
MWCC metering station 2 4 2 1 0.5
Floodplain regulations 0.5 2
Zoning /setbacks 0.5 2 1
Hennepin County parks 2 3 7 1
Utilities 1
b
w
N
N
� N U
� C U
C CZ C (D q N
W iu U U C ca t5 o U
m m 2 cm
• r
0
d (L (� W J H U) Co Q C7
Landscape Design
Site review 4
Photos 1
Meetings 4 1 8 1
Preliminary Concepts 2 1 4 17
Refine concepts 1 1 8
Final concept 1 1 1 8 1
Preliminary Work
Hydraulic analysis 0.5 6
Pump evaluation /selection 0.5 4
Lift station emergency by -pass 0.5
Wet well sizing /layout 0.5 4 1
Piping layout 0.5 2.5 1
MWCC meter station 0.5 2 2 0.5 0.5
Odor considerations 0.5 3 2
Building layout - upper level 1 4 4
Building layout - lower level 1 4
Screening Equipment 0.5 2 0.5
Existing Station Demolition /Reuse 0.5 1 2.5
By -pass pumping 1 2 0.5
Electrical requirements 1 0.5 0.5
Mechanical requirements 0.5 0.5
Existing genset reuse 0.5 1
L
N
N
td
... � r , i""'""`"'"` ry...•. rww..+.w � .... -..... wi,r...r. ++,...+.. -. rw...Ww, mow, .rrr•w, .w...: .we„uw,
i
c
� y U
CO C U
C p> C 3 y
c v CO ` Q v U
W 0 U V cz tj 22
m
CL
a� m v Z cL ' c
0.. a. (n W J F - (n -j Q 0
Accesss 1 2 2
Final Plan Preparation /Design
Title Sheet 0.5 5
General Information 1 1 16
Existing Demolition /reuse plan 1 4 24
Existing demolition /reuse sections 1 32
Site plan 40
Main level plan views 0.5 2 40
Lower level plan views . 0.5 2 24
Roof plans 1 2 1 2
Base (footings) plan 0.5 15 1 8
Structural plan views 0.5 1 6 3 16
Structural sections 0.5 1 4 5 18
Pump /piping plans /sections 0.5 4 36
Misc. sections /structure and equipment 0.5 2 40
Misc. details 1 2 36
MWCC meter station /meter 1 4 6 16 12 2
Landscaping 4 13
Architectural building details 1 6 40
Roadway layout /profile,etc. 1 4 28
Underground pipe 1 8
Retaining Walls 1 0.5 1 2 2
Underground fuel storage /piping 1 2
w
N
N
n
0 m
c
c U V U
G (1) _U
c U a)
Cz CL
W a m U (z 2
N a) 2 0) U Z C L C
a_ fn W J 1- (n J Q 7 } 0
Electrical - general circuitry 0.5 2
Service entrance /auto transfer 1
Motor control center 0.5 2
One line electrical diagrams 1
Electrical details 1
Genset installation details -0.5
Mechanical - heat/ ventilation 0.5
Quality control review 18 8 16 1 2.5
Cost estimate 2 18 20 1 0.5
Specification Preparation
Review City's requirements 2 2
Assemble frontend documents 1 4 1.0
Division 1 sections 1 8 3
Site work 2 4 0.3
Sheeting 1 1 0.5
Silting /Silt fence 0.5 0.3
Concrete and rebar 2 1 0.5
Misc. construction materials 1 1 0.5
Fence /gate 2 0.3
Doors /windows 2 0.3
Hardware 0.5 0.3
Precast planks 0.5 0.3
�
Roofing 2 0.3
w
N
N
d
�....M.w«rv........, i ,.....w.,. �.......0 pw..o..a.., r.�+...., - . -.... ,w.�.n.... rwrww 1 +wrrSW^ wwwo.w rrw.wrwj ww.wWwr www.nrwr+a.»•y "w"'W"w.
C C U Ca 0
N V
N
CL 0
W c�C cz O O V
N N U f�0 U i' C C '2 C
O O
Masonry 2 0.3
Insulation 1 0.3
Painting/ coatings 2 0.3
Misc. metals/ stairways 4 0.5
Structural metal 1 0.3
Hatchways 2.5 0.3
Valves 3 0.5
Piping /Couplings, etc. 3 0.3
Pumps 1 4 0.5
Screen equipment 2 0.5
Bituminous /gravel 0.5 0.3
Excavation /compaction 1 0.3
Landscaping 1 14 1
By- passing /maintain operation 2 4 1
Scheduling 2 6 0.5 1
Division 15 Mechanical 1 4
Division 16 - Electrical 1 4
Spec assembly/ coordination 1 1 5 6
Specification Quality Control review 8 6 1 3
Coordination
Interim reviews with City 16 16 4 7 1.5
Hennepin County 1 6 2 1
w MWCC follow up /plan and spec review 1.5 3 2 0.5
N
N
M'n`�
CZ N U
CIO C_ U N
C C N y
W 0 v ccz U ca 2 U
ai a v Cz v Z c r c
a a inw ~ u) -jQ 3
General Process 8 8 4
Structural 4 2 6
Landscaping 2 0.5 2
Electrical 2 4 4 1.5
Mechanical 2 1 2 0.5
Bidding Services
Prepare bid documents 1 1 0.5
Print bid sets 2 6
Contractor questions 16 40 4 8 2
Addendum preparation 2 10 4 1 4
Attend bid letting 2 2
Award Services
Evaluate bids /contractor 1 2
Prepare bid recommendation 1 2 0.5
Prepare contracts 1 6
Construction Services
Preconstruction meeting & preparation 6 6 1
Contractor calls/ coordination 40 72 4 16 2 8
Coordination with MWCC, etc. 8 6 0.5 2
Shop Drawing Review
ro
Contractor scheduling plan 1 4 1 0.5 0.5
w
w
m
N
N
�
c ? N U
C 0)
cv �- a U
w U CO t o
" D f- V N d CO
a) V .0 p L C
0 0 2 c ca V Z c� o
a- n. 05 W J � U) J< y (3
Concrete 0.5 0.5
Reinforcing steel 1 9 9 8 24
Misc. construction materials 6 2
Fence /gate 1
Door /windows 2
Hardware - 1
Precast planks 2 0.5
Roofing 2
Masonry 2
Insulation 1
Painting 4
Misc. metal /stairways 1 12 2 6
Structural metal 1 0.5
Hatchways 2.5
Valves 4
Piping /fittings 1.5
Pumps 2 12
Screen equipment 1 4
Bituminous 0.5
Landscape materials 0.5 4
Magnetic flow meter 0.5
MWCC meter controls 0.5
Genset fuel storage tank 2
b
w
N
N
G7
..wwww. .s.r.rw waww «w., wuwwu „ r..s.� .,.:wwww.`
CD c o
0 C U U U
3 _N
Cz
W iv ►- v W U C Co
O U
a� m �i v Z c�
a n in W H W < - } C7
Fuel leak detection 2
Electrical - general materials 1
Lighting 0.5
Service entrance /auto transfer 0.5
Motor control center /starters /etc. 0.5
Heating equipment 0.5
Ventilation equipment 0.5
Shop drawing coordination with subs 4 8 0.5 4 4
Shop drawing multiple set mark -up 56
Shop drawing resubmittals 2 16 2
Equipment O & M manual submittals 8 1
Total Hours 206 512 61 546 138 8 116 64 16
Total Direct Labor Costs $5,593 $10,546 $1,365 $9,676 $1,982 $216 $1,812 $622 $138
Total Project Hours 1,667
Total Project
Direct LaborCosts $31,950
I
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 10/29/90
Agenda Item Number I F C1
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
ITEM DESCRIPTION:
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR REMOVAL OF SIX HOUSES ON 69TH AVENUE
NORTH, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1990 -21, CONTRACT 1990 -K
DEPT. APPROVAL:
1 )
SY KNAPP, DIRE OR OF PUBLIC WORKS
MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION:
No comments to supplement this attached report Comments below
/attached
/
********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached )
On September 10, 1990, the City Council approved specifications and authorized
• advertisement for bids for Improvement Project No. 1990 -21, 69th Avenue North House
Removals. Bids for this work were received and opened on October 18, 1990. Two
house moving companies submitted bids (or offers) for the six bid items (see
attached resolution). Ernst Machinery & Housemovers Corporation, of Brooklyn Park,
Minnesota, submitted the highest offers for all six of the bid items.
Ernst Corporation is an established house moving /sales firm with a good reputation
in the Metro area. Additionally, Ernst has a 14 acre site where they can place
moved houses and subsequently show them to prospective buyers. Staff views this
aspect as a definite "plus" and feels that Ernst Corporation may be immune from some
of the scheduling problems and /or delays that plague the smaller, less organized
firms. Accordingly, staff recommends award of all six of the bid items to Ernst
Machinery & Housemovers Corporation.
Council Action Required
Adoption of the attached resolution.
Member introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR REMOVAL
OF SIX HOUSES ON 69TH AVENUE NORTH, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO.
1990 -21, CONTRACT 1990 -K
WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for Improvement
Project No. 1990 -21, 69th Avenue North House Removal, the following bids or
offers were received, opened and tabulated by the City Engineer, on the 18th
day of October, 1990:
Bid Item Bid Item Bid Item Bid Item Bid Item Bid Item
Bidder No. 1 No. 2 No. 3 No. 4 No. 5 No. 6
Ernst Machinery &
Housemovers Corp. $6,714.00 $7,660.00 $7,753.00 $6,417.00 $6,951.00 $6,613.00
Crocus Hill
Development, Inc. $3,500.00 $5,800.00 $5,500.00 ($1,000.00) ($1,000.00) $3,500.00
WHEREAS, it appears that Ernst Machinery and Housemovers Corporation
of Brooklyn Park, Minnesota has submitted the highest offers for all six of
the bid items.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that:
1. The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute a contract with
Ernst Machinery and Housemovers Corporation for the removal of the
bid items.
2. All costs and revenues associated with Improvement Project No.
1990 -21, 69th Avenue North House Removal, shall be accounted for
in the MSA Fund No. 2611.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
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:
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date /29/9
Agenda Item Number
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
ITEM DESCRIPTION:
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF WELLHOUSE NO. 10,
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1990 -16, CONTRACT 1990 -G
********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
DEPT. APPROVAL:
i
SY KNAPP, DIRECTOR 6F PUBLIC WORKS J
MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION:
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached )
On August 13 of this year the City Council approved plans and specifications and
authorized advertisement for bids for Well No. 10 - wellhouse construction. Bids
for this work were received and opened on October 22, 1990. Of the three bids
received (see attached resolution) the lowest bid of $402,420.00 was submitted by
• Richmar Construction Inc. The Engineer's estimate at the time of the bid opening
was $410,000.00.
Richmar Construction Inc. has extensive experience in wellhouse construction in the
Metro area and has most recently worked on projects for the City of Maple Grove.
Black & Veatch, the City's engineering consultant for this project, has worked with
Richmar and report that they (Richmar) are a competent firm, capable of handling the
work. Accordingly, staff recommends award of the contract to Richmar Construction
Inc.
Note The cost for this phase of the well construction, as reported to the Council
in January of this year, was approximately $610,000. That cost anticipated the use
of chlorine gas for raw water treatment, which in turn created the need for a
scrubber system with additional building space. These are the requirements of the
latest State Fire Code and the interpretation of its hazardous material storage
standards.
Since the initial report, Staff has investigated alternatives to gas chlorination.
It was revealed that a liquid chemical chlorine feed system (which doesn't require
the installation of a scrubber system) could be designed for the wellhouse. While
such a system would raise the annual materials and maintenance costs by
approximately $1,000.00, it appears more cost - effective over the life of the well
than gas chlorination and installing a scrubber system. Therefore, the final design
of the wellhouse has incorporated a liquid chemical feed system and thereby
alleviates the scrubbing requirement.
• Council Action Required
Adoption of the attached resolution.
Member introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION
OF WELLHOUSE NO. 10, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1990 -16, CONTRACT
1990 -G
WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for Improvement
Project No. 1990 -16, Well No. 10 wellhouse construction, bids were received,
opened, and tabulated by the City Clerk and City Engineer, on the 22nd day of
October, 1990. Said bids were as follows:
Bidder Bid Amount
Richmar Construction Inc. $402,420.00
A & K Construction, Inc. $425,809.00
Barbarossa & Sons, Inc. $435,300.00
WHEREAS, it appears that Richmar Construction Inc. of Fridley,
Minnesota, is the lowest responsible bidder.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that:
1. The Mayor and City Manger are hereby authorized and directed to
enter into a contract with Richmar Construction Inc. of Fridley,
Minnesota in the name of the City of Brooklyn Center, for
Improvement Project No. 1990 -16 according to the plans and
specifications therefor approved by the City Council and on file
in the office of the City Clerk.
2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return
forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except
that the deposit of the successful bidder and the next lowest
bidder shall be retained until a contract has been signed.
3. All costs for this improvement shall be charged to the Public
Utilities Fund.
RESOLUTION NO.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
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 Council Meeting Date 10/29/ 90
Agenda Item Number cg
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
ITEM DESCRIPTION:
RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF DISEASED SHADE TREES
DEPT. APPROVAL:
SY KNAPP, DIREI TOR OF °UBLIC WORKS 7
MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION:
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached )
• The attached resolution represents the official Council action required to
P q
expedite removal of the trees most recently marked by the City tree inspector,
in accordance with approved procedures. It is anticipated that this
resolution will. be submitted for Council consideration each meeting during the
summer and fall. as new trees are marked.
Recommendation
It is recommended the Council adopt the attached resolution.
Member introduced the following resolution and
40 moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE
REMOVAL OF' DISEASED SHADE TREES (ORDER NO. DST 10/29/90)
WHEREAS, a. Notice to Abate Nuisance and Shade Tree Removal
Agreement has been issued to the owners of certain properties in the City of
Brooklyn Center giving the owners twenty (20) days to remove shade trees
on the owners' property; and
WHEREAS, the City can expedite the removal of these shade trees by
declaring them a public nuisance:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that:
1. The shade trees at the following addresses are hereby declared
to be a public nuisance.
PROPERTY OWNER PROPERTY ADDRESS TREE NUMBER
CITY OF B. C. SHINGLE CR.PKWY 654
CITY OF B.C. SHINGLE CR PKWY 655
2. After twenty (20) days from the date of the notice, the property
owners will receive a second written notice that will give them
(5) business days in which to contest the determination of City
Council by requesting a hearing in writing. Said request shall be
filed with the City Clerk.
3. After five (5) days, if the property owner fails to request a
hearing, the tree(s) shall be removed by the City.
4. All removal costs, including legal, financing and administrative
charges, shall be specially assessed against the property.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
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.
MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
REGULAR SESSION
OCTOBER 18, 1990
CITY HALL
CALL TO ORDER
The Planning Commission met in regular session and was called to
order by Chairman Pro tem Lowell Ainas at 7:31 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Chairman Pro tem Lowell Ainas, Commissioners Ella Sander, Kristen
Mann, and Mark Holmes. Also present were Director of Planning and
Inspection Ronald Warren and Planner Gary Shallcross. It was noted
that Chairperson Molly Malecki and Commissioners Wallace Bernards
and Bertil Johnson were excused.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 27 1990
Motion by Commissioner Mann seconded by Commissioner Sander to
approve the minutes of the September 27, 1990 Planning Commission
meeting as submitted. Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Lowell
Ainas, Commissioners Sander, Mann and Holmes. Voting against:
none. The motion passed.
APPLICATION NO. 90026 (Edina Realty / Blumentals Architecture)
Following the Chairman Pro tem's explanation, the Secretary
introduced the first item of business, a request to rezone from R5
to C1 a 1.1 acre parcel of land at 7100 Brooklyn Boulevard which is
presently the site of the Edina Realty building. The Secretary
reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission
Information Sheet for Application No. 90026 attached). The
Secretary explained during his presentation that the application is
technically only for the developed parcel, but that staff would
recommend expanding the rezoning to include the vacant parcel zoned
R5 to the east. He stated that the owner of that parcel, though
not present, has indicated to staff that he concurs with the
rezoning to C1. He explained that if it were not rezoned to C1, a
multiple family development could be built on the vacant parcel.
The Secretary also explained that the site in question was formerly
occupied by the old City Hall years ago and, therefore, has an
office use as a preceding use on the property. He stated that
there had been public meetings in the past in which the neighbors
and the City itself expressed a preference for office use on the
property even though it was zoned R5.
Commissioner Sander asked what was the size of the vacant parcel to
the east. Mr. Janis Blumentals, representing the applicant, stated
that it was approximately 25,000 sq. ft. In answer to another
question from Commissioner Sander, the Secretary noted that the
vacant parcel to the east is landlocked, but that a covenant exists
10 -18 -90 1
n�
which allows access to that parcel across the developed parcel at
7100 Brooklyn Boulevard. He stated that another office building
was approved for the vacant parcel, but has not been pursued to
I
this point.
Commissioner Sander asked why the property was not rezoned to C1
when the office development was proposed. The Secretary answered
that it was not necessary to rezone the property, but that a
special use permit was pursued instead. The Planner explained that
the property was probably zoned R5 in 1968 when apartment
development was popular. He stated that, as apartment development
declined and office development increased during the 1970's, an
ordinance amendment was passed to allow office uses by special use
permit in the R5 zone. He stated that it was then easier for
developers to seek a special use permit for an office development
than to go through the rezoning process. The Secretary added that
the old RB zone which existed in the Zoning Ordinance prior to 1968
also allowed both multiple family development and limited
commercial development.
Commissioner Holmes asked if the reason for the rezoning was really
for a bank. The Secretary answered that the firm that wishes to go
into the building calls itself a bank. He stated that a finance
office would be allowed in the R5 zone, but not a bank. He also
noted that a bank use requires parking based on the retail parking
formula. He added that the proposed bank tenant would have
tellers. Mr. Janis Blumentals explained that Edina Realty is owned
by Metropolitan Federal Bank and that it is a corporate policy to
move a small branch bank facility into the real estate offices of
Edina Realty to provide one stop shopping. He stated that there
was no intent for a driveup facility and pointed out that
Metropolitan Federal is presently located in K Mart. The Planner
asked Mr. Blumentals to clarify whether Metropolitan Federal would
be open to the public. Mr. Blumentals responded in the
affirmative. The Secretary commented that if the bank were not
open to the public, it could be considered to be an accessory use
to the real estate office and would not require rezoning. He
stated that the rezoning opens up the property to a broader range
of service /office uses.
Chairman Pro tem Ainas asked how many square feet the office
building was. Mr. Blumentals responded that it was approximately
10,000 sq. ft. (the Planner noted that the gross floor area is
closer to 14,000 sq. ft.). Chairman Pro tem Ainas asked for the
size of the bank facility. Mr. Blumentals responded that it would
only be about 400 sq. ft. There followed a brief discussion
regarding signery for the bank. The Secretary explained that wall
signery is limited to building identification signery and does not
allow for tenant identification signery.
Commissioner Sander stated that the applicant would still need a
site plan approval for the additional parking. The Secretary
10-18-90 2
agreed and noted that the applicants are working with the church to
possibly expand parking into an unused portion of their off -site
parking lot. He added that the Edina Realty building could expand
its site and take land from the vacant parcel to the east to
provide more parking. He stated that he recommended combining
whatever land was needed for the additional parking through a plat
and that that land also be rezoned to C1. He added that the City
did not want to allow shortcutting through the Edina Realty site
and through the church's off -site parking lot to avoid the signal
at Noble and Brooklyn Boulevard.
Mr. Blumentals stated that they were negotiating with the church,
but that it was more difficult than negotiating with an individual
and that he hoped a site plan would be available for the
Commission's review when the rezoning comes back for final
consideration.
Commissioner Sander stated that she thought that Edina Realty had
approximately 80 agents office in the existing building. She
stated that the site is already short on parking spaces in
practical terms and that more parking is needed even without the
bank. There followed a brief discussion of parking problems in the
area and the formulas for office, medical and bank uses.
Commissioner Holmes inquired as to the provision for handicapped
parking. The Secretary stated that handicapped parking stalls were
already provided and no new ones would probably be needed because
of the additional stalls.
PUBLIC HEARING (Application No 90026)
Chairman Pro tem Ainas then opened the meeting for a public hearing
on Application No. 90026 and asked whether anyone present wished to
comment regarding the proposal. No one spoke.
Commissioner Holmes stated that his main concern with the proposal
was the need for additional parking. Commissioner Sander asked
whether it was necessary to send this application to a neighborhood
advisory group in light of the fact that they were notified and yet
no one has shown up to comment on the application. The Secretary
stated that he still recommended that the standard procedure be
followed and that the rezoning be referred to a neighborhood
advisory group. He stated that people may simply support the
office development and oppose multiple family and, therefore, have
no objection to the rezoning; or there may be other reasons why no
one showed up at the public hearing.
ACTION TABLING APPLICATION NO. 90026 (Edina Realty/ Blumentals
Architecture)
Motion by Commissioner Sander seconded by Commissioner. Mann to
table Application No. 90026 and refer the matter to the Northwest
Neighborhood Advisory Group for review and comment. Voting in
10 -18 -90 3
favor: Chairman Pro tem Ainas, Commissioners Sander, Mann and
Holmes. Voting against: none. The motion passed.
APPLICATION NO 90027 (Johnson Controls Inc.)
The Secretary then introduced the next item of business, a request
for site and building plan approval to construct a 6,660 sq. ft.
addition to the existing 10,000 sq. ft. Johnson Controls building
located at 1601 67th Avenue North. The Secretary reviewed the
contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information
Sheet for Application No. 90027 attached).
Commissioner Holmes asked whether no site lighting is required in
the Zoning Ordinance. The Secretary explained that the Zoning
Ordinance sets limits on light intensity for site lighting adjacent
to residential and commercial uses. He stated that it also
prohibits glare from being perceptible beyond the property line.
He added, however, that there is no minimum requirement for site
lighting.
Chairman Pro tem Ainas asked the applicant whether he had anything
to add. Mr. Mike Dorso responded in the negative. Chairman Pro
tem Ainas asked whether they wished to get the foundation of the
addition in before the frost. Mr. Dorso responded in the
affirmative and noted that a contractor has been selected and a
local architect has been hired to get the necessary approvals in a
timely manner.
ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO 90027 (Johnson
Controls, Inc
Motion by Commissioner Mann seconded by Commissioner Sander to
recommend approval of Application No. 90027 subject to the
following conditions:
1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the
Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior
to the issuance of permits.
2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject
to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the
issuance of permits.
3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial
guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City
Manager) shall be submitted prior to the issuance of
permits.
4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop
mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from
view.
5. The building is to be equipped with an automatic fire
extinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and shall be
10 18 -90 4
i
connected to a central monitoring device in accordance
with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances.
6. An underground irrigation system shall be installed in
all landscaped areas to facilitate site maintenance.
7. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is
subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances.
8. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking
and driving areas.
9. The property owner shall enter in an Easement and
Agreement for Maintenance and Inspection of Utility and
Storm Drainage Systems prior to the issuance of permits.
Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Ainas, Commissioners Sander,
Mann and Holmes. Voting against: none. The motion passed.
OTHER BUSINESS
The Secretary then reminded the Planning Commission that the
variance application (Planning Commission Application No. 90023)
submitted by Alan Chazin had been tabled in August and the time for
action under the ordinance had arrived. He stated that there had
been discussions amongst the staff and with the applicant and that
they have not come to any conclusion on how to proceed. He stated
that he had received a letter from Mr. Sellergren, an attorney
representing the applicant, asking that the application be tabled.
He asked the Commission to acknowledge the letter and take an
action tabling Application No. 90023.
ACTION TABLING APPLICATION NO. 90023 AT THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST
Motion by Commissioner Sander seconded by Commissioner Mann to
table Application No. 90023 at the applicant's request. Voting in
favor. Chairman Pro tem Ainas, Commissioners Sander, Mann and
Holmes. Voting against: gainst: none. The motion passed.
DISCUSSION
Commissioner Mann asked how many C1 uses existed on R5 parcels at
present and whether it was not appropriate to rezone those parcels
to C1. The Secretary answered that most of the office uses on R5
property were located in the neighborhood of 70th and Brooklyn
Boulevard. Chairman Pro tem Ainas recommended that the City deal
with such rezoning applications as the need arises. The Secretary
related the history of the parcel at the southwest corner of
Brooklyn Boulevard and I -94, that it was formerly zoned R5 and that
an office development and a church development were proposed on the
property and that eventually it was rezoned to C1 to preclude
multiple family development. There followed a brief discussion of
office uses in the R5 zone. There was also a brief discussion of
the acquisition of land at 69th and Brooklyn Boulevard for the 69th
Avenue widening project.
10 -18 -90 5
t
ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Commissioner Mann seconded by Commissioner Holmes to
adjourn the meeting of the Planning Commission. The motion passed
unanimously. The Planning Commission adjourned at 8:49 p.m.
Chairman Pro tem
10 -18 -90 6
Planning Commission Information Sheet
Application No. 90026
Applicant: Edina Realty /Blumentals Architecture, Inc.
Location: 7100 Brooklyn Boulevard
Request: Rezoning
The applicant requests rezoning from R5 to C1 of a 1.1 acre parcel
of land at 7100 Brooklyn Boulevard. The land in question is
presently developed as the site of the Edina Realty office
building. It is bounded on the north by the Brooklyn United
Methodist Church parking lot and two single - family homes, on the
east by a vacant R5 zoned parcel that was to be the site of another
smaller office building, on the south by the Boulevard Plaza office
condominium development, and on the west by Brooklyn Boulevard.
The basic purpose of the rezoning is to allow a small bank facility
to locate in the existing Edina Realty office building. Financial
institutions are a permitted use in the C1 zoning district, but are
not one of the service /office uses allowed by special use permit in
the existing R5 zoning district.
All rezoning applications are to be evaluated in light of the
Rezoning Evaluation Policy and Review Guidelines contained in
Section 35 -208 of the City's Zoning Ordinance (copy attached) . The
applicant's representative, Mr. Janis Blumentals, has submitted a
letter (also attached) in which he addresses the guidelines point
by point. A recitation of the guidelines and the applicant's
arguments along with staff comments follows.
a) Is there a clear and public need or benefit?
Applicant: "The rezoning would make this site, presently zoned R5,
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan which calls for
service /office use."
Staff: The Comprehensive Plan does specifically recommend
service /office use on this site and the vacant site to the east
(see area #41 on the Land Use Revisions Map, attached) . The
proposed C1 zoning is consistent with the Plan recommendation.
Perhaps the more immediate question is whether there is a benefit
to allowing some service /office uses, such as banks, which are
allowed in the Cl zone, but not the R5 zone. The C1 zoning would
allow for slightly more intense uses, but would also preclude
multi- family uses which are not consistent with the Plan for this
area.
b) Is the proposed zoning consistent with and compatible with
surrounding land use classifications?
10 -18 -90 1
Application No. 90026 continued
Applicant: "The neighboring land, on both sides of Brooklyn
Boulevard is zoned either R5, C1 or C2. With the heavy traffic on
the boulevard many of the R5 lots have been developed as Cl by
special use permit. Directly to the north of our site is a very
large church parking lot. The undeveloped land behind our property
is planned and designed for an office building."
g g
Staff: We would agree that the proposed C1 zoning is consistent
and compatible with surrounding land use classifications and with
the nature of Brooklyn Boulevard as a major thoroughfare.
C) Can all permitted uses in the proposed zoning district be
contemplated for development of the subject property?
Applicant: "Permitted uses that are compatible with the
constraints of the existing office building will work, since this
land is already developed as an office building and its required
parking."
Staff: One of the issues that needs to be addressed with a bank
occupancy within the existing office building is parking.
Financial institutions are required to have parking based on the
retail parking formula. The proposed bank facility would occupy
approximately 400 sq. ft. of space on the first floor. The general
office formula requires only two spaces for this area. However,
the retail formula requires 11 spaces for the first 2,000 sq. ft.
of gross floor area or fraction thereof. Therefore, the retail
formula requirement for this space is 11 spaces. The irony of the
situation is that, if the bank use were larger, the total parking
requirement for the building would actually be less. There may be
a need to address this irony somehow in the ordinance. At present,
however, there is a need to provide nine (9) additional parking
stalls. It is our understanding that there have been discussions
with the Brooklyn United Methodist Church to either acquire or
encumber land on their off -site parking lot to provide additional
parking. As a result, the applicant will either have to obtain a
special use permit for off -site accessory parking or may have to
expand the area to be rezoned to include whatever land is acquired.
The buffer requirements for a parking lot for an office building
are the same as for a church parking lot. We do not believe the
need to provide more parking for the bank use presents additional
issues which argue against the rezoning of the office building
site. They can feasibly be addressed through a proper site plan
which may be forthcoming.
d) Have there been substantial physical or zoning classification
changes in the area since the subject property was zoned?
10 -18 -90 2
Application No. 90026 continued
Applicant: "Several of the adjoining properties that are zoned R5
have used special use permits for C1 use, in lieu of rezoning, so
the general atmosphere of Brooklyn Boulevard is commercial, even
though the present zoning on many of those sites is for apartments.
The amount of traffic on the Boulevard reinforces the commercial
character of the avenue."
Staff: One zoning change that has taken place since this property
was zoned R5 is that the land to the south, which contains the
Boulevard Plaza office condominiums was rezoned from R5 to R3. A
special use permit was granted for the office use in the R3 zone.
Zoning this property to R3 would be somewhat consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan, but would preclude a bank occupancy. The
proposed Cl zoning is more consistent with the Comprehensive Plan
recommendation for this parcel since it calls specifically for
service /office uses. The applicant is correct in observing that
there have been office developments in this area and that, because
of the traffic on Brooklyn Boulevard, service /office use of the
property is logical.
e) In the case of City- initiated rezoning proposals, is there a
broad public purpose evident?
Applicant: "Not applicable."
Staff: Not applicable.
f) Will the subject property bear fully the ordinance development
restrictions for the proposed zoning districts?
Applicant: "The subject property is in compliance with zoning
regulations presently in force for C1 districts, and through
rezoning would allow uses such as financial institutions, in this
building."
Staff: The applicant has addressed use compliance with Cl
regulations, but not other C1 requirements, such as parking. The
site meets lot width and area requirements for a C1 parcel adjacent
to a major thoroughfare. The greenstrip, setback and parking
requirements are met for a general office use. However, as has
been pointed out above, the site does not have adequate parking if
a bank occupancy is proposed. The applicant must address the
parking issue by acquiring or encumbering land beyond the existing
site. However, even if no additional parking can be obtained, we
do not feel the rezoning should, therefore, be denied. The
i
10 -18 -90 3
_... _..... -..
Application No. 90026 continued
proposed rezoning is consistent with the comprehensive Plan and the
existing land use is consistent with the proposed zoning. A bank
use may not become feasible able for parking reasons. Nevertheless,
most service /office uses can be comprehended.
Is the subject property g) rt generally unsuited for uses
7 P P Y g Y permitted
in the present zoning, with respect to size, configuration,
topography or location?
Applicant: "The present R5 zoning without the special use permit
for this piece of land would not have been useful for the original
development, since the size of this lot is not sufficient to
provide multi - family housing and the necessary green areas and
amenities, etc. The use of the office buildings as buffers between
commercial or street with heavy traffic and single- family
residential has proven superior to multi - family housing
developments, due to the limited hours of business, and generally
clean nature of offices."
Staff: We would not agree that the original parcel (about 72,500
sq. ft.) was too small for multi - family development, but certainly
a project of that size would have limited amenities. The R5 zoning
probably made sense 20 years ago when traffic on Brooklyn Boulevard
was less than today and when there was a strong demand for
apartments. Today, it is felt that the community has a surplus of
apartments and the traffic on Brooklyn Boulevard probably lends
itself more to commercial than residential development.
Service /office uses have been viewed for some time as a good
transitional use along Brooklyn Boulevard to buffer retail nodes
from each other and the Brooklyn Boulevard from single - family
development.
h) Will the rezoning result in the expansion of a zoning
district, warranted by: 1 Comprehensive Planning; 2 the
P g
lack of developable land in the proposed zoning district; or
P P P g
3) the best interests of the community?
Applicant: 11 1. This rezoning ill expand he C
g P
t 1 zone only to the
extent that this land will become part of the use recommended in
the Comprehensive Plan.
2. This piece of land is already developed, and is in
compliance with the regulations set forth for the Cl
zone.
3. It is in the best interest of the community to have the
actual zoning reflect what exists on the property and
eliminate any questions or gray areas created by a
special use permit."
10 -18 -90 4
Application No. 90026 continued
Staff: The proposed zoning is consistent with the City's
Comprehensive Plan. There is little vacant land in either the R5
or C1 zones; however, this parcel is not vacant anyway. We would
recommend that the area to be rezoned be expanded to the vacant
parcel to the east. That parcel was created about five years ago
and was planned to be the site of another, smaller office building.
We do not feel that it would be appropriate to leave that parcel
zoned R5 and possibly allow any apartment building which would have
to gain access through the existing office building site at 7100
Brooklyn Boulevard. The plat that divided the original parcel was
approved with the understanding that the easterly parcel would be
developed as an office. An approved plan for an office building on
that parcel does exist. We believe it would be in the best
interests of the community to rezone both parcels to Cl and
preclude any multi - family development in this location.
i) Does the proposal demonstrate merit beyond the interests of an
owner or owners of an individual parcel?
Applicant: "It is in the interest of the City to clarify the
actual zoning of this property, so that what is on paper agrees
with what there is on the site."
Staff: We agree in this case and would add that it is in the
City's interest to have both zoning and use consistent with the
City's Comprehensive Plan.
Procedure
The City's practice with rezoning applications is for the Planning
Commission to open a public hearing, take comments and then table
the application and refer it to the relevant neighborhood advisory
group for review and comment. We would recommend following that
procedure in this case also.
Su by,
Gary Shallcross, Planner
roved by,
C j
Ronald A. arren, Director of Planning and Inspection
10 -18 -90 5
Planning Commission Information Sheet
Application No. 90027
Applicant: Johnson Controls, Inc.
Location: 1801 67th Avenue North
Request: Site and Building Plan
Location /Use
The applicant requests site and building plan approval to construct
a 6,666 sq. ft. addition to the existing 10,000 sq. ft. Johnson
Controls building at 1801 67th Avenue North. The property in
question is zoned I -1 and is bounded by 67th Avenue on the north,
by James Avenue on the east, by the Northwestern Bell maintenance
building on the south, and by the Coachman Industrial building on
the west. The use of the building is a combination of office and
warehouse or storage space. Most of the addition is to be devoted
to office space. The Johnson Controls use is considered to be a
permitted use in the I -1 zoning district.
Access /Parking
The site has one access off 67th Avenue North and one access off
James Avenue North. The access off James Avenue is being moved
about 10' south of its current location so as to make it easier for
trucks to exit the site from the new loading dock on the east side
of the building. The proposed building utilization is 11,872 sq.
ft. of office space (59.36 parking spaces at 1 per 200 sq. ft.) and
4,794 sq. ft. of warehouse space (5.99 spaces at 1 per 800 sq. ft.)
for a total parking requirement of 65.35 or 65 spaces. The
proposed site plan provides for a total of 65 parking spaces
including 2 handicapped stalls near the new south entrance.
Johnson Controls utilizes a number of vans which are driven to and
from work by employees. The vans are not stored on the site and,
therefore, represent no additional parking demand.
Landscaping
The site in question is 60,450 sq. ft. or approximately 1.4 acres.
The point requirement for this site under the landscape point
system is 104 points. The site presently has 73.5 points worth of
landscaping including six (6) Summit Green Ash trees. The
landscape plan calls for 81.5 additional points by providing a
variety of new plantings, including two Imperial Honey Locust trees
in the green area immediately south of the building, two Sugar
Maples at either end of the row of parking east of the building and
a Greenspire Linden just north of the loading dock. The plan also
proposes a number of various shrubs in planting beds adjacent to
the south and east walls of the building addition and in a planting
bed along the north side of the existing building.
Grading /Drainage /Utilities
The proposed grading and utility plan calls for no new utility
installations except an 8 storm sewer line to convey roof drainage
to an existing storm sewer line in the parking lot in front of the
10 -18 -90 1
Application No. 90027 continued
access off James Avenue North. The new parking lot area along the
south side of the site will drain eastward to the existin g paved
area and into an existing catch basin east of the building. No new
water or sewer lines are proposed. It is recommended that a
concrete pad or heavier bituminous be provided in the loading dock
area. The applicant's architect has also been advised that B612
curb and gutter is required around all parking and driving areas.
New curbing will, therefore, have to be B612 type.
Building
The proposed floor plan shows that the majority of the new addition
will be devoted to an open engineering department with an
unspecified number of work stations. There will also be an
expansion of the storage area for "consigned material." The
building exterior materials are to match the existing exterior
treatment. The background treatment is to be 12" concrete block,
matching existing coursing. lit faced ribbed block
Sections of s
g g g P
will be
interspersed with anodized aluminum windows on the west
elevation. Larger windows will be provided on the south and east
elevations to allow natural light into the office area of the
addition. An entryway with an air lock is proposed in the side of
the addition.
Lighting /Trash
The site presently has no exterior site lighting and none is
proposed as this is basically a daytime use. The City has no
minimum lighting standards. We are not aware of any security
problems at this location. A trash enclosure is not indicated on
the plans. The architect has indicated that an enclosure will be
placed near the southwest corner of the building. It should be
kept in mind that required parking spaces may not be used for the
location of dumpsters and that an opaque screening device is
required.
Recommendation
Altogether, the proposed plans appear to be in order and approval
is recommended, subject to at least the following conditions:
1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the
Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior
to the issuance of permits.
2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject
to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the
issuance of permits.
10 -18 -90 2
r
Application No. 90027 continued
3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial
guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City
Manager) shall be submitted prior to the issuance of
permits.
4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop
mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from
view.
5. The building is to be equipped with an automatic fire
extinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and shall be
connected to a' central monitoring device in accordance
with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances.
6. An underground irrigation system shall be installed in
all landscaped areas to facilitate site maintenance.
7. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is
subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances.
8. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking
and driving areas.
9. The property owner shall enter in an Easement and
Agreement for Maintenance and Inspection of Utility and
Storm Drainage Systems prior to the issuance of permits.
Submitted b byy,�
Gary Sh�llcross
Planner
roved by,
Ronald A. Warren
Director of Planning and Inspection
10 -18 -90 3
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 10
Agenda Item Number
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
ITEM DESCRIPTION:
Application No. 90027 - Johnson Controls, Inc.
DEPARTMENT APP
Signature - title Director of P1 anni ng a I p i 0 ,
MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION:
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
*********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached X
Application No. 90027 is a request for site and building plan.
approval submitted by Johnson Controls, Inc. This application was
considered by the Planning Commission at its October 18, 1990
regular meeting. A copy of the minutes from that meeting,
information sheet, site drawing, and a map of the area are attached
for the City Council's review.
Recommendation
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the application
subject to the nine conditions listed on pages 4 and 5 of the
I
October 18, 1990 Planning Commission minutes.
favor: Chairman Pro tem Ainas, Commissioners Sander, Mann and
Holmes. Voting against: none. The motion passed.
APPLICATION NO. 90027 (Johnson Controls Inc-1-
The Secretary then introduced the next item of business, a request
for site and building plan approval to construct a 6,660 sq. ft.
addition to the existing 10,000 sq. ft. Johnson Controls building
located at 1601 67th Avenue North. The Secretary reviewed the
contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information
Sheet for Application No. 90027 attached).
Commissioner Holmes asked whether no site lighting is required in
the Zoning Ordinance. The Secretary explained that the Zoning
Ordinance sets limits on light intensity for site lighting adjacent
to residential and commercial uses. He stated that it also
prohibits glare from being perceptible beyond the property line.
He added, however, that there is no minimum requirement for site
lighting.
Chairman Pro tem Ainas asked the applicant whether he had anything
to add. Mr. Mike Dorso responded in the negative. Chairman Pro
tem Ainas asked whether they wished to get the foundation of the
addition in before the frost. Mr. Dorso responded in the
affirmative and noted that a contractor has been selected and a
local architect has been hired to get the necessary approvals in a
timely manner.
ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 90027 (Johnson
Controls. Inc.
Motion by Commissioner Mann seconded by Commissioner Sander to
recommend approval of Application No. 90027 subject to the
following conditions:
1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the
Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior
to the issuance of permits.
2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject
to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the
issuance of permits.
3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial
guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City
Manager) shall be submitted prior to the issuance of
permits.
4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop
mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from
view.
5. The building is to be equipped with an automatic fire
extinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and shall be
10 -18 -90 4
connected to a central monitoring device in accordance
with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances.
6. An underground irrigation system shall be installed in
all landscaped areas to facilitate site maintenance.
7. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is
subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances.
8. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking
and driving areas.
9. The property owner shall enter in an Easement and
Agreement for Maintenance and Inspection of Utility and
Storm Drainage Systems prior to the issuance of permits.
Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Ainas, Commissioners Sander,
L!n-!n d Holmes. Voting against: none. The motion passed.
OTHER BUSINESS
The Secretary then reminded the Planning Commission that the
variance application (Planning Commission Application No. 90023)
submitted by Alan Chazin had been tabled in August and the time for
action under the ordinance had arrived. He stated that there had
been discussions amongst the staff and with the applicant and that
they have not come to any conclusion on how to proceed. He stated
that he had received a letter from Mr. Sellergren, an attorney
representing the applicant, asking that the application be tabled.
He asked the Commission to acknowledge the letter and take an
action tabling Application No. 90023.
ACTION TABLING APPLICATION NO. 90023 AT THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST
Motion by Commissioner Sander seconded by Commissioner Mann to
table Application No. 90023 at the applicant's request. Voting in
favor: Chairman Pro tem Ainas, Commissioners Sander, Mann and
Holmes. Voting against: none. The motion passed.
DISCUSSION
Commissioner Mann asked how many C1 uses existed on R5 parcels at
present and whether it was not appropriate to rezone those parcels
to Cl. The Secretary answered that most of the office uses on R5
property were located in the neighborhood of 70th and Brooklyn
Boulevard. Chairman Pro tem Ainas recommended that the City deal
with such rezoning applications as the need arises. The Secretary
related the history of the parcel at the southwest corner of
Brooklyn Boulevard and I -94, that it was formerly zoned R5 and that
an office development and a church development were proposed on the
property and that eventually it was rezoned to C1 to preclude
multiple family development. There followed a brief discussion of
office uses in the R5 zone. There was also a brief discussion of
the acquisition of land at 69th and Brooklyn Boulevard for the 69th
Avenue widening project.
10 -18 -90 5
Planning Commission Information Sheet
Application No. 90027
Applicant: Johnson Controls, Inc.
Location: 1801 67th Avenue North
Request: Site and Building Plan
Location /Use
The applicant requests site and building plan approval to construct
a 6,666 sq. ft. addition to the existing 10,000 sq. ft. Johnson
Controls building at 1801 67th Avenue North. The property in
question is zoned I -1 and is bounded by 67th Avenue on the north,
by James Avenue on the east, by the Northwestern Bell maintenance
building on the south, and by the Coachman Industrial building on
the west. The use of the building is a combination of office and
warehouse or storage space. Most of the addition is to be devoted
to office space. The Johnson Controls use is considered to be a
permitted use in the I -1 zoning district.
Access /Parking
The site has one access off 67th Avenue North and one access off
James Avenue North. The access off James Avenue is being moved
about 10' south of its current location so as to make it easier for
trucks to exit the site from the new loading dock on the east side
of the building. The proposed building utilization is 11,872 sq.
ft. of office space (59.36 parking spaces at 1 per 200 sq. ft.) and
4,794 sq. ft. of warehouse space (5.99 spaces at 1 per 800 sq. ft.)
for a total parking requirement of 65.35 or 65 spaces. The
proposed site plan provides for a total of 65 parking spaces
including 2 handicapped stalls near the new south entrance.
Johnson Controls utilizes a number of vans which are driven to and
from work by employees. The vans are not stored on the site and,
therefore, represent no additional parking demand.
Landscaping
The site in es
qu tion is 60,450 sq. ft. or approximately 1.4 acres.
The point requirement for this site under the landscape point
q
P P
system is 104 points. The site presently has 73.5 points worth of
landscaping including six (6) Summit Green Ash trees. The
landscape plan calls for 81.5 additional points by providing a
variety of new plantings, including two Imperial Honey Locust trees
in the green area immediately south of the building, two Sugar
Maples at either end of the row of parking east of the building and
a Greenspire Linden just north of the loading dock. The plan also
proposes a number of various shrubs in planting beds adjacent to
the south and east walls of the building addition and in a planting
bed along the north side of the existing building.
Grading /Drainage /Utilities
The proposed grading and utility plan calls for no new utility
installations except an 8 storm sewer line to convey roof drainage
to an existing storm sewer line in the parking lot in front of the
10 -18 -90
1
Application No. 90027 continued
access off James Avenue North. The new parking lot area along the
south side of the site will drain eastward to the existing paved
area and into an existing catch basin east of the building. No new
water or sewer lines are proposed. It is recommended that a
concrete pad or heavier bituminous be provided in the loading dock
area. The applicant's architect has also been advised that B612
curb and gutter is required around all parking and driving areas.
New curbing will, therefore, have to be B612 type.
Buildings
The proposed floor plan shows that the majority of the new addition
will be devoted to an open engineering department with an
unspecified number of work stations. There will also be an
expansion of the storage area for "consigned material." The
building exterior materials are to match the existing exterior
treatment. The background treatment is to be 12" concrete block,
matching existing coursing. Sections of split -faced ribbed block
will be interspersed with anodized aluminum windows on the west
elevation. Larger windows will be provided on the south and east
elevations to allow natural light into the office area of the
addition. An entryway with an air lock is proposed in the side of
the addition.
Lighting /Trash
The site presently has no exterior site lighting and none is
proposed as this is basically a daytime use. The City has no
minimum lighting standards. We are not aware of any security
problems at this location. A trash enclosure is not indicated on
the plans. The architect has indicated that an enclosure will be
placed near the southwest corner of the building. It should be
kept in mind that required parking spaces may not be used for the
location of dumpsters and that an opaque screening device is
required.
Recommendation
Altogether, the proposed plans appear to be in order and approval
is recommended, subject to at least the following conditions:
1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the
Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior
to the issuance of permits.
2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject
to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the
issuance of permits.
10 -18 -90 2
Application No. 90027 continued
3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial
guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City
Manager) shall be submitted prior to the issuance of
permits.
4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop
mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from
view.
5. The building is to be equipped with an automatic fire
extinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and shall be
connected to a central monitoring device in accordance
with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances.
6. An underground irrigation system shall be installed in
all landscaped areas to facilitate site maintenance.
7. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is
subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances.
8. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking
and driving areas.
9. The property owner shall enter in an Easement and
Agreement for Maintenance and Inspection of Utility and
Storm Drainage Systems prior to the issuance of permits.
Submitted by�,�
Gary Sh�llcross
Planner
roved by,
/ J40-4�
Ronald A. Warren
Director of Planning and Inspection
10 -18 -90 3
r VIC�T P(A HATE PIA _r
FF } nADI/Nr cc4G 3L
L[ _ rfA6L1 N" r -AC IS
cf IF 1+ 1 Z:'MIrCC e<
Ll C Tu.", Al.bGk.ITr I.(
t
t T
n c
) t
PF. P N
C D P h T 1 � I -L �•c
u l (.LttN ):Itt)Iru(kN Trt rw cc <o- <Tn'Lrl1 ✓S+rt r' 110f ` �_.•- •••
f 4 � 1 wrNGED tut NVH•'S Euo / /v<+i A•AT w) • s M
(• C 1 v+li0 / +vw ^•1IL• SrMLA SrlrtA •b•M1Uw- /N,rb. +wAll.iL' rJ fcT 'lt
J{ C 11C Ur+T AnOnR VITAr 1N W^ Cwr lU(Htwrl r)'lIr MNT ♦'Be 1 • '
7t.: l I �r•4.• IW`1r A<lR S•w<C Ilw r.rti JY.'0e
11 1 T ^NNTir rlw U<u1X t'[DV jwr•NrLN /.'0I(rci C)- � '. • Z
,c L <c•<ti Tr Nr•tR ]•.NInrN3 r.ertw.An)•wcNH .+kT _ BurtDING /••DDIi IC+II [ktSTruG Br.r11 DIIG i F
If l Cnc•f K•Mt1(Dt Y.pNRNNH VrD••. N<•N lrl r, 0r•Nt<•<rwc.uN' a41s• ~- l M.I O
•- 1 f Lt <DfIA. -I JL1. [/ Irlr {AY N••.nl •� ftT i -' Z
]('ILL..wUrnf tfrtrw ].tc•, <w'. A -'
/ f 1 IS S<.•.,<DN T✓NNlO ]<•Nltl l 1,w 0'.N 1:.+u Dl<' •f rtT M'1 A /r' Q
f I l I fS1tIT1 DOG wLCf CdN• S••<n•rriru {I I•clA'IHNIt' •. K'T f • '`/! j • �
S 1 r S b1v o.-. 7r•Nrf {1 Trtl •1 •r•) vrHw••u.H 'Lltr r••i •f rq .• �,• • � �� ' 7 \'. ' r
h • rr.n u^< Ncnf•uw cu D,•1•w nNUwN<s t•.rNri 7.+arNi �b ra " �� N• ' / ./: r `°
Yr.) _ _ — -[. nN111 1•'r1 r a_. t' ]': �_ ____ juJ {�'. ;1 i(
y •t.r vJ� r
�.I
' M i
A -I
N,
na•r•t ••w11 p•n F _.1'y'.. < a • a.y. we .. .
L4 /Jp APE NO'TCS ( .__ -. __.. _ ... ..._. _... - !rv✓n +C•rin.c roN �' __
i I. ••, Ilnr✓SII I!NTINL nY tAS To alclvl )� -] AGL1{L1if ^
•rK• HJ ✓N wrTM � rrt. 0<..L< M'l l'
.. u ila %fL /ID h1NlING Att df TO BL ryGI0 Wff. et
•I• wt L•' T• 0( 2/1 r(.^Ttl OS SIR INr4N4 {rf 11r
t` CI fY'IIIIfI TC SPI IN Rt1 TrnRf /.Rft<S (Or OTM1Yf�
! S-f. Lfrlr( —11, b( NI1 1` f0 I.rl 1C' {ril t_I kwrlsff 10rni NIIY•
L t'+1 <..< [L••"1 w<•r1 rr II.•• 611.1 All" 01- 11 JAMS
AVENUE NORTH
( Pr•r<nr N, wart 7� I� +N•rrrci J<r/nr7 Rr wNNIN ��'
Or KI r w ! Mr NI a..NrSWNG
• tir •t trN.•I T c l � 1 a[Y, ww<r rwr </ 7NI< iN1 'rJ - hn
< . r1♦ rr 1 +r l ISC Tt1 ^. D1 rNlt Rt c.U11t
I •' It •NT) )J.f • 1.0"I0 F, Pr.(• LIS \•A• P1r +1/
Mr�i •
M
f I�� � it 6'�r � � �
BROOKLYN CENTER
HIGH SCHOO
I MF-
EARLE
. ♦ BROWN • �� ��
SL
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 10/29/90
Agenda Item Number
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
0 ITEM DESCRIPTION:
An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances Regarding
the Zoning of Certain Land
DEPARTMENT APPR
Signature - title Director of Planning a psp�ctjnn
MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: {
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached X )
On April 9, 1990 the City Council approved Planning Commission
Application No. 90003 which was a rezoning request submitted by ,E
and H Properties (Mr. Howard Atkins) involving the rezoning from R5
(Multiple Family Residence) to C2 (Commerce) and C1
(Service /Office) of certain land located at the southeast quadrant
of T. H. 252 and 66th Avenue North. A small sliver of land was
rezoned to C2 to square off the westerly parcel which was then
proposed for development as a combination gasoline service
station /convenience store /car wash. The easterly parcel was
rezoned to C1 for future office development.
On the same date the City Council approved Planning Commission
Application No. 90004 which was a preliminary plat resubdividing
this same property to create two parcels of land, the westerly one
being zoned C2 and the easterly one being zoned C1.
The final step in any rezoning approval is a housekeeping type of
ordinance amendment that describes in the Zoning Ordinance (Chapter
35) the rezoned land under its newly designated zoning district.
Because this property is being replatted we have waited to bring
this ordinance amendment to the City Council until a final plat,
containing the new legal description for the property included in
the rezoning, has been brought to the City Council for final
approval. Attached is a copy of the final plat indicating the C2
and C1 zoned property.
Recommendation
The final plat approval has been set for the Council's
consideration on October 29, 1990, therefore, the first reading of
the ordinance amendment is also 'recommended. It should be noted
that if there is some delay in the filing, or processing, of the
new plat that we will simply recommend continuation of the adoption
of the ordinance amendment until the time the plat is accepted.
i
E AND N PROPERTIES ADDITION
o.LrNC m- -ieo eo -Nno- .,[ e
qi of 1
., :.'I' 1 P .,,[ ..,�. ,.l' " "� - 13,r_n•L' _ �. "" �? ,� o so I eo vo no
cs f[cl orl I �•,_ r DO.0 0 1. .� C� sc E rEFr
y0 ORrENt r 0 T 1] eE•NInG SYSIEM
B• ED OnTU
C Uit 55 M
CE' _t IRUN MUN .Mf nT wriN C•P "A '—C, PL] inB]9
z vr.nee•lr'>nw , 1 , \ W , J - •DEnDns u+un MUnuraurt wuno
kk
'1
DN.11N ACE •NU U1rLIrYf• ra Nl]•Nl" N1nU3.
I .
.'_ ; r, r� .: :. �•' y � �, � ina ]rcF nn wm rn uyr ESSOn�fe. rs[nun .
P \ I o
••, .t /� ' I ]D ':' _ �r+n•Dxa�n�na .or frN,'s,•nn .r �na.0 r,rl u�
:,. j •r r '. .• ' 1 _ � - -_ nio�ir m w•r fol rrnf v�D.,n on n•r "
I � t wiorn,un�nv uruxn .,r run o, ao rD�n n,
` 1.. .._ ._ - - _. � ----= a ^ t! ( I �a Slln'nM ltl w__ ._ ... I � �� .. 1 r'U ,�• _ „
�r MERILA
ASSOCIATES
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the
day of , 1990 at p.m. at the
City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway to consider an amendment to
the Zoning Ordinance regarding the zoning of certain land.
Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request
at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the Personnel
Coordinator at 561 -5440 to make arrangements.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES
REGARDING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN LAND
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances of the City
of Brooklyn Center is hereby amended in the following manner:
Section 35 -1140. MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT
(R5). The following properties are hereby established as being
within the (R5) Multiple Family Residence District zoning
classification:
[That part of Lot 15, Auditor's Subdivision No. 310, lying
east of a straight line extension of the west line of Lot
1, Block 2, Farr's First Addition, and west of Willow
Lane.
That part of Lots 5, 6, and 7, Block 1, Olson's Island
View Terrace, described as follows: Commencing at the
southeast corner of Lot 6, thence northerly to the
southeast corner of the north 25 feet of Lot 7; thence
west 100 feet; thence southwesterly to a point in the
south line of Lot 5, distant 10 feet west from the
southeast corner thereof; thence east to the point of
beginning.]
Section 35 -1170. SERVICE /OFFICE DISTRICT (C1). The
following properties are hereby established as being within the
(Cl) Service /Office District zoning classification.
Lot 2, Block 1 E and H Properties Addition.
Section 35 -1190. COMMERCE DISTRICT (C2). The following
properties are hereby established as being within the (C2) Commerce
District zoning classification:
[That part of Lot 15, Auditor's Subdivision No. 310 lying
west of a straight line extension of the west line of Lot
1, Block 2, Farr's First Addition; except highway.
ORDINANCE NO.
That part of Lots 4, 5, 6 and 7, Block 1, Olson's Island
View Terrace described as follows: Commencing at the
southwest corner of Lot 5, thence northerly to the
southwest corner of the north 25 feet of Lot 4; thence
east to a point 100 feet west from the southeast corner
of the north 25 feet of Lot 7; thence southwesterly to a
point in the south line of Lot 5 distant 10 feet west
from the southeast corner thereof; thence east to the
point of beginning; except highway.]
Lot 1, Block 1, E and H Properties Addition.
Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after
adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication.
Adopted this day of 19
Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
Date of Publication
Effective Date
(Brackets indicate matter to be deleted, underline indicates new
matter.)
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 10/29/9
Agenda Item Number
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
ITEM DESCRIPTION:
STORM DRAINAGE UTILITY PROPOSAL - DISCUSSION ITEM
DEPT. APPROVAL:
r
SY KNAPP, DIRE CTOR OF; PUBLIC WORKS
MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION:
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached
********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached Y es )
Attached is a staff proposal for implementation of a storm drainage utility system
• pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 444.075. The report presents (1) a proposed
storm water management budget for 1991; (2) a proposed system of user charges which
would be added to the City's quarterly public utility billings for water, sanitary
sewer and recycling; and (3) an ordinance which, if adopted, will formally create
and establish this new Public Utility. It is noted that, while the system for
setting fees is established within the ordinance, the rate structure shall be
adopted by resolution.
City Council Action Required
• Review and discuss the report.
• Conduct first reading of ordinance and schedule the second reading and
public hearing on the ordinance.
• As noted above, formal consideration of the fee structure should occur,
by resolution, following adoption of the ordinance.
CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY
OF
BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430
BROOKLYN
TELEPHONE: 569 -3300
C ENTER FAX 561 -0717
EMERGENCY - POLICE - FIRE
911
October 29, 1990
TO: Sy Knapp
FROM: Diane Spector k�
SUBJ: Establishment of a Storm Drainage Utility
SUMMARY:
The City Council has discussed establishing a storm drainage utility
in Brooklyn Center on two occasions, and has requested staff to
develop this detailed proposal for formal consideration. Under this
proposal the City would charge property owners a storm drainage fee
based on the property's contribution to storm water runoff. The
revenues generated would be used to operate, maintain, improve, and
administer the City's storm water management program. This utility
would be established by creating a new chapter within the Brooklyn
Center city ordinances.
The base rate per quarter is recommended to be $12 per acre per
quarter. Single family and duplex residential property owners would
be charged a flat rate of $3 per quarter. These rates would provide
a 1991 budget of approximately $260,000.
The Costs of Managing the Storm Drainage S y s te
Brooklyn Center has constructed a basic storm water drainage system, and has
to the present time maintained that system using general tax revenues. The
Surface Water Management Act of 1982 (SWMA) mandated that municipalities
provide more planning and management of storm water. Implementation of these
mandates will continue to increase the cost of managing Brooklyn Center's
storm drainage system considerably b the level of general tax revenues
now spent.
�9B6ALL #MEPoCA CfiY
2
Table 1 details the 1991 proposed budget for Brooklyn Center's storm drainage
activities:
TABLE 1
1991 PROPOSED STORM DRAINAGE UTILITY BUDGET
ACTIVITY BUDGET ITEM AMOUNT
1. Watershed District $36,700
Allocations
MANAGEMENT
AND 2. Street Sweeping $40,000
MAINTENANCE
3. Storm Sewer $40,000
Maintenance
PROFESSIONAL 4. Develop Local $75,000
SERVICES Management Plan
5. Ryan Lake /Twin Lake $27,500
CAPITAL Outlet Improvements
PROJECTS $20,000
6. Other
RESERVE 7. Reserve $25,000
TOTAL $264,200
Notes to Items:
1. Cities are required to participate in the planning and management
activities of Watershed Management Organizations (WMO's), which
are required to manage the various Watershed Districts. These
organizations pass along the costs of management and
administration to the cities within their districts.
2. The City conducts a regular program of street sweeping, to reduce
the amount of leaves, sand, and other debris which washes into the
drainage system and the lakes, rivers, creeks, and wetlands which
drain the city. The $40,000 shown represents the cost of the
current level of service for this activity.
3. The storm sewer system requires routine maintenance and repair.
The $40,000 shown represents the current (minimal) level of
service for this function.
4. In addition to the requirement for development of management plans
by the WMO's, the SWMA required that cities develop comprehensive
Local Storm Water Management Plans. These plans are intended to
identify operational, maintenance and capital project needs within
the municipality. A consultant would be retained to prepare this
3
plan for Brooklyn Center. The $75,000 shown for 1991 represents
one -half of the estimated costs for development of such a plan.
While a plan meeting the minimum requirements of state mandates
could be developed at a lower cost, City staff recommends that a
more detailed study be conducted, so as to develop a comprehensive
plan which fully addresses the City's entire storm water
management needs.
Note: City staff plans to present a proposed process for selection
of a consultant for the development of this local plan to the City
Council for review and discussion prior to seeking any consultant
proposals for this purpose.
5. The Watershed Management Commissions also manage capital
improvement projects which benefit the entire district; these
costs are also allocated to the cities. The Shingle Creek
Watershed Commission is constructing in 1990 the Twin Lakes /Ryan
Lake outlet improvements, with Brooklyn Center's share estimated
at $27,500.
6. This item would provide a reserve for other activities or projects
which could include water quality improvements to the Twin Lakes.
If no additional projects or activities are approved for 1991,
this revenue could be reserved for future capital improvements or
storm water management activities.
7. This item would begin to provide for a capital reserve. This
reserve could be used to fund capital projects, or it could also
be used to pay some or all the costs of replacing street sweeping
equipment. The $65,000 mechanical sweeper is due to be replaced
in 1992, and the $150,000 vacuum sweeper in 1997.
Future Costs
While Brooklyn Center has in place a basic storm drainage system, by today's
standards there are areas where the existing system is undersized, and the
existing system in other areas is only skeletal. It can be expected that a
number of capital improvement projects will be identified in the local
management plan. In addition, standards of quality of runoff entering surface
waters are now more stringent. The plan will evaluate the need for any storm
water treatment. Finally, operational and maintenance needs of the existing
system will be evaluated. There is no estimate at this time of the potential
annual cost of the improvements that a comprehensive local plan might
identify.
The Generation of Revenues
A storm drainage utility created under the authority granted by Minnesota
Statutes Section 444.075 would generate the revenues needed to conduct these
activities by charging a fee that is based on the property's contribution to
runoff. That is, a more densely developed parcel of land with little or no
4
grassy area such as a commercial or industrial property with a large building
and parking lot will contribute more storm water to the drainage system. A
less densely developed property, such as a school with large playing fields,
or a park will contribute less. Thus, storm drainage utility fees are user
fees.
A comprehensive study conducted for the City of Roseville in 1985 has been
used by many Metro area suburbs as a model for establishing storm drainage
fees. City staff has reviewed this model and found it to be technically and
financially sound. Accordingly, we recommend its use, with a few minor
adjustments to more accurately reflect factors which are specific to Brooklyn
Center. This model establishes Residential Equivalency Factors, or REFs, for
different types of land use. These factors consider the typical residential
property to have a factor of one. An REF of five, such as that recommended
for commercial and industrial land uses, means that such a property
contributes on average five times more runoff per acre than one acre of
residential property. Thus, that property would be charged five times more
per acre than a residential property. Table 2 shows the land use
classifications and REFs recommended for implementation in Brooklyn Center:
TABLE 2
RECOMMENDED LAND USE CLASSIFICATIONS
AND RESIDENTIAL EQUIVALENCY FACTORS (REFS)
CLASSIFICATION LAND USE REF
1 Cemeteries, Golf Courses 0.25
2 Parks 0.50
3 Single Family and Duplex 1.00
4 Schools, Institutional 1.25
5 Multiple Family, Churches 3.00
6 Commercial, Industrial 5.00
7 Vacant Land As Assigned
A property's storm drainage fee is calculated by multiplying its acreage times
its REF times the base rate. For simplicity and fairness, all single family
and duplex parcels are considered to be 1/4 acre (this is the average size of
all R -1 and R -2 lots in Brooklyn Center). Thus, all single family and duplex
property owners would pay the same flat rate. Table 3 shows the estimate of
revenue that would be generated if the base rate was $12 per quarter per acre
per REF. The rate for a residential property would then be: 1/4 acre times
1.00 REF times $12 per quarter, or $3 per quarter.
Table 3
Brooklyn Center Proposed Storm Drainage Utility
Estimate of Annual Revenue if Residential Rate Equals $3 /Quarter
(Number of Parcels and Area Estimated)
Residential Parcels = 1/4 Acre
Residential Rate Per % of
Equivelency Acre If Total Average Average
Factor Base Rate= Area Annual Annual Total Area Quarterly
Land Use Class (REF) $12 /quarter (Acre) Revenue Revenue Parcels (Acres) Charge
Cemetary 1 0.25 $3.00 8.999 $107.99 0.0% 1 8.999 $27.00
Golf Course 1 0.25 $3.00 17.534 210.41 0.1% 12 1.461 4.38
Parks 2 0.50 $6.00 358.103 8,594.46 3.3% 38 9.424 56.54
Single /Double Family 3 1.00 $12.00 1,843 88,464.00 33.5% 7372 0.258 12.00
($3.00 /parcel) (7372 parcels)
Schools 4 1.25 $15.00 101.127 6,067.62 2.3% 7 14.447 216.70
Institutional 4 1.25 $15.00 79.652 4,779.11 1.8% 15 5.310 79.65
Multiple Family 5 3.00 $36.00 236.514 34,057.96 12.9% 773 0.306 11.01
Churches 5 3.00 $36.00 61.873 8,909.76 3.4% 27 2.292 82.50
Commercial 6 5.00 $60.00 243.203 58,368.73 22.1% 128 1.900 114.00
Industrial 6 5.00 $60.00 227.357 54,565.64 20.7% 63 3.609 216.53 ">
Vacant 7 As Assigned
TOTAL 3,177.361 $264,125.67 100.0% 8,436 $7.83
DRAFT
PUTIL:summ2 /dfs 25- Oct -90
I
Ui
6
Table 4 shows the fees charged by some other cities in the metro area with
storm drainage utilities:
TABLE 4
PROPOSED BROOKLYN CENTER STORM DRAINAGE FEE
COMPARED TO OTHER CITIES' 1990 RATES
QUARTERLY QUARTERLY
RESIDENTIAL BASIC
CITY RATE RATE
Apple Valley $5.25 Individually Set
Edina $5.00 $13.45
Fridley $1.75 $ 5.75
Richfield $7.20 $ 7.20
Robbinsdale $3.00 $20.00
Roseville $4.29 $13.00
BROOKLYN CENTER (proposed) $3.00 $12.00
Because these fees are user fees, such a utility provides a mechanism for
raising revenue in a fair way that does not increase taxes. The City may also
then collect the user fee from the owners of properties which are tax exempt.
Proposed Ordinance
A storm drainage utility must be established by ordinance. It is proposed to
create Chapter 16 of the Brooklyn Center ordinances to establish this utility
and define the administrative procedures. It is proposed to begin charging a
storm drainage utility fee with the water and sewer utility bill as of January
1, 1991. The storm drainage fee would be subject to the same payment
schedules, penalties, and collection methods as are water and sanitary sewer
charges.
This ordinance would provide an appeal process for property owners who dispute
the land use classification assigned to their property, or who believe that
there are special circumstances regarding their property. These owners can
present hydrologic evidence to the Council and to staff for review. The
Council may authorize the City Manager to adjust the storm drainage fee for
that property, or for a class of parcels. However, the ordinance as proposed
would not allow the Council to make a retroactive adjustment.
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the day of
, 19 , at p.m. at City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek
Parkway, to consider An Ordinance Adding Chapter 16 Regarding Storm Drainage
Utility.
Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request at least 96
hours in advance. Please contact the Personnel Coordinator at 569 -3300 to make
arrangements.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE ADDING CHAPTER 16 REGARDING STORM DRAINAGE UTILITY
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Chapter 16 is hereby added to the City Ordinances with language
as follows:
CHAPTER 16 - STORM DRAINAGE UTILITY
Section 16 -101. FUNCTION There shall be in the City of Brooklyn Center a
Storm Drainage Utility which shall be operated as a public utility pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes Section 444.075.
Section 16 -102. MANAGEMENT The city manager shall be responsible for the
management of the Storm Drainage Utility. Operations shall be supervised by the
city director of public works
Section 16 -103. STORM DRAINAGE UTILITY FUND There shall be maintained
within the City accounting system a separate fund to be known as the Storm
Drainage Utility Fund All revenues derived by the utility shall be deposited
in such fund. Such fund shall be used to operate maintain repair, expand and
administer the City's storm drainage system
Section 16 -201 RESIDENTIAL EQUIVALENCY FACTOR (REF) One (1) REF is
defined as the ratio of the average volume of runoff generated by one (1) acre
of a given land use to the average volume of runoff generated by one (1) acre of
typical single family residential land during a standard one (1) year rainfall
event.
Section 16 -202. STORM WATER DRAINAGE FEES.
Subdivision 1. Calculation of Fee Storm water drainage fees for parcels
of land shall be determined by multiplying the REF for a parcel's land use by
the parcel's acreage and then multiplying the resulting product by the storm
water drainage rate The REF values for various land uses are as follows:
CLASSIFICATION LAND USES REF
1 Cemeteries, Golf Courses 0.25
2 Parks 0.50
3 Single Family and Duplex 1.00
4 Schools and Institutional 1.25
5 Multiple Family and Churches 3.00
6 Commercial, Industrial 5.00
7_ Vacant Land As assigned
ORDINANCE N0.
Subdivision 2. Standardized Acreage For the purpose of calculating storm
drainage fees, all developed single family and duplex residential parcels shall
be considered to have an acreage of one - fourth (1/4) acre
Subdivision 3. Excluded Lands The following land uses are exempt from
storm water drainage fees: (a) public rights of way: and (b) vacant unimproved
land with ground cover.
Subdivision 4. Other Land Uses Other land uses not listed in the
foregoing table shall be classified by the city manager by assigning them to the
classes most nearly like the listed uses from the standpoint of probable
hydrologic response
Subdivision . 5. Appeals Appeals regarding the determination of the proper
classifications may be made to the city council The council may adjust by
resolution, the storm drainage fee for a parcel or a class of parcels based upon
hydrologic data to be supplied by property owners which data demonstrate a
hydrologic response substantially different from the standards Such
adjustments of storm water drainage fees shall not be made retroactively.
Section 16 -203. STORM DRAINAGE RATE The city council shall adopt by
resolution a base storm drainage rate which shall be included in the Public
Utilities Rate Schedules pursuant to Section 4 -104 of this code
Section 16 -204. PAYMENT OF FEE The city manager shall establish
procedures for determining and collecting customer charges consistent with the
adopted rate schedules
Collection of fees shall be subject to the same obligations service
charges, penalties and methods of collection as are charges` for water and
sanitary sewer service pursuant to Section 4-105 of this code
Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after publication and
thirty (30) days following its adoption.
Adopted this day of 19
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Date of Publication
Effective Date
(Brackets indicate matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter.)
r
association of
metropolitan
municipalities
October 15, 1990
AMM MEMBER LOCAL OFFICIALS:
Attached are the recommendations for 1991 Legislative Policy from the
five standing committees of the AMM and the Board of Directors.
Please review the policies with your council for action at the
membership meeting scheduled for the evening of November 1, 1990. A
notice containing specific meeting details will follow.
Note that a new Section of Endorsed Policies has been added. These
are LMC or other organization policies in which the AMM concurs but
will not actively lobby. This is in keeping with the goal to focus
AMM effort on major concerns to metropolitan area officials and
cities that are not being addressed by other groups.
The Board of Directors would like to point out that some significant
0 changes or additions were made to several major policies and asks
that you review these policies with extra care. Major changed or
added policies include; I -C Local Government Aid, I -D -1 Homestead
Class Rates, II -F Contractor Licensing, III -B -1 Cities Development
and Economic Development responsibilities, III -B -3 Tax Increment
Finance, III -C Land Use Planning, IV -G -4 Regional Bonding for
Regional Parks, IV -I -1 Integrated waste Stream Planning, IV -I -3
Metropolitan County Responsibilities, and V -0 Metropolitan Tax.
Again, this year, the Board is requesting the membership to help
establish policy priority. Please indicate below your five highest
priority policies and if this is an individual or a city council
determination. These will be collected at the November 1 meeting.
Respectfully,
GL Larry Bakken, President
Association of Metropolitan Municipalities
TOP POLICY PRIORITIES
ELECTED OFFICIAL APPOINTED OFFICIAL CITY COUNCIL
1. 4.
2. 5.
3.
(CITY NAME - OPTIONAL)
183 university avenue east, st. paui, minnesota 55101 (612) 227 -4008
R
2.
P R O P O S E D
P O L I C I E S
A N D
L E G I S L A T I V E P R O P O S A L S
1991
OCTOBER 4, 1990
THIS DOCUMENT PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
INDEX
PART ONE
MUNICIPAL REVENUES
AND TAXATION
I. MUNICIPAL REVENUES
PAG NUMBER
A. LEVY LIMITS
1 - 10
1. Repeal 1
2 . Index 1
B. LEVY LIMIT
MOD IFICATIONS 1
1. Realistic Levy Base
2
2. Reverse Referendum
2
3• Mandated
State and Fe
deral 2
Programs
4 ' Special
Levies and Base 3
C• LOCAL Adjustment
GOVERNMENT AID 3
1. Aid Program 4
2. LGA Formula 4
3. State Commitment
4
4 • Minimum Aid
5
D. PROPERTY TAX
5
1• Homestead Class Rates
5
2' Non - G overnmnt a l e
3• Tax Exempt Property 5
State Owned Tax Exempt
4. pt Property
Property Tax RefO 6
K,
" E • GENERAL FISCAL
IMPACT POLICIES 7
1• Fiscal
Note Continuation 8
2• Funding Shifts
8
3 • State
Revenue Stability 9
9
PART TWO
GENERAL LEGISLATION
II. GENERAL LEGISLATION
11 - 20
A. LABOR RELATIONS ISSUES (PELRA)
11
1. Disciplinary Action
11
2. Impasse Resolution /Binding Arbitration
11
3. Picket Lines
12
4. Unfair Labor Practice Charges
12
5. Part Time Employees
12
6. Bureau of Mediation Services
12
B. TORT LIABILITY
12
C. DATA PRIVACY AND OPEN MEETING
13
D. POLICE AND FIRE PENSION PROVISIONS
14
1. Investment Earnings (13th. Paycheck) 14
2. Employee Contribution Amount
15
E. OPPOSE REDUCTION OF AUTHORITY OR LOCAL CONTROL 15
F. CONTRACTOR LICENSING
15
G. CONTRACTORS PERFORMANCE BONDS
16
H. POLICE OFFICER STANDARDS AND TRAINING (POST) 16
RECRUITMENT
I. STATE AGENCY RULE MAKING
17 ,
J. SHADE TREE DISEASE CONTROL PROGRAM
17
K. CONCURRENT DETACHMENT AND ANNEXATION
18
L. DATA PRACTICES
19
I. LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION
19
2. GENERAL PUBLIC DATA
19
-ii-
PART THREE
HOUSING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND LAND USE
III. HOUSING AND NEIGHBORHOODS 21 - 34
4
A. HOUSING AND NEIGHBORHOODS 21
1. Examine Local Requirements 21
2. Practices Which Increase Housing Costs 21
3. Mandatory Land Use Standards 22
4. State and Regional Housing Policies 22
5. Federal Housing Policy 23
6. Local Housing Policy 23
7. Housing In The Metropolitan Area 24
S. Neighborhood Liveability 25
9. State Licensed Residential Facilities 28
Group Homes
B. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 29
1. Cities Development and Economic Development 31
Responsibilities
2. Equal Treatment of Cities 31
3. Tax Increment Financing 32
4. Local Option for Development Organization 32
Structure
5. County Economic Development Authorities 33
(EDA's)
C. LAND USE PLANNING 33
-iii-
PART FOUR
METROPOLITAN AGENCIES
IV. PHILOSOPHY WITH RESPECT TO METROPOLITAN 35 - 49
GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES `
A. PURPOSE OF METROPOLITAN GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES 35
B. CRITERIA FOR EXTENSION OF METROPOLITAN 35
ORGANIZATION POWERS
C. STRUCTURES, PLANNING, IMPLEMENTATION AND 36
FUNDING OF METROPOLITAN SERVICES AND PROGRAMS
1. Policy Planning - Implementation 36
2. Funding for Regionally Provided Services 36
3. Regional Tax Rates and User Fees 37
D. COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING - LOCAL AND REGIONAL 37
INTERACTION
E. COMBINED SEWERS - SEPARATION 38
F. METROPOLITAN COUNCIL BUDGET /WORK PROGRAM PROCESS 38
1. Budget Detail and Specificity 38
2. Reliance on Property Taxes 39
3. Program Evaluation 39
G. METROPOLITAN PARKS AND OPEN SPACE FUNDING 39
1. Operation and Maintenance (0 & M) Funding 40
2. Funding for Impacts of Regional Parks on 40
Host Communities
3. Priority Setting Process for Capital 40
Improvement Grants
4. Regional Bonding For Regional Parks 41
-iv-
H. WATER MANAGEMENT IN METROPOLITAN AREA 41
I. WASTE STREAM MANAGEMENT 42
1. Integrated Waste Stream Planning 43
2. Hazardous and Dangerous Waste Management 44
3. Metropolitan /County Responsibilities 45
4. Local Solid Waste Management Responsibilities 46
5. Funding 46
6. Organized Collection 47
7. Host Cities and Cleanup Responsibilities 48
PART FIVE
TRANSPORTATION
V. TRANSPORTATION 50 - 58
A. STREET AND HIGHWAY FUNDING 50
B. MOTOR VEHICLE EXCISE TAX TRANSFER 50
C. HIGHWAY AND TRANSIT INTEGRATION 51
D. METROPOLITAN TRANSIT SYSTEM FUNDING 51
E. HIGHWAY JURISDICTIONAL REASSIGNMENT AND FUNDING 51
F. STATE AND COUNTY HIGHWAY TURNBACKS 52
G. CSAH DESIGNATION 53
H. 1 3C' TRANSPORTATION PLANNING PROCESS - ROLE 53
OF ELECTED OFFICIALS
I. LARGE TRUCKS (TRIPLE TRAILERS) 54
J. MTC REDUCED SERVICE AREA MILL RATE 54
K. SEAT BELTS 55
L. PEAK HOUR INTERSTATE TRUCK BAN
55
-v-
M. REGIONAL TRANSIT SYSTEM 55
N. MSA SCREENING COMMITTEE 56
0. METROPOLITAN TAX 57
PART SIX
ENDORSEMENT POLICIES,
VI. ENDORSEMENT POLICIES (LMC POLICIES) 59 - 65
A. TRUTH IN TAXATION 59
B. RESERVE FUNDS 60
C. SALES AND MOTOR VEHICLE EXCISE TAX 61
D. STATE ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS 61
E. COMPARABLE WORTH 62
F. LIQUOR ISSUES 63
G. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITIES 63
H. MUNICIPAL SERVICE DISTRICTS 63
I. HAZARDOUS SITE CLEAN -UP AND REDEVELOPMENT 64
J. TOLLWAY AUTHORIZATION 64
K. ROAD ACCESS CHARGE 65
I
-vi-
I
MUNICIPAL REVENUES
PAGE 1 THROUGH 10
LEGISLATIVE POLICIES
1991 -1992
I
MUNICIPAL REVENUE AND TAXATION
I -A LEVY LIMITS
A -1 LEVY LIMIT REPEAL
W The Association of Metropolitan Municipalities has consistently
opposed the levy limit laws in that they apply uniform statewide
restrictions to cities and are too inflexible to accommodate
inflation, of ation uncert
anties in state and federal financial aids, and
the diverse problems and circumstances faced by cities throughout
the state. Such laws are inconsistent with principles of local
self - government and accountability. Neither do they recognize
changing local conditions as to either expenditure needs or
revenue sources. Levy limits may ultimately work against the
interests of local taxpayers because the law creates an incentive
for cities to take maximum advantage of the opportunity to make
general or special levies. For example, the arbitrary decision in
1981 to create a new levy limit base effectively penalized those
cities that were successful in holding down their property tax
levies in 1981. This was done again in 1987 and 1988. History has
now provided cities with numerous lessons teaching that cities
which choose to levy less than the maximum allowed in a given year
risk being later tied to unrealistic or artificially low new
limits for future budget years. Therefore,
THE AMM REMAINS STRONGLY OPPOSED IN PRINCIPLE TO SUCH LIMITATIONS
AND RECOMMENDS THAT THE MINNESOTA LEGISLATURE ALLOW LEVY LIMIT
LAWS FOR CITIES TO SUNSET PER CURRENT LAW FOR TAXES PAYABLE 1993.
A -2 LEVY LIMIT INDEX
The 1985 Legislature reversed the annual levy limit base increase
index from the greater of the Implicit Price Deflator or 5% to the
lessor of these. In 1987 this was changed to 3 %, 1988 to 4 %,
and 1989 to 3 %. For many years cities argued that the levy base
increase should not be a flat percentage but be indexed to reflect
cost of doing business. This is especially true since labor costs
are 60 to 65 percent of the total municipal cost, yet because of
the state PELRA laws control of wages and wage increases often is
determined by outside arbitration. Also, during those years, of
flat percent increase, many adjustments and gimmicks were needed
to keep up but with the adoption of the Implicit Price Deflator as
an index, this would not be necessary.
THE AMM URGES THE LEGISLATURE TO RESTORE THE ANNUAL LEVY BASE
INCREASE TO THE IMPLICIT PRICE DEFLATOR, SINCE THIS IS THE
ONLY INDEX OF ACTUAL NEED.
-1-
I-B LEVY LIMIT MODIFICATIONS
Although the AMM is strongly opposed to Levy Limitations as
currently legislated, the organization is aware that there is
significant legislative initiative to maintain the responsibility
for local property tax levels. However, local government must
continue and be allowed to provide for services that people demand
and that state and federal law require. Therefore, for taxes
payable in 1992 and thereafter if repeal is not adopted, the
Association supports amendments to the present levy limit law to
provide further relief from current inequities.
B -1 REALISTIC LEVY BASE
The 1983 legislature restored the pre 1982 levy base formula of
local government aids plus levy limit on which annual growth is
calculated without regard to actual levy. This method provides
that cities may levy less than the limit without losing the
ability to regain the underlevy in future years. The legislature
also provided growth based on an index rather than a flat
percentage and growth increase for the greater of population or
households and some base growth for commercial and industrial
activity. All of these growth factors are necessary as a minimum
to allow cities the ability to at least stay even with service
provisions for the varying population needs. The 1987 and 1988
legislature eliminated the underlevy reserve and the use of C/I
for growth. The 1989 Legislature reduced population growth to
one -half.
THE AMM STRONGLY URGES A RETURN TO BASE ADJUSTMENTS INCLUDING
FULL POPULATION OR HOUSEHOLD GROWTH AND COMMERCIAL /INDUSTRIAL
GROWTH. ELIMINATING THE ABILITY TO LEVY LESS THAN THE MAXIMUM
WITHOUT LOSING THE DIFFERENCE FOR THE FUTURE WILL ALMOST
CERTAINLY GUARANTEE THAT CITIES MUST LEVY THE MAXIMUM.
B -2 REVERSE REFERENDUM
The 1981 legislature eliminated the Reverse Referendum procedure
which allowed a local governing body to increase its levy base by
up to 10% if it was at 98% or more of the levy limit the previous
year. The law restricted use to a one time 10% increase or
up to 10% in multiple steps and public hearing procedures. The
increase was subject to a referendum if a petition was presented
containing signatures equal to 5% of the number of persons voting
at the previous general election. If no petition was received,
the increase becomes effective. This provision provided a measure
of flexibility for cities and counties that needed base increases
for various reasons. The 1988 Legislature eliminated all city
referendum ability for property tax increase.
I
-2-
THE AMM REQUESTS THE LEGISLATURE RE -ENACT THE REVERSE REFERENDUM
AND REFERENDUM PROVISIONS TO ADD FLEXIBILITY FOR LOCAL UNITS.
B -3 MANDATED STATE AND FEDERAL PROGRAMS.
The cost of local government is being influenced more and more by
both state and federally legislated mandated programs and
increased mandated benefits or costs for in -place programs. Due
to current levy limitation restrictions, the ability of local
government to pay these increased costs is severely restricted,
thereby causing in many instances, a reduction in the level of the
traditional service functions of police, fire, street, etc. There
is a vast range of mandated program increases which have no
bearing or relationship to the annually allowed levy limit
increase. Some of these include worker's compensation benefits,
binding arbitration, federal social security, minimum wage laws,
comprehensive planning, Critical Areas Act, Shorelines Act, OSHA,
etc.
THE AMM URGES THE LEGISLATURE TO RECOGNIZE THAT MANDATED INCREASED
EXPENDITURES IN ONE PROGRAM WITHOUT A CORRESPONDING INCREASE IN
FUNDING ABILITY MANDATES A DECREASED EXPENDITURE IN THE OTHER
SERVICE AREAS SUCH AS PUBLIC SAFETY ETC. THEREFORE, WHEN NEW
PROGRAMS OR INCREASES TO EXISTING PROGRAMS ARE MANDATED, THE
LEGISLATURE SHOULD PROVIDE SUBSTANTIAL STATE FUNDING ASSISTANCE
ALONG WITH, AS APPROPRIATE, A PERMANENT LEVY LIMIT BASE INCREASE
TO OFFSET THE NEW COSTS.
B -4 SPECIAL LEVIES AND BASE ADJUSTMENTS
The legislature has in the past recognized that occasionally
special conditions exist that require special funding or
modification of a cities current funding in order to continue the
ability to finance ongoing required services. The special levies,
except for bonded debt and pension costs, as delineated in
Minnesota Statutes 1987, Section 275.50 were eliminated in 1988 as
were levies for Economic Development Authorities, Infrastructure
replacement and other special activities. It is imperative that
the legislature reconsider elimination of these levies. Generally
for cities as a whole the amount levied is insignificant compared
to total property taxes. However, on an individual local level
they can be very significant and without this ability could lead
to a drastic reduction in the ability to protect the Public
Health, Safety and Welfare of the people of the state. In
addition to these special levies eliminated by the 1988 tax bill
the legislature should consider levies for natural disasters,
lawful orders, Eurasian Milfoil treatment, and shifts of service
costs from one jurisdiction to another as well as levy base
adjustments for permanent mandated or shifted activities including
Comparable Worth (pay equity) adjustments, waste recycling
activities, drug enforcement, and truth in taxation.
-3-
TO ALLOW CITIES THE ABILITY TO EFFECTIVELY CONTINUE PROVIDING
SERVICES THAT PROTECT THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF MINNESOTAS
CITIZENS, THE ANN ENCOURAGES THE LEGISLATURE TO RESTORE THE
SPECIAL LEVIES ELIMINATED IN
THE 1988 TAX BILL, CREATE NEW SPECIAL
LEVIES FOR NECESSARY OR LIMITED MANDATED ACTIVITIES SUCH AS DRUG _
ENFORCEMENT AND ERASIAN MILFOIL TREATMENT AND TO PROVIDE LEVY BASE
ADJUSTMENT FOR PERMANENT MANDATED ACTIVITIES SUCH AS PAY EQUITY
PAYROLL INCREASES, COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH WASTE RECYCLING _
ACTIVITIES, AND TRUTH IN TAXATION.
I -C LOCAL GOVERNMENT AID
C -1 AID PROGRAM
State Aid to cities has been a much debated legislative issue for
two decades. Over that time the formula(s) have ranged from pure
per capita, to need based on value and service, to a distribution
based on location and past spending. Homestead Credit has changed
to Homestead Aid and is no longer a direct taxpayer subsidy. New
gimmicks such as Disparity Reduction Aid (Mill rate equalization)
and Tax Base Equalization Aid, have been invented to target money
to various regions when the general aid formula could not be
politically justifiably rigged to work. Because of the regional
fracturing or because cities and city aid has become an easier
less emotionally backed target, the legislature has begun what
appears to be a systematic shift from city aid to school and
county assistance programs.
THE STATE SHOULD CONTINUE A LOCAL AID COMMITMENT TO CITIES TO HELP
MAINTAIN REASONABLE PROPERTY TAXES ON A FAIR BASIS FOR THE
PROVISION OF NECESSARY PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE
SERVICES.
C -2 LGA FORMULA
It is time for the cities and the legislature to return to basics
and develop a single rationally based formula for redistribution
of state collected wealth to continue the state commitment for the
provision of necessary public health, safety, and welfare
services by city government to the states citizens.
A SINGLE STATE AID FORMULA SHOULD BE ADOPTED
THAT CONTAINS SEVERAL ELEMENTS TO HELP STABILIZE THE COST OF BASIC
LOCAL SERVICES. THE FORMULA SHOULD CONSIDER:
- WEALTH OR TAX CAPACITY; _
- PROPERTY TAX BURDEN RELATIVE TO INCOME;
-THE SERVICES WHICH ARE NECESSARY AND THUS SHOULD BE SUPPORTED
BY THE STATE; AND
-AN APPROPRIATE SUPPORT LEVEL FOR THE VARIOUS INCLUDED
SERVICES.
-4-
C -3 STATE COMMITMENT
The state, when faced with budget shortfalls, has been quick to
solve its problem on the back of city government and thus local
taxpaying constituents that have been promised certain services.
The majority of cities do not have the states budget reserve nor
two year cycle flexibility and therefore cannot make major budget
adjustments in mid year.
• THE LEGISLATURE, WHEN SOLVING BUDGET PROBLEMS, SHOULD NOT TARE
AWAY OR REDUCE LOCAL GOVERNMENT AID, HOMESTEAD AND AGRICULTURAL
CREDIT AID, OR TAX BASE EQUALIZATION AID IN THE SAME YEAR IT HAS
BEEN BUDGETED BY LOCAL GOVERNMENT. IF THE STATE BUDGET RESERVE
HAS BEEN EXHAUSTED AND CUTS IN A CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR ARE STILL
NECESSARY, THEN THE STATE SHOULD ALLOW LOCAL UNITS TO RECOVER CUTS
IN THE FOLLOWING BUDGET YEAR.
ANY FUTURE AID REDUCTION MADE BY THE LEGISLATURE SHOULD BE
RECOVERABLE BY INCREASED LEVY AUTHORITY.
C -4 MINIMUM AID
The old Homestead Credit program guaranteed that all homeowners
would receive at least some redistribution of their sales and
income tax revenue back in the form of lowered property taxes.
Under the current system, homeowners do get a calculated property
tax reduction but there is not necessarily a payment from the
state to the city for that calculated reduction. In fact some
cities now no longer receive any LGA, TBE, or HACA of any kind,
thus, local tax rates for all property are higher.
THE STATE SHOULD CONTINUE A MINIMUM AMOUNT OF AT LEAST HACA AID TO
EACH COMMUNITY IN FAIRNESS AND TO UPHOLD THE ORIGINAL COMMITMENT
TO ALL OF THE STATES TAXPAYERS.
I -D PROPERTY TAX
D -1 HOMESTEAD CLASS RATES
Homestead taxable value is determined by applying 1% to the first
$68,000 market value, 2% to the market value between $68,000 and
$110,000, and 3% to the market value in excess of $110,000. This
triple split rate causes an artifcial difference in market value
compared to taxable value especially between outstate and the
metro area. The vast majority of homes in outstate Minnesota are
valued at less than $68,000, thus, taxed at the 1% rate while in
the metro area many, especially newer homes, are in excess of
$100,000 and pay taxes based on 2% and 3% of significant portions
of their value. The split rate system also causes geometrically
progressive tax rather than just progressive. A $120,000 home
-5-
pays 3 times the tax of a $60,000 home while a $240,000 home which
is 4 times the value of a $60,000 home pays 9 times the tax.
Higher valued property should pay proportionately higher taxes but
not geometrically higher taxes. Although, the ideal solution from
a fairness perspective would be a single rate for homestead
property regardless of market value, the AMM will support a two
tier system as a desireable step in the direction of establishing
a fair property tax system.
THE AMM SUGGESTS RETURNING TO A TWO TIER HOMESTEAD CLASS TAX RATE `
SYSTEM, THE FIRST TIER OF 1% ON VALUE UP TO $68, 000 MARKET VALUE
AND THE SECOND TIER OF 2% ON MARKET VALUE OVER $68,000. WHILE THE
AMM PREFERS THAT THE STATE INCREASE HACA TO OFFSET THE EFFECTS OF
GOING TO A TWO TIER SYSTEM, IN ANY EVENT, LOCAL UNITS OF
GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT BE PREVENTED FROM RECOVERING THE LOST
REVENUE THROUGH LEVY.
D -2 NON- GOVERNMENTAL TAX EXEMPT PROPERTY
One of the glaring inequities in the Minnesota tax system involves
the free local services that are provided to tax exempt property
owned by certain non - governmental organizations. It is widely
acknowledged that such property benefits directly from
governmental services such as police and fire protection and
street services provided by cities and counties. However, since
there is not legal basis for claiming reimbursement for the cost
of such services, they are borne by the local taxpayers.
Furthermore, such property is concentrated in certain cities and
counties resulting in a heavy cost burden in certain parts of the
state.
THE ASSOCIATION BELIEVES THIS PROBLEM SHOULD BE CORRECTED BY
ENACTING LEGISLATION, REQUIRING OWNERS OF TAX EXEMPT PROPERTY,
EXCEPT FOR CHURCHES, HOUSES OF WORSHIP, AND PROPERTY USED SOLELY
FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES BY ACADEMIES, COLLEGES, UNIVERSITIES AND
SEMINARIES OF LEARNING, TO REIMBURSE CITIES AND COUNTIES FOR THE
COST OF MUNICIPAL SERVICES.
D -3 STATE AND METROPOLITAN AGENCY OWNED TAX EXEMPT PROPERTY
The State of Minnesota and Metropolitan Agencies owns a
significant amount of property within the metropolitan area.
Cities provide a range of services that benefit these properties.
However, since the they are exempt from paying property taxes,
municipalities are not reimbursed for the cost of these services.
This places an unreasonable burden on cities.
The State of Wisconsin established a program called "Payment for
Municipal Services" in 1973. The program provides a mechanism for
municipalities to be reimbursed by the state for services they
provide to state -owned properties. Through a formula based on the
-6-
value of state -owned buildings within a city, the Wisconsin system
reimburses cities for police, fire, and solid waste services.
THE AMM ENCOURAGES THE STATE LEGISLATURE TO ESTABLISH A PROGRAM
FOR REIMBURSING MUNICIPALITIES FOR SERVICES TO STATE AND
METROPOLITAN AGENCY FACILITIES. THE PROGRAM SHOULD (1) ENSURE
THAT THESE AGENCIES PAY ASSESSMENTS FOR SERVICES THAT BENEFIT
THEIR PROPERTY, AND (2) ALLOW CITIES TO RECEIVE COMPENSATION FOR
SERVICES THAT ARE FUNDED THROUGH GENERAL REVENUE, SUCH AS POLICE
AND FIRE, WHICH ARE VALUABLE TO THE STATE OF MINNESOTA AND
METROPOLITAN AGENCIES.
D -4 PROPERTY TAX REFORM
Many significant changes in the property tax system have been made
since the 1988 Session. The AMM believes it is critical that any
future proposals be evaluated on the basis of their impact on
individual communities. A proposal that may appear balanced on a
statewide basis can have very disparate effects on individual
cities.
The difference in property tax burdens among taxpayers living in
neighboring tax jurisdictions which provide similar services must
also be kept within reasonable limits. Any significant tax burden
disparities would adversely affect cities' abilities to compete on
a fair basis for residents and economic development.
Tax increment districts are dependent on tax rates and assessment
ratios of the current property tax system. The financial
viability of those projects should not be jeopardized by
state - imposed changes in the tax structure. Likewise, enterprise
zone businesses have been recruited based on a commitment that
they would receive a preferential classification ratio in the
calculation of their property tax obligations. These development
districts should be protected from any negative consequences of
tax reform. The tax increment financing plan in effect at the
time legislation is passed should be the basis for determining
remedies.
In enacting any major reforms of the Minnesota property tax
system, including the complementary system of aids to local
government, the AMM recommends that the Legislature pursue
policies which meet the following conditions:
THE IMPACT OF THE PROPOSAL SHOULD BE THOROUGHLY ANALYZED, NOT ONLY
FOR ITS IMPACT STATEWIDE, BUT ALSO FOR ITS EFFECT ON INDIVIDUAL
COMMUNITIES.
MAJOR SHIFTS THAT INCREASE DISPARITIES IN TAX BURDENS AMONG TAXING
JURISDICTIONS OR REGIONS WITHIN THE STATE SHOULD NOT OCCUR.
-7-
ALL SIGNIFICANT CHANGES SHOULD BE PHASED IN SO THAT CITIES CAN
ADEQUATELY PLAN FOR ANY NEEDED ADJUSTMENTS.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT AID, OR AN EQUIVA PROGRAM OF SHARING STATE
REVENUE FOR THE PURPOSE OF EQUALIZING LOCAL PROPERTY TAX BURDENS,
SHOULD REMAIN AN ESSENTIAL COMPONENT OF THE PROPERTY TAX SYSTEM.
CATEGORICAL AID PROGRAMS SHOULD NOT BECOME A SUBSTITUTE FOR LGA
AND RELATED PROPERTY TAX RELIEF PROGRAMS.
PROPERTY TAX REFORM SHOULD NOT JEOPARDIZE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT
DISTRICTS WHOSE ESTABLISHMENT AND FINANCING WERE BASED ON
CONTINUATION OF THE CURRENT TAX STRUCTURE. ANY TAX REFORM NEEDS
TO RECOGNIZE EXISTING TAX INCREMENT FINANCE DISTRICTS AND THEIR
CASH FLAW AND OBLIGATIONS. IMPACT ON ENTERPRISE ZONES MUST ALSO
BE ADDRESSED.
PROVIDING TAX RELIEF FOR COMMERCIAL/ INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY AND
HIGH - VALUED HOMESTEAD PROPERTY SHOULD REMAIN A HIGH PRIORITY.
TAX STATEMENTS SHOULD ACCURATELY REFLECT HOW MUCH THE PROPERTY
BENEFITS FROM STATE PAID RELIEF. THE CHANGES IN TAX STATEMENTS
MADE BY THE 1988 LEGISLATURE HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO MISLEAD
TAXPAYERS ABOUT THE VALUE OF HOMESTEAD CREDIT /TRANSITION AID
PAYMENTS MADE TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.
THE PROPERTY TAX SYSTEM SHOULD IMPROVE EQUALIZATION FOR CITIES,
COUNTIES AND SCHOOLS AND FOR INDIVIDUAL TAXPAYERS WITHIN THE
PARAMETERS OF OTHER AMM PROPERTY TAX OBJECTIVES. AT THE SAME
TIME, REFORMS SHOULD NOT MAKE MAJOR REDUCTIONS IN THE PROPERTY TAX
BASES OF CITIES.
AN INCOME - ADJUSTED CIRCUIT BREAKER AND RENTERS' CREDIT SHOULD
CONTINUE.
SIMPLIFICATION AND ACCOUNTABILITY ARE DESIRABLE GOALS THAT SHOULD
BE ADDRESSED WITHIN THE ABOVE TENETS.
I -E GENERAL FISCAL IMPACT POLICIES
E -1 FISCAL NOTE CONTINUATION
Many laws are passed each year by the legislature which have a
substantial effect on the financial viability of cities. Some of
these, such as revenue and tax measures, have an obvious and
direct effect which is often calculated and reported during the
hearing process. Many others, such as worker's compensation
benefit increases, mandated activities, binding arbitration and
other labor related legislation, social programs, etc., have
costs which are not as obvious but which will now be known due to
a fiscal note requirement. Cities and others will now be able to
-8-
determine the real cost of a program or suggestion and be able to
use this data in determining the merits.
THE STATE SHOULD CONTINUE A POLICY OF "DELIBERATE RESTRAINT^ ON
ITS MANDATED PROGRAMS AND UTILIZE EXTENSIVELY THE RECENTLY
ADOPTED FISCAL NOTE STATUTE IDENTIFYING LOCAL GOVERNMENT COSTS
ON ANY NEW MANDATED PROGRAMS.
E -2 FUNDING SHIFTS
The Minnesota House of Representatives Research Department
annually prepares 'Major State Aids and Taxes: A Comparative
Analysis'. The statistics for 1985, 1986, 1987, and 1988 show an
imbalance of state revenues collected and aids and credits
distributed between the metropolitan and outstate areas that is
growing each year. Over 65% of the State Revenue is collected in
the Metropolitan Area while significantly less than 50% of the
aids and credits are redistributed in the metro area. In 1987
there was $.65 returned in aids and credits for each dollar
collected in the metro area whereas, there was $1.44 returned per
$1.00 collected in greater Minnesota. If this trend is allowed to
grow , state tax and aid policies may jeopardize the future
economic growth of the metro area to the detriment of the whole
state.
STATISTICS COMPILED BY THE HOUSE RESEARCH DEPARTMENT SHOW THAT THE
MAJORITY OF THE STATE REVENUE IS RAISED IN THE METRO AREA WHILE
ONLY A MINORITY OF THE STATE AIDS AND CREDITS ARE ALLOCATED TO THE
METRO AREA. WHILE SOME IMBALANCE IS ACCEPTABLE AND
UNDERSTANDABLE, THE AMM REQUESTS THE LEGISLATURE TO NOT ALLOW THE
IMBALANCE TO GROW AND TO CONSIDER HOW THIS DISTRIBUTION OF
RESOURCES EFFECTS THE ECONOMIC GROWTH AND VITALITY OF THE METRO
AREA AND THUS THE ENTIRE STATE.
E -3 STATE REVENUE STABILITY
The AMM has in the past supported a state budget reserve of a
sufficient size to allow the state to overcome unexpected Revenue
shortfalls in a given year. This supporting position was adopted
to prevent a repeat of the 1980 disaster where cities did not
receive certified State Aids that had become an integral part of
the budget. However, when faced with a similar shortfall in 1990,
the state legislature and administration again withheld needed
already budgeted State Aids. The state acted as if use of the
budget reserve for its stated purpose would somehow be bad and
that it was better to take away service resources from citizens
and blame local government.
THE AMM SUPPORTS A CONTINUED STATE BUDGET RESERVE ONLY IF THE
STATE IS WILLING TO USE THE RESERVE IN TIMES OF REVENUE SHORTFALL
IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN THE BUDGETED COMMITMENTS MADE TO LOCAL
-9-
GOVERNMENT- MAINTAINING A BUDGET RESERVE MERELY FOR THE SAKE OF
HAVING MONEY IN THE BANK WHILE ARBITRARILY CUTTING PREVIOUSLY
COMMITTED LOCAL EXPENDITURES IS BAD PUBLIC POLICY AND IS DECEIVING
TO THE CITIZENS OF MINNESOTA.
-10-
II
GENERAL LEGISLATION
PAGE 11 THROUGH 20
II
GENERAL LEGISLATION
II -A LABOR RELATIONS ISSUES ( PELRA)
In addition to coverage under the Minnesota Public Employee
Labor Relations Act, public employees find their employment
relationship governed by a number of laws that can conflict with
their collective bargaining rights negotiated under PELRA.
Disciplinary actions against a public employee can be governed by
the veterans preference law, the human rights act, federal
discrimination laws, civil service or merit systems, laws relating
to specific employee classes (i.e. city managers) or specific job
protections (i.e. right to know or workers compensation laws) or
by state and federal due process or implied contract provisions.
PELRA should be amended to encourage successful negotiation of the
"terms and conditions of employment ". Specifically, constraints or
artificial timelines on the parties' ability to bargain, should be
amended.
A -1 DISCIPLINARY ACTION
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES INCLUDING VETERANS SHOULD HAVE "ONE BITE" IN
DISCHARGE ACTIONS. THE NEGOTIATED COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
AGREEMENT SHOULD CONTROL THE ACTION, AS LONG AS STATE AND
FEDERAL DUE PROCESS RIGHTS ARE GUARANTEED.
THE DISCHARGE PROCEDURES RIGHTS UNDER ANY LAW OR SYSTEM SHOULD
BE HELD BEFORE A NEUTRAL PARTY AND SHOULD BE HANDLED WITHIN 120
DAYS OF THE DISCIPLINARY ACTION INITIATED BY THE PUBLIC
EMPLOYER.
COMPENSATION PAYMENTS AND ACCRUAL OF BENEFITS SHOULD NOT BE
PERMITTED WHERE AN EMPLOYEE HAS BEEN GIVEN NOTICE OF THE
EMPLOYER'S INTENT TO DISCHARGE FOR "JUST CAUSE."
THE VETERANS PREFERENCE LAW, PROHIBITING DISMISSAL OF
PROBATIONARY EMPLOYEES WITHOUT A HEARING, SHOULD BE AMENDED SO
THAT ALL PROBATIONARY EMPLOYEES ARE TREATED UNIFORMLY.
A -2 IMPASSE RESOLUTION /BINDING ARBITRATION
ALL PUBLIC EMPLOYEES, REGARDLESS OF JOB CLASSIFICATION, SHOULD
HAVE THE RIGHT TO STRIKE. HOWEVER, A STATUTORY MECHANISM SHOULD
.� BE PUT IN PLACE THAT ALLOWS A PUBLIC EMPLOYER TO ADDRESS PUBLIC
HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE CONCERNS IN THREATENED OR ACTUAL STRIKE
SITUATIONS.
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO PARTICIPATE IN MEANINGFUL
MEDIATION UNTIL AN IMPASSE IS DECLARED BY THE MEDIATOR. THE
ARBITRARY STATUTORY IMPASSE TIMELINES SHOULD BE REPEALED.
-11- -
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES, AFTER IMPASSE IS DECLARED, SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO
GIVE ONLY ONE NOTICE OF THEIR INTENT TO EXERCISE THEIR RIGHT TO
STRIKE. IF THE NOTICE IS GIVEN AND THEY FAIL TO STRIKE DURING THE
STATUTORY PERIOD, THEY WOULD LOSE THEIR RIGHT TO STRIKE.
THE AMM STRONGLY URGES THE LEGISLATURE TO READOPT ITEM BY ITEM
LAST BEST OFFER INTEREST ARBITRATION TO PROMOTE MORE MEANINGFUL
NEGOTIATIONS FOR ESSENTIAL EMPLOYEES.
A -3 PICKET LINES
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES SHOULD NOT BE GIVEN THE RIGHT TO REFUSE TO CROSS
A PICKET LINE.
A -4 UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE CHARGES
REVIEW OF UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE CHARGES SHOULD BE TRANSFERRED FROM
DISTRICT COURT TO AN ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY. (I.E. BUREAU OF
MEDIATION SERVICES, PERB, OR OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS).
A -5 PART TIME EMPLOYEES
THE AMM RECOMMENDS THAT THE LEGISLATURE REINSTATE THE PREVIOUS
DEFINITION OF EMPLOYEES COVERED BY PELRA TO BE PERSONS EMPLOYED
FOR MORE THAN 100 WORKING DAYS IN A CALENDAR YEAR, INSTEAD OF THE
CURRENT 67 DAYS FOR NON STUDENTS.
A -6 BUREAU OF MEDIATION SERVICES
THE LEGISLATURE SHOULD PROMOTE IMPROVED COMMUNICATION AND
COOPERATION BETWEEN EMPLOYERS AND EMPLOYEES BY CONTINUING THE
STATE LABOR- MANAGEMENT PROGRAM WITHIN THE STATE BUREAU OF
MEDIATION SERVICES.
THE BUREAU OF MEDIATION SERVICES SHOULD DEVELOP AN EXPEDITED
GRIEVANCE ARBITRATION PROCESS.
II -B TORT LIABILITY
The Municipal Tort Liability Act was enacted to protect the
public treasury while giving the citizen relief from the
arbitrary, confusing, and administratively expensive prior
doctrine of sovereign immunity with its inconsistent and
irrational distinctions between governmental and proprietary
activities. The act has served that purpose well in the past,
however, courts frequently forget or ignore the positive benefits
secured to citizens damaged by public servants as a result of
enactment of the comprehensive act which includes some limitations
on liability and some qualifications of normal tort claims
procedure.
-12-
The special vulnerability of far -flung government operations to
debilitating tort suits continues to require the existence of a
tort claims act applicable to local governments or local
governments and the state. The need for some type of limitations
is evidenced by recent experiences with the insurance market.
Cities in Minnesota are finding it increasingly difficult to
obtain insurance at an affordable rate, if at all. Amendments in
1983 to increase the dollar amounts recoverable by plaintiffs
should be adequate to satisfy any reasonable claim. Further
changes in limits beyond the current $200,000 per person and
x $600,000 per occurrence should not be made.
Joint and several liability provisions have been modified to
lessen the deep pockets effect some.-The current limit of payment
is times two for liability of 35% or less (i.e. if the city is 30%
liable, they may be required to pay 60% of the damage award) or
total responsibility if liability is over 35% (i.e. if the city is
40% liable, they may be required to pay 100% of the damage
award). This still seems onerous especially when this comes out
of taxpayers pockets. Payment liability should definitely not be
increased.
THE AMM SUPPORTS THE CONTINUED EXISTENCE OF THE MUNICIPAL TORT
LIABILITY ACT AND RECOMMENDS THAT THE CURRENT LIMITS OF LIABILITY
REMAIN INTACT. JOINT AND SEVERAL LIABILITY PROVISIONS FOR PAYMENT
LIMITS SHOULD NOT BE INCREASED FROM CURRENT LAW SO THAT TAXPAYERS
ARE NOT MORE UNFAIRLY SUBJECTED TO DEEP POCKET AWARDS.
II -C DATA PRIVACY AND OPEN MEETING
Data privacy laws protect individuals from the release of
information to the public which the legislature has deemed to be
private or which could be unnecessarily harmful to the individual.
On the other hand, the open meeting law prohibits local government
units from holding closed sessions except when discussing pending
or actual lawsuits with an attorney or labor negotiations.
Unfortunately, many occasions have arisen in past years where
local units in dealing with individuals or employee disciplinary
matters have been forced to either violate the Data Privacy
Statutes or the Open Meeting Statute in order to fairly resolve
the issue.
The Minnesota Supreme Court in early 1989 apparently resolved the
conflict between the two laws and did so by establishing a clear
rule that when 'not public data' comes before public bodies,
either the data must not be released or the meeting must be
closed. However, the 1990 legislature overturned that decision,
but in its clarification, raised more questions than existed prior
to that 1989 Annandale decision. The new law allows an initial
hearing to be closed, unless an individual being accused requests
a public hearing, but does not provide for notice to the
-13-
individual. It does not say whether the name can be released.
The new law provides that the data which is a basis for firing or
suspension is public after final determination and that cities
must use 'reasonable efforts' to protect private data. However,
the law is unclear as to whether final determination is upon
council action or upon completion of grievance and arbitration of
the action. The time gap between council action and filing of
grievance is a problem for determining what data is public or
private. It does not define 'reasonable efforts' nor does it
provide a method to discuss multiple charges, some of which may
not be included as part of the ultimate basis for action.
Finally, it is unclear as to whether or not the law is
retroactive.
Local officials appear to be just as much or more at risk under
the new law than the old law prior to the Annandale decision, and
thus, because of the severity of punishment should probably
err by closing meetings rather than err by inadvertently violating
the Data Practices Act and violating an employees right.
THE AMM REQUESTS THE LEGISLATURE TO MARE THE DATA PRIVACY AND OPEN
MEETING LAWS CONSISTENT SO THAT TO COMPLY WITH ONE LAW A CITY
SHOULD NOT HAVE TO VIOLATE THE OTHER. FURTHER, THE AMM STRONGLY
SUPPORTS LEGISLATION FAVORING DATA PRIVACY OVER OPEN MEETING WHERE
CONFLICTS ARISE TO PROTECT THE EMPLOYEES RIGHT OF CONFIDENTIALITY
FOR PERSONAL AND PRIVATE DATA.
II -D POLICE AND FIRE PENSION PROVISIONS
Local police and full -time fire relief associations were phased
out by the 1980 legislature, unless the local council opts to keep
the relief association. All new employees will become part of the
state police and fire PERA fund and the state will reimburse local
units for a portion of the unfunded liability remaining in the
local fund. The unfunded liability was projected to be paid by the
year 2011 but current investment earnings are in excess of 10% and
thus could, at that continued rate, reduce the time to year 2005.
However, the legislature is considering siphoning earnings in
excess of that needed for 2011 amortization to reduce state
payments and property tax levy for unfunded liability as well as
provide a bonus (13th. paycheck) to retirees. If investment
increase drops below 10 %, the local property taxpayers in future
years will pay more, not only to pick up the property tax
reduction but the state reimbursement reduction. It would be
better public policy to wait until the unfunded liability is
funded. Also, 1979 Law set employee contributions at 8% and the
Legislative Retirement Commission has in the past established a
general policy requiring public safety employees to pay 40% of the
normal pension costs.
D -1 INVESTMENT EARNINGS (13TH. PAYCHECK)
-14-
THE AMM OPPOSES LEGISLATION USING INVESTMENT EARNINGS OF LOCAL
POLICE AND FIRE PENSION FUNDS THAT ARE
IN EXCESS OF
THAT NEEDED
TO AMORTIZE UNFUNDED ACCRUED LIABILITIES BY THE YEAR 2011, FOR
REDUCTIONS OF STATE AMORTIZATION AID AND BONUS (13TH. PAYCHECK)
PAYMENTS TO RETIREES. THE EXCESS EARNINGS SHOULD BE USED TO
FULLY AMORTIZE UNFUNDED ACCRUED LIABILITY AND ONLY THEN SHOULD
ANY CONSIDERATION BE GIVEN TO INCREASED BENEFITS.
D -2 EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION AMOUNT
EVEN THOUGH THE EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION AMOUNT WAS SET AT 8 %, IN
MANY FUNDS THIS IS NOT EQUIVALENT TO 40% OF THE NORMAL COSTS. THE
AMM URGES THAT THE CONTRIBUTION LEVEL BE SET AT 40% OF THE NORMAL
COST OF FINANCING THE BENEFITS EVEN IF THIS AMOUNT EXCEEDS 8% OF
BASE SALARY. ANY INCREASE IN BENEFITS FOR CURRENT EMPLOYEES
INCLUDING ANY RESULTING DEFICIT, SHOULD BE FINANCED 50% BY THE
EMPLOYING CITY AND 50% BY EMPLOYEES ON A CURRENT BASIS.
II -E OPPOSE REDUCTION OF AUTHORITY OR LOCAL CONTROL
The AMM has for many years opposed certain statutory changes that
erode local authority or mandate activities which cost money to
implement without provision to recover those costs. Rather than
adopt a separate policy for each issue, the AMM believes that as
general policy the legislature should not decrease current
authority or mandate activities creating a cost without
corresponding funding or an overwhelming obvious demonstration of
need. Included in this general policy is opposition to mandates
such as; state or metropolitan licensing of tree treatment
contractors, plumbing inspections by licensed plumbers only,
and requiring competitive bidding for land sales.
THE AMM OPPOSES STATUTORY CHANGES WHICH ERODE LOCAL CONTROL AND
AUTHORITY OR CREATE ADDITIONAL TASKS REQUIRING NEW OR ADDED LOCAL
COSTS WITHOUT A CORRESPONDING FUNDING MECHANISM.
II -F CONTRACTOR LICENSING
The AMM has in the past opposed statewide licensing of general
trade contractors based primarily on loss of local control,
enforcement, and revenue. However, the AMM does recognize the
need to establish uniform standards, better enforcement, and the
� capability to track and eliminate irresponsible contractors. The
key to a successful licensing system will be the ability to
enforce the standards. One major problem that needs to be
addressed is the loss of revenue to cities but continuation of a
local administrative activity which will cost money. A solution
would be to authorize cities to attach a modest license check
surcharge to building permit fees. This would allow cities to
recover actual costs in verifying current license in good standing
-15-
and the occasional extra cost of time spent where a contractor has
no license or an invalid license.
THE AMM DOES NOT OPPOSE STATEWIDE LICENSING OF GENERAL TRADE
CONTRACTORS ACCOMPANIED BY STANDARDS AND TESTING AS KONG AS: (1)
CITIES HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICIPATE IN THE FORMULATION OF
STANDARDS; (2) ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES ARE GIVEN HIGH PRIORITY;
AND (3) CITIES ARE GIVEN AUTHORITY TO ATTACH A SURCHARGE TO N
BUILDING PERMITS TO RECOVER COSTS OF VERIFYING THAT THE CONTRACTOR
HAS A CURRENT LICENSE IN GOOD STANDING.
II -G CONTRACTORS PERFORMANCE BONDS
The 1989 legislature modified Minnesota Statutes 574.26 to allow
contractors to provide a letter of credit instead of a performance
bond for contracts of less than $50,000. This is an improvement
but still will create significant hardship with many reputable
small contractors. In todays market, projects in excess of
$50,000 are very common and are not really large jobs. The
emphasis should be in protecting the public.
THE AMM URGES THE LEGISLATURE TO PROVIDE GREATER FLEXIBILITY IN
CONTRACTOR GUARANTEES FOR CITIES BY ALLOWING IN ADDITION TO BONDS,
OTHER RELIABLE FINANCIAL SECURITY GUARANTEES, SUCH AS LETTERS OF
CREDIT, WITHOUT LIMITATION AS TO PROJECT COSTS.
II -H POLICE OFFICER STANDARDS AND TRAINING - RECRUITMENT
Current POST rules require at least a two year degree in law
enforcement to be eligible to become a peace officer. This is
somewhat restrictive in that it does not allow for College degreed
persons to make a career change without returning to school for
significant added course work. The current applicants tend to
lack maturity that may be desireable to blend into police
departments.
Since the adoption of uniform standards of training and licensing
for police officers in 1978 many positive changes have been made
to allow a wide range of people to qualify to be police officers
in Minnesota. However, one area is still a significant problem,
protected class recruitment, specifically Black and Hispanic
minorities. Because of the education requirements, people must
decide or be recruited early in the post secondary education time
frame, to qualify in police work. Neither POST nor cities are in
the position of being able to induce or recruit people into the
appropriate educational track at the appropriate time and the
University /College system is not doing so either. Therefore,
protected class hiring is very difficult. One area that has been
overlooked is Military Police, who are trained police personnel
but may lack the required academics.
-16-
THE AMM ENCOURAGES THE POST BOARD TO CONSIDER ALLOWING PERSONS
WITH COLLEGE DEGREES OR OTHER APPROPRIATE EDUCATION AND MILITARY
POLICE PERSONNEL TO BECOME PEACE OFFICERS WITH SOME ADDITIONAL LAW
RELATED COURSE WORK THAT CAN BE ATTAINED THROUGH PRE EMPLOYMENT
PART -TIME EFFORT OR DURING THE FIRST YEAR OF FULL TIME PEACE
OFFICER EMPLOYMENT. THIS DOES NOT AFFECT THE SKILLS COURSE
REQUIREMENTS.
II -I STATE AGENCY RULE MAKING
3 Legislation is needed to assure that municipalities are informed
of proposed rules when they are initiated by State Agencies to
assure a more meaningful appraisal of their impact upon local
government.
State agencies now are required to only publish notice of proposed
rules in the State Register which is not in general circulation
and which is available to local governments only by subscription,
whereas, State law mandates that local governments publish notice
of a variety of activities in legal newspapers and mail notices to
potentially affected parties. State agencies are not required to
notify local governments when rules are proposed that have direct
impact upon and directly involve the local governments.
The current law also allows the agencies to decide that proposed
rules are "non- controversial" and thereby negate the requirements
for a Public Hearing. The decision that a proposed rule is
"non- controversial" may be overridden only if 25 persons file a
notice with the agency that a Public Hearing is desired.
The law requires agencies to make a finding as to the cost the
proposed rules would have for other units of government; this
process does not require the solicitation of input from the other
units of government, but, rather, is left to the agency itself.
The cost threshold for "non - controversial" is an overall dollar
amount that does not consider that the cost could be very
significant for some units.
THE AMM REQUESTS LEGISLATION THAT WOULD REQUIRE DIRECT
NOTIFICATION FOR PROPOSED AGENCY RULES IF THERE IS IMPACT OF ANY
FINANCIAL NATURE REGARDLESS OF THE AMOUNT. ALSO, THAT AGENCIES BE
REQUIRED TO ESTABLISH AN OPEN PROCESS TO SEER
INPUT FROM AFFECTED
GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES PRIOR TO DECLARING A PROPOSED RULE
"NON - CONTROVERSIAL" THUS BYPASSING FORMAL PUBLIC HEARING.
II -J SHADE TREE DISEASE CONTROL PROGRAM
Starting in 1977 the legislature made a strong commitment to
-17-
control Dutch Elm and Oak Wilt tree diseases by enacting an
excellent Shade Tree Disease Control program and backing that
legislation with sufficient funding to bring the diseases under
control. However, due to lack of financing in the most recent
past, Dutch Elm disease is once again spreading rapidly as it has
in other areas of the country when financial commitment has
stopped. Therefore, the AMM urges the legislature to:
CONTINUE THE SHADE TREE DISEASE CONTROL LEGISLATION WITH NO
CHANGES AND TO PERMIT CITIES TO USE SPECIAL LEVIES, SPECIAL
ASSESSMENTS, AND OTHER SOURCES TO FUND LOCAL CONTROL PROGRAMS.
II -K CONCURRENT DETACHMENT AND ANNEXATION
Prior to 1985 the changing of municipal boundaries initiated by
property owners was limited to the single case where their
property was totally surrounded by another community. The 1985
legislation opened the possibility up to all property owners to
initiate such action. This broad based allowance is problematic
in some instances because of the City expense and intercity
divisiveness that it causes.
IT IS THE POLICY OF THE AMM THAT THE PROVISION ALLOWING PROPERTY
OWNERS TO PETITION FOR ANNEXATION BE MODIFIED TO ALLOW PETITIONING
UNDER ANY OF THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA.
-THE PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE BEEN DENIED A REASONABLE USE OF THEIR
LAND WHICH IS CONSISTENT WITH AND ALLOWED UNDER THE CITY'S
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING ORDINANCE. THE PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE
NOT BEEN DENIED A REASONABLE USE IF THE PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT HAS
BEEN DEFERRED PURSUANT TO A PHASING OR STAGING PLAN.
-THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DOES NOT ACCOUNT FOR SIGNIFICANT BARRIERS
SEPARATING THIS LAND FROM SERVICE FROM THE CURRENT COMMUNITY
INCLUDING ANY ABILITY TO ACCESS ITS STREET SYSTEM.
- PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE PAID FOR SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR SERVICE BUT
DUE TO ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE GOVERNING BODY ARE PROHIBITED FROM ANY
CONNECTION TO THAT SYSTEM.
BEFORE PROPERTY OWNERS INITIATE PROCEEDINGS UNDER THESE CONDITIONS
THEY MUST UNDERTAKE A PROFESSIONAL PLANNING FEASIBILITY STUDY TO
BE CONDUCTED BY A CONSULTANT TO BE SELECTED AND PAID FOR BY THE
PROPERTY OWNERS. THE CURRENT COMMUNITY MUST APPROVE THE SELECTION
OF THE CONSULTANT OR OFFER AN ALTERNATIVE CONSULTANT ACCEPTABLE TO
THE PROPERTY OWNERS. IF AGREEMENT CANNOT BE REACHED, THE
MUNICIPAL BOARD SHALL APPROVE A CONSULTANT. THE STUDY SHOULD
EXAMINE THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY AND
THE
RAMIFICATIONS OF DETACHMENT AND ANNEXATION. THE STUDY SHOULD
ADDRESS PHYSICAL PLANNING ISSUES, DELIVERY OF SERVICE AND ANY
FINANCIAL RAMIFICATIONS TOGETHER WITH ANY IMPLEMENTATION PLAN.
-18-
THE PROPOSED PLAN FOR THE PROPERTY SHALL BE PRESENTED TO THE
CURRENT COMMUNITY. IF REJECTED BY THE CURRENT COMMUNITY, THE
PROPERTY OWNERS SHALL PRESENT THE PLAN TO THE OTHER COMMUNITY.
PRIOR TO A HEARING IN FRONT OF THE MUNICIPAL BOARD, AFTER THE
PETITION HAS BEEN SUBMITTED, THERE SHALL BE A PERIOD TO ALLOW FOR
MEDIATION BY THE CITIES.
FAILING A MEDIATED RESULT, A REVIEW SHALL BE CONDUCTED BY THE
REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSIONS) OR METROPOLITAN COUNCIL WHERE THE
CITIES ARE LOCATED. COMMENTS WILL THEN BE FORWARDED TO THE
MUNICIPAL BOARD FOR CONSIDERATION.
THE MUNICIPAL BOARD'S DECISION MUST BE BASED ON A BALANCING OF THE
INTERESTS OF BOTH MUNICIPALITIES AND THE PROPERTY OWNERS. FACTORS
TO CONSIDER SHOULD INCLUDE BUT NOT BE LIMITED TO:
-THE EXTENT OF PUBLIC SERVICES THAT CAN BE PROVIDED BY EACH
MUNICIPALITY;
-THE FINDINGS OF THE REGIONAL PLANNING AUTHORITY REGARDING THE
IMPACT ON THE REGIONAL SYSTEMS;
-THE ECONOMIC IMPACT ON EACH COMMUNITY AND THE PROPERTY OWNERS;
-THE EXISTENCE OF PHYSICAL BARRIERS WHICH SEPARATE THE PROPERTY
FROM THE REMAINDER OF THE CURRENT MUNICIPALITY BUT NOT THE
PROPOSED MUNICIPALITY; AND
- ADDITIONAL CRITERIA INCLUDED IN MS 414.041, SUBDIVISION 5
II -L DATA PRACTICES
L -1 LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION
The definition of 'licensing agency' in Minn. State 13.41 is not
clear as to the inclusion of cities, therefore, it is unclear
whether all or part of the information on license issuance is
public. This can be a real problem when issuing liquor licenses,
since part of the data concerns sensitive business and personal
finances.
THE AMM ENCOURAGES THE LEGISLATURE TO CLARIFY THAT POLITICAL
^ SUBDIVISIONS OF THE STATE INCLUDING CITIES ARE LICENSING AGENCIES
IN MINN. STATUTES 13.41 AND THAT FINANCIAL DATA OF A PERSON OR
BUSINESS SUBMITTED IN CONJUNCTION WITH AN APPLICATION FOR A LIQUOR
LICENSE OR OBTAINED AS A RESULT OF AN INVESTIGATION OF THE
APPLICANT OR LICENSEE SHALL BE CLASSIFIED AS PRIVATE.
L -2 G ENERAL PUBLIC DATA
-19-
The Government Data Practices Act allows municipalities to charge
the actual costs of searching for, retrieving, and copying public
data if copies of the data are requested. The law prohibits
municipalities from charging the costs of searching for and
retrieving data if a person asks only to inspect it. In many
cases, the searching and retrieving are the most time - consuming
aspects of supplying data. Making a copy is frequently only a
small portion of the time required and should not be the standard
for determining whether a charge is appropriate. _
Profit- making enterprises have used this free service to augment
their businesses. For example, individuals have established
businesses for preparing special assessment searches. Personnel
from these businesses use city facilities, including expensive
computer equipment, to obtain the special assessment data. The
personnel may also take significant amounts of staff time for
explanations of the data collected. They then dominate the
publicly provided telephone for lengthly periods to transmit the
information obtained. These businesses use city facilities and
personnel as part of a profit- making enterprise, solely at
taxpayer expense. Municipalities should be allowed to charge for
retrieving and explaining public data whether or not the request
includes copying.
The law also prohibits municipalities from charging for
separating public from non - public data. This task may be very
time- comsuming and is necessary to protect the non - public data.
Municipalities should be allowed to charge for this service.
To preserve the Act's spirit and intent of keeping government
records open to inspection for public purposes, the new charges
proposed would not apply to the media or to private citizens
requesting information about themselves or their own properties.
THE AMM ENCOURAGES THE LEGISLATURE TO AMEND MINN. STAT. 13.03,
SUBD. 3 TO ALLOW MUNICIPALITIES TO CHARGE FOR RETRIEVING AND
EXPLAINING PUBLIC DATA AND FOR SEPARATING PUBLIC FROM NON- PUBLIC
DATA. THIS AMENDMENT WOULD NOT APPLY, HOWEVER, TO THE MEDIA OR TO
PRIVATE CITIZENS REQUESTING INFORMATION ABOUT THEMSELVES OF THEIR
OWN PROPERTIES.
-20-
4 ,
III
HOUSING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND LAND USE
PAGE 21 THROUGH 34
III
HOUSING, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND LAND USE
III -A. HOUSING AND NEIGHBORHOODS
The housing problem for persons currently unable to afford market
rate housing can only be mitigated if all levels of government and
the private sector including non - profit groups work together and
if each contributes a fair share to the solution.
Each level of government should contribute to help solve the
problem and each level's contributions should be of the kind it is
best suited to make. The Federal and /or State Levels should
continue to provide the direct subsidies for housing for low and
moderate income persons. The Federal and State Governments also
have the responsibility to provide a tax climate in which the
private sector can produce and maintain rental units that are
affordable to low and moderate income households. The State
should also
rant
local 1 units of overnment the authority ty and
flexibility to conduct the kind of housing programs that best
meets their diverse needs.
The Metropolitan Council should continue to place high priority on
housing planning for the Metropolitan Area and provide specific
guidance to the public and private sectors so that both can make
rational decisions relative to future housing needs. The Council
should continue to be aggressive in seeking innovative ways to
create housing opportunities for low income persons.
Local units of Government also have a major role to play. Local
controls constitute but a small portion of the total cost of
housing but local units should not establish requirements which go
beyond what is necessary for the protection of health, safety and
welfare. Local units should also work with the private and
non - profit sectors to make the best use of existing tools to
produce affordable housing which is more affordable.
Decision makers at all levels must become more cognizant of their
actions, policies, and decisions which have an undesirable impact
on housing costs.
A -1. EXAMINE LOCAL REQUIREMENTS.
Local requirements, if excessive, can add to the cost of producing
affordable housing.
.� COMMUNITIES SHOULD EXAMINE THEIR LOCAL REQUIREMENTS (LAND USE
REGULATIONS, SUBDIVISION ORDINANCES, ETC.) TO ASSURE THAT THESE
REQUIREMENTS DO NOT GO BEYOND WHAT IS NECESSARY FOR THE PROTECTION
OF HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE, AND INHIBIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF
AFFORDABLE HOUSING. MODIFICATIONS SHOULD BE MADE WHEN
APPROPRIATE. NO LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVE NEEDED.
A -2. PRACTICES WHICH EFFECT HOUSING COSTS.
-21-
Decision makers at all levels of government must become more
cognizant of actions they take which have an impact on housing
costs. These actions in themselves may be worthwhile and
beneficial, but when implemented result in increased housing
costs. Examples of this type of action would include such things
as the sewer availability charge, restricted growth policies,
building and energy codes, environmental rules, etc.
ALL LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT SHOULD EXAMINE THEIR PRACTICES AND
POLICIES TO DETERMINE POSSIBLE UNNECESSARY IMPACTS ON HOUSING
COSTS. CHANGES SHOULD BE MADE AS NECESSARY.
A -3. MANDATORY LAND USE STANDARDS.
Uniform standards for housing style, type and size are not
appropriate because of the great diversity among cities and
differences within cities relative to density of development,
topography, age of housing stock, the mix of housing values, and
the level of municipal services which are provided.
Land use regulation is one of the tools used by city officials
to protect the health, safety, welfare, and interests of the
city's residents.
THE LEGISLATURE SHOULD NOT PASS LEGISLATION WHICH MANDATES UNIFORM
ZONING AND SUBDIVISION STANDARDS OR WHICH REMOVES ADDITIONAL LAND
USE REGULATION AUTHORITY FROM LOCAL UNITS OF GOVERNMENT. CITIES
SHOULD RETAIN THE AUTHORITY TO REGULATE THE LOCATION, SIZE,
AMOUNT, AND TYPE OF HOUSING WITHIN THEIR BOUNDARIES. NO
LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVE NEEDED.
A -4. STATE AND REGIONAL HOUSING POLICIES.
The State should develop an overall State Housing Policy and
provide the necessary tools for implementation. The Legislature
needs to provide for financing strategies which will carry out the
long range goals for providing and maintaining affordable housing
opportunities. The State Housing Policy should enable and assist
local and metropolitan governments, private and non - profit
developers to initiate affordable housing. Local governments
should participate in the formulation of state and metropolitan
housing policy which will be used to support local housing goals.
T
THE AMM RECOMMENDS THAT THE STATE ESTABLISH A STATE HOUSING POLICY
AND THAT THE RESOURCES NEEDED TO IMPLEMENT THAT POLICY BE
DESIGNATED. SEVERAL STATE FINANCING SOURCES SHOULD BE CONSIDERED,
INCLUDING:
* STATE APPROPRIATIONS
* STATE BONDING
-22-
* STATE GAMBLING REVENUE
* INCREASED MORTGAGE DEED TAX
THE STATE SHOULD CONSIDER CONSOLIDATING S MALLER PROGRAM ACTIVITIES
TOGETHER WITH ANY NEW REVENUES WITH THE HOUSING TRUST FUND.
DISTRIBUTION COULD THEN BE BASED ON STATE PRIORITIES. THE STATE
SHOULD ALSO CONSIDER THE USE OF STATE TAX POLICY TO BENEFIT THE
MAINTENANCE AND DEVELOPMENT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING. AN EXAMPLE OF
THIS WOULD BE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A STATE LOW INCOME HOUSING TAX
CREDIT.
THE AMM RECOMMENDS THAT THE PROPERTY TAX SYSTEM NOT BE USED TO
FUND STATE AND METROPOLITAN GOALS.
LOCAL PARTICIPATION IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF STATE POLICIES IS
CRITICAL FOR THE LANG TERM IMPLEMENTATION OF THE HOUSING GOALS.
A -5 FEDERAL HOUSING POLICY
The Federal Government has a broader and more diverse tax base
than state and local governments. For this reason, the Federal
Government should provide the necessary funding to fulfill its
housing policy commitments to very low income persons beyond the
funding reach of state and local governments.
THE AMM SUPPORTS CONGRESS'S EFFORT TO ADOPT HOUSING LEGISLATION
WHICH WILL INCREASE FUNDING LEVELS FOR THE PROVISION OF AFFORDABLE
HOUSING.
IT IS ESSENTIAL THAT FUNDING IN THE FORM OF GRANTS BE PROVIDED TO
CITIES IN ORDER TO SUPPORT THE NEEDS OF THOSE PERSONS REQUIRING
ASSISTED HOUSING (VERY LOW INCOME). THIS SHOULD INCLUDE:
- THE RENOVATION AND REHABILITATION OF SUBSTANDARD HOUSING
- INCENTIVES THAT WOULD ENCOURAGE OWNERS NOT TO OPT OUT OF
SECTION 8 CONTRACTS
- CONTINUED AND INCREASED FUNDING OF THE SECTION 8 RENT
SUBSIDY PROGRAM
- CONTINUED AND INCREASED FUNDING OF SECTION 202 PROGRAM
A -6 LOCAL HOUSING POLICY
There is a great diversity among cities in the metropolitan area.
Some cities need more housing for low income persons while other
cities need housing for moderate to upper income persons. Cities
should have the authority to promote whichever kind of housing is
in the public purpose and best interest of the particular city and
is consistent with the regional housing policy. Cities need to
have a greater flexibility in financing their housing goals if
they are to meet the intent of the Metropolitan Land Planning Act.
-23-
CITIES SHOULD BE GRANTED SUFFICIENT AUTHORITY AND FLEXIBILITY BY
THE LEGISLATURE TO CONDUCT AND FINANCE HOUSING PROGRAMS THAT MEET
THEIR INDIVIDUAL HOUSING NEEDS. LOCAL FUNDS CAN BE USED TO
LEVERAGE FEDERAL, STATE AND METROPOLITAN RESOURCES WHEN THEY CAN
MEET COMMON POLICY GOALS.
IT IS NECESSARY TO EXPAND FINANCIAL RESOURCES AVAILABLE AT THE
LOCAL LEVEL. THIS COULD INCLUDE:
- THE REMOVAL OF SOME OF THE LIMITATIONS ON THE USE OF TAX
INCREMENT FINANCING FOR HOUSING
- REMOVAL OF CITY AND HOUSING AUTHORITY LEVY LIMITS
- ALLOW FOR SPECIAL IMPACT FEES
- SPECIAL LEVIES FOR HOUSING
- REINSTATE THE STATE DEED AND MORTGAGE TRANSFER TAX
EXEMPTION FOR PUBLIC AGENCIES
- USING THE PROPERTY TAX SYSTEM TO PROVIDE INCENTIVES FOR LOW
INCOME HOUSING
A -7 HOUSING IN THE METROPOLITAN AREA
Rental housing, which makes up approximately 35% of the housing
units in the metropolitan region, plays an important role in the
metropolitan housing market. Traditionally, rental units have
provided an affordable housing option for singles, young adults,
young married families, students and the elderly. Many of which
were low and moderate income households. Recent studies completed
by the Metropolitan Council are showing demographic changes that
are likely to have broad impacts on the housing characteristics of
many cities. The long term implications could find many
communities with:
* a low demand for its existing rental stock
* an aging housing stock in need of rehabilitation
* a decreasing demand for new housing
* a loss of equity for homeowners
* a declining property base caused by decreased valuation
from lower income rents and decreased property maintenance
* a change in household composition
* a potential loss of subsidized housing stock
* a general slowing of the region's growth rate
THE AMM RECOMMENDS THAT CITIES CAREFULLY LOOK AT THE POTENTIAL
IMPACTS THESE DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS MIGHT HAVE ON THEIR HOUSING STOCK
AND BECOME INVOLVED WITH ALL LOCAL AND REGIONAL GOVERNMENTS TO
SUCCESSFULLY ADDRESS THE POTENTIAL PROBLEMS. IT IS IMPORTANT TO
RECOGNIZE THE MARKET FORCES THAT WILL REQUIRE CITIES TO ADDRESS
THE METROPOLITAN NATURE OF THESE ISSUES.
THE AMM SUPPORTS THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL'S TASK FORCE ESTABLISHED
TO PROVIDE DIRECTION IN ADDRESSING THESE METROPOLITAN HOUSING
-24-
ISSUES.
A -8 NEIGHBORHOOD LIVEABILITY
Rapidly evolving social, demographic, economic and behavorial
changes are converging on many cities creating new challenges that
exceed their capacity to deal effectively with their new
environments.
The challenges cities face, such as deteriorating neighborhoods,
crime, and drugs, need the cooperative efforts of public private
and business interests to solve. Cities have expanded public
safety, inspection, and health programs; have aggressively
repaired and replaced infrastructure; ie., replaced streets and
public utility lines; have removed diseased trees, redeveloped
parks, refurbished or replaced neighborhood civic facilities; and
have developed programs to assist low and moderate income families,
yet problems continue to grow.
Cities should take the lead in developing local and regional
strategies that will assist them in dealing with growing
neighborhood problems. These strategies should include the
following major categories:
1. Physical and structural deterioration of the
neighborhood.
2. Social welfare of the neighborhood.
3. Educational opportunities.
PHYSICAL AND STRUCTURAL DETERIORATION OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD:
a. Cities need to evaluate the demographic impact on
their housing stock and plan for future
rehabilitation or reuse. The demographic impacts
may include declining home values, delayed or
non - maintenance of housing stock, foreclosed or
abandoned housing and the changing of neighborhood
character (i.e. An owner base to a tenant base). In
a metropolitan area these forces go beyond a city's
boundary and may require a more metropolitan view to
try to resolve the causes of the problems.
b. Cities need to plan for continued upgrading of public
facilities (i.e. streets, utilities, parks) even in
the face of declining values. This may
require statutory authority beyond existing authority.
C. Cities need to plan for regulatory enforcement at
levels needed to maintain neighborhood quality. If a
strong level of enforcement is provided up front it
can be an effective relatively low cost long term
-25-
strategy for maintaining neighborhood quality.
d. Cities need to plan for and encourage neighborhood
resident's participation in the preservation of the
city's neighborhoods. Neighborhood pride can become
one of the strongest tools that cities can tap into,
provided that other resources are in place that can
provide the means by which this energy can focus.
e. Cities need to expand their resource base and plan
for the targeting of resources to accomplish their
long -term strategy for neighborhood preservations.
Expanding this resource base will require
coordinated efforts at the federal, state, regional
and local level.
f. Cities need to strengthen their ability to take
appropriate legal actions in a swift manner to
eliminate deteriorating structures in a
neighborhood. Lengthy procedures accelerate damaging
impacts blighted structures have on a neighborhood.
This should include the expanding use of the housing
court to allow for action on single family dwellings
and for City code enforcement.
g. Cities need to plan for and encourage neighborhood
resident's participation in recreational pursuits and
activities. Along with the appropriate public
facilities for recreation and leisure, there needs to
be organized programs and activities to make the best
use of these facilities.
SOCIAL WELFARE OF NEIGHBORHOODS:
a. Cities need to evaluate those social issues that
directly impact the liveability in a neighborhood
(aging, child care, transportation, job training,
domestic abuse, etc.) and plan for long -range
systems that will strengthen the liveability of
neighborhoods.
b. Cities need to become more familiar with the social
welfare system and work closely with state and county r
agencies to emphasize the need of stabilizing
neighborhoods and the family units within those
neighborhoods.
c. Cities need to strengthen the cooperation of
individuals and families within the neighborhood to
support city initiatives dealing with crime and drug
awareness, public health issues (i.e. garbage houses,
-26-
animal infestation, etc.) and domestic abuse.
d. Cities
need to plan for services to neighborhoods
that will allow for affordable
day are
trans transportation Y ,
p and fob opportunities. The impact of
lack of these services has the greatest impact on the
low income and elderly households within any
neighborhood.
e. Cities need to develop programs and /or participate in
the development of state and regional programs to
lesson the impact that poverty has on the
destabilization of a neighborhood. These programs
are needed to deal with the broad range of issues
rather than one specific activity and can be
tailor -made to address a problem by linking
activities together (i.e. rent, mortgage assistance
or tax breaks tied to rehabilitation loans; rent
assistance tied to child care; job training and
transportation assistance, etc.).
EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES:
a. Cities need to encourage, participate in and
strengthen the school systems community education
outreach programs. These programs provide an
0 opportunity to coordinate school and city efforts to
strengthen the liveability of neighborhoods.
b. Cities need to work within the education process
by providing early childhood education on problems
cities face in dealing with social impact on
neighborhood liveability.
c. Cities need to work closely with secondary and
post secondary education systems to encourage job
training programs. Such programs can help solve
neighborhood problems (i.e. work study with forestry,
rehabilitation, maintenance, etc. which will give
work experience by providing opportunities in the
neighborhoods).
THE AMM WILL SUPPORT LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVES THAT PROVIDE
CITIES WITH THE NECESSARY TOOLS, FUNDING AND PROGRAMS TO HELP
STRENGTHEN AND PRESERVE NEIGHBORHOODS. THE AMM ALSO BELIEVES
THAT A HOLISTIC APPROACH IS NEEDED TO SOLVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD
DETERIORATION PROBLEM AND WILL REQUIRE THE COOPERATION AND
INVOLVEMENT OF EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS, HUMAN SERVICES
AGENCIES, PRIVATE NON - PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS IN ADDITION TO
CITY RESOURCES.
-27-
A -9 STATE LICENSED RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES (GROUP HOMES)
The AMM believes that ersons with disabilities P are entitled to
live in the least restrictive possible environment and should have
a range of residential choices throughout the state. The AMM also
believes that residential based facilities (i.e. Group Homes)
should not be concentrated over-concentration concentration of such facilities
could have a negative impact on the community and on the facility
residents. Recent amendments to the Federal Fair Housing Act may
have an impact on the State's ability to regulate residential
based
facilities, but the extent of such impact is not known as
yet. However, the AMM believes that the rinci les contained
olio
P P in
this
policy are very appropriate and any state legislation
pursued should
P not conflict with the AMM principles.
The residents of residential based facilities come from our
communities and the AMM believes that cities as one of the mayor
institutions of our society have a responsibility to be a part of
the solution by welcoming such facilities on a fair share and
rational basis. The AMM believes that cities have a
responsibility to be part of the solution, but it also believes
that the state has the major responsibility to assure that the
residents living in residential based facilities receive care and
supervision appropriate to the extent of their disability.
The state's de institutionalization policy is directly linked to
the need for more residential based care facilities in our cities
and the state has the responsibility to provide sufficient funding
to assure adequate care and supervision of the residents placed in
such facilities. The state also has the responsibility to notify a
city when such a facility is licensed so that the city is prepared
to deal with emergencies that might occur in such a facility.
The AMM also believes that the state has an obligation to
screen clients, particularly in the corrections area, so that
persons placed in residential based facilities are not a danger
to themselves, fellow residents, or the community.
THE LEGISLATURE SHOULD ADHERE TO THE FOLLOWING PRINCIPLES WHEN
DEALING WITH THE ISSUES OF DEINSTITUTIONALIZATION AND RESIDENTIAL
BASED FACILITIES:
-THERE MUST BE TIMELY NOTIFICATION TO CITIES WHEN A RESIDENTIAL
FACILITY LICENSE IS ISSUED OR RENEWED IN ORDER TO PROVIDE THE CITY
ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND.
-STEPS MUST BE TAKEN TO AVOID THE CLUSTERING OF COMMUNITY
RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES ATTRIBUTABLE TO ECONOMIC, GEOGRAPHIC OR
PROGRAMMATIC EXPEDIENCE. STANDARDS OF NONCONCENTRATION FOR THE
STATE
E OR FOR COUNTY ISSUED RFP S SHOULD BE ESTABLISHED. IN
ADDITION, FINANCIAL INCENTIVE PROGRAMS FOR PROVIDERS LOCATING IN
-28-
NON - CONCENTRATED AREAS SHOULD BE EXPLORED.
-THERE MUST BE ADEQUATE STATE FUNDING SO THAT THE RESIDENTS OF
THESE FACILITIES RECEIVE PROPER CARE AND SUPERVISION.
-THERE MUST BE A REALISTIC ONGOING SCREENING PROCESS TO ASSURE
THAT PERSONS PLACED IN A RESIDENTIAL FACILITY WILL BENEFIT FROM
SUCH LIVING ENVIRONMENT AND WILL NOT BE A DANGER TO THEMSELVES OR
OTHERS. THE LICENSING AUTHORITY MUST BE RESPONSIBLE FOR REMOVING
ANY PERSONS FOUND INCAPABLE OF CONTINUING IN SUCH ENVIRONMENT.
- FACILITIES LICENSED BY THE CORRECTIONS DEPARTMENT SHOULD NOT BE
EXEMPT FROM REASONABLE LOCAL LAND USE REGULATIONS.
-ANY LEGISLATION EFFECTING LAND USE CONTROLS SHOULD BE EXPRESSED
IN TERMINOLOGY CONSISTENT WITH LOCAL LAND USE CONTROLS.
-A FAIR SHARE CONCEPT AND FORMULA SHOULD BE CONSIDERED WITHIN THE
METROPOLITAN AREA, BUT SUCH CONCEPT AND FORMULA MUST BE COGNIZANT
OF OTHER FACTORS INCLUDING TRANSPORATION FACILITIES, JOBS
AVAILABILITY, AND OTHER NEEDED SUPPORT SERVICES.
III -B ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Cities have an interest in the maintenance of and appropriate
enhancements to the economic base of their respective communities.
It is the community's economic base which provides;
a.) the tax base and other revenue sources which support
the general operations of citites, counties and school
districts;
b.) the employment of some or a substantial number of
residents and,
c.) the means by which the populous is housed.
All Metropolitan communities address economic development when its
translated to physical development through their local land use
regulations with the individual communities striving for "orderly
development ". As a group however, Metropolitan communities differ
as to development needs and view points, with each community's
needs subject to a number of variables.
A municipality's ability to both regulate and promote economic
development is based on authority established by other
organizations and regulations. It is this ability that is of
general interest to all Metropolitan communities. The Association
of Metropolitan Municipalities (AMM) is the principal policy
action group acting on behalf of its member cities. As such it is
appropriate that AMM present the policy issues and concerns to
-29-
those organizations that set the rules.
Because of divergent economies, differing needs and diverging
viewpoints between Metropolitan Minnesota and Greater Minnesota
there is a need to ensure that the means of economic development
available to AMM member cities are appropriate to their needs and
that economic development efforts of others are complementary to
and not at the expense of member cities. As noted economic
development for local governments is not just a matter of more tax
base for the community but entails tools to promote, regulate and
service the development. Promotional means include Housing and
Redevelopment Authorities, Economic Development Authorities, Port
Authorities, tax increment financing, revenue and general
obligation bonds, condemnation and the Star Cities Program.
Regulation includes its comprehensive planning and land use
functions. Servicing include water, sewer, streets and other
municipal services.
TRANSPORTATION AS A KEY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT
Transportation, not only streets and highways but mass transit,
rail and air are all key elements in the economic development
picture of a community.
While infrastructive issues such as water and sewer are to some
degree issues for one or two governmental entities, transportation
systems involves the entire gammet from the local municipality
through the federal government. Additionally it is more than just
an infrastructure issue. Concerns as to where highways were to be
planned was a significant issue raised in the formation of the
Metropolitan Council and a rationale for passing the Fiscal
Disparities Act in 1973.
The transportation issue has come to the forefront in the last few
years as major highways and interstate links have aged, existing
routes have volumes exceeding capacity and federal and state
funding has not kept pace with needs. This has been further
highlighted by using a previous highway funding source the sales
tax /MVET to help balance the State general fund. This has
resulted in cuts and delays in projects throughout the state.
With economically depressed areas demanding more funding to
improve their economic attractiveness to businesses and
economically successful areas needing funding to keep pace with
expansion, the issue of funding has become very divisive between
Metro and Greater Minnesota. A balanced and an efficient, well
maintained transportation system, including the before mentioned _
components; is a necessity so as not to retard economic
development.
BUSINESS FACTORS IN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
-30-
While governmental entities can provide inducements, services and
infrastructure there are a number of other factors that influence
a business' economic development decisions. Factors such as in
place resources and costs, human resources (availability that
matches the needs), regulations and attendant costs, governmental
costs such as taxes, services etc. While only some of these are
under the control or influence of the governmental sector in the
state and therefore the mission of AMM, these entities should make
efforts to ensure that state and local governments are
competitive.
GENERAL ISSUES IN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Apart from direct business factors other items influence
locational and expansional considerations including "Quality of
Life" factors such as the educational systems, arts, theater and
professional sports teams. In addition governmental concerns
relate to housing, environmental impacts and economic security
among others.
B -1 CITIES DEVELOPENT AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT RESPONSIBILITIES.
The AMM has been operating under the assumption that cities have
the primary responsibility for economic development within their
jurisdictions. This includes redevelopment as well as new
development. However, it became apparent during the discussion
and debate concerning Tax Increment Finance last session, that
many legislators, state agency officials, officials representing
other levels of government and many private sector representatives
do not share that view. With the destruction of TIF as a viable
tool for economic development, cities no longer have the necessary
tools to be responsible for economic development in today's
economic environment. Consequently, we believe that legislative
action is needed to address the many issues and costs associated
with economic development in our cities.
THE AMM ENCOURAGES THE LEGISLATURE TO EXAMINE THE QUESTION OF
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND DETERMINE WHICH LEVEL OR LEVELS OF
GOVERNMENT SHOULD HAVE THE PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITY FOR ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THIS STATE. IF IT IS TO BE A SHARED
RESPONSIBILITY, THEN THE VARIOUS ROLES INCLUDING ALL ISSUES AND
COSTS WHICH EFFECT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SHOULD BE CLEARLY
DELINEATED. THE APPROPRIATE TOOLS SHOULD THEN BE DEVELOPED SO
THAT EACH 'PLAYER' CAN CARRY OUT THE DESIGNATED RESPONSIBILITIES.
THE AMM STRONGLY RECOMMENDS THAT LOCAL GOVERNMENTS BE GIVEN A
MEANINGFUL OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS EXAMINATION
PROCESS.
B -2 EQUAL TREATMENT OF CITIES.
The AMM believes that all cities irrespective of size or location
-31-
should be treated fairly with respect to the availability and use
of state authorized development and redevelopment tools, and
programs and state funding.
THE AMM URGES THE LEGISLATURE TO EXAMINE EXISTING PROGRAMS, SUCH
AS URAP, GREATER MINNESOTA CORPORATION (GMC), ETC. TO ASSESS WHERE
THESE PROGRAMS CAN BE EFFECTIVELY UTILIZED BY ALL CITIES. NEW
PROGRAMS DESIGNED TO ADDRESS SPECIFIC CIRCUMSTANCES SHOULD UTILIZE
PROBLEM DEFINITION AS THE CRITERIA FOR MUNICIPAL PARTICIPATION AS
OPPOSED TO GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION, SIZE OR CITY CLASS, ETC.
B -3 TAX INCREMENT FINANCING.
Tax Increment Finance (TIF) has enabled cities to plan and carry
out housing, economic development, and redevelopment projects on
their own initiative. TIF represented, prior to 1990, the most
feasible and effective strategy or tool exercised by cities to
preserve and improve their own physical and economic environments.
TIF was virtually the only tool available to most cities for
positive self intervention to curb the spread of blight and to
encourage and manage sound economic development which is so vital
to provide jobs and to maintain a healthy tax base.
Unfortunately, the many restrictive amendments placed on TIF
during the 1990 Legislative Session have virtually eliminated TIF
as a viable tool for most cities.
CITIES ARE THE LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT MOST INVOLVED WITH ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT (INCLUDING REDEVELOPMENT) WHICH ENCOMPASSES BUT IS NOT
LIMITED TO THE CREATION OF JOBS. UNTIL THE LEGISLATURE CREATES
NEW TOOLS TO HELP CITIES DEAL WITH ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (INCLUDING
REDEVELOPMENT), IT SHOULD RESTORE TIF AS A VIABLE TOOL. MINIMUM
RESTORATION INCLUDES:
A. THE LGA REDUCTION FOR ALL TYPES OF DISTRICTS OTHER THAN
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS SHOULD BE ELIMINATED.
B. ELIMINATE THE RENOVATION AND RENEWAL DISTRICT AND
REESTABLISH THE CRITETIA FOR THIS DISTRICT AS ONE OF THE
ALTERNATIVE TESTS FOR A REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT OR CHANGE TIME
DURATION FROM 15 TO 25 YEARS.
C. ELIMINATE THE FIVE YEAR RULE AND RESTORE POOLING REQUIREMENTS
AS THEY WERE PRIOR TO THE 1990 AMENDMENTS.
E. EXTEND THE CREDIT ENHANCEMENT BONDING PROVISIONS ENACTED IN
1990 TO PRE MAY 1990 TIF DISTRICTS
B -4 LOCAL OPTION FOR DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION STRUCTURE.
A bill was introduced in the 1988 legislative session which would
have had the effect of forcing cities to have a combined, single
development authority for housing and economic development and
redevelopment activities. The proponents argued that the intent of
-32-
the legislation was not to restrict local development activities but
to help assure coordination and cooperation at the local level.
Opponents argued that cities ought to have the maximum flexibility
in determining which type or types of local agencies were the most
appropriate to meet the desires and unique needs of different
cities. There is a possibility that a bill similar to the 1988 bill
will be introduced in the 1991 session.
THE AMM SUPPORTS LEGISLATION WHICH WOULD ENABLE CITIES TO HAVE A
SINGLE, COMBINED DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AS LONG AS IT IS OPTIONAL.
IF THE LEGISLATURE BELIEVES THAT IT IS IN THE 'PUBLIC INTEREST' TO
HAVE A SINGLE, COMBINED DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, IT SHOULD PROVIDE
INCENTIVES TO ENCOURAGE CITIES TO ADOPT THAT OPTION. SUCH ACTION
SHOULD NOT BE MANDATED NOR SHOULD A CITY BE PENALIZED IF IT DOES NOT
CHOOSE SUCH OPTION. THE AMM ALSO SUPPORTS ENABLING LEGISLATION TO
ALLOW CITIES TO CREATE AN AREA (TWO OR MORE CITIES) DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY.
B -5 COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITIES (EDA'S)
Some county officials working through the Minnesota Association of
Counties are asking that Counties be given EDA authority similar to
Cities. A bill was introduced in the 1989 Session to grant such
authority and will probably be introduced again in 1991. There may
be areas of the state, particularly in Greater Minnesota, where it
makes sense to do economic development projects on a larger
geographic basis such as a County. Such rationale does not exist in
the seven county area in the AMM's judgement.
THE AMM DOES NOT NECESSARILY OPPOSE THE GRANTING OF ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY TO COUNTIES BUT BELIEVES SUCH AUTHORITY IS
NOT NEEDED FOR COUNTIES IN THE METROPOLITAN AREA SINCE IT WOULD
BE DUPLICATION OF AUTHORITY PRESENTLY EXERCISED BY CITIES.
HOWEVER, IF SUCH AUTHORITY IS GRANTED TO METROPOLITAN COUNTIES IT
MUST HAVE TWO LIl : (1) A COUNTY CAN NOT DO A PROJECT OR ( 2 )
LEVY AN EDA TAX IN A CITY WITHOUT THAT CITY'S GOVERNING BODY'S
APPROVAL. HOWEVER, THE AMM BELIEVES COUNTIES SHOULD NOT BE
GRANTED SUCH AUTHORITY UNTIL AFTER THE EXAMINATION ASKED FOR IN
POLICY B -1 HAS BEEN COMPLETED.
III -C LAND USE PLANNING
Land use regulation by cities in the Metropolitan Area has been
governed by the Municipal Planning Act (MS 462) and the
Metropolitan Land Planning Act (MS 473). While not a perfect
framework, these acts have worked well for the vast majority of
cities in the metropolitan area. Land use control for cities is
more than just one of the many powers and occupies a significant
part of the work of city councils and their staff. - It has a
significant impact on other community regulations, tax base,
economic development and redevelopment. It is a driving force for
-33-
creating service needs. Land use regulation is the common thread
which runs through most of a city's functions and operations.
The legislation sponsored by the Governor's Advisory Committee on
state local - relations (ACSLR) and introduced in the last three
sessions would have substantially altered the overall land use
control framework including:
1. Diluting the authority of local elected officials thereby
reducing local accountability, `
2. Establishing a new legal framework which would render moot
much of the existing case law and existing codes and
ordinances.
3. Leaving out significant aspects of present law which allows
local officials the discretion to manage development in their
cities.
The proposals may have been well intentioned in attempting to
create uniform land use rules for counties, towns, and cities
rather than the present diverse enabling laws. However, the
advantages of such uniformity to metropolitan area cities, did not
outweigh disadvantages caused by the loss of city flexibility in
achieving uniformity nor did the proposals adequately address the
interface between the state act and the Metropolitan Land Planning
Act. While the special AMM Task Force created to deal with the
ACSLR proposals identified the concerns listed previously, it did
recognize some positive features contained therein and the AMM
would support some changes to existing law.
THE AMM DOES NOT BELIEVE THAT MAJOR CHANGE IS NEEDED IN THE
STATUTES WHICH GOVERN MUNICIPAL LAND USE PLANNING AND REGULATION
AND OPPOSES CHANGES WHICH WOULD REDUCE LOCAL FLEXIBILITY. THE AMM
ALSO DOES NOT BELIEVE THAT UNIFORMITY IN PLANNING LAW AMONG
THE THREE TYPES OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS INVOLVED IN LAND USE PLANNING
IS NECESSARY. HOWEVER, THE AMM WOULD SUPPORT LEGISLATION
CONTAINING MORE EXPLICIT AUTHORITY FOR LOCAL GOVERNING BODIES
PROVIDED SUCH AUTHORITY IS PERMISSIVE AND WOULD NOT OPPOSE
MODIFICATION OF STANDARDS FOR GRANTING VARIANCES AND ADJUSTMENTS
AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE CURRENT RIGID STANDARDS CONTAINED IN
STATUTES.
THE AMM WOULD ALSO SUPPORT LEGISLATION WHICH ADDRESSES THE
INTERFACE BETWEEN THE STATE ENABLING STATUTE AND THE METROPOLITAN
LAND PLANNING ACT AND ELIMINATES THE CONFLICTS AND
INCONSISTENCIES BETWEEN THE TWO.
-34-
IV
METROPOLITAN AGENCIES
PAGE 35 THROUGH 49
IV
METROPOLITAN AGENCIES
IV. PHILOSOPHY WITH RESPECT TO METROPOLITAN GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES
The solution to some metropolitan problems is beyond the scope P P Y p of
a single governing body. Therefore, when such problems arise, it
is in the interest of all concerned for governing units to
cooperate in reaching a solution.
There are also issues which are of such magnitude that they
encompass the concerns of the entire metropolitan area and such
issues must necessarily be dealt with by a metropolitan unit.
• That unit, however should act in cooperation with local governing
bodies. Metropolitan Agencies and Local Governmental Units should
be viewed as partners with each respecting the role of the other
in addressing metropolitan wide problems and issues.
IV -A PURPOSE OF METROPOLITAN GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES
The diversity and political fragmentation of this metropolitan
area results in the need for a regional service delivery system to
provide certain services or portions of services to most
effectively and efficiently satisfy the needs of the residents.
Examples of this type of regional service needs are the prevention
of pollution, provision of certain transportation functions, etc.
There is also a need for planning on a metropolitan basis which
should be done in cooperation with local government. The federal
and state governments require that some grant applications be
reviewed by a regional agency to determine consistency of these
applications with regional plans and programs.
THE PRIMARY AND PREDOMINATE PURPOSES OF THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
AND METROPOLITAN AGENCIES SHOULD BE TO COORDINATE THE PLANNING AND
DEVELOPMENT OF THE METROPOLITAN AREA: TO PROVIDE WITHOUT
DUPLICATION THOSE AREA WIDE SERVICES WHICH ARE BEYOND THE
CAPABILITY OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL UNITS TO PROVIDE INDIVIDUALLY OR
JOINTLY: TO PROVIDE AREA WIDE PLANNING WHERE NECESSARY WITH
COOPERATION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL UNITS: AND TO FULFILL THE
REGIONAL REVIEW RESPONSIBILITIES FOR GRANTS AND LOANS AS
DIRECTED BY THE STATE AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENTS.
IV -B CRITERIA FOR EXTENSION OF METROPOLITAN ORGANIZATION POWERS
There is a natural tendency of any organization to seek more
authority in both breadth and depth; therefore, increased
authority to the Council and its Agencies should contain carefully
considered specific direction.
THE LEGISLATURE, IN GRANTING THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ADDITIONAL
AUTHORITY TO UNDERTAKE AN ACTIVITY, SHOULD SPECIFICALLY STATE THE
AUTHORITY BEING GRANTED AND NOT INCLUDE GENERAL LEGISLATIVE
LANGUAGE SUCH AS... °INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO SUCH MATTERS
AS..."
-35-
ANY EXPANSION OR EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY SHOULD BE CONSIDERED
ONLY WHEN AT LEAST ONE OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS EXISTS:
-THE SERVICE, FUNCTION, OR ACTIVITY HAS BEEN SHOWN TO BE NEEDED
AND IT CAN BE DEMONSTRATED THAT IT CANNOT BE EFFECTIVELY OR
EFFICIENTLY PROVIDED OR ADMINISTERED THROUGH EXISTING GENERAL
PURPOSE UNITS OF GOVERNMENT.
- INTERVENTION ON A REGIONAL BASIS IS NEEDED FOR PROTECTION OF THE „
REGIONAL INVESTMENT IN A METROPOLITAN PHYSICAL SERVICE SYSTEM.
IV -C STRUCTURES, PLANNING, IMP AND FUNDING OF
METROPOLITAN SERVICES AND PROGRAMS.
The Metropolitan Council was established by the Legislature in
1967 to coordinate "the planning and development" of the
Metropolitan Area. The Council, was mostly advisory but was given
responsibility for regional policy development and coordination in
the areas of wastewater treatment and disposal, land
transportation and airports. The Council was given limited
approval authority for development proposals which were of
metropolitan (regional) significance. The Council was given no
direct operational authority and instead the Legislature created
two new Metropolitan Commissions (MWCC and MTC) and restructured
the MAC to operate and provide regional services. The Metropolitan
Council's responsibility was expanded subsequently to include
regional parks and open space, solid waste, regional review
authority, approval authority for controlled access highways and
for certain elements (airports,transportation, parks and open
space,. and sewers) of local comprehensive plans. The Council was
not given operational authority except for the regional HRA and
the Council can only operate that authority in a city at the
request of that city.
C -1 POLICY PLANNING - POLICY IMP
The historic legislative intent concerning separation of
responsibility for metropolitan (regional) policy planning and
policy implementation should be reaffirmed.
THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL SHOULD BE A PLANNING AND COORDINATING
BODY. REGIONAL PROGRAMS SHOULD BE IMPLEMENTED AND OPERATED BY
EXISTING METROPOLITAN OPERATING AGENCIES AND /OR GENERAL PURPOSE
UNITS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
C -2 FUNDING FOR REGIONALLY PROVIDED SERVICES
The Metropolitan Council and the Metropolitan Agencies funding has
evolved over a period of time and is a mixture of property taxes,
-36-
user fees, federal and state pass through revenues, etc. There
has been some discussion to replace these sources with a single
new revenue source.
THE AMM BELIEVES IT IS APPROPRIATE TO CONTINUE TO FUND THE
REGIONAL AGENCIES AND ACTIVITIES BY A COMBINATION OF USER FEES,
PROPERTY TAXES, STATE AND FEDERAL GRANTS, ETC. THE AMM BELIEVES
' THIS METHOD PROVIDES BETTER OVERSIGHT OF EXPENDITURES BY THE
'PAYERS' AND THEREFORE OPPOSES THE IMPOSITION OF A SINGLE NEW
REVENUE SOURCE TO REPLACE THE PRESENT FUNDING SOURCES.
C -3 REGIONAL TAX RATES AND USER FEES
The Legislature controls the maximum tax rates that can be levied
by the Metropolitan Council and the other Metropolitan Agencies.
We believe it should continue to do so. User fees are generally
controlled by the Metropolitan Agency collecting the fees (MAC,
MWCC and MTC) but the Legislature has on occasion interceded. The
setting of user fees, and the process for setting fees has
generally not been considered a problem by local officials except
for isolated cases. The AMM believes that:
USER FEES FOR REGIONAL SERVICES SHOULD NOT BE DICTATED BY THE
LEGISLATURE BUT SHOULD BE DETERMINED BY THE OPERATING AGENCY
PROVIDING THE SERVICE. USER FEES SHOULD BE REVIEWED BY THE
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ON A PERIODIC BASIS TO ENSURE THAT SUCH FEES
ARE CONSISTENT WITH REGIONAL SYSTEM PLANS AND GOALS. AN OPEN
VISIBLE PROCESS /PROCEDURE SHOULD BE EMPLOYED FOR USER FEE CHANGES
UNDER GUIDANCE OF THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL WHEN CHANGES ARE
NECESSARY.
IV -D COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING - LOCAL AND REGIONAL INTERACTION
Implementation of the legislation passed in 1976 mandating the
completion of local and regional comprehensive plans is complete.
Planning, however, is an ongoing process, and several precepts
should be kept in mind by Local Units of Government, Metropolitan
Agencies, and the State as this planning process continues.
METROPOLITAN SYSTEM PLANS, MUST CONTINUE TO BE SUFFICIENTLY
SPECIFIC IN TERMS OF LOCATIONS, CAPACITIES, AND TIMING TO ALLOW
FOR CONSIDERATION IN LOCAL COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING.
y THE REGIONAL INVESTMENT IN METROPOLITAN PHYSICAL SERVICE SYSTEMS
(TRANSPORTATION, WASTEWATER TREATMENT, AIRPORTS, AND PARR AND OPEN
SPACE) SHOULD CONTINUE TO BE PROTECTED BY PREVENTING ADVERSE
IMPACT ON THESE SYSTEMS DUE TO LACK OF INTEGRATION AND
COORDINATION BETWEEN REGIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING.
LOCAL OFFICIALS MUST HAVE EFFECTIVE INPUT INTO THE REGIONAL
PLANNING PROCESS ON AN'ONGOING BASIS.
-37-
DESIGNATION OF OTHER REGIONAL PLANS AS METROPOLITAN SYSTEMS PLANS
SHOULD NOT BE MADE UNLESS TH IS A COMPELLING METROPOLITAN AREA
WIDE PROBLEM OR CONCERN THAT CAN ONLY BE SOLVED THROUGH A REGIONAL
SYSTEM DESIGNATION.
IV -E COMBINED SEWERS - SEPARATION
The three communities of Minneapolis, St. Paul and South St. Paul
still have a significant amount of combined waste water and storm
water sewers which create overflows of untreated waste water into
the Mississippi River during heavy rains and storm water runoff
periods. These cities have over many years been progressing with
sewer separation projects paid for primarily through local tax
levies. The Federal and State governments are pressing the issue
of meeting certain water quality standards in the Mississippi
River consistently which apparently cannot be done until
separation is complete. The state has provided additional funding
since the 1985 Legislative Session to help pay for the speed up.
IT HAS BEEN AMM POLICY THAT IF THE STATE GOVERNMENT CONTINUES TO
PURSUE THE ACCELERATED COMBINED SEWER SEPARATION PROGRAM IN THE
THREE CITIES, THAT IT ALSO CONTINUE TO PROVIDE FUNDING TO ENSURE
THAT NEITHER LOCAL PROPERTY TAXES NOR METROPOLITAN SANITARY SEWER
COSTS ARE INCREASED DUE TO THE ACCELERATED BUILD EFFORT. THE
PROGRAM TO DATE HAS PROCEEDED ACCORDING TO THAT POLICY.
CONSIDERABLE FEDERAL MONEY HAS ALSO BEEN AVAILABLE TO ASSIST IN
THE SEPARATION PROJECT IN THE PAST. THE AMM UNDERSTANDS THAT
FEDERAL FUNDS WILL BE CUT DRAMATICALLY IN FUTURE YEARS, REQUIRING
A FINANCIAL RESTRUCTURING OF THE PROGRAM. AS THE CSO ISSUE HAS
SIGNIFICANT IMPLICATIONS, BOTH FOR STATE FINANCES AND FOR
DEVELOPMENT IN THE METROPOLITAN AREA, THE AMM REQUESTS THAT ITS
BOARD OF DIRECTORS HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW AND COMMENT ON
ANY SIGNIFICANT CHANGE IN THE FINANCING OR IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
FOR THE SEPARATION PROJECT.
IV -F METROPOLITAN COUNCIL BUDGET /WORK PROGRAM PROCESS
The Metropolitan Council has an annual budget approaching 15
million dollars and its programs impact the two million plus
people living in the metropolitan area. The budget document
should convey sufficient information so that the residents can
determine what 'product' is being produced and how much the `
'Product' costs and the benefits. The budget process should
commence early enough in the annual adoption cycle so that the
residents can provide meaningful input as to goals and priorities.
F -1 BUDGET DETAIL AND SPECIFICITY
The annual budget and work program document has been improved in
-38-
recent years and contains more detail and specificity which
enables public interest groups to make more reasoned
recommendations but further improvements can be made.
MANDATED OR NON DISCRETIONARY PROJECTS, PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES
SHOULD BE IDENTIFIED. PROJECTS, PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES WHICH MAY
BE DISCRETIONARY BUT ARE TOTALLY OR MOSTLY FUNDED BY A FEDERAL OR
- STATE GRANT SHOULD ALSO BE IDENTIFIED. MORE INFORMATION SHOULD
CONTINUE TO BE PROVIDED AS TO PREVIOUS YEARS EXPENDITURES AND
PROGRESS FOR ON -GOING PROGRAMS, PROJECTS AND ACTIVITIES.
F -2 RELIANCE ON PROPERTY TAXES
The AMM is aware of growing reliance on the
property tax to support Council activities. Federal grants
formerly funded about two /thirds of the Council Budget and the
local property tax about one /third. The federal portion has now
shrunk to about 20 percent and the property tax has increased to
over 60%.
THE COUNCIL SHOULD MARE A THOROUGH EXAMINATION OF THE PROGRAMS
FORMERLY FUNDED BY FEDERAL GRANTS OR NON -LOCAL FUNDS TO DETERMINE
IF THEY ARE STILL NECESSARY AND WORTHWHILE WHEN ONLY LOCAL DOLLARS
ARE INVOLVED. ADDITIONALLY THE COUNCIL SHOULD SEER TO DIVEST
ITSELF OF SERVICES THAT IT PERFORMS FOR THIS AREA, IF SUCH
SERVICES ARE PERFORMED BY STATE AGENCIES FOR THE BALANCE OF THE
STATE, OR SEER STATE FUNDING FOR THOSE SERVICES. SOME AREAS WHICH
NEED TO BE EXAMINED INCLUDE SOLID WASTE, HEALTH CARE, HUMAN
SERVICES PLANNING
ETC.
F -3 PROGRAM EVALUATION
The Council usually levies the maximum or close to the maximum tax
levy allowed. It is difficult for 'outsiders' to determine if
internal evaluation is being performed to ascertain the
effectiveness or necessity of council programs or if they are
being continued because 'they have always been done.'
THE AMM BELIEVES THAT EVERY MAJOR COUNCIL PROGRAM /PRIORITY SHOULD
MEET FOUR TESTS:
-THE ISSUE OR PROBLEM BEING ADDRESSED IS IMPORTANT TO THE WELL
BEING OF THE REGION.
- COUNCIL INTERVENTION OR ACTIVITY WILL MARE A DIFFERENCE.
- COUNCIL EFFORT OR ACTIVITY DOES NOT DUPLICATE OR SERVE AS A
SUBSTITUTE FOR A STATE LEVEL PROGRAM OR EFFORT OR WHAT SHOULD BE A
STATE LEVEL ACTIVITY.
- COUNCIL IS MOST APPROPRIATE AGENCY TO INTERVENE OR PERFORM
ACTIVITY.
IV -G METROPOLITAN PARR AND OPEN SPACE FUNDING
-39-
The Legislature established the Metropolitan Parks and Open Space
System in 1974 and provided state /regional fiscal support for
acquisition and development of the regional park system and
provided a "payment in lieu of taxes" to local units of government
on a decreasing basis for land removed from the tax rolls.
Partial state funding for the operation and maintenance of
regional parks has been provided by the legislature since 1985 in
recognition that regional parks provide the same basic function
in this area as state parks provide in greater Minnesota.
G -1 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE (O & M) FUNDING
Due to increased usage, a leveling of state aids and the impact of
levy limit restrictions; it is becoming increasingly difficult
for the implementing agencies to operate and maintain these
regional facilities.
THE AMM RECOMMENDS THAT THE STATE CONTINUE TO PROVIDE SUPPLEMENTAL
FUNDING TO IMPLEMENTING AGENCIES TO HELP PAY FOR THE MAINTENANCE
AND OPERATION COSTS OF THE REGIONAL PARRS AND OPEN SPACE SYSTEM.
THIS FUNDING LEVEL OUGHT TO BE INCREASED SUBSTANTIALLY FROM
PRESENT LEVELS (ABOUT 10% OF TOTAL) TO MORE EQUALLY TREAT THE
METROPOLITAN AREA COMPARED TO GREATER MINNESOTA WHERE THE STATE
PAYS 100% OF THE COSTS FOR STATE PARRS. THE AMM BELIEVES THE
STATE SHARE SHOULD BE ABOUT 40 %. THE REGIONAL PARRS SHOULD REMAIN
UNDER THE CONTROL OF THE IMPLEMENTING AGENCIES (CITIES AND
COUNTIES).
G -2 FUNDING FOR IMPACTS OF REGIONAL PARRS ON HOST COMMUNITIES
No provision was made to mitigate the cost impacts of a regional
park facility on a "host community ", if such community is not the
owner of the facility. The cost impacts include such items as
public safety costs, street and road maintenance, litter cleanup,
permanent loss of tax revenues, etc.
THE AMM RECOMMENDS THAT AS A CONDITION FOR RECEIVING STATE O & M
FUNDING FOR A REGIONAL PARR FACILITY, THE FACILITY OWNER AND
OPERATOR MUST NEGOTIATE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE HOST COMMUNITY TO
REIMBURSE IT FOR ITS ACTUAL DIRECT COST IMPACTS. THE HOST
COMMUNITY MUST DOCUMENT SAID COSTS AND THE METROPOLITAN PARKS AND
OPEN SPACE COMMISSION (MPOSC) WOULD SERVE AS THE ARBITRATOR IF A
NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT IS NOT ACHIEVED.
G -3 PRIORITY SETTING PROCESS FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT GRANTS
Each legislative biennium, the Metropolitan Council and the MPOSC
make a funding request to the legislature for funds for
acquisition and /or development projects within the regional parks
system. As part of the grant request process, the Council and the
-40-
I�
MPOSC with significant input from the implementing P agencies,
P g prepare a priority list of projects to be funded if the funds
granted are less than the funds requested.
THE AMM URGES THE LEGISLATURE TO PROTECT THE INTEGRITY OF THE
PROJECT PRIORITY PROCESS ESTABLISHED BY THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
BY NOT ALTERING THE PRIORITY PROJECT LISTING. THE AMM ALSO
STRONGLY ENCOURAGES IMPLEMENTING AGENCIES NOT TO CIRCUMVENT THE
PROJECT PRIORITY SETTING PROCESS.
G -4 REGIONAL BONDING FOR REGIONAL PARRS
The Legislature for the past several years has provided less than
25% of the funding requested by the Metropolitan Council and the
MPOSC on an annual
basis. To allow for the orderly and planned
development schedule for the regional parks and open space system,
the Metropolitan Council is planning to use previously granted
authority and issue regional bonds to make up part of the
shortage.
THE AMM BELIEVES THIS ACTION CREATES A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT AND
COULD TARE THE 'STATE OFF THE HOOK' IN FUTURE APPROPRIATION
CYCLES-THE AMM BELIEVES THAT THE REGIONAL PARKS ARE ESSENTIALLY A
SUBSTITUTE FOR STATE PARKS IN THE METRO AREA AND SHOULD BE FUNDED
ACCORDINGLY. IN ESSENCE, METRO AREA TAXPAYERS WILL BE PAYING
TWICE AND THIS IS NOT EQUITABLE. THE AMM URGES THE METROPOLITAN
COUNCIL TO REDOUBLE ITS EFFORTS TO OBTAIN AN EQUITABLE SHARE OF
STATE FUNDING TO SUPPORT THE REGIONAL PARKS AND OPEN SPACE
SYSTEMS.
IV -H WATER MANAGEMENT IN METROPOLITAN AREA
In order to safeguard the public health and the environment it is
necessary to plan and manage our water resources as a valuable
state and metropolitan resource. Most Water Management
Organizations (WMO cities, and towns are doing a good job of
dealing with surface and groundwater management issues and
seem to be the most logical entities to have such responsibility.
These existing mechanisms should continue to be used to the
greatest extent possible to address surface and groundwater
management problems, instead of establishing a new system or
creating new organizations.
Local units of government should retain the basic responsibility
for surface water management as they are the level of government
closest to the problem but they need the financial resources and
' tools to implement this responsibility.
THE AMM SUPPORTS THE OVERALL THRUST OF THE AMENDMENTS TO THE
METROPOLITAN
SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT ACT AS CONTAINED IN LAWS
1990, CHAPTER 601. HOWEVER, WE BELIEVE IT IS ESSENTIAL TO INCLUDE
-41-
CITY OFFICIALS IN A MEANINGFUL WAY AS THE BOARD OF WATER AND SOIL
RESOURCES (BWSR) AND THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL MOVE TO IMPLEMENT
THOSE AMENDMENTS. THE AMM DOES NOT BELIEVE ADDITIONAL MAJOR
CHANGES ARE NEEDED IN THIS ACT AT THE PRESENT TIME BUT THERE ARE
SOME WATER RELATED ISSUES WHICH SHOULD BE ADDRESSED:
-THE LOCAL COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING THE SURFACE AND GROUND WATER
MANAGEMENT RESPONSIBILITIES SHOULD BE OUTSIDE OF LEVY LIMITS.
-THE LEGISLATIVE COMMISSION ON WATER SHOULD EXAMINE THE 1987
METROPOLITAN GROUNDWATER PLANNING AMENDMENTS TO ASSESS IF COUNTIES
ARE THE LOGICAL ENTITY TO MANAGE GROUNDWATER IN THE METROPOLITAN i
AREA AND IF THE BWSR BOARD SHOULD BE EXPANDED TO INCLUDE SOME
METROPOLITAN AREA CITY OFFICIALS.
-THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL SHOULD FORM AN ADVISORY COMMITTEE OF
LOCAL OFFICIALS TO ASSIST IT IN IMPLEMENTING ITS NEW SURFACE WATER
MANAGEMENT RESPONSIBILITIES.
ALSO THE LEGISLATURE SHOULD PROVIDE FUNDS IF IT MANDATES ANY
ADDITIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT PLANNING OR IMPLEMENTING ACTIVITIES
BY LOCAL UNITS OF GOVERNMENT.
IV -I WASTE STREAM MANAGEMENT
The problem of managing the waste stream (for all types of waste)
is and will continue to be one of the major social
environmental problems during this decade. We are rapidly
running out of space (capacity for land disposal) in the
metropolitan area and there are no general disposal facilities in
this state for Hazardous Waste. We are also learning that for
many materials incineration may not be a good environmental
alternative to landfill disposal.
The existing waste management system centralizes responsibility at
the state level for hazardous waste but requires the cooperation
and support of all levels of government and the private sector.
The solid waste system for the metropolitan area is essentially a
three tiered system: cities control and regulate collection;
counties are responsible for 'siting' new landfills, developing
abatement plans, developing processing facilities and regulating
existing landfills; and the Metropolitan Council provides grants
and has regional planning and coordinating responsibilities. The
systems were intended to foster and encourage abatement, recycling
and resource recovery for as much of the waste stream as possible
and then to assure environmentally sound disposal for the
remaining waste. In spite of a great deal of cooperation and
coordination among and between the various levels and units of
government and the private sector, some major problems appear on
the horizon.
While much has been accomplished during the past decade in
improving the waste stream management system. Much remains to be
done and any future legislation should take into account the
following precepts.
-42-
I -1 INTEGRATED WASTE STREAM PLANNING
The disposal of solid waste is a multifaceted problem which will
require the cooperation and participation of all levels of
government and the private sector to effectively develop a solid
waste system which is cost effective and environmentally sound.
To achieve such a system, all elements of the waste management
hierarchy (reduction, reuse, recycling, composting, incinceration,
landfilling) must be utilized. Further, it must be realized that
an effective "system" begins before materials become "waste" and,
as such, a comprehensive view of the entire life cycle of products
is needed in order to succeed.
-THE AMM ENDORSES THE CONCEPT THAT SINCE GOVERNMENT IS RESPONSIBLE
FOR SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL, IT HAS A LEGITIMATE INTEREST IN BEING
INVOLVED IN OVERALL WASTE STREAM MANAGEMENT. THIS MEANS THAT
GOVERNMENT'S INTEREST BEGINS BEFORE MATERIALS BECOME "WASTE."
-THE AMM ENDORSES A WASTE MANAGEMENT HIERARCHY WHICH INCLUDES
REDUCTION, REUSE, RECYCLING, COMPOSTING, INCINERATION AND
LANDFILLING. FURTHER, A COMPREHENSIVE SYSTEM MUST INCLUDE A
MIXTURE OF ALL THESE ELEMENTS AND SHOULD NOT RELY SOLELY ON ANY
ONE ELEMENT.
-THE AMM ENCOURAGES MORE ATTENTION BE GIVEN TO THE ALTERNATIVES OF
REDUCTION, REUSE AND RECYCLING BY ALL LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT.
+THE STATE SHOULD FUND THE DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF AN
EDUCATION PROGRAM, WHICH ACTIVELY ENCOURAGES CITIZENS TO RECYCLE,
COMPOST, REUSE AND REDUCE WASTE GENERATION.
+LEGISLATION SHOULD BE INITIATED TO REQUIRE PACKAGING TO MEET
RECYCLED CONTENT STANDARDS AND /OR RECYLABILITY, DEFINED AS
RECOVERY RATES, STANDARDS.
+ESTABLISH STATE REGULATIONS WHICH ENCOURAGES BEVERAGE AND FOOD
RETAILERS TO HAVE A DEPOSIT AND RETURN PROCESS IN PLACE FOR
REUSABLE AND RETURNABLE CONTAINERS.
+LEGISLATION SHOULD BE INITIATED TO REGULATE THE SALE,
DISTRIBUTION, AND DISPOSAL OF NON RECYCLABLE, NON RETURNABLE, AND
NON DEGRADABLE PACKAGING MATERIALS. FEES OR DEPOSITS ON THESE
y ITEMS SHOULD BE CONSIDERED.
-THE AMM OPPOSES ANY LEGISLATION WHICH WOULD LIMIT LOCAL
INITIATIVES IN WASTE STREAM MANAGEMENT UNLESS AN OVERALL STATE OR
METROPLITAN WIDE SYSTEM IS ESTABLISHED WHICH ACCOMPLISHES THE SAME
GOAL OR OBJECTIVE.
-THE AMM SUPPORTS COMPOSTING AS A TECHNIQUE FOR REUSE OF
-43-
YARDWASTES AND OTHER APPROPRIATE COMPONENTS OF THE SOLID WASTE
STREAM. GIVEN THE PROHIBITION ON LANDFILLING YARDWASTE, RESIDENTS
AND REFUSE HAULERS NEED TO BE IMMEDIATELY PROVIDED WITH CONVENIENT
LOCATIONS TO DEPOSIT BRUSH AND OTHER YARDWASTES FOR PROCESSING.
COUNTIES WITH ASSISTANCE FROM THE STATE OR METROPOLITAN
COUNCIL SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FAR LOCATING AND OPERATING
COMPOSITING FACILITIES AND MUST NOT DELEGATE THIS RESPONSIBILITY
TO CITIES WHICH DO NOT WISH TO OPERATE SUCH FACILITIES. MINOR
CHANGES MAY BE NEEDED IN THE EXISTING OVERIDE PROCESS TO ENABLE
COUNTIES TO SITE THESE TYPES OF FACILITTES.
I -2 HAZARDOUS AND DANGEROUS WASTE MANAGEMENT
The improper dis disposal of hazardous P wastes, through landfillin
g g or
incineration, poses a major risk of water and air pollution. Much
has been done to monitor the generation and proper disposal of
hazardous waste by business and industry, and these efforts should
continue.
However, the reduction, control and ro er disposal p p p al of
household hazardous wastes is a significant concern which needs to
be addressed.
(A.) HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE.
THE AMM SUPPORTS A STATE -WIDE PROGRAM TARGETED TO THE REDUCTION
AND PROPER MANAGEMENT OF HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTES, INCLUDING:
- PERMANENT DROP OFF OR DISPOSAL SITES - STRATEGICALLY AND
CONVENIENTLY LOCATED THROUGHOUT THE STATE WHERE ALL TYPES OF
HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTES CAN BE TAKEN FOR PROPER HANDLING,
PROCESSING, OR DISPOSAL.
- EDUCATIONAL AND POINT -OF -SALE INFORMATION FOR CONSUMERS NOTIFYING
THEM OF THE HAZARDOUS NATURE OF CERTAIN PRODUCTS AND THE
IMPORTANCE OF PROPER HANDLING.
- INVOLVEMENT OF THE GENERATORS (RETAILERS) IN THE MANAGEMENT
SYSTEM FOR HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTES TO HELP ASSURE PROPER
HANDLING AND PROCESSING.
- INFORMATION TO CONSUMERS ALERTING THEM TO NON - HAZARDOUS
SUBSTITUTES FOR HAZARDOUS HOUSEHOLD PRODUCTS.
- ENCOURAGEMENT WHICH COULD INCLUDE INCENTIVES TO MANUFACTURES TO
PRODUCE LESS HAZARDOUS PRODUCTS FOR USE IN HOUSEHOLDS. THE TOP
PRIORITY OF THE HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM IS TO
REDUCE THE AMOUNT PRODUCED.
(B.) COMMERCIAL /INDUSTRIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE.
THE AMM SUPPORTS CONTINUED EFFORTS AT THE STATE LEVEL TO PROPERLY
MANAGE INDUSTRIAL HAZARDOUS WASTES INCLUDING THE RE -USE RECOVERY
AND RECYCLING OF AS MUCH HAZARDOUS WASTE AS POSSIBLE. THAT WHICH
CANNOT BE RE-USED OR REPROCESSED MUST BE DISPOSED OF IN AN
ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND MANNER. MANUFACTURERS SHOULD. ALSO BE
ENCOURAGED TO REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS USED IN
THEIR MANUFACTURING PROCESSES.
-44-
(C.) DANGEROUS AND OTHER WASTES WHICH POSE AN ENVIRONMENTAL
PROBLEM.
Re: Scrapping of automobiles, with air conditioning systems,
refrigerators, home air conditioners and building insulation
containing Ozone - Depleting Compounds.
Chlorofluorcarbons (CFC's) and Halons when discharged into the
environment deplete the earth's protective ozone layer, allowing
increased ultra - violet radiation causing such harms as skin
cancer, cataracts, supressions of the immune systems and damage to
crops and aquatic life. CFC's in a form commonly known as Freon
are widely used in airconditioning and refrigeration systems.
Fire extinguishers are the primary source of Halons released into
the earth's atmosphere. CFC's are often a propellent used in the
manufacture of foam board insulation. CFC's are a solvent in the
manufacture of electronic equipment.
The recapturing and recycling of freon from auto air conditioning
units could eliminate approximately 20% of all CFC's nationally.
AMM STRONGLY SUPPORTS LEGISLATION THAT REQUIRES RESPONSIBLE
DISPOSAL OF CFC'S (FREON) AND HALONS. THE AIR CONDITIONING AND
REFRIGERATION SERVICE OPERATORS AND THE WASTE MANAGEMENT /DISPOSAL
INDUSTRY MUST RECAPTURE AND RECYCLE WASTE PRODUCTS. ELIMINATING
CFC'S (FREON) AND HALON FROM THE WASTE STREAM SHOULD BE THE GOAL.
I -3 METROPOLITAN /COUNTY RESPONSIBILITIES.
As noted previously, the cities have the responsibility for waste
collection including implementing and managing most recycling
type programs. The other waste stream management
responsibilities are basically split between the Metropolitan
Council and the Counties. Considerable progress has been made in
recent years in certain parts of the waste stream management
system particularly those aspects for which cities are
responsible. But several significant problems beyond the control
of cities are becoming evident including: the inability of the
counties to site needed waste facilities (landfills, transfer
stations, compost sites, etc.), fluctuating and /or lack of markets
for some recyclables, uneven funding among counties to run the low
tech systems, and the radical variance in disposal costs
throughout the metropolitan area. Some of these problems are
urgent and significant changes may need to be made in the waste
stream management system in the metropolitan area. Some of the
current waste stream management concerns are similar to the
concerns which precipitated the formation of other regional
commissions.
WHILE NOT RULING OUT ADDRESSING THESE CONCERNS WITHIN THE
-45-
EXISTING INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK, SERIOUS CONSIDERATION SHOULD BE
GIVEN TO THE FORMATION OF A REGIONAL SOLID WASTE COMMISSION.
SUCH COMMISSION SHOULD INCLUDE LOCAL ELECTED OFFICIALS. MORE
ANALYSIS AND STUDY IS NEEDED TO DETERMINE THE TOTAL LIST OF
FUNCTIONS TO BE
ASSIGNED TO SUCH COMMISSION
BUT MOST FUNCTIONS NOW
PERFORMED BY THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL AND THE COUNTIES SHOULD BE
GIVEN STRONG CONSIDERATION INCLUDING THE FOLLOWING:
- OWNERSHIP ( INCLUDING THE ASSUMPTION OF DEBT) OF THE CURRENT MAJOR
PUBLIC DISPOSAL AND PROCESSING FACILITIES.
- RESPONSIBILITY FOR SITING CERTAIN TYPES OF WASTE PROCESSING AND
DISPOSAL FACILITIES.
- REGULATION OF DISPOSAL CHARGES (TIPPING /FEE) TO PROVIDE MORE
FAIRNESS AND
EQUITY.
- DISTRIBUTION OF FUNDS TO SUPPORT THE LOCAL RECYCLING PROGRAMS.
- DISTRIBUTION OF OTHER GRANT FUNDS NOW MANAGED BY THE
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
-MOST OTHER FUNCTIONS PERFORMED BY THE COUNCIL EXCEPT FOR THE
PLANNING FUNCTIONS (LONG RANGE POLICY PLANS, ETC.).
- COORDINATION OF MARKETING EFFORTS FOR RECYCLABLES.
I -4 LOCAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT RESPONSIBILITIES
Cities have certain responsibilities in helping to manage and
implement an effective solid waste management system including
recycling programs and the collection systems. The AMM believes
that to date cities, utilizing a variety of collection systems,
are doing a good job of managing Local Recycling and Waste
Collection.
THE RESPONSIBILITIES NOW ASSIGNED TO CITIES FOR SOLID WASTE
MANAGEMENT SHOULD REMAIN WITH THE CITIES. THE AMM BELIEVES THAT
THE SYSTEM OUGHT TO BE FLEXIBILE AND BASED ON PERFORMANCE
STANDARDS AND /OR GOALS RATHER THAN MANDATED TECHNIQUES. TO HELP
ACHIEVE RECYCLING AND ABATEMENT GOALS, THE AMM WOULD SUPPORT THE
CREATION OF A DISPOSAL SYSTEM WHERE INCENTIVES ARE PROVIDED TO
RESIDENTS WHO REDUCE THEIR VOLUME OF WASTE THROUGH ABATEMENT,
RE -USE AND SOURCE SEPARATION ACTIVITIES.
I -5 FUNDING
The current funding system for• solid waste has a number of
drawbacks: It does not encourage maximum utilization of the waste
disposal hierarchy; it often gives no incentive to individual
residents to participate in recycling; it does not differentiate
between generators of 'clean' waste and 'problem' waste; and it
has given no assurances that the main sources of funding are
related to the entities incurring expenses.
-AMM BELIEVES THAT THE FUNDING SYSTEM SHOULD RECOGNIZE THAT ALL
-46-
METHODS OF DISPOSAL, INCLUDING RECYCLING HAVE A COST. ALSO THE
TRUE AND FULL COST OF THE ENTIRE DISPOSAL SYSTEM SHOULD BE
RECOGNIZED.
-AMM BELIEVES THAT IN GENERAL FUNDING FOR THE SOLID WASTE SYSTEM
SHOULD COME FROM THE GENERATORS OF SOLID WASTE THROUGH THE COST OF
DISPOSAL. IN PRACTICAL TERMS, THIS MEANS THAT THE TIP FEE SHOULD
N
BE THE GENERAL, ALL - PURPOSE VEHICLE FOR FUNDING.
y -IN GENERAL, THE FUNDING SYSTEM SHOULD ENCOURAGE MAXIMUM USE OF
THE WASTE HIERARCHY. FOR EXAMPLE IT SHOULD COST MORE TO DISPOSE
OF WASTE IN LANDFILLS THAN IN RESOURCE RECOVERY FACILITIES.
-AMM SUPPORTS THE CONCEPT THAT MATERIALS WHICH CAUSE SPECIAL
PROBL IN THE WASTE STREAM SHOULD BEAR THE COSTS (THROUGH THE
COST OF PURCHASING THE MATERIALS) ASSOCIATED WITH THESE PROBLEMS.
-AMM ENCOURAGES PROVIDING FINANCIAL INCENTIVES SUCH AS VARIABLE
AND DIFFERENTIAL FEES TO RESIDENTS WHO PARTICIPATE IN RECYCLING
WHILE MAKING IT CLEAR THAT EVEN RECYCLING HAS A COST.
-AMM BELIEVES THAT ANY FUNDING SYSTEM MUST GUARANTEE DISTRIBUTION
OF THE MONIES TO ALI ENTITIES INVOLVED IN THE SYSTEM AND RECOGNIZE
ALL COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE SYSTEM. THIS MEANS A SIGNIFICANT
PORTION OF THE FUNDS RAISED THROUGH THE SALES TAX SHOULD BE
DISTRIBUTED TO CITIES WHICH OPERATE RECYCLING PROGRAMS. THE AMM
ALSO BELIEVES THAT THE ENTIRE PROCEEDS OF TAX ON SOLID WASTE
SHOULD BE DEDICATED TO SOLID WASTE ACTIVITIES.
I -6 ORGANIZED COLLECTION
Organized collection serves as a viable and important method for
municipalities to achieve solid waste abatement. It is a type
of service agreement that allows cities proper regulatory power
over their solid waste collection ion system. It provides
municipalities the opportunity to choose the type of solid waste
collection that would best serve their residents.
'Just Compensation' legislation is designed to limit
municipalities regulatory power in the area of solid waste
collection. In placing severe financial penalties on
municipalities that undertake organized collection, 'Just
Compensation' legislation infringes on municipalities rights to
establish intangible service agreements for municipal services.
-THE AMM ENDORSES THE CONCEPT OF ORGANIZED COLLECTION AS A VIABLE
METHOD FOR MUNICIPALITIES TO ASSERT REGULATORY POWER OVER THEIR
SOLID WASTE COLLECTION SYSTEMS.
-THE AMM BELIEVES THAT ORGANIZED COLLECTION MUST CONTINUE TO BE
AVAILABLE TO CITIES AS THEY CHOOSE A TYPE OF SOLID WASTE
-47-
COLLECTION SYSTEM THAT WOULD BEST SERVE THE NEEDS OF THEIR
RESIDENTS.
-THE AMM OPPOSES ANY LEGISLATION THAT WOULD IMPOSE COMPENSATION
PENALTIES ON MUNICIPALITIES WHO CHOOSE TO IMPLEMENT A SOLID WASTE
COLLECTION SYSTEM.
I -7 HOST CITIES AND CLEANUP RESPONSIBILITIES
While solid waste facilities are components of county and regional
solid waste management systems, they must be located in individual
cities. Because the number of facilities is limited, the effects
of hosting these facilities is not equally shared among cities.
Most of these effects are negative - an increased likelihood and
incidence of water, soil, air, and noise pollution; and increased
amount of litter and offensive odors; a greater likelihood of
adverse impacts on values of neighboring properties; a need for
increased maintenance on public streets and highways; and
potential threats to public health and welfare in areas immediate
to and along access routes to these facilities. Longer -term
impacts may affect cities if the organizations responsible for
facility operations cease as financially viable entities.
Safeguards need to be enacted for host cities for the operations
and clean up responsibilities associated with solid waste
facilities.
The trend within the metropolitan area has been to internalize
present and future costs of solid waste management on current
generators of solid waste. These costs should include the extra
and adverse financial impacts borne by host communities. Cities
host these regional facilities because of accidents of geography.
Liabilities for these facilities should be shared across the
region.
-THE AMM SUPPORTS THE CURRENT COMPENSATION LEVEL ALLOWED THROUGH
SURCHARGE FEES AS A MINIMUM LEVEL; THIS COMPENSATION SHOULD BE
CONTINUED OR INCREASED. THIS FORM OF COMPENSATION SHOULD BE
AVAILABLE TO ALL TYPES OF SOLID WASTE FACILITIES.
-THE AMM BELIEVES THE HOST COMMUNITIES SHOULD NOT BEAR A
FINANCIAL LIABILITY ASSOCIATED WITH SOLID WASTE FACILITIES. COSTS
INCURRED FOR MONITORING OPERATIONS AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS SHOULD
BE BORNE BY FACILITY OPERATORS OR, IN THE ABSENCE OF SUCH
REGULATIONS, BE ASSUMED BY THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. LEGISLATION
NEEDS TO BE STRENGTHENED SO AS TO EXEMPT CITIES FROM ANY PRESENT
AND FUTURE LIABILITY ARISING FROM OPERATIONS OF SOLID WASTE
FACILITIES. LEGISLATION SHOULD FURTHER ESTABLISH THAT PROCEEDS ,
FOR FUTURE REMEDIAL ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIONS BE IN A TRUST FUND.
-THE AMM WILL SUPPORT LEGISLATION WHICH CLEARLY ARTICULATES THAT
REMEDIAL ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIVITIES ARE THE RESPONSIBILITY ONLY ON
-48-
THE PERMITTED OPERATOR AND /OR THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.
-THE AMM BELIEVES THAT LOCAL PROPERTY TAXING AUTHORITIES SHOULD
NOT BE FORCED TO LEVY HIGHER PROPERTY TAX RATES BECAUSE SOLID
WASTE FACILITIES MAY DEPRESS PROPERTY VALUES WITHIN PARTS OF THE
TAXING JURISDICTION. OPERATORS SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO PAY
ADDITIONAL FEES COMMENSURATE WITH THE ADVERSE TAX REVENUE IMPACT
RESULTING FROM LOWER VALUES ON NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.
-THE AMM WILL SUPPORT MEASURES WHICH REQUIRE THAT OPERATORS OF
SOLID WASTE FACILITIES GUARANTEE THE PURCHASE VALUE OF PROPERTIES
WHICH ARE INFLUENCED BY THEIR PROXIMITY TO THOSE FACILITIES.
-49-
r
V
TRANSPORTATION
PAGE 50 THROUGH 58
V
TRANSPORTATION
V -A STREET AMD HIGHWAY FUNDING
An efficient transportation system is a vital element in planning
for physical, economic, and social development at the state,
regional, and local levels. Funding for current roadway
maintenance reconstruction, and construction of new streets and
highways in developing areas is a significant major element of a
s competitive and safe transportation system. Due to past high
inflation and declining state revenues there has been a tendency
by the Legislature to divert much needed roadway funds to state
general expenditure. This trend must be reversed and funding
expanded to at least pace inflation plus growth to insure high
quality transporation within the state and metropolitan region.
THE AMM URGES THE LEGISLATURE TO PROVIDE AN ADEQUATE LEVEL OF
FUNDS SO THAT NECESSARY STREET AND HIGHWAY MAINTENANCE MAY BE
CONTINUED, NECESSARY NEW STREET AND HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION MAY
OCCUR, AND THE MUNICIPAL STATE AID FUND LEVEL CONTINUES GROWTH.
V -B MOTOR VEHICLE EXCISE TAX TRANSFER
The Transportation Study Board (TSB) and the Minnesota
Transportation Alliance (MTA), formerly Good Roads, are both
recommending radical changes to the use of MVET and funding of non
maintenance highway functions. This is in recognition of the fact
that the legislature is not going to follow through on the 1980
legislative intent to transfer 100% of the MVET to the Highway
Users Fund and Transit Assistance Fund. The current transfer from
general fund is 30% or approximately $78 million for FY 1992 of
which $20 million goes for transit and $58 million under new law
goes to the Trunk Highway Fund. After 1991 cities and counties
are cut out of the MVET Highway fund distribution. The state's
Trunk Highway Fund, supposedly for construction and maintenance of
Highways, currently funds $68 million worth of related activities
including the Department of Public Safety (Highway Patrol),
Tourism, River Parkway, Safety Council and several others. It is
questionable if these activities are legitimate expenses from gas
tax funds per the Minnesota Constitution.
The TSB and MTA are both recommending removing the related
activities from the Trunk Highway Fund. In addition they are
recommending creation of a Transportation Services Fund for the
related activities as well as the Transit Fund for mass transit
including LRT both to be funded from a portion of MVET. This
funding exchange is approximately equal for existing Highway
Funding. The TSB would like to see a portion of MVET remaining
after use for the Services and Transit Funds go to highway
construction and maintenance.
THE AMM ENDORSES THE CONCEPT OF REMOVING NON HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION
AND MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES FROM THE STATE TRUNK HIGHWAY FUND AND
-50-
THE CREATION OF A TRANSPORTATION SERVICES FUND FOR THESE
ACTIVITIES AND A TRANSIT FUND FOR MASS TRANSIT BOTH OF WHICH
SHOULD BE FUNDED FROM DEDICATED MVET FUNDS.
V -C HIGHWAY AND TRANSIT INTEGRATION
An efficient Transportation System consists of both high quality
roadway and high quality transit opportunities. These two
elements must be considered together from early planning through
implementation especially in high growth Metropolitan areas where
the travel needs tend to glut to excess capacity new or expanded
highways as soon as they are opened for use. The AMM understands
that to some degree this is done in planning and that transit is
considered somewhat when determining funding priorities for
highway construction, however, it is felt that the integration of
highway and transit is minimal and should be significantly
increased.
THE AMM URGES EXISTING AGENCIES INVOLVED IN MAJOR HIGHWAY AND
TRANSIT PLANNING AND IMP T , E24FNT ATION TO INTEGRATE THESE ACTIVITIES
TO ENSURE AN EFFICIENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM. CRITERIA USED TO
DETERMINE HIGHWAY FUNDING FOR CONSTRUCTION AND EXPANSION SHOULD BE
REVIEWED AND UPDATED TO REQUIRE INCLUSION OF TRANSIT MODES AND
OPPORTUNITIES, WHEN APPROPRIATE. ONLY WHEN THIS IS ACCOMPLISHED
WILL THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM BE TRULY EFFICIENT AND COST
EFFECTIVE.
V -D METROPOLITAN TRANSIT SYSTEM FUNDING
Because of the large economically diverse population but rather
compact nature of the Twin City Metropolitan Area, it is an
absolute necessity to provide an effective and efficient public
mass transit service augmented by a variety of programs,such as
Rideshare and Project Mobility, to protect the economic
viability of the area. Without a good transit system, the
Metropolitan Highway system would not just be crowded, it would be
totally inadequate. Many elderly and handicapped persons residing
in the area primarily because of access to unique services would
be almost totally immobile. Due to statutory constraints, there
are no funding resources available for other units of government
to pick up the difference if the programs are allowed to
deteriorate. Therefore, legislative funding of transit programs
through the RTB should be a high priority.
THE AMM REQUESTS THE LEGISLATURE TO CONSIDER THE METROPOLITAN
TRANSIT PROGRAMS AS HIGH PRIORITY AND FUND THEM SUFFICIENTLY.
FUNDING ALTERNATIVES SHOULD INCLUDE THE STATE GENERAL FUND, MOTOR
VEHICLE EXCISE TAX, THE FARE BOX, PROPERTY TAX, AND SERVICE
EFFICIENCIES.
V -E HIGHWAY JURISDICTIONAL REASSIGNMENT AND FUNDING
-51-
The State Highway Study Commission and Metropolitan Jurisdictional
Task Force have been studying the possibility of reclassifying
many roadways in the state as to appropriate use classifications
and jurisdiction. This reassignment in the metropolitan area is
estimated to shift $6.1 million annually from the state and $1.2
million annually from the counties to the cities for an increase
of $7.3 million annually for general maintenance and life cycle
treatment (i.e. sealcoat, overlays, etc.). This task is
appropriate, but will have a profound effect on city finances and
future ability to maintain good road systems, especially if
certain criteria are not met and finance alternatives established.
Therefore, the AMM offers the following as a guide to continuing
discussion and ongoing studies.
THE AMM SUPPORTS JURISDICTIONAL REASSIGNMENT OF ROADS ON A PHASED
BASIS BASED ON FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION AND OTHER APPROPRIATE
CRITERIA SUBJECT TO A CORRESPONDING MECHANISM FOR FUNDING OF
ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS AND CONTINUING MAINTENANCE SINCE CITIES DO
NOT CURRENTLY HAVE THE FINANCIAL CAPACITY TO ABSORB THE ADDITIONAL
ROADWAY RESPONSIBILITIES WITHOUT NEW FUNDING SOURCES. THE
EXISTING MUNICIPAL TURNBACK FUND IS NOT ADEQUATE BASED ON
CONTEMPLATED TURNBACKS.
V -F STATE AND COUNTY HIGHWAY TURNBACKS
Current state law provides that the state and /or county may
declassify a trunk highway and turn it back to a local unit of
government. The only provision is that it must be in
good condition. The unit receiving the highway does not have the
option to refuse title and must, thereafter, maintain the turned
back road. The local unit may add the turnback highway to its MSA
highway mileage and even exceed the unit's mileage limit if it is
already at its designated limit. This will qualify that
particular stretch of street for MSA maintenance funds. However,
two problems exist: 1) the maintenance allocation may not be
sufficient if the street is a high volume carrier, such as Highway
8 through Ramsey County; and 2) the miles of turnback designated
by the local unit as MSA streets will be deducted from the unit's
future additional MSA allocation limit, thus forcing the local
unit to totally maintain that portion from its local funds or lose
the right to determine at its option other local streets as part
of the MSA system.
THE ASSOCIATION OF METROPOLITAN MUNICIPALITIES REQUESTS THE
LEGISLATURE TO MODIFY THE LAW TO EITHER 1) ALLOW CITIES THE RIGHT
TO REFUSE HIGHWAY TURNBACKS FROM THE STATE OR COUNTY, OR 2) ALLOW
THE LOCAL UNITS MSA MILE LIMIT TO BE INCREASED BY THE MILES OF
TURNBACK WITHOUT AFFECTING FUTURE ALLOCATIONS AND ESTABLISH A
SPECIAL MAINTENANCE ALLOCATION FOR TURNED BACK HIGHWAY MILES BASED
ON VOLUME OF USAGE. FURTHER, STANDARDS AND CRITERIA FOR TURNBACK
-52-
ROADS SHOULD BE ESTABLISHED BY MNDOT IN CONJUNCTION WITH LOCAL
UNITS OF GOVERNMENT, AND NOT MEETING THESE STANDARDS BE MADE PART
OF THE CRITERIA FOR WHICH A CITY MAY REJECT THE TURNBACR.
V -G CSAH DESIGNATION
County State Aid Highways located within cities may not be
abandoned, changed, or revoked without the concurrence of the
governing body of the city unless the city refuses or neglects to
approve plans for construction which are in conformance with CSAH
standards for a period of one year. Counties would like the
authority to change designation without preparing expensive plans
and without city concurrence based on changing conditions. Cities
are concerned about abandonment of major county roadways without
appropriate maintenance. Therefore;
THE AMM OPPOSES ELIMINATION OF CITY COUNCIL CONCURRENCE FOR COUNTY
STATE AID HIGHWAY ABANDONMENT, CHANGE, OR REVOCATION UNTIL SUCH
TIME AS ALTERNATIVES CAN BE DEVELOPED.
V -H 1 3C' TRANSPORTATION PLANNING PROCESS - ROLE OF ELECTED
OFFICIALS
The transportation planning process in the Twin City Metropolitan
Area has been developed in response to a variety of federal and
state laws and regulations. The Metropolitan Council (MC) was
formally designated by the Legislature in 1974 (1974 MRA) as the
agency responsible for the administration and coordination of said
planning process. Included within this designation is the
responsibility for long range comprehensive transportation
planning required by Section 134 of the Federal Highway Act of
1962, Section 4 of Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964 and
Section 112 of Federal Aid Highway Act of 1973, and such other
federal transportation laws as may be enacted subsequently. The
planning required under the federal laws is commonly referred to
as the 1 3C' process (continuous, comprehensive, and cooperative),
and the MC is the metropolitan planning organization (MPO) under
federal terminology. Federal law and regulations require that the
MPO function as "the forum for cooperative decision making by
principal elected officials of general purpose local government"
and receipt of federal financial aid for the planning,
construction and operation of transportation improvements in
urbanized areas is contingent upon the existence of a planning
process which is satisfactory to federal authorities. When the
Legislature designated the MC as the transportation planning
agency for the metropolitan area, it also mandated the
establishment of an "advisory body" to assist the MC and
Metropolitan Transit Commission fission
(MTC), now Regional Transit Board,
in carrying out their responsibilities. While specific duties
were not assigned, the Legislature did specify that the advisory
body would consist of citizen representatives, municipal, county,
-53-
and appropriate state agency representatives. This advisory body
is now called the Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) and contains
17 local elected officials among its membership of about 30
officials. The MC has consistently viewed the role of TAB as an
advisory body based on the 1974 MRA. Hence, local elected
officials in this area do not play as vital a role in the
federally mandated 1 3C' transportation planning process as was
intended by federal law and regulation. Although, the Federal
Regulations no longer require exclusive local official
representation p n as the MC the still maintain y ain local official
involvement in the MC and 1 3C' process. In addition, the current
elected official participation and 1 3C' process has worked
reasonably well in this Metropolitan Area.
THE AMM SUPPORTS AS A MINIMUM THE CONTINUATION OF THE CURRENT
LOCAL ELECTED OFFICIALS INVOLVEMENT IN THE 1 3C' PROCESS. IF
MODIFICATION IS CONSIDERED, THE AMM URGES GREATER LOCAL OFFICIAL
INPUT IN THE SELECTION PROCESS OF THE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
AGENCY.
V -I LARGE TRUCKS (TRIPLE TRAILERS)
The trucking industry has recently proposed to the state
legislature to allow truck tractor and trailer combinations of up
to 110 feet on Minnesota State Highways. Due to offtracking of
rear wheels acceleration distance needs and time and distance
required for safe passing, current legal lengths are pushing P g
g g P g the
limit of safety and physical ability of our interstate and trunk
highway systems. Longer tractor /trailor combinations would only
exacerbate these conditions beyond tolerable limits. To upgrade
the Highway System to accommodate longer units would be very
expensive reducing funding resources for other much needed
critical projects. Once allowed on the interstate and designated
trunk route highways there would undoubtedly by pressure to
provide access to various local areas which would be prohibitive
in cost for local upgrading and unacceptable for safety,
Therefore,
THE AMM URGES THE LEGISLATURE TO NOT INCREASE TRUCK TRACTOR AND
TRAILER COMBINATION LENGTH LIMITS BEYOND CURRENT LIMITS DUE TO
UNACCEPTABLE COST FOR HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION AND FOR PROTECTION OF
PUBLIC SAFETY.
V -J MTC REDUCED SERVICE AREA MILL RATE
Prior to the 1988 Tax Bill, the levy for MTC was expressed as 2
mills and adjusted by a number of recalculations which raised the
total levy to between 3 and 3.5 mills. The 1984 Legislature
provided that based on reduced service, the MTC levy in certain
areas would be reduced. The reductions were intended to be either
25% or 16% but were expressed in mills and written in such a
-54-
manner that less of a reduction than that amount originally
intended by the legislature was actually implemented. Current law
no longer refers to mills but increases by growth percentages from
existing dollar amounts. The AMM feels that the reduced service
area levy should y be adjusted to reflect flect
7 the intent of the 1984
law.
THE AMM REQUESTS THE LEGISLATURE TO MODIFY THE REDUCED SERVICE
AREA LEVIES TO REFLECT 1984 LAW INTENT OF 25% LEVY REDUCTION FOR
PEAR HOUR SERVICE ONLY AND 16% LEVY REDUCTION FOR PEAR PLUS `
PARTIAL OFF PEAR HOUR SERVICE.
V -K SEAT BELTS
The Legislature passed a no penalty mandatory seat belt usage law
in 1986 and added some modest penalties effective beginning August
1, 1988. Originally, a violator could be stopped and ticketed for
non use of a seat belt. However, when penalties were added, a non
use ticket could only be issued incidental to being stopped or
detained for another traffic violation. Compliance went from 32%
to 45% when penalties were added. The change to ticketing
incidental to another violation caused a reduction from 98,000
tickets to 80,000 tickets.
THE AMM SUPPORTS A CHANGE IN THE SEAT BELT STATUTES WHICH WOULD
ALLOW ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITIES TO ISSUE CITATIONS FOR SEAT BELT
VIOLATIONS WITHOUT FIRST HAVING TO ENFORCE OTHER TRAFFIC CODE
VIOLATIONS.
V -L PEAR HOUR INTERSTATE TRUCK BAN
The AMM is and has been a strong supporter of funding for Highways
and Transit programs in recognition of the increasing congestion
on the major metropolitan highways. In conjunction with increased
highway and transit facilities, the AMM believes that programs
should be implemented that would better utilize existing
facilities. One of these would be to eliminate large trucks from
the major interstates during peak hour traffic. This would
increase capacity cit b 15
P Y Y % plus provide increased P ublic safety.
Recent
statistics show an accelerating accident rate between
trucks and passenger vehicles during these hours.
THE AMM REQUESTS THE LEGISLATURE AND MNDOT WORK WITH TRUCKING
FIRMS TO STUDY ELIMINATION OF LARGE TRUCKS FROM SOME OR ALL OF THE
METROPOLITAN INTERSTATES DURING PEAR TRAVEL HOURS TO INCREASE
CAPACITY AND
SAFETY. THE AMM ENCOURAGES IMPLEMENTATION OF
SOME
FORM OF REDUCED •
TRUCK TRAFFIC DURING PEAK HOURS INCLUDING A
DEMONSTRATION PROJECT, AS SOON AS PRACTICAL.
V -M REGIONAL TRANSIT SYSTEM
-55-
The purpose of a Transportation System is to provide mobility for
people and accessibility to and for economic development and
services. The most effective system will make maximum use of all
transit alternatives and strategies where they are most
appropriate, thus, creating a truly integrated system. Exclusive
reliance on only freeways is imprudent and possibly cost
• prohibitive primarily due to social and economic upheaval of
established neighborhoods for right of way acquisition. Transit
improvements are imperative, but even with implementation of
" various load increasing strategies, the capacity is finite and
g P Y
will reach unacceptable saturation limits within the forseeable
future. The AMM supports more coordination and integration of
Transit and Highway planning and implementation.
THE REGIONAL TRANSIT SYSTEM SHOULD BE A COMBINATION OF SHORT AND
LONG HAUL SYSTEMS AND BE INCLUDED IN ALL PLANNING DOCUMENTS AT ALL
LEVELS INCLUDING EIS STUDIES.
THE LONG HAUL SYSTEM SHOULD INCLUDE HOV LANES, EXPRESS BUSES, AND
THE LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT SYSTEM WHICH SHOULD BE BUILT WHEN IT IS
APPROPRIATE AND FINANCIALLY FEASIBLE IN EACH CORRIDOR OF THE AREA
TO CONNECT RESIDENTS TO JOB, RETAIL, AND COMMERCIAL CENTERS.
THE SHORT HAUL SYSTEM COULD INCLUDE A VARIETY OF MODES, INCLUDING
A TAXI SYSTEM, BUSES, NON - MOTORIZED, AND PARR AND RIDES ADEQUATE
TO CONNECT THE LONG HAUL SYSTEM AND REGIONAL CENTERS, MAJOR TRIP
GENERATORS AND COMMUNITIES, BOTH URBAN AND SUBURBAN.
BUS SYSTEMS AND ESPECIALLY LRT SYSTEMS SHOULD INCLUDE AMPLE
REGIONAL PARR AND RIDE FACILITIES, WITH EASY ACCESS, CONSISTENT
WITH THE PLANNING OF A REGIONAL ENTITY TO ACCOMMODATE THE NEEDS OF
THE PUBLIC. FEEDER SYSTEMS SHOULD BE A MAJOR CONSIDERATION FOR
BUS PARR AND RIDE AND LRT STATIONS. PLANS SHOULD BE CONSIDERED TO
USE VAN POOLS TO ALSO FEED THE PARR AND RIDES FOR EXPRESS BUSES
AND LRT.
ALL TRANSIT MODES AND TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MANAGEMENT POLICIES
SHOULD BE GIVEN EQUAL CONSIDERATION NOW AND IN THE FUTURE IN ORDER
TO PROVIDE THE BEST TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM POSSIBLE TO THE
METROPOLITAN AREA.
THE FINANCING FOR THE REGIONAL SYSTEM SHOULD BE BORNE IN
PROPORTION TO THE BENEFIT OR SERVICES RECEIVED.
V -N MSA SCREENING COMMITTEE
The Metropolitan Highway Districts 5 and 9 were combined in
1989/90 administratively to form one Metropolitan Highway District
within the MNDOT structure. By law the MSA screening committee
consists of one member from each Highway District and first class
City. Technically, the combining of Districts 5 and 9 reduces the
-56-
membership by one from the metro area. This was not intended by
MNDOT. Therefore;
THE AMM REQUESTS THAT THE STATUTES BY MODIFIED TO PRESERVE TWO
SEATS ON THE MSA SCREENING COMMITTEE FROM THE METROPOLITAN HIGHWAY
DISTRICT.
V -O METROPOLITAN TAX '
0-1 REGIONAL TAX n
A number of agencies have suggested the use of a special
Metropolitan Tax for various purposes. The AMM membership has had
extensive discussion on this issue, and given the reality that a
metro tax will continue to be considered, the AMM offers the
following position:
THE AMM MEMBERSHIP FEELS THAT ANY NEW METROPOLITAN TAX SHOULD BE
RELATED TO A SPECIFIC NEED THAT CAN BE IDENTIFIED AS CRITICAL TO
THE METROPOLITAN AREA AND THAT CURRENT FINANCIAL OR TAX RESOURCES
CANNOT BE USED OR DIVERTED FROM LESSOR PRIORITY ACTIVITIES.
0-2 REGIONAL TAX PRINICIPLES
If it is shown that an activity is in critical need of funding and
that there is no current source that can be used, then certain
principles should be applied.
ANY NEW METRO GENERATED TAX OR REVENUE SOURCE SHOULD NOT BE USED
AS A REASON TO REDUCE CURRENT OR FUTURE STATE ALLOCATIONS FOR ANY
ACTIVITY OR REDIRECT METRO TARGETED STATE AGENCY FUNDS TO OTHER
REGIONS.
A NEW TAX AND ITS SOURCE, TO THE DEGREE POSSIBLE, SHOULD BE
RELATED TO THE USE.
A NEW TAX SHOULD BE IMPOSED AS BROADLY AS POSSIBLE AND TO THE
GREATEST EXTENT POSSIBLE ON THE USER OR LARGEST BENEFICIARY OF
THE ACTIVITY FUNDED.
THE TAX OR REVENUE SOURCE SHOULD BE STABLE.
THE FUNDS SHOULD BE DEDICATED TO THE STATED PURPOSE, NOT ACCOUNTED
FOR IN OR THROUGH THE STATE GENERAL FUND, AND SPENT ONLY ON `
METROPOLITAN PROJECTS.
THE TAX OR REVENUE SOURCE CHOSEN SHOULD BE ONE THAT WILL NOT `
RESTRICT LOCAL GOVERNMENT REVENUE OPTIONS OR IMPACT LOCAL
GOVERNMENT NEEDS FOR FUTURE CRITICAL ACTIVITIES.
0-3 TRANSPORTATION TAX
-57-
The AMM does feel that Transportation needs are becoming critical
in the Metropolitan Area and that LRT must be examined within the
context of the total Transportation system. A proposal has been
brought forward by the Regional Transit Board to fund LRT
AMM SUPPORTS THE CONCEPT OF A METROPOLITAN TAX FOR METROPOLITAN
TRANSPORTATION NEEDS, INCLUDING LRT WITH THE FOLLOWING
CONSIDERATION: (1) TAXES SUCH AS THE MOTOR FUELS, MOTOR VEHICLE
EXCISE TAX, SALES TAX, AND PAYROLL TAX SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED;
AND (2) THE PROPERTY TAX AND GENERAL INCOME TAX SHOULD NOT BE
CONSIDERED.
-58-
VI
ENDORSEMENT POLICIES
PAGE 59 THROUGH 65
a�
VI
ENDORSEMENT POLICIES
VI -A TRUTH IN TAXATION (LMC POLICY RS -4)
The League recommends improvements in the truth in taxation law
designed to make the process meaningful for property taxpayers and
workable for cities and other local units of government. The
League believes that all levels of local government (including
counties and school districts) as well as the state government
should be required to follow similar truth in taxation
y requirements for public hearings on budget and tax issues.
The Legislature should make changes in the following areas.
1. NOW THAT TRUTH IN TAXATION IS IN PLACE, LEVY T , TS SHOULD BE
ABOLISHED. IF THE LEGISLATURE CONTINUES TO IMPOSE RESTRICTIVE
LEVY LIMITS, THEN ONLY CITIES WHICH NEED TO EXCEED THEIR LEVY
LIMITS SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO GO THROUGH THE TRUTH IN TAXATION
PROCESS.
2. PARCEL - SPECIFIC TRUTH IN TAXATION NOTICES SHOULD BE REQUIRED
AS SOON AS POSSIBLE IN ALL COUNTIES SO THAT THE PRECISE IMPACT OF
BUDGET AND LEVY DECISIONS ON INDIVIDUAL TAXPAYERS' BILLS ARE
DISPLAYED. STATE FUNDS SHOULD BE APPROPRIATED TO FINANCE
COMPLIANCE WITH THIS STATE MANDATE. Under current law, most
counties (except Hennepin, Ramsey, and St. Louis) are required to
produce a general notice that only indicates the proposed levy
(after reduction by LGA) and the percent increase or decrease
from the previous year's levy. In many cases, such statements
will mislead taxpayers about the effects of levy changes on their
property tax bills. Only a parcel - specific notice can avoid
misleading taxpayers.
3. LOCAL GOVERNMENTS SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO AMEND THE LEVY THAT
THEY PRELIMINARILY PROPOSE TO THE COUNTY AUDITOR ON SEPTEMBER 1.
IN ADDITION, THE TRUTH IN TAXATION PROCESS SHOULD APPLY ONLY TO A
LOCAL UNIT'S LEVIES, NOT ITS TOTAL BUDGET. Truth In Taxation
requires budget adoption and levy certification by September 1.
Many cities will have a difficult time realistically assessing
their budget needs that far in advance of the beginning of the
budget year. The early certification date, in combination with
the rule that prevents the city's final levy from exceeding its
preliminary September 1 estimate, could work against responsible
budgeting and force cities to overestimate their budget needs in
,. order to avoid potential revenue shortfalls.
4. SINCE TRUTH IN TAXATION NOTICES MUST BE SENT TO EACH PARCEL OF
PROPERTY, LOCAL UNITS SHOULD NOT BE REQUIRED TO PUBLISH NEWSPAPER
ADVERTISEMENTS.
5. THE METHOD FOR CALCULATING THE PROPOSED TAX INCREASES SHOWN ON
TAXPAYER TRUTH IN TAXATION NOTICES SHOULD REFLECT AS ACCURATELY AS
-59-
POSSIBLE THE ACTUAL YEAR -TO -YEAR INCREASES OR DECREASES OCCURRING
IN TAXPAYERS' TAX BILLS.
6. A CITY SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO USE ITS OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER TO
PUBLISH NOTIFICATION OF A RECESSED TRUTH IN TAXATION HEARING, AS
LONG AS THAT NEWSPAPER IS ONE OF GENERAL, INTEREST AND READERSHIP
IN THE COMMUNITY.
7. PROPERTY TAX STATEMENTS PROVIDED TO HOMEOWNERS SHOULD
ACCURATELY REFLECT THE AMOUNT OF STATE -PAID PROPERTY TAX RELIEF r
PROVIDED FOR THE PARCEL OF PROPERTY. For example, artificial
calculations of "homestead credit" amounts are not acceptable.
VI -B RESERVE FUNDS (LMC POLICY)
THE LEGISLATURE SHOULD NOT ATTEMPT TO CONTROL OR RESTRICT CITY
CASH BALANCES OR RESERVES. RESERVES ARE NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN THE
FISCAL VIABILITY OF CITY GOVERNMENTS, TO PURCHASE CAPITAL GOODS
AND INFRASTRUCTURE, AND TO MAINTAIN HIGH LEVEL BOND RATINGS.
The 1989 Legislature initiated discussion and study of cities'
cash balances and reserves. There are several reasons why cities
must carry adequate reserves and cash balances.
First, cities need substantial cash balances at the beginning of
their fiscal year to finance their expenditures for the first six
months of the year. By statute, cities' fiscal year is on a
calendar year basis from January 1 through December 31. The major
sources of city revenue are property taxes and state aid.
Property tax payments are not made to cities until June and state
aid is not provided until late July- -six to seven months into the
city fiscal year. Without a substantial cash balance at the
beginning of the year, cities would not have funds to operate for
the first half of the fiscal year. The only alternate would be
for the city to engage in costly borrowing which is neither in the
taxpayers' nor the state's interest. The state auditor and city
auditing firms have suggested that to be prudent, cities should
carry an end -of- the -year dedicated cash balance sufficient to fund
city expenditures for the first half of the year.
Second, many cities, in order to save taxpayer dollars and avoid
paying costly debt interest, accumulate reserves for major capital
purchases and infrastructure. A common example is increasing
reserves to purchase an expensive fire engine or public works •
vehicle. In some cities, it may appear as if a city has a large
reserve compared to its annual expenditures, but in reality it is
"saving" for a major purchase and has minimal real cash reserves.
Because of the vast differences in the size of the 855 cities of
Minnesota and the various local preferences in financing
purchases, it would be bad public policy for the Legislature to
restrict or eliminate cities' abilities to accumulate reserve
-60-
funds.
Third, cities need some reserves to meet emergency g Y or
unanticipated expenditures created, for example, buy natural
disasters, lawsuits, and premature breakdown of vital equipment.
Finally, the bond rating firms require liquidity and ability to
pay debt in order to receive a favorable bond rating. Bond rating
firms scrutinize city reserve levels when rating bonds. The
better the bond rating, the lower the interest cost is to the
taxpayer.
VI -C SALES AND MOTOR VEHICLE EXCISE TAX EXTENSION. (LAC POLICY
RS -5)
THE LEAGUE OPPOSES FORCING LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO PAY THE SIX
PERCENT SALES AND MOTOR VEHICLE EXCISE TAX ON THEIR PURCHASES.
Forcing local governments to pay the state sales tax means one
level of government is taxing another. This increased sales tax
will directly result in increased local property taxes.
In 1987, the governor proposed extending the six percent sales and
motor vehicle excise tax to purchases made by cities and other
local government units. While rejecting the sales tax proposal,
the Legislature did accept the motor vehicle excise tax plan,
effective with city purchases of vehicles made after May 31,
1987. This excise tax, however, does not apply to public safety
vehicles.
VI -D STATE ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS. (IMC POLICY RS -6)
THE LEAGUE STRONGLY OPPOSES DEDUCTING STATE ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS
FROM FUNDS APPROPRIATED FOR PROPERTY TAX RELIEF. IN ADDITION, IF
A STATE AGENCY IS REQUIRED TO RECOVER COSTS THROUGH A STATE
CHARGE -BACK FOR SERVICES TO LOCAL UNITS, THEN DURING
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS THE STATE SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO JUSTIFY
THEIR CHARGES ON THE BASIS OF THE SERVICES PROVIDED TO THE
INDIVIDUAL LOCAL UNITS.
All state government costs should be subject to the standard
appropriation review process and be funded directly by specific
state appropriation, not by a broad deduction from property tax
relief programs. While decisions on the necessary staffing and
funding levels for state agencies are made by the appropriations
committees, tax policy decisions should be handled by the tax
committees.
When state administrative costs are financed through the local
government aid (LGA) appropriation, funds available for property
tax relief are reduced, defeating the purpose of LGA. In 1990,
such state costs included the unprecedented large sum of $460,000
-61-
to fund the state auditor's office and certain department of
administration functions related to local government. In the case
of the state auditor's office, earmarked deductions from LGA are
being used to finance over 40 percent of the auditor's
state - appropriated budget, an inappropriate action in the League's
opinion.
Furthermore, LGA funds are being used to finance auditor and
department of administration operations which do not relate to
cities, but to all local ,governments -- counties, school districts,
and townships. The LGA program is largely designed for and used
by cities. Other state programs -- county income disparity aids,
school aids -- largely benefit other units of local government. the
League believes it is wholly inappropriate and unfair to almost
exclusively tap city funds for programs which relate to all units
of local government.
In order to promote a cohesive and coordinated state tax policy
and provide for adequate review of proposed state agency costs, it
is recommended that no state agency's administrative costs be
deducted from property tax relief funds. This will allow the tax
committees to fully determine the level of property tax relief to
be provided.
VI -E COMPARALE WORTH. (IMC POLICY GLP -5)
THE LEAGUE SUPPORTS EFFORTS TO ELIMINATE ANY SEX -BASED DIFFERENCES
IN COMPENSATION OF PUBLIC EMPLOYEES AND ASKS THE LEGISLATURE TO
REFRAIN FROM FURTHER AMENDING CURRENT LAW UNTIL THE LEGISLATURE
EVALUATES IMPLEMENTATION REPORTS IN 1992.
THE LEAGUE SUPPORTS PROVIDING FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO CITIES IN
THE FORM OF A SPECIAL LEVY OR PERMANENT LEVY BASE ADJUSTMENT FOR
EQUITY ADJUSTMENTS OR A LIMIT ON THE AMOUNT OF EQUITY ADJUSTMENTS
WHICH A LOCAL GOVERNMENT MUST MARE IN ANY YEAR. Following a
review of implementation reports, the legislature should exempt
from the law those employers for which a job evaluation system
proves unworkable, such as those with too few employees or too
many single incumbent job positions.
The 1990 legislature enacted significant amendments to the state's
comparable worth legislation. Many local governments will incur
substantial costs in adjusting their implementation programs. As
a result of the changes, some cities may not finish implementation ' s`
by the December 1991 deadline. Further changes only months prior
to the deadline would be irresponsible. Following the deadline,
the legislature should evaluate the implementation reports and
consider options for providing financial assistance to those
jurisdictions still deemed out of compliance with legislative
goals.
-62-
VI -F LIQUOR ISSUES. (LMC POLICY GLP -7)
THE LEAGUE OPPOSES THE ESTABLISHMENT OF ONE CLASS OF BEER AND THE
OFF -SALE OF WINE IN OTHER THAN LIQUOR STORES, but supports
greater local authority regarding hours of sale and license fees.
• The establishment of one class of beer in Minnesota would cause
substantial problems in controlling the sale of beer in filling
stations, grocery stores, drug stores, and elsewhere where 3.2
• beer is sold. Also, with regard to a proposal for only one class
of beer in Minnesota, current 3.2 on -sale establishments could be
selling strong beer without the supervision and controls imposed
upon on -sale liquor establishments and municipal liquor stores, or
would be forced to meet most if not all the restrictions on
intoxicating liquor establishments.
Cities should be authorized by law to extend drinking hours from
1:00 to 2:00 a.m. and be authorized to charge a special license
fee for this privilege.
VI -G ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITIES. (LMC POLICY)
The AMM believes that cities should have equal development
authority and powers.
THE AMM SUPPORTS LEGISLATION WHICH WOULD PROVIDE CITY ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITIES WITH THE SAME POWER AND AUTHORITY AS
CERTAIN CITIES HAVE BEEN GRANTED IN SPECIAL PORT AUTHORITY ACTS.
VI -H MUNICIPAL SERVICE DISTRICTS. (LMC POLICY)
Many court decisions relative to special assessments have made it
extremely difficult for cities to use special assessments to finance
public services and improvements. The Minnesota Supreme Court has
interpreted the State Constitution to require not only that a
special assessment project specially benefit affected parcels of
property but also that the city be able to prove that the market
value of a property will increase in direct relation to the amount
of the special assessment applied to that property. Also cities'
ability to finance annual operating and maintenance costs of some
services to property through the use of special service changes is
either unclear or non - existent under current law. The only current
financing alternative to special assessments or services charges is the general property tax. But it may not be desireable to use the
general property tax to finance some capital or operating expense
for various reasons.
THE AMM SUPPORTS LEGISLATION WHICH WOULD ALLOW CITIES TO CREATE
MUNICIPAL SERVICE DISTRICTS. CITIES SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO FINANCE
THE TYPE OF IMPROVEMENTS LISTED IN M.S. 429.021 (RELATING TO THE
CONSTRUCTION, REPLACEMENT, AND MAINTENANCE OF SUCH THINGS AS
-63-
STREETS, SIDEWALKS, GUTTERS, STORM AND SANITARY SEWERS, WATERWORKS
SYSTEMS, STREET LIGHTS, AND PUBLIC MALLS, PARKING, OR COURTYARDS).
BOTH SERVICE CHARGES AND AD VALOREM PROPERTY TAXES SHOULD BE
AVAILABLE TO FINANCE SERVICES OR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS IN THE
DISTRICT.
VI -I HAZARDOUS SITE CLEAN -UP AND REDEVELOPMENT. (LMC POLICY)
Minnesota Cities have difficulty in redeveloping sites that
require clean up of chemical contamination. The inability to '
clean up and redevelop contaminated sites has significant negative
effects on the area in which the sites are located and has broad
implications for general public health and safety. The State and
Federal Superfund is limited, recent changes to the tax increment
law make it even less 'likely that money generated from a
"hazardous substance subdistrict" will be sufficient and many
other impediments exist to redevelopment of these contaminated
sites. Mechanisms for the treatment and redevelopment of affected
sites must be implemented.
THE ASSOCIATION OF METROPOLITAN MUNICIPALITIES SUPPORTS
LEGISLATION WHICH WOULD ACCOMPLISH THE FOLLOWING:
(1) PROVIDE FOR A STATE -WIDE REVOLVING LOAN FUND TO HELP CITIES
FINANCE CLEAN -UP COSTS WHEN SUPERFUND MONEY IS NOT
IMMEDIATELY AVAILABLE, REIMBURSEMENT FROM "HAZARDOUS
SUBSTANCE SUBDISTRICTS" IN "TAX INCREMENT DISTRICTS" IS NOT
SUFFICIENT, AND DEVELOPMENT POSSIBILITIES EXIST; AND
(2) GIVE MUNICIPALITIES ACCESS TO A SITE FOR TESTING PURPOSES
BEFORE COMMENCING A FORMAL EMINENT DOMAIN ACTION; AND
(3) IN AN EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEEDING COMMENCED BY A MUNICIPALITY,
TO ALLOW FOR A REDUCTION IN THE COMMISSIONER'S AWARD FOR THE
ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF POLLUTION CLEAN -UP COSTS IF KNOWN: AND
IF THE ESTIMATED POLLUTION CLEAN -UP COSTS ARE NOT KNOWN, TO
ALLOW THE MUNICIPALITY TO TAKE THE PROPERTY WHILE RETAINING
THE RIGHT TO RECOVER POLLUTION CLEAN -UP COSTS FROM THE OWNER;
AND
(4) AMEND THE MINNESOTA ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE AND LIABILITY ACT,
MINN. STAT. CH. 115B TO EXCLUDE MUNICIPALITIES AND OTHER
PUBLIC BODIES FROM LIABILITY FOR RESPONSE COSTS AND DAMAGES
ARISING IN CONNECTION WITH THE RELEASE OR THREATENED RELEASE
OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES.
VI -J TOLLWAY AUTHORIZATION. (LMC POLICY)
THE LEAGUE SUPPORTS OPPORTUNITIES FOR ALTERNATIVE FINANCING FOR
LOCAL TRANSPORTATION NEEDS INCLUDING THE OPTION OF LOCAL AUTHORITY
FOR TOLL FACILITIES. Cities should be given the flexibility
-64-
I
necessary to finance future needs through public, private, or joint
agreements.
VI -R ROAD ACCESS CHARGE. (LMC POLICY)
THE LEGISLATURE SHOULD AUTHORIZE CITIES TO ESTABLISH, AT THEIR
OPTION, ROAD ACCESS CHARGES FOR NEW RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, AND
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT. Growing communities are finding it
increasingly difficult to finance construction of facilities
needed for new residential, commercial, and industrial
development. Assessments on developing property for sewers and
streets which directly benefit the property are the most common
available legal option.
Often, however, there are major streets leading to new
development that need to be constructed. Under current law, only
the abutting benefitted property can be specially assessed, and
then only for the degree of benefit. This is generally inadequate
to pay for the roadway upgrades which are necessary to serve
larger populations. Cities should be allowed to levy such charges
on an area or per lot basis at the time subdivisions are approved,
(similar to park dedication fees), or on existing open lots when a
building permit is issued. For other services, the Legislature
has recognized similar problems and authorized charges to provide
facilities which do not directly abut the affected property. Two
such instances are park dedication fees and sewer availability
charges.
t�
1
-65-
Nj
t�
0 V-1 7 7
1 Cohqn l
o u nc re r
r v
r -,2diar, Ccu nc i i s e nbe r
1 1 'Fcctt, 1--c,,•-in,- 4 member
- - STxtcn, - hai -rsol)
'rock iv Cent Charter
'A
T -- c p o e d Chan-, s o S4- c t c. n 7
Y -harter
This memc is to acdvise you That + h e- cn Se 2� aQ
p vacancies n the
unai a�prc wor chan -�e c
Cc)' rn re CJ' t �7 C. r� a r t e r wrordinq for _p i
e 1
nc i osed,
-n SILIM-Marv, --asons - t wordi,—, C",.an'r
e s a re 7,
-or more si:)ec d 4
—or- as to how a cou nc v ac a nc 7 7 w c u I d r, e s d.
+ 11 - Fac' - t`
7' o s s i - c n f p- i t mo d. i I i c: a t Ji c n s e r e z ligh� o-
council member and mavor terms are now lour years, - i"herefore, i t i S
t 1
- or o--oseu . t -tit i-n th;- case ol a vacaf. tirm of off ;ce being 'Less han 6,
days, the Cit? I 11 ar PC i n t r. the case of a vacated term of
Caunc wj
OfT ice being 365 days or incre, a = - pecial e lection shall be held. The
wordi- regarding tne timin; of the sr- election has been also been
modified to allow Sufficient f il i n g 4- 4 Me
Pursuart to Hinnesota Sta 4 10. 1 .2 `ubdivision 7, the Erocklyn Center
Charter Co.mmission reco=uends the adoiD by ordinance of the attached
proposed amendmen't t o The Brook &�n�-er
L City Charter.
cb
tnc
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the day
of , 19 at p.m. at City Hall, 6301 Shingle
Creek Parkway, to consider An Ordinance Amending Chapter 2 of the Brooklyn
Center City Charter Regarding Vacancies in the Council.
Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request at least 96
hours in advance. Please contact the Personnel Coordinator at 569 -3300 to make
arrangements.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 2 OF THE BROOKLYN CENTER CITY CHARTER
REGARDING VACANCIES IN THE COUNCIL
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Section 2.05 of the Brooklyn Center City Charter is hereby
amended as follows:
Section 2.05. VACANCIES IN THE COUNCIL [The office of Mayor or Council
member shall become vacant upon death, resignation, removal from office in
any manner authorized by law or forfeiture of the office.] When, for any
reason, a vacancy should occur in the City Council or office of Mayor, the
City Council must publically declare such vacancy within ten days of its
occurrence. The Mayor or Council member shall forfeit the office for (1)
lack at any time during the term of office of any qualification for the
office prescribed by this charter or by law, (2) violation of any express
prohibition of this charter, (3) conviction of a crime involving moral
turpitude, [or] (4) failure to attend three consecutive regular meetings of
the Council without being excused by the Council(.) or (5) departure of
residence from the City [A vacancy in the Council shall be filled
temporarily by the Council and then by the voters for the remainder of the
term at the next regular election unless that election occurs within one
hundred (100) days from the occurrence of the vacancy, this period being
necessary to allow time for candidates to file. The Council by a majority
vote of all its remaining members shall appoint a qualified person to fill
the vacancy until the person elected to serve the remainder of the
unexpired term takes office. If the Council fails to fill a vacancy within
thirty (30) days, the City Clerk shall call a special election to fill the
vacancy. The election will be held not sooner than ninety (90) days and
not later than one hundred twenty (120) days following the occurrence of
the vacancy and to be otherwise governed by the provisions of Section 4.03,
special elections. The quorum of the Council consists of three (3)
members; if at any time the membership of the Council is reduced to less
than three (3), the remaining members may by unanimous action appoint
additional members to raise the membership to three (3).]
ORDINANCE NO.
Section 2.05A. PROCEDURE TO FILL COUNCIL VACANCIES If the remaining term
of office created by a vacancy is less than three hundred sixty -five (365)
_days. the Council shall within 30 days fill such vacancy, or vacancies
for this period by appointing a person or persons who must meet all the
qualifications of this charter. If the Council fails to fill a vacancy, or
vacancies. within thirty (30) days of it becoming vacant the City Clerk
shall call a special election without a primary to fill the vacancy or
vacancies. The special election is to be held no sooner than one hundred
(100) days and not later than one hundred thirty (130) days following the
occurrence of the vacancy or vacancies and to be otherwise governed by the
Provisions of Section 4.03, Special Elections
In case of a vacancy where there remains three hundred sixty -five (365)
days or more a special election shall be called The City Clerk shall
call a special election without a primary to fill the vacancy. The special
election is to be held no sooner than one hundred (100) days and no later
than one hundred thin 130 days following the occurrence of the vacanc_
Y ( ) Y g y
and to be otherwise governed by the provisions of Section 4.03, Special
Elections.
When a vacancy in an elected municipal office occurs within one hundred
thirty (130) days prior to a regular municipal election date the special
election to fill the vacancy shall coincide with the regular election
The _quorum of the Council consists of three (3) members if at any time the
membership of the Council is reduced to less than three (3) the remaining
members shall by their unanimous action appoint additional members to raise
the _membership to a minimum of three (3) Consideration is to be given to
former council members mayors or present and past city commissioners
All appointed members shall serve until a special election or a regular
election is held.
Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after publication and
ninety (90) days following its adoption.
Adopted this day of 19
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Date of Publication
Effective Date
(Brackets indicate matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter.)
T `0: S
o Le n, nc i I me , Tilbem r
h i 11 C ,
Tcdd� rat.,; !_s On u 1. c
- • I ae 7 b
Terr- Pedl ar, cu n, c i me m'- e r
Celia _Scott,
_"�ar-_-ra Se-l'ton, Chairr.er-_�On
Cent
_hart 2r
DATE: j
Frcpos�ed Changes +,c) Sect ion
-er
m L=, i acllvise voti -n h) a a r - Cc�
c iSS 1Op I C T I u D e, r
- ormved wordin.zr charg.e-_
aD C 12 .! j.
Yf
— eetin2 of the
C i t v Ch art e r. The vc� on t'n
cri er a me r, t -_�ras .3 Fro 7'.:__
wor' 4 -S encco=er'l'.
reasor. For --ais, prc v Co won't have
7c lrneq on
rp e
aa ll or e i v r 4 u as . 3�
ar i n in - rh-_ of-
to 7, HnIlesota S
atu �le:_-
Cha—er Commission r the a c-tiCn, bv 0 n a n e , or the attached
,)ro�_,ased amendment - -c Erco—l-vil v r
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the day
of , 19 at p.m. at City Hall, 6301 Shingle
Creek Parkway, to consider An Ordinance Amending Chapter 3 of the Brooklyn
Center City Charter Regarding Council Meetings.
Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request at least 96
hours in advance. Please contact the Personnel Coordinator at 569 -3300 to make
arrangements.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 3 OF THE BROOKLYN CENTER CITY CHARTER
REGARDING COUNCIL MEETINGS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Section 3.01 of the Brooklyn Center City Charter is hereby
amended as follows:
Section 3.01. COUNCIL MEETINGS. [On the first business day of
January following a regular municipal election, the Council shall meet
at the usual place and time for the holding of council meetings.] The
City Council shall hold regular meetings at such time and place as
they, by motion, shall determine Elected officers provided for by
this Charter shall be sworn in and assume the duties of the office to
which they were elected at the first council meeting in January
following such election or as soon thereafter as practical on or
before the first regularly scheduled council meeting [At this time,
the newly elected members of the Council shall assume their duties.
Thereafter, the Council shall meet at such times each month as may be
prescribed by ordinance or resolution.] The Mayor or any two members
of the Council may call special meetings of the Council upon at least
twenty -four (24) hours' written notice to each member of the Council.
Such notice shall be delivered personally to each member or shall be
left at his/her usual place of residence with some responsible person.
All meetings of the Council shall be _in compliance with the Minnesota
Open Meeting Law, and any records thereof shall be made available at
all reasonable times.
Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after publication and
ninety (90) days following its adoption.
Adopted this day of 19
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
ORDINANCE NO.
Date of Publication
Effective Date
(Brackets indicate matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter.)
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Council Meeting Date 10/29/90
Agenda Item Number
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
ITEM DESCRIPTION:
1991 Association of Metropolitan Municipalities Policies and Legislative Proposals
*********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
DEPT. APPROVAL:
Signature - title
MANAGER'S REVIEW /RECOMMENDATION: F
No comments to supplement this report Comments below /attached.
*********************************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
SUMMARY EXPLANATION: (supplemental sheets attached
In your agenda materials, you will find a copy of the 1991 AMM Proposed Policies and Legislative
Proposals.
This rather extensive document represents the proposed policies and legislative proposals which the
AMM will be working with during the upcoming legislative session. The communication from
President Larry Bakken requests the various City members of AMM to assist the Board in developing
priorities with regard to these policies and legislative proposals. Please review these policy proposals
and decide whether to individually express your priorities or jointly express them at our Council
meeting Monday night.
I would like to particularly call to your attention the proposed policy on page 58 of this document.
This particular policy 0 -3 transportation tax states the AMM should support a metropolitan tax for
metropolitan transportation needs. The Council may want to request a modification of this policy and
add to transportation needs the needs for housing and infrastructure replacement.
RECOMMENDATION:
Decide whether to express your priority preference by individual or as the City Council. You should
also pass on to the AMM by motion any comments on these policies.
Licenses to be approved by the City Council on October 29, 1990: t �
AMUSEMENT DEVICE - VENDOR
Mark John Haider 3630 Admiral Lane
Chief of Police
CHRISTMAS TREE SALES LOT
P.Q.T. Company 4007 58th Ave. N.
Weber's Greenhouse 5040 Brooklyn Blvd.
P.Q.T. Company 4007 58th Ave. N.
Jerry's NewMarket 5801 Xerxes Ave. N.
City Clerk
COMMERCIAL KENNEL
Wonderful World of Pets 1269 Brookdale Center ,mil
Sanitarian�<
ITINERANT FOOD ESTABLISHMENT
Brooklyn Center Lioness 6500 Humboldt Ave. N.
Brooklyn Harmonettes 6155 Earle Brown Dr.
Willow Lane Elementary School 7020 Perry Ave. N.
Sanitarian !`^
MECHANICAL SYSTEMS
Minndak Mechanical 14918 200th Ave. NW
Building Official
RENTAL DWELLINGS
Initial:
Manfred & Sandra Bergstrom 5328 Emerson Ave. N.
Melvin & Mildred Jampsa 5619 Hillsview Road
Paula Brodin 1600 55th Ave. N.
Renewal:
Maranatha Place 5415 69th Ave. N.
Twin Lake North Apartments 4500 -4590 58th Ave. N.
Victoria Townhouses 6740 -6861 Grimes Place
Eugene J. Sullivan 5329, 33 Brooklyn Blvd.
Randall B. Cook 5347 Brooklyn Blvd.
Roland Scherber 5243 Ewing Ave. N.
Daniel & Georgette Kitchin 5601 Logan Ave. N.
Mr. and Mrs. John Schroeder 5312 Oliver Ave. N.
Savage II /Portfolio Properties 5300 -5322 Ponds Drive
Savage II /Portfolio Properties 5301 -5315 Ponds Drive
Savage II /Portfolio Properties 5319 -5333 Ponds Drive
Savage II /Portfolio Properties 5400 -5422 Ponds Drive
Savage II /Portfolio Properties 5401 -5423 Ponds Drive
Savage II /Portfolio Properties 5426 -5448 Ponds Drive
Savage II /Portfolio Properties 5427 -5441 Ponds Drive
Duane & Jenny Christiansen 5400 Sailor Lane
Savage II /Portfolio Properties 7225 -7247 Unity Ave. N.
Savage II /Portfolio Properties 7240 -7254 Unity Ave. N.
Savage II /Portfolio Properties 7251 -7273 Unity Ave. N.
Savage II /Portfolio Properties 7260 -7274 Unity Ave. N. /
Richard R. Dawson 3955 69th Ave. N.
Director of Planning
and Inspection f
GENERAL APPROVAL: ' ' ' ' 2
D. K. Weeks, City Clerk