11-24-1986 CC MIN
e
e
e
REGULAR MEETING OF THE ELK RIVER CITY COUNCIL
HELD AT THE ELK RIVER POLICE DEPARTMENT MEETING ROOM
MONDAY. NOVEMBER 24. 1986
Members Present:
Mayor Hinkle, Councilmembers Schuldt, Gunkel and Tralle
Members Absent:
Councilmember Engstrom
Staff Present:
Patrick Klaers, City Administrator; Lori Johnson, Finance
Director; Philip Hals, Public Works Superintendent; Terry
Maurer, City Engineer; Peter Beck, City Attorney
Also Present:
Bill Birrenkott, Utilities Superintendent, and Utilities
Commissioners Don Kettner. Henry Duitsman and Doug Dill
1. The Meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Hinkle.
2. Consider 11/24/86 City Council Agenda
COUNCILMEMBER GUNKEL MOVED
1986 CITY COUNCIL MEETING.
THE MOTION PASSED 4-0.
TO APPROVE THE AGENDA FOR THE NOVEMBER 24.
COUNCILMEMBER TRALLE SECONDED THE MOTION.
3. Consider 11/17/86 Minutes
The following corrections were noted:
(1) Page 1, Item 2, should be "Councilmember Tralle, not "Commissioner"
(2) Page 6. Item 8B, line 2. should be "objectives", not-"objections".
(3) Page 7, "M-Vale Plat", line 6 of the motion, the following should be
added after the word "M-Vale", "but that no further work be allowed
at this time."
COUNCILMEMBER TRALLE MOVED
COUNCIL MINUTES AS AMENDED .
THE MOTION PASSED 4-0.
APPROVAL OF THE NOVEMBER 17. 1986 CITY
COUNCILMEMBER GUNKEL SECONDED THE MOTION.
4. Joint Meeting with Utility Commission and City Council
4.1 Hydrant Rental Fees
Commissioner Don Kettner stated that the hydrant rental fee was
established some years ago as a result of damage to fire hydrants by
snowplows. Commissioner Kettner noted that approximately $8,400 in
hydrant rental fees to be collected from the City is budgeted for 1987.
Commissioner Kettner stated that he would like to defer discussion of
this item until after discussion of Item 4.2.
4.2 Water Tower Bond Repayment
Mayor Hinkle introduced City Attorney, Peter Beck. Mr. Beck presented the
following background information for discussion of this item.
I
Page 2
City Council Minutes
November 24, 1986
e
On April 1, 1985 at a regular City Council meeting, the City Council
approved a tax increment plan to finance the new water tower. This was
not an official joint meeting with the Municipal Utilities, but the
Utilities were represented by Edson Stansfield, Utilities Superintendent,
and Councilmember Duitsman, who served on the Utilities Commission.
Terry Maurer and Phil Hals also were in attendance at the meeting and the
City's fiscal consultant, Springsted, Inc. was represented by Ron
Langness. The City Council reviewed the proposed increment district,
parcel by parcel to try to determine what they could expect by way of
increments to finance the water tower. It was determined that there
could be substantial deficiencies in the cash flow generated by the
increments. The City Council found that they would need some assurances
that the water tower project could be paid for before they could give
authorization to proceed. Mr. Langness provided handouts at the meeting
showing cash flow projections, noting the expected shortfall and
projections with both a $17,500 annual contribution and a $25,000 annual
contribution by the Municipal Utilities.
Mr. Beck stated that he had made a notation on his copy of the cash flow
sheets showing the acknowledgement by the utilities to make a $20,000
annual committment. Based on this assumption, the City Council went
ahead with the project. Mr. Beck further stated that this meeting took
place before the bonds were issued.
e
Commissioner Duitsman stated that he does not feel he agreed to an annual
payment, but rather a one-time payment of $20.000. Commissioner Duitsman
noted that at that time the Water Department was operating with a
deficit. Mr. Beck stated that despite that fact, he felt the Utilities
also could see the need for the water tower.
Commissioner
water tower.
estimates.
Kettner
Mr.
asked how close the cost projections were for the
Beck stated that the project had come in under
Commissioner Kettner stated that the Utility Department is in a position
to make the 1987 payment. but felt that he could not make a commitment
for future years and that they would have to deal with the payment on a
year- by-year basis. Commissioner Kettner stated that at this time, he
doesn't know where they will get future funds, as they will be
encountering some significant expenditures, such as the water main
replacement in the Main Street project and possibly chlorination of the
City's water system. He noted that the only means of increasing the
Water Department revenues is through increased water usage, and that the
rates cannot be raised, as they are high already. He also noted that the
increased development in the City would help the water usage.
e
Mr. Bill
what the
Drinking
River.
Birrenkott stated that the Water Department must wait to see
Federal government does in regards to modifications in the Clean
Water Act, and to know what financial impact it will have on Elk
e
e
e
Page 3
City Council Minutes
November 24. 1986
Commissioner Duitsman stated that he was in favor of setting up a water
service district to generate funds for the Water Department; an idea
which had been previously discussed by the City Council and Utilities
Commission.
Commissioner Kettner again stated that the payments to help payoff the
Water Tower Bond Issue must be dealt with on a year-by-year basis. and
that he is in favor of discontinuing the hydrant rental fee charge (Item
4.1). Commissioner Kettner stated that there has been very little damage
to hydrants in the past several years. Mr. Hals noted that the hydrants
are quite well marked now and that the last damage he could recall was in
1983 and was not done by a City employee.
Commissioner Doug Dill stated that he can't see the support for an annual
payment. and does not feel that was the intent. He further stated that
there was no money in the Water Department at that time.
Commissioner Duitsman agreed that he felt the intent was a one-time
payment of $20.000. He questioned whether or not the tax increment would
cover the bond repayment.
Mr. Beck stated that with bids
shopping center developing much
looking better than one originally
coming in lower than expected and the
faster than he had anticipated. it is
expected.
Discussion was carried on regarding the financial position of the Water
Department.
It was the concensus of the Utilities representatives to discuss at one
of their upcoming meetings the following plan to assist in paying for the
water tower project:
(1)
payment
amount
of $20.000 in 1987 to the City by the Utilities. with the
of future years' payments to be made as funds are available.
(2) Negotiate increase in the $12.000 Payment in Lieu of Taxes made by
the Utilities to the City (Agenda Item 4.4).
4.4 Payment in Lieu of Taxes
It was noted that this payment was set up some years back by former Mayor
Frank Madsen to help with the City's negative financial situation.
Mr. Bill Birrenkott noted that in his experience this type of payment is
common. and that it is merely a transfer of utility dollars back to the
tax payer.
Page 4
City Council Minutes
November 24, 1986
e
Discussion was carried on regarding donations made by the Utilities to
the City, such as street lighting, lighting of ball parks, Christmas
decorations, etc.
Further discussion was carried on regarding the title used for the
transfer of funds (Payment in Lieu of Taxes) and setting up a standard to
be used in calculating the dollar amount to be paid.
Bill Birrenkott discussed, how the payment was determined in the various
States he has worked. He noted that in South Dakota they use 1-1/4%
percent, of the depreciated capitalized tax property and that he has
found .75% percent used in Minnesota. Mr. Birrenkott stated that the
value of the Municapal Utilities is approximately 2.5 million before
depreciation, and 1.5 million after depreciation. he stated that since
it is nearly impossible for utilities of this nature to determine exactly
how many feet of line they have, how many poles and how many guide wires
they had, they use a federally dictated chart of accounts to determine
values. He further stated that he has calculated that they would pay
approximately $12,000 to $14,000 in taxes, if they were a private
enterprise, noting that he did not used the assessed valuation. Mr.
Birrenkott also noted that if the water towers are on the City's books,
they will have to be capitalized, and that it must be recorded as an
assit on capitalized property.
e
Mr. Bill Birrenkott stated that he felt it is very important that
consideration be given 'to the Water Department service area, especially
the old core City, when new development is proposed, so that problem
areas can be taken care of whenever possible.
It was the consensus that another meeting between the Utilities and City
Council would be set up, possibly mid to late January, to discuss the
bond payments and increase in payments in Lieu of Taxes plus other
relevant issues.
4.5 1984 Bond Repayment
Ms. Lori Johnson stated that this $58,000 project consisted of a 16 inch
water main crossing under Highway 169 from the new shopping center site
to Dodge Avenue. Mrs. Johnson further stated that there is a $26,000
deficit between the project cost and the amount assessed out. She noted
that in researching the project she found reference to a $54,000
commitment by the Utilities. She also noted that there were two
assessments levied against the developer totaling $32,000. Ms. Johnson
stated that although the books show $54,000, $26,241 is the balance that
was supposed to be picked up by the Utilities (sewer & water).
Mayor Hinkle stated that he could not recall what was agreed to, but that
he does remember that Barthel signed a waiver for a public hearing on the
assessment.
e
Commissioner Duitsman felt that he did not recall that the Utilities were
involved in any commitment to finance the project.
Page 5
City Council Minutes
November 24. 1986
e
Commissioner Kettner stated they would research this item and get back to
the Ctiy Council at the next joint meeting.
Mr. Maurer stated that the project was done
working for them. but if the City requested.
at the project file for information that
Mr. Klaers stated that he would send a
possible.
by CEO when he was no longer
they would allow him to look
may help clear up the issue.
request to CEO as soon as
At this time Commissioner Kettner stated that he would have to leave the
meeting because of a previous commitment. Commissioner Kettner stated
that he has regretfully decided to not continue on the Utilities
Commission when his term expires December 31. 1986. He stated that he
feels it is important to get a person with utility background to serve on
the commission and that he would be willing to serve on a month-by-month
basis until such a person is found.
Mayor Hinkle expressed the Council's appreciation for Commissioner
Kettner's six years of service on the Utilities Commission.
e
Discussion was carried on regarding the Utility Commission meeting
minutes. Members of the Council expressed their desire for more detailed
minutes. Mr. Bill Birrenkott stated that their Attorney has advised them
that it would be better to record only the formal actions taken at the
meetings. Mr. Beck stated that he felt it was important that pertinent
comments are also recorded for future reference. The Utilities
Commission agreed that the minutes of their meetings would be sent
directly to the City Hall for distribution to members of the City
Council.
Discussion was carried on regarding Utility input in plat reviews in
the future. It was the concensus that new plats needing City utility
connections would continue to come to the Utility office. as well as any
other developments the City Councilor staff feels they need to review.
4.3 Street Lighting Policy
Mr. Klaers stated that he could find no record of a formal street
lighting policy. He expressed his concern for the need for such a
policy. as experienced in the Deerfield 3rd Addition which has an urban
setting with no street lights.
Commissioner Duitsman stated than if an individual requests a street
light. they must pay all costs including cost of the pole. light.
installation and labor and are charged a monthly energy usage fee.
e
Mr. Bill Birrenkott stated that if the City requests a street light. they
must pay the capital cost for the pole and light and the Utilities
donates the cost of labor and equipment for installation as well as the
continued maintenance of the light. He also stated that at the present
Page 6
City Council Minutes
November 24, 1986
e
the City pays $100.00 a month for street lights ($1,200 a year). Mr.
Birrenkott noted that in calculating the actual energy used, the cost of
street lights for the City for 1985 was $23,000. He stated that the
$1,200 paid to the Utilities is subtracted from the actual cost and the
result is the amount the Utilities donates to the City for street
lighting.
Commissioner Duitsman
placed on the amount
lights.
stated that three years ago, a $25,000 cap was
the Utilities will continue to donate for street
Discussion was carried on regarding the benifits of projected new growth
and development in the City, and the impact it will have on the City and
Utilities.
Mr. Bill
policy,
maintain
Birrenkott stated
he found a document
street lights in the
that in his search for a street lighting
stating that the City will only install and
old historic townsite.
Mayor Hinkle stated that the City Council will be considering redefining
the urban/rural bounds. He noted that the Deerfield 3rd Addition needs
to be bought into the urban district and that the issue of street
lighting there will need to be addressed.
e
Mr. Klaers stated that the
plats. Councilmember Gunkel
requirement.
City may
expressed
require street lights in future
her support for such a
Mr. Bill Birrenkott questioned who would
costs for street lights in new developments.
felt the users should pay the costs.
pay the ongoing maintenance
Mayor Hinkle stated that he
Discussion was carried on regarding costs for installation of street
lights and energy costs. Mr. Birrenkott stated that it costs
approximately $225 to $250 for one light and pole. He further stated
that an individual requesting a street light may either pay for the cost
of a light and pole and be billed a monthly energy cost, or the Utilities
could put in a street light and bill the individual monthly for the pole
light and the energy used.
It was the consensus of the City council and Utilities Commission that a
meeting be set up including Bill Birrenkott, Lori Johnson, Terry Maurer.
Peter Beck and Pat Klaers to review past street lighting procedures and
to develop a street lighting policy, which will include street lighting
for new plats.
e
Discussion was carried on regarding the ineffective street lighting in
Barthel Shopping Center, new lighting for the downtown on the Main Street
project, and street lighting for the Industrial Park..
e
e
e
Page 7
City Council Minutes
November 24. 1986
Mr. K1aers stated that plans for projects such as those mentioned will be
passed to the Utilities for their comments.
4.6 Dam Maintenance
Discussion was carried on regarding maintenance of the Lake Orono Dam
with the following comments being noted:
1. The City has assumed ownership of the dam.
2. Rusty Bradway. employee of the Elk River Municipal Utilities. is
currently responsible for overseeing the dam on a daily basis and
that the City has maintenance responsibility for the dam.
3. The dam provides the cooling water for the diesel generators.
4.7 Other Business
A.
Combining of Sewer and Water Departments
Commissioner Dill introduced the subject of combining the Water and
Sewer Departments. He stated that he was in favor of the idea. Mr.
Dill stated that he also thought it was a good idea. and that he felt
it made sense for the Ut1ities to take over the sewer. since they
already do the billing and collecting now.
Mayor Hinkle stated that he was not sure whether the Utilities should
take over the sewer or whether the City should take over the water to
bring them under one roof. He stated that a previous referendum came
about because of the feeling of the Council that the two departments
should be. together. At that time. the Water Department was not
supporting itself as it now is. and also there is the fact that the
City Council must do the bonding and assessing for any improvements.
He stated that if the Sewer Department was combined with the Water.
there would have to be a means for direct communication between the
Utilities and the City.
Counci1member Gunkel expressed her feeling that the referendum failed
generally because people just weren't informed or didn't understand
the issue.
Commissioner Dill
deal of the work
that in addition to
line cleaning and
plant.
stated that he feels the Utilities does a great
of the sewer department now. Mayor Hinkle stated
bonding and assessing the City is responsible for
maintenance. as well as running the treatment
Mr. K1aers stated that he feels the Water and Sewer is interrelated
with the streets as the mains typically line under the street system.
Page 8
City Council Minutes
November 24. 1986
e
Councilmember Tral1e questioned whether or not there was a way to
combine the two departments (water and sewer) other than by
referendum. Mr. Beck stated that the Council could add the sewer to
the Utilities Control by resolution. but to place the Water
Department under the City's control would take a referendum.
Discussion was carried on regarding the possible duplication of
equipment under the present set up.
Counci1member Gunkel questioned what would happen if the Utilities
took over the Sewer Department and they experienced a need for major
equipment replacement. Commissioner Duitsman stated that they would
have to come to the City to help them. which would be the same for
the water and electric departments. Mr. Dill stated that they also
could use short term borrowing.
Mayor Hinkle concluded the discussion by saying that the
ramifications need to be studied further but that he feels they
(Council and Utilities Commission) are in agreement that the two
departments should be together.
B.
Dead End Water Service Areas
e
Discussion was carried on regarding problems and complaints with bad
smelling and bad tasting water in certain non-looped water service
areas. Commissioner Duitsman expressed his concern that a line be
extended when the Main Street project is completed to take care of at
least one of these problems.
5. Resolution Approving 1987 Pay Plan for Non-Organized City Employees
Mr. Klaers outlined the proposed 1987 Pay Plan for members of the City
Council. It was the consensus that consideration of the resolution would
take place at the 12-8-86 Council Committee Meeting.
6. Other Business
COUNCILMEMBER SCHULDT MOVED APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION 86-85. A RESOLUTION
EXPRESSING RECOGNITION AND APPRECIATION FOR THE DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE
or MR. LEROY PIK.E. COUNCILMEMBER TRALLE SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION
PASSED 4-0.
There being no further
MEETING BE ADJOURNED.
MOTION PASSED 4-0.
business. COUNCILMEMBER TRALLE MOVED THAT THE
COUNCILMEMBER SCHULDT SECONDED THE MOTION. THE
The meeting adjourned at 10:15 p.m.
e
submitted.
Deborah Kleckner
Recording Secretary
--