The URL can be used to link to this page

CHA 02/27/2006 ,.� TO: Charter Commission Members isirj_ FROM: Deb Skogen, City Clerk and Staff Liaison Date: February 23, 2006 CITY OF Re: February 27, 2006, Charter Meeting FRIDLEY Reminder: The Charter Commission created a new policy for members to follow regarding attendance at meetings. If you plan on attending the meeting, call or e-mail me before 8:00 a.m. Monday, February 27th If a commissioner has not called or e-mailed by 8:00 a.m., Monday, February 27th, it will be assumed they will not be attending the meeting. If there will be a quorum, based on the number of a meeting will be held, but Commissioners will not be called. If there will not be a quorum, those Commissioners who called will receive a phone call notifying them there will not a quorum and the meeting will be cancelled. A notice will then be placed on the door of the cancellation of the meeting for those commissioners who did not call,but came to the meeting. Attached please find your agenda for the February 27th meeting,. I have included reference materials pertaining to the discussion on a possible utility rate increase and the discussion on Chapter 1. The City Council will hold a public hearing on Monday, February 27th, on the proposed amendment by ordinance appointing election judges. The Commissioners may choose to recess or adjourn the meeting early to allow the attendance at the council meeting during that time period. Deb Phone: 763-572-3523 e-mail: skogend@ci.fridley.mn.us CITY OF FRIDLEY CHARTER COMMISSION AGENDA MONDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 2006 7:00 P.M. LOCATION: Fridley Municipal Center Meeting Room 1 (Lower Level) CALL TO ORDER: ROLL CALL: 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES January 23,2006 3. Administrative Matters A. One opening B. Nominations Committee Report 4. Discussion of Possible Rate Increase Question 5. Discussion of Chapter 1 6. Discussion of Mission Statement(remove from the table) 7. Discussion of Glossary/Index(remove from the table) 8. Discussion of Future Items 9. ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: Monday, March 27, 2006, at 7:00 p.m. in Meeting Room 1 in the Lower Level CITY OF FRIDLEY CHARTER COMMISSION MEETING January 23,2006 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Jorgenson called the Charter Commission meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Borman,Braam,Gerrity,Hoiby,Holm,Jorgenson,Linder,Reynolds,Soule,Van Dan Members Absent: Findell,Fitzpatrick,Gordon and Johnson Others Present: Deb Skogen,City Clerk/Staff Liaison 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Commissioner Hoiby MOVED and Commissioner Reynolds seconded a motion to approve the agenda. UPON A VOICE VOTE,ALL VOTING AYE,CHAIRPERSON JORGENSON DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. APPROVAL OF NOVEMBER 28,2005,CHARTER COMMISSION MINUTES: Commissioner Borman MOVED and Commissioner Braam seconded a motion to approve the November 28,2005, Charter Commission Minutes,with a small amendment removing the June 26 calendar date for 2006 meetings. UPON A VOICE VOTE,ALL VOTING AYE,CHAIRPERSON JORGENSON DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS A. Commission Openings Ms. Skogen stated there was one opening on the Charter Commission. She also said she did not have time to send letters to the head election judges to see if anyone might have some interest, and will do that prior to the next meeting. Commissioner Gerrity said that her term expires April 22,2006 and she did not want to renew her appointment. She will send an e-mail confirming her resignation. There was discussion about previous Commission members and Chairperson Jorgenson said she would try to contact some of the individuals to see if they had any interest. Some of the names discussed were Ed Hammernick,and Vicki Klares. It was also suggested notices be placed on Cable and sent to the Focus. B. Nominations Committee Chairperson Jorgenson asked if there were any individuals who would like to serve on the Nominations Committee. Commissioners Holm and Hoiby volunteers and Peter Borman agreed to Chair the committee. CHARTER COMMISSION MEETING OF JANUARY 23,2006 PAGE 2 4. Discussion of Possible Utility Rate Increase Chairperson Jorgenson said she received phone calls from a lot of people who were disappointed the question from the special election was not passed. At the same time they said they could understand,however,because they were asking to remove all of the language allowing them to increase the rate at any time,rather than asking for a rate increase. That is why she suggested recommending a utility rate increase to the city council to send to the voters during the next regular municipal election in November. She said a question might resemble something like,should the city council be allowed to increase the rates on the water,storm water and sanitary sewer funds by 9%for the first year and another percent the next year. Commissioner Hoiby said the council's intent was not to raise by double digits and she would want to see it kept below 10%. Commissioner Holm agreed that it had to be kept under 10%but said it was worth asking for something. Ms. Skogen said they may want to address rate of inflation or 5%which ever is less in whatever they recommend to the council,whether it would be up to and including or no higher than a total percentage. Commissioner Holm said if the Council got approval from the voters in 2006,they could increase the rates in 2007 and possibly implement an inflation increase in 2008. Chairperson said she did not want to see the provision done away with but would support a rate increase. Commissioner Holm said the council could request a rate increase,but did not think they could increase it more than they needed to operate the utilities. Commissioner Borman wondered what the Met Council rate increases were and what the increases were for. Finance Director Rick Pribyl was available and said they had requested a 9%increase in the summer of 2005 for 2006. He said their requests usually come late summer. Chairperson Jorgenson said if any type of expansion were done to the sewer system,the Met Council would charge all of the users in the system and not just where the expansion occurred. Commissioner Reynolds said there might be a big redevelopment project in the Dowling Avenue area of Minneapolis and that major infrastructure changes were needed. She felt the 9%rate increase requested by the Met Council could be used up very quickly for some of their projects. There was additional discussion about an 8 or 9%increase,but until the Commissioenrs had more information available to them,they felt they could not recommend an increase at this time. They instructed Ms. Skogen to provide more information and statistics as to what the city rate increases have been since 2000 as well as what the Met Council rates or increases would be during this time. Commissioner Van Dan said at the last meeting one of the Commissioners said the rate increase issue had not been tested,but said it had with the special election and that to have another election to test it would be an extra expense. Commissioner Borman said Commissioner Van Dan might have misinterpreted what he had said. What he had said was that the Council had never tested the issue by just requesting a rate increase,rather than requesting the language be removed. He said rate increases could only be requested at regular municipal elections. He said if the council had done that in 2002,2004 and 2006 and if the increases had been denied,then there would be reason to remove the language. Commissioner Reynolds MOVED and Commissioner Borman seconded a motion to table the issue until the next meeting. CHARTER COMMISSION MEETING OF JANUARY 23,2006 PAGE 3 n UPON A VOICE VOTE,ALL VOTING AYE,CHAIRPERSON JORGENSON DECLARED THE MOTION PASSED. 5. Discussion of Chapter 1 Commissioner Borman was confused at the language that,"the city may render convenient within or without the limits of the city." Chairperson Jorgenson said the city may need to enter into an agreement or contract with someone outside of the city limits,or may need to purchase something outside of the city limits and that is what this meant. She said a good example of this was in 1996 when part of Coon Rapids was annexed to the City due to those residents receiving Fridley utilities rather than Coon Rapids utilities. Commissioner Van Dan stated Minneapolis Water Works had plants,one in Columbia Heights and one in Fridley. Chairperson Jorgenson said that the St.Paul intake was located near Osborne Road and East River road as well. Commissioner Soule thought it might be easier to review the section if everything were laid out between semicolons with bullet points. So Ms. Skogen will prepare Chapter 1 similar to that of legislative bills by numbering the lines and bulleting each section. It was also suggested that staff provide copies of other city charters for this section. 6.&7. Mission Statement and Glossary/Index Commissioner Van Dan MOVED and Commissioner Reynolds seconded a motion to table these two items. UPON A VOICE VOTE,ALL VOTING AYE,CHAIRPERSON JORGENSON DECLARED THE MOTION n PASSED. 8. Discussion of Future Items Chairperson Jorgenson said that the discussion of the mail ballot election was tabled because it was decided the cost of doing an election by mail ballot was the same as administering a regular election,due to the cost of postage. Commissioner Holm MOVED and Commissioner Hoiby seconded a motion to permanently remove this item from the agenda. UPON A VOICE VOTE,ALL VOTING AYE,CHAIRPERSON JORGENSON DECLARE THE MOTION PASSED. Chairperson Jorgenson asked if there was any other business or items for future agendas. Commissioner Van Dan wondered when the appointment of the Police Chief by the mayor was changed to the city manager. Commissioner Van Dan related information that happened in the 1960's that she and a former Charter Commission member had been discussing one afternoon. Commission Van Dan said she would like to see an amendment to the Charter changing that back to appointment by the mayor. Chairperson Jorgenson said that currently the city has a city-manager form of government allowing the city manager to administer the city on a day-to-day basis,which included the hiring of personnel. She said the City Manager makes a recommendation to the City Council to appoint or hire someone,and the City Council usually approves. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Holm MOVED and Commissioner Van Dan seconded a motion to adjourn the meeting. CHARTER COMMISSION MEETING OF JANUARY 23,2006 PAGE 4 ry UPON A VOICE VOTE,ALL VOTING AYE,CHAIRPERSON JORGENSON DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 8:15 P.M. Respectfully submitted by Debra A. Skogen,City Clerk/Staff Liaison and Kathleen Linder,Secretary TO: Charter Commission Members _ FROM: Peter Borman, Chairman of Nominating Committee J Date: February 9, 2006 CITY OF Re: Nominating Committee Report for 2006-07 Officers FRIDLEY The nominating committee has met and selected the following three names for nomination to serve as officers for the 2006 Commission year. Other names may be submitted during the February meeting; however, the Nominating Committee does recommend a unanimous vote for these three names. Chairperson-Nancy Jorgenson Vice-Chairperson - Peter Borman Secretary- Cindy Soule n r Recycling Fee History Ord 962 12/10/90 $2.50 per unit per quarter solid waste programming fee Ord 1013 05/17/93 $2.50 " Ord 1019 10/04/93 $4.00 " Ord 1111 11/24/97 $6.00 " Ord 1122 03/22/99 $5.50 " Res 61-2001 11/19/01 $5.50 " Res 19-2002 2/25/02 $5.73 " Res 69-2002 11/18/02 $5.95 " Res 64-2003 11/24/03 $6.06 Res 2004-68 11/22/04 $6.16 Res 2005-75 12/12/05 $6.33 Storm Water Drainage Rate History Res 94-1995 12/11/95 $8.40 per quarter per REF-acre P-\ Res 69-2001 11/19/01 $8.73 per quarter per REF-acre Res 67-2002 11/18/02 $9.06 per quarter per REF-acre Res 48-2003 9/29/04 $9.21 per quarter per REF acre Res 2004-70 11/22/04 $9.36 per quarter per REF acre Res 2005-77 12-12-05 $9.63 per quarter per REF acre Water Rate History Res 72-1995 10/23/95 0-5,000,000 $.90/1,000 Gal/Min $10.80 Over—5,000,000 $.95/1,000 Gal 0-5,000,000 Sr. Rate $.70/1,000 Gal/Min $8.40 Res 116-1996 11/25/96 0-5,000,000 $1.00/1,000 Gal/Min $12 Over—5,000,000 $1.05/1,000 Gal 0-5,000,000 Sr. Rate $.75/1,000 Gal/Min $9 Res 67-2001 11/19/01 0-5,000,000 $1.04/1,000 Gal/Min$12.48 Over—5,000,000 $1.09/1,000 Gal 0-5,000,000 Sr. Rate $.78/1,000 Gal/Min $9.36 Res 68-2002 11/19/02 0-5,000,000 $1.08/1,000 Gal/Min $12.96 Over—5,000,000 $1.13/1,000 Gal 0-5,000,000 Sr. Rate $.81/1,000 Gal/Min $9.72 Res 49-2003 9/29/03 0-5,000,000 $1.10/1,000 Gal/Min $13.20 Over—5,000,000 $1.15/1,000 Gal 0-5,000,000 Sr. Rate $.82/1,000 Gal/Min $9.84 Res 2004-71 11/22/04 0-5,000,000 $1.12/1,000 Gal/Min $13.44 Over—5,000,000 $1.17/1,000 Gal 0-5,000,000 Sr. Rate $.83/1,000 Gal/Min$9.96 Res 2005-78 12-12-06 0-5,000,000 $1.15/1,000 Gal/Min $13.80 Over—5,000,000 $1.20/1,000 Gal 0-5,000,000 Sr. Rate $.85/1,000 Gal/Min $10.20 Sanitary Sewer Rate History Res Number Date Property Consumption Minimum Minimum Class Basis Charge Consumption Res 105-1994 12/19/94 Single Family Winter Qtr $21.96 12,000 Gal Comm/Ind Current Qtr $45.75 25,000 Gal Consump in N/P Entity Current Qtr $45.75 25,000 Gal excess of min Mul Dwell Winter Qtr $45.75 25,000 Gal $1.83/1,000 QD/Sr Winter Qtr $14.64 max 0 min 8,000 Gal max Consump in excess of min$1.83/1,000 Gal Res 73-1995 10/23/95 Single Family Winter Qtr $30.00 12,000 Gal Comm/Ind Current Qtr $62.50 25,000 Gal N/P Entity Current Qtr $62.50 25,000 Gal Mul Dwell Winter Qtr $62.50 25,000 Gal QD/Sr Winter Qtr $20 max 0 min 8,000 max Consump in excess of min $2.50/1,000 Gal Res 111-1999 12/20/99 Single Family Winter Qtr $26.40 12,000 Gal Comm/Ind Current Qtr $55.00 25,000 Gal N/P Entity Current Qtr $55.00 25,000 Gal Mul Dwell Winter Qtr $55.00 25,000 Gal QD/Sr Winter Qtr $17.60 max 0 min 8,000 max Consump in excess of min $2.20/1,000 Gal Res 68-2001 11/19/01 Single Family Winter Qtr $27.36 12,000 Gal Comm/Ind Current Qtr $57.00 25,000 Gal N/P Entity Current Qtr $57.00 25,000 Gal Mul Dwell Winter Qtr $57.00 25,000 Gal QD/Sr Winter Qtr $22.80 max 0 min 10,000 max Consump in excess of min$2.28/1,000 Gal Res 66-2002 11/18/02 Single Family Winter Qtr $28.44 12,000 Gal Comm/Ind Current Qtr $59.25 25,000 Gal N/P Entity Current Qtr $59.25 25,000 Gal Mul Dwell Winter Qtr $59.25 25,000 Gal QD/Sr Winter Qtr $23.70 max 0 min 10,000 max Consump in excess of min $2.37/1,000 Gal Res 47-2003 9/29/03 Single Family Winter Qtr $28.92 12,000 Gal Comm/Ind Current Qtr $60.25 25,000 Gal N/P Entity Current Qtr $60.25 25,000 Gal Mul Dwell Winter Qtr $60.25 25,000 Gal QD/Sr Winter Qtr $24.10 max 0 min 10,000 max Consump in excess of min $2.41/1,000 Gal Sanitary Sewer Rate History (page 2) Res Number Date Property Consumption Minimum Minimum Class Basis Charge Consumption Res 2004-69 11/22/04 Single Family Winter Qtr $29.40 12,000 Gal Comm/Ind Current Qtr $61.25 25,000 Gal N/P Entity Current Qtr $61.25 25,000 Gal Mul Dwell Winter Qtr $61.25 25,000 Gal QD/Sr Winter Qtr $24.50 max 0 min 10,000 max Consump in excess of min $2.45/1,000 Gal Res 2005-76 12/12/05 Single Family Winter Qtr $30.24 12,000 Gal Comm/Ind Current Qtr $63.00 25,000 Gal N/P Entity Current Qtr $63.00 25,000 Gal Mul Dwell Winter Qtr $63.00 25,000 Gal QD/Sr Winter Qtr $25.20 max 0 min 10,000 max Consump in excess of min $2.52/1,000 Gal ' ANALYSIS OF UTILITIES WATER Audited Estimated Estimated 2001-06 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Cash 3,147,364 2,979,197 2,797,134 3,583,805 3,022,786 2,683,166 Accumulated Depreciation 6,817,767 7,266,877 7,793,516 8,183,085 9,115,378 9,788,213 Operating Income(Loss) (59,837) (150,297) (103,540) (108,284) (166,818) (155,931) (744,707) Net Income(Loss)After Transfers (49,395) (221,095) (160,994) (242,783) (279,914) (201,355) (1,155,536) SEWER Audited Estimated Estimated 2001-06 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Cash 3,248,886 2,958,116 2,888,092 3,021,215 2,490,250 2,493,951 Accumulated Depreciation 3,603,076 3,801,852 4,120,442 4,390,502 4,692,410 4,999,205 Operating Income(Loss) ' (111,682) (15,648) (234,457) 2,610 ' (216,420) (223,094) (798,691) Net income(Loss)After Transfers ' 53,552 61,198 (177,414) 51,895 ' (164,421) (168,094) (343,284) STORM WATER Audited Estimated Estimated 2001-06 .0""\ 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total Cash 1,446,560 1,343,348 1,322,547 1,289,876 1,124,863 1,047,783 Accumulated Depreciation 2,969,625 3,137,997 3,319,874 3,502,957 3,691,078 3,879,911 Operating Income(Loss) 26,638 23,544 29,543 64,699 32,342 57,087 233,853 Net Income(Loss)After Transfers 47,908 (87,230) (61,275) (66,537) (77,622) (9,913) (254,669) COMBINED,- Audited Estimated Estimated 2001-06 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 •Total Cash 7,842,810 7,280,661 7,007,773 7,894,896 6,637,899 6,224,900 Accumulated Depreciation 13,390,468 14,206,726 15,233,832 16,076,544 17,496,866 18,667,329 Operating Income(Loss) (144,881) (142,401) (308,454) (40,975) (350,896) (321,938) (1,309,545) Net Inco (Loss) • er Transfers 52,065 (247,127) (399,683) (257,425) (521,957) (379,362) ` 1,753,489) 'The income shown for 2004 is due to MCES undercharging all municipalities due to lower flows for the time period billed. In order to correct for this,they changed the way they charge,and are now guaranteed a set S amount,so this situation won't happen again in the future. 'The net income(loss)after transfers compared to the operating income(loss),appears to be more favorable in the sewer fund due to there being much less debt service in the sewer fund compared to the water and storm water funds. G. )FRIDLEY ) WATER FUND PROJECTIONS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS Useful Depreciation Depreciation Depreciation Depreciation Depreciation Depreciation Description Amount Life 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2005 Repair Wells 3&6 60,000 5 6,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 6,000 Street Project-watermain replacement 100,000 50 1,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 Replace backwash electronics at Commons 190,000 10 9,500 19,000 19,000 19,000 19,000 19,000 Replace main electrical service 30,000 25 600 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 Mod.&install of new chemical feed systems 70,000 20 1,750 3,500 3,500 3,500 3,500 3,500 Replace filter media at Commons 300,000 15 10,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 Replace filter values&actuators at Commons 200,000 25 4,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 Re-roof Commons WTP 50,000 25 1,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 Purchase of new Pot Patcher 135,000 10 6,750 13,500 13,500 13,500 13,500 13,500 Purchase of new 1/2 ton Pickup Truck 24,000 5 2,400 4,800 4,800 4,800 4,800 2,400 Purchase of Hydraulic Vibration Plate for Backhoe 8,520 5 852 1,704 1,704 1,704 1,704 852 1,167,520 43,852 87,704 87,704 87,704 87,704 78,452 2006 Watermain lining 83rd Ave RR-Main 100,000 50 - 1,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 Repair Wells 7&9 60,000 5 - 6,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000 Street Project-watermain replacement 100,000 50 - 1,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 Re-roof&repair facade&brickwork on Locke Park F.P. 200,000 20 - 5,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 3/4 ton GMC pickup truck 30,000 10 1,500 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 Emergency chlorine shut-off valves;Commons&Locke 18,500 10 925 1,850 1,850 1,850 1,850 508,500 - 15,425 30,850 30,850 30,850 30,850 2007 Repair wells 4&8 65,000 5 - - 6,500 13,000 13,000 13,000 Street project-watermain replacement 100,000 50 - - 1,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 Water tower#2-inspect interior/exterior,repair 600,000 10 - - 30,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 765,000 - - 37,500 75,000 75,000 75,000 2008 Repair wells 5,10,&12 90,000 5 - - - 9,000 18,000 18,000 Reconstruct alley to pump house#2,4,&6 60,000 5 6,000 12,000 12,000 Street Project-watermain replacement 100,000 50 1,000 2,000 2,000 Storage building 300,000 25 6,000 12,000 12,000 550,000 - - - 22,000 44,000 44,000 2009 Repair wells 1&11 65,000 5 6,500 13,000 Install VFD at Well 8 50,000 5 5,000 10,000 Install VFD at Well 9 50,000 5 5,000 10,000 Street Project-watennainreplacement 100,000 50 1,000 2,000 Upgrade SCADA hardware&software 250,000 10 12,500 25,000 515,000 - - - - 30,000 60,000 2010 Repair wells 2&13 65,000 5 - - - - - 6,500 Street Project-watermain replacement 100,000 50 - - - - 1,000 Commons Water Tower-inspect,repair,and paint 200,000 10 - - - _ - 10,000 365,000 - - _ - 17,500 Total Improvements 3,871,020 Total Additional Annual Depreciation 43,852 103,129 156,054 215,554 267,554 305,802 Total Amount to Remove From Depr-EST (9,187) (22,516) (10,450) (11,494) (10,215) (10,000) Total Annual Change in Depreciation 34,665 80,613 145,604 204,060 257,339 295,802 Note:As of 2003,the threshold for depreciating assets is 55,000 2/23/2006 MCES Jarges 2000 throu4i 2005 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Jan/Feb $ 169,152 $ 185,555 $ 186,484 $ 228,462 $ 208,891 $ 210,146 Feb/Mar $ 169,152 $ 185,555 $ 186,484 $ 228,462 $ 202,836 $ 210,146 Mar/Apr $ 185,472 $ 178,011 $ 166,276 $ 194,627 $ 198,530 $ 210,146 Apr/May $ 185,472 $ 178,011 $ 166,276 $ 194,627 $ 198,530 $ 210,146 May/Jun $ 185,472 $ 178,011 $ 166,276 $ 194,627 $ 198,530 $ 210,146 Jun/Jul $ 194,336 $ 185,063 $ 174,291 $ 191,750 $ 175,294 $ 210,146 Jul/Aug $ 194,336 $ 185,063 $ 174,291 $ 191,750 $ 175,294 $ 210,146 Aug/Sep $ 194,336 $ 185,063 $ 174,291 $ 191,750 $ 175,294 $ 210,146 Sep/Oct $ 202,064 $ 202,724 $ 197,140 $ 199,069 $ 192,433 $ 210,146 Oct/Nov $ 202,064 $ 202,724 $ 197,140 $ 199,069 $ 192,433 $ 210,146 Nov/Dec $ 202,064 $ 202,724 $ 197,140 $ 199,069 $ 192,433 $ 210,146 Dec/Jan $ 185,555 $ 186,484 $ 228,462 $ 196,781 $ 210,146 $ 216,828 Total $ 2,271,475 $ 2,256,989 $ 2,216,553 $ 2,412,047 $ 2,322,648 $ 2,530,443 $ 14,010,155.84 MCES Charges 2000 to 2005 $2,600,000 �u ��t � `i�a'TM` "i''g-»^` Fr'c�'� � i $2,5()(),()()() ' ' $2,400,000 Dollars$2 300 000 $2,200,000 fi $2,100,000 a �� $2,000,000 � "� F w � � .,.,,4 is 9a�, urSC`.x u .. ' 1 2 3Year 5 6 1..r.J 16.E 4 t 6 _..i L L-..--A L.__a .1 niter ) ) TOTAL UTILITY RATES MINNEAPOLIS METRO TOTAL UTILITY RATES The graph depicts corn- - Lake Elmo,MN ■ $22.11 Maple Grove,MN I$23.48 bined typical monthly , Fridley,MN - i I$27.35 water, wastewater, and Eagan,MN l$27.93 Falcon Heights,MN $29.04 stormwater utility rates i Coon Rapids,MN r• :I$29.37 Eden Prairie,MN I a$29.54 for all municipalities sur- Brooklyn Park,MN i°:'$30.42 > veyed. The rates are Cottage Grove,MN I -I$30.50 ' ••Water y - Andover,MN '..:J$30.58 ❑Wastewater based on 7,500 gallons Rosemount,MN i 1$31.01 ❑Stormwater I k- Bloomington,MN 1$31.17 1- of water usage per Hopkins,MN L ..$31.38 month, with the excep- Saint Paul Park,MN I$31.57 S New Brighton,MN L I$31.99 tion of stormwater. The , Plymouth,MN - i $32.70 V Champlin,MN I$33.42 V number at the end of - Ramsey, I$35.24 _ the bar represents the - Apple Valley,MN _$35.32 c Richfield,MN I 1$36.05 z. total typical utility bill. Mendota Heights,MN RI$37.04 Chaska,MN 1$37.12 Other common charges - Anoka,MN a, J$39.12 such as solid waste, Maplewood,MN 1$40.73 - Crystal,MN 1$41.76 mosquito control, etc. Savage,MN $41.83 - Saint Paul,MN I$42.41 are not included in the Mahtomedi,MN r . ;,•1$46.91 overall utility bill pre- - M01na,MN <I$47.78 Farmington,MN I.:;< : I$48.16 sented within this sur- Little Canada,MN $51.82 Mnneapolis,MN ' La a$53.83 Vey. Prior Lake,MN ' I$55.25 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Typical Monthly Residential Utility Bill($) I NOVEMBER/DECEMBER NO;2005 136 1 1 iii ..y wuxi+ski - dR 7 . C O-M�M y U N T Y R E P O R T t l if7=4,-;n-,,,,,,,:-1,--""t:ItiS.,,,W.,....,,,_.j4-7/14,..,,,,,"ritw,,,,.. ---477=1,171ritti.74,4,-71,C,107, Proposed City Charter Change 4 '' The Fridley City Council and the Fridley Charter ellk. Commission have agreed to a proposed Charter, t�4�t a �rl tnF amendment that would remove the City's water, jfl iJ Y= 3ai � � ,w a sewer and stormwater systems from Charter provi- i" i' sions that limit rate increases to the rate of inflation Frdi°°';' ; t 9� 3 :, or 5%,whichever is less.We would ask that as you � ii P ; ▪�i� � •. vote on November 8,you consider the reasons why �� jl x4 ii m1:1�i. this change is needed. 'M"4� A- lthough our water,sewer and stormwater utilities E I� �,,:. r, • „ are expected to operate like businesses with sufficient x wi �b • rl revenues to cover operating costs,they have,for sev- r'"--_� � ., • ' eral years,experienced net operating losses. As loss- ' . . ,- es grow, fund balances shrink and our ability to "▪ r▪„� replace our aging water,sewer and stormwater infra- • w � ES �` s 1s- �j ? , ' structure weakens. k -ate t� ,t '; While it's easy to suggest that costs be trimmed to ° _ cover these operating losses,the reader should keep i 1�t �3,t33,3-43.'13,34` :� l # in mind that Fridley's water,sewer and stormwater sible for reasonable rate setting. This method �� Ii a+� A � i�, y systems already operate at a cost that is among the worked well in the past and is likely to work well in ,.,.' ,,_, -. very lowest in the metropolitan area.Moreover,they the future.At the same time it will help to ensure operate with the same number of employees as we that those responsible for Fridley's water sewer and ,; had thirty years ago. It is also true that many of the storm water utilities will have the tools and the costs to operate our three utilities are well beyond resources to address Fridley's water,sewer and storm- - local control. Nearly three-fourths of our costs for water needs in a timely and cost effective manner. o s 'n the City's sewer system are dictated by treatment 74 1. costs that are set by the Metropolitan Council.Other The ballot language that you will see at the polls on y 1 ,ti• 'a costs are mandated by state and federal drinking November 8 will read as follows: . w- ater standards.Still other costs,such as the cost of $_, � � , fuel, electricity, natural gas, asphalt, chemicals, employee health insurance and employee retirement Shall the Fridley Charter be amend benefits are enerall beyond the control of the Ci g yes ty ed so as to permit water,sewer and It is also true that many other costs,such as water stormwater charges above the rate storage tank repairs,the replacement of broken sewer of inflation without the passage of a lines and the repair of sewage lift stations may not be - � o , referendum for each such increase.▪ I n %, i t , deferred without significant impact to public health° e �= + and safety. ' O Yes - ws a i� h' f , G- iven the nature of our three public utilities,we sug- �d � gent that the Charter restrictions that subject rate 11. 0�"._ a - i7 increases above the rate of inflation to biennial ' - t approval of the voters be eliminated.Instead,we sug- �� a • F p t gest that Fridley residents control their water sewer If you have any questions about this issue we wel- ,, l'i;b4 and storm water rates,as they did prior to 2001,by come you to call Finance Director Rick Pribyl at • y holding their elected City Council members res on- ? g ry p 572-3520.• d � 5 Recycling FI orescept Bylbs lip t o 1°' free Fire• �t► , top- a Electronics.Applialnfor Air Conditioners � Saturday.October 8,2005 Priceslinformation 572 3607 i • ' "'y” 4 x� l,1 , k1 9 am to I pm X50-71x. ye NE Behind Columbia Ice Arena W �fMayor ,Sc{ Lund - - .,' City of Fridley PRESORTED STD ;- — U.S.Postage '*"'' x�;,.Y� 6431 University Avenue NE 'g G� ', }?1% (t l�,: Fridley,MN 55432 Permit 2886 ^°-s ,:.; s,"' Minneapolis,MN _, , �= 1. ECRWSS o �}' Postal Customer f,a '14 air Public Works/Public Safety• page 6 Fridley Community Report L .2005 Street Reconstruction Project e, `_.±•,•„,,,,~tp Is in Full Swing • In our April newsletter, we identified [ e the four street roonstructirm areas for yy $ I" . the 2005 street reconsrrucuon project yyY f a ' � "M" ' a Y. t" Since then,we've awarded a contract to ti .'3 Palda and Sons, Inc. of St. Paul, • .1 �, -� r,,,,,.rc l Moron eta. They began work in the ,p, • -�Y*:' b'y_, Logan Parkway area on May 23, 2005 'S and are nearing completion of work in lit this neighborhood. Prior to their work, Steve Monsrud heel Enctgr relocated three utility pole • and('<ntcr}oint Energy replaced existing Chosen As New gas contras and services.The Citya ry Seer Division developed preliminary plans to establish a "rain also vrsved sever i s in the area with a camera garden"in an open area in Jay Park,The rain garden and repaired six sewer services.The first layer „f will csscntially be a detention pond with a forty b}' Police Sergeant paving was applied to streets in this area the week of fifty foot base and a sloped area a with a diameter of Steve Monsrud officially began his first shift as June 27. eighty to one hundred feet.The area will be planted Fridley Police Sergeant shortly after a ceremony with plants that thrive in suer,arras and which on Tuesday, June 14 in the Fridley Council Underg,ramd work on the remaining three areas of absorb moisture and _pollutants such at Chambers. A big contingent of fellow officers the 2005 project has already begun. As of the phosphorouc,' While • there- will be some family and other City employees watched as writing of this article,nubs have been installed on maintenance of this area, future plant life will Public Safety Director Don Abbott officially the sneers located in phase two, an area that generally be allowed CO grow■ hour cutting. installed Steve as Sergeant. includes Stonybrnok ,Way, Craigbrook Way, - _ Rickard Road, Craig Way, Pirwood Way, Pearson Now that the ceremonies are over,Steve assumes The project has also entailed some right-of-way• Way and Bel Air Way. We began removing the the sizeable responsibility of serving as shift existing paving in the third reconstruction area on veal usrnon in Franco s of he project a ear where supervisor for the 6:30 p.m.to 6:30 a.m.shift, July 5.This area includes portions of Ruth Street, street widening is desirable To this end,our City probably the busiest time for police officers.As Ironton Street as gell as all of Fairmont and Ruth Public Works Director,Jon Haukaas, has acquired sergeant,he supervises six police officers and is Circles. It also includes a service road next to Mc right-of-way along portions of Glen Cress Road, responsible for ensuring that any police response BNSF Railroad tracks between Ely and Liberty and the BNSF Service Drive.For the most part,this during his shift is appropriate and consistent with Streets. As the paving is removed, it is ground in land acquisition has gone smoothly. departmental policies and procedures.His other /� place and mixed with the gravel below. duties include responsibility for manpower While we are le than_half coax„through the scheduling,assignment of patrol and equipment As is the case with any project of this size, there construction on this- year's 3.3-mile street to all areas of the City,and overall assurance of have been a fe v pmblenu,The most signili rat of effective police service during his tour of duty. mprovement project, tire projects are proceeding these has stemmed from new rules for maintaining smoothly with only minor change orders and very Steve has been a Fridley Police Officer since existing meets runoff.Although the City a replacing pod cooperation from residents.We want to thank 1995. He serves as a Neighborhood Resource surfaces, the Rice Creek Watershed District has all of you that have been and will be Officer for Rice Creek Plaza, Hartman Circle, heen insistent that we abide by new rules that inconvenienced by this yeas street reconstruction Locke Park,Logan Park and Edgewater Gardens require the tr aunenr of storm water runoff'by program for your cooperation. if there are future neighborhoods. He is also a member of the establishing rain and other nut storm concerns or questions, we incire you to couract bicycle patrol team, a background investigator and an intoxilizer operator.Additionally,Steve is water iiltauoo(iciitie.This ha led us ru shedule Assistant Public Wnrks Director Layne One on at a_meeting with residents in the Jay Park area near 572-3551. He may also be reached by c-mailing a Field Training Officer whose job is to provide on-the-job training,coaching and mentoring to Holly Center, As a result of the ntecirug, we've him atnucsonithci.fridley.mnus.• new officers.According to Captain Bob Rewitzer, "Steve responds promptly and effectively to police calls. His low-key demeanor inspires City Working on Water Treatment confidence and a high degree of respect from both citizens and peers," Plant 'Upgrades Steve earned his promotion as a result of both hard work and very high scores on a new testing • •One of the major capital improvement projects for v,. process for police sergeants.The process included ' a written test on case law and departmental 2005 provides for upgrading of the Commons Park policies, an oral interview with an interview water treatment plant.These improvements include k t t- panel, a research project, and a peer group replacement of filter media for two of the seven evaluation. filters, installation of a new, state of the art, q.+s electronic control system, installation of a new x: 't,. Steve graduated from Coon Rapids High School chemical feed system that will be designed to reduce ' ' in 1988. Several years later, he obtained a BS Degree in Law Enforcement from Mankato State the naturally occurring radium in our groundwater, g use a has ended,and to be completed in four to six University. During his tenure as police officer, and replacement of the roof. g P many has completed courses and seminars, months. P Y including those on Spanish for law enforcement, The engineering firer of Bonestroo, Rosene, background investigation, and advanced field Anderlik, and Associates (BRAA) of St Paul We've budgeted $1.2 million for the project. sobriety testing. ice\ Funding will come from capital improvement is designing these improvements. Public Works bonds that were sold earlier this ear for a number Director Jon Haukaas has been working with y We welcome Steve as he joins his brother Mike of City capital improvement projects. Ultimately Monsrud as one of seven Fridley Police Sergeants. BRAA to identify the scope of work and develop water rate revenue will be used to retire the bonds. While he is low man on the sergeants'seniority preliminary engineering plans. Final plans should list, we look forward to having his very be completed by the end of summer; and, the If you have questions about the project,please e- productive and capable leadership in the very project will be bid in September.We expect the mail us at fridley@ci.fridleynm.us. Alternatively, demanding role of police sergeant for many years project to begin in October, after the peak water give Jon Haukaas a call at 572-3550.• to come.■ www.ci.fridley.mn.us Council • page 3 Ill, e i Charter Commission Discuss Charter Change for Utility Rates. ...ii. 4 Onpup � ± ,I ty Cizuncdd the fast have been operating at net losses that threaten the improvement projects such as the Commons Park reading o,,41nijc tthar w uI4 change the City availability of reserves to e future cost of filter plant improvements that are currently being Charter in-- s ifia ,uu#uy rates from operations and needed-,I.:! dements. Cash designed for 2006 construction. a Charter provisi ' p:es-in rates to the reserves forthethree u frum$7.8 rate of inflation. y-tf,l.ibe Fridley Charter million in 2001 to$6 r 0. 77 '''f *end Although Council could continue to operate within Commission met to discuss Council's proposal. of 2006, staf-ex to ii i.p 1 the confines of a Charter amendment that limits rate After considerable discussion, the Charter millio i , y increases to less than the cost of providing service,the Commission approved the Charter amendment and _ , continuation of this situation threatens the reserves returned the legislation to Council fora second t s� 7 e that are needed to maintain and operate the systems. reading on July 25.The proposed amendment will be �; I t The current system is also unfair in that it relies on forwarded to the County Board of Elections prior to ' r k " it , resources that belong to every Fridley resident to August 16 and included on a special election ballot ?". t",,, subsidize the operating costs of systems that are this November.Although the same issue failed in rsen 1 , 5 ..n i disproportionately used by industrial and other high 2004 by a 60%to 40%vote,many have commented 7005. 'S , zwq end users that the lengthy and confusing ballot language was I 1 responsible for its failure. supporters o Chart also _.int out that While it is possible to try to raise water,sewer and ,costs for the ee u...,t,-,,;,-,, ,1 largel .tetmined by storm water rates by going to the voters for rate Those who support this change point out that prior external fs such age"...f tal and •to drinking increases, the process of waiting until a general to the Charter change that tied utility rates to the rate water requireinents as well by dir.-;:z.., is that are election(every two years)and securing a positive vote of inflation,the City Council had established a long passed airing to Fndley for'ewageFir tstt the of 51%of those voting in the election is one that is history of conservative rate raising that left Fridley „Met opolttartY Council. Other privy sector very cumbersome and uncertain, at best To the with nearly the lowest utility rates in the as thr for ene ,and the is I ."' extent that:,this process leads to the depletion of metropolitan area.They also point out that as of the . outsi •r 1.ntml, j ,, reserves, it forces Fridley residents to pap for all spring of 2005,Fridley rates for water,sewer and ` 3v l , capital jmprovement costs by borrowing at higher storm water utilities remain at the low end of the = They also paint out that wide the n •bet of water: rates than would otherwise be the case, It also limits spectrum. A recent survey of thirty-three storage rangy,booster stations and n'' s - , 's responsiveness to needs for this very metropolitan area communities showed that Fridley's a has grown over the years,;the n , Ems• ", -',,of municipal service. rates were lower than those in thirty of the thirty- e .1 ens who maintain tlsese � �- � ., c three cities surveyed. A t § j5 4 '" there's always room for more .std , 3 i r r a a � WO welcome your gtteatign$ While supporters of the change believe that low rates w le „` ^y do so by contacting the will continu= tong haul,they also point out i 7 '" ii a:calling 572-3500 or e-mail us ../•••••., &that over ; r years F s th tdities t ., ' .us.11 City Submits Grant Application for SNC Improvements On August 9, 2002, the Fridley City Council r `.'''''• - ''s t't Parking and landscaping improvements would approved a resolution that authorized the complement building and shelter improvements. Springbrook Nature Center Foundation to begin . These would include an expansion of the existing raising money for Nature Center improvements parking lot on a water permeable surface, the identified in Phase I of their Nature Center"vision construction of an eight-foot berm along 85th package." The resolution specifically established _ ,,i Avenue, a large memorial garden, new walking that these improvements must be made without and landscaped picnic areas. City capital or operating dollars. � m I '' As is the case with many worthwhile ventures,the On June 13,2005 Council approved another reso- - Springbrook Nature Center expansion faces many lution expressing its support for a grant application The Foundation and the City are requesting the challenges. In addition to the State legislative to the State Department of Finance for$2.5 million challenge,the Foundation faces the formidable task grant funding to increase space for Springbrook in State bonding money. Once again the Council of raising$2.5 million and developing a plan that Nature Center programming. In particular, the approved the resolution with the understanding money would be used to create additional space for assures an adequate, non-City revenue stream to that the Springbrook Nature Center Foundation cover additional operating costs.The Foundation would raise an additional $2.5 million as the the Center's environmental education programs. will be developing their fund-raising plans between required match to the State grant. They also The money would also be used to provide now and the approval of State grant funding in May additional space for community events, expand assumed that any additional operating costs associ- of 2006.They expect to take a year to raise the local exhibit space and create additional outdoor with the improvements would be covered by ona match to the grant from foundations,individuals, additional program revenue and/or funds provided classrooms.A small portion of the money would businesses and community organizations. by the Springbrook Nature Center Foundation. also be used for creation of a memorial garden. Thereafter, if all goes according to plan, the Foundation will ask the City to begin the Assuming that the preliminary application that was The centerpiece of the expansion would be a 12,840 construction process. filed with the State in June is accepted,the City will square foot addition to the existing building.The be asked to submit a final application by September expansion would house handicapped accessible rest While funding for this project is a huge 30, 2005. Since the grant is part of the State's rooms, a kitchen, an indoor amphitheater, undertaking, there is no doubt the Foundation �"•••• bonding bill that will be considered in 2006,it must expanded exhibit space, indoor classrooms, members are a very hard working and tenacious ultimately be approved during the 2006 portion of volunteer space and a visitors'cafe. group.We wish them well in reaching their goals the current legislative session. The City and the and in the process providing Fridley and the ■ Foundation should know by May of next year In addition to the new building space, the grant northern suburbs with a premier attraction. whether or not the State grant has been approved. would also provide for an additional 3,000 square State Senator Satveer Chaudhary deserves credit for feet of outdoor facilities. These include a multi- If you have questions about the project,we invite assisting the Foundation and the City with this level deck, a new pavilion with rest rooms and you to contact Fridley Parks and Recreation legislation. several smaller shelters. Director,Jack Kirk at 572-3570. • 406 yam ..-1 The street projects also include $140,000 for seal coating and $100,000 for a "mill and overlay" on 61St Avenue. Planned expenditures for parks capital improvements include drainage improvements to the Community Park ball fields ($75,000), the resurfacing of the south lot at Commons Park ($68,000), and tennis/basketball court overlays ($51,000). The budget for building improvements includes the construction of a new salt/sand storage shed at the public works compound ($175,000)and the replacement of non-slip tile in the Police Department($20,000). Alb D. Enterprise Funds. In addition to the budgets for funds that are supported by taxes and fees, we also budget for four funds that are theoretically self-supporting. These include the Water, Sewer, Storm Water and Liquor Funds. Table 4 depicts these expenditures. Table 4 Enterprise Funds Budget Budget 2005 2006 Chan!e %Chan.e Water Fund $2,117,193 $2,102,955 ($14,238) (0.7%) Sewer Fund 3,520,429 3,636,270 115,841 3.3% Storm Water Fund 483,622 429,913 (53,709) (11.1%) Municipal Liquor 6,047,843 6,027,255 (20,588) (0.3%) Total $12,169,087 $12,196,393 $27,306 0.2% The 2006 budget for these funds is $12,196,393, or roughly the same amount as was budgeted for 2005. The budget for the three utilities is $6,169,138 or about .8% more than we budgeted for 2005. This expenditure includes an $80,176 or 3.2% increase in the cost of sewage treatment that is passed down to us by the Metropolitan Council's Environmental Services 11 A°61404 Division. While the increase in costs for operating our three utilities is minimal, we project that the operating deficit for these funds will grow to$438,114. Liquor Fund expenditures will be reduced by $20,588. This reflects lower personal service costs associated with a shift toward greater reliance on full-time rather than part-time employees. We expect Liquor Fund revenues of$6,045,176 and net income of $517,921 in 2006. This compares with projected revenues of $6,045,116 in 2005. As in 2005, we will transfer $500,000 from this fund to the General Fund. E. Debt Service. In addition to operating funds, the City maintains a number of funds that have been established for the administration of debt service. In 2006, we expect to pay $418,024 in debt service on water system improvements. In addition to water system bonds, the City will pay $103,000 in 2006 for debt on storm sewer projects. We also anticipate $214,822 in 2006 street improvement debt. All of the City's debt service is for capital improvement projects. The absence of debt for City operations, along with relatively strong reserves, has helped the City achieve an Aal credit rating from Moody's Investor Service, Inc. for 2005 bond issues. IV. The Tax Impact The City's 2006 property tax levy will be $8,757,188. This represents an increase of $689,239 or 8.5% over the 2005 property tax levy. The levy increase includes $218,202 allowed by the City Charter, $293,654 allowed as a replacement for lost state aid, $7,700 allowed by the City Charter as an increase in the Springbrook Nature Center levy, and $169,683 for debt retirement on street improvement bonds. 12 2 / D. Enterprise Funds. The 2005 budget includes $12,169,087 in expenditures for four enterprise funds. This amount is 3.4% less than the amount budgeted for 2004. These funds include the Water Fund, the Sewer Fund, The Storm Water Fund and the Liquor Fund. Expenditures for each of these funds are depicted in Table 4. Table 4 Enterprise Funds Budgeted Expenditures Budget Budget 2004 2005 Change % Change Water Fund $ 1,910,386 $2,117,193 $206,807 10.8% Sewer Fund 3,565,534 3,520,429 (45,105) (1.3%) Storm Water Fund 462,663 483,622 20,959 4.5% Municipal Liquor 6,662,863 6,047,843 (615,020) (9.2%) Total $ 12,601,446 $ 12,169,087 ($432,359) (3.4%) 1. Water Fund. The Water Fund budget for 2005 is$2,117,193, or about 10.8% larger than the budget for 2004. Most of the cost increase, $206,807, reflects additional cost for treatment chemicals ($13,600), a new overhead charge for services of the municipal garage ($18,300), and additional depreciation costs for 2004 and 2005 capital improvements. There is also an additional debt service charge of$41,423. While capital outlay purchases do not show up as budgeted items, Council should be aware that staff is projecting the purchase of a new pot patcher from the Water Fund in 2005 at an estimated cost of$135,000. We are also projecting the purchase of a new V2 ton pickup truck ($24,000) and a hydraulic vibration plate for the backhoe ($8,530). The cost of these items will show up as depreciation in the 2005 and future budgets. 13 7,00f is410643 2. Sewer Fund. The Sewer Fund budget for 2005 is $3,520,429, or $45,105 (1.3%) lower than the budget for 2004. The decrease reflects a reduction of $120,807 in the City's MCES charge for wastewater treatment. The City's portion of the operating cost (about 33% in 2005) is expected to grow by $47,235 or by about 5%. This latter increase reflects cost-of-living adjustments for our five Sewer Division employees. There is also a $17,800 increase for municipal garage services. Additionally, Public Works has requested that we purchase a new front end loader ($80,000) and a new pickup truck($28,000) in 2005. These costs will be depreciated in 2005 and beyond. 3. Storm Water Fund. The budget for the Storm Water Fund will be roughly the same as the 2004 budget. The $483,622 budget is 4.5% greater than the budget for 2004. The budget reflects a small increase ($6,603) in depreciation costs for capital projects. Council should also keep in mind that $100,000 of this budget is transferred to the Streets Capital Improvements Fund for storm water improvements associated with the 2005 street reconstruction project. There is another $100,700 that is in the form of an interfund charge from the General Fund to the Storm Water Fund for General Fund overhead. 4. Liquor Fund. The Liquor Fund budget has been reduced by about 9% for 2005. We expect to spend $6,047,843, or $615,020 less than what we budgeted for 2004. Nearly all of this reduction may be attributed to realignment of expectations regarding the cost of the product (cost of goods sold). Other budget changes include an increase in the budget for personal service costs of 14 105 1147 "46 $70,738. This reflects the decision to budget for two full-time positions that were authorized, but not budgeted in 2004. It also reflects the addition of hours for part-time employees. In 2005,the Fridley liquor stores will generate a$500,000 transfer to the General Fund. E. Debt Service. In addition to the operating funds, the City maintains a number of funds that have been established for the administration of debt service. The 2005 budget includes $195,340 to cover principal and interest payments on special assessment bonds. We also expect to pay a total of $1,425,120 in debt service on water system improvements. Of that amount, $980,000 will be used to retire a 1996 bond issue. We have also budgeted for the rebuilding of the Marion Hills stand pipe and other significant improvements to the Commons Park Filtration Plant that are being financed through a recent debt issuance. In addition to the special assessment bonds and water system bonds, the City has outstanding debt on sanitary sewer and storm sewer projects. Annual debt service on these bonds is $142,126.25. This includes $10,305 for sewer-related debt and $131,821.25 for storm water-related debt. Other than enterprise fund debt and special assessment debt,the City has no other general obligation long-term debt. Moreover, none of the City's debt service payments are from the General Fund. This status, along with relatively strong reserves, has helped the City to again be granted an Aal credit rating from Moody's Investor Services, Inc., for the 2004 bond issues. It has also helped us to maintain city-wide taxes and fees that are generally lower than those taxes and fees in surrounding communities. 15 t &PAO° Pension Fund within the Public Employees Retirement System. The amount budgeted for 2004, $478,393, is $133,198 larger than the amount budgeted for 2003. This amount is to be used for the funding of three school resources officers as well as for new Police Department technology. C. Capital Project Funds. The budget for streets, parks and building improvements has been drastically reduced due to State cutbacks in Local Government Aid. While there will be a 2004 street reconstruction project on Lynne Drive, Regis Terrace, Regis Trail and the East University Avenue Service Drive, there is only one other small project on the 2004 list of capital projects. About $15,000 will be spent to install new, mobile, modular storage units in the Police Department's evidence room. D. Enterprise Funds. The 2004 budget includes $12,602,446 in expenditures for four enterprise funds. This amount is 3.7% greater than the amount budgeted for 2003. These funds include the Water Fund, the Sewer Fund, the Storm Water Fund and the Municipal Liquor Fund. Expenditures for each of these funds are depicted in Table 2. Table 2 Enterprise Funds Budgeted Expenditures Budget Budget 2003 2004 Change % Change Water Fund $ 1,986,811 $ 1,908,186 ($ 78,625) (4.0%) Sewer Fund 3,444,662 3,570,434 125,772 3.7% Storm Water Fund 434,878 460,963 26,085 6.0% Municipal Liquor 6,286,174 6,662,863 376,689 6.0% Total $ 12,152,525 $ 12,602,446 $449,921 3.7% 14 OW AV"04 /'1 1. The Water Fund: The Water Fund budget is smaller for 2004. It includes $1,908,186 or $78,625 (4.0%) less than the 2003 budget. Most of the decrease is accounted for by the elimination of budgeting for one position that had been budgeted for several years but not filled. It also reflects a $20,000 savings from our"off peak"program with Xcel Energy. Under this program, we move from Xcel power to our own generators during peak energy periods. In addition to the operating budget described above, the Water Fund also includes a capital improvements budget for 2004 that anticipates replacing the Marion Hills Water Tank at a cost of$550,000. We have also budgeted capital improvement money for well repairs and water main replacement that will be done, as needed, in conjunction with the 2004 street reconstruction project. 2. The Sewer Fund: Since more than 73% of this budget consists of charges for sewage treatment that are passed along to us by MCES (Metropolitan Council Environmental Services) the overall level of spending from the Sewer Fund is mainly outside our local control. The budget for 2004 provides $3,570,434 or 3.65% more than the amount budgeted for 2003. Nearly all of the increase may be attributed to increased treatment costs of 5.04%. In addition to the costs found in the operating budget, $105,000 is projected for sewer capital improvement costs. These include relining of 2,000 feet of 10-inch sanitary sewer line located between Moore Lake and Jefferson Street. 15 2_ S1.4t *io. 3. The Storm Water Fund: We budgeted $460,963 or 6% more than was budgeted in 2003 for this fund. Nearly all of the increase may be attributed to increased depreciation for projects built in 2003 or projected to be built in 2004. Another$91,000 has been projected to cover the cost of storm water capital improvements. These include the relining of 640 feet of 36-inch storm sewer pipe on 75th Avenue. 4. The Liquor Fund: The 2004 Liquor Fund budget projects expenditures of$6,662,863 or 6%more than was budgeted for 2003. All of the increase is reflected in the cost of goods sold. The budgeted amount also includes a $450,000 transfer to the General Fund. E. Debt Service. In addition to operating funds, the City maintains a number of funds that have been established for administration of debt service. The 2004 budget includes $139,135 to cover principal and interest payments on special assessment bonds. We also expect to pay $378,973 in debt service on water system improvements, About 44% of this debt service or $168,175 stems from the issuance of bonds in 1996 for construction of our third water treatment facility. The remainder of this cost is debt service on the 1.5 million gallon storage tank built in 1991, renovation of the Locke Park filtration plant in 1993 and repair of various wells. In addition to special assessment bonds and water system bonds, the City has outstanding debt on sanitary sewer and storm sewer projects. Annual debt service on these bonds is $139,268. This includes $10,910 for sewer-related debt and $128,358 for storm water-related debt. 16 2wc' Other than enterprise fund debt and special assessment debt, the City has no other long- term general obligation debt. Moreover, none of the City's debt service payments are from the General Fund. This status, along with relatively strong reserves, has helped the City maintain a Aal credit rating from Moody's Investor Services, Inc. It has also helped us to maintain City- wide taxes and fees that are lower than those in any of the nine surrounding communities. IV. The Tax Impact of the 2004 Budget The decision by the Fridley City Council to levy back 60% of the lost State aid will cost Fridley's property tax payers $657,890 or about $50 per year for the owners of the average value home in Fridley (valued at $163,400). Property tax increases will also be affected by any growth in the estimated market value of Fridley property as determined by our City Assessor. The first step in calculating property taxes is to calculate the value of tax capacity that may be attributed to a particular home (in this case the average value home.) This is done by applying the class rate for single family homesteaded property to the estimated market value of a home. In the case of our average value home, we would multiply the first $500,000 of this value by 1%. Once this is done, we would multiply the remainder of the value by 1.65% and add the two products. The result, or tax capacity, is multiplied by the sum of the tax capacity rates for the City, Anoka County, the school district in which the property is located and other units of local government that have jurisdiction in the area occupied by the property. After doing all of this, we are still not through. We must also add in the value of any market rate levies approved by the voters in any of the school districts and subtract the value of the Residential Market Value Homestead Credit. This credit is determined by multiplying the market value by .4% to a maximum of$304. This maximum is achieved at a market value of $76,000. Any value in excess of$76,000 is multiplied by .09% and subtracted from the $304 credit. 17 MCES - Metropolitan Council Environmental Services, St Paul - Minneapolis, Minnesota Page 1 of 2 444 Metropolitan m a AtA A e Environmental Services m 4 About MCES/ On-line Tour m „; a', Contact Us/ Org Chart- PDF li • fl it, d . F ?-* W Competitiveness_and Value Water Resource Management Policy Plan Metropolitan Council Environmental Services ( MCES ) exists to support the Council's mission by protecting the public health and environment and providing its customers efficient and effective water resources management. Environmental Topics What's New • Environmental Education • Directions Newsletter - Water & Environment o Wastewater Treatment for Youngsters • Annual Sewer User& Septic System Data Survey • Metro Water Resource Assessment • Water Quality Improvements Brochure • Metro Rivers, Streams & Lakes Monitoring • I/I Surcharge Program • Metro Wastewater Treatment • 2005 Governor's P2 Report o Biosolids Recyclin g • Lower Minnesota River Model o Capital.._Projects • Treatment Plant Tours o Industrial Waste • MetroEnvironment Partnership_ Grants o Interceptor Sewers • Water Supply Plan Template o Pollution Prevention • 2004 Performance Repo,rt - 403k PDF o Rates &Billing • Interceptor Sewer Project Fact Sheets Environmental Information Tools Featured Links • MCES - Environmental Information Mqmt System • Governor's Clean Water Cabinet • Metropolitan Council ......Search Engine • Inflow and Infiltration (VI) Task Force • Bridges - Search Engine • ISTS Management Database • EPA - Environmental Terms&....Acronyms • Urban Small Sites BMP Manual • Metro Area Proiected Water Demand Report Metropolitan Council Environmental Services Mears Park Centre •230 East 5th Street• St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-1626 • Phone 651-602-1000 E-mail Address: environment @metcstate.mn.us Metropolitan Council Home ( Services I About Us I Meetings & Events I Resource, Reports & Data I http://www.metrocouncil.org/environment/environment.htm 2/10/2006 Metropolitan Council - Environmental Services Page 1 of 2 444 Metropolitan " '" a § "' 5 n - %." AACouncil ° t Mt...,;ome> ES Home Last Updated: 11/18/05 About MCES Metropolitan Council Environmental Services ( MCES ) is one of three divisions of the Metropolitan Council. MCES collects and treats wastewater at its eight regional • MCES Profile treatment plants. It also develops plans to preserve and manage the region's water (PDF, 126k) resources. • MCES Performance Report The division provides these services in ways that support the Council's regional (PDF, 403k) growth strategy and protect public health and the environment. • 100+ Years of Water Quality Services provided by MCES ensure that: Improvements in the Twin Cities • Sufficient sewer capacity exists to serve planned development, • MCES Organizational Chart • Sufficient capital investments are made to preserve water quality in the (PDF, 32k) region, • Wastewater collection and treament services are provided in a cost- and qualtiy-competitive manner, • Local plans provide for adequate water supply and nonpoint pollution prevention in the region, and • Local action is catalyzed through water quality grants. MCES conducts region-wide surface and groundwater planning and non-point source pollution abatement (the pollution that comes from urban runoff, etc, but not from a fie). The division also conducts industrial wastewater management, and air and :r quality monitoring and reporting. The division manages water resources in c,„iipliance with all regulatory requirements and in ways that help ensure environmental sustainability. MCES helps keep the region's rivers and lakes clean. MCES treatment plants process 300 million gallons of wastewater every day from more than two million residents. Some 550 miles of large sewer pipes collect wastewater from 103 communities. The plants have been operating at 99 percent compliance with their permit requirements. The performance of the plants shows results. Water quality in the region's rivers--where the treated wastewater is discharged--is improving. Area rivers support a diversity of aquatic life and the waters are once again suitable for boating, fishing and, in certain areas, swimming. General Manager: Bill Moore MCES Information: 651 602-1096 ©2005 Meetropolitan_Council.All Rights Reserved. http://www.metrocouncil.org/environment/AboutMCES/ 2/10/2006 Metropolitan Council - Environmental Services Page 1 of 2 ts l t . _. '', � i- F.�-444 Metropolitan ogif 414 Council � j . Environmental Services Home > Rates&Billing Home. Competitiveness I Financial Plans(Budgets) I Rates&Charges I Billing Procedures FAQ I Financial Analysis Requirements Competitiveness and Value Being competitive means that MCES will strive to keep wastewater rates below the national average for similar-sized Comparison to other wastewater rates utilities. Providing value means that MCES will contribute to the economic vitality of the region through quality and cost-effective Comparison to other local utility costs wastewater utility management. Pricing Philosophy Budget Policy & Goal. Wastewater Retail Rate Comparison Twin Cities Seattle 1 Metro .� Boston $237 174 -11 r ,$ -Milwaukee 276 �_ �� i San Francisco -; - — ? Chicago ' _ $299 r y1.— --_ Denver \ St. Louis Ii $129 Philadelphia ` 176 176 -. $196 Los Angeles ,L y1, Cincinnati g \ 307 240 `- x — Phoena r--e" 175 1 IT ---a Dallas t $235 / . ' -, Tampa 350 E , ,F�--`0.m MCES maintains wholesale rates that are below the national average for similiarly-sized sanitary districts and is committed to improvement in that standing. The map above compares MCES's retail rates to other publicly owned treatment systems around the country. Information is from the 2002 Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies (AMSA) report, The AMSA Financial Survey, and compares average annual retail rates. To_p. MCES' Municipal Wastewater Wholesale Rates C ..mpare the Value -When compared to other household service costs, the Twin Cities average retail rate for Sewer Service is a bargain. The following graph shows average household costs per month. http://www.metrocouncil.org/environment/RatesBilling/Competitiveness.htm 2/10/2006 Metropolitan Council - Environmental Services Page 2 of 2 Cost/Month ,90 $80 $70 $60 _ $20 $10 1 • $80 1 $57 1 $50 1 $23 , 17 I 17 II $15 I Wireless Gas Electric Cable Phone Water Trash Sewer Phone Service Service TV Service Supply Collection Service Service Service (retail) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Sources: 1. Wireless Phone - $50 - National average per Star Tribune article dated 12/9/04. P . Natural Gas - $80 - Minnesota average per May 2005 study by Fisher, Shoehan &Colton titled On the Brink: The Home Energy Affordability Gap. 3. Electric - $57 - Minnesota average per May 2005 study by Fisher, Shoehan &Colton titled On the Brink: The Home Energy Affordability Gap. 4. Cable TV - $50 - Comcast's standard cable package, including taxes and fees. 5. Phone - $23 - Qwest's rate for basic telephone service including taxes and fees. 6. Water Supply - $17 - Combined average charge for Minneapolis and St. Paul in 2003 (80,000 gallons/houshold/year). Rates for most Twin Cities suburbs are lower than this. 7. Trash - $17 - Waste Management's and Walters' average monthly rate for residential 64 gallon garbage service excluding taxes and fees). 8. Sewer Service - $15 - Average retail rate per household in the Twin Cities metropolitan area. MCES receives a portion of this amount, with the remaining going to the community. Top Last updated 8/26/05 Contact: Dan Schueller Phone (651)602-1624 eMail dan.schuelller @metc.state.mn.us More information on MCES charges ©2005 Metropolitan Council.All Rights Reserved. http://www.metrocouncil.org/environment/RatesBilling/Competitiveness.htm 2/10/2006 Metropolitan Council - Environmental Services Page 1 of 2 'a'- -= "ems° q..x.,, 444 Metropolitan! . 41ot?Eneil Environmental Services Home > Rates&Billing Hom e Competitiveness I Financial Plans&Budgets I Rates.&Charges I Billing Procedures Pricing Philosophy Environmental Services rates are based on a region-wide average cost-of-service pricing philosophy. In other words, users are charged for the costs that MCES incurs to provide the specific services used. Charges for basic wastewater flow are based on the volume of flow disposed of by each community and MCES' average cost to treat wastewater. Charges for new capacity demand are intended to pay for the approximate average cost of growth. Charges to treat high strength wastewater are charged to the specific industrial users that discharge the high strength wastewater. For wastewater utilities, some aspects of the charging system are prescribed by Environmental Protection Agency regulations (35.929-1) that state that the Regional Administrator may approve a user charge system based on actual use described as follows: A grantee's user charge system based on actual use (or estimated use) of waste water treatment services may be approved if each user(or user class)pays its proportionate share of operation and maintenance (including replacement) costs of treatment works within the grantee's service area, based on the user's proportionate contribution to the total waste water loading from all users (or user classes). To insure a proportional distribution of operation and ,•. maintenance costs to each user(or user class), the user's contribution shall be based on factors such as strength, volume, and delivery flow rate characteristics. Minnesota municipalities are required to design charges "as nearly as possible proportionate to the cost of providing the service"(M.S. 444.075(36)). The Council supports this by designing its own fees based on cost-of-service. Moreover, cost-of-service pricing provides the most rational pricing signals to users thereby improving the economy of the region. For example, an industrial site that is considering whether or not to add pre-treatment equipment at their site will be encouraged to make the best decision for the region if their wastewater charges reflect the actual cost of the service. Jason Willett, MCES Finance Director(651) 602-1196 Updated 6/13/2005 ©2005 Metropolitan Council.All Rights Reserved. • • http://www.metrocouncil.org/environment/RatesBilling/PricingPhilosophy.htm 2/10/2006 Metropolitan Council - Environmental Services Page 1 of 3 AAA Metropolitan = I'�.�"'�� ,�.--'� "'.�.' -Y^r`,r�+�a N"�c+�W'�"s-': = `. � Council zdj 4_1 Environmental Services Home > Rates&Billing Home Competitiveness I Financial Plans&Budgets I Rates&Charges I Billing Procedures Budget Policy and Goal MCES's Rate Policy Rates and Charges Policy The Council will design and adopt fees and charges using a regional cost-of-service basis: - Municipal wastewater charges will be allocated to communities uniformly, based on flow. - Industrial wastewater strength and load charge rates will each be uniform, and proportionate to the volume and strength of discharges. - Load charges for septage, portable toilet waste, holding tank wastewater and out-of-region wastes will be uniform for each type of load, and based on the volume of the load and the average strength of the types of loads. - Service Availability Charges (SAC) will be uniform within the urban service area of the region. SAC for a Rural Growth Center where a treatment facility is owned by the Council will be based on the reserve capacity of the plant and the Council's debt service specific to the Center. SAC for a Rural Growth Center where interceptor facility(s) are owned by the Council will be the urban SAC charge plus a charge based on the reserve capacity of the specific interceptor(s) and the Council's debt service specific to the Center. The Council will seek customer input prior to, and give at least three months notice of, any material changes in the design of fees and charges. The Council will maintain wastewater rates for MCES that enable the division to: - Meet wastewater regulatory requirements; I''''*Ilnplement MCES infrastructure rehabilitation and repair needs; and rovide wastewater capacity for growth consistent with the Council's 2030 Regional Development Framework. II Rates MCES has met and exceeded the guidelines of the rate policy by operating all treatment plants within permit standards, maintaining infrastructure in good repair, and sustaining water quality while providing customers with predictable, moderate rates. Looking ahead to 2006, municiple wastewater charges are equal to what they were in 1997 (see chart below). http://www.metrocouncil.org/environment/RatesBilling/BudgetRateGoals.htm 2/10/2006 Metropolitan Council - Environmental Services Page 2 of 3 Municipal Wastewater Charges Os in millions) $180 $150 $120 $90 1141.01 140.6 128.91 1191 124.51 126.01 1321 124.91 138.51 141.8 $60 $30 $0 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Based on CPIILI inflation rate (2005 & 2006 projected at 2.7%) MW Charges —II— Inflation Adjusted Retail Rates: In 2002, the regional average retail residential sewer rate per household in the Twin Cities for wastewater treatment was $177. That yearly rate, compared to rates in similar-sized districts, is below the national average. In an Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies (AMSA) 2002 survey, MCES ranked sixth among its peers in retail rates. This was an improvement over 1999 when MCES was ranked ninth. Peer agencies are considered as all those that treat more than 100 million gallons of wastewater per day and respond to AMSA's triennial Financial Survey. A summary of rankings based on the last three AMSA surveys follows: Data From AMSA Survey MCES' Retail Rate Ranking* 2001 2002 6 of 31 (83rd percentile) 1998 1999 9 of 30 (72nd percentile) 1995 1996 8 of 29 (75th percentile) . 005 survey of 2004 data will be available in early 2006. http://www.metrocouncil.org/environment/RatesBilling/BudgetRateGoals.htm 2/10/2006 Metropolitan Council - Environmental Services Page 3 of 3 * Because of the different number of responses in each year, the percentile rank of DDS is also provided (this represents the percentage of respondents that rted higher retail rates than MCES). More information 2004 Rate Study - PDF Format Updated 08/26/05 ©2005 Metropolitan Council.All Rights Reserved. /"■ http://www.metrocouncil.org/environment/RatesBillingBudgetRateGoals.htm 2/10/2006 Metropolitan Council - Environmental Services Page 1 of 2 AAA Metropolitan � r t„ ., .: _ + tunel t � 1P � r - . � Environmental Services Home > Rates&Billing Home Competitiveness Financial Plans(Budgets) I Rates&Charges ( Billing Procedures FAQ Financial Analysis Requirements Financial Plans (Budgets) The MCES Financial Plans documents are comprised of the following: 20.05-200.6 Capital Finance Plan.(CF...P.) - PDF Format �~ 2005 Summary Budget - PDF Format 2005 Annual Budget& Five Year Est - r '' ` I PDF Format dpa5; �a r - 2005 Capita l Bud Im rovement Pro et &Capital ' � �� gram (CIP) Q!b r� �� NOTE: Budget amendments occur, call � � � n "�� Jason Willett for details (651) 602-1196 If you would like co ies of 2005 � �r , � documents, please contact MCES. at �'� ,rt i (651) 602-1263. updated 06/13/05 To view, navigate, or print PDF files, downloa...d thefree Adobe Acrobat Reader for your Op_erating__System from Adobe.and install it on your computer. Open the PDF file in the Adobe Reader. ©2005 Metropolitan Council.All Rights Reserved. http://www.metrocouncil.org/environment/RatesBilling/FinancialPlansBudgets.htm 2/10/2006 Metropolitan Council - Environmental Services Page 1 of 3 444 Metropolitan _e , 4 4Council V ? 1 f fiVfk Environmental Services Home > Rates&Billing Home. Competitiveness I Financial Plans(Budgets) I Rates&Charges I Billing Procedures FAQ I Financial Analysis Requirements MCES Rates and Charges: Municipal Wastewater Charge Add-on-service Charge Service Availability Charge (SAC) Self-monitoring Report Late Fees Industrial Strength Charges Stipulation Agreement Payment Liquid Waste Hauler Load Charges Cost Recovery Fees Indust_rial Discharge Permit Fees Rate Reports: Study of 2004 Municipal Wastewater Rates - PDF Format 1. Municipal Wastewater Rate: The charge by MCES to communities for sewer service treatment. All 103 customer communities pay MCES an allocated portion of MCES Municipal Wastewater Charges based on the volume of wastewater treated. Most cities cover their own sewer costs by charging a higher "retail" rate to residents and businesses. Those rates are specific to each city. 2005 2006 Total MCES Municipal Wastewater Charges: $138,500,000 $141,770,000 cation to communities based on total system flow (7/1/03 -6/30/04 flow period): ' 94,567.5 mg 91,860.5 mg IlApproximate rate per million gallons (mg): $1,464.56 $1,543.32 Municipal Wastewater Char_geFact Sheet-pdf Dispute summary of the steps required for...resolution of a disputed bill. Return to top 2. Service Availability Charge (SAC): The service availability charge is a onetime fee imposed by MCES for new connections or increased volume discharged to the metropolitan wastewater system. The SAC fee is similar to fees used by many wastewater utilities and municipalities and is generically known as an "impact" or "connection" fee. One SAC unit equals 274 gallons of maximum potential daily wastewater flow volume. A freestanding single-family residence is charged one SAC unit. Other types of buildings pay a prorated SAC fee, based on the estimated volume of wastewater they will generate. Service Availability Charge Discount 2005 SAC 2006 SAC 'Base Unit Fee: Single-Family Dwelling I $1,450 $1,550 Apartment (without individual laundry facilities) 20% $1,160 $1,240 Multi-Dwelling Public Housing (without garbage disposals or 25% $1,087.50 $1,162.50 dishwashers) Multi-Dwelling Public Housing (without individual laundry facilities, 400/13 $870 $930 garbage disposals or dishwashers) Commercial: Base unit fee times number of residential equivalent units r'EUs) where the number of REUs is based on an estimated maximum itential flow Illndustrial: Based on fee times number REUs where the number of II II II http://www.metrocouncil.org/environment/RatesBilling/RatesCharges.htm 2/10/2006 Metropolitan Council - Environmental Services Page 2 of 3 Us is based on maximum normal flow volume II II II II ANC Procedure Manual I SAC Forms - PDF Format Return to top 3. Industrial Strength Charges: Industrial strength charges are fees for additional treatment costs caused by industrial wastewater which has more pollutants than typical residential wastewater. Industrial strength charges are based on the concentration of pollutants (as measured by Total Suspended Solids (TSS) and Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) and the volume of the discharge. Strength charge rates are set by the Council, based on expenses at wastewater treatment plants for treating TSS and COD in excess of normal residential wastewater. Industrial users are also subject to normal municipal wastewater (volume) charges. Of the approximately 817 permitted Industrial Users, about 350 pay strength charges to MCES. Industrial Strength Charges -within Council Region 2005 2006 Rates Rates Cost per excess pound of Total Suspended Solids (TSS) $0.129 $0.136 Cost per excess pound of Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) $0.0645 $0.068 Return to top 4. Liquid Waste Hauler Load Charges: Liquid waste haulers pay MCES for septage, leachate and other hauled wastes that are discharged to approved MCES disposal sites. The load charge combines a strength charge component with a volume component. The volume component is based on the MCES municipal wastewater rate. In addition, a $10-$50 per load Service Fee applies to hauled wastes originating outside the Region. Load charges are different for holding tank, portable toilet waste, septage and industrial wastes. Load Charges (per 1,000 gallons) 2005 2006 Rates Rates ptandard Load Charge I $32.30 $33.81 Holding Tank Rate $1.47 $1.52 Portable Toilet Waste Rate $42.94 $44.94 Collar County Load Charge (Includes $10 per 1,000 gallons service fee for waste from $42.30 $43.81 outside the region) Return to top I Industrial Waste Rates & Fees. 5. Industrial Discharge Permit Fees: Industrial Users of the system must apply for a permit from MCES to discharge wastewater. Those Industrial Users issued a permit are subject to annual permit fees, which recover a portion of the costs to administer the industrial pretreatment program. Permit fees are based on permit type, annual volume of wastewater, Significant Industrial User (SIU) status, and reporting frequency. Return to top I Industrial Waste Rates& Fees 6. Add-on-Service Charge: A charge assessed to special discharge permittees for disposal of treated, contaminated groundwater. Charge is assessed in lieu of SAC due to the temporary nature of the service. Return to top I Industrial Waste Rates & Fees 7. Self-monitoring Report Late Fees: A fee assessed to permittees who fail to submit a complete self- monitoring report on a timely basis. The late fee amount is based on the frequency and severity of late reports. Return to top I Industrial Waste Rates& Fees 8. Stipulation Agreement Payment:These are negotiated monthly payments and daily penalties intended to negate the economic advantage of noncompliance with federal pretreatment standards or local limits. Aturn to top I Industrial Waste Rates...& Fees _. Cost Recovery Fees:These fees are used to recover MCES costs from any responsible party associated with spill or enforcement responses, non-routine data requests, special discharge requests, orders to appear, or notice http://www.metrocouncil.org/environment/RatesBilling/RatesCharges.htm 2/10/2006 Metropolitan Council - Environmental Services Page 3 of 3 of violations. ➢ irn.._totop I Industrial Waste Rates & Fees. Last updated 08/22/05 Contact: Dan Schueller Phone (651)602-1624 eMail Da_n Schueller©M ETC S.tate.MN.US ©2005 Metropolitan Council.All Rights Reserved. i1 http://www.metrocouncil.org/environment/RatesBilling/RatesCharges.htm 2/10/2006 Metropolitan Council -Environmental Services Page 1 of 2 .=J Home a a Building Communities That Work Environmental Services Home > Rates...&...Billing Home Competitiveness I Financial Plans(Budgets) ( Rates&Charges I Billing Procedures FAQ( Financial Analysis...Requirements Billing Procedures FAQ Who decides how much cities pay for treatment? Revenue Sources (2005 budget) Industry-specific Municipal Charges: 53% Wastewater Charges SAC* *SAC =Service 76.4% Transfer Availability 17.6% Charge Other: .7% Metropolitan Council Environmental Services' (MCES) annual operating budget provides a plan for the resources necessary to support its two mandated core functions, wastewater collection and treatment and water resource planning. The major source of those resources is the Municipal Wastewater Charge (MWC), the fee paid by the 103 customer communities which send wastewater to the MCES system. The authority to allocate the costs of the system among users is established in state law (see MN 473.517). The specific method of assessing wastewater fees is determined by the Council. The charge paid by customer cities is a "wholesale" fee, and is based on the metered amount of wastewater disposed to the system. Each city sets and charges its own "retail" rates to homeowners and businesses in its service area to recover the costs of city- owned collection systems in addition to the fees paid to MCES. Questions about a sewer bill for an individual home or business should be directed to the city in which the property is located. Return to top How are the charges to individual cities determined? The total to be charged to customer cities in any calendar year is the amount of Municipal Wastewater Charges included in the annual budget adopted by the Council for that year. The charges to individual customer communities are a function of the level of system use, the metered flow of wastewater from each community into the system. Beginning with 2005, the charging method was modified to provide more predictability in the charges, both for communities and MCES. Metered flows for a "flow year," the twelve months from July 1 to June 30, are compiled as they become available. After the metering results for all cities are final, the percentage of each city's flow of the total is ---olculated. That percentage is then multiplied against the budgeted total of wastewater revenues required for the xt calendar year, and cities are notified in September of the amount of their new monthly charges to begin in January. http://www.metrocouncil.org/environment/RatesBilling/BillingProcedures.htm 2/10/2006 Metropolitan Council - Environmental Services Page 2 of 2 Municipal Wastewater Charge..Fact Sheet -pdf more information contact: Dale Ulrich at (651) 602-1020 for information on MCES costs &revenues. Kyle Colvin at (651) 602-1151 for data on municipal flows. Return...to....top_ Updated 03/02/05 ©2005 Metropolitan Counc.illl..All Rights Reserved. http://www.metrocouncil.org/environment/RatesBilling/BillingProcedures.htm 2/10/2006 Metropolitan Council - Environmental Services Page 1 of 3 /A/Metropolitan _ j a•r^ s tCvuneil .4 1 ° _ ° Environmental Services Home > Rates&Billing Home Competitiveness I Financial Plans(Budgets) I Rates&Charges ( Billing Procedures FAQ I Financial Analysis Requirements Financial Analysis Requirements & Guidelines Unless authorized by the MCES Finance Manager, MCES staff and consultants should use the following assumptions and methodologies in all financial analysis and budget development. Rates&Assumptions • Inflation Rates (per year): Labor(including benefits): 3.5% Non-labor: 2.5% Construction (for capital expenses in future years): 2.5% or contract provisions, if available • Discount Rate (to bring future costs to present value): Discount Rate to use in analysis: 5.0% This is the average annual cost of capital (net interest cost of bonds) for the past ten years. • • • Useful Lives: Buildings/Structures: 40 years Gravity Sewers: 80 years Forcemains (dual-pipes, corrosion-resistant materials): 40 years Process Piping: 40 years Equipment: Varies, 20 years is typical Mechanical & Electrical Systems: 20 years Instrumentation &Control: 15 years Mobile Equipment: 10 years • Replacement Cost Factor: Factor to use before adjusting for inflation: Non-mobile equipment 1.25 Mobile equipment 1.00 This accounts for higher replacement cost due to newer technology, installation, and purchasing equipment separately from the original construction project. Use these factors unless there is compelling reason to use different rates. • Analysis Horizon: Master Plans: 50 years Facility Plans: 20 years Interceptors: 50 years http://www.metrocouncil.org/environment/RatesBilling/FinancialAnalysis.htm 2/10/2006 Metropolitan Council - Environmental Services Page 2 of 3 Treatment Plants: 20 years n Other Capital Projects: Life of the project's main/major structure Projects that depend on a specific contract: Contract Term • Terminal Residual Value: For assets that are not fully depreciated at the end of the analysis horizon: -Maximum Terminal Value = cost less straight line depreciation to terminal date. -Minimum Terminal Value = scrap value of materials less demolition costs. For land (if applicable) Original land purchase price ( a conservative estimate) • Financial Analysis Methodology: For decision-making, such as alternatives analysis, use incremental cost analysis methodology. For pricing services, use a full cost approach, and consult MCES Finance for additional guidance. • Capital Costs: As a percent of construction cost Master/Area Planning - Undeveloped Design Details: 30% Facility Planning - Undeveloped Design Details: 20% Engineering, Administrative, and Legal costs: 20% • Operation and Maintenance Prices (including sales tax): Electricity $.045/kwh Natural Gas - Firm (includes distribution charge) $10.50/MMBtu Natural Gas - Interruptible (includes distribution charge) $7.75/MMBtu Diesel Fuel $1.90/gallon Polymer Depends on sludge and process Chlorine (1-ton cylinder) $390 Sulfur Dioxide (1-ton cylinder) $500 Caustic Soda $1.00/gallon Sodium Hypochlorite $.47/gallon Labor Salaries &Benefits - Operations $79,000 (1,800 hours work time per (excludes overtime) year) Labor Salaries & Benefits - Maintenance $79,000 (1,800 hours work time per (excludes overtime) year) - Last Update: 03/07/05 r questions or suggested additions to this page, contact: http://www.metrocouncil.org/environment/RatesBilling/FinancialAnalysis.htm 2/10/2006 Metropolitan Council - Environmental Services Page 3 of 3 Dan Schueller at (651) 602-1624 ©2005 Metropolitan Council.All Rights Reserved. ,—\ http://www.metrocouncil.org/environment/RatesBilling/FinancialAnalysis.htm 2/10/2006 ©oS I Ordinance Proposing p g Charter Amendment J Ordinance Proposing Charter Amendment • 2005 City Council Commission Survey recommended City should limit losses in water, sanitary sewer and storm water utility funds due to increasing costs and limitation of City Charter by holding special election to let voters amend the charter. 2 1 Ordinance Proposing Charter Amendment • MN Statutes Chapter 410.12, subd. 5, allows City Council to propose an amendment by ordinance subject to Charter Commission Review. • Ordinance drafted proposing charter amendment to begin public discussion • If City Council wishes to proceed, hold 1st reading and forward to Charter Commission for their review Ordinance Proposing Charter Amendment • Charter Commission has 60 days to review and recommend approval or denial of proposed amendment (August 12th). • If more time needed for review, Charter Commission may adopt a resolution requesting additional 90 day review (November 10th) 2 Ordinance Proposing Charter Amendment .J\ • Ordinance forwarded to Charter Commission on June 14th for their review. • State Law requires charter amendments to be placed on the ballot for a general election to be forwarded to county 12 weeks before the general election, which would require city to notify county by August 16th Ordinance Proposing Charter Amendment • When forwarding ordinance, City Council may wish to express an urgency and request the Commission try to make their recommendation to City Council by August 8th to allow enough time for city clerk to notify Anoka County of special election. J 3 Ordinance Proposing Charter Amendment • Background/Findings: • 2000 - successful initiative petition amended city charter • 2000-2001 - Ad Hoc Work Group met to remedy confusing language and recommended amendment to Charter Commission to review • 2001 - charter amended by Ordinance No. 1152 Ordinance Proposing Charter Amendment • Background/Findings. • Charter amendment placed a cap on the amount of increase the city could charge for utility fees, resulting in an unintended consequence thereby causing the city the inability to recover the cost of providing the service. • 2004 — Charter amended by ordinance and successful referendum petition circulated resulting in a defeat of the amendment at the general election. 4 Ordinance Proposing Charter Amendment • Background/Findings: • The 2006 budget preparation and planning provided information showing the city will continue to be unable to recover the costs for providing water, sanitary and sewer services to its customers due to the language in the charter. • Federal Mandates—regulating higher water standards • Higher sewage disposal rates imposed by MCES • Ongoing Repairs and maintenance of infrastructure I /`\ Ordinance Proposing Charter Amendment • Background/Findings • Proposed charter amendment would help eliminate potential for long term subsidy from general fund. I 5 Ordinance Proposing Charter Amendment • Ballot Question • Shall the Fridley City Charter be amended in a manner that removes limits on the rates that may be charged for the operation and improvement of its water, sewer and storm water systems as shown below: • Yes • No • ("actual language to be amended" Ordinance Proposing Charter Amendment • If Charter Commission Review and Recommendation is returned to the City council by August 3rd, the second reading could be held on August 8th. • If 2nd Reading held, the proposed Special Election would be held Tuesday, November 8, 2005, in conjunction with School Districts 13, 14 and 16. 2 6 Ordinance Proposing Charter Amendment • Recommendation • Discussion and first reading of the ordinance proposing an amendment to the city charter. I r-. 7 J IF I IL AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF CITY f FRID LEY June 13, 2005 RID To: William W. Burns, City Manager From: Richard D. Pribyl, Finance Director Debra A. Skogen, City Clerk Date: June 8, 2005 Re: First Reading of an Ordinance Proposing to Amend the City Charter and Providing for a Special Election Based on the Council/Commission Survey Questions and the follow up conference meetings the City Council held with many of the Commission members, a majority felt the City should limit the losses occurring in the utility funds due to the limitation in the City Charter and put the question of removing water, sanitary and storm sewer rates once again before the voters. Most members in attendance at the meeting felt that the last election regarding this issue had a question that was too long and complicated and voters did not understand what they were voting on. We have received numerous comments from other residents who felt they had misunderstood the question and would have voted differently if they knew what it was they read. MN Statutes Chapter 410.12., subd. 5, allows the City Council to propose an amendment by ordinance subject to Charter Commission review. Given the direction of the City Council and their wish to amend the Charter, staff drafted an ordinance and reviewed it with the City Attorney. This ordinance initiates the possibility of a special election this fall and is meant to be a catalyst for discussion. Should changes be suggested that create simpler and clearer ballot language,this ordinance could possibly be modified by its second reading. Because the law appears to be silent on the process, it is our interpretation, should the City Council wish to proceed,that the City Council would hold a first reading of the ordinance and forward the ordinance to the Charter Commission for their review and recommendation. Once the Charter Commission has received the ordinance proposing the amendment,the Charter Commission has 60 days to amend or recommend approval or denial (August 12th). In addition, if the Charter Commission feels it needs more time to study the proposed amendment,they may adopt a resolution requesting an additional 90 days to review the proposal (November 10). Once the proposed amendment is returned to the City Council,they may hold a second reading of the ordinance. If the City Council is interested in holding a special election this year,they may wish to convey the urgency of that message to the Charter Commission. State law requires charter amendments to be placed on the ballot for a general election be forwarded to the County 12 weeks before the general election, or by August 16, 2005. This would mean the Charter Commission would want to complete their review and recommendation by August 3rd so that staff could provide the materials to the City Council by August 8d'. Staff recommends discussion and first reading of the ordinance proposing an amendment to the city charter. Ord 3 —Language prepared by city attorney ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING FRIDLEY CITY CHARTER, CHAPTER 7. TAXATION AND FINANCES, SECTION 7.02.3.A. & B. PERTAINING TO UTILITY FEES SECTION 1. The Fridley City Council hereby finds the following: That in 2000, a successful initiative petition proposing an amendment to the Fridley City Charter requiring voter approval for tax increases beyond specified inflationary adjustments, or to create, expand or increase various fees was received and placed on the November 7, 2000, municipal election ballot. The question was approved by the voters by 57% of all people voting in the election. In an attempt to remedy confusing language contained in the amendment and potentially dangerous and costly problems for the City, an ad hoc work group met and formulated an ordinance designed to correct the language contained within the amendment. The ordinance was reviewed by the City Charter Commission and recommended to the City Council for adoption. The ordinance was approved April 9, 2001. That in 2004, due to the City's increased costs in providing the sanitary sewer, storm water and water sales to its customers, it was found that an unintended consequence to the City had been created by the amendment by not allowing the City to recover its full costs for providing sanitary sewer, storm water and water sales. The Charter Commission recommended adoption of an r'1 ordinance removing utility fees from Section 7.03.A. of the City Charter as a defined fee that could not be increased above 5% or the rate of inflation, whichever is lower. The City Council adopted the ordinance; however, a successful Referendum Petition requesting withdrawal of the ordinance was received and placed on the November municipal election ballot. The question approving the ordinance failed and the ordinance did not become effective. During the 2006 budget preparation and planning it was determined that sanitary sewer, storm water and water costs continue to increase due to a number of outside factors beyond the control of the city. Some of these factors include federal mandates imposing increasingly higher standards for water and sewer, higher sewage disposal charges imposed by the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services agency, and ongoing repairs and maintenance of the system's infrastructure. The City Council sent a Survey to all current city commissioners to query their thoughts about utility rates. There was overwhelming agreement that the charter should be amended to allow the city to recover its costs for sanitary sewer, storm water and water sales. That a proposed charter amendment will help eliminate potential for long term subsidy of sanitary sewer, storm water and water deficits; provide cost recovery for federal or state mandates; and maintain all other spending restrictions which requires city council to obtain direct voter approval for programs that increase costs above 5%or the rate of inflation, whichever is lower. SECTION 2. That Chapter 5, Section 5.09 of the Fridley City Charter states that, "The ways to initiate amendments to this Charter are set forth in Minnesota Statutes. Minnesota Statutes Chapter Ordinance No. Page 2 �—, 410.12, subd. 5, allows for the city council to propose an amendment to the voters by ordinance. This ordinance shall be submitted to the charter commission for review. After the charter commission completes its review and notifies the city council of its recommendation, the city council may submit it to the people. SECTION 3. That the Fridley City Council hereby ordains that the Fridley City Charter be amended and that a Special Election be held in the City of Fridley on November 8,2005,to allow the people to vote on the following question: Shall the Fridley Charter be amended so as to permit water,sewer and storm water charges above the rate of inflation without the passage of a referendum for each such increase? O Yes O No SECTION 4. That the City Clerk shall cause notice of said election to be given to the Anoka County Auditor within 53 days of said election and that notice of said election be published in the official newspaper of the City for at least three weeks prior to said election; and That the City Council ordains that the election shall be held at the usual polling locations for the state general election, as set forth in Exhibit"A,"and that said election shall be held and conducted in accordance with the Minnesota State Statutes applicable to municipal elections and the provisions of the Home Rule Charter; and That the City Council shall meet within seven days from said election as required by law for the purpose of canvassing said election and declaring the results thereof. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF , 2005. First Reading: June 13, 2005 Charter Commission Review: July 18, 2005 Second Reading: Publication: Ordinance No. Page 3 Exhibit A Polling Locations WARD 1 PRECINCT 1 Grace Evangelical Free Church 755 73rd Avenue Northeast WARD 1 PRECINCT 2 Hayes Elementary School 615 Mississippi Street Northeast WARD 1 PRECINCT 3 Fridley Municipal Center 6431 University Avenue Northeast WARD 1 PRECINCT 4 Fridley Community Center 6085 7th Street NE WARD 2 PRECINCT 1 Woodcrest Elementary School 880 Osborne Road Northeast WARD 2 PRECINCT 2 Knights of Columbus 6831 Highway#65 Northeast WARD 2 PRECINCT 3 St.Philip's Lutheran Church 6180 Highway#65 Northeast WARD 2 PRECINCT 4 North Park School—Gym 1 5575 Fillmore Street Northeast WARD 2 PRECINCT 5 North Park School—Gym 2 5575 Fillmore Street Northeast WARD 3 PRECINCT 1 Springbrook Nature Center 100 85th Avenue Northeast WARD 3 PRECINCT 2 Redeemer Lutheran Church rte- 61 Mississippi Way Northeast WARD 3 PRECINCT 3 Stevenson Elementary School 6080 East River Road WARD 3 PRECINCT 4 Fridley Covenant Church 6390 University Avenue Northeast aen 4 „_... Proposed Charter Amendment The need for an amendment was brought to the attention of the Charter Commission in July of 2003 during the 2004 budget process ... Current Requirement Since 2001, in order to increase utility charges and recycling fees beyond the rate of inflation (currently at 1 .8%), or 5%, whichever is less, ,City Council must submit a p 6s0 to be voted on at the next gen 1 lection. \ \ I Current Status of Water, Sewer and Storm Water Funds — Year End 2003 Deficit • Water ($191,000) • Sanitary Sewer ($232,974) • on Water ($ 15,000) • Total ($459,974) Open Forum held by Charter Commission on February 10, 2004. Broadcast live on the Fridley Cable Channel, and rebroadcast several additional times. Small audience, one person speaking for and one 'z person speaking against amendment 1\ tlitibnal comments were received after Open 2 Reasons for Proposed Charter Change • To eliminate large deficits in these services • On long-term basis, eliminates potential problem of subsidizing water and sewer with transfer of dollars from the General Fund. • P- 1 i City Council flexibility to deal with uniq b r blems associated with these service Reasons for Proposed Charter Change • Unintended consequence of the petitioners and the voters. • Eliminates subsidy to large businesses. 3 Section 7.02.3.A. Proposed Language • For the purposes of this subsection, "fees" includes sales and use taxes, utility charges (other than water, storm water and sanitary sewer), (recycling fees), gas and electric --.`._,_'-fT chise fees and any other (recy 4 ' gees would be removed) Section 7.02.3.B. Proposed Language • For the purposes of this subsection, the term "fees" does not include: Water, storm water and sanitary sewer charges; recycling fees; Parks and Recreation Department participation e7v, charges for photo-copying, sales of al liquor uor q 4 Language in 2000 Charter Petition (as approved by the voters) For purposes of this subsection, "fees" includes but is not necessarily limited to, sales and use taxes, business and occupation taxes, excise �, impact fees, license fees, p i fees and any discretionary mon nary charge by city government. \\\\ Amendment of April, 2001 • Clarifying language added: "For purposes of this subsection, "fees" includes sales and use taxes, �,3y charges, recycling fees, 5 • Rate Increase to be approved by voters very cumbersome • Allows a minority of voters to determine outcome of issue • Using reserves forces future residents to pay for improvements by borrowing money at higher rates of interest rather than using e es as security for bond issues. Summary • Proposed Charter Amendment will: • Eliminate potential for long term subsidy of water and sewer services. • Provide cost recovery for federal/state/county mandated water quality and recycling requirements. �M? ain all other spending restrictions which wiles city council to obtain direct voter approval for ogr ms that increase costs above 5% or the rate o 'ntion, whichever is lower. 6 Charter amendment by ordinance requires a unanimous vote of the City Council. 7 History of Rate Increases Sanitary Storm Year Water Sewer Water 1999 ---- -12% ---- 2000 ---- ---- ---- i--_ 01 4% 3.60% 4% i 3.80% 3.80% 3.80% 2003 1.80% 1.80% 1.70% Quarterly Utility Cost Comparisons Fridley $74.27 Spring Lake Park $80.05 +7.8% New Brighton $81 .19 +9.3% "-C bn Aids $80.05 +7.8% Columb Heights $101 .06 +36.1% \\\ 8 r. Recycling Charges Per Qtr Deficit • 2000 $5.50 ($32,000) • 2001 $5.50 ($32,500) `•,2002 $5.73 ($48,000) - 2 $5.95 ($15,000) • 200 $6.06 ($35,545) Utility Funds Financial Status • Asset Value $30.0 million • Accumulated Depreciation $13.8 million • Debt ($ 2.4) million a $ 6.9 million 9 Remaining Cash • Cash as of 12/31/03 $31,371,896.77 • Restricted Cash -$16,755,783.51 • Balance (Cash less Restricted) $14,584,359.70 i ure Project Costs -$14,269310.80 a' in Cash $ 315,048.90 10 February 10, 2004 Charter Commission Open Forum Background - 1999 ✓ Franchise fee for gas and electric utilities ordinance adopted by city council ✓ Franchise Fee Referendum Petition circulated and successfully placed on ballot. ✓ Special Election — December 14, 1999, Franchise Fee Referendum successful and the Franchise Fee on gas and electric utilities was defeated. 1 n Background - 2000 ✓ Charter Amendment Petition circulated and successfully placed on November Ballot. ✓ General Election November , 2000, Charter amendment successful now limiting the City Council's ability to raise fees, or taxes, beyond certain limits, without direct voter approval. Background 2000-01 ✓Work Group created to discuss ramifications of newly adopted charter amendment and to draft charter amendment language. ✓Ordinance Amending Charter adopted by City Council April 9, 2001, as a result of recommendation of Work Group. 2 Current e Lan ua g g FRIDLEY CITY CHARTER CHAPTER 7. TAXATION AND FINANCES. Section 7.02 Power of Taxation 3 Section 7.02.01 The City shall have, in addition to the powers by this Charter expressly or impliedly granted, all the powers to raise money by taxation pursuant to the laws of the State which are applicable to cities of the class of which it may be a member from time to time, Section 7.02.01 (Cont.) provided that the amount of taxes levied against real and personal property within the City for general City purposes shall not exceed in dollars, a tax levy that is greater than the prior year tax levy increased by an inflationary index, or 5%, whichever is least 4 Section 7.02.01 (Cont.) Said inflationary index shall be that as defined by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers in the Minneapolis, St. Paul metropolitan area. (Ref. Ord. 592, 1102 and 11/7/00 Amendment) Section 7.02.02 The City Council may also levy a tax against real and personal property within the City in addition to said limit as defined in paragraph 1 provided the Council shall: 5 Section 7.02.2 (Cont.) A. Adopt a resolution specifying purposes of additional Tax Levy. B. Hold a Public hearing. C. Adopt a resolution with affirmative votes by at least 4 Council Members. D. Levy takes effect if approved by 51 % of the votes cast in the election. Section 7.02.03 Any other fees created, or increased beyond the limits set forth in subsection 1, shall require voter approval as stipulated in subsection 2. 6 Section 7.02.3.A For the purposes of this subsection, "fees" includes sales and use taxes, utility charges, recycling fees, gas and electric franchise fees and any other fee that produces a tax burden or direct financial obligation for all property owners and/or residents of Fridley. (Ref Ord 1152) Section 7.03.B For the purposes of this subsection, the term "fees" does not include: Parks and Recreation Department participation fees, charges for photo- copying, sales of municipal liquor store products, or civil and criminal fines and other charges collected in cases of restitution or violation of law or contract. 7 Proposed Language Section 7.02.3.A (new) For the purposes of this subsection, "fees" includes sales and use taxes, utility charges (other than water, sanitary sewer and storm water), gas and electric franchise fees and any other fee that produces a tax burden or direct financial obligation for all property owners and/or residents of Fridley. (Ref Ord 1152) Section 7.02.3.B (new) For the purposes of this subsection, the term "fees" does not include: water, storm water and sanitary sewer charges; recycling fees; Parks and Recreation Department participation fees, charges for photo- copying, sales of municipal liquor store . . . Current Status of Water, Sewer and Storm Water Funds — Year End 2003 Deficit • Water ($191,000) • Sanitary Sewer ($236,000) • Storm Water ($ 15,000) • Total ($463,000) 9 r--, History of Rate Increases Sanitary Storm Year Water Sewer Water 1999 ---- -12% ---- 2000 ---- ---- ---- 2001 4% 3.60% 4% 2002 3.80% 3.80% 3.80% 2003 1.80% 1.80% 1.70% n Quarterly Utility Cost Comparisons Fridley $74.27 Spring Lake Park $80.05 +7.8% New Brighton $81 .19 +9.3% Coon Rapids $80.05 +7.8% Columbia Heights $101 .06 +36.1% r-. 10 Utility Costs Beyond Council Control • 75% of sewer costs passed along by MCES • State and Federal Mandates . Increased monitoring requirements . Increasing water quality standards Problems With Current Charter Language • Difficulty in presenting issue to voters • Long lead time requirements. • Education of Voters • Council members and city staff cannot be involved in "promoting" approval • No citizen interest group likely to campaign for change • 51% threshold 11 Other Issues ➢ Uneven beneficiaries • Largest businesses receive biggest subsidy ➢ Micro-managing the utility operation • Structure of rates • Minimum charges • Excess consumption Recycling Charges Per Qtr Deficit ➢ 2000 $5.50 ($32,000) • 2001 $5.50 ($32,500) • 2002 $5.73 ($48,000) • 2003 $5.95 ($15,000) • 2004 $6.06 ($35,545) 12 Reasons for Proposed Charter Change To eliminate large deficits in these services On long-term basis, eliminates potential problem of subsidizing water and sewer with transfer of dollars from the General Fund. Permits City Council flexibility to deal with unique problems associated with these services. Reasons for Proposed Charter Change Unintended consequence of the petitioners and the voters. Eliminates subsidy to large businesses. 13 Disadvantages of Proposed Charter Change • Alters what voters approved in November, 2000 > Increases costs to homeowner by $4 to $5 per quarter, or $1.66/month (less than the cost of a McDonald's Happy Meal). Utility Funds Financial Status • Asset Value $30.0 million • Accumulated Depreciation $13.8 million • Debt ($ 2.4) million • Cash $ 6.9 million 14 Unintended Consequences Did the 2000 charter amendment include utility charges and recycling fees? Language in 2000 Charter Petition (as approved by the voters) For purposes of this subsection, "fees" includes but is not necessarily limited to, sales and use taxes, business and occupation taxes, excise taxes, impact fees, license fees, permit fees and any discretionary monetary charge by city government. 15 Amendment of April, 2001 Clarifying language added: "For purposes of this subsection, "fees" includes sales and use taxes, utility charges, recycling fees, Summary Proposed Charter Amendment will: • Eliminate potential for long term subsidy of water and sewer services. • Provide cost recovery for state/county mandated recycling program. • Maintain all other spending restrictions which requires city council to obtain direct voter approval for programs that increase costs above 5% or the rate of inflation, whichever is lower. 16 ,--, February 10, 2004 Charter Commission Open Forum For Further Comments • Please e-mail your comments to Fridley City Clerk Deb Skogen at: > skogendaci.fridley.mn.us • Or mail your comments to: • Deb Skogen, City Clerk 6431 University Avenue NE Fridley, MN 55432 17 Remaining Cash • Cash as of 12/31/03 $31,371,896.77 • Restricted Cash -$16,755,783.51 > Balance (Cash less Restricted) $14,584,359.70 Future Project Costs -$14,269,310.80 Remaining Cash $ 315,048.90 18 CURRENT CHARTER LANGUAGE ATTACHMENT 1 FRIDLEY CITY CHARTER CHAPTER 7. TAXATION AND FINANCES. Section 7.01. COUNCIL TO CONTROL FINANCES. The Council shall have full authority over the financial affairs of the City, and shall provide for the collection of all revenues and other assets, the auditing and settlement of accounts, and the safekeeping and disbursement of public moneys. In the exercise of a sound discretion it shall make provisions for the payment of all liabilities and expenses. The Council shall establish the fiscal year for the City. Section 7.02. POWER OF TAXATION. 1. The City shall have, in addition to the powers by this Charter expressly or impliedly granted, all the powers to raise money by taxation pursuant to the laws of the State which are applicable to cities of the class of which it may be a member from time to time, provided that the amount of taxes levied against real and personal property within the City for general City purposes shall not exceed in dollars, a tax levy that is greater than the prior year tax levy increased by an inflationary index, or 5%, whichever is least. Said inflationary index shall be that as defined by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers in the Minneapolis, St. Paul metropolitan area. (Ref. Ord. 592, 1102 and 11/7/00 Amendment) Nothing in this provision shall be construed to impair any general obligation the City may have in support of otherwise lawful indebtedness or similar obligation supported by the full faith and credit of the City, provided, however, that long-term, general obligation indebtedness shall not be used for the purpose of funding the routine and daily business operations of the City. (Ref Ord 1152) 2. The City Council may also levy a tax against real and personal property within the City in addition to said limit as defined in paragraph 1 provided the Council shall: A. Adopt a resolution declaring the necessity for an additional tax levy and specifying the purposes for which such additional tax levy is required. B. Hold a public hearing pursuant to three (3) weeks' published notice in the official newspaper of the City setting forth the contents of the resolution described in Subdivision A. C. Adopt after such public hearing a resolution by an affirmative vote of a least four(4) members of the Council which shall be presented as a clear and concise 'plain language' ballot question at the next regular municipal election. (Ref. Ord. 592, 1102 and 11/7/00 Amendment) D. The additional tax levy shall take effect if 51% of the votes cast at said election are in favor of its adoption. CURRENT CHARTER LANGUAGE ATTACHMENT 1 Fridley City Charter Chapter 7 Section 7.03 3. Any other fees created, or increased beyond the limits set forth in subsection 1, shall require voter approval as stipulated in subsection 2. A. For the purposes of this subsection, "fees" includes sales and use taxes,utility charges,recycling fees, gas and electric franchise fees and any other fee that produces a tax burden or direct financial obligation for all property owners and/or residents of Fridley. (Ref Ord 1152) B. For the purposes of this subsection,the term "fees" does not include: Parks and Recreation Department participation fees, charges for photo-copying, sales of municipal liquor store products, or civil and criminal fines and other charges collected in cases of restitution or violation of law or contract. The term "fees" also does not include rental housing fees, building permit fees, liquor license fees,the extension or transfer of cable television service authority to additional service providers for which fees are already being charged, fees for the operation of junk yards,annual license fees for the operation of pawn shops and other regulated business, and any other charge for services, including health and safety related Code enforcement, and other goods, services or materials routinely provided by the City to its citizens or other members of the public which, by law,must be limited to the actual cost of the service being provided. The term "fees" shall not include any special assessments made under Minnesota Statutes Section 429. (Ref Ord 1152) C. For the purposes of this subsection, "fee increase" includes a new tax or fee, a monetary increase in an existing tax or fee, a tax or fee rate increase, an expansion in the legal definition of a tax or fee base,and an extension of an expiring tax or fee. (Ref Ord 1152) D. For the purposes of this subsection, "city" includes the city itself and all its departments and agencies that are organized to exercise the "Powers of the City" as defined in Chapter 1 of this Charter. "City" shall not include any body of government owing its existence to separate constitutional or statutory authority outside of the Charter,regardless of whether that other body of government has jurisdiction or performs duties and services within the boundaries of the City. (Ref Ord 1152) E. For the purpose of addressing natural disasters this subsection does not apply to any specific emergency measure authorized in Chapter 7, Section .08 (7.08). (Ref 11/7/00 Amendment) Section 7.03. BOARD OF REVIEW. The Council shall constitute a board of review and shall meet as such in the usual place for holding Council meetings to equalize the assessed valuations according to law, and a published notice of such meeting shall be given in the official newspaper of the City at least ten (10) days prior to the day of said meeting. (Ref Special Election 4/12/60, Ord. 592) Page 2 Proposed Charter Amendment Language ATTACHMENT 2 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 7.02,POWER OF TAXATION, OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CHARTER The Fridley City Council hereby finds after review,examination and recommendation of the Charter Commission that Section 7.02,Power of Taxation, of the Fridley City Charter be hereby amended and ordain as follows: Fridley City Charter Chapter 7. Taxation and Finances Section 7.02 POWER OF TAXATION 3. Any other fees created, or increased beyond the limits set forth in subsection 1, shall require voter approval as stipulated in subsection 2. A. For the purposes of this subsection, "fees" includes sales and use taxes,utility charges(other than water,storm water and sanitary sewer), recycling f gas and electric franchise fees and any other fee that produces a tax burden or direct financial obligation for all property owners and/or residents of Fridley. (Ref Ord 1152) B. For the purposes of this subsection,the term "fees" does not include: Water,storm water and sanitary sewer charges; recycling fees; Parks and Recreation Department participation fees,charges for photo-copying, sales of municipal liquor store products, or civil and criminal fines and other charges collected in cases of restitution or violation of law or contract. The term "fees" also does not include rental housing fees, building permit fees,liquor license fees,the extension or transfer of cable television service authority to additional service providers for which fees are already being charged, fees for the operation of junk yards, annual license fees for the operation of pawn shops and other regulated business,and any other charge for services, including health and safety related Code enforcement, and other goods, services or materials routinely provided by the City to its citizens or other members of the public which,by law,must be limited to the actual cost of the service being provided. The term "fees" shall not include any special assessments made under Minnesota Statutes Section 429. (Ref Ord 1152) PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF 2004. Scott J. Lund, Mayor ATTEST: Debra A. Skogen, City Clerk PROPOSED CHARTER AMENDMENT ATTACHMENT 3 n BACKGROUND AND INFORMATION • The City currently does not fully recover its costs for providing these services. These charges are really"pass-through"charges. The practice of the City is to only recover its costs in providing water, sewer and recycling services, and does not make a profit.. • The restrictions on increases in these charges is an unintended outcome of the charter amendment that was passed by the voters in November of 2000. That change was intended to restrict actions by the City Council to substantially increase services and costs paid by taxpayers beyond the rate of inflation, and not to impose other taxes upon residents by adding sales taxes or"franchise fees" on top of utility charges. It was not intended to cover pass-through type charges such as water, sewer and recycling fees. • In order to increase costs beyond the rate of inflation(currently at 1.8%) the City Council must submit a proposal to be voted on in the next general election. This is a very cumbersome process which typically requires a long lead time. Also, the standard for obtaining voter approval is quite high, requiring a 51% approval by all persons voting in the election(not just those voting on the issue). • Water and sewer costs are increasing due to a number of outside factors beyond the control of the city. These include: federal mandates that impose increasingly higher standards for water and sewer, higher sewer disposal charges imposed upon the city by the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services agency that is responsible for overall sewage disposal in the Twin Cities area, and ongoing emergency repairs and maintenance of the system's infrastructure. • Recycling fees are merely a"pass-through" of contracts for services that are re-bid every two years; and are subject to market conditions. These costs typically vary due to changes in prices the collectors receive for bottles, cans, paper, etc, that are collected. a003 Charter Commission Meeting July 24, 2003 • Current Charter language specifically requires that increases in utility rate increases be no more than 5% or indexed to the rate of inflation, whichever is less; 2 Utility Rate Facts • While this limitation works for some years, it does not work for others. Many utility costs are outside City Control. • 75% of sewer costs are charges that are passed along to the City by the MCES • Water and sewer systems are largely underground. While we do a lot of annual maintenance, we can not easily predict when sewer and water lines will break or when pump motors for wells will burn out. 1 Utility Rate Facts ) • Water usage is also not controlled. Several wet summers have kept water usage far below normal. Usage affects both water and sewer revenue I Water Fund Deficits: 2002 ($266,000) (actual) 2003 ($164,561 ) 2004 ($174,108) 2005 ($293,479) 2006 ($490,678) 2007 ($711 ,617) 2008 ($945,916) 2 2 Sewer Fund Deficits: 2002 $61 ,196 (actual) 2003 ($14,070) 2004 ($224,766) 2005 ($259,388) 2006 ($289,098) 2007 ($311 ,807) 2008 ($277,223) I Additional Information: • We are looking at rate increases for 2004 that are 8.5% and 9.5% for water and sewer. The cost is about $2 per quarter per utility, or about $8-9/year. • Fridley rates are among the lowest in the metro area and generally lower than any of our neighbors. 3 n Proposed Charter Amendment • Seeking Charter amendment that will enable City Council to pass along rate increases that reflect the city's costs and enable us to fund the projects that will help us keep our systems healthy. J Capital Improvement Needs • Since much of the need for increase relates to either revenue or capital improvements, Jon Haukaas is here to explain capital improvement needs. • An article in the August 10th newsletter will describe the need for utility rate increases. J 4 Proposed Amendment • Deb Skogen has developed the language for the amendment as well as the schedule of actions that need to be taken. 5 FRIDLEY CITY CHARTER CHAPTER 1. NAME,BOUNDARIES,POWERS AND CONSTRUCTION OF GOVERNMENT Section 1.01. NAME AND BOUNDARIES. 1. Upon the taking effect of this Chapter, the Village of Fridley in the County of Anoka and State of Minnesota shall become a City under the name of City of Fridley and shall continue to be a municipal corporation with boundaries the same as they now are established or as they may hereafter be established. Section 1.02. POWERS OF THE CITY. 2. The City of Fridley shall have perpetual succession; 3. may sue and be sued; 4. may use and alter its seal at pleasure; 5. shall be capable of contracting and being contracted with; 6. may take by purchase, condemnation, gift, devise, or otherwise, and hold, lease, sell and convey all such real and personal property as its purposes may require, or the transaction of its business may render convenient,within or without the limits of the City; 7. may acquire, construct, own, lease and operate public utilities, and render public service of every kind; 8. may grant franchises or licenses for the construction, operation and maintenance of public utilities in, over, upon and under the streets and public places in the City, and shall have power to fix and regulate the fares,tolls, or charges which may be collected,the extensions which shall be made, and regulate the services which shall be rendered by any owner or operator of a public utility franchise of license; 9. may assess, levy and collect taxes, for general or special purposes, on all subjects or objects which the city may lawfully tax; 10. may borrow money on the faith and credit of the City or on a public utility or other property owned by the City or the revenues therefrom by the issuance and sale of bonds or certificates of indebtedness; 11. may appropriate the money of the City for all lawful purposes; 12. may provide for, construct,regulate, and maintain public works and local improvements; 10/05/89 Fridley City Charter Chapter 1 Section 1.04.4 '' 13. may levy and collect assessments against real property within the City for local improvements and services including garbage and refuse collection and disposal; 14. may license and regulate persons, corporations and associations engaged in any occupation,trade or business; 15. may define, prohibit, abate, and suppress all things detrimental to the health, morals, comfort, safety, convenience and welfare of the inhabitants of the City, and all nuisances and causes thereof; 16. may regulate the construction, height and materials used in all buildings, and the maintenance and occupancy thereof; 17. may regulate and control the use for whatever purposes of the streets and other public places; 18. may make and enforce local police, sanitary, and other regulations; 19. may pass ordinances for maintaining and promoting the peace, good government and welfare of the City, and for the performance of all the functions thereof; shall have all the powers possessed by municipal corporations at common law; 20. shall have, retain and may exercise all powers, functions, rights, and privileges, heretofore possessed by the Village of Fridley; 21. may exercise such powers beyond its corporate limits as may be necessary for the effective exercise of any powers granted herein as now authorized by law; 22. and in addition thereto, the City of Fridley shall have and exercise all powers, functions,rights, and privileges exercised by, or which are incidental to, or inherent in, municipal corporations and are not denied to it by the Constitution or general laws of the State of Minnesota. 23. The enumeration of powers herein shall not be construed to limit or restrict the powers granted in general terms, nor shall any specific power granted in this charter be construed to limit or restrict the powers granted in this Section. 24. In addition to the powers herein and hereafter granted, the City of Fridley shall have full power to deal with all matters of municipal concern and have complete self-government in harmony with and subject to the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota. Section 1.03. CHARTER,A PUBLIC ACT. 25. This Charter shall be a public act and need not be pleaded or proved in any case. It shall take effect fifteen(15) days from and after its adoption by the voters. 10/05/89 Fridley City Charter Chapter 1 Section 1.04.4 Section 1.04. DEFINITIONS. 1. Eligible voter. A resident of the City of Fridley who is qualified to register to vote. 2. Registered Voter. An eligible voter who is currently registered in the City of Fridley. 3. Voter. A registered voter who has voted in the City of Fridley within the last four years. 4. Electorate. The whole body of eligible voters. (Ref. Ord. 857) 10/05/89 10/05/89 krta 1(1( CHAPTER 1. NAMES,BOUNDARIES AND GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 1.01 Name and Boundaries. The municipal corporation now existing and known as the"City of Anoka"shall remain and continue to be a body politic and corporate under the same name and with the same boundaries, and with power and authority to change its boundaries in the manner authorized by law. Section 1.02 Powers. The City shall have all powers,which it may at any time be possible for a municipal corporation in this State to exercise. It is the intention of this Charter,that every power,which the people of the City might lawfully confer upon themselves as a municipal corporation by specific enumeration in this Charter,shall be deemed to be so conferred by the provisions of this section. The Charter shall be construed liberally in favor of the City,and the specific mention of particular powers shall not be construed as limiting in any way the generality of the powers hereby conferred. Section 1.03 Charter a Public Act. The Charter shall be a public act and need not be pleaded or proved in any case. Except as otherwise provided herein,it shall take effect thirty(30)days from and after its adoption by the voters. City of Anoka/City Charter 5 of 30 CHAPTER 1. NAME, BOUNDARIES, POWERS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS Page 1 of 1 bo,friA CHAPTER 1. NAME, BOUNDARIES, POWERS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS Sec. 1.01. Name and boundaries. The Village of Blaine, in the County of Anoka, State of Minnesota, shall, upon the taking effect of this charter, continue to be a municipal corporation, under the name and style of the City of Blaine, with the same boundaries as now are or hereafter may be established. Sec. 1.02. Powers of the city. The city shall have all powers which it may now or hereafter be possible for a municipal corporation in this state to exercise in harmony with the constitutions of this state and of the United States. It is the intention of this charter that every power which the people of the City of Blaine might lawfully confer upon themselves, as a municipal corporation, by specific enumeration in this charter shall be deemed to have been so conferred by the provisions of this section. This charter shall be construed lib erally in favor of the city, and the specific mention of particular powers in the charter shall not be construed as limiting in any way the generality of the power herein sought to be conferred. Sec. 1.03. Charter a public act. This charter shall be a public act and need not be pleaded or proved in any case. It shall take effect thirty (30) days from and after its adoption by the voters. http://library3.municode.com/mec/DoeView/19960/1/3/4 1/30/2006 CHAPTER 1. CITY AND WARD BOUNDARIES • Page 1 of 4 n Aar LO CHAPTER 1. CITY AND WARD BOUNDARIES Section 1. Municipal Corporation Continued. The City of Minneapolis in the County of Hennepin in the State of Minnesota shall continue to be a municipal corporation under the name and style of the City of Minneapolis with the same boundaries as now are or may be hereafter established. (As amended 7-27-72) Amendment note-- The amendment of July 27, 1972, deleted a lengthy legal description of the area constituting the city in 1920 and continued the city's powers as a municipal corporation. Section 2. Powers. The City of Minneapolis may sue and be sued, plead and be impleaded, in any court; make and use a common seal and alter it at pleasure; take and hold, lease and convey all such real, personal and mixed property as the purposes of the corporation may require, or the transaction[s] or exigencies of the business may render convenient within or without the limits of such city; shall be capable of contracting and being contracted with, and shall have all the general powers possessed by municipal corporations at common law, and in addition thereto shall possess powers hereinafter specifically granted, and all the authorities thereof shall have perpetual succession. (As amended 7-27-72) Amendment note--The amendment of July 27, 1972, deleted a lengthy legal description of the area constituting the city in 1920 and continued the city's powers as a municipal corporation. Section 3. Thirteen Wards. A. The City shall consist of thirteen Wards with as nearly equal population as practicable. Within the time specified in paragraph C hereof the Redistricting Commission shall readjust the boundaries of the Wards in accordance with the following standards: 1. A population quota for each Ward shall be determined by dividing the total population of the City by 13. In no case shall any Ward, when readjusted, have a population more than five percent over or under such population quota. 2. Each Ward shall consist of contiguous compact territory not more than twice as long as it is wide, provided that the existence of any lake within any Ward shall not be contrary to this provision. Wherever possible, Ward boundary lines shall follow the centerline of streets, avenues, alleys and boulevards and as nearly as practicable, shall run due East and West or North and South. 3. To the extent possible, the Wards shall be numbered consecutively, first on the East side of the Mississippi river and then on the West side and from North to South. However, notwithstanding the foregoing, effective the date of this amendment and thereafter, all newly drawn Wards shall retain the same numerical designation as the then currently existing Ward from which the newly drawn ward received the largest portion of its population. 4. Population shall be determined by use of the official population, as stated by census tracts and blocks in the official United States Census. Whenever it is necessary to modify census data in fixing a Ward boundary, the Redistricting Commission may compute the population of any part by use of other pertinent data or may have a special enumeration made of any block or blocks using the standards of the United States http://library3.municode.com/mcc/DocView/11490/1/3/4 1/30/2006 CHAPTER 1. CITY AND WARD BOUNDARIES Page 2 of 4 Census. If the population of any block or blocks is so determined, the Redistricting Commissio n may assume that the remainder of the census tract has the remaining population shown by the census. In every such case, the determination of the Redistricting Commission as to population shall be conclusive, unless clearly contrary to the census. B. In each year ending in the number two, or whenever the number of Wards is changed, or when required by court order, Redistricting Commission shall be established to draw Ward boundaries. The Commission shall consist of members, as provided herein, who are eligible voters of the City. The Redistricting Commission shall be appointed as follows: 1. The largest number of City Council members who consider themselves to be affiliated with the same political party shall appoint one person to the Commission. The remaining members of the City Council shall appoint one person to the Commission. 2. The Charter Commission shall request a list of nominees from the following sources: The City Chair, or if there is no City Chair, the State Chair, of each major political party, as defined by Minnesota Statute 200.02, Subdivision 7, whose candidate for governor or for United States senator in the preceding election received five (5) percent of the total ballots cast for that office in the City of Minneapolis. Each party list shall contain at least six, but not more than ten, names of persons broadly representative of the city population. Nominees shall not currently be or within two years previous to appointment, have been, an elected official of municipal, county, state or federal government, nor an employee of a political party, nor a candidate, in a primary or general election, for a public office for which the ballot indicates a political party designation of candidates, nor an employee of city government. Each party list shall include persons from groups traditionally under represented in city government, including racial minorities. The names of the Council appointees and the lists of party nominees shall be submitted to the Charter Commission not later than February 1 in years ending in two. Requests for appointees and nominees shall be made by the Charter Commission 45 days prior to the above deadline. 3. The Charter Commission shall accept letters of nominations from duly eligible voters of the City. The letters may be self-nomination or the nomination of another, all of whom must be eligible voters of the City. Notice of the request for letters of nomination shall be a public notice made by the Commission 45 days prior to February 1 in years ending in two. Within 15 days after receiving the lists of party nominees and self nominees, the Charter Commission shall select by a majority vote of all of its members, two members from each majorparty to serve on the Redistricting Commission, at least one of which must be from the lists submitted by the parties. Remaining members may be chosen from either the lists submitted by the political parties or from the list of self nominees affiliated with that party. The Charter Commission at its discretion may also select by majority vote up to two other members from a list of names limited to those submitted only by: a) political parties who do not qualify as major parties; or b) self nominees who are not affiliated with any political party. No political party shall constitute a majority of the Redistricting Commission. The members selected by the Charter Commission, and the Council appointees shall then, within ten days, meet at a time and place selected by the Charter Commission and elect by a majority vote one more person to serve on the Redistricting Commission who shall serve as its chair. If a chair is not selected within fifteen (15) days after the time set for the initial meeting, each contending faction shall name the person of their choice for chair and the selection shall be made by lot. http://library3.municode.com/mcc/DocView/11490/1/3/4 1/30/2006 CHAPTER 1. CITY AND WARD BOUNDARIES Page 3 of 4 If a member shall cease to serve, the vacancy shall be filled in the same manner as that member's original appointment. Each person selected as a member of the Commission shall take an Oath of Office before acting as a member. The written Oath shall be filed with the City Clerk. Members of the Commission shall receive per diem on the same basis as members of the City Planning Commission. The City Council, upon request of the Redistricting Commission, shall promptly provide funding for such staff and other assistance as the Commission deems necessary to complete its work in a timely manner. C. At or within the times prescribed by law, the Redistricting Commission shall adopt a Ward boundary plan in accordance with the standards of paragraph A hereof. The Commission, with appropriate notice, shall hold at least two public hearings prior to adoption of the plan. At least one of the public hearings shall be for the purpose of reviewing the tentative plan. A copy of the tentative plan shall be published as a legal notice for the public at least seven (7) days prior to the public hearing on the tentat ive plan. Neighborhoods, as delineated by the Planning Department, shall be solicited for their input. The plan shall state the boundaries and population of each Ward and shall be deemed completed when filed with the city Clerk with the signatures of a majority of the members of the commission. The Redistricting Commission shall, at this time, be dissolved; however, if the District Court finds the plan improper and returns it, the Commission shall reconvene for the purpose of revising and readopting the red istricting plan. Whenever Wards have been so readjusted, no further Ward adjustment shall be made until the announcement of the next decennial United States Census. In the event any territory shall be annexed to the City, it shall become part of the adjoining Ward. D. Should the Redistricting Commission fail to adopt a plan within the time prescribed, each of the contending factions on the Redistricting Commission shall submit a plan, and one plan shall be selected by lot. Determinations by lot shall be supervised by the City Clerk. E. (1) The District Court shall exercise original jurisdiction in any matter relating to apportionment in the manner provided by law, and upon application by an appropriate party and after notice and hearing may compel the execution of any action required hereunder. (2) If a redistricting plan is questioned in a proceeding before the Court, and insufficient time remains to determine the issue, the Court may either (a) postpone the effective date of the plan, or (b) if the proposed plan appears to more closely reflect the distribution of population than the existing Ward apportionment, order that the proposed apportionment be effective for the next election without prejudice to the issue with respect to subsequent elections. (3) If a redistricting plan is questioned in a proceeding before the Court, and the Court finds the plan is improper, the Court shall return the plan to the commission for revision and readoption. F. The City Council shall enact the ordinances necessary to implement this section, provided that redistricting shall be governed by the law in effect on January 1 of the year in which a Redistricting Commission is established. No readjustment of Ward boundaries shall apply to any City election if the adopted plan goes into effect after the first date for filing for such elections. All Council Members, including those who take office as provided in Chapter 2, Section 16 or 16A of this Charter, may complete the term for which they are elected, or appointed notwithstanding changes in Ward boundaries. G. This amendment shall take effect immediately upon certification of its adoption by the voters of the City of Minneapolis. H. The method herein provided shall be the sole method for readjusting Ward boundaries, and the City Council shall have no power to readjust Ward boundaries except as in this section provided. (As amended 11-5-46; 11-5-74; 11-11-80; 83-Or-234, § 1, 9-30-83; 11-8-83; 88-0r- http://library3.municode.com/mcc/DocV iew/11490/1/3/4 1/30/2006 CHAPTER 1. CITY AND WARD BOUNDARIES Page 4 of 4 018, §§ 1, 2, 2-12-88; 88-Or-220, § 1, 12-16-88; 91-Or-262, § 1, 12-27-91; 11-2-99) Amendment note-- The amendment of November 5, 1946, related to ward boundaries. The amendment of November 11, 1980, amended § 3 in its entirety, to provide for a reapportionment commission and reapportionment plan procedures. Prior to amendment, the section concerned the wards and ward boundary commission. The amendment of November 8, 1983, changed "Alderman"to "Council Member." 88-Or-018 added language relative to ward boundaries. 88-Or-220 amended paragraphs B--D to make changes relative to time of reapportionment of war d boundaries. http://library3.municode.com/mcc/DocView/11490/1/3/4 1/30/2006 Mounds View Charter Page 1 of 19 Mounds View City Charter Please read this disclaimer. Click on the desired Chapter or scroll through this screen to browse the Charter. • CHAPTER 1: Name, Boundaries,Powers and General Provisions • CHAPTER 2: Form of Government • CHAPTER 3: Council Procedure • CHAPTER 4: Nomination and Elections • CHAPTER 5: Initiative,Referendum and Recall • CHAPTER 6: Administration of City Affairs • CHAPTER 7: Taxation and Finances • CHAPTER 8: Public Improvements and Special Assessments • CHAPTER 9: Eminent Domain • CHAPTER 10: Franchises • CHAPTER 11: Public Ownership and Operation of Utilities • CHAPTER 12: Miscellaneous and Transitory Provisions CHAPTER 1 NAME, BOUNDARIES, POWERS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 1.01. Name and Boundaries.The City of Mounds View,Ramsey County,Minnesota shall continue to be a municipal corporation under that name and with the same boundaries as now are or hereafter may be established. The Clerk-Administrator shall keep at least two copies of this Charter with amendments, and shall maintain in each copy an accurate up-to-date description of the boundaries. The copies of the Charter, amendments, and boundary descriptions shall be available for public inspection anytime during regular office hours. Section 1.02. Powers of the City. The City shall have all powers which it may now or hereafter be possible for a municipal corporation in this state to exercise in harmony with this Charter and with the Constitution of this state and of the United States. It is the intention of this Charter to confer upon the City every power which it would have if it were specifically mentioned, unless otherwise provided in this Charter. The Charter shall be construed liberally in favor of the City, and the specific mention of particular municipal powers in other sections of this Charter does not limit the powers of the City to those thus mentioned. Unless granted to some other officer or body, all powers are vested in the City Council. Section 1.03. Charter a Public Act. This Charter shall be a public act and need not be pleaded or proved in any case. �+_..11,,,,,,,,, mn iic/charter htm 1/30/2006 CITY OF BROOKLYN PARK CITY CHARTER Brooklyn P CHAPTER 1 NAME,BOUNDARIES,POWERS,AND GENERAL PROVISIONS SECTION 1.01 NAME AND BOUNDARIES The Village of Brooklyn Park,in the County of Hennepin,and State of Minnesota,shall,upon the taking effect of this Chapter, continue to be a municipal corporation, under the name and style of the City of Brooklyn Park,with the same boundaries as now are or hereafter may be established. SECTION 1.02 POWERS OF THE CITY The city shall have all powers which it may now or hereafter be possible for a municipal corporation in this state to exercise in harmony with the Constitution of this State and of the United States. It is the intention of this Charter that every power which the people of the city might lawfully confer ipon themselves as a municipal corporation,by specific enumeration in this Charter,shall be deemed to have been so conferred by the provisions of this section. This Charter shall be construed liberally in favor of the city, and the specific mention of particular powers in the Charter shall not be construed as limiting in any way the generality of the power herein sought to be conferred. SECTION 1.03 CHARTER A PUBLIC ACT This Charter shall be a public act and need not be pleaded or proved in any case. It shall take effect thirty (30)days from and after its adoption by the voters,except as provided for in Section 14.17. City Charter Page 1 of 22 CHARTER FOR THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA CHAPTER 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 1.01.Name and boundaries. The City of Plymouth is and will continue to be a municipal corporation with the boundaries existing on the effective date of this charter or as later modified in accordance with law. Section 1.02. Powers. The City of Plymouth has all powers that it is now or hereafter possible for a municipal corporation in the State of Minnesota to exercise in harmony with the Constitutions of the State of Minnesota and of the United States. It is the intention of this charter that every power that the people of the city might lawfully confer upon themselves as a municipal corporation by specific enumeration in this charter is deemed to have been so conferred by this section. This charter is to be construed liberally in favor of the city. The specific mention of particular powers in this charter is not to be construed as limiting the generality of the powers conferred by this section. Section 1.03 Application of General Law Where the Charter is Silent. Where the city charter is silent on a matter that is addressed for statutory cities by Minnesota Statutes Chapter 412 or other general law pertaining to the Council-Manager form of government and general law does not prohibit a city charter from addressing the matter, the City of Plymouth shall apply the general law. (Amendment#1; 11/7/95) CHAPTER 2 FORM OF GOVERNMENT Section 2.01. Form of government. The form of government established by this charter is the council-manager plan. The council exercises the legislative power of the city and determines matters of policy. The city manager is responsible to the council for the proper administration of city affairs. Section 2.02. Boards and commissions. There are no separate administrative boards or commissions except boards and commissions required by law or those established for the administration of a municipal function jointly with another political subdivision. The council performs the duties and exercises the powers of administrative boards or commissions. The council may establish boards or commissions to advise the council with respect to municipal functions or activities, to investigate subjects of interest to the city or to perform quasi- judicial functions. Section 2.03. Council members; qualifications and terms. Subd. 1. The council is composed of a mayor, one ward council member for each ward and two at large council members. The mayor and the council members must be eligible voters of the city and must further qualify for office as provided in this charter. http://www2.ci.plymouth.mn.us/pls/cop/docs/FOLDER/CITY_GOV/CG CHARTER/CH... 1/30/2006 gIbb■iksdA/4 CITY CHARTER CHAPTER 1 NAMES, BOUNDARIES, POWERS, AND GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 1.01.Name and Boundaries.The City of Robbinsdale,in the County of Hennepin,and State of Minnesota, shall,upon taking effect of this charter,continue to be a municipal corporation,under the name and style of the City of Robbinsdale,with the same boundaries as now are or hereafter may be established. Section 1.02.Powers of the City.The City shall have all powers which it may now or hereafter be possible for a municipal corporation in this state to exercise in harmony with the constitution of this state and of the United States. It is the intention of this charter that every power which the people of the city might lawfully confer upon themselves,as a municipal corporation,by specific enumeration in this charter shall be deemed to have been so conferred by the provisions of this section.This charter shall be construed liberally in favor of the city and the specific mention of particular powers in the charter shall not be construed as limiting in any way the generality of the power herein sought to be conferred. Section 1.03.Charter a Public Act.This charter shall be a public act and need not be pleaded or proved in any case. n 1