SR 05-06-2002MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Mayor and Council
Pat Klaers, City Administrator
May 6, 2002
Special City Council and Sherburne County Board Meeting
There are a variety of agenda items to jointly discuss with the City Council and thc
Sherburne County Board at our meeting on Monday, May 6, 2002. This meeting will be held
at 6:00 p.m. in the Elk River Training Room. Most of the agenda items will be of an
"update" nature. There will be only be a few attachments included with this City Council
packet and my agenda comments are brief.
Agenda Item
e
Northstar Corridor Funding/Project Update
Commissioner Betsy Wergin is scheduled to provide an update on the status of the
Northstar project.
GIS
City Engineer Terry Maurer and County Engineer Dave Schwarting can
provide an update on the status of the GIS project. I understand the work by
Howard R. Green is essentially finished and the county will complete future updates
of the mapping system.
e
Legislative Update
At this time there is nothing to report. Serious meetings are anticipated after the
Democratic Caucus this weekend. As of May 6, 2002, there ~vill only be two weeks
left in the 2002 legislative session. The city and county both want a veto proof
budget to be adopted rather than providing the Governor with a free hand to cut
state aids to local units of government.
Se
Gravel Audit
Sec attached memo from Building and Zoning Administrator Steve Rohlf.
County Fair/Fairgrounds Status
County Administrator Brian Benson is scheduled to provide an update on the short
and long range plans of the Fairboard.
e
Streets/Roads
No action is being requested on any of the items listed under the Streets section of
the agenda. Attached is a county map showing the county roads in Elk River.
Regarding County Road 40, it should be noted that federal funds are available for a
project in 2003. Questions regarding this project include the status of ROW and any
realignment in the northern part.
7.6.
CR 77 and Schools...Crossings and Pathways
This issue is related to children crossing County Road 77 to get to the schools.
Councilmember Kuester requested this item to be on the agenda.
Solid Waste/Environmental
Building and Zoning Administrator Steve Rohlf will be in attendance at this meeting
to participate in this discussion.
Regarding Item 8.4., RDF Contract, it should be noted that the contract with the
county expires in 2009 but the commitment to enter into serious negotiations with
NRG and Great River Energy needs to be made by 2004. The city ~vants to be part
of these discussions as these facilities are within the city limits and also the city has a
strong desire to continue receiving its host fee for having the RDF operation in the
city.
MEMORANDUM
Item ~ 5
TO:
Mayor and City Council
FROM:
Stephen Rohlf, Building and Zoning Administrator
DATE: May 6, 2002
SUBJECT: Gravel Audit
At last year's joint City Council/Sherburne County Board meeting, both bodies asked staff
to consider how to conduct an audit of the various gravel companies mining within the city
limits. The purpose of the audit is to check that the appropriate amount of gravel tax is
being paid.
The County Auditor, County Surveyor and myself pondered how to conduct such an audit
for quit a while before agreeing on what we think is the only feasible scheme. We propose
developing two sets of contour maps of the seven most active pits in Elk River, which
includes at least one pit from ev~'ry current operator. One contour map will show the
elevation of each of the seven pits in 1997 and the second will show their elevations in 2000.
From these two sets of contour maps the volume of what has been removed during those
years can be estimated. These estimated volumes can then be compared to the volumes the
gravel companies reported for tax purposes during those same years.
A proposal by Howard R. Green Company to conduct this work is attached. The cost
projections in the proposal include purchasing the aerial photos needed to develop the maps.
The city and county agreed to share the cost of the audit in an amount proportional to the
percent of the tax each receives from gravel. The total estimated cost of the project is
$30,460. The city's portion will be $9,138. If the Council agrees to go ahead with this
project they need to identify a funding source. The most logical source of funds is Council
Contingency.
Even though staff believes the proposal as outlined above is the best way of checking
reported volumes versus actual volume, there are some inherent problems. One problem is
that exact volumes cannot be accomplished using just contour maps. A margin of error will
have to be factored in, which will probably be at least 10%. In other words, the gravel
companies will have had to under report their volumes by a lot before we can confidently
call them on it.
Another complicating issue staff ran into is that several gravel mines have had previous
owners. Staff decided to only go back as far as 1997 with the first contour map to avoid the
issue of multiple miners in the same pit and the inevitable argument regarding which one
under reported the volume. A large volume of unreported gravel will have to be found
during this relatively short time frame (1997-2000) to recoup the cost of the audit.
Staff has no reason to have an opinion one way or the other regarding the accuracy of the
volumes reported by the gravel companies. An audit does place the miners on notice that
the volumes they report are being monitored, which will hopefully act as a deterrent to under
reporting. However, the $30,000 price tag makes it an expensive message. Staff is not
recommend for or against the proposed audit. We are prepared to go ahead with this
project, if the Council chooses to do so.
5th
231st
~d%v
!32
5
;hi Rd
214th
Av
Av
205d
211th
8
2O
196da Av
>
2~
5
Otsego
Albertville
M
33
221sts~v
[6
21 lth Av
Watson St
21
o.~
Rush St
94th
School St
£[k R~'ver
~@
N
34
225th Av
3
217th Av
10
208th Av
207th Av
190th
35
35
'l:I3rd
I
Ay
11
St
12
<
9
213th Av
1300
93rdAv
209th Av
~3
18: AO ,
10
25
~m20500~ - '~
11
: 12
O
12
ve:~,,H Kel
:
S
~24
:i
14
Co-.
P