11/18/1996 CONF MTG - 4868�
�
CffY OF
FRIDLEY
CITY COUNCIL CONFERENCE MEETING
NOVEMBER 18, 1996 - 7:30 P.M.
CONFERENCE ROOM A (UPPER LEVEL)
1. M�S Staffing Options.
2. Housing Maintenance Code and
Point-of-Sale Program.
3. CDBG Funding Guidelines.
4. Annexation of Lot 16, Revised Auditor's
Subdivision 103, Coon Ra.pids.
5. Designation of Truck Routes.
6. Tobacco Ordinance Update.
7. CEC Fundraising Committee.
8. Other.
+ Y
�
�
CffY OF
FRIDLEY
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
William W. Burns
MEMORANDIIM CityManager
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
William W. Burns, City Manager �
�
November 15, 1996
SUBJECT: MIS Staffing Options
I have reviewed the attached memorandum from Rick Pribyl. After reviewing his
memorandum, I believe that we need to consider a fourth option. I have asked Rick to
evaluate the possibility of an Option C with a very high powered computer specialist. I
would tend to call this the "High Powered C" versus the e�cisting "Low Powered C." Rick
and I will be working on Monday to elaborate on this option and will have the results
available on Monday evening.
1�.�rh�I:3i�
Attachment
� I
TO: WILLIAM W. BURNS, CITYMANAGER ��V �°
FROM.• RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR
SUBJECT.• MIS STAFFING OPTIONS
DATE: November 1 S, 1996
Per your instructions I have analyzed the options that the city has in regards to staffing the
MIS Division. These options have been reviewed and substantiated by a number of
consulting groups that specialize in information technologies.
�t�ckurau���l
We have attempted to quantify services and costs of information technologies that we
need to maintain current and future information infrastructure. At the time Dawn
submitted her resignation we were in the process of :
• Upgrading to the Windows 95 Operating System on all upper end P.C.'s.
• Implementing the Client - Server Software on The AS400.
• Converting from WordperfectlLotus to Microsoft Office.
• Moving to Micro-Soft Exchange (E-Mail, Scheduling, Calendaring, Internet Access).
• Reviewing re-wiring options.
• Converting the Special Assessment System to the AS400
• Modifying the Security System on the AS400
With the loss of the MI5 Department, we do not have appropriate direction or time to
keep the above projects on track, and as such, the projects have been put on hold. At
least one of these projects involves the interest of Council since it would provide the city
with an excellent e-mail system that could have an internet connection. We were in the
process of making the move to a server based office e-mail system when the MIS
personnel left.
At this time it is difficult to identify ezactiv what contractual requirements are needed to
complete each of the conversions stated above and what the expenses might be related to
staff down time if not done properly. Each option that utilizes outsourcing should
consider the added cost of staff down time since computer down time relates to
unproductive staff time .
MIS STAFFING(Continue�
�rri� Bxu�stsfiu��K
In addition to the difficulty of identifyin� contract prices on technology that changes daily,
we need to discuss the expectations of the level of support. There are three levels of
support that can be expected when talking about technical computer support:
• In-House Computer Support
• Contractual maintenance - 0 to 6 Hours
• Time and materials maintenance - 0 to 48 Hours
A. In-house Computer Support - This is the level of service that the City of Fridley has
had and become accustomed to since 1984 when the City left the LOGIS organization.
Since that time we had three full-time employees providing support:
1. MIS Technician - This position is what is called a level 2 MIS position that has the
supervisory responsibility for an MIS Dept. and jurisdictional planning responsibilities.
2. MIS Specialist - This position would be a level 3 position that deals more with special
programming tasks and support of specific equipment such as networks.
3. Computer Information Specialist (position eliminated in 1995)- This position
provided application and P.C. support.
The support provided by the remaining two positions can be broken down into three major
areas:
Normal Daily Support - Backups, correcting printer problems, correcting network
problems, diagnosing Mini-Computer, File-Server, Telephone System, Voice Mail,
Personal Computer Problems. Doing routine maintenance on all of the above.
Reviewing disk utilization and providing required disk maintenance. Provide support
to restore data on P.C.'s that have hardware failures. This activity at times has proven
to be almost endless, since it is the employees that tend to define the daily tasks for
MIS based on daily problems. This person also handles maintaining a11 supplies related
to computers.
2. Upgrade Paths (Hardware, Software, Communications) - Installing various upgrades
to all of the computers. On the Mini-Computer they have installed numerous upgrades
to a11 of the software that is outlined on Ezhibit A. The P.C.'s have recently
consumed great amounts of staff time related to the upgrade to windows 95, Office
and Microsoft Exchange and their connectivity issues to the AS400. The current
project of installing the File Server and communications across the old category 3
wiring has also caused difficult problems. It seems that any upgrade to any platform
tends to cause problems at another level on some other piece of hardware.
MIS STAFFING(Continuet�
3. Planning (Research and Development) - This is area is also very strategic to the
longer term goals and cost impacts to the City. To provide the most cost-effective
upgrade paths to new technology is of primary importance to the City and it is
extremely beneficial to have someone on staff that knows all of our systems and work
flow in order to propose work saving technologies. Examples of this is the new
soflware that has yet to be installed, called Microsoft exchange that provides e-mail,
city calendaring, and probably city wide fax capability. To provide guidance for this
installation is done only by knowing the system and its limitations. Our staff has
provided this type of system implementation with limited outside assistance.
The MIS Division has provided both staff support and direction to the MIS committee.
The committee was responsible for the development of the City's 5 Year MIS Plan.
This staffing level was justified through a very complex cost analysis back in 1984 when it
was deternuned that is was much more cost effective to leave the LOGIS organizaxion and
provide in house information systems.
This type of computer support provides the quickest response time to service staii
requests. The in-house solution can be done one of two ways.
1. The City can replace the existing authorized positions and continue with the past
method of in-house support.
2. The City can out-source staff people as explained in Option A.
Both of these options should provide for the best option for support. Theoretically the
outsourcing option, although more expensive would provide for the best support option,
since a company resource stands behind a in-house staff person.
B. Contractual Maintenance - Contractual Maintenance relies on outsourcing as much
support as possible. The misconception about this type of support is that it happens
without inside staffing. Contractual maintenance will still require in house personnel. We
will need to have someone here on-staffthat has the ability to diagnose various problems
and handle the variety of questions that continually bombard US personnel. In this case
maintenance agreements are the major source of support. This type of support will
provide a degraded level of support as compared to what this City has been accustomed to
since there will be a response lag time.
MIS STAFFING(Continue�
C. Time and Materials Maintenance - In this particular case Contractual Maintenance
is used but not through maintenance agreements. In most cases maintenance agreements
are not used, but instead the City would pay for all time and materials used to restore
computers systems. Also in this case, some type of employee would be required to be
responsible for diagnosis and support of equipment and personnel. This type of support
would be the slowest since, without maintenance agreements, this City would receive
repair services after all other contractual maintenance support ca11s had been responded to
by the support company.
I have provided the reasonable options for the City of Fridley. I have ruled out a
complete outsourcing option with no replacement on any positions in the MIS area. My
basis for drawing this conclusion, is that we will require at a minimum one in-house
computer specialist to diagnose problems and provide routine maintenance on our existing
systems. To do anything less than this will cause some major problems in the future that I
feel could result in potential lost data, hardware problems, and potential public relations
problems. It should also be noted that Option C would materially reduce support to
all systems since the majority of support would be coming from fragmented support
of specialized service contracts.
�1/�� �Ct��ff'i���� Alrcr��s�ti�eK
�fptiu�� A
Complete Outsource Option(See Exhibit B}
A. Full Time on Site Contract US consultant(40 hours per week)
B. Full Hardware and Software Maintenance Contracts
C. Contract for on-going technical consulting
D. Contract for annual 3 year US plan
Nptia��� �!
In House Technical Support (See Exhibit C� With limited maintenance contracts
A. Two full-time IS employees
B. Limited Hardware and Software Maintenance
���tiw�� C
Limited In House Technical Support with Outsourcing (See Exhibit D)
A. One full-tim� IS employee
B. Hardware and Software Maintenance Contracts
C. Contract for on-going technical consulting
D. Contract for annual 3 year US plan
MIS STAFFING(Continue�
The contracting option should be analyzed and approached very carefully. It should be
recognized that there could be a change in the amount of time required to respond to
assistance requests compared to the past response with in house staff. It has been tried by
a number of governmental units and has been unpopular according to a survey taken by
the ICMA in 1994. This survey found that only 3% of those responding to the survey
were outsourcing these activities. ICMA also stated that they felt this type of outsourcing
would not become a major trend in the future because of the comple�ty of many of the
computer environments. One example of problems with outsourcing was the City of
Minneapolis and the utility billing problem they had a few years ago. They had apparently
outsourced a majority of their system development and maintenance with the end result
being a major embarrassment newsworthy enough to appear in both the Minneapolis and
St. Paul papers.
EXffiBIT B
Aaria�� �
COMPLETE OUTSOURCING OPTION
(No City Employees Rehired)
REQUIREMENTS:
40 Hour per week in house support
IS Plstnning Document
Outs�rcing RFP
Service Contracts:
Meridinu SL-1 Phone System
Centigram Voice Mxil System
Network Tec6rtical Support
HP File Server Main� Contract
AS400 Maint Contract
Total Cost
5100,000
$ 1,000
$12,000
S 8,000
$ 1,S(10
$10,000
$ 1,000
$ 5.000
$138500
Under this Opdon the City would not rehire any City employees but would instead contract with a
computer support company to place a 40 hour per week consultant within the MIS area. This company
would then:
1. Be responsible for all operadons of in-house computer systems. This includes the hardware
maintenance on the IBM AS400 mini computer, TI990 mini-computer, HP File server, and all personal
computers(includes all backups, prevendve maintenance, system resource planning and token-ring
network management).
2. Be responsible for implementing the information technology as directed by the city information
systems committee and for assembling planning dociunents developed by the committee.
3. Provide hardware and software support for all departments
4. Coordinate all training for packaged sofiware
5. Coordinate development of 5 Year Informadon Technology document between the IS Committee
and the Planning Consultant to met budget timelines
6. Responsible for contacting the appropriate vendors for repair and maintenance of the telephone and
voice mail system.
Pro - Theoretically this option should generate a higher level of service for the City, It brings the
resources of an entire company to the support of the city through the on site representative.
The City of Fridley would not be responsible for normal human resources issues including replacement of
the on-site person if that person chooses to resign. AIl recruiting and associated costs should be the
responsibility of the vendor.
Con - This option will result in a higher cost to the City. It will also require an additional cost for a
consultant to work with staff to produce an RFP and competitively bid the project.
EXHIBIT C
q��ri��v u
In-House Technical Support - With limited maintenance agreements
(Two City Employees Rehired)
REQUIREMENTS:
Comparable positions rehired
Range 6 Eaempt Position
Grade G Non-Ezempt Position
Benefits(estima.te)
Total
Training $
Meridian SL-1 Support*
Centigram Voice Mail*
Network Technical Support
HP File Server Maint. Contract
AS400 Hardware Maint.
$42,500.00 (Step 3)
30,308.16
?Z,808.16
15.000.00
$87.808.16
6,000.00
4,000.00
1,500.00
7,500.00
1,000.00
5,000.00
26,000.00
Estimate of Total Cost S 113.808.16
*Time, materials and training during
learning curve period
Under this Option the City would rehire the same positions that were recently vacated by Char and
Dawn. You should be aware that because we have lost two employees that were with the city for
an extended period of time we will be saving approximately $15,000 in the first year if we are able
to attract qualified candidates at the entry range of the cunent rate of pay for the two positions.
The responsibilities of the two positions would be the same as in the past and as defined in the
respective position descriptions. In summary they would provide in house support for a11 activities
shown on Eghibit A.
Pr0 - This option provides the same leve! of response to the City as has been provided in the past
after the appropriate learning curves and training.
This option will be less expensive than the out-sourcing option
COII - Under this option it may be difficult to maintain personnel in these positions for an
eartended period of time. The dollars we spend on training may be lost if attrition is high for these
two positions.
EXHIBIT D
u��ri��u C
Limited In-House Support with - Maintenance Agreements
(One City Employee Rehired,� Technician)
REQUIREMENTS:
Comparable positions rehired
Grade G Non-Eaempt Position S 30,308,16
Overtime $ 2,000,0(1
Ben�ts 6.600.0(1
Total $ 38 8.16
IS PlAnning Document 510,000.0(1
Meridian $L-1 Phone System 8,000.00
Ceetigram Voice Mail $ystem 1,500.00
Network Technicnl Support 20,000.00
HP File Server Maint Contract 5,000.00
Training g�ppp,pp
AS400 Support 15.000.0(1
$ 64 0.00
Estimate of Total Cost $103.408.16
Under this option the City would hire a person at the levei of the MIS Specialist. This person would
probably only have skills related to P.C.'s and limited exposure to file servers, they would not have the
necessary skills to provide direction within the A/5400 client server environment and probably not have
the skills related to assist in the internal development of the GIS system or any telephone system skills.
This position would have primary responsibility for determining where a problem exists and for
contacting a seivice provider to diagnose the problem and correct it. This person would be responsible
primarily for computer backups, and liaison to service providers. You should also be aware that the City
of Fridley will not have any day to day planning related to informadon technologies. The planning
activity will occur by engaging a consultant to provide the city with a study. There would be limited
planning ongoing through the US Committee since a computer specialist would not be available to provide
technical support to the decision making process that is on-going at each US meedng. Under this option
departments will tend to create redundancies and conflicts between departments since procedures and
policies for installadons, upgrades, and processes will not be as organized without proper MIS guidance.
The e�ct responsibilities for this posidon at this time has not been determined and thus a position
description is not available.
PCO - This solution would tend to be the most inexpensive in terms of dollars
COn - This solution will cause a major reduction in the level of service that the city will receive. It
should be noted that this solution will not provide the same response that the past solution has provid�d.
It will cause staff down time that should be considered a cost in relation to the overall soludon. The
employee hired under this soludon will not have the expertise to solve most of the issues, but will be able
to detemune in most cases where the problem area is and ca11 the appropriate consultant to respond to it.
This cost analysis does not take into account the cost of unproductive staff time awaidng soludons to
problems. This solution will also consume more of the Finance Directors time in regard to computer
related is�es.
MEMORANDUM
PLANNING DI'VISION
DATE: November 13, 1996
TO: William Burns, City Manager� `��
FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director
Grant Fernelius, Housing Coordinator
SUBJECT: Housing Maintenance Code and Point-of-Sale Program
Should the City pursue a housing maintenance code and a point-of-sale program? The
results of the survey recently given to Council members are unanimous that the City
should adopt both ordinances (a survey will be sent to Bob Barnette). Less clear,
however, is the level of regulation in each ordinance.
For example, two out of the four surveys indicated that the point-of-sale program shouid
be an "information only" ordinance, two said it should require correction of life/safety
hazards, and one said it should require total compliance. Further, there was no
consensus as to which model the housing maintenance code should be based on.
To clarify which direction the ordinances should take, interviews will be conducted with
staff members from other communities. An initial list of questions is attached. Should
there be additional issues that the Council would like us to investigate, we will certainly
include those in the interviews. A list of cities is also attached.
Recommendation
Unless otherwise directed, we will continue to research the different models of housing
maintenance codes and point-of-sale programs and return to the Council with
additional information about each type of ordinance. It is anticipated that the interviews
and additional research should be completed by the end of the year and could be
presen#ed at a Council meeting in January.
BD:Is M-96-527
Housinp Code SurveY
1. Would you support doption of a Housin Mainte ance Code?
�\ �t.�.C�.(,�,�t �-.' `�1�� j � 1/'�%� t�.�.����s� �t �Ce��
� Yes � s .� � � S °fuY` 3 'i'-�`�'�..
� No � � �"-�-°Y� t.�JE �..�,��,t tac.-- ��� �� �
?��i.. ��.�`�J °tti �.l�f.�. i r i c.+t.. 1^'� � r�,P.:4,.. �, , ',v
\.-°"/ � l "�"� C� [/`v� '•
2. If you support an rdinance, which mo�ould you support?
! Adopt a F�idley specific code ���- ���}g�^�
Model after another City
�Adopt Uniform Housing Code �. ��t ; �,-� 5�.� � �'7��
Wait for State of Minnesot to Adopt a cod, `
_,,L.._.�r�� 1����i � �,�e� �-ur�a..:Q� ���:�` ��.���_ � U
3. What should the maintenance code cover?
� All residential property (including rental)
Owner-occupied residential property only
4. Would you support adoption of a Point-of-Sale program in Fridley?
� Yes
No
5. If you support an ordina�ce, which model would you support?
_�Information Only
_�Identify and Correct Life / Safety Hazards
�_Total Code Compliance
INTERVIEW QUESTIONS
REGARDING
HOUSING MAINTENANCE CODE AND
POINT-OF-SALE PROGRAM
Citv of Fridlev Staff Research Prior to Interviews
Fridley staff will compare in detail the City's existing codes with the Uniform Housing
Code, the Building Officials and Code Administrators National Property Code, and
other communities' housing maintenance codes. Other communities' point-of-sale
c�des will also be evaluated. A matrix will be developed comparing the advantages
and disadvantages of each ordinance, what areas of a structure does the ordinance
regutate, and what enforcement procedures are in place to enforce the code.
Housing Maintenance Code Questions
1. How does the City define "success"?
2. How many complaints are received per year? How are complaints tracked and how
are changes in housing conditions tracked? Describe/provide statistics regarding
the type of complaints.
3. In what ways are multiple family properties treated differently or the same as owner-
occupied properties?
4. What type of professional qualifications do the housing inspectors have?
5. How many hours per week are spent on enforcing the housing maintenance code?
How many staff people are assigned to enforcing the ordinance?
6. What process was used to adopt the housing maintenance code?
7. What does the City feel is the best combination of ordinances to preserve and
upgrade housing stock: housing maintenance code and information only point-of-
sale program, housing maintenance code and correct life safety hazards, or housing
maintenance code and require total compliance?
8. What changes should be made to the ordinance?
9. Has there been a legal challenge to the ordinance? If so, describe how it was
resolved. How many cases have been prosecuted?
10. How are interior violations handled?
Interview Questions
Page 2
Point-of-Sale Program
Is the ordinance "successful"? Define success.
What process was used to adopt the point-of-sale program? When were area realtors
brought into the process? How were residents informed about the ordinance?
What are typical violations that are seen as a result of the program?
What qualifications are required of the truth-in-sale inspectors? Are they licensed by
the City on an annual basis?
If corrections need to be made prior to sale, who is responsible for enforcement and
how is compliance tracked?
How was the program advertised after ordinance adoption?
How many staff hours/weeks of time are spent in enforcing the ordinance? How many
staff people are affected by the ordinance?
What changes should be made to the ordinance?
Has there been a legal challenge to the ordinance? If so, describe how it was
resolved. How many cases have been prosecuted?
Others�
Cities to Interview
Minneapolis
St. Louis Park
Bloomington
Richfield
Crystal
Maplewood
St. Paul
Hopkins
Columbia Heights
MEMORANDUM
DEVELOPI�ZENT DIRECTOR
DATE: October 24, 1996
TO: Wiliiam W. Bums, City Manager
FROM: �'�Barbara Dacy, Community Development Directo�
Grant Fe�nelius, Housing Coordinator
SUBJECT: Survey Regarding.Poin#-of-Sate and Housing Maintenance
Codes fior Single Family Homes_
Introduction
Over the last several years more and more suburba� communities are adop#ing
ordinances which require the inspedion of single family homes priot' to transfer
of ownership. These "point-of-sale" programs typicaUy require ihe sefler to have
their property inspected before it is placed on the mar{cet_ The inspection report
is available to prospective buyers wlio, in theory, are better informed about the
home before making an offer. in some oommunities, tfie selier is also required
to correct any hazards or other problems before the home is sold_
in addition to Point-of-Sale (POS) programs, many communities are also � �
adopting Housing Maintenance Codes which address or�-going housing
conditions and maintenance issues_ This type of code establisfies a minimum
standard for the health, safety, and maintenance (i_e. exterior) of �esidential
prope�ties. When used in tandem with a POS program, a maintenance code
allows a City to resoive probiems which arise f�om time to time, instead of having
to wait for a sale to take enforcement action.
The foliowing memo discusses a range of options that could be pursued in
Fridley. Also attached is a brief survey for the Councii to compiete. The survey
will be helpfu! in determining whether there is �suppo�t for either of these
programs and, if so, howthe programs.could be structured_
J�.
Memo Regarding Point of Sale 1 Housing Maintenance Codes
October 24, 1996
Page 2
Point-of Sale Proarams
The attached matrix identifies three fo►mats which have been adopted by several
communities.
lnformation Only
This type of prog�am is designed to provide very basic information to a
prospective buyer. The emphasis is on consumer protection, but does
not require any substandard conditions to be fixed. The report is
structured to indicate whether an item "meets code", is "below code", or is
"hazardous"_
This approach is used in the cities of Minneapolis, Maplewood and South
St. Paul_ The regulations impact 1and 2 family dwellings, townhomes,
condominiums and even apa�tment buildings (Maplewood only). The
inspections a�e conducted by independent contractors who are licensed
by each community. The inspecto�s are required to carry their own
insurance and must file a copy of tMeir repo�t for each home with the
respective city. ,
Although this approach is less intrusive than some programs, it doesn't
require any corrective action. 1n some cases, the violation will continue to
exist and never be fixed.
ldentify / Correct Life Safety Hazards �
This second approach is used in the cities of Bloomington, Hopkins and
St. Paul. The program requires an inspection at the point-of-sale and all
hazardous conditions must be repaired before the home is sold_
Typical hazards which would have to be correc#ed include the following:
• S#ructural faiiure {collapsed roof, foundation wall, etc.)
� Electrical system (frayed or exposed winng)
• Plumbing system (open waste lines, no traps, no relief valve on water
heater, leaking pipes, etc_)
• Heating system (cracked heat exchanger, no gas shut-off)
• Life / Safety (no smoke detectors, no handrails, etc. )
Memo Regarding Poirrt of Sale J Housi�g Maintenance Codes
October 24, 1996
Page 3
if an evaluator is uncertain whether a specific item is hazardous they can
request that the seiler obtain a certification from a iicensed contraetor ihat
the system is functioning properJy. For example, in Bloomington this
ce�tification can be required for the water heater, plumbing, electrical or
structurai systems.
Finally, all items which are de#ermined to be hazardous must be
inspected by the City after the repairs are completed. In this situation,
the City will become invotved once a building permit is issued to correct
the hazardous conditions.
The advantage to this approach is that hazardous conditions are
corrected before the prope�iy is sold. The buyer is provided with some
level of protection that the home meets minimum standards for health and
safety as determined by an independe�t third patty_ The disadvantage
of #his approach over the °information only" model is that ii does require
the seller to pay for repairs, which can be expensive_ Also, this
approach does not achieve to#al code compliance which can greatly
improve the condition and appea�ance of a property.
Full Code Compliance
The third point-of-sale model is one which requires fu1! code compliance
before the property is so1d. The only community using this approach is
the City of St. Louis Park.
This approach requires the seller to cor�ect any item which is considered
to be substandard, not just those items which �are hazardous. The
distinc#ion befinreen this approach and the "hazard onl�i' method isn't
always clea�. The St. Louis Park model would require the repair of a
leaky roof, patching cracks in the foundation (larger than'/n),
replacement of deteriorated soffits and fascia, and removal of asbestos
chimneys.
This app�oach is by far the most comprehensive and effective. However,
in some cases it can be the most expensive for the seller.
Summary of Point-of-Sale Proqrams
Each of the models described above have been designed to meet the goal of
improving the condition of single-family housing_ The effectiveness of each
Memo Regarding Poi�t of Sale / Housing Maintenance Codes
October 24, 1996
Page 4
app�oach will depend on a number of factors including the amount of resources
devoted to the program {i.e. experience of inspectors, staff suppo�t, etc.), the
amount of input from the general public and real estate industry, how well
information is disseminated about the program, and finally whether the program
is monitored to assess it effectiveness.
Housinq Maintenance Codes
Across the Twin Cities many communities have adopted separate codes which
address the condition and maintenance of existing residential stn�ctures.
Communities with housing maintenance codes include:
Blaine (emergency conditions only)
Brooklyn Center
Brooklyn Park
Columbia Heights
Crys#al
Minneapolis
New Brighton
New Hope
Robbinsdale
St. Paul
White Bear Lake
In general, these codes are very similar and many actually use the same
language. In most communities the code covers all residen#ial property from
single family, duplex, triplex, up to apartmen#s_ Many of these same cities also
license rental property which is addressed in the same
ordinance_
In terms of whaYs covered, the codes establish minimum standards for light and
ventilation; cooking, heating and sanitary equipment; occupancy �evels; and
maintenance items (typicafiy the exterior areas). The standards are minimal;
the codes do not specify the quality of systems such as casement vs. double
hung windows, white vs. gold appfiances, etc.
Under current Fridley City Code there are only a few references to housing
standards and maintenance, especiaily with regard to owner-occupied housing.
The rental code does cover minimum standards and maintenance items_
�-
Memo Regarding Point of Sale / Housing Maintenance Codes
October 24, � 99fi
Page 5
The purpose of establishing a separate c�de (or one which covers ali housing)
would be to provide the city with the legal authority #o ensure minimum
standards for housing. This code would not be used by the City #o gain access
to private property without cause. It would, for example, allow the City to
enforce exterior maintenance issues as problems arise. Presen#ly, the City must
have to wait unti! a structuce �eaches severe deterioration or abandonment
before it can take action. Finally, as the housing stock continues to age, it is
impo�tant to make sure that olde� housing remains livable.
Model Codes
There are several standards that could be adopted_ Fridley could tailor an
ordinance to meet specific needs in the community, using one of the previousfy
mentioned communities as a model. The problems with drafting a code in #his
way are twofold:
1. Lack of .uniformity which may lead to potential confusion for prospective
buyers because the code is different from an adjoining community_
2. The need to periodically update the code to meet changing requirements
could be quite cumbersome and lengthy.
A second approach would be to adopt one the uniform codes establist�ed by
either the Intemationa! Conference of Buitding Officials (ICBO) or the Building
Officials and Code Adminis#rators (BOCA). In this case, the City would adopt a
uniform code by reference and modifications would be made by #he respective
code organizations.
There is g�owing support at the state level to adopt a uniform cade for Minnesota
which would be similar to #he uniform codes fo� building, piumbing and electrical
systems. At this time the State is considering the Nationa! Property
Maintenance Code enacted by BOCA. Adoption could occUr as early as 1997.
Summary of Housinq Maintenance Codes
Adoption of a housing maintenance code provides the city with one mnre tool in
the effo�t to maintain an adequate supply of decent, safe and sanitary housing.
The need for stronger regulatory action stili remains despite the success of the
housing prog�ams. Clearly, these initiatives by the Council and HfZA have
worked and should be continued. However, there are owners who choose not
� -
.g
Memo Regarding Paint of Sate / Hausing Mair�tenance Codes
October 24, i 996
Page 6
to maintain their properties_ A maintenance code would be heipful in
addressing these problems.
Recommendation
S#aff recommends that the Council complete the attached survey on poini-of-
saie and housing maintenance codes. Results of this survey will be discussed
at the meeting on October 28t'' and wil! provide direction on how to proceed.
We should point out that either approach wil! take time to implement, however
both could be implemented simultaneously.
GF/
M-9�-503
` ,�
�
�
i
.y
�
O
S <n
v- �
O O
� �
tST �'
� �
� �
C �
� L
� �
t`- a`
g �
�
's P
� � �
� � �
; r �
� U �
u � � � E �
m �� � E
n � � � �
o � � � � .�
� m
� � �� �� �
� � r � � g —` � �' �
'� a� LL � � � E � ui � � �
�� ���o = � �
� �n � 1-- � � I- � U � � �
�
N
a w o
�
� � a
Z � �
� a �
� � �
H � m �
� � m
d � � �
d � � �� � �
� _ �
�
" � � ��.� � �
a r y m .
� a E 3 m ryD °-' �
� �' $ �
c3� c� c� o E� ��.
b �8-° Q��m � � n g
mxv� w �� � i- �-� . �� � :
� � . .
� m �
, E�t � c �;
� �`; _ � �
E �z° �� °
� ` � � �' � � -$
��.�g �� �- � a
� 8 :m
� `° � $ �
� �� � m s m �
�° ���� �� � � � �
L .� � � g � � � : : �..� .� � � �
�
z y_ � �� �S�E �� � � ° �
m
� � � a N g ` � o � � � � � a .� `� � � �
92 z i
� ��� g �c�� � Z � SS Q �� a � � �
m
c
E � m o
�a � -a � ao
rn m m m � `m °m
a � ` c. . a �, a,
a a a Q o m c m
O p V � �j��....� V .�i �
a i� a a m � Q a 19 m
>
1- U 1- E 3 U C � � �
Q �
Housinq Code Surve�
'I. Would you support adoption of a Housing Maintenance Code?
Yes
No
2. If you support an ordinance, which modet would you support?
Adopt a Fridley specific code
Model after another City
Adopt Uniform Housing Code
Wait for State of Minnesota to Adopt a code
3. What should the maintenance code cover?
All residential property (including rental)
Owner-occupied residential property only
4. Would you support adoption of a Point-of-Sale program in Fridley?
Yes
No
5. If you support an ordinance, which model would you support?
Information Only
Identify and Correct Life / Safety Hazards
Total Code Compliance
DATE: November 15, 1996
MEMORANDUM
PLANIVING DIVISION
TO: William Burns, City Manager��,j �
FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director
Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator
Kurt 7ensen-Schneider, Planning Assistant
SUBJECT: CDBG Funding Guidelines
Based on the discussion at the July 8, 1996 City Council meeting (attached), the Human
Resources Commission is requesting:
A. An update on consideration of fundin� the ACCAP Senior Outreach program through
an allocation from the 1997 general fund.
B. An update on whether budget discussions included funding recommendations for the
Senior Home Companion program or (based on Councilman Schneider's comment)
the Park and Recreation progam.
C. A response to the attached letter from Chairperson Oquist regardin� CDBG grant
allocation criteria.
The HRC was unable to meet on November 7, 1996 due to the lack of a quorum. A
special meeting is being scheduled for November 21, 1996. The results of the Council
discussion will be incorporated into the upcoming review process for 1997 CDBG
applications.
KJS:kjs
M-96-529
_. ' _ - . Y••' i �:- �-: ' ^ 1 ; .
- . . :i�� �� . - - - . _
October 15, 1996
Dear Mr. Mayor and Members of the Council:
I was unable to attend the July 8, 1996 City Council meeting; however, as the Chair of the Human
Resources Commission, I believe it is my role to bring forward concerns expressed by the
Commission regarding the Community Development Block Grant process for l 996-97. The
Commission's primary concern is the manner in which the Commission and its representing
member were treated at that meeting.
The Human Resources Commission spends a tremendous amount of time reviewing CDBG
applications before making its recommendation to the City. During the 1996 allocation process,
the Commission designated a majority of two meeting agendas and scheduied a third interview
meeting to review each organizations proposal. Our recommendation to allocate funds is an
extremely difficult task. The applications themselves take considerable time to review. In spite of
the difficuity, the Commission takes pride in its ability to sort through the multitude of variables
and to make a solid recommendation..
All the organizations that apply for funding serve a need in the communitv and when evaluated
singularly appear to deserve the Commissions recommendation. The dif"nculty in determining
what organization is recommei�ded for funding lies in having to weigh the merits and qualities of
one organization against another. Whether the organization will use the money to seed new
programs, sustain ongoing programs, or simply exist are all areas of consideration to help the
Commission justify funding.
We recognize the Commission's recommendation to allocate CDBG funds is just that, a
recommendation. However, the Commission has expressed great dissatisfaction in the manner in
which its decision-making process was scrutinized during the teievised City Council meeting on
July 8, 1996. We welcome constructive feedback and will follow Council's ]ead if improvements
need to be made to the process, however, as a result of the comments made at that meeting, the
Commission believes that there is confusion about the selection criteria.
In conclusion, I would like the City Council to review the current criteria which the Commission
uses to evaluate applications (these criteria were based on previous Counci] direction).
Specifically, please provide us with direction on the following issues:
A) Previous Council direction was to focus funding on new programs and programs for youth
(see attached). Is this stil( valid? Should the Commission be focusing on other areas?
B) Should the number of Fridley residents served override other criteria? For example,
Alexandra House is an ongoing program and has other revenue sources, but serves a large
Fridley population.
C) Should City-sponsored programs apply for and receive CDBG fi�nd; {i.e. Park and Recreation
Programs and Fridle�� Scnior Pro�rarn)?
..�\_ - � _ __ _ _ �•_ - _ _ _ �_ '��' i_i: : �� : �•��.=.1. _ . J 7"l � "_ _ � t
D) Will the ACCAP Senior Ouiccach program be funded through the 1997 Geneial Fund budgct?
While the Commission understands that its recarnmendaiions wili not always be approved, we
kwpc to avoid thc type af situation wtuch occutred aL the Ju}y 8, 1496 Council meetir�g.
J
ll1St
�'�C C�181IPCt
i �T i-.'� � . C�.]
FRIDLEY HIIIKAN RESOIIRCES COMMISSION GIIIDELINEB
_) FOR PRIORITIZING CDBG HUMAN SERVICB FIINDING REOIIE8T8
Prioritization will include, but not necessari3y be limited to,
consideration of the following points:
1. New or Expanded Program.
A. The program is a new program providing an innovative
response to a community need.
B. The program represents a significant increase in the
level of services previously provided.
2. Organizational Need.
A. The program is not viable without further financial
support.
B. There are few, if any, alternative sources of funding
available.
3. Community Need.
A. The number of Fridley residents served is high in
1 relation to the amount requested.
J
B. The program is meeting an important community need.
C. The program does not overlap with services provided
elsewhere in the community.
D. The program addresses a 1994 "target need" of the
Commission by serving youth or meeting medical/dental
needs of low income persons.
4. Program Quality.
A. The applicant demonstrates the availability of an
effective staff.
B. The applicant has a realistic view of resources and
limitations.
C. The applicant has spent past CDBG funds (if received) in
a timely manner for the original purposes intended.
5. Budget.
A. The budget is reasonably accurate given the objectives of
the proposal during the grant period.
� B. The �otal amount requested is reasonable in view of:
I
t;�z i.d=_� L i r.r,;; `ar i?rioritizing -�DBG
i F>;1qe 2
{1) Z'he overall program budget.
(2) The proportion of Fridley residents served to the
total number of clients served.
C. The administrative costs and program service costs are in
reasonable balance_
�
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 8, 1996 PAGE 11
Mr. Scott Lexvold, representing Miller �uneral I�ome, stated that
they cannot expand to the east, south, or north, which only leaves
the area to the west for expansion. If they added on to the main
building to the west it would conflict with the utility easement;
therefore, they are proposing to add on to the garage. If the
variance is denied, he will probably request a variance for
encroachmerit into the easement.
Mr. Lexvold stated that in regard to the petition, only three
properties abut their property and are affected. The property on
the north edge is already affected.by the existing qarage, and the
other two owners purchased property adjacent to commercial. He
felt that with the planting strip, there would be a 64 foot setback
to the rear of the property. With the addition it should give the
neighbors more privacy. He did not think the removal of thirteen
trees was a large impact for the area_
Councilwoman Bolkcom stated that the concerns were the removal of
the trees and problems with drainage and runoff.
Mr. Lexvold stated that the concern was erosion due to the loss of
the trees. There was no change to the slop to cause erosion.
Councilman Schneider stated that he did not have a problem with the
front yard setback but was concerned about the addition to the rear
of �his property since it abuts a very residential neighborhood.
He felt the number of trees to be removed was a signi.ficant loss.
MOTION by Councilman Schneider to concur with the recommendation of
staff and the Appeals Commission and grant that part of Variance
Request, VAR #96-12, to reduce the front yard setback from 80 feet
to 37 feet to allow a minor building addition. Further, to deny
that part of Variance Request, VAR #96-12, to reduce the rear yard
setback from 40 feet to 24, feet for an accessory structure.
Seconded by Councilwoman Jorgenson. Upon a voice vote, all voting
aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously_
12. �1PPROVING HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION FOR THE
ALLOCATION OF HUMAN SERVICE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
FUNDS :
AND
RESOLUTION NO. 46-1996 AUTHORIZING AGREEMENTS BETWEEN THE CITY
OF FRIDLEY AND RECIPIENTS OF 1996-97 FEDERAL COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS:
1r. Kurt Jensen-Schneider, Planning Assistant, stated that this is
'� resolution to authorize agreements with recipieizts of CDBG
iunding. The City received requests totaling over $65,000, and
only $30,000 in funding was available. Out of �he fourteen
,organizations requesting funds, nine were recommended.
�
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 8, 199b PAGE 12
Councilwoman Bolkcom stated that she did not recall that the
minimum allocation had to be $2,500. She felt that Council a�anted
to encourage cooperation between agencies. _
Councilwoman Jorgenson stated that she recalled the County stating
that if there were the same programs being funded from other
cities, as well as Fridley, they would pool these funds.
Ms. Dacy stated that she believed the direction was that a minimum
funding request would be for $2,500 in order `to provide some cost
efficiency in terms of administering the program. The direction
given to the Human Resources Commission was that the minimum amount
of assistance would be $2,500. If Council wished to fund an
ozganization for less than this amount, that would be their
prerogative_
Councilman Schneider felt that the $2,500 was a guideline bu� not
mandated. He asked what criteria was used in evaluation the
applications received from the various organizations.
Ms. Terrie Mau, representing the Human Resources Commission,
reviewed the guidelines and how the applications were prioritized
using the criteria.
Councilman: SchnEider .: st,at�d ,.,that he :d�,d...not ,-'feel . the ;, Gity' s>
, �_.__ . _,
Recreation� program` shouid conipete for these � funds,�: as- it places -the
Commission"`in�-an awkward posi�tion.
Ms. Mau stated that it was a concern last year; however, this
program has been expanded to the grade schools and serves a very
high number of Fridley residents.
Councilwoman Bolkcom stated that domestic violence is a huge
problem. Alexandra House was not recommended for funding.
Ms. Mau stated that every member of the Commissi.on
services of Alexandra House to the community.'�
question that this organization did not serve the
that they have other funding sources.
recognizes the
It was not a
residents, but
Councilwoman Jorgenson stated that the schools and churches are
involved in funding SACA. A lack of food is a problem, but there
is also a problem with domestic abuse. There are many police calls
on domestic abuse.
Ms. Mau stated that she does not receive any police reports on this
issue. She only has information from Focus News, and she did not
know if this information would have made a difference in the
recommendation to eliminate Alexandra House from funding.
Cot�ncilwoman Jorgenson stated that the Human Resources Commission
has a huge task to determine the allocations for funding. Loo}cing
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 8, 1996 PAGE 13
at the murders in surrounding communities and the rise in domestic
abuse, she felt they had to try to get back to those issues_ There
a-re programs for youth, and most of the youths are- coming from
homes where there is violence.
Ms. Mau stated that with such a small sum of money, the Commission
has to look at the all-around need and the number of residents
served. She said she is not saying Alexandra House is not serving
the Fridley residents, but allocations were made to those who meet
the criteria and guidelines.
Councilman Billings stated that he felt the Human Resources
Commission was being taken �o task for their recommendations. They
have carefully and painstakingly spent time making these
recommendations. `If Council decides they would like to allocate
the funding differently, a motion can be made to this effect. If
there is going to be an argument with the Human Resources
Commission about their recommendations, Council should appoint a
sub-committee to review these applications and submit a recommen-
dation to Council.
Councilman Schneider stated that he knows the Human Resources
Co-nmission spends a lot of time on this issue and does an excellent
job, bu� he wanted to u.-�derstar�d their rationale_
Councilwoman Jorgenson stated that she receives. calls from citizens
on how the funding is distributed. She agreed that the Human
:Resources Comrnission is doing a good job. They have tough
decisions, but she needed to know what their decision are based on.
Councilwoman Bolkcom stated that
great job. In all fairness
recommended for funding, she felt
Fridley residents served.
she felt the Commission does a
to the programs that were not
Council shouid know the number of
Ms. Mau stated that A Blanket of Hope is a new program. It was
felt that by giving them seed money the criteria of a new and
innovative program was met.
Ms. Mau stated that Alexandra House was not recommended for funding
because it did not meet the criteria for a new and innovative
program. Alexandra House has a large budget, and the majority of
their funding is used for salaries. Another consideration was the
other funding they receive. Fridley could give them only a small
amount, and it was felt that the funds could be better used
elsewhere.
Ms. Mau s�ated that the ACCAP Senior Outreach program, which the
Commission felt Council strongly supported, needed to be funded.
FRIDLEY CITY COiJNCIL MEETING OF JULY 8, 1996 PAGE 14
Ms. Mau stated that Arc of Anoka and Ramsey Counties �ell into the
category of duplication and has funding from other sources.
Ms. Mau stated that Banfill Locke Center for the Arts does not
serve enough Fridley residents. It is a wonderful organization,
but the Commission did not feel they could track where the funds
are spent.
Ms. Mau stated that Central Center for Family Resources is the only
organization funded that provides counseling for children, which is
a badly needed service.
Ms.�Mau stated that the Fridley Recreation Department has an on-
going program that is being expanded to other areas. The program
focuses on children, and Council has been proceeding in that
direction. -
Ms. Mau stated that the Community Emergency Assistance Program
supports the food shelf and provides services not provided by other
organizations.
Ms. Mau stated that the Fridley Senior Program needs to be funded
through CD�G funds in order to be an on-going program.
Ms. Mau stated that in regard to the Northwest Suburban Kinship
program, �he Co�unission had misgivings about the future of the
program after the retirement of Ms. Doddy.. The program also serves
only a small amount of people.
Ms. Mau stated that the Nucleus Clinic has only one paid person,
and the rest are volunteers. They serve a lot of Fridley residents
and have requested only funding for six mon�hs. However, they will
continue to serve Fridley far one year_ She stated that they
-- provide counseling for u�wed mothers and men on their
responsibilities.
Ms. Mau stated that the Southern Anoka County Coinmunity Assistance
organization needs funding to provide a service which is used by a
lot of Fridley residents.
Ms. Mau stated that St_ Philips Lutheran Church is increasing their
program which is a positive program for Fridley.
Ms. Mau stated that Tamarisk has served only nine Fridley residents
in the last two years. It does not mean it is not a good program.
They need to investigate funding elsewhere because they do not meet
the criteria.
Ms. Pat Prinzevaile, representing Alexandra House, stated that
Alexandra House has.been a recipient of CDBG funds for many years.
Because of a mailing or postal issue, they did not receive the date
and time of their inte.rview.
0
FRIbLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 8, 1996
PAGE 15
Ms. Prinzevalle stated that Alexandra House did not present a new
and innovative program. They have expanded their services and the
number of residents served has increased from 1,90��to 2,756.
Their organization and the Fridley Police Department have a model
program in the.State of Minnesota. Ms. Prinzevalle stated that she
is not here to say that they should be funded and others should
not. She_would like to say that they provided services to a
significant amount of Fridley residents for over the last four
years. If CDBG funding cannot be provided perhaps other funding
may be available for Alexandra House.
Councilwoman Jorgenson stated that she appreciates the information
Alexandra House._sends to the Poiice Department regarding the number
of cases and citations issued.
Councilman Schneider asked Ms_ Prinzevalle what percent of the
budget goes towards salaries.
Ms. Prinzevalle stated that Alexandra House's budget is about $1.5
million_ They provide services for women and their families.
Alexandra House built a new facility to increase their residential
size, and there were 46 residents from Fridley last year in this
facility averaging a twelve day stay. The cost is $82 per day per
person. The bulk of their funding comes from general assistance,
where a per diem is paid. If tne persons are not qualified for
this assistance Alexandra House does not get paid for their stay.
In terms of intervention services, they provide $70,000 to $80,.000
of services to the City. �inds come from United Way and corporate
support. .
Ms. Prinzevalle stated that they have two legal advocates that
serve three cities; Fridley, Blaine, and Circle Pines. The salary
line is high, but not high for the City because there is one person
for intervention services who is paid $30,000. Fridley comprises
45 percent of this service. She stated that she understands the
reasoning behind the Commission's recommendation when they receive
multiple and diverse funding. Fridley is getting quite a bit of
service, and she requested that the City continue their partnership
with Alexandra House so that they may continue to provide the
services to the City.
MOTION by Councilwoman Jorgenson to
allocations for the 1996-97 CDBG funds:
Organization
A Blanket of Hope
Alexandra House
ACCAP Senior Outreach
Arc of Anoka and Ramsey Counties
Banfill Locke Center for the Arts
Central Center for Family Resources
authorize the following
Amount
$2, S00
3, 000
6, 000
0
0
2, 500
FRII�L.EY ::iTX CJUNCTI, MEETLNG OF JULY� 8, 1S��+E; PAGE 16
(7rC7dRl Z;�:,1C)il
Fridley Recr��atior: � NaL. Res.
Community Emerqericy Assistance
Fridley Senior Program
Northwest Suburban Kinship
Nucleus Cl i_r�i c
Southerri Anoka County Commuizity
S t. Ph i 1 ips I.,utt�eran Church
Tamaris?�
!l;r:' �;.'. . ,_
�2�Jt. C3r ���)l)
Progratn 2, ����O
2, 5t10
t�
2, OOf)
Asst. 2, SOt)
2 Sr�U
,
0
Further,-. thai : Lhe Counci.-1,-;�consider budqet�_nc� tt�e ACCAP Senior
Outreach program from the General �nd ixl 1997_ Seconded by
Councilrr�an Schn�ider. Upon a voice vote, C:o�.anc�_ltiaoman Jorgenson,
Councilman Schr�eider, Coui�cilwoman Bolkcom ��r�d Mat,�c�r Nee voted in
favor of ti�e r:��t�i�ri_ Councilrnan Billiners >>o�.��:: aqain�t. t.he mo�ion_
Mayor Nee deciared the motion carried by a �our to o��� vote.
MOTION by Councilwomaii Jorgenson to adopt Resollltic�n No_ 46-1996,
au�horizi.n� agreements between th� City of 1'�idl�v and recipients
of 1996-97 ? ederal corimunity developmertt block_ gr.a?.1= funds, with
the amendeG a�nounts contain2d in the above rno�.ion. Seconded by
Councilman S<:tinei_der. Upon a voice vot_e, Co,zncil�aomtan Jorgenson,
Councilman Schneider, Councilwoman Bolkcom anc� Mayor Nee voted in
favor of t��e motion. Councilman Billings voted against the motion.
Mayor Nee declar_ed the motion carried by a foi��� �o one vote.
13. RESOLiITI0i1 NO. 47-1996 AUTHORIZING THF' EXECUTION OF �
COOPERATIVE, AGREEMENT FOR THE REMOVAL OF THE SLIP RAMP ON
T.H. 47 (UNIVERSITY AVENUE? Ai�7D 60TH I�VFNUE {6�7�EZD l) :
Mr. Flo��a, Public Works Director, stated ttlat MnD(�T has prepared a
cooperati_ve agreemen� for the removal oL the slip ramp at
University Avenue and 60th Avenue. The agreemen� ca11s for the
S�ate to �ay lt�� percent o� the cost associated witri �_he removal of
this slip ramp and the placement of concr��e curb, gutter and
landsr_apinq at a cost not to exceed $14,393.59.
MO`I'ION by Counci_iman Schneider to adopt Resoluti_on i�io. 47-1996.
Seconded by Ccuricilznan Billings. Upon a voice vo�c., aIl vot.i.��g
aye, Mayor Nee d�clar_ed the motion carried unanimousl.y.
14. FPPROVI�L OI' JOIN�' POWERS AGFZEEMENT WI`I'H SCi�00L� DIS'i'RICT NO. 14
FOR S HI�RF', i� US E O F F�C I L I T I E S: -- ------- -----
`I�}11S lt::':r� t�:i`,: �__ �_:'�E'C� frOlTl ��1� dC�E�T1C;i�+ c?i: f.�i(:' ;'E' j� _..,. Of t�l�' �lt-Y
i`'� d. I1 � i C� E: �_
7�«. fi0i°1�; 1��? I?U 1' C`�MPLIP.NCE :
MO`I'I�JN !-�y Co��i�c��il_�nan Sctlne�c�er t�o d�zecl. :�taff �-o revic�w ver_���
dC�iiT E'_5:.�? 'Jt;iV ::1:';I ���lf� ��i i_ Ill£i�311:� 't U �J�'�1_I1C� i�<){R�' ��'��)C_ �� _:ii�E) CC)[T1�11dt�CF�
�VIEIVY�RANDITM
PLANNING DIVISI4N
DATE: November 12, 1996
l�
TO: William W. Burns, City Manager��
FROM: 8arbara Dacy, Community Developmen# Director
Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator
Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant
SUBJECT: Annexation of Lot 16, Revised Auditor's Subdivision 103, Coon Rapids
REQUEST
Mr. Gerry Kantor owns Lots 15 and 96, 81ock O, Riverview Heights �Fridiey) and �ot
16, Revised Auditor's Subdivision 103 (Coon Rapids)(see attachment A). Mr. Kantor
has requested annexation of Lot 16 io the City of Fridley (see attachment B). The City
of Coon Rapids is unable to provide sewer and water utilities to Lot 16, services would
need to be extended from the intersection of Kimball Street and Riverview Terrace. Mr.
Kantor has a purchaser for these lots. The purchaser would like all lots to be in one
municipality in order to have the most flexibility for construction of a dwelling on the
lots.
ANNEXATION PROCESS
The Minnesota Municipal Board is established by State Statute to review annexa#ion
requests. Annexations may be iniiiated by the municipality, the Board, or a property
owner. If both cities are in agreement, each Counci! passes a resolution and a
simul#aneous "detachment and annexation" occurs. The resolutions are submitted to
the Board #or final action. The City Attorney t�as indicated that the Board should find
this type of request a routine case for approval (see memo daied November 11).
Annexation may occur withou# 100% agreement of the affected property owners.
Based on preiiminary conversations with Coon Rapids staff, it is anticipated that Coon
Rapids will agree to a"detachment". A number of options have been reviewed with
Coon Rapids staff, and the City is agreeable to a detachment of up ta five lots to the
Annexation o# lot 16
November 13, 1996
Page 2
City of Fridiey.
OPTIONS FOR ANNEXATION
The owner has pe#itioned #he City to annex Lot 16, Revised Auditor's Subdivision 103
into the Ci#y. There are othe� lots to consider for annexation since the City of Fridley
provides sewer and water service to adjacent iots. A1so included as possibie
candidates for annexation are Lots 14, and 9 5, Revised Audiior's Subdivision 103, and
Lots 22 & 23, Block 4, Mississippi Oaks (see attachment C). There is a spectrum of
options for the Council to consider:
Option A, No Annexation
This option requires the property owner to construct a dwelling on the properties
as currently legatly defined and located in their respective municipaiities. if a
dwelling was constructed on Lots 15 and 16 in Fridley, iot area and setback
variances would be required. i.ot 16 in Coon Rapids is buildable without
variances. Sewer and water services and access would be ex#ended in the
Riverview Terrace right of way to the municipal border. An agreement befinreen
the two cities wouid need to be executed as has been done in the past with
adjacent iots (Lots 22 and 23, Block 4, Mississippi Oaks are currently served by
the City of Fridley in #his manner). No tax base increase would be received by
the City.
Option B, Annexation of Lot 16
This op#ion would annex only Lot 1 fi, as requested by the peiitioner (see
attachment D). This would allow the purchaser to have the maximum flexibility
for dwelling construction on the property. The prope�ty would be serviced in the
manner described in Option A, minus the agreement. R utility easemen# would
be retained across Lot 16 in order to provide services to Lots 14 and 15 which
are currently serviced by a privaie weli and septic system.The City would gain
$220 - 336 in taxes each year (#ull taxes are $1433-2988).
Option C, Annexation of Five Lots
This option would a�nex five lots �nto the City of Frid{ey (see attachment E).
There are several advan#ages to this op#ion:
1. The City gains additionai tax base for !o#s which it currently services
($916, see a#tachment F). Taxes to the affected property owners
Annexation of Lot 16
November 13, 1996
Page 3
wouid be lower in Fridley.
2. The north border of the City will be "straightened", thereby providing a
logical boundary between the two cities.
3. Sewer and water easements wi!! be in place to provide services to the
dwelling on Lots 14 and 15, st�ould the septic system fail.
4. The school district wil! remain the same.
There is one disadvantage to this option:
1. The dwelling on Lots 14 and 15 has access to Broad Avenue via a 10
foot private lane between Lots 22 and 23. This access is nonconforming
as the Zoning Code requires a minimum of 25 feet of access. If this
dwelling were damaged to more than 50% of its value, the Council would
have #o approve a variance to allow reconstruction of the dwelling, or a
public street must be constructed to provide legai access.
This disadvantage, however, also holds t�ue for the City of Coon Rapids.
Two out of the four property owners have been informally contacted about this
option. The owner of Lots 14 and 15 (septic system) is favorable to the
annexation.
COST OF ANNEXATION
What is the cost of annexation to the City? The cost is minimal, as the City is already
bi!ling the lots serviced in Coon Rapids. The property owner wouid be required to pay
for the extension of the street and services to Lot 16. The owner of Lofs 14 and 15
would also participate in the cos# of #he utility extensions, as they benefit from their
instalfation. The City gains $916 in increased tax base ($5755 total taxes).
CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends tha# the City Council direct staff to work with the City ofi Coon Rapids
to pursue Option C, annexing five lots. The City of Coon Rapids is waiting for direction
from the Fridley City Council prior to ini#iating a parallel process to respond #o the
annexaiion request. The Coon Rapids scheduie will be coordinated with the Fridley
schedule so that the processes will be concurrent. The preliminary schedule for
annexation is:
Annexa#ion of Lot 16
November 13, 1996
Page 4
1. neighborhood meeting in December (coordinated with the appropriate
Councilperson)
2. Planning Commission pubiic hearing January 8, 1997, and
3. City Council approval January 27, 1997.
M-96-526
cc: Lee Starr, Coon Rapids Communi#y Development Director
Gateway:My Documents/Michele/Annex
� ' n •�� o � - oo..,.- ' ` � or.>
v � y-�
. ��s � ��� ( (Z `l v
�) � �1� ou �cor v \ �V ) o . � o 1��� � � o
,)a A�i ��� � h\ 12D� �� � eZ ,� �,. s� ' ATTACHMENT A
` ��,. � \ ���o) � ,
O � ° �� �
r �,� 9 '` � ., �1 i`}. 1�z�) o °�� 3
1 �� � . � � � � � s . �e
, - ,�h �"l �� , , � Zas.z
a �� N o� ,, 6�0.� t.?�) o�
1 i o
C1 �� �8 �3� � �, 1/ 6 0� � � � J (SEL. 3 QQ z�-)
I\ �,4 p`l , o �e. (ss) � /� o • , 1 z .o.s. � Q
\° <'�6/3 �`n (s9) {e `� o � "o (�eo) � a
, ti � � .S ��g1 � .
� . .� .o �.
\. �� � '� k � R' . �6 ^ �
o �l .a_ � z3�.s G`
_ `� � <. `l�b� � ��) ��a = � �. �� , � w
e° �' 9� B LV D. � � —
� �
`� '�9' �� �S 1 9B z � r-.�o `'�
�
�.• �
�p• � , i� a9 3z .00 �oa i�a Q�
V 10 — g 821/6 ��� - ; .. so . Y C' �Q �j
� �� ,.� ,9�� � �g�� � r��s� �rl �� FR
\ q � � � � I OF
�9zo i9 0) � � �+ Y
�
� r
� � * C�� � (�� '� �'� o �1
o � � /8 � J9�` ° ! �
o l 7 �, Zo �, Z,� �
� Z
V���, � �� � �) �� � I .� >
�� �
.' . O � 30 ii . J.Y �•f Q /O O /O O � /O O �
�.Q � � Auo �si18. 90'.� � ,z2 �Z°Z�� '
- � , o, �
�
�Z ^ I rJ NO. !� REV. � q: z 3kO4�� q
ss.
� ;: z:>:::a �.1��� B9 V _.v
d[s . • � �+
r <�
r
�
�..: :<�i;::t::s>:'i:"':'i' �::<>: .-�.:>i�':<`:;i:;i'�'i=c�>;::��'�:. .;:.::. �7
ting Munici al
ti -: � ba.'
:: ;;� �f ::zi=:_?;; :`:.E''� .
:.:: �:��:..."' :- M1 . R /F W � �
C� E �
�- E
< ;::.::�::::. ::.. ...
:::: ::: ::;.:;
<:: <`::a�: :«:;<:>: ::: >:" ::..:........ ::.:::. Iz V► °
-� ` R
<
�
�
�:%�:: : : : ::::::;:::: :. .:_ ::::::.:: :::::::;:::::::;: :::::..
�t l�l �
Y.j�`` ;;� = �s R <J 3 $ � undaries
� � 4 : 7. `� P sro� ar ': 4.-
::�M rNOM rs �,�� , , : � � .
<\ ;:= `��`'".. •_ yErGH�.�) °� �°° ~� '�$
�..:.:�'.i4 . - � ;Z..�. ..� p$.�R ?, ?, s,
.:� � - �� , !! 39 0 = _ 9
,: as1 0. . I w � .o pL� � « � � �-
�N - 0 1 , -
K .
0
.A �w
1 M o �ot _ a L � '
y tA + �° 3+ �'� � � r I 6' 3�' so
� OR 7 .rs o30
- C ) ~ �p)1 p.
3 0
� I � - ° ,,� � ":�REET ,
til fi � -� 9 �j � r � 2 3, � �
�� I L s i� ! Q
u� � s 0 c
9
.
0
^ `� � ' � t Y �
� �I g �i.z `S �. - � ( � ` �
�/ � N Z ��
o� S �
� a � � z l 9 8 � G a s3O °
O � v�� _ ` 6 4 '� o
. �1; �� z r' 21 a � � $�t�
� __ _. - _
, I � �� ,, s
0 � � 3 ,�_�N (
.__ h fb` 0 1' � o ' 1'} \s[G. 3 RQ ��
1� I s,"� � i
o � o � 3 �3 ,
A
\� ` �
p0 '1 O
l�
�i � 1) :+ �
'�. o� ' L �3 �
M
��` � N s � sT• Property owned
�� zP �
,
N M w ....�....,-: �
0
`.,�'' �' E� ap by Mr Kanior
� ��
�I
I
I
\ c 3•�l
�n 3�' �
Y �
1 3� e.;
Q�
9'" �� t
', � • n � Zg :
� � z 21
Al ' „p 7 � .
Gerald F. Kantor
6718 Marilyn Drive
Maple Grove, MN 55369-5416
Telephone (612) 424-6628
City of Fridley
Municipal Center
6431 University Ave NE
Fridley, MN 55432
ATTN: Scott Hickok
October 25, 1996
Subject: Request for Annexation of Lot 16, Auditor's Subdivision No 103,
Coon Rapids by the City of Fridley
Scott Hickok:
This letter is my formal request to have my property in the City of Coon Rapids be annexed
to the City of Fridley. The property is Auditor's Subdivision No 103 and the Anoka County
Pin is R04 302411006 00338138. Please advise me what I can do to expedite the requested
annexation.
Thank you for your cooperation and assistance in this matter.
Sincerely,
Q4 ^
/ / '�f.� J� eJ �� «' �Fi
✓'��
Gerald F. Kantor
cc: LuAnn M Petricka
Jeff A. Dotseth
Michele McPherson
, " � V� .�. " I� �. �� _ . . ' ( <OY. »I
/�°-s._ � `? � o
�`,�i ` ° � ' z �� °
�f
°"r`°'" � <��� ° ° ',�' °' � ATTACHMENT B
.� ,%��'O,n ���� � o i r 2 0� �t� � <� i• e6
eZ �� �y� �.� ,o � � ` Q ��z�) � .
, �2°// 9 \ (i'¢ a� �1�> ° e �.�`� 3
� , 5 S . �8
� ��� � (�) , � , � �Bf.�
o a N 6�0+
�" .�a 9 � o� '� A /.7�) o �
� -�� �F- � 8 �J�� '� � ( 6 O� � '`7 � J �SEG. 3 QQ u)
� �! �1 • �o �0 � (?s� 0 • . 1 .Z 4S• 7 Q
�o �<��0�.3�,4 �39� :'•: ��� �� � �o �,66p� n a'
.: �, � -.` �°` s� , °• o � ,� �,�8) h .
Q a h �
�; `.��/ ��•�'' / ? ,o: s�; �� L6 z 3 �. f G G
P
.� 1 �b�� L�� ��e •� `,'�� ' ,
_ ��. �� ; '9 � 8LV0. �°
\�� �9� �0 �,J � /,� 9a,7 - �° T-.�o ..�
'"� � �D' �I�) : �� a9 37 ♦o o io o � 70 00�
. ,� .. •
, 2 O�%
� �° \o +e�°/6 � ;��°� r»o) 9�0 (� 9so) i f��s) so C � r' ��RI G`
� � �gl �i9Z.�� V (�9 °� � � 35) � �� "+ /�� o � rY O�
( � ( '� �
� o /% � /8 � J9 � ,ZO� ZJ � �
° � Z
��. � � y � �+) �� I. , � >
, �� �
� � �
003ac.ss So �oc ioo ' ioo <
� �.Q ^ _ � AUD SU6. 9�'.� � Z2 �Z°Z�� '
� /3 a i
\ a i .gf
^ �Z � 15 N0. 1 3 REV. �' : z63k���°__�
�
. .. y�
�
�
�
r�
�
�s� r ,.
�
':�:
�fl r�.
r :
0
�
'�>:::>::::' r � Y�
.
M
..�:.:::;-- �
{'7 �
�.:::::...::. .:::::
............ ..... :::::an _ s
� :::::::: .: ::c
........ .:. :::: ::::: .......:�.._ ::�::::: ::.: :� •-
c. <::=�:><>:::::»>: <::.:;"::>::>««< ::...:::.:.::.::`;- i � ` IE
<::�:: >>««>::..;>;:...:»»»»>:<�<;;:;;:«: ::«:. ' > (tV
''' 1 I t M ! s g�
;::y,:;;<> «;:::<:_:z: ::<:;_>:: R (a .e
�<::��!d'.:.. .:t`�:;; <::::;_::> �.s � �S fq� J,�r. ':.
r;::��:;��«::. ;s _- MP �4:
J 4) ..: :6.:. tN� t5 ' �' � "
� IS - � NE�GN�.�� � �°° " '�'g
"'� ° �4 9 � ;z�= _,��'-e�.,�'tR �, �� so
� �� r
� � I ,� iJ' 3 z) - g .
�is't o. w . � � �� ��� 1 M - - � � .
a _ � .p � �
. i � � 1. �O* f� ♦ -
/ 6 • .
� �. 31 ' � � ..' ,. •t " `6� 3 Z �
.e
I `. .�- �, �/ 1� oR � �ET o
so
� 1 � ' ' ' ..c�� ?. "
w �1 . z� � � t � � a
°'� � s :�� � p O
� � � 8 'a ' z o �
t^n g 3a 3 i ,�
�I �i. s � �_ 't ' o
l� 0 ` , ` � �
.f
C a� G ,.Z / 48'G5 a3a �
� �I� - � � � °
" ' " �� z �� 21 8'� ` s R�� -
,.
� -- �'
0` 3 jO��� z
--_ h�,�� - ` t �sec. a a4 1�)
d
�
0
\� 1
N
�\ �� '
� \-c
i- �
N cn
h\ '
� �
I
�
;
;
� • ����!��'����. ��e�6�'�� �'
1`��ij�" %� � ':1�'��� � � � �
�M.s��� r .► ,
�,j�� ��'' �-'
� ''�� ` �, � • • � '• �
��
�'�I�' �� • • . ••
CK �jf
C� 1 � �
�� r�'.
��;�� ,.�
��,� . •
�� � ,.
Wayne B. Holstad
Russell L.C. Larson
Frederic W. Knaak*
•Also Licensed in Wisconsin
& Colorado
November 11, 1996
Holstad, Larson & Knaak, P.L.C.
Attorneys at Law
3535 Vadnais Center Drive
Suite 130
St. Paul, Minnesota 55110
Telephone: (612) 490-9078
Facsimile: (612) 490-1580
Ms. Barbara Dacy
Director of Planning and Community Development
City of Fridley
643j Universit�� Avenue N.E.
Fridley, MN. 55432
RE: Annexation lssues
Dear Barb:
I�aren Hill Pjeld j�
John L. Lindell
t Real Property Law Specialist
One of the items you brought to my attention at our November 1, 1996, staff
meeting was a request for an opinion on the City's options and obligation in an
annexation proceeding concerning some property located in Coon Rapids next to
Fridiey that the City would consider for annexation. You also indicated that the
property is currently serviced for utilities by the City of Fridley and that the City of Coon
Rapids would be agreeable to the transfer.
This last fact, the willingness of the City of Coon Rapids to agree to the transfer,
allows me to give you a very simple answer. Minnesota Statutes Section 414.061,
Subdivision 1, provides that a concurrent "detachment and annexation" (to use the
correct technical term) is initiated by a resolution from both cities requesting the action
by the Minnesota Municipal Board. !f both Coon Rapids and Fridley were to submit
su�h rAs�E;��+i�r. unc+ t:":s, :.�ern "fos�^d t� �ie �n �� �Qr", i�e �"u�;�i,�af �car� has the
authority to immediately effect the transfer. Ordinarily, I would expect a detachment
and annexation such as this to be handled routinely by that Board and I can currently
anticipate no issues which would likely result in anything other than approval.
Please let me know if I can be of any other assistance to you on this or any other
matter.
Sincer y,
�'
L_/ .
L
r r c . Kn ak
Fridley City Attorney
cc: W. Burns
M. McPherson
,a �
�,�� sis��
,.�' � -e /,O
� �q,• '�,� '^j
o "°
I" u`�� �� h' 9 01 (�)
,� o w � \ - _.,>.��,- - -
� ° , o Z ��) o
o�T�or ; �� ; . o �,�o� o
���,� � e; � 2O� ��, «° � ,� �,. e6 ATTACHMENT C
t �. � Z - �
.� i ;; �o
.
(,�4 0l �1�� � � (.��� 3 �
�� � ,� �5 � s . �8
° � Pgs.z
� a ° N �I ( 64cJ.i a c
' 0 1� �� 9 �3�� � °� � �.7i� \ J �SEG. 3 QQ z.z-�
� t �. �/60�
\ �,� ' 0`1 ' 'o �e. �u) `� o • . I z -os � Q
\--a �n6/3 � (j�> `� � �. (,�eo) � �-
_. ti�� (�� �°� �o °• a � .S �zgl ;� .
�� % ��/� k ? ,a ' F �6 ° z 3 �. s � G �
.,- L bz� ��� , .�,. ��
�' t4.�� �, �'1 �° G e �6 , i *
�� �� �93 s�vo. � .
��� ,�9� �0 �.S q /,A 9e. � - �° r .�o `�
'"� �' g�o• .� �2') ��� a9 azz io o io 0 70 :. .
i
O
� � \ I a2�/lo � : . ���... . � � se
.� � 4,. �� ,�� U9�� �,g�� � r,�s� f� t�
� Y
° �
� o.
N
C
'
�
�
�e
�
� �,
h �
�
�
O
ti
ti
. � �o
. � L
_ y'1�
�
�
O �
\ _
�
� M
._,
;�
� v
N c.�
i �\
�'r
1 !
� !
�
. �i9z0} � �/9 ° � (a�) ° ��) �? ��� ° C� T
o /7 � /8 � /9 � ,20� Z1 ^ �
/ n
� Z
�� c � (L (� � 3�) l�� � -P Ll
�� � ! >
.. 003oc.ss so I �
.�.� ::.::.::...::.:. /co �eo
- ::;;:�>x:::::.::::::.:::;:� ::::::::.::::.:::::.: �........
�:::.� :: :.: ::.: ::::.. -:::.::� ': '::%2:::i ::: :�:::;;i::�::::J;:J;::;:.".'.'.; O.� .. ::...:.........
':::':�4::'::y::::: :.:;�.:..:.;�:;`::':;:+ � �
'%::::�:: �:::::::::::::.;._ .� .
?`.:..;�i:::�2::�':: _� _':y"'o..:;
�. .�.:::::�5.:::s:::<:::%�..:::�i;�-::;":;.'.:s:;:::::::::C:::':::::::::::::::::::::i:::�:;:::::::":::..:::::::i:::`:ci:y::5::�".::'<::.' , �.
�::::::.:»x� .::.:.;:::-::.;;::::.:: :;: ;:. 'l�-..:. �. . �
;ii:::_i::::.::i;;.`�:'s�::::;... ';iiE::i�!Q.�:t:i:i::?:;i :. `�;� . <: i` E:: E::;:y : �.: :i' �� a;::i::ii�:;::::. ::- . ..:::�:.�.:�.�. ::: .::::�,..�� .
:: :��:::::::::::::�:: , :: . :. :::::::::, .:::::::. �::�:::::::�
: : : :::: ::::::: .:. �:::::::.:-::���.: _ ���:::::::::::::::. . _::::: ::::�:::::::::::..::..:::
- �:::::� :::..::: ::: : ::.: ::::: ::��
:. :::::::::::: : :.::::: :: :::::::::::.::::::::.:::.. . . . � ��... .... .
::: : � : :: : :: ::::::::: : :::: : ::: ::: : :::: : : : ::::::::::: ::::::: :::::. .: :::: ::.:: . : ::
:: �� �:::: ::__:
. .... .. :.: ._: .. :::::_ ...� . _.
:::::: :. . :..:: c :::: : . :::
::.. :. . :::::: ::::::::::: ;::;::: :::: - :::: ::: .:::�.,:::_ :::....,:::. �;_:::�.
� : ::::::� ::_:_: . ;. :: : ;::: . ;: _: . ;:::;. ::;�:::::: _::
: .:� � ��► :::: ::,::.�, �:: : {
., `; � :::::.:::...::::::::: :.:.::::::.�►:.:::: � .:..:»>::>:<:��:�:::::.. _._.,._._._.. .: .: ::::::::::::�
� .. ...._: .:::::.:::.:::.:::::.::::.. �
_ _ . ,. .. ... .. . .. .. .: .:::_:::::::::: ;� :::; :::::;;:::� :
^ =O����rr uY �rr�.�. .,,
� / . 5.--- �+�_ � o
i, --� � 6 l) ti�`� $ a°' , e l.p�s � RylEWP �
-- df � { � ` �$ R� <� 3 °�-g g
� j� �L� y1Q : I��i . rN�Mp >1., �.�- .: , �4;.
�
� S • ;� NEIGNT� a �� � �$
° 9 9 rz� .,r�r'-C,�'�R �� 1� So
I _ 4� 13� o l` 3 t) p�` ' r 9
o K� , y � �� -
� p L�* � O �
� ' �° 3� H��� ( w � r7 6, 3 Z' o so
I � �"�Y � �� �� •=f °3�
� � , 1��, ..�•EE-�o
1 � TR 3' 3�
2 � 5 Z �
I � jo O `o Q
` 1 g ,�, 3� �' t m
, ,,.s ,. �� c �o
C`* ]�.f �� .o G� 1�e .. / 9 8 n ` � � � �a I
rIC '
��
I
� -
� O
\
�9
O �
0
N
^ �'
� �
A\
�
C
d�
_��
♦ O�
�F ��
�stG. 3 RQ L7�
�
• � Possible additional
annexation candidates
\ e 7
� � =f
M I 9 � �e
� � �,� I� z ��`� 3 y 21 �8 i_.
f � � V , o .._� �- � � � or. 7,5� ,
a U '
"� (�) s/s � �2 � � � Z ��� o ,. ,
ourcoT a ' o , o b0 Q�
:� -o �iA , �� � � ,, �� ��, `�� ° � � �. B6 ATTACHMENT D -
� ( !z
�Q �, ' � � �' �z BZ � . o�
5 �� � . �" � � `
,. o� '-o (��4a� (1,� a e (.t�� 3 �
y � � � ° s . 79
��2 / ��i' 9 1 ( � ° '
L. 0 7'� �o N / l 2 es. z
! 6�",` �
'� -���a�,Z 5 e %� �,� ��bo� �{ � (.2�) : J (sec. a aa u)
�, � p7 • =o �m� (u� �� o I z as � Q
�° < b�3 ��A �q�) •- �` � '� ��6e0� n �
: ti ���'9•p ;r'O � '� ,� %�d) h
� 1��'� � ? ,o : ,� 66 � z 3 �. s � � �
�,-� \e_ � bZ' C�) - �{ a9�:p�
s c � � '-1 . G •
'�, ° , �� � � . w`
, �<<, �,;' ���js- � /,� .�B � . � B LV D. � T .�o �
_ �'' �' 3io•.� �1'� i� a� az �oo �oa � �o . O �
Q
� �� : 1��.��6 . .��� . � s .�a � t.Y F�RID
\ � Q� � � � . o) /9?0� �/960� �198O�A (199 � � � O�.' F
,
�
` o� su
I `r' °-
N
0
�
�o
�
� b
M
I � �.
h �
�
H
o I
�
i� ` �
���
.____ ���
l�
O
��
� �
��
;�
� V
�v m
�\ 1
a" I
I
i,
�
,
��9�o v �!9 v �s) o �3�) �? ��� ° r, � �
\ o /7 � /8 � l9 � ,ZD�, Zl : �.
� `� 2
� p�, c � O(/� + 3«) t?�� � �- i° Ll
�,� °° I �
_ �jac.ss Sa /oo /oo /oe
�.Q � _ 414i.1o. suB. 9��..+ � Z2 �z�Z�� '
- � , a, �
, .B, �
� �Z � I5 N0. I 3 REV. �q : z`3k��° .� .
a. Ri#�e��,�� ���: _ _ R�����t�� ,+��_ ��S�rr u ��iira�r r� �
� : ::::�; :::::::::: �,::.:::::::::_ _::::: ::.:: �s a.: - �� _ .�� a Pro sed new
ti '::::t�:::;; ;;: � :::::::::: : :. �b-. � p�
� ::»:��:.:«:::: >:::. : � �a t � � �Ewa :
::»� ::::::::::::Y�:::: ::;::::>;: .:::::::..:.:..... . > v
.p �,::,::::::.:;;:::.::::::::;.. i : R r
':y;..:�::;::::::::: :::::::::>::»::.> ::.:....::::::::: :::::::::»:::_::::. � I� N � IVIu
-� - ::::.��� �::�� .. � _ . � 's. R �<� � �g � �yr 'cipal Boundary
o �,s a
/4
- : /4) �j �
d �
0
� o �o�
G '' '
� ..
I ` �
� �
� 4
`
\I �
C y ��
o�
�
a�
� �
�� -
i
I-
� O
�
.fl
��
0
N
sQ
i+ � I
\
: \?
�!�
1�� �:�?7
� \\ e��1�
�
���_�.A���
�o�_
�v�
�
r�l
so
1
30 50
�$
�� ,� �
1 a
O � �
� �
`� Z I ..
(.KL. 3 QQ J�3�
�F���e�� �,��-� .
r�C� � �
�
�� � J
' � r :� I . - �
� � • • :
' �.
� p
Efl����``� � • � •
•
a
- a v
w��s �
� : c�� �
% /A
� �g• ' �,� '^/
0 /�°
`�� // h� 9 �1 ���
v� .� . ���i ��i �
�. o o.,o�, �z%?��
pUrLOT a � o � �- ATTACHMENT E
'(!�i � ° ' 12 0� �� z � �. �� \
� �� �. d z � ^
� I � ��� j .
. , �
� (/ �¢ 41 (I/) o � �-2!� i v
�
o � /� s , yg
Ni "Zas.z Q`
� 1a � � o� , 6� r.?7) o�
=p �� lZ �� (�� �, �r�o� °i �f . � tSEG. 3 aa u>
� 1� ' p�l . �o �e. (�s) � o • . I z -o-s � Q
�o �<��0�.��,n ��� .; ��� /(O � '`o ('660� ���) � a'
_ 1, �Oc'°P :4 �° ?� �
� , '°,-. �`l��'¢ ��,•k /�� � q ' �. L6 h z 37. f f.G
., x� ,�. � �r '�.. �� � � .
- < 13�
��
, � 1Q \
,�
.
: �
0
��
`��� \
�J_
�
s o.
a
c
I
:�
�
��
�
��
��
^
�
0
�
ti
, ��
�`
�'��.
b
�
O
\�
N
� M
�
��
� v
N M
vl\3-
�, "� , a . G e. �
r���i�- � � .�e � _ � 8 LV 0. � T �o �
l` g'o., ) �i a9 az .on ioc � 7n .:. . �`oo'
/ OF� p-)f�'t
����'%'.` , C�°� 11�0) �/960� �198�j I ��995� 5e C�T� �C �Ptfi
� rY r
4 �i 920� v (i9 �� � �5� o ��� � {�) o C )
�
o /7 � /8 � /9 � Zo�° Zl � �.
" � `� z
-� � �� � �� �� � ; .� >
�� �, 44 i <
� i.+���,��.��. . �:�t�!if!. ::::fi�. ��!� .: ��:. : i±l�.::i��„�� ?. . .:.�.�if� i �ii+(�.��.�.
<::>::;>:::::.�`:<:;:;:.: :;;::...:.«:.:::: :::::.::::..:::::.::::::�. :. . :::::::. .! .:::::.: :..., :
: :::::::..::.:::::.::.�:::.::: !� :::...... �'_�...._:: _-.::.. . . sed new
:�::.:::;::::_: ::::::: :::::::::: �..:.:.. ::::..:_::::......:..... . ..
::.: ::::::::::::..:. �:::::::. . : ::::::: ::::: ::::;:_::.:::;.:::::,::::::::. :. : ..:. ...::::::::::::� :::.:: . .. .:.::.:.::::.:.:::..:::..:.:. .
::::: <::::. :::::. :::;:::....: ::::::::;:::: :: .:::::. ::: ;: :. ::::;:_ - : . : :::::.: _::: _:::::.: :,:::. .:::.::::::::: ::.. .: ::: ��.�� .
::::_: ..�::::::._ ::::<:�:_ :_::: ::;:: :.:_:::: :.: .: :. ::::::.::::::::::.:. :::::. . ::: .:::�::;::::::::_�.
:::::_ ...�. .. :..::. :::..... .... ..: . . . .
: :: _ ::: _ � � `.: _ : ; ..::::: :::::. : . .
.
:::::::: ::::: �::::: ;::::;a:::�::::::_::::::���: :: :..._: �8�::::::>::::::::::::: .: :_::::::::: :;:::: .: :. ::.: .. .: ::.:. .:: �
::: :.::.....::::.:::::.::::::::::..::::::� ..: .:::; :_:::::::::::::;::::::::::::;:. ::::;::.::::: : . ,: .�::::-::. ;;:::::_ urnc I Bounda
;�::: `::::�::::::::;:: _
�
�
- :::::-:: .: ::� :::::::::: :::::::::::::::.:.;:::��_.::;:
::::: ::::::::: _ :::::::::::.:,:.:::<:: ::::::_:::: :::; :::::::::::::::;:::
:::::: :::: ::::::: ::::::: : :: ::::::::: ::::: :::::::.�:::: ; :: : : :::::::::::;:::::::::::::::
- _:.�.
° : :: ::::.: :: :::::<:� :::::_: .:: :_ : :::: : :::::;:; . ._: :: . :.:.: : ::::_: -. :;::: ::::: : ::_
: ::�. .::::: : :::: �::��::_ ::::::::: : - ::. ::::: :::: �:::: :.::��::�: -
„ :::.::::::>�`'"`�:::: ::: :: ::::.::::.::.:.::��:::::::::::::�::.:� ::�'�'�:.. :*:::� :: _:::::::::::::_::::»_:�:
,� .::: :.:. .. . :.:::..:. .:::::::::<:.:,::.:< ._:.:::::<:,::.>:<.::::::,: .::;.»,:.>::,::::::::::::.:::.....,:.. ; .:_ ::::::,::::::�:.::::::;::.::::::.
__�.._.. ,
- � ., , f
^
s>:i`�i: ;�#_:y;::: :,
s r az
O
N
a%`
' � �
�
�.
R
�
W
>�>> �<?_-<:
� �
�j � E
_
c. t.
I
�
<:::�:::..:::::<.. > V
_ � (t
': �: 'i:'<::;:::: :..' <<:'<`::.: :. .::.;_.::. :..
w � �t
':�_ � t
1
�1 g
u� R s
_"k�':>:::>::; :.<>:::;<:>:::. .> <> <;;:s :;><>:.:_:::::<:: ::.::... �
�^$i!,d"::i';`�i_N'.:;:::<::::::_ u�s P Ss.>s �J,nr°: 4'
;,s>::.;:.;v;L, :;:<;:�:: � rNOM �5 �/ + a : � `
) �S - ° °• `HE�r'N�".s� F Q'°° �� T$�
° ,4 9 � ��p1' ..�?"�'�R �, �� so
� -_4,l �•li�3z) " 9
� o p►1-�-_ � • y"
o K1 � - .
7� � t� � . '1
� � `0 3� ���� � 32� sa
� .)~ � ^llt�R �6 ..r °3�
� � � � � � 1 .. � f �-� $
"'V '' - 2i = � ' �5-�REE,' �_ p
1 a.,. o00
` + . � z o�
`• g 30 . + 3 � � � , �
�` II-Y � �� • ( I �
Ca��� �°3= _«�^ �,�sa32..
�I�
n1 �
�
�
� O
\
�9
o Z
�\ -
N
S Q
��
\
i�oT�����
� 1
_� ��
..`t'/7.ry�•i- �� I
i��� `� ��i
�,�, ,
����, ��.�
•n` � ' �
���� r�
!�A1 �' I I Z8 � 2423 2,2�� 119,g�
(.S[G. 3 QQ 1i3�
o�
��, , Opt�on C:
Annexation of
- F,�� �ots
�
� 'a�
U �'"
wZ
0 0 0 0 0
J� O O O �
� (� � .-- CO O
� 0 M N ("3 tV
�a� � � �
J
�
�
J� �O O O O
� � O N � VM'
LL 1-- � � � bR
� �
� W
0.. �
�
~ �- 0�0 �- I�
Z Q � t� �j �
U� � � � � `r
Z
O
0
? O ^ M O
J ~
� � Efi 69 tfl
� � �
`
zv�v� oo� o
O vp vp��� v� �
F- p— p— � 7 C'> C
a, m m � Q o a� o
�� 'u� �nv a�i>� �>
Q�N NN'tn � N�� ��
� W .� (n .r (n .� � � �., U �
W O'— O'— O � O��
JL� J� J� J�(n _..1Q(n
-a v � �n
� cv m cv �
W o 0 0 `�
� m m m � �
Q aMO aMO M Z>
N
d
x
�
C
ca
N
�
�
�
y-
�
�
�
N
.�
�
U
ATTACHMEIVT �`
City of Fridley
TO: William W. Bums, City Manager� ��
�
FROM: John G. F1ora,rPublic Works Director
DATE: November 25, 1996
SUBJECT: Designation of Truck Routes
PW96-243
The neighborhood south of I-694 has been requesting the reduction of trucks driving on
their residential streets. Accordingly, we are proposing to establish, by resolution,
desigr�ated truck routes on 49th, 53rd, 57th and 61st Avenues between University Avenue
(TH 47) and Main Street (County Road 102).
Withi�. this area, 3rd Street, a MSA street, is designated for truck traffic. To eliminate
trucks on this route, the Commissioner of Transportation must approve this elimination.
This is a north/south route and does not directly impact the industrial truck traffic from
the Main Street area.
It is recommended that the City Council consider the attached resolution to the
Commissioner of Transportation requesting the reduction of truck traffic on MSAS Route
326 (3rd Street).
JGF:cz
Attachment
RESOI�Fl.'I0�1 PU. - 1996
I• =• •1 5i � I� r� � • 1�1' •1 111 1 N • : V• 4:. • 1� •��'
•.� 1 • � •lai
Wf�REP�B, residential prope.rties are being im�act,ed by Ybeavy trucks driving on
their streets frcan an adj oining itx�ustrial area, ar�d
�S, the CitY Prq�ses to establish an east/west truck route syst�n between
Trunk Hic�r,ray 47 ar�d the ir�dustrial area west of Oozulty Rpad 102 at�d sauth of I-
694, and
�i8, 3rd Street between 49th Avenue and 53rd Avenue is designated as State
Aid Route 326, and
�S, this road is not necessary for truck traffic to access the industrial
are.a, and
W�S, the elimination of trua)c traffic on State Aid rautes requires the
CaYranissioner of Transportation approval.
I�IOW, TF�IItEFORE, H� IT RE80LVID THI�,T, the City C7ouncil of the City of Fridley,
Anoka Coimty, Mirn�sat.a, requests the Carrnmissioner of Transportation to apprave
the limitation of heavy txuck traffic except for residential deliveries on MSAS
Route 326 between 49th and 53rd Avenues in the City of Fridley, and
BE IT FU� RF�OLVID TF�T, designated trucic routes are being established to
sexvice the industrial area.
� �i�i� • I� • � • • :ii� �:1' M •� 11 y • Y:1" M • ' ' �� Y:� _ 4: � • • '
• • �i I•i�i•
WILLIAM J. NF� - 1�,YOR
fV11Y�.�ITF1
����ilili�u �.IG ul' l NYY N�I� ./
a
a
�
�
�
�
�
/
:�
] a � '� �` •,1 \ o "`�' .� :i . .' .`, : ` t - e -�`m9 �. . _,Y 'it � . +I �- i t= �- c� \ 37 � .�� �� t �„ �.G
'. ,,,�`' a'. _ a f .r � q E... ! S � � .� -�, . t ..s�
'.�. _.w- - ,(� � �� \'] .� f �` �• : �� V' :l iA l ; � . �..-s'.L e �� f ��.
� o - i: '�J7� 9 � ; ��� '.� � ' f 1�" � , �" i . �,- ,.� � � � �, , � : ;,,
f � , � � � .�p`at h�1. ��� �r4.r I\�.� �,rti ���'�� �` �„u.,r ' _ i"� µ i- I I�� ��c ,�' '. t_ „Yi+� J y �) ��� �r E
� Y h�, a" ��` ��c� :-i'.� �", ,� R I }.��� S v 3 ia, �t � i '��� 1C ��" f`�''� • 1I' � , �'� ' , o
t k ��; , ;
�r S µ� S�� � I 7�x� I�� -�--"_' J* � f i� ``✓ y FT �R �-j �v��` � � . J I ��2
� � � � t �� � � � , � , � �-.� � � � - � �. � ��
�y�. 1 ; .�i<[ 1 l.+C[ � �� -1.- .4 i �1 xc -
a�. �j t•ty C � � &
� 6~ . � . !� I �..rcePl�� . 1rv I
v l �: k `f: �� < 8 1�m
t�.ti..l:\ ., .'�'.L.Q � �"-� � • 1 I `'NC[. u�t� �[��tl[ t i.:. .� J � C ��L� �.L Y •��. : � ' I ' L�x
1 ' _ i�:-;rr
i y
1 . , y� � � �� . � Y. � '` � �---'. �. d � , i y, J M [ -. ,� ` ' fi ..., � �- `� � �' 1 " �
•4 . � , iq a'��. �- .. � o Q M I r~ Y �`.
C
� .' � j � .- a. h � �- ��.t } ik.- �.r �Y .� " .3....'. Z � :�� � � ' s'F v' �
_ . ° �j - l '. I ,�, ''' . �-�+♦ F .!- �1 a� .. t` A `� `� .. : .�b �I, '
i ' 1 % �� ,;�,. ; ...:. . � j • r � � ii._ a .
; � � � ` � fi rt- '�� .� j c— . . ' �� � � F
t ' <. / . }� � ].+ .. I : . � ` u , � .• �p : .
� ,' . y�, t _ C `C, . .uvt� t • r
•�J� k°'.� F4 �. ^� U�`� K.es � .ti :'.� �
- _ _ i' � E. ; ��-t l�..C�. � .� � _.�_ ' � , 'p i _ Z
r -
�. JV � . 'Y/ . � YJOR , n - .
� �`)' .t..ro. W(/ 1 .
� � �� � i � ,g; '✓ . � ' /t,E.: . '. . i � ..
��' �:,. /a , �I � oRE ; :`e�.._, * 'r R{,'^' . -L LL
,J J' �;,� �� � I � �-+ ; ,�..> �' M 0 KE / J�y ,{, � •c a �, a ; � _ o
��� � LA �' '�� � �� • -� ~ .~ u•t
,. ,�� . _ �
,y {ris%St�v:: n - �� � � t' � �. � .. . .. .� .
�I�ri�•j{�:•• '/��//'^��� � I 4� ._ �t� •` r �\ _ JS' ,.I.•! 1'� + J
` � • �' i/�' i7� 'F. F �i `' ('� -, 1 �\ � �� MY� 1 � � �-• -
s�j�, . 4=t�'-'-�-�
ti�7 . • j� / . � ', � p'-�'-r � �s�'`t � �, i � �¢� . � � c� �'r�� un.0 t-<.� o: °"^"" "
�i�.r`;�;� �j� j .s�:..l(� �..-`„��. �cR x � � � .�.. �� rr' uoln� L�I, t� I j ��� u
i =
:�r'r'. � o� �_ .y`[:� r•... �� • / - . �pBN i.. F � � .
t�^:�>::�:: � � ;.---��--� � �r r --�- � •. :::.::�:
. .s ;x;.;.. � :; � �j .� � . . :;�:4:;':�::
g�`� •uo - sue ,f ����..1� - ��Mnr -•. ��f . .. 4 k • - 'Z.'.. � .
j � xJ il� ��k��r4�S �$p _ � .� ~
� '� i � 5� .�, . .� r U
h ..i . , -�� � - � . ( � � �;� � �.
_ . .... a NQ Y 4 �ya
�\ 6KA/ '� [ ...�.� �.� „ -� � ':9)t'��' 2•� H _
/ ``'J x � '. ' � _ _ = aL •
�c\" � '�;���� �"1`� °`.� ' ' � � � -"�_ - '�''`
�" � f � ..�, ` i .:� �t - m. � _
/� i � - a r a
Pr 1 ���—K f eI ` �.�
,
,( � . y � r �' 1 __1_3r� � 7. � . T ' . t,/� ' - 1 � . ..
� �' .� "'"s°��
- r�:�� � ���CE� _ / 1 .w �F , � , t � - 1� � F ' ���� .
/' � �
' � � j .�__ � c ; 1 i � �.Ip� � \'�=�-rtns�� i a.K ����tF��(� - � �, �. .��'•f ����.�.�...
t�f-�� � < �t 5' �SJ�"��P��� i :cn. � ' , ... _. � . 1-. ... _.
� f =� � � �+t'�� € - . �=`�'�' _-- �, ° �.. C LUMBiA � � s H� R� . g .� � � io -1
� � � - :Y.� � � � , ' _ • - - ' _ '
� '�.;�'"~ � ` _:.�_ DISTRICT LEGEND
;I : £ '': �`J >:
.' .'�: "'� '- R-i ONE FAMILY DWG'S ❑ M-1 IIGMT INDUSTqIAL ❑
ay�`j��. F � ��', ;_ p-2 TWO FPMILY OWG'S � M-2 MEAVY INDIISTRIAL �
��•'' y��: ��S» P-3 GEN. MUlT1VLE DWG'S � PUO PLANNED UNIT DEV. �
q� i ' �
� "'_
n�r L' �; �: •�» .- R-6 MOBILE XOME PAHK � 5-i NYDE CAXK NEIGXBORHOOD ❑
� O
�r'C, I� �I � ��= ��� P PUBLIC FACILITIES 0 S-2 REDEVELOPMENT DISTPICT �
�A 1+c = � Q O-7 CpEEK 8 PIVER FHESERVATION �
.7'O _ _. J-�; �C-1 LOCAL BUSINE55
t��. fij: :: , p kF �
�( 0 'O-2 CflITICAL RflEA
� � ' _ :.�':_ = U� , C-2 GENEHAL �BUSINESS
'�h�` � �
�'�. �' ' ' t{�I:�� - C-7 GENERAL SHOPVING -
\�'^� \ _ '��" tl.j ,r C-R1 CENERAL OFFICE � VACATED STREETS� �
, r �' - t '
'yK,d ' '� `�s �y _-. :
.b`'d`i �� 'N_:�.uii�<:-; ,F���.�.:,
�,-��� �,{ =_== ZONIN�
,• ,.� ��� :a � {
r•:;.. ItL_ I /.. MAP OF
i-_._ ����������■
4. . ., J J �-,� _
�:�°:.°; :� . MQ��� '� : TRUCK ROUTE CITY OF
,; ; d ` ::_
.��; � � � . FI�IDI.EY
j� J _
f,i. ��� � �? i .. �'_:
L�
G'� = �°! MINNESOTA
N�o.; r?,^; ° � � .
.�- �
1' `�.' ����' � � .' a`="���� 3rd STREET COMPILED AND DRAWN FROM OFFICIAL RECORDS -
�� nu
�- `�> " BASED ON ORDINANCE NO. 70 AND ZONING MAP
��� c�•�cy� ,� - EFFECTIVE DATE JAN. 27, 1956 TOGETHER WITH AlL
�� `o ��3' '�� � � ii AMENDING�OROINANCES ADOPTED AND EFFECTIVE AS OF
; �,o,� 6.•� �. „„� � /
� � _��F �d`. I , -l[� JULY 1986
'''';."�; � /i � � ._.....,._.. ... ...
CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS
o i� iz-----�� ,
MILE
�\
October 30, 1996
Mr. Bob Brown, Dist State Aid Engr
MN Dept of Transportation
1500 County Road B2 W
Roseville MN 55113
Subject: Truck Route Designations
Dear Mr. Brown:
PW96-171
The City of Fridley is proposing to establish spQCific truck routes to service the industrial
area west of Main Street (CSAH 102). This designation is predicated on ensuring large
trucks access to the industrial area from University Avenue and I-694 without driving
through residential neighborhoods.
In designating this area, we have one State Aid street, MSAS 326 (3rd Street), between 49th
and 53rd Avenues on which we propose to limit truck traffic as it does not compliment the
truck traffic in this area.
The attached resolution requesting the Commissioner of 'I4�ansportation to approve the
elimination of truck traffic use on MSAS 326 between 49th and 53rd Avenues was approved
by the City Council at their November 25, 1996 meeting.
Request this resolution be provided to the Commissioner and approved. If you require any
additional information in this regard, please contact me at 572-3550.
Sincerely yours,
John G. Flora
Director of Public Works
JGF:cz
Attachments
//b �' � � ��\\
%�i��\
i����
, ��--.�
, �-..ES�,�
��, �,r
'��� C
Fridley Police Department
Memorandum
��
To: Bill Burns �1�
From: Gary Lenzmeier ��
Date: November 15, 1996
Re: New Tobacco Ordinance
During the November 4�' Council meeting I was asked by the Council to gather more
information concerning the ordinance. They wanted to know more about the new tobacco
ordinances from the cities of Hopkins, Golden Valley and St. Louis Park that were sent to
them by Smoke Free 2000. After contacting a spokesperson from each of the cities, I
learned that each of the ordinances is very new. The Hopkins ordinance has not yet gone
through the first reading and the Golden Valley ordinance needs to be published first
before it can be enforced and the St. Louis Park ordinance does not go into effect until
January 1, 1997. In all three cities the city council hears any appeals. Of course there is
no hearing history for the ordinances in any of the three cities.
I did discuss the issue of counter displays with each of the spokesmen and they did not
indicate a big problem having that as being part of their ordinance. In Golden Valley, a
lobbyist from the tobacco industry spoke to the Council but so did a representative from
Target who supported the ordinance. This was before Target elected to get out of the
tobacco business. The council elected to ban counter displays. In St. Louis Park, three or
four doctors spoke in support of the ordinance as did a Target representa.tive. There was
at least one representative from the retailers at the meeting but after the people spoke in
support of the ordinance, none of the retailers elected to speak. In Hopkins, it has not yet
officially gone before council but one of the councilmen is a tobacco retailer who owns a
convenience store. He had a difficult time with the ordinance but is now more
understanding of it.
In an attempt to find more history on hearings, I contacted a spokesperson for the City of
Roseville which has had their ordinance in effect since 1993. They have had several
hearings and one retailer has had two hearings. Their ordinance provides for a hearing
officer appointed by the City Manager. The City Manager has appointed the department
head who overseas the area of the civil penalty to be the hearing officer. Roseville uses
civil penalties for many of their violations, not only tobacco. Although the ordinance
does not discuss it, if the person is not satisfied with the hearing officer he can appeal it to
the City Manager. If that does not satisfy the person, he can appeal it to the Council.
This has happened in one case and the Council elected to support the staff on their
decision. .
.
I did send a letter to all the Fridley tobacco retailers on November 7, 1996 asking them
how they felt about mandatory employee training. I asked that they provide this
information to me by November 18. As of today I have had four responses. The Fridley
VFW was concerned about how the ordinance would effect their tobacco vending
machine. I told them the way they use their machine is probably fine, but if they fail a
tobacco compliance check, they would have to update their machine to make it
electronically activated. I also receive a call from Maple Lanes. They have a machine
that is electronically activated which is acceptable under the new ordinance. They
wanted to know what training is available to them. I plan to send something to them
from the North Suburban Tobacco Project. I also received a letter from the manager of
the Grocery Hut. The manager felt tobacco regulation should be up to the State, not local
government. He/she was also upset about the concept of removing tobacco products from
the counter. He/she compared it with availability of liquor and candy. Helshe also
addressed the training issue indicating they now train their clerks and provide them with
all the recent updates concerning the tobacco sales. He/she did not feel the store should
be responsible for clerks selling.
I also had a visit from Bobbi Larkin, the Territory Sales Manager for Brown &
Williamson Tobacco Corporation. She stopped by the Police Department to find out
more about the ordinance in relation to the Golden Pipe. She said it recently closed and
she has a client who is thinking about reopening it. I gave her a copy of the proposed
ordinance.
I expect that over the weekend I will receive more information from retailers concerning
the letter I sent.
emo
Date: November 15, 1996
TO: The Honorable Mayor & City Council
FR William W. Bums, City Manager ��1 �
`,qv Jack Kirk, Director of Recreation & Natural Resources
RE: CITIZEN'S FUNDRAISING COMMITTEE FOR COMMUNITY CENTER
The City Council has expressed interest in establishing a fundraising committee of citizens to determine fumishings
for the new community center facilities and to solicit donations from the community to make the purchases. We met
on Tuesday, November 12"' to discuss the purpose of the committee, a plan for putting the committee together, and
a projected timeline for committee action. A Fundraising Committee concept holds tremendous poter�tial for outfitting
the new community facility with necessary equipment and fumishings. In addition, the fundraising campaign is an
opportunity to increase public awareness of, and support for, the community center project. We have provided the
following information as a starting point for moving the Fundraising Committee process along. We request your
review of this information and any suggested additions and/or changes.
Purpose of the Committee
The Citizen's Fundraising Committee will be established to:
1. determine equipment and fumishings needed at the new community activity center facility.
2. develop a list of prioritized needs or gifts catalog to shop to the community.
3. solicit donations from prospective businesses, foundations, organizations and individuals.
Committee Formation
There are several options we can undertake to establish this Citizen's Fundraising Committee. The three options we
see that would work for our current situation are as follows:
1. Hire a professional fundraiser to solicit funds from the business and community organizations.
• Page 1
2. Form a committee of interested citizens responding to our call for assistance.
3. Contact select individuals with fundraising experience and/or community organization affiliation.
We recommend a combination of options (#2 ). While we want to encourage interested volunteers to help with
this committee, it may be in our best interest to selectively recruit individuals with proven fundraising ability and close
ties to potential supporting organizations.
Possible Committee Members
The following individuals were identified as possible committee members for their fundraising background and/or
their affiliation with community organizations.
NAME ORGANIZATION
1. Chuck McKusick City of Fridley
2. Jack Kirk City of Fridley
3. Steve Klaers Rotary
4. Scott Lund Lions
5. Barb Warren Chamber
6. Linda Caillier '49er Days
7. Glen VanHulzen Has worked on ISD #14 fundraising projects
8. Greg Rosholt School Board
9. Sally Woodard Seniors
10. Bob Bamette Retired School District 8� City Council Elect
11. Dave Kondrick Planning and Parks & Recreation Commissions
12. Barney Buss Seniors
13. Dave Ryan Rotary
14. Stan Kowalski VFW
15. Dennis Rens Retired School Supenntendent
16. Don Meyers Retired High School Principal
17. John Litchy Legion
Timetable
The following is a recommended timetable for the committee work.
November 1996 Establish Direction for Citizens Fundraising Committee
November-December 1996 Recruit Committee Members
• Page 2
November-December 1996
December 1996
January 1997
January 1997
February 1997
February 1997
January-February 1997
February 1997
February 1997
March-May 1997
June-July 1997
March-August 1997
September 1997
September 1997
October 1997
Staff Identify Equipment and Fumishings Needed for New Community
Center
Convene Initial Committee Meeting and Identify Woric Plan
Develop a List of Prospective Donors (Businesses, Foundations,
Community Organizations and Individuals)
Review Staff List of Equipment and Fumishings and Make Addition,
Deletions and Modifications
Make Final Selections on EquipmenUFumishing Styles and Color
Specifications
Prioritize Equipment and Fumishings for the Dona6ons Campaign
Establish Gifts Catalog to Shop to Prospective Donors
Target Potential Prospects and Make Committee Assignments for Initial
Contacts
Determine Fundraising Strategy and Develop Presentation Materials
Make Presentations and Solicit Donations
Follow-up on Undecided Prospects
Receive Donations and Purchase Fumishings and Equipment
Determine Recognition for ponors to Facility
Thank You Letters to all Donors
Citizens Fundraising Committee Recognition at Community Center
Grand Opening
Once the direction for the committee and fundraising campaign is decided upon, staff will initiate the process of
recruiting participants. Because this remodeling/addition project at the Community Center is moving along at a fairly
rapid pace, we suggest implementing the fundraising campaign plan as soon as possible.
JK:sj
JK96-81
• Page 3