The URL can be used to link to this page

05/17/1999 CONF MTG - 4649� ` CfTY OF FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL CONFERENCE MEETING May 17, 1999 — 7:00 p.m. Fridley Municipal Center Conference Room A 1. 1999 Council/Commissions Survey and 2000 Goals and Objectives. 2. Franchise Fee Proposal. 3. Lease for Proposed New Liquor Store. 4. Architectural Agreement with KKE for Liquor Store. 5. Public Access Request for Proposal. 6. Other Business. Memo to: The Mayor and Council From: Williarn W. Burns, City Manager �V'� Subject: Survey/Barb and Jack's Y2K Goals Date: 5-14-99 On Monday evening, I would like to discuss the remaining Council/Commission survey results with you. Following that,, Jack and Barb will be present to describe how their Y2K goals fit in with your survey responses. I have included a copy of the survey results. � i `� r . � �' I - � CfiY OF FRIDLEY MEMORANDIlM Memo To: � The Mayor and Council [�_�� • William W. Burns Cit Manager �1Y From. � Y Subject: Council Survey Results, Phase 2 Date: April 22, 1999 William W. Burns City Manager In the last memo, 1 covered the questions dealing with public safety and public works. In this one / will cover recreation and community development. 1 will a/so describe your responses to the overall priorities question. Once again, I will focus on areas of agreement and disagreement. Areas of Agreement Item #21 - On the question of what to do with the Sand Dunes, 3 out of 4 of you want to continue to support this area as a natural sand dunes park. This includes rebuilding the boardwalks for this area. 19 of 24 commission members agree with you. Item #23 - This one had to do with additional weekend, evening or holiday hours for senior programs. Three of you would limit program expansion to occasional spec�al programs on Sundays and holidays. One of you would expand the hours of operation to meet the interest level shown. Commission members were fairly evenly split among the options. A plurality, 8, agreed with the Council majority. :� � '� . +' - �I Item #28 - Three of you wou/d /eave open the Springbrook Nature Center Specialist position that was eliminated in 9996. One of you would add it back. 16 of 24 commission members agreed with the Council majority. ltem #30 - Three of you would continue our current yard waste site. One of you would c/ose the site and use the savings to support the pick-up of storm damaged tree limbs. - While 10 of the commission members agree with the Council majority, 14 would c/ose the site. Item #33 (Part 2) - While you were split evenly on the wisdom of studying the potential land uses that might be stimulated by the Medtronic development, alI four of you indicated that we should not try to match land areas to uses. Rather, we should wait to see what private market interest there is in the areas likely to be impacted by the Medtronic development. Item #35 - Three out of four of you said that the Gateway East project should be pushed as quickly as possible. One of you thought that we should wait until after comprehensive plan amendments are completed and until we have a chance to size up future redevelopment efforts we may want to make in response to the Medtronic project. Fourteen commission members agreed with a majority of Council members. ltem #38 - In this one we asked you about continuation of the City's scattered site housing program. Three of you said that we should aggressively continue. One of you fee/s that we should discontinue this program and rely on code enforcement and condemnation to address blighted properties. Seventeen of the commission members agree with a majority of you. 2 /tem #39 - You were asked about how we might fund the people and programs that we have added in recent years without raising proper#y taxes. Three of you feel we should cover these costs through a combination of utility franchise fees and increased liquor operating revenues. One of you would re/y instead on liquor operating revenues, expenditure reductions and continued use of fund ba/ance. The commission members were really split on this issue. Only 5 of them agreed with a majority of you. Areas of Disagreement Item #27 - Here we pointed out that the 5-year playground equipment program is scheduled to end in the year 2000. You were then asked whether you favored shifting the $200,000 per year that we have been using for playground equipment upgrades to capital improvements at the Springbrook Nature Center. Two of you said yes; finro of you said no. Sixteen of the 24 commission members answered yes. Item #31- In this one, we asked about storage of campers and non-motorized travel trailers. Two of you said that we should create a new, more lenient ordinance. One of you said maintain our existing ordinance. And one of you did not answer the question but indicated a concern with our double standard. Seventeen commission m�mbers think we should /eave the ordinance the way.it is. ltem #32 - We asked whether motor homes should be � restricted from parking in residential driveways. Two of you said no; two of you said yes. The commission members split 12 to 12. � Item #33 (Part 1) - We asked you whether it would be useful to analyze the types of uses that are likely to be stimulated by the Medtronic development. Two of you said yes; two of you said no. Twenty-one of the twenty-four commission members said yes. Item #33 (Part 2) - As I indicated earlier all of you agreed that we should not do a study whereby we try to identify sites for new uses generated by Medtronic. Twenty of the commission members feel that we should be doing this. ltem #33 (Part 3) - Two of you said we should initiate a planning process whereby we attempt to match uses and sites after Medtronic's Phase 1 is under construction. Two others said that the question did not apply given their answer to the preceding question. Nine of the commission members felt that we should do this study as part of the current - comprehensive plan amendment process. Six more said that we should initiate the uses and sites study immediately. ltem #34 - ln question 34 we asked whether or not the City should be proactive by initiating affordable replacement housing for the housing that will be affected by the City's redevelopment projects. You were split two to two in your answers to this one. The commission members were split 13 to 9 on this one with 2 abstentions. The 13 want us to be proactive in creating affordable housing. Item #36 - This question asked about restructuring the City's housing rehabilitation program. Two of you feel that the program is successfu/ as current/y structured and would leave it alone. Two others would maintain the existing program but raise the maximum loan value from $25,000 to a $35,000. Thirteen commission members would /eave the program structured as is. Eight more would keep it as is but raise the loan value limits. Three would scale back the program. lt is interesting that no council or commission member selected Option C. Under that option, we wou/d restructure the program to make it more attractive for the owners of lower valued homes, even if this meant giving the money away. Item #37 - In question 37 we asked about apartment rehab. Two of you would like us to develop programs that provide incentives for private developers to acquire and rehab apartment buildings. One of you would provide the " assistance to the rental owners. And another of you did not seem to be supportive of any assistance. Eighteen of the commission .members expressed positive choices toward assisting apartment rehab. Eight of these agreed with the strategy of providing the incentive to developers. Seven wou/d provide financial assistance to the owners. Five commission members thoughf we should not assist in apartment rehab. ltem #40 - This one had to do with use of fund ba/ances. Two of you think we should avoid drawing down fund ba/ance principal but be willing to use interest growth in excess of the rate of inflation to support the General Fund. One of you would use whatever amount of fund balance is necessary to avoid raising property taxes. And, one of you did not answer the question. Fourteen commissioners would draw down the interest growth in excess of the rate of inflation. Five of the commission members felt that we should purposefully drav�r down fund balances. Two commission members wou/d drav� 5 down whatever it takes to avoid raising taxes. And, one commissioner would avoid using fund balance altogether. Responses to Questions Requiring Numeric Weighing of Alternatives ltem # 20 - Here we asked you to rate various options for improving our parks and recreation facilities using a scale of 1 to 5. The potential average score for each option would have been a 5. The highest average score that you gave, however for any single option was a 3.50. Under this option , we would upgrade and redevelop our existing park facilities. You would, however look favorably toward building new park facilities (average score = 3.25). You were not quite as positive toward purchasing additional land to expand our parks (average score = 3.0) or adding improvements to the Community Center (average score = 3.0). The 24 commission members gave answers similar to yours, with one exception. They were considerably /ess likely to purchase additional land to expand our parks facilities. Your 3.0 for this item compares with their 2,29. Item #22 - This one asked you about different Community Center options. Of these options, you gave the highest average score (3.25) to building a double gymnasium. Your next highest score (2.75) went to adding a family-oriented swimming facility. Your lowest scores, 1.5 and �.25, went to an exercise fitness area and to the do nothing option, respectively. There was not nearly as much spread among the commission members' answers to this one as there was 6 �� i i to Council's answers. Their average score ranged between 2.48 for the double gymnasium to 3.09 for the do nothing option. - Item #24 - We asked you about expanded FCC programs for middle and high school aged youth. The bottom line is that you did not show much enthusiasm for any of the options you were given. Your average scores ranged between 1.5 for additional instructional activities to 2.5 for volunteer service projects (one of you rated this one a 5) and parent-child c/asses, activities and events. Commission member support for a// of these items was much greater than Council support. Their scores ranged between 2.88 for additional instructional activities to 3.66 for volunteer service projects. Item # 25 - We asked about expanding the hours of "The Zone Underground. " Again, you did not show much enthusiasm for any of the options that were offered. Your average scores ranged between 2.00 for Monday through Friday evenings after 6:00 p.m., to 2.75 for weekends during the day and daytime hours during the summer. Once again, commission member responses were considerably more enthusiastic than Council responses. Their scores ranged beiween 3.37 and 3.58 for each of the three options for extending youth center hours. ltem # 26 - This one asked about various capital improvemen� options for the Springbrook Nature Center. Your scores we�� very /ow for a/l of these items except maintenance of existi� � .4 facilities. Scores on the 5 improvement items ranged between 9.0 and 1.75. Commission responses to these options were considerably more enthusiastic than Council responses. The range was between 2.22 for conducting of special events to 3.47 for upgrading the visitors center. Incidentally, we did not send surveys to the SNC Foundation members. Item #29 - Here we asked that you rate the importance of various Nature Center programs. Your scores ranged befinreen 2.50 for providing speakers for nature programs to 4.75 for providing coordination of youth and adult volunteers. You were a/so very supportive (with a score of 3.75) of providing self-guided programming activities at the Nature Center. Commission member scores were somewhat higher than Council member scores . The range was befinreen 2.82 for conducting special events to 4.70 for providing coordination of youth and adu/t volunteers. In contrast to Council, the commission members placed much more importance on providing speakers (score = 3.36) and serving as an information resource to the community (score 3.36). Like Council they supported providing self-guided program opportunities (3.35) and were supportive of providing environmental education classes to elementary schools (score = 3.61). Item #41 - Here we listed a wide variety of projects suggested in the preceding survey questions and asked you to rate them by importance. Your scores ranged between 1.50 for correction of basement flooding on Jackson Street to 4.0 for 8 � . deve/oping a plan that will address potential impacts of the Medtronic project, Your scores did not differ significantly from commission sco�es (/ used a difference of 1 point or more as my barometer) except for the University Avenue fence issue and assisting the Jackson Street people with basement flooding problems. Commission members are much more likely to favor replacing the fence and to help the Jackson Street people than you are. _ Below are the Council and commission scores for each item. • Development of A plan that will Address potential lmpacts of the Medtronic project • Sing/e family Housing rehab program • Scattered site acquisition program • Springbrook Creek erosion control project. 9 Council 4.0 4.0 3. 75 3.00 Commission 3.67 3.21 2.96 2.57 � • Additional full-time firefighters and fire equipment to handle Medtronic and United Defense. • Construction of new classroom at the fire training site. • Funding of Gateway East property acquisition. • Funding of additional hours of operation for senior programs. • Funding of additional hours of operation for youth programs. • Remodeling and � expansion of Police department facilities to accommodate youth programs. io Council 3.00 3.00 3.00 2.75 2, 75 2. 75 �' Commission 3.50 3.25 2. 67 2.54 3,12 3. 71 � ti` � • Hiring of an additional full-time public works employee. • Dredging and algae control at West Moore Lake Basin • Construction of doub/e gymnasium at FCC. • Installation of a public access terminal for police records retrieval. • Sponsorship of affordable rental housing in Fridley. • Modification of SNC to accommodate live theater. • Construction of a sma/l outdoor patio at SNC. � COUI7C/I 2.25 � 2.25 2.00 2, 00 2.00 1. 75 1. 75 Commission 3.04 2,08 1.83 1,54 2. 71 2.25 2. 50 0 • Replacement of tMe University Ave fence with decorative fencing. • Correction of basement f/ooding problems on Jackson Street r 12 Council 1. 75 1.50 Commission 2. 75 2. 71 s v� BUDGET 2000 City of Frldley GOALS and OBJECTIVES Fund Depertmettt �� 101 Ge�eral Fund O7 Aecreation dc NaturaC Res 7Q Recrestion PEREORMaNCE COSTS/ BUDGET OBJECTIVES/ACTIVITIES MEASURES UNITS EXPLANATION tMPACT OBJECTIVE #1 To improve the playground equipment at Community Park, Creekridge Park, Flanery Park, Jubilee Park, and Locke Park by providing modern, safe, and accessible play structures. ACTIVITIES 1 a. To estabiish the specifications for the March 2000 Absorbed playground equipment projects. 1 b. To advertise for bids on the playground April 2000 Absorbed equipment projects. 1 a To provide for neighborhood input into Apri12000 Absorbed the selection process. 1d. To work with vendor(s) on final design October 2000 $186,000 and oversee the installation of the play- ground equipment in the parks. OBJECTIVE #2 To provide gymnasium facilities for use at the Fridley Community Center. ACTIVITIES: 2a. To conduct focus groups and May-April 2000 Absorbed interviews with youth sports representa- tives to determine facility needs. 2b. To survey adults in the community to Dec 1999•Jan 2000 citizen survey Absorbed determine gymnasium facility needs for adult and family programs. 2c. To work with an architect to establish July 2000 preliminary design and cost estimates for est. $8,000 New Money a FCC gymnasium facility. 2d. To present costs and facility needs September 2000 Abs°rbed recommendations to the Parks and Recreation Commission for consideration. ., BUDGET 2000 City ot F�ldley GOALS and OBJECTIVES Fund pepertment piWaion 101 General Fund 07 Aecreatton dc Naturaf Aes 7Q Rect+eation PERFORM/1NCE COSTSi BUDGET OBJECTIVES/ACTIVITIES MEASURES UNtTS EXPLANATION IMPACT OBJECTIVE #3: To assist Fridley residents in achieving greater personal growth. ACTIVITIES: 3a. To promote the fitness and exercise December 2000 Absorbed activities offered by the Flecreation Depart- ment to the public by emphasizing health � and weliness benefits. 3b. To include health/wellness compa December 2000 /tbsorbed nent to all of the youth activity offerings. 3c. To provide a health/wellness infor- December 2000 Absorbed mation page in the department seasonal brochures. 3d. To sponsor a Y2K Weliness Festival. May 2000 $2,000 New or donated money OBJECTIVE #4 To provide quality hard court surfaces in the neighborhood park system for tennis and basketball piaying. ACTIVITIES: 4a. To work with the Parks and Recreation January 2000 Absorbed Commission to determine optimai numbers of tennis/basketball courts and needed locations for the community. 4b. To research the various options February 2000 Absorbed available for hard-court surfacing of tennis and basketbail facilities. 4c. To deterrnine costs associated with March 2000 Absorbed court surface alternatives. 4d. To make a recommendation to the April 2000 Absorbed Parks & Recreation Commission for a sustainabie system of hard couR up- grading and maintenance. BUDGET 2000 City ot F�Idley GOALS and OBJECTIVES Fund Depertment Diviston 101 General Fund 07 Recreatton & Natural: Res 70 Recreation PERFORMANCE COSTS/ BUDGET OBJECTIVESiACTIViT1ES MEASURES UNITS EXPLANATION IMPACT 4e. To incorporate the court surfacing May 2000 Absorbed financial needs into the Parks S-Year Capital Improvement Program. OBJECTIVE #5: To improve the West Moore Lake Sand Dunes Park by establishing a long land use plan and impiementation schedule. ACTIVITIES: Sa. To convene a joint meeting of the September 1999 Absorbed Fridiey City Council and the Pa�ics and Recreation Commission to discuss the potential and optimal uses of the Sand Dunes Park. , 5b. To research cost estimates for January 200a Absorbed aitemative improvements to the park. Sc. To report findings to the Parks and March 2000 Absorbed Recreation Commission and the Fridley Ciry Council for a decision on recommend- ed improvements. 5d. To incorpo�ate the Sand Dunes plans April 2000 Absorbed into the Parks 5-Year Capital Improvement Project. OBJECTIVE #6: - To expand the scope of Parks and Recreation information provided to Fridley residents on the City of Fridley Internet home page. ACTIVITIES: 6a. To expand the scope of Parks and March 2000 Absorbed Recreation information provided to Fridley �esidents on the City of Fridley Internet page. 6b. To catalog all park amenities as a July 2000 Absorbed database for the public access. BUDGET 2000 Gity of F�idley GOALS and 08JECTIVES Fund Depertment ENvtsiort 101 General Fund 07 Recreation & Natural Res ?0 F�ecreation PERFORMANCE COSTS! BUD(iET OBJECTIVESIACTIVITIES MEASURES UNtTS EXPLANATION IMPACT 6c. To provide detailed information about July 2000 Absorbed the Recreation and Natural Resource Oepartment activities on the web page. 6d. To create program promotion December 2000 Absorbed strategies and customedparticipant feed- back opportunities via the InterneL 6e. To establish links to other Parks and December 2000 Absorbed Recreation related web sites on the Internet (i.e., National Recreation and . Park Association, MN Recreation and Park Association, National Association of Interpretation, MN Youth Athletic Services). OBJECTIVE #7: To increase the opportunities for volun- teers and local organizations to participate in community service projects. ACTIVITIES: 7a. To promote the opportunities by December 2000 Absorbed booking staff as speakers at school, church and business meetings or functions. 7b. To create four special service project December 2000 Absorbed events for the volunteers to assist senior citizens in the communiry (i.e., �ake-a-thon, mini paint-a-thon, spring and fall clean- ups). OBJECTIVE #8: To develop a Fridley Senior Program Web site to provide information on programs and service. ACTIVITIES: Sa. To determine pertinent information to April 2000 Absofied be included on the Fridley Senior Program web site. 8b. To train seniors at the FCC Computer July 2000 Absorbed Lab to develop and maintain the site with current data. BUDGET 2000 Ctty of F�idley GOALS and OBJECTIVES Fund Depertment Divbion 101 Generai Fund 8T Rect�estton & Natural Res 70 Recreatio� PERFORMANCE COSTS/ BUDGET OBJECTIVES/ACTIVITIES MEASURES UNITS EXPLAN�tTION INfPACT 8c. To establish the Senior Program site September 2000 $350-$500 New Money on the Internet. 8d. To update the site on a monthly basis. December 2000 Absorbed OBJECTIVE #9: To improve and expand the programs and services for the Fridley seniors. ACTIVITIES: 9a. To conduct a Fridley senior participant March 2000 TBD satisfaction and interest survey to deter- mine program direction. 9b. To conduct focus groups made up of May 2000 Abscrbed representatives from different interest areas (i.e., young seniors 50-65 yrs old, homebound service groups) to determine needs and interests. 9c. To work with the Senior Advisory Board September 2000 Abscrbed and the Senior Program Committee to develop and/or revise program offerings based on survey and focus group infor- mation. OBJECTIVE #10: • To improve the computer skills of the � seniors by using the new technology resources at the Fridley Community Center. ACTIVITIES: 10a. To train 75 seniors in basic computer September 2000 Absorbed skills. 10b. To train 50 seniors in Internet use September 2000 Absorbed and e-mail skills. 10c. To train 10 volunteers to serve as December 2000 Absorbed assistants in a Senior Computer Lab. OBJECTIVE #11: To increase the participation by those who live or work in Fridley in the Department's athletic program. ACTIVITIES: 11 a. To develop a promotional brochure March 2000 Absorbed for each of the adult sports offered through the Recreation and Natural Resource De aRment BUDGET 2000 CItY of FtidbY GOALS and 08JECTIVES Fund DepsnmeM Divisicn 101 General Fund � 07 Aecrsatiort d� Naturat Res 70 Recreation PERFORMaNCE COSTS/ BUDGET 08JECTIVES/ACTIVITIES MEASURES UNCTS EXPLANkTiON IMPACT 11 b. To regularly promote athletic league December 2000 � Absorbed opportunities in the City'Newsletter, Recreation Oepartment seasonal brochures and the local newspaper. 11 a To contact all major Fridley employ- April 2000 Absorbed ers to promote the opportunities for athletic participation. 11 d. To work with ihe ERC to promote Apri12000 Absorbed participation of an employee's team in the athletic programs. OBJECTIVE #12: To promote the teen program among at-risk youth. ACTIVITIES: March 2000 Absorbed 12a. To obtain referrals from the Police Department Youth Workers and school district staff members. 12b. To make contact with youth at home April 2000 Absorbed or at school to discuss positive recreation choices. 12e. To arrange for registration forms April 2000 Absorbed to be completed by parents/guardians. . 12d. To discuss payment options for Aprii 2000 Absorbed those families who cannot affo�d the fuU program cost. 12e. To follow-up with the youth, their December 2000 Absorbed family and the referring party. OBJECTIVE #13: To increase the opportunities for youth to � camplete community service (at the Zone Underground and at other community based programs). ACTIVITIES: 13a. To establish an on-going relation- January 2000 Absorbed ship with Anoka County to get referrals. 13b. To make contact with youth to May 2000 Absorbed arrange times and tasks for community senrice. BUDGET 2000 Clty of Fridley GOALS and OBJECTIVES Fund p8pertm8M p�tp� 101 Generai Fund 07 Recroation & Naturat Res 70 Recreation PERFORMANCE COSTS/ BUDGET OBJEC77VES/ACTIVITIES MEASURES UNITS : EXPLANATION IMRACT ' 13c. To create an open-ended "task" list Apri1200o Absorbed for youth needing to complete community service. OBJECTIVE #14: To improve the adult softball program by improving the scorekeeping operation. ACTIVITIES: 14a. To research the options available for January 2000 Absorbed on-the•field operation of the scoreboard consoles. 14b. To determine costs for converting February 2000 Absorbed the existing scorebosrd system to an on-the-field operation. 14c. To install the new scoreboard April 2000 TBD operatiort systems at the four Community Park fields. 14d. To use the participant operated May 2000 Absorbed scorekeeping system with the adult softball program. 101 General BUDGET 2000 C(ty of FMdley GOALS snd OBJECTIV DepertmeM To enhanceparticipant use of Nature Center facilities by improving the signage. ACTIVITIES � 1 a. To design, purchase and instaU August 2000 improved directional and informational signs on the 3 miles of traiis at Springbrook Nature Center. 1 b. To design, purchase and instail _ August 2000 Nature Center entrance signs that convey appropriate information regarding security, safety issues, park policies, and program activities. 1 c. To design, purchase and install August 2000 external signs for the interpretive building regarding hours of operation, facility locations, and program information. OBJECTIVE #2: To upgrade Springbrook's Interpretive Building's handicap accessibility. ACTIVITIES: 2a. To install electronic door opening August 2000 access to the building's main entrance doors. 2b. To instalt restroom stall doors to meet August 2000 ADA requirements. OBJECTIVE #3: To prepare staff training videos for on- going programs at Springbrook Nature Center. ACTIVITIES: 3a. To videotape on-going activities and June 2000 programs. 3b. To have videotapes edited and August 2000 formatted into staff training resources. TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TB� TBD Absorbed Absorbed BUDGET 2000 City of F�Idley GOALS and OBJECTIVES Fund Depenrnent D(viaiort 101 Generat Fund OT Recroation & Natural Res 71 Naturalist PERFORMANCE COSTS/ BUDGET OBJECTIVES/ACTIVRIES MEASURES UNtTS EXPLANATION IMPACT 3c. To purchase VCR and monitor for use August 2000 $8� with training ot part-time staff. OBJECTIVE �4: To develop a master design plan for the 7 acre entrance area at Springbrook Nature Center. ACTIVITIES: 4a. To wo�ic in conjunction with the June 2000 Absotbed Springbrook Nature Center Foundaticn to ' develop an entrance area design that fits within the overall mission of the Nature Center. . 4b. To woric with the Springbrook Nature August 2000 `� Absorbed Center Foundation to develop a funding strategy to accomplish the work in the design. 4c. To seek funding for the development of December 2000 Absofied the Nature Center entrance area design plan. - MEMORANDUM DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOIZ DATE: May 14, 1999 TO: William W. Burns, City Manager ��f � FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director SUBJECT: 2000 Community Development Department Goals and Objectives Impact of Medtronic Proiect The Medtronic project will have the most impact on the City of Fridley's future more than any other before it. The project will not only change the Fridley I-694 corridor but will also affect development in the north metro area. Three developers have already contacted me in search of sites for hotel and retail development. Their comments are telling: "The City hit a home run for the community'; "this will change the Ciry's image'; "the city needs to jump on this opportunity". The City of New Brighton is redeveloping the parcels in the I-35W and I-694 interchange and is also exploring hotel opportunities. I would be professionally irresponsible if I did not recommend to the Council a proactive approach to deal with the multitude of impacts from the Medtronic project. The impacts I am speaking of include, but are not limited to: 1) Land use: • Initially there will be a demand for hotel; restaurant, and retail space. • Where is the best place to start? • What will the market support in the future? • How does the market relate to the community's goals? � What are the community's goals? • Does the City want to encourage redevelopment for a Super 8 hotel or a Radisson? • How does the City want to influence development? 2) Housing: • Existing housing will need to be demolished to make way for new land uses. • How will the City replace lost units? • How will it affect the City's livable community benchmarks? • What about "move-up" housing to retain or attract households that want higher valu� homes? 3) Schools: � What impact will redevelopment projects have on the school districts? 2000 Community Development Department Goals and Objectives Page 2 May 14, 1999 • Will there be more kids or less kids? 4) Infrastructure: • TH 65 lane widening project needs to be addressed. • Sewer line upgrade needs to be completed by Phase II. • What will the spillover effects of redevelopment require of fire and police services? . What about transit services including light rail and the Northstar Corridor? . Will there be more demands on parks and bikeway/walkway impacts 5) SociaL• • Will there be more or less demand for cultural activities/amenities? 6) Technology Impacts: • What should the City be doing, if anything, regarding technological infrastructure such as fiber optic services? In short, I recommend that the City be prepared to respond to the multitude of impacts that the Medtronic project will generate. The Comprehensive Plan will address some of the above issues in general, but I recommend that a study be completed solely for the purpose of addressing the impacts from the project. Elements of the study would, at minimum, include a market analysis, a land use component, and a housing component. The scope and cost of the study has yet to be determined, but because of the redevelopment implications, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority may be more appropriate to fund the study. I do r�commend however that the Council endorse this concept, and request that staff initiate the study this summer. Council/Commission Survev Topics The topics in the Council/Commission Survey which affect the Community Development Department are: • Impact of the Medtronic project • Timing of Gateway East project • Housing Rehabilitation Programs • Scattered Site Acquisition Programs • Apartment Rehab Program • Yard Waste Site • Campers/trailers/boat storage • Replacement affordable housing The department's goals and objectives reflect all of the above activities in the upcoming 18 months. There seemed to be general agreement to push ahead with Gateway East and the Scattered Site program., and to keep the yard waste site open. There was a general feeling among the Council to adopt a wait and see approach on studying the impacts of the Medtronic development, while the Commission members seemed to support moving ahead with a separate study. There was less agreement on the remaining issues. . 2000 Community Development Department Goals and Objectives Page 3 May 14, 1999 Department Priorities The top three department priorities are as follows in the order that they appear: 1. Define scope and cost of impact study of Medtronic project, and initiate analysis this year 2. Complete the Comprehensive Plan process 3. Keep pushing ahead with Gateway East project and initiate salvage yard redevelopment process - The remaining objectives include: 1. Keep pushing ahead with housing rehab and scattered site programs with a careful eye on the pooling issue 2. Initiate process to analyze the apartment rehab program 3. Initiate zoning text amendments on the following topics: • Outdoor display (summer of 1999) • Survey questions regarding campeNtrailer/boat issues (fall 1999) • Initiate text amendment process after survey results • Relax front yard setbacks for home additions • Minimum lot area analysis in residential and commercial areas • Septic system maintenance requirements (1995 Met Council requirement) 4, Continue Systematic Code Enforcement Program 5. Ir�itiate optical imaging.of land use files, building plans, and address files. Budget Implications The 2000 budget will contain the required funding to complete the Comprehensive Plan. It is hoped that the bulk of the plan can be prepared the latter part of 1999, and the Council adopt the plan in the year 2000. The Medtronic Development because of its size, will require significant amount of time and attention by the Building Official, Ron Julkowski. As a result the building division budget will contain a request for additional funds for contract inspector assistance. About $10,000 is authorized in the 1999 budget for part-time help to assist the department in completing optical imaging of land use applications, building plans, building permits and, inspection slips in the contents of the address files. Because of the problems associated with the former provider of the optical imaging software, new software is now being evaluated by cifiy staff. Continuation of this part-time help will be requested in the 1999 budget. Because of the volume of the permit activity in the last finro-three years, staff is now evaluating a variety of software applications to automate the permit and inspection tracking system, which is now being used by Mary Hintz. The cost of software in this area has reduced significantly over the last nine years and staff is hopeful to purchase software which would cost less than $10,000. 2000 Community Development Department Goals and Objectives Page 4 May 14, 1999 Finaliy, the Planning budget will also request a summer intern to assist with the Code Enforcement program ($10,000). The 1999 Community Development Block Grant application did include $10,000 to be allocated towards Code Enforcement which wou(d help to retire the cost for Lori Skotterud. A similar amount is being proposed for the year 2000 budget. Summarv I look forward to discussing these issues with Council on Monday night. BD1jt Attachments M-99-121 BUDGET 2000 City of Fridley GOALS and OBJECTIVES F ; _ _ , . <; ::.: :...: .... .:....:;:;> .:: ;: . :.::.:;:.;:>::: :::>::;:.:::;; . .::::::: . ..:.::::. und _ >,:.:::;::.::.:>;;:;; :;...;::>;; .:. .:. ., , ..... .. . ::::. . : .; De achneh� ;:::::: :.;:.:::::...: .:.::.:. .:. :. .: .: . D�xis�on :::::;:.....:.;.; :. ::.::..:.:.;::.;;.;.;:.;::.:;:.: ::: ;.: < ;: P.:...... .:. <.:.::.:.:.;;.;::.:..:>;;>:.::::::>;.;;;>; ;:;»; ...... . ...... . ;..::. ; : 10<1 .General Funtl , , ,, _ ;; ;08 �orrtmunity �evelopm,errt < 80: 8u�lding inspe�� ' , ,: PER.�4RMANCE , . ;. ;.: ; . COSTSI BU�GET ;: > ;: ;: OBJECTIV�S�ACTIVIT[ES...: ; MEABURES ;: UNETS:: .: .:EXPtANAT10N. ...:1MP�'ECT :: _ _ __ ...._...... __ .... .._ _ ... .. . . _ ...... ....... ......... OBJECTIVE #1 To initiate optical imaging prbgram Hire Temporary New Money Employee Also $10,000 authorized ACTIVITIES in 99 budget 1a. Image com.�ndustrial plans 540 plan sets Dec-00 1b. Image residential plans 1,675 plan sets Dec-00 1c. Image inspection slips 92-98 26,000 slips Dec-00 1d. Image 20°�6 of address files 2,200 files Dec-00 1 e. Image land use files 2,000 files Dec-00 Obiective #2 Maintain high level of customer satisfaction in all aspects of division Activities 2a. Hire contract inpsector to allow Contractor hiring $50,000 New Money Building Official to focus on Medtronic authorized in 99 �ees to cover - project. budget; hire in costs 2b. Purchase permit and inspection Mar-00 �90,000 New Money tracking software 2c. Conduct customer service surveys Dec-00 Absorbed 2d. Evaluate results of ISO analysis Dec-99 e�6��rbed and recommend changes BUDGET 2000 City of Fridley GOALS and OBJECTIVES Fund ' !Depa[tm.ent ! <; > ; Qivis.ion 262, 265, 267, 501 08 Community :pevelopment ;: . HRA<;f Housiktg PERFORM/�tNCE <GQSTS/ HUDGE� '; OBJEG71VESfAGTIYITIES MEASURES:. UNiTS EXPLElbtA.'FtON iMPACT > OBJECTIVE #1 Complete Gateway East Project ACTNITI ES 1a. Draft RFP to developers to solicit Aug. 1999 N/A $1,000 HRA proposals on town home project 1 b. Select developer for project. Oct. 1999 N/A None N/A 1 c. Complete demolition of any remain- Oct. - Nov. 1999 N/A $50,000 HRA structures. 1d. Conduct neighborhood meeting to Jan. 2000 N/A None N/A review proposed project 1 e. Developer to finalize plans and site Jan. - Mar. 2000 N/A None Private designs. Developer 1f. Complete negotiations on a develop- Apr. 2000 N/A None HRA ment agreement with HRA. 1 g. Developer to submit application for May 2000 N/A None Private land use approvals. Developer 1 h. Intiate site work, including grading, Jun. 2000 N/A $190,000 HRA road closure/realignment and install- ation of public improvements. 1 i. Developer to initiate construction. Jun. - Jiy. 2000 N/A None Private Developer BUDGET 2000 City of Fridley GOALS and OBJECTIVES F�nd Deparfinent Division . ; Z62, 26..5, 2&7, :501 08. Community De�elopment HRA / Housiag > '' ;; ; <: ' ;:. . PERFORM.�tNCE ::;; ; CZ?S�S/ BU;DGET i:: >: OB,iEC7fVES/ACTNITIES > MEASUR�S EJNITS > EXPLANA'FlON ;. IMRACT OBJECTIVE #2 Implement Model Redevelopment Pro- gram for Older Apartments. ACTIVITIES 2a. Hire professional to facilitate a Jan. 2000 N/A $5,000 HRA focus group with stakeholders in Fridley multi-housing market. 2b. Identify issues conceming physical Feb. - Mar. 2000 N/A None N/A condition of properties (e.g. appearance, amenties, parking, lanscaping, etc.) 2c. Deve�op range of options for City Apr. 1999 N/A None None invoivement in project. 2d. Identify potential funding sources. May 2000 N/A None None 2e. Solicit owner participation. Jun. - Jly. 2000 N/A None None 2f. Identify project costs. Aug. 2000 N/A Unknown HRA 2g. Complete financial analysis and Sep. 2000 N/A Unknown HRA municipai contribution. 2h. Impiement project and use a model Oct. 2000 N/A Unknown HRA elsewhere in the Ciry. BUDGET 2000 City of Fridley GOALS and OBJECTIVES Fund ' ' ; ; Department ;: Divisiun 262, 265, 267, 504 : 08 Communrt� Developrnent IiRA f Housing ::. . > PERFORMAhICE : COS�SI BUDGET �BJEGTt�fES/AC�IVETIES MEASURES UNITS EXPLi�iNATIC1t� IMPAG7 OBJECTNE #3 Develop strategy to fund housing rehab- ilitation programs. ACTIVITIES 3a. Evaluate interest-rate buy down pra Jan. 2000 N!A None Absorbed gram. � 3b. Evaluate saie of existing HRA loan Jan. 2000 N/A None Absorbed portfolio. 3c. Evaluate using HOME or CDBG Jan. 2000 N/A None Absorbed monies for low-interest loan program. 3d. Appfy to MHFA or Met Council for Jan. - Apr. 2000 N/A None Absorbed rehab funding. 3e. Consider special legislation to Jan. - Mar. 2000 N/A $5,000 HRA regarding TIF (e.g. pooling restrictions, penalties, etc.) ' BUDGET 2000 City of,Fridley GOALS and OBJECTIVES fund ;.: ..:... : .:.:> De �. , ::.;:..::::: :::;:::::::::;::::>:;::;:::;:.:>:::>:::::.>::: : : .. .. :. ;:::>.:; ,:;:; p rhrtett� ::. ;:.. : .... .. ; .: ' . > ;:: :. ..;;::::.:: : ..;;:: >; :.:::.:::: . . ::>::: I1i �ston ;:;;.: :: : .: >1!0� `,., _ > .:>::: >..,....:.. ,; k ,. General::Fund ,. :. �: _ ;..: ;:::. ' " 08 Commu�� <.;::::.. _ ;. ; tY Developmer� : 81 Ptannrn < < " PER�C�RMANCE �OSTS7' BUDGE7. ; ;:: f�BJECTIVES7ACTiVIi'IES; ` ': ;M�ASUR�S ; : UC1tfT$ ; :LXPLi4N�►Ti:ON iMPACT ..:: Obiective #1 To adopt a 2010 Comprehensive Plan $35,000 remains $35,000 in existing requested Activities contract in new money for 1a. Request extension from Met Council Jun-99 storm sewer and human 1 b. Draft plan Jun-Dec 99 services chapter 1c. Approve Plan and submit to Met Jan-00 Council Obective #2 To educate residents and businesses regarding code enforcement program and issues. ACTIVITIES 2a. Prepare educational materials Apr-00 $500 New money 2b. Conduct seminar with businesses May-00 Absorbed 2c. Enter code enforcement data into June-99 through � Absorbed complaint tracking system 2000 2d. Prepare quarterly articles and reports Mar-00 in newsletter 2e. Prepare reports for Council Ongoing None Absorbed OBJECTIVE #3 Evaluate Ordinances and Pursue Required Amendments ACTIVITIES 3a. Septic System ordinance amendment Aug-99 Publication e4bsorbed 3b. Outdoor Display in Commercial Zoning Districts Sep-99 Publication Absorbed 3c. Front yard setback for home additions 3d. Camperslfrailers/Boat storage 3e. Lot area requirements 3f. Home occupation OBJECTIVE #4 To create developable industrial sites and job opportunities by removing salvage/ automobile recycling yards. ACTIVITIES 4a. Compile parcel and cost information 4b. Analyze financial impact 4c. Evaluate need for soil/groundwater remediation 4d. Initiate acquisition, demolition, and relocation 4e. Conduct developer RFP process 4f. Complete land use application review To improve public information documents for distribution ACTIVITIES Sa. Purchase Corel Draw 8 software 5b. Prepare/udpdate public handouts regarding zoning requirements BUDGET 2000 City of Fridley GOALS and OBJECTIVES Aug-99 After survey results Mar-00 Dec-0a Acquire salvage yards in Onan TIF Dist Jul-99 Sep-99 Oct-99 Apr-00 May-00 Jan-00 May-00 Mar-00 Aug-99 Publication Publication Publication Publication None None Absorbed Absorbed Absorbed Absorbed Absorbed Absorbed File grant ap�s To be Apply to DTED determined or Petro Board HRA Budget To be determined None Absorbed None Absorbed $800/unit None $800 Absorbed ' I � � , I1 C OBJECTIVE #1 Achieve 100% of County Recyciing Goal by increasing public education on recycling 1a. Support BFI's Mobius curriculum in Fridley area schools 1b. Place recycling information in each issue of the City Newsietter 1c. Focus on County-designated recycling material in all education efforts, as applicable 1d. Ensure recycling compliance at ail apartment buildings in city 1e. Attend property manager's meetings, as needed BUDGET 2000 City of Fridley GOALS and OBJECTIVES tons Send out letters to each school district in Fridley by Aprii, 2000 Have a minimum of four articles printed per year Meet County contract requirements for 2000 Inspect all apartment locations at least once per year Staff conducts presentation(s) if requested or if there are problems 1f. Conduct at least two public education Satisfy County demonstrations per year on recycling/waste requirements for the yea reduction 2000 1g. Develop cable tv programs on recycling as Minimum 2 productions possible during the year 1 h. Maintain a 24-hour recycling hotline phone Ongoing number that will be listed in the Blue Pages 1i. Promote City-owned buildings recycling All employees are aware services to City employees on a regular basis of what can be recycled in City Buildings I j. Ensure that all new residents receive Ongoing �ecycling information !k. Utilize all mediums of promotion as Ongoing ipplicable for public education - like block ;aptain newsletter, senior newsletter, ommunity bulletin board, etc. I. Host a recycling display at annual One event - March 2000 �modeling fair m. Maintaing current recycling information on Ongoing ;ity Web Site 237-0000 SWAP 20 None, program is funded by BFI $4,000 for an additional Environmenta� Section in newslette $500 per year in papedRlSO printer lease None None I$500 for handouts and prizes $50 for props Investigating cost ISCORE/ SWAP SCORE/ SWAP Absorbed SCORE/ SWAP SCORE/ SWAP SCOREJSWA None Absorbed None (part of Absorbed Administration tasks) None Absorbed $100 in printing and SCORE/ display needs SWAP Absor��d BUDGET 2000 City of Fridley GOALS and OBJECTIVES Fund . ; . . . . . . ;:; ...:..:. . .. ....:.: . . De arfinettt ;.>:.:::..;:::;:.;.::.::..:.;:::: Q�xtBton ; ;: ; p ; :.: ,.. . .. <::>::>:::::::;;, >. ,,: .....:. ...::::::::>:::.:. . : :: : ;:.. : :. . ;;::::.::;::. .::.>:;: ,:;:. ;.. :237. Sat�d . Waste : Abatement ` : 0� :; .:.:.:; ::::: ::::::: ::: ::>:,; .> : <:::.: : ::::...:::: :.. :...:. <::;::;.;;.: . ;:; :.:::. .:.:::::: .::: ... ..: :::.. ,: :... ::.. >; , , _ .. ....::. . . . . 00:;:;::::.:;..:..;: :.:;:::::::>> ::::::;:> .>;>;'::::;:::.>:>:;::>::::>:>::.;:`::�>::>:: ;, ; ; .. PEa�aRMANCE <: .. .: ... �C�STSf SuDGET ; ,< :< ; OBJECTIVES%ACTtVtTIES ;: . .. ... ; �IIEASUKE$ ' Ul1LlTS ': EXPL�lNA7'1014t ;lMP'�t�T: : 1n. Maintain current information on FIL line Ongoing None Absorbed 10. Monitor performance of curbside recycling Have system up to date None Absorbed service provider through complaint tracking and working effectively system. by Feb. 2000 Obiective #2 Ensure that Frildey residents have access to a waste management system that maximizes recycling yet is cost effective 2a. Complete a study of current waste Ongoing Investigatin cost Absorbed management system 2b. Use citizen survey to evaluate citizen Complete by Dec., 2000 Absorbed habits Obiective #3 Protect ground water and surtace water quality in the City of Fridley 3a. Consider application for a Phase II Clean Complete application by Amount to be Request funds Water Partnership Grant for Springbrook due date determined by from SCWMO Subwatershed SCWMO 3b. Monitor VVellhead Protection Plan Process Ongoing 3c. Conduct public education regarding storm Onemailing during year $5,000 Request funds water management combined with cable tv from SCWMO 237-0000 SWAP 2000 BUDGET 2000 City of Fridley GOALS and OBJECTIVES ;;:;;:.; : ;`:? `; : . ;', :';', F:und - : ;.;.. �.;:: Depactcn�n� ::::>:>`:'::;:;'::::":>:»::;:::::::_'>: :.:�:::.:;:::: 237 SoCid 1Na�ste Abatement ;:;.;:` ..;::..:. 2� Recycl�ng bays: :::::::::::;:::;::::: ;>:::. _ ;:.:::: : ;.;.: ; AEf�F�?RMANCE ; ,.; OB.I�CTIV�S/ACTt1ltT[ES ' ; ; ,.:;.ME11SlJRE� ._; ;'.>:. .>::::<;;; OBJECTIVE #1 As an effott to achieve County recycling goals, collect problem materials at 8 drop off days/year in a cost effective manner. ACTIVITIES 1a. Collect materials that count towards county Collect at least 30 tons goals. of material 1b. Inform public of drop off dates. Use City Newsletter, community billboard, cable tv, and notices to garbage haulers at least once per year to promote collections 1a Continually evaluate the economical Evaluate possibility of feasibility of collecting additional items. adding at least two different items � 237-2900 SWAP 2000 $10,000 SWAP/ SCORE None Absorbed None � Absorbed � � CfIY OF FRIDLEY MEMORANDIlM Memo to : The Mayor and Council � From: William W. Burns, City Manager ,�"�i Subject: Franchise Fee Proposal Date: May 12,1999 William W. Burns City Manager At Monday's conference meeting, I will propose that we begin the process of establishing franchise fees for Minnegasco and NSP as defined in the attached ordinance. The main characteristics of the fee are as follows: • The franchise fee is essentially a sales tax on utility bills that will be charged to the two utilities and passed on to their customers. • The fee will appear on monthly utility bills as a 3% charge to residential customers and as a flat rate charge to commercial,/industrial customers (see Attachment #1). • For NSP bills, it will mean a payment of about �1.29 per month for the average user of electricity. • For Minnegasco bills, it will mean $1. 73 per month for the average user of natural gas. • The total cost to residential users will be about $36 per year. • Those who have high utility bills will pay more; those who have low utility bills will pay less. • Those who have household income below federally defined poverty levels will have an opportunity to obtain a franchise fee rebate. • It will generate about �716,000 annually in new revenue for the City. There are several reasons why we are proposing this fee. In general, we are proposing it to pay for existing programs and services that are not covered by current sources of revenue. Another way of saying this is that we are trying to avoid further erosion of our fund balances. We are also proposing the franchise fees in order to offset the impacts of class rate changes on local property taxes and other state legislative initiatives that have limited our ability to raise property ta.xes and reduced our intergovernmental transfers from the state. The franchise fees together with increased revenues from our liquor operations are also being sought to give us more flexibility to respond to community needs. In 4 of the last 6 years, we have spent more for General Fund �penditures than we have taken in from revenue sources. While we did break even in 1998, this year we are projected to spend $1,304, 682 more than we will receive from all General Fund revenue sources. All of this money is derived from fund balances. Attachment #2 reveals the relationship between General Fund revenues and expenditures. Attachment #3 shows the condition of our General Fund Reserves and other unreserved fund balances. In addition to the broader picture, there are specific areas where we have been spending without offsetting revenues. These are all new expenditures that we have taken on within the last few years as our � response to what we see as Fridley's needs. These expenditures include the following: 1. Three new police officers were added in 1994. The current cost of those three officers is about $195,000 per year for both salary and benefits. 2. Two new police officers were added in 1999 at a cost of $83, 765. While $50,000 of this amount is funded through grants, we will assume the entire cost of these officers beginning in 2002. By that time cost of living and merit step increases will have raised the cost of these two employees to approximately �105,000. 3. In addition, the Public Safety Director has asked for another grant funded police officer to work principally in our school system for the year 2000. Again, we will receive a substantial portion of this person's salary from grants through the year 2003. After that, the $55,000 salary and benefits will be ours to fund. 4. Project Safety Net was added in 1994. The current, non-reimbursed cost for Kevin Thomas and other Police Department employees is �50,000 to $55,000. In addition to that,1999 staff and program costs for our Youth Center are $75,655 in 1999. S. Our rental housing program was introduced in 1995. While we will spend $93,182, to operate this program in 1999, only $42,975 is projected to be recouped from license fees. This leaves $50,207 to be paid for from General Fund revenues. 6. We built the FCC in 1997 and 1998. In 1999, we will spend $52,144 to operate this facility. We will also spend another $1,683 as our share of the operating costs for the Hayes Gymnasium. 3 . 7. We have been spending between $10,000 and $33,000 per year since 1996 to remove damaged tree limbs from private property in Fridley. We are budgeting $20,0000 for this purpose in Z000. 8. This year we restored corridor maintenance to our budgez While we budgeted $Z0,000, we expect to spend another $18,000 for equipment rental for this purpose. 9. We are also facing ongoing costs for additional assessing personnel and code enforcement personnel, and we expect the Finance Department to ask that an existing part-time information systems position be upgraded to a full-time position in the year 2000. As we get into an increasing number of new computer applications, the demand for help from IS staff far exceeds the supply. 10. We have also faced some significant one-time or start up costs in 1999. We expect to spend about $300,000 to prepare for Y2K. Of this amount $21,000 will be taken from General Fund resources. We have also spent �22,000 to provide equipment and software for the paperless agenda process, and another $50,000 for complaint tracking. In addition, we will spend at least $102, 000 for the amendment and publication of our comprehensive plan. This amount includes the visioning process. As we've spent more, we've seen the state legislature cut back on their commitment to LGA and HACA. We've also seen them apply their sales tax to our purchases, establish levy limits, and restructure the property tax system in a manner that reduces Fridley's tax capacity by more than 12%. In 1999 we are likely to get legislation that limits the amount of new value that we can use for establishing the taxable value of property. Moreover, they have exacted severe penalties for the use of Tax Increment Financing that, at least potentially, can impact our future local government aid. 4 r As we look into the future, we see many needs for Fridley. As our streets get older, we hope to continue our annual street reconstruction programs. These have been costing about $500,000 per year. In addition to that, we've been spending another $200,000 per year on seal coating and slurry sealing. In 1999, we are spending $2.2 million on the Riverview Heights project. While some of this cost is offset by state, metro system aid, a significant portion is funded through property owner assessments and from City resources. Of the $2.2 million that we will spend on the Riverview Heights project, only �500,000 will be reimbursed from state aia� In addition to needing funding for City streets, we will also continue to face growing needs for both youth and adult recreational programs. We are badly in need of additional gymnasium space for both of these groups. Funding from new revenue sources may make it possible to fulfill this need. We are also very likely to see continued pressures for improved street lighting, better maintenance of our three major highway corridors and increasing expenditures for a growing senior population. As we see the Medtronic project materialize and the departure of United Defense, we will also see increasing pressures for improved fire protection in Fridley. While the franchise fees will not pay for all of any of this, it will put us in a much better position to address these issues as they materialize. The last time that we discussed franchise fees, you were very concerned with what other cities were doing in this regard. There are four other cities in this area that have franchise fees. Blaine has negotiated a flat rate for different classes of customers including the residential class. The other cities charge a percentage of the customer's monthly bill for different customer categories. OuY fees would use a percentage for residential customers and a flat rate for various categories of commercia�ndustrial customers. 5 In order to compare rates, I have looked at the rates that would be charged by Fridley and the four other cities for their NSP residential customers. I've used NSP's number for the average monthly bil� That n umber is $43. 31. Blaine...... ...... ............ $ . 70 Coon Rapids ................ $1. 73 Fridley ....................... $1.29 Minneapolis ................ $ 2.17 Mounds View ............... �1.08 Fritz Knaak has prepared a franchise fee ordinance (see Attachment #4). Our plan is to use the time between now and July 12 to discuss the proposed fees with individuals and organizations within Fridley. We would also propose to place an article in our June newsletter as well as prepare a brochure similar to Attachment #5. Then on July 12, we would hold a public hearing on the ordinance, followed by a first reading on July 26 and a second and final reading on August 9. Thank you for reviewing this lengthy memo. I think I got carried away. 6 Minneqasco Residential @ 3% Firm A Firm B Firm C SVDF A SVDF B LVD 1994 Revenues 8,746,668 Expenditures 9,037,704 Excess (291,036) *Unaudited Attachment #1 Fee Structure $ 1.73/month $ .87/month $ 2.82/month $ 13.18/month $ 26.59/month $147.50/month $150.00/month NSP Residential @ 3% Small C/IND Small C/ID Large C/I Secondary Large C/I Primary Attachment #2 General Fund External Revenues vs. Expenditures 1995 - 1996 1997 8,942,118 9,595,587 9,882,031 9,647,338 9,479,381 10,030,524 (705,220) 116,206 (727,882) **Projected Attachment #3 Fund Balances 1994-1999 Unreserved $ 1.29/month $ 4.00/month $ 10.00/month $ 93.00/month $150.00/month 1998* 10,105,852 10,064,639 41,213 1999** 9,770,254 11,074,936 (1,304,682) Unreserved Discretionary Fund Balances & Retained Year General Fund Fund Balances Earnings - All Funds 1994 6,803,230 22,998,929 38,961,904 1995 6,566,390 23,303,588 37,372,126 1996 6,955,626 24,316,159 38,643,141 1997 7,042,469 21,924,924 39,498,218 1998 7,456,584* 21,423,664'' 40,454,254'' 1999 6,569,801"" 17,492,266"* 37,502,559'"' *Unaudited **Projected Attachment #4 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CO IN CUDERA NEW CHAPTER 409, AMENDING THE CITY CODE T ENTITLED "FRANCHISE FEES" The City Council of the City of Fridley does ordain as follows: SECTION 409.01. PURPOSE The Fridley City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the City to impose an equivalent franchise fee on all entities providing electric and gas service pursuant to franchise within the City in accordance with the franchise agreement entered between the City and each such energy supplier. The franchise fee is paid as fixll compensation for the rights to transmit and distribute electric or gas energy for public or private use within and through the limits of the City as permitted by the respective franchise of each energy supplier. The equivalent fee was determined in advance by the City based on each energy suppliers' estimated Gross Revenues so that the fee paid by one Customer Classification is in all material respects the equivalent, based on a percentage of the estimated Gross Revenues for the Customer Classification, of the fee paid by each similar Customer Classification(s) of the other energy suppliers. SECTION 409.02. FEE SCHEDULES 1. Minnegasco Company Gas Service Fee Schedule. A franchise fee is hereby imposed on Minnegasco Company for rts gas franchise granted by the City in the following amounts and as defined in Section 7 of the parties' Franchise Agreement. Customer Classification Residential Firm A Firm B Firm C SVDF A SVDF B LVD Amount per Month 3% of customer's monthly gas bill $0.87 per month 2.82 per month 13.18 per month 26.59 per month 147.50 per month 150.00 per month � ._ L � � � � � _ � V � � � � �„ Vt.L� �I.+ Q `�w � P L � N � � T � � C � f� N � t� y... � C '� C L 'a � � p � N p� � L � fE �� fl" � C .� � � � � � � C C N�'' N 0�� C N �6 � � � Q- c3 � � N � � � � L L L (�i � � U � _ � .0 � .� N p � � � � � C � � ` � O 0 N � � � � c6 � �, �+ p� O j =�� j� N � ."--�' tn � O C � fC � � U� c� c .• � rn a� � cn � o � o'rn�i � �•� � c � n, j� N � � f� � Q � � � � � M., E �+ _�� o� o� Q�� N 3� � � = L � � � L O L � � � L � (n � y„� � � � � = U�- p V- � c�E 0� �� m� O Q �� Q f6 Q N.� % � • • • • �� ca � O � � N O O �Z''r�'�� p �� O � U � � � � � � � � a- � o .�a�� a� C �`� �•�.cn �� ,-�� y .��.,, � � ,� � � ~ � � C � � � � � � � � V � � � ,�.�',, � � � � "� R3 � U � � O � �'� U � ��•� �� F-��v�� > t4 L � � � � � N 7 �� O 0 T � � O 0 � �� L � � � ,� U � O � � O � � � � � L .� .� � � .� cNa � c �O >+� C:�' :� U Y 'a (Q � 0 � y-+ (� � �A` W � � O A' C � W C y-+ � ssa.rpp� Suzpzby�r � � � � N Y � N � � O •� L � U U� ,.,, O � O U � O N � e � L = V .O C _ � U � � L (Q L � � � �^, W QQ C � � � C fa O > � � O � � O �L � U N � � � O � _ O � N � _ � � L � t � � � � 'y � N � C � N � � N C ` (n � L � � � � Q L (Q Q � � � L Q m � � • � � � a0 � I 0 _ = N iIi L C� � � 'a .�? •N N � � i ° V ��c�i�c�ao � � � � ` r.. _ � H j V � ;E N �. > O ,0 O � O = .Q N � C �� O � .� � � N � � � � � O ;F O C � V � � y � C � �^.,. '� � � "r v N T W rt� � � � (� �+ L � i�i � � L � � � � � � •W i� y�-+ Q � O � � � � � � x � � � � N (� "-' � � N — 7 ?� O � V � � � � � � � � V � � � � � � � � � vi C V Q� (� � i�' N ��I�C�cNQ.��>U .Q � • • • A � U 3 N "'' ca �� Q N � L � � U O� N O ca � = U � O � � Q � � � � C � � � � � O � � � �.0 f� � ��0� �+ N �, � = H Q f�4 w'- � O V O � a> � = o � � � � O L Q �O � C _ � � � ._. r.�. �, � � f0 � °� vi O � Y � � O Q� 3 N C � � � � � � � Z '� � � >+ � � .«.� uj �, N = �� U V 'C "� (a � �> .N � � � c � `� � _ � � 3 F- rn �' 0 � � U � i >+ � � N � ca � � � � U N � U cv � rn a� � c 3 �� O N V �. 0 � � � O U = � � � � f� � � � O � � � "� O � � � _ � U .� .. V) L � •"= O � � O � � U C Q � � � _ � � � OO L ia ��♦ v�i W � (� � Q � .� � > C O � � � t � � � L Q �— O ca � � � U t� O � _ \ — � �, M � L � 3 ca a a� 0 a 3� mZrn N N i. N ��— or- �� i � C � 0 C1 i � 0 y � � 0 O N U � � = L fC — � � _ � Q � � (�6 � � U C L � L � N � O �� Q � �N � V � � � � �^` � � � L � W m O � � � C � N � � O N � � V �,.� N >NM,� Q- > N N � Q N � U � � N� o � N � � 3 � � L ��.. U `� W � � .Q � � V/ � � � � � U C � � r� C O �t/) N L � L � � � .� m .� .� � � � � � Q � O X � O *= � :a N > Q- � N aNi��a�'i� L 0 fC� ��.� U �i X .� �L � f � � � � � � tn � �C — � N O '� � � � �(3 = fn •� V v�i p u, o'� N N c� � N E� N r�-.. N � � fB � U�'`�+N-'•fn � w�.. C � N � � � � � '� �� O >'� "'. �'� C �� ,C �+ � � � O � � N 4- '� = � � V � N � "� �, tn � � t � � � � c��f- OQ Q.Q . . . � � Q N fa L � C f6 ._ N � f� � � � t C N � ' � o � � � � :r C � � � � � N � c��. m o �- �, N � � � � � � Q j � � O � � O Q � N � 0�•� C � U tn � N f�II N w�,,, �� Q L � � � � � � N � O N � �+ 'C � N �w. N � �._t Q"� N �+.�0 V � 3 ln Q..� c ca � L fN6 �, = O N .p N � � � � � Q f� �' N � t L - � � � ti � � � � w � N � Q � � � � �' V /n fn •"= � __ � U � � � � � > U � � � ."_' ?r p � � � � � � � N 'C v`- O = a� � a� v, a� ca c �3 p) � > � > � O •"= � t t t � � f�3 O ��,V U f0 > L > N � Q � � L � t � � f0 � N i � � � � "-_�' � �= � �p ?� � �j � ?' � c ��O�u��°� � >, o n u��iEHEaH�o� T °' � � Q � O � � � � N V �'p_ �� O 0 0� � L L � � � � � � 0 � � � � O�� c"-'n�N�HU u� -� � Q- LL � N�.�., � C3 � � � — C C � +� +�+ N� �� N� p.� N�.L��N�a�°o ,� � � � � ,� p) ,� O � � � � � �+� � � M (n � t/j N V X � �,N �_� U U O a�-' � Q- U� �-�- C C cn ca c�La.;�-C X 0 �� •� �� c0 �•� V N N ,�Q-oa��a�a�ioc �.� n�.cF-�C� E� � � N O � L � "� �+ �' L � —2� � O W C � � � � �' U � y � O � � C +y-' � � a� U U Q O � C�� N � � � � � a�a�Eo � O � � 0 c � U � ca �- �, �n ,�L�N a� L � C ."'-�'' H c�itLU TO: WILLIAM W. BURNS, CITYMANAGER �� FROM: RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR SUBJECT: PROPOSED LIQUOR STORE AT THE NEW CUB FOODS SITE DATE: May 14,1999 As you are aware, we have been working on two items related to the opening of a new Liquor Warehouse location; a lease, and architect services. We have received a draft of the lease from Holiday. I have had the City Attorney review the document and there are a couple of items that we will be working through with the people at Holiday. I have attached the significant components of that lease. For the past 5 years we have been utilizing the services of KKE Architects. We aze now at a point that we need to have an architect develop the schematic design and progress through the various phases to an end product. The space we are looking at in the Cub Foods Store (owned by Holiday Companies) is a space of 13,331 squaze feet along the side of Gander Mountain. We would need to design a space that is secure from all other tenants in the building. I have outlined some of the elements of the proposed agreement with the azchitect and have attached them also. In the past we have provided Council with a very high level summary proforma. I have included summary proforma information as part of this memo. Over the past couple of months the Liquor Retail Industry has been buzzing with the rumor that we are expanding our operation to include a store at the new Cub Foods location. Everyone that I have spoken with feels that this is one of the best locations that could have ever been chosen. It is very possible that the store could surpass our proj ections. RDP/me Holiday/Cub Foods Lease Cub Lease expires on 10/31/2013 We would be taking the site on an "as is" basis Signage - one sign on the east side of the building a 124 sq ft Sign Lease Cost Years 1-5 6-10 11-15 1 st Opt 2nd Op1 3rd Opt 4th Opt Cost $ 6.25 $ 7.19 $ 8.25 $ 9.51 $ 10.94 $ 12.58 $ 14.46 Space 13,331 13,331 13,331 13,331 13,331 13,331 13,331 Total $ 83,318.75 $ 95,849.89 $ 109, 980.75 $ 126,777.81 $ 145,841.14 $ 167,703.98 $ 192, 766.26 Common Area Maintenance Charges would also be part of the lease cost. Holiday has also stated that our lease can be terminated by the loss of the grocery tenant Two outstanding issues on the lease: Insurance Limits Liquidated damage issues in the event of lease termination. Rick Pribyl Project Description : • Design and remodel preexisting space in the Holiday building • The proposed store square footage would ` 4� be 13,331 square feet `��`��y � ��' M� ��. � — Pro�ect elemen�s tnc[ude � ; � a,�� ;;� � �� : � �� . ;.Stn,rft�raE�E'�e �u �� Architectural Services - New Liquor Location � Rick Pribyl Scope of Basic Ser� • Schematic Design Phase • Design Development Phase • Construction Documents Phase � : . �, � �� • Bidding or Negotiation� Phase �� _� : �� • Cons�ruct��on Pk�ase /�d��nistra��o��`�� ,m. A .e � •",�,��m.��r ;�,,,�:, '�, ss of th' Ca 4 �t�.o G� tr c Construction Admi • The architect will provide the administration on the contract • The architect will visif the site on a re ular � 9 basis to determine that the work is in ;��'��; - accordance w�th #he contract documen�s: _-�° x��2 . �� .,,.�.;��a ._� e. .. � � .�. , . �� .....�=�,,.ua�e�� Architectural Services - New Liquor Location 2 Rick Pribyl Compensation for: • Compensation would be calculated at 7.75 % of Construction Cost • Estimate of construction at this time is $721,000 • Estimated architect fees would be $55,878.00 _ � �� — �� . Architectural Services - New Liquor Location 3 O O h � N M �4 h � � � w � W �! � � � N � t 4�.1 � L 0 � a - � � 'i � N O � � 0 O � � � N J � 0 O � O O O � ti O O � C�0 O O 00 N O O � 00 O O CO I� O O i� M N 00 � tf) O O �[! N � M 00 tn O O�fi � r- tn r- tn 0� 00 M e- N O N � �! � � � Efi 4R 6�? 69 EA 69 E14 69 O O O �t I` O O � CO O O o0 N O O � 00 O O CO t� O O tG M 00 �t1�00� � N 00 00 tt� O O� M 00 � N � 00 00 �t! � M 64 ER d4 EF} EJ-} Efi Eii 6R N O O N f` O O Q� � 000 �f�00� o� O O o0 N O O � C� 0�0 N � tf O O ��if CMC CO N Ca � O O� I� � 0�0 N � � � � M M Ef3 ER d4 EA EF? EF� EA d9 N � � O U � o ,... C \ y,r (� w, .-- O cB o O U v� c�n ` Q � U U � x °� �' O w � � y o a� � � cn (� N tn � O� ta C� �U C9 � � Q O F�— � � � � � �_� � � � � � � � o N �c~o, �ti °o,°o,�o Cp tn r- M N O O O � r- I` O O O � O O O � � � � � � Ef� H? Ef3 d9 EF? Ef? ER � o Q U Q � � � .� � � �. N � � � � U� a`�i U s a� o U a� U � � a� a� � � � tn � � v cn cn � �- p J U I— Cn J J(/� � Q NI � \I 0 � M o I � N C � 7 � N � v- O � � � � � c � � � � O ti M � � � � � M ti M ti O O N N � N O N M � � lL') N Y U (0 � A co � 0 L ca a� } �i�°, o c� o � o O O � Ef? E!> � � o �- c N � � 0 U c� �" O � � � � CfTY OF FRIDLEY MEMORANDIlM Memo To: � The Mayor and Council (�_,�� W. Burns Cit Manager �1Y' From. Will�am , Y Subject: Council Survey Results, Phase 2 Date: April22, 1999 William W. Burns City Manager In the last memo, 1 covered the questions dealing with public safety and public works. ln this one / wiU cover recreation and community development. I will a/so describe your responses to the overall priorities question. Once again, I will focus on areas of agreement and disagreement. Areas of Agreement Item #21 - On the question of what to do with the Sand Dunes, 3 out of 4 of you want to continue to support this area as a natural sand dunes park. This includes rebuilding the boardwalks for this area. 19 of 24 commission members agree with you. Item #23 - This one had to do with additional weekend, evening or holiday hours for senior programs. Three of you would limit program expansion to occasional special programs on Sundays and holidays. One of you would expand the hours of operation to meet the interest level shown. Commission members were fairly evenly split arr'on� the options. A plurality, 8, agreed with the Council majority. Item #28 - Three of you wou/d leave open the Springbrook Nature Center Specialist position that was eliminated in 1996. One of you would add it back. 16 of 24 commission members agreed with the Council majority. ltem #30 - Three of you would continue our current yard waste site. One of you would c/ose the site and use the savings to support the pick-up of storm damaged tree limbs. While 10 of the commission members agree with the Council majority, 14 would c/ose the site. Item #33 (Part 2) - While you were split evenly on the wisdom of studying the potential land uses that might be stimulated by the Medtronic development, all four of you indicated that we should not try to match land areas to uses. Rather, we should wait to see what private market interest there is in the areas likely to be impacted by the Medtronic development. ltem #35 - Three out of four of you said that the Gateway East project should be pushed as quickly as possib/e. One of you thought that we shou/d wait until after comprehensive plan amendments are completed and until we have a chance to size up future redevelopment efforts we may want to make in response to the Medtronic project. Fourteen commission members agreed with a majority of Council members. Item #38 - ln this one we asked you about continuation of the City's scattered site housing program. Three of you said that we shou/d aggressively continue. One of you feels that we should discontinue this program and rely on code enforcement and condemnation to address blighted properties, Seventeen of the commission members agree with a majority of you. 2 Item #39 - You were asked about how we might fund the people and programs that we have added in recent years without raising proper#y taxes. Three of you fee/ we should cover these costs through a combination of utility franchise fees and increased liquor operating revenues. One of you wou/d rely instead on liquor operating revenues, expenditure reductions and continued use of fund ba/ance. The commission members were really split on this issue. Only 5 of them agreed with a majority of you. Areas of Disagreement ltem #27 - Here we pointed out that the 5-year playground equipment program is scheduled to end in the year 2000. You were then asked whether you favored shifting the $200,000 per year that we have been using for playground equipment upgrades to capital improvements at the Springbrook Nature Center. Two of you said yes; two of you sa��d no. Sixteen of the 24 commission members answered yes. Item #31 - ln this one, we asked about storage of campers and non-motorized travel trailers. Two of you said that we should create a new, more lenient ordinance. One of you said maintain our existing ordinance. And one of you did not answer the question but indicated a concern with our double standard. Seventeen commission members think we should /eave the ordinance the way.it is. Item #32 - We asked whether motor homes should be restricted from parking in residential driveways. Two of you said no; two of you said yes. The commission members split 12 to 12. 3 Item #33 (Part �) - We asked you whether it would be useful to analyze the types of uses that are likely to be stimulated by the Medtronic development. Two of you said yes; two of you said no. Twenty-one of the twenty-four commission members said yes. Item #33 (Part 2) - As I indicated earlier all of you agreed that we should not do a study whereby we try to identify sites for new uses generated by Medtronic. Twenty of the commission members feel that we should be doing this. Item #33 (Part 3) - Two of you said we should initiate a planning process whereby we attempt to match uses and sites after Medtronic's Phase � is under construction. Two others said that the question did not apply given their answer to the preceding question. Nine of the commission members felt that we should do this study as part of the current comprehensive plan amendment process. Six more said that we should initiate the uses and sites study immediately. Item #34 - In question 34 we asked whether or not the City should be proactive by initiating affordable replacement housing for the housing that will be affected by the City's redevelopment projects. You were split two to two in your answers to this one. The commission members were split 13 to 9 on this one with 2 abstentions. The 13 want us to be proactive in creating affordable housing. Item #36 - This question asked about restructuring the City's housing rehabilitation program. Two of you fee/ that the program is successful as current/y structured and would leave it a/one. Two others would maintain the existing program but raise the maximum loan value from $25,000 to a $35,000. Thirteen commission members would /eave the program structured as is. Eight more would keep it as is but raise the loan value limits. Three would scale back the program. It is interesting that no council or commission member se/ected Option C. Under that option, we would restructure the program to make it more attractive for the owners of lower valued homes, even if this meant giving the money away. Item #37 - In question 37 we asked about apartment rehab. Two of you would like us to develop programs that provide incentives for private developers to acquire and rehab apartment buildings. One of you would provide the � assistance to the rental owners. And another of you did not seem to be supportive of any assistance. Eighteen of the commission members expressed positive choices toward assisting apartment rehab. Eight of these agreed with the strategy of providing the incentive to developers. Seven would provide financia/ assistance to the owners. Five commission members thoughf we should not assist in apartment rehab. Item #40 - This one had to do with use of fund balances. Two of you think we should avoid drawing down fund balance principal but be willing to use interest growth in excess of the rate of inflation to support the General Fund. One of you wou/d use whatever amount of fund balance is necessary to avoid raising property taxes. And, one of you did not answer the question. Fourteen commissioners would draw down the interest growth in excess of the rate of inflation. Five of the commission members fe/t that we should purposefully draw down fund balances. Two commission member� would draw 5 � down whatever it takes to avoid raising taxes. And, one commissioner would avoid using fund balance altogether, Responses to Questions Requiring Numeric Weighing of Alternatives Item # 20 - Here we asked you to rate various options for improving our parks and recreation facilities using a scale of 1 to 5. The potential average score for each option would have been a 5. The highest average score that you gave, however for any single option was a 3.50. Under this option , we would upgrade and redevelop our existing park facilities. You would, however /ook favorably toward building new park facilities (average score = 3.25). You were not quite as positive toward purchasing additional land to expand our parks (average score = 3.0) or adding improvements to the Community Center (average score = 3.0). The 24 commission members gave answers similar to yours, with one exception. They were considerably less likely to purchase additional land to expand our parks facilities. Your 3.0 for this item compares with their 2.29. Item #22 - This one asked you about different Community Center options. Of these options, you gave the highest average score (3.25) to building a double gymnasium, Your next highest score (2.75) went to adding a family-oriented swimming facility, Your lowest scores, �.5 and 1.25, went to an exercise fitness area and to the do nothing option, respectively, There was not nearly as much spread among the commission members' answers to this one as there was 6 Y to Council's answers. Their average score ranged between 2.48 for the double gymnasium to 3.09 for the do nothing option. � Item #24 - We asked you about expanded FCC programs for middle and high school aged youth. The bottom line is that you did not show much enthusiasm for any of the options you were given. Your average scores ranged between 1.5 for additional instructional activities to 2.5 for volunteer service projects (one of you rated this one a 5) and parent-child c/asses, activities and events. Commission member support for al/ of these items was much greater than Council support. Their scores ranged between 2.88 for additional instructional activities to 3.66 for volunteer service projects. Item # 25 - We asked about expanding the hours of "The Zone Underground. " Again, you did not show much enthusiasm for any of the options that were offered. Your average scores ranged between 2.00 for Monday through Friday evenings after 6:00 p.m., to 2.75 for weekends during the day and daytime hours during the summer. Once again, commission member responses were considerably more enthusiastic than Council responses. Their scores ranged between 3.37 and 3.58 for each of the three options for extending youth center hours. Item # 26 - ihis one asked about various capital improvement options for the Springbrook Nature Center. Your score� wer� rrery /ow for all of these items except maintenance of existin� � facilities. Scores on the 5 improvement items ranged between �.0 and 1.75. Commission responses to these options were considerably more enthusiastic than Council responses. The range was between 2.22 for conducting of special events to 3.47 for upgrading the visitors center. lncidentally, we did not send surveys to the SNC Foundation members. Item #29 - Here we asked that you rate the importance of various Nature Center programs. Your scores ranged between 2.50 for providing speakers for nature programs to 4.75 for providing coordination of youth and adult vo/unteers. You were a/so very supportive (with a score of 3.75) of providing self-guided programming activities at the Nature Center. Commission member scores were somewhat higher than Council member scores . The range was between 2.82 for conducting special events to 4.70 for providing coordination of youth and adult volunteers. In contrast to Council, the commission members placed much more importance on providing speakers (score = 3.36) and serving as an information resource to the community (score 3.36). Like Council they supported providing se/f-guided program opportunities (3.35) and were supportive of providing environmental education c/asses to elementary schoo/s (score = 3.61). Item #41 - Here we listed a wide variety of projects suggested in the preceding survey questions and asked you to rate them by importance. Your scores ranged between 1.50 for correction of basement flooding on Jackson Streei to 4.0 for s deve/oping a plan that wil! address potential impacts of the Medtronic project. Your scores did not differ significantly from commission scores (I used a difference of 1 point or more as my barometer) except for the University Avenue fence issue and assisting the Jackson Street people with basement flooding problems. Commission members are much more likely to favor replacing the fence and to help the Jackson Street people than you are. . Below are the Council and commission scores for each item. • Development of A p/an that will Address potential Impacts of the Medtronic project • Single famil y Housing rehab program • Scattered site acquisition program • Springbrook Creek erosion control Council ,, 4.0 3. 75 Commission 3. 67 3.21 2.96 project. 3.00 2.57 9 • Additional full-time firefighters and fire equipment to handle Medtronic and United Defense. • Construction of new c/assroom at the fire training site. � Funding of Gateway East properly acquisition. • Funding of additional hours of operation for senior programs. • Funding of additional hours of operation for youth programs. • Remodeling and � expansion of Police department facilities to accommodate youth programs. io COU/7C%l 3.00 3.00 3.00 2. 75 2, 75 2. 75 Commission 3.50 3.25 2.67 2.54 3.12 3. 7� � • Hiring of an additional full-time public works employee. • Dredging and algae control at West Moore Lake Basin • Construction of double gymnasium at FCC. • Installation of a public access terminal for police records retrieval. • Sponsorship of affordable rental housing in Fridley. • Modification of SNC to accommodate live theater. • Construction of a small outdoor patio at SNC. m Council 2.25 2.25 2.00 2.00 2.00 1. 75 1. 75 Commission 3.04 a. os 1 a�3 1.54 2.i1 2.25 . �; ;' � . Replacement of ti�e University Ave fence with decora�ive fencing. Correction of basement flooding problems on Jackson Street 12 Council 1. 75 1.50 Commission 2. 75 2. 71