Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009 11-23 City Council Manager Workshop PacketAGENDA MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL MANAGER WORKSHOP 5:00 P.M. Monday, November 23, 2009 Council Chambers, City Hall A. CALL TO ORDER B. ROLL CALL C. APPROVAL OF AGENDA D. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 5:00 P.M. 1. Discussion of Commission and Board Member Appointment and Reappointment Process. 5:10 P.M. 2. Review of 2010 Final Budget Proposal 5:40 p.m. 3. Recreational Fire Discussion E. NEW BUSINESS F. ADJOURNMENT THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLAND Work Session Agenda Item D1 AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager, Jim Antonen FROM: Charles Ahl, Assistant City Manager Sarah Burlingame, Senior Administrative Assistant SUBJECT: Discussion of Commission and Board Member Appointment and Reappointment Process DATE: November 16, 2009 INTRODUCTION During the last appointment process for commissions and boards, the City Council requested that the questions used during the interview portion be brought back before them for discussion. City Staff has brought these questions forward to the Council for discussion during this meeting as well as the topic of voting methods, which has been an issue in the past. This report will also go over the process for appointment and reappointment, for discussion purposes. BACKGROUND Appointment/Reappointment Process Terms for commission /board members usually expire at the end of the year. When that date nears, the City Manager's office will send a notice to the commissioners/board members who have a term that is to expire to bring this to their attention. They are provided with an application and asked to return a completed application if they would like to seek reappointment. Once applications are turned in by the specified deadline, commissioners/board members seeking reappointment will then be scheduled for interviews with the City Council either in November /December, although with a new Council being sworn in after the first of the year on alternating years, it may be more appropriate to continue terms until interviews are conducted with the new Council in January /February. Commissioner terms are set such that their terms do not expire until the Council appoints someone to the vacancy. If a commission position is vacant either through a resignation or the Council not re- appointing that individual, then Staff will advertise and accept applications until the position is filled. During the interview portion, each of the City Council members will ask the applicant one question related to the commission or board. In the past, questions have been selected from a compiled list using questions submitted by the current members on the related commission or board, as well as City Council Members and City Staff. Questions for each of the commissions and boards that have been used in the past are included with this report for discussion purposes, as the Council has indicated concern with the relevance of the questions. These questions have not been reviewed with the various Commissions. Once the interviews are done, the City Council will submit voting ballots to City Staff, who tally the votes and provide the final tally to the Council. The City Council then makes a formal action during a regular City Council to approve the appointments. Council Voting Methods Currently, there is no set policy on how the City Council votes to appoint commissioners and board members. Past practice has varied from year to year and different methods of voting have been utilized, but all methods have utilized written ballots. Packet Page Number 3 of 26 Commissioner Selection Process Page two Council Voting Methods (cont.) Below are samples of different methods utilized in the past, as well as possible methods to consider for use in the future. These are provided for discussion purposes. Yes or No Method — When only 1 candidate is being considered for 1 position, the Council can simply vote yes or no. This method has also been utilized for the reappointment process, since there is only 1 candidate being considered for 1 position. Yes No Candidate A ® ❑ Ranked Method 1 — When more than 1 candidate is being considered for 1 position, Council was instructed to score their top three candidates with a score of 3, 2, or 1, with 3 being the best score. The candidate with the most points would be s elected for appointment. • Ranked Method 2 — When multiple applicants are being chosen from for 1 or more positions, the Council was instructed to give a rank to each of the candidates, with 1 being the highest. Then staff would tally the votes and assign points to the rankings. The candidate with the highest points would be selected for appointment. Rank Points Candidate A 1 5 Candidate B 3 3 Candidate C 4 2 Candidate D 5 1 Candidate E 2 4 Candidate A would be selected for appointment • Bracket Method — This method has not been utilized by the City Council. This method uses a bracket system where each candidate's name is added to the ballot once they have been interviewed. Each time a name is added, they are placed in the rank compared to the candidate( already interviewed. Staff would then compare the ballots submitted to determine Lilt: gal lulua« w ut:� auuvn Ii:�u. 1. Candidate A 1. Candidate A 1. Candidate C 1. Candidate C 2. Candidate B 2. Candidate A 2. Candidate A 3. Candidate B 3. Candidate D 4. Candidate B Candidate C would be selected for appointment Packet Page Number 4 of 26 Rank Candidate A 3 Q 1 Candidate B 3 2 1 Candidate C 3 2 0 Candidate D Q 2 1 Candidate D would be selected for appointment • Ranked Method 2 — When multiple applicants are being chosen from for 1 or more positions, the Council was instructed to give a rank to each of the candidates, with 1 being the highest. Then staff would tally the votes and assign points to the rankings. The candidate with the highest points would be selected for appointment. Rank Points Candidate A 1 5 Candidate B 3 3 Candidate C 4 2 Candidate D 5 1 Candidate E 2 4 Candidate A would be selected for appointment • Bracket Method — This method has not been utilized by the City Council. This method uses a bracket system where each candidate's name is added to the ballot once they have been interviewed. Each time a name is added, they are placed in the rank compared to the candidate( already interviewed. Staff would then compare the ballots submitted to determine Lilt: gal lulua« w ut:� auuvn Ii:�u. 1. Candidate A 1. Candidate A 1. Candidate C 1. Candidate C 2. Candidate B 2. Candidate A 2. Candidate A 3. Candidate B 3. Candidate D 4. Candidate B Candidate C would be selected for appointment Packet Page Number 4 of 26 Commissioner Selection Process Page three RECOMMENDATION Staff is requesting that the Council review the information provided and give staff input on the questions used during the interview process and indicate which voting method is preferred by the Council. Attachment: 1. Council Interview Questions for Commission /Board Appointments Packet Page Number 5 of 26 Work Session Agenda Item Attachment Community Design Review Board Interviews Why are you interested in serving on the Community Design Review Board? 2. Are you available on Tuesday evenings? 3. Have you ever attended a Community Design Review Board meeting? 4. Are you committed to serve on this Board for the two full years of the appointed term, or do you intend to run for an open City Office in the next election, which could create another vacancy on this Board before your two -year term is completed? 5. Can you read construction plans? 6. What is your experience in analyzing design or architectural elements for compatibility with surrounding buildings, cost to the building owner, functionality, and maintenance? 7. Are you familiar with the different types of building materials on the market today that are used in construction? 8. Do you have any experience in signage design and/or ordinance development regarding signage? 9. What is your experience and knowledge base regarding different types of landscaping techniques? 10. What is your experience and knowledge base regarding plantings with regard to their ease of maintenance, resistance to disease, longevity, compatibility of other plants, expected growth rates, expected longevity? 11. Can you discuss your viewpoints regarding new development, retrofitting existing buildings, multi -use zoning, and the direction Maplewood should take in developing design standards? 12. Are you familiar with new techniques for reducing the amount of impervious surfaces? 13. What is your experience with regard to the review of parking lot plans, parking requirements, balancing the ratio between impervious and pervious surfaces? Packet Page Number 6 of 26 Work Session Agenda Item Attachment POSSIBLE INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND NATURAL RESOURCE COMMISSION POSSIBLE QUESTIONS Do you foresee any problems with attendance at regularly scheduled meetings? 2. What do you feel you can bring to this commission — interests, talents, life experiences, etc? 3. The commission will focus on issues related to the environment such as recycling, solid waste, storm water management, wetlands, energy, global warming and others. Please share your experiences in working with one of these issues or other issues related to the environment. 4. The City of Maplewood tries very hard to balance development and property rights with the protection of our natural resources. Where do you see your interest or concerns in the process of balancing various interests? 5. What environmental policies or practices have the City of Maplewood put into place that you feel have made a positive impact on the City? Conversely, what policies or practices need improvement? 6. What two environmental issues do you feel the Environmental and Natural Resource Commission should address for the City of Maplewood? Packet Page Number 7 of 26 Work Session Agenda Item Attachment Historic Preservation Commission Interview Questions 1. What expertise do you have in the field of historic preservation? 2. Do you have a particular field or fields of interest in history? 3. Do you have any previous affiliation with historical societies or history centered organizations? 4. Do you have any experience in grant writing? 5. What do you feel is historic in Maplewood? 6. What expertise can you believe you can add to the goals of the Commission? 7. How can the Commission benefit by having you as a member? 8. How do you feel you can benefit by becoming a member of the Commission? 9. What do you see as a historical plan for Maplewood? 10. Is there anything that would hinder you from regular attendance at Commission meetings? Packet Page Number 8 of 26 Work Session Agenda Item Attachment HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR APPLICANTS 1. What about being a member of the Maplewood HRA interests you the most? 2. What impact {s} would you like to have on the future development and growth of Maplewood as an HRA member? 3. Regarding the housing stock in Maplewood, do you see a need for proactive action by the HRA or the city in general for improvement? For example, as it relates to things like: redevelopment, improvement of housing stock due to better maintenance codes, other? 4. What are your views /opinions regarding continued development or growth of Maplewood since we are nearing a state of full development? 5. What housing developments or neighborhoods in Maplewood, old or new, do you feel are enduring from the standpoint of design, desirability and density? Why do you feel so? 6. Do you see the city government as an impetus of proactive change and improvement and growth in housing matters, or one that should more so be in a position to primarily react to proposals that are brought forth by developers? Packet Page Number 9 of 26 Work Session Agenda Item Attachment PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION INTERVIEW QUESTIONS 1.) Please discuss why you believe parks and open space are important to the quality of life for residents in the City of Maplewood? 2.) Please discuss your experience utilizing trails and how you believe the City should proceed with developing a network of trails throughout the City. 3.) Have you or a family member participated in a Parks and Recreation Program offered by the City? Please discuss your experience with that program and what you liked and disliked and suggestions for improving the program(s). 4.) As a Parks and Recreation Commissioner, one of the program areas the Commission is responsible for is the Maplewood Community Center — please discuss your experience with the community center. Are there any programs you would like to see added or eliminated? 5.) The Maplewood Community Center, MCC, is an enterprise fund of the City. The goal is that this facility be self supporting and that the MCC generate all revenues required to meet it operational budget. Do you have ideas that would produce more revenue for the MCC? 6.) Discuss what the City's Priorities should be regarding park maintenance or other improvements to City Recreational Facilities. Packet Page Number 10 of 26 Work Session Agenda Item Attachment i • • • 1. Do you foresee any problem with attendance at regularly scheduled meetings? At city council meetings? Would you have any difficulties with meetings that might go later than 10:00 p.m.? 2. Do you have any areas where you might have a conflict of interest? How would you handle this? 3. We usually receive our packets on Thursday. Some of them contain a considerable amount of reading material. Do you foresee any difficulty in visiting the sites mentioned on the agenda and getting the material read by the Tuesday meeting date? 4. All of our regular meetings are televised and rerun, do you think you will have any problem expressing your opinions with the camera's eye on you? 5. As previously mentioned, the commission's role is advisory to the council which makes the final decision. Can you be comfortable with this role? 6. At times we have controversial items with a variety of opinions and sometimes outright hostility being expressed. Can you be comfortable with these situations? 7. What do you feel you can bring to this group — interests, talents, life experiences, etc. 8. After sitting through this meeting do you have any questions on what was done and why? Did you disagree with any of the decisions? If so, why? (If there was a split vote, which side would you have been on ?) 9. Looking at how Maplewood has developed, a. What do you think has been done well? b. What do you think could have been done better? c. What do you see as important to be addressed in the future (near or far)? Packet Page Number 11 of 26 Work Session Agenda Item Attachment Questions for Police Civil Service Commission Applicants What do you think is the most important function of Maplewood's Police Civil Service Commission? 2. Tell us your experience in dealing with confidential personnel matters. 3. What do you think are the major challenges for law enforcement in Maplewood today? 4. As a commissioner, you could be called upon to investigate charges against a police officer, determine guilt or innocence, and select appropriate punishment if the officer is found guilty. What experiences and skills qualify you to perform this duty? 5. What qualifications and experience do you have that would add to the commission's deliberations? 6. What motivated you to apply for a Commission position? 7. What key traits do you think characterize a superior police officer? 8. One of the purposes of the PCSC is to "create a policy system which shall ...be made attractive as a career." As a member of the PCSC, what would you do to help attract and retain talented police officers? Packet Page Number 12 of 26 Agenda Item D -2 Memorandum To: James W. Antonen, City Manager From: Bob Mittet, Finance Director Date: November 19, 2009 Re: Review of 2010 Final Budget Proposal BACKGROUND The City Council has received a proposed 2010 Budget. It was presented at a workshop held November 9, 2009. The proposed budget is based on a 5% property tax levy increase with the increase use to meet unmet needs including additional debt service funding, filling two vacant police positions, hiring 2 additional firefighter/paramedics and filling two vacant positions in parks and recreation. Staff recognizes the economic stresses of the current recession and reduces expectations in some key charges for services in the Citizen Services and Community Development and Parks Departments. Staff has eliminated Market Value Homestead Credit from the budget in 2010 recognizing the unallotments of 2008 and 2009. The 2010 Budget maintains the obligations of the labor contracts adopted for the 2009 — 2010 period. City management continues to explore cost- saving opportunities including continuation of the 2009 mandatory leave program through 2010. During 2008 and 2009, early retirement incentives were provided to staff. Eight of our most experienced staff elected this program. Hit particularly hard were the public works and parks & recreation functions. Public works re- assignments will help mitigate some of these retirements in 2010 but parks and recreation will need additional staffing to be able to maintain adequate programs. Both of these departments will be challenged to maintain levels of service citizens are accustomed to. Finally, staff recommends maintaining adequate fund reserves such that future tax levy requests will be based on incremental changes and avoiding dramatic increases. Packet Page Number 13 of 26 November 98, 2009 The proposed 2010 budget accomplishes all of the above mentioned considerations. Staff recognizes the pressures of the current recession to reduce or even eliminate tax levy increases. Attached is an analysis of tax capacity and levy increases proposed by a variety of metro area suburbs. This analysis, prepared by the Finance Department at the City of Brooklyn Center shows that Maplewood is among the cities with the lower requests. This reflects our relative non - reliance on Local Government Aid and our adjustments to become non - reliant on Market Value Homestead Credit. Also attached, is the Budget Summary, proposed for the 2010 Budget but not previously included in the proposed budget book. RECOMMENDATION At this workshop, staff seeks feedback and recommendations from the council prior to preparation of a final document that will be submitted for approval at the December 7 meeting. This meeting has been published as the Truth in Taxation hearing. Packet Page Number 14 of 26 O rr N W 3 M M a d x F- W y a CL 0 a M 0 8 , y L. CL LL E d Q M U T x � H a aH a` � d {A b Q d N 4 O b � Q 0. cy N 0 N 6 I Ln oO .-i M o �.o N .-a o d" r\ m d M kO d am- M V - M M Ln E N N �. • • Yi M d" M M N fN d' M M d" M N N +-{ M M N N Ln ,-a QD � M o C) M N N o ko N M tr N Ln o o M C) ":r M r` r` ko M O O O O M MLnLnmr\ - irj m "pLnp m ry to o N,o Ln w t,o ry o h M C) .-i M M Ln Gi N t'r V' C) 0 C) of G of to o> Ln Lr Lr M Ql [r M + N . 1.4 1-1 M C) rr Cal M Ln N M M M Ln M M M N M to M M M M h N 14 N M M .-i N w CO M -i ,-t to Ln o N to o Ln to N d Ln d' M to M 0 -+ r, N to r\ o to -i d M Ln r^ M +- -i cD rr M M M LG Ln C r r\ ar k6 C Lr� t1 rl C d \° \° \° \ \ \ \° \ \ \° \ \° a a o o a a o 0 0 0 0 0 r\ M r\ 11" tp N C) M C) d CO o O1 CO N OR N -i o OR t1- CO -i I: Ln rN + 4 io +-i M Ln �.o Ln oO q N 1-1 —1 C) N M Ln Ln to -i r J C) o Ln N to co .-i r, r\ M -i Oa M V' r\ Oo d o C) to o r. CO d' M d' Ln M m h M d' M M O . - i ,--i m M rl rr llr C) Ol M IX) a) to to C) r M M io N CO r\ Ol N . + i M 4 � 1� 1 M Ln N N Ln 1-4 to 1.4 M C) C) o M I w� r" M C) C) r" C) C) o Ln Ln N o r, + C) m Cr o m tD M h r\ N N to r l M t,C) C) o io oc C) M +-{ M Ln Io N to M C� Io 1 of of o to of �o Ln Ln �r' M V- M .-1 , - i N .-i ,-1 .-1 M M a) r, C) Ln Ln M M C) Ln oO V to M M Ln M M M M to N -- m M r%, b" to w N Ln Ln Oo to Ln C) N M N IF co Eo lh IF C6 M to M o N r, N to r\ o r. M d" Ln o r' co m tiD op Ln d' Ln m co d M ,-i N ­4 ,-a ,-1 r\ cT CO O 6� o N C) M oo I - Ln r\ oS to d' o Ln N to o d" *-i to Ln N Ol r lq� N Ln C) V - CO -i Ln to , q C) M 'Cr �.o M N M r d Ln r\ o N to d" o o N N d' CO M o r+ M Ln Ln N M M ll h CD M r" r' M Ln" " of , �o , 4 Ln to .-4 .-i N M CO IT N. 4 Cr M N �Lr M l N N CM') .^-i r" M 1 V' M tD rl .-1 ­4 +-a d' M M r\ to M M o to Ln M N %o C) M to M M V' to d' r\ 1-4 N tV N Ln M M +-q M N N .a3 N N —j _ ro o o ro M c > o o "0 v i m o O =3 N N CL C. � v O 2 0 ° O ru fu V o o ' M U U U- U 2 2 wcl� w Ln 3: c U Y O CL) O U .g v . Packet Page Number 15 of 26 INTRODUCTION FORM OF GOVERNMENT The City of Maplewood operates under the Council- Manager form of government. All policy decisions and legislative activities are the responsibility of the Council, but the administrative duties are delegated to the City Manager. One of the primary administrative duties of the City Manager is to prepare an annual budget for approval by the Council. 2010 BUDGET PROCESS In July, department heads started the preparation of their budget requests for the 2010 calendar year. Maplewood's fiscal year is the calendar year. During August, department heads submitted their budget requests to the Assistant City Manager and Finance Director. They reviewed the budget requests as they were received to determine if they were accurate, reasonable and well- justified. Beginning in August, the Finance Director prepared a preliminary budget based upon initial revenue estimates, department budget requests and recommended revisions in department budget requests. The Assistant City Manager and Finance Director together met with each department head to individually discuss revisions to their budget requests. During these meetings, the Finance Director's recommended revisions were discussed and the Assistant City Manager made the final decision as to what would be included in the proposed budget. The Finance Director used this information to prepare the proposed budget document. On September 14 a proposed budget and proposed tax levy was certified to Ramsey County. By November 16 Ramsey County sent a notice to each taxpayer indicating the proposed property tax increase and the date of the City's Truth in Taxation and budget hearings. On December 7, 2009 the Council approved the proposed budget and the City's property tax levy to finance the approved budget. BUDGET ORGANIZATION The City's annual budget consists of three basic sections: Operating Budget, Capital Improvements Budget and Debt Service Budget. Each of these sections is comprised of funds. A fund is defined as an independent fiscal and accounting entity with a self - balancing set of accounts and resources which are dedicated for a specific purpose. The revenue and expenditure accounts for each fund are listed within each budget section. The expenditure accounts within the funds that comprise the Operating Budget are grouped by departments and subdivided into programs within each department. The focus of the Capital Improvements Budget, are major projects and capital outlay of $50,000 or more. The Debt Service Budget is organized by bond issue to insure that financial resources are adequate to pay principal and interest on long -term debt when due. Packet Page Number 16 of 26 Dear Honorable Mayor Longrie and City Council Members 1 am pleased to transmit to you the City of Maplewood's 2010 Budget. The 2010 Budget is funded at City Council's direction by a tax rate that limits new spending for operations and debt service to only a 5.0% increase. The operating budget decrease is 0.04% while the debt service budget has increased by 5.7 %. There are four primary considerations in the preparation of the 2010 Budget: 1. Essentially, the tax levy increase replaces the lost Market Value Homestead Credit. (MVHC) 2. Fire and Police Departments have increases reflective of City Council stated priorities. 3. Additional levies for debt service reflect 2008 and 2009 unallotments of MVHC. 4. While the budget reflects increases in 2010 capital improvements, the acceleration of projects in 2009 actually results in a decrease in 2010. This budget includes funds for a number of deferred maintenance projects to protect the public investment in the Maplewood Community Center and other City buildings which have suffered from a lack of proper maintenance in recent years. Conserving the City's financial resources is important and the 2010 Budget protects our excellent bond rating and minimizes the need for borrowing for unexpected expenditures while drawing the General Fund balance to a level covering 36.6% of anticipated expenditures. The 2010 Budget was adopted only after months of budget workshops and public meetings in which the City Council reviewed City expenditures, with unprecedented depth, department by department to gain a full understanding of City needs and to determine its fiscal priorities. The Council's commitment of time and attention was welcomed by staff who understands the role of the elected officials in setting priorities for the use of limited public resources. 1 want to thank all those who participated in the 2010 budget process to build a balanced service centered financial plan for the City of Maplewood. Sincerely, James W. Antonen City Manager OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER 651- 249 -2051 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST MAPLEWOOD, MN 55109 Packet Page Number 17 of 26 Budget Overview OPERATING BUDGET EXPENDITURES STEADY Operating budget expenditures for 2010 are $31.7 million, which is $12,250 lower than 2009. The budget changes by department are as follows: OPERATING BUDGET EXPENDITURES BY DEPARTMENT % CHANGE 2009 AMOUNT OVER OVER 2006 2010 OVER (UNDER) (UNDER) (DECREASE) BUDGET 2009 BUDGET 2007 BUDGET Citizen Services 4,583,110 (34,930) (0.8)% Community & Parks Development 2,188,380 (7,030) (0.3)% Executive 1,008,440 (17,800) (1.7)% Finance 748,480 (8,150) (1.1)% Fire 4,329,160 40,200 0.9% Information Technology 742,210 (22,080) (2.9)% Legislative 188,100 (11,430) (5.7)% Police 7,741,800 212,910 2.5% Public Works 10,181,020 (163,940) (1.6)% Total expenditures $31,710,700 ($12,250) 0.0% FULL -TIME The number of full -time employees included in the 2010 Budget is 163 which EMPLOYEES is one less than the previous year. Transfers of programs between DOWN 1 departments have a neutral effect. Attrition through retirements are partially offset by the addition of two new firefighter/paramedics. The number of full - time equivalent positions in the 2010 Budget is 181 which is a decrease of four from 2009. 57% OF Approximately 57% of the Operating Budget is accounted for in the City's OPERATING General Fund. BUDGET IN GENERAL The following shows sources and uses of funds for the 2010 General Fund FUND Budget compared to the 2009 Budget: It has been common for the past several years for the General Fund to reflect a deficit budget. The deficit projected in the 2010 Budget shows use of fund Packet Page Number 18 of 26 % CHANGE 2009 2010 INCREASE OVER 2006 BUDGET BUDGET (DECREASE) BUDGET Sources of funds: Taxes - current $11,329,590 $12,246,335 $916,745 8.1% Other revenues 7,158,690 6,289,770 (868,920) (12.1 %) Fund balance 69,075 187,465 118,390 171.4% Total $18,557,355 $18,723,570 $166,215 0.9% Use of funds: Expenditures $18,090,330 $18,158,570 $62,871 0.3% Transfers (net) 467,025 565,000 97,975 21.0% Fund balance Total $18,557,355 $18,723,570 $166,215 0.9% It has been common for the past several years for the General Fund to reflect a deficit budget. The deficit projected in the 2010 Budget shows use of fund Packet Page Number 18 of 26 reserves of $187,465. This is because it is city budget policy to make conservative revenue estimates and liberal expenditure estimates. Consequently, the General Fund ending balance is usually higher than budgeted and provides a resource for financing the deficit in the annual GENERAL FUND REVENUES UP 0.3% GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES UP 0.4% The increase in General Fund revenues amounts to $47,825. Most of the increase is in current taxes which are up $698,745 due to an increase in the tax levy. This increase is offset by reductions in intergovernmental revenues (Market Value Homestead Credit) and charges for services. All of the additional tax revenue will be transferred to the Debt Service Fund. The 2010 Budget includes recommended expenditures that are 0.4% higher than the 2009 Budget. The breakdown by department is as follows: GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES BY DEPARTMENT AMOUNT OVER % CHANGE 2010 (UNDER) OVER 2008 BUDGET 2009 BUDGET BUDGET Citizen Services 1,256,440 33,050 2.7% Community & Parks Dev. 1,633,320 (22,040) (1.3)% Executive 1,008,440 (17,800) (1.7)% Finance 675,670 (6,670) (1.0)% Fire 1,831,400 (42,920) (2.3) Legislative 162,980 10,200 6.7% Police 7,715,800 212,910 2.8% Public Works 3,874,520 (98,490) (2.5)% Total expenditures $18,158,570 $68,240 0.4% The decreases in most departments are due to various decreases in all segments of the budget offset by increased personnel costs. Re- assignments of some personnel account for the variations between departments. The Fire Department actually has an increase of two new personnel offset by the allocation of a portion of administrative expenses to the Ambulance Service Fund. GENERAL The fund balance also needs to be large enough to finance unexpected FUND expenditures. Therefore, the budgeted 12 -31 -10 fund balance has been set at BALANCE 36.6% of the 2010 budgeted expenditures. This should provide a sufficient WILL BE balance to cover cash flow needs and unexpected expenditures. Also, it is 36.6% higher than the level that it was at in October 1989 when the city's bond rating OF BUDGET by Moody's Investors Services was increased to its current level, Aa2. The bond rating is confirmed with each new bond issue, most recently as of November 18, 2009. Packet Page Number 19 of 26 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS BUDGET This portion of the budget covers the acquisition and construction of major facilities other than those financed by the Operating Budget. The revenues and expenditures within the Capital Improvements Budget are grouped by fund. The money within each fund is restricted for major equipment purchases and construction projects costing in excess of $50,000. All other capital outlay is financed within the Operating Budget. The 2010 Budget implements the first year of the 2010 -2014 Capital Improvement Plan adopted by the City Council. This five -year plan is updated annually through a comprehensive capital needs planning process. CAPITAL Revenues for 2010 in the Capital Improvements Budget are $1,914,928 IMPROVEMENTS which is 28.5% more than 2009. Major revenue sources for the 2010 Capital REVENUES UP Improvement Budget are taxes including tax increment revenues ($624,998), 28.5% intergovernmental revenue ($300,000), charges for services ($713,850) and miscellaneous revenues ($276,080) which includes investment earnings and sale of property. CAPITAL The Capital Improvement Budget expenditures are $13,940,768 which is IMPROVEMENTS 34.8% more than the 2009 Budget. During 2009, the Council approved EXPENDITURES acceleration of several street reconstruction projects. The result of this is that UP 34.8% 2010 actually reflects a decrease in capital expenditures from actual 2009 expenditures. Street reconstruction expenditures, park development and a replacement fire truck account for the increases in 2010 over the 2009 Budget. This portion of the budget covers the payment of principal and interest on the City's bonded indebtedness. DEBT Revenues for 2010 are 19.5% more than 2009. Major revenue sources, as in SERVICE past years, are property taxes ($3,516,000), special assessments REVENUES ($2,595,000), state street aid ($461,010) and investment earnings ($30,000). UP 19.5% Once again, Market Value Homestead Credit is not available for funding debt service, thereby increasing the need for increases in other revenue sources. DEBT SERVICE Expenditures for 2010 ($9,481,369) are 5.7% more than 2009. The increase EXPENDITURES is due to higher scheduled principal and interest payments, due in large part UP 5.7% to issuance of bonds in 2008 and 2009. Staff will continue to pursue opportunities to reduce debt service expenditures through responsible use of refunding of debt. The anticipated new debt issues for 2010 total $10,640,000 to finance public works improvements. Packet Page Number 20 of 26 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2010 - 2014 CAPITAL Based on projections in the 2010 -2014 Capital Improvement Plan, the Capital IMPROVEMENT Budget will range from $10.9 million in 2011 to $25.9 million in 2014 with EXPENDITURES 2010 capital expenditures at $16.1 million. Major factors affecting the capital IN 2010 -2014 budgets will be (a) residential and commercial growth and (b) the number of public improvement projects that are approved for construction. Packet Page Number 21 of 26 Work Session Agenda Item D3 AGENDA REPORT TO: City Manager, Jim Antonen FROM: H. Alan Kantrud, City Attorney; Steve Lukin, Fire Chief SUBJECT: Consider First Reading of Recreational Fire Ordinance DATE: August 17, 2009 INTRODUCTION The City Council directed staff to integrate and streamline the current language regarding recreational fires. Aspects of state law were not reflected in the existing language as written in § 20 -38 of the Code. DISCUSSION The City Council discussed this matter and wanted the City's Ordinance to be at least as restrictive as the State law is. The new language is in concert with the State law, and references to those laws and the state fire code are included in the new language. Additionally, it was requested that the City provide for `permitting' of such fires. Highlighted changes include a greater distance from structures (25' from 20'), the removal of combustible materials such as "coal" and added other restricted /improper combustibles such as plastic, treated lumber and construction debris. We are now requiring full supervision of recreational fires until they are burned -out or completely extinguished /doused. We have also added a "wind" restriction of 15 mph and a "good neighbor" section per council direction. A copy of the current code and proposed code are both attached to this report for review and comparison. Staff is suggesting that the permit essentially be a copy of the Ordinance, printed and available for law enforcement upon demand if police are called out for any reason related to the fire. The theory at work here is that if a recreational fire user takes the time to print the ordinance, they will have read it and be able to comply with its requirements, and be responsible /liable for violations of it (due to the presumption that if they print it, they read it). RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the language presented here. Please consider this matter and conduct first reading of this new ordinance, and if appropriate, waive second reading. Attachments: A) Section 20 -38 of the current Code B) Proposed Ordinance C) May 28, 2009 City Council Meeting Minutes, Item L6 Packet Page Number 22 of 26 JOBNAME: No Job Name PAGE: 360 SESS: 2 OUTPUT: Toe Apr 8 12:31:10 2003 Work Session Agenda Item D3 , Attachment § 20-37 MAPLEWOOD CODE structure in this manner shall be done only under supervision and control of the designated fire department officer and pursuant to a permit issued by the fire chief. A charge may be made for this service, and the money so received by the fire department shall be used to defray expenses of the department. (Code 1982, § 12-27) R 79 WIT 7#7 f MEN I a M_ trespasser. (Code 1982, § 12-28) Tflmffloa��� It shall be unlawful in the city for any person to bum or attempt to burn refuse, leaves, wastepaper, garbage or other combustible materials. (Code 1982, § 12-30) No fire shall ever be started by any person on the surface of any bituminous, asphalt or oil-treated roadway in the city at any time, (Code 1982, § 12-32) Sees. 20-41-20-65. Reserved. Sec. 20-66. Adoption of National Fire Codes. There is hereby adopted by the city, for the purpose of prescribing regulations governing conditions hazardous to life and property from fire or explosion, all of those certain codes, Packet Page Number 23 of 26 Work Session Agenda Item D3 Attachment Section 20-38. Permits required for outdoor fires. (a) . No person shall kindle, ignite, set or start any outdoor fire in the City, not contained in a city-approved incinerator, at any time, unless authorized by the issuance of a permit as provided for by the Department of Natural Resources for, "open burning." (b) . City Authorization for Camp/Recreational Fire. Campfires and so-called "recreational" fires are defined by Minnesota Statute, § 88.171, as those that are no larger than 3 feet in diameter and 3 feet in height and used for pleasure, religious, ceremonial, cooking, warmth, or similar purposes and are specifically authorized under this article subject to the rules and restrictions as hereinafter written. Recreational fires should not be lit or maintained if the smoke therefrom unreasonably causes discomfort or a negative impact to neighboring properties. If a complaint is lodged and verified by a peace officer or fire fighter and in their opinion is creating a nuisance situation, the operator may be called upon to extinguish the fire immediately until conditions change or improve. A permit is required for all recreational fires. The permit is a copy of the Maplewood Code Section 20-38 regarding recreational fires. The permit must be on hand while burning a recreational fire and available if asked for by a firefighter or police officer. A copy of the recreational fire code section (§ 20-38) is available online at www.ci.maplewood.mn.us or you can obtain one at the Maplewood City Hall. The following are the minimum requirements for camp/recreational fires as defined above: 1. A recreational fire shall be limited to one (1) location per property parcel/address at a time. 2. Recreational fires must be at least 25 feet from all buildings or combustible materials. Combustible materials are things such as wood, paper and plastics [MFSC (07) Section 307.4.2]. 3. Conditions which could cause a fire to spread within 25 feet of a structure shall be eliminated prior to ignition [MSFC (07) Section 307.4.2] Packet Page Number 24 of 26 Work Session Agenda Item D3 Attachment 4. Recreational fires must be constantly attended by an adult until the fire burns out completely or is extinguished [MSFC (07) Section 307.5]. 5. A minimum of one portable fire extinguisher complying with [MSFC (07) Section 906] with a minimum 4 -A rating or other approved on -site fire extinguishing equipment, such dirt, sand, or garden hose shall be readily available at all times until the fire is extinguished. Examples of other approved fire extinguishing equipment would be a charged garden hose, dirt, or sand (and a means of applying it) [MSFC (07) Section 307.5]. 6. The only materials permitted in a recreational fire are wood from trees, small branches or charcoal. 7. No person shall conduct, cause, or permit burning of rubber, plastics, chemically treated materials, or other materials which produce excessive or noxious smoke including, but not limited to, tires, railroad ties, composite shingles, tar paper, insulation, composition board, sheetrock, wiring, paint, or paint filters, construction debris, garbage, or waste materials. 8. Recreational fires must be immediately extinguished if they pose a fire safety' risk, if they are not in compliance with the above, or when directed to do so by a police officer, firefighter, fire warden, or DNR officer [MSFC (07) Section 307.3]. 9. Recreational fires are only allowed from 2 :00 p.m. until 11:00 p.m. with winds less than 15 mph unless written permission for an exception is received from the fire chief or fire marshal. (c) . The owner of any property upon which a fire is started or originally ignited, in violation of this section, shall be responsible therefore and shall be subject to penalties provided in this chapter, unless such owner can adduce proof that such fire was started by a stranger or trespasser. (Repeals and replaces Ord. 838; Code § 20 -38, 5/27/03) Packet Page Number 25 of 26 Work Session Agenda Item D3 Attachment Extracted from the May 28, 2009 City Council Meeting Minutes L6. Wood Smoke Task Force Report — Councilmember Rossbach (Councilmember Hjelle recommended L6. be heard out of order) a. City Councilmember Will Rossbach gave the report. b. City Attorney, Alan Kantrud answered questions of the council. c. Maplewood Fire Chief, Steve Lukin answered questions of the council. 1. Michelle, Jwanouskos, 879 Crestview Drive South, Maplewood. 2. Jerry Slama, 2311 Valleyview Avenue, Maplewood. 3. John Wykoff, 2345 Maryland Avenue, Maplewood. (spoke twice) 4. Mark Jenkins, 830 New Century Boulevard, Maplewood. 5. Jim Nygaard, 1110 County Road C East, Maplewood. 6. Dave Hafner, 1037 Marnie Street, Maplewood. 7. Jason, Schuller, 2360 Timber Avenue, Maplewood. Councilmember Nephew moved that staff implement the educational recommendations under advisement from the task force and for the city attorney to brim back a proposed technical revision to the ordinance language and the preference would be to use the same good neighbor language as the City of Bloomington. Seconded by Mayor Longrie. Ayes — Mayor Longrie, Councilmembers Hjelle, Nephew & Rossbach Nom Councilmember Juenemann Councilmember Hjelle made a friendly amendment that this portion of the ordinance be brought back as a workshop and staff should enact an educational piece in the Maplewood Monthly to be printed twice a year. Councilmember Nephew accepted the friendly amendment. Mayor Longrie accepted the friendly amendment. The motion passed. Packet Page Number 26 of 26