HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014/08/25 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Study SessionAGENDA
AUGUST 25, 2014
6:00 p.m. BOARDS & COMMISSIONS INTERVIEW – Community Room
6:30 p.m. CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION – Community Room
Discussion Items
1. 6:30 p.m. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – September 2 and 8, 2014
2. 6:35 p.m. 2015 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Discussion
3. 7:35 p.m. Water Meter Replacement Program
8:05 p.m. Communications/Meeting Check-In (Verbal)
8:10 p.m. Adjourn
Written Reports
4. South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Study Update
5. 2014 Semi-Annual Housing Programs Activity Report
6. July 2014 Monthly Financial Report
7. Delinquent Utility Accounts
Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request.
To make arrangements, please call the Administration Department at
952/924-2525 (TDD 952/924-2518) at least 96 hours in advance of meeting.
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: August 25, 2014
Discussion Item: 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Future Study Session Agenda Planning – September 2 and September 8, 2014
RECOMMENDED ACTION: The City Council and the City Manager to set the agenda for
the Special Study Session scheduled for September 2, 2014 and the regularly scheduled Study
Session on September 8, 2014.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Council agree with the agendas as proposed?
SUMMARY: At each study session approximately five minutes are set aside to discuss the next
study session agenda. For this purpose, attached please find the proposed discussion items for
the Special Study Session scheduled for September 2, 2014 and the regularly scheduled Study
Session on September 8, 2014.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Future Study Session Agenda Planning - September 2 & 8, 2014
Prepared by: Debbie Fischer, Office Assistant
Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 1) Page 2
Title: Future Study Session Agenda Planning – September 2 and September 8, 2014
Special Study Session, September 2, 2014 (Tuesday) – 6:45 p.m.
Tentative Discussion Items
1. Star Tribune Value Edition Circulars – Administrative Services (35 minutes)
Discuss complaints from residents regarding distribution of unwanted newspaper circulars.
Study Session, September 8, 2014 – 6:30 p.m.
Tentative Discussion Items
1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – Administrative Services (5 minutes)
2. Affordable Housing Strategy Review – Community Development (45 minutes)
Staff will present strategy options for implementing the affordable housing goal specifically
related to the inclusion of affordable housing units in market rate developments that have
received City financial assistance.
3. Blake Road Corridor Study – Engineering/Community Development (45 minutes)
Hopkins hosted an open house in late June and talked about traffic conditions, traffic growth
and impacts, and goals for the study. Staff will provide an update on study findings and a
review of potential improvements.
Communications/Meeting Check-In – Administrative Services (5 minutes)
Time for communications between staff and Council will be set aside on every study session
agenda for the purposes of information sharing.
End of Meeting: 8:10 p.m.
Reports
4. Sustainable SLP Branding
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: August 25, 2014
Discussion Item: 2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: 2015 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Discussion
RECOMMENDED ACTION: No formal action required. This report is to assist with the
Study Session discussion regarding 2015 Budget recommendations and to provide information
for setting the 2015 Preliminary Property Tax Levies on September 15, 2014.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
• Is there other information that Council would like to review in more detail?
• Are there any other service delivery changes Council would like to have considered?
• What does the Council want to certify as preliminary levy on September 15, 2014? Staff
recommends a 5.50% change from 2014 to 2015 Preliminary Property Tax Levy with the
goal of reducing this amount by the time the final property tax levy is adopted in
December.
• Does the Council want to certify the maximum HRA levy amount for the 2015 levy?
• Does the Council agree with the franchise fee adjustment recommended by staff?
• Does the Council have any questions or suggested changes to the attached CIP?
• Is the Council comfortable with the proposed utility rate adjustment plans?
SUMMARY: Included is information pertaining to the 2015 Budget and 2015 Preliminary
General Property Tax and HRA levies. Staff is currently analyzing submitted budgets for 2015.
Also included in the report are some items of significance that are being considered. In addition,
staff would like direction on any other major changes, programs, or policies that should be
evaluated during the preparation of the 2015 budget. The 2015 – 2024 Capital Improvement
Plan (CIP) is attached as well for the City Council to review. Finally, there is a brief discussion
on utility rates and recommended rate changes.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Information regarding the budget, tax
levies, CIP, and utility rates are provided in this report.
VISION CONSIDERATION: All vision areas are taken into consideration and are an
important part of our budgeting process. St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and
engaged community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
2015 Budget Calendar
2015 – 2024 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)
2015 Proposed Utility Rates – Impact on a Property
Prepared by: Brian A. Swanson, Controller
Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 2) Page 2
Title: 2015 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Discussion
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: On June 23, 2014, staff met with the City Council to discuss the 2015
Budget Process. Council agreed that staff should follow recommendations from the “2015
Budget Production Guidelines” when preparing the 2015 Budget. Assumptions for the 2015
Budget included a pattern similar to past years; a levy increase, modest increase in other fees and
charges where appropriate to fit with business costs, maintain high quality and responsive service
delivery, hold expenditures flat where possible with adjustments for some modest growth based
on essential business needs, funding for a wage and benefit contribution increase, utility rate
increases, and continued long range financial planning.
Discussion Topics – Monday, August 25th:
The purpose of the Study Session discussion is to make sure service delivery and business needs
are congruent with Council expectations in preparing the 2015 Budget. For 2015, as in the past,
budget production guidelines, as well as Vision and Mission, are in the forefront of budgeting
recommendations. The Study Session discussion is intended to be at the higher level to allow
Council to provide levy direction to staff as well as other initiatives they would like staff to add
or explore. Based upon this discussion, staff can then prepare more information to bring back to
the City Council if needed. Department Directors, or their designee, are here this evening to
answer questions from the City Council relating to the 2015 Budget. Below is the suggested
order of the budget presentation and discussion for the Study Session:
1. Discussion on overall budget, requests and council requested items to explore.
2. Brief discussion on 2015 Franchise Fee adjustment.
3. Answer any City Council questions on the 2015 – 2024 CIP.
4. 2015 Preliminary Property Tax Levy discussion for adoption on September 15, 2014.
5. 2015 Preliminary HRA Levy discussion for adoption on September 15, 2014.
6. 2015 Utility Rates and impact.
7. Council questions, comments, expectations, and data requests for upcoming meetings,
including the budget calendar.
The 2015 Preliminary Budget Items of Significance:
Legislative directives:
• There are no levy limits in place for 2015.
• Local Government Aid has been approved to be issued in accordance with a formula set
by the state. Currently the City is scheduled to receive $512,466 in 2015. These dollars
go into the Capital Replacement Fund.
Staffing Costs & Wages: Funds for staffing are the largest expenditure of the City’s operating
budget. In building the 2015 budget recommendations, a wage adjustment of 2.5% is being used
as an assumption. As a reminder, all 5 union contracts are closed and set at this level for 2015.
PERA Coordinated Plan: Changes will be incorporated into the 2015 budget: Employee
current contribution of 6.25% of salary will increase to 6.5% in 2015. Employer current
contribution of 7.25% of salary will increase to 7.5% in 2015.
PERA Police and Fire: There are changes to police and fire PERA contributions to help bring
more stability to those funds. Changes will be incorporated into the 2015 budget. Employee
current contribution of 10.2% will increase to 10.8% in 2015. Employer current contribution of
15.3% will increase to 16.2% in 2015.
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 2) Page 3
Title: 2015 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Discussion
Benefits: For 2015 the City has a second year rate with HealthPartners not to exceed 12%. This
will be set by them later in 2014 after review of claims experience. Staff continues to work with
the City’s benefits consultant and internal benefits committee on cost containment on
claims. We had an extensive education and listening process with staff over the last several
months relating to benefits. It was important to gather information from all employee groups and
enrollment types to obtain information from them about planning for the future to help us
understand what plan design(s) are important to our employees. This study group consisted of a
representative sample of employees from all departments and all unions in direct proportion to
their health insurance enrollment status. This was done so we could get feedback from all plan
selection population groups (single, family, employee plus spouse and employee plus
children). Information will be used to help make recommendations on future plan designs and
recommendations on employer contribution. Based on design input from our employees, we
recommend $307,000 be set aside in 2015 for increased benefit contribution ($278,700 general
fund and $28,500 non-general fund). Staff plans to bring more information to Council in the
near future on recommended plan design and employer contribution. The wellness incentive
benefit for 2014 was set at $40 per employee per month. We are in the process of reviewing the
wellness program and at this point anticipate keeping the wellness program incentive at $40 per
participant in 2015 (no budget increase requested).
Summary of Significant 2015 Budget Personnel Requests That Are Included:
The most significant requests received from departments in 2015 budget related to staffing.
Original requests from departments for additional staff was approximately $1,078,158 ($307,000
of this is for benefit contribution). This does not include the cost of the standard adjustment for
wages and benefits. All requests were reviewed and the City Manager had discussions with each
Department Head making the request. Directors and the City Manager reviewed business needs
and funding and also looked at alternatives for service delivery with some requests and moving
some requests to 2016 budget. Below is the summary of staffing requests and funding
recommendations:
What staffing additions or changes are recommended at this time for 2015?
• Associate Appraiser PT, $22,500, non-benefit earning. Position to support appraisers and
provide technical assistance in records and data management. Would assist with the
required exempt assessment field work required every 6 years.
• Fire Department Intern PT, $5,000. To assist department with projects.
• Web Coordinator FT, $80,000 includes benefits. To provide ongoing maintenance and
upgrades to city web pages. Currently part of Technology/Web Coordinator position.
With more applications having web based connections and to provide accurate
information to our customers, additional time is needed for the web. This also allows the
Technology Coordinator to continue to integrate, update and assist with existing systems
and help departments with new systems for example Public Stuff/My SLP.
• Construction Codes Inspector FT, $98,486 (minus $34,000 staffing cost for temporary
inspector and intern) includes benefits. Additional staff needed to provide timely
inspections. This will also replace the funds for temporary inspector and intern.
• Dispatch PT, $15,000, non-benefit earning. Positions hired and trained to fill in our
dispatch staffing as needed. PD currently uses this type of staffing and would like to
continue with some additional staff to this pool of qualified staff.
• DARE Police Officer $33,185 grant funded, benefit earning. If we receive grant funds,
this is the City portion for each of the 3-year grant cycle. If we do not receive the grant
funding this dollar amount could be eliminated or reallocated.
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 2) Page 4
Title: 2015 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Discussion
• Police Officer FT, $74,850 includes benefits. To support moving from 4 districts to 5
districts. Given the strong growth occurring in the community and the anticipated growth
associated with SWLRT it is important to remain proactive vs reactive to community needs.
• Public Service Worker FT, $70,000 includes benefits. Utility fund. To support Utilities
operations, storm water initiatives, plowing and sidewalk maintenance. To assist staff
with overall maintenance operations and work in coordination with other maintenance
divisions.
• Sustainability Outreach Coordinator, PT $38,000 includes benefits. Solid Waste Program
Fund. To support the Environment and Sustainability Commission and provide education,
communication, coordination and outreach to community members, businesses, and staff
on environmental related objectives and projects.
• Utility Billing Clerk, PT, $35,000 includes benefits. To provide customer service and
support billing amongst the 4 utility funds.
• Other personnel related costs:
o Engineering Tech: $5000 to modify one of the tech positions to incorporate
additional AutoCad design to assist Engineering with projects and technical
needs. Change to position will be made via anticipated voluntary attrition.
o Fire Paid on Call (POC): $100,000 to increase number of POC by 10 to assist
department and increase response by our volunteers. This budget increase is for
response, equipment and training.
o Ops & Rec: $6,700 for minimum wage increases for seasonal and temps.
What staffing requests or changes are not included in the 2015 budget or are moved to 2016:
• PT Wellness Coordinator $38,000 ($10,100 of this amount could be funded through
Health in the Park HIP for 2015/16). New PT position to be added to the work of the
Volunteer Coordinator to work with Health in the Park to sustain and continue to grow
the initiative and programs. Also will assist others in coordinating community active
living initiatives; work with departments on programs; work with Parks & Rec for
wellness activities; and support City initiatives. This position is a new concept to help
sustain, connect and grow healthy lifestyle initiatives in the community and with staff.
Comment: Budget limitations may not be available to support this at this time. Will
continue to review and explore other funding sources.
• Property Maintenance Inspector FT, $98,486 includes benefits. Requested to help with
complaints and to follow up on inspections. Comment: City Manager and Department
Director are reviewing this position to see if additional staff time can be directed to this
effort with existing code inspectors; to review processes to create efficiencies and timely
follow up; and to meet with other departments to see if they can provide assistance in the
field with staff from Public Safety areas and Operations.
• Police Officer FT, $74,850 includes benefits. To support department activities and
provide changes as needed in staffing when changes are made from 4 districts to 5
districts. Comment: Recommended to start with one additional officer for 2015 as listed
above and to add this second position in the 2016 budget recommendations.
Summary of Significant 2015 Budget Non-personnel Requests That Are Included:
• Administrative Services – Increased revenue projections came in for additional liquor
licenses and investigation fees totaling approximately $51,000. Increased expenditure
requests were for insurance; attorney fee increase; consultants for council workshop and
customer service training program; audit and training; with a decrease in expenditure for
election judges. The cumulative effect of the expenditure changes is approximately $178,000.
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 2) Page 5
Title: 2015 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Discussion
• Information Resources – Increase proposed in postage for additional mailings of
$20,000 and decreases of $35,600 for new police software after leaving LOGIS. A
$10,000 decrease for a new managed print services contract for a total reduction of
approximately $25,600 for non-personnel related activities
• Inspections – Increased revenue projections of approximately $431,000 related to both
licensing and permit fees. For expenditures, increases of $15,000 and $5,500 were
submitted for contract cleaning for city buildings and credit card processing fees,
respectively.
• Operations and Recreation – This department requested several line item increases for
expenditures for increased tree removals for $30,000; a Zamboni battery for $9,000;
increased tire purchases for $5,000 (both in vehicle maintenance); and increased
insurance for Parktacular for $1,000. The cumulative increase of these proposed changes
is $45,000.
• Police, Community Development and Engineering - These departments requested
small increases for training, purchases of a traffic counter and ERU helmets and radios.
The cumulative increase for all the budget changes submitted is approximately $5,000.
• Cable TV Fund – Staff recommends continuing with the plan to reduce the transfer from
the Cable TV Fund to the General Fund by $25,000 per year. Reducing the annual
transfer by $25,000 each year through 2019 and by $34,506 in 2020 will improve
sustainability in the fund until the franchise fee agreement expires in 2021. At that point,
if no new agreement is available, the fund could operate through 2022 and into early
2023 before running out of resources as currently budgeted.
• Development Fund – Proposed expenditures for Vision, a community survey, and
insurance totaling approximately $29,000.
• Housing Rehabilitation Fund – Increased funds for several programs such as the
Transformation Loan, Green Remodeling and Move-Up Design services, totaling
approximately $36,000.
• Park Improvement Fund – Increased tree plantings for $40,000. This is to fund
additional trees to be planted each year as replacements for 100 ash trees removed.
• Utility Funds – Proposed increases for credit card processing fees and insurance
premium adjustment, totaling approximately $46,000.
• Franchise Fees - In the past, Council has directed staff to consider franchise fee
adjustments every other year. Based on the City’s schedule, those occur in odd numbered
years. Therefore, in 2015, based on analysis within the Pavement Management Fund, it
is recommended the Council consider a franchise fee increase for customers of
CenterPoint Energy and Xcel Energy. For a residential customer, staff is recommending
an increase of $0.75 per utility, or $18 per year. The total fee for a residential customer
would be $3.25 per utility per month. Based on this increase and increases in other
customer classes, revenues would increase by approximately $500,000 within the
Pavement Management Fund.
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 2) Page 6
Title: 2015 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Discussion
• Fees, Charges and Other Revenues - Staff will continue to review current fee data
based on cost analyses and other communities before making recommendations for the
2015 Fee Schedules for the Council to consider later this year.
• CIP (Capital Improvement Plan) - Staff has completed the first and second round work
on the CIP, and a report is attached. This information has been programmed into the
LRFMP, and Accounting is analyzing the results in an effort to create long-term
sustainability in funds and is also looking at where changes in funding or
expenditures/expenses need to occur for the City Council and City Manager to consider.
Note: There are no funds in the CIP for a community center or for light rail projects at
this time.
• Accepting Partial Ownership of Residential Water Service Lines Program - Council
asked staff to explore this potential change in business and to provide what this may
mean, and what an estimated cost would be for the program. Currently, homeowners
own the service lines from their houses all the way to the connection to the water main
and are responsible for the repair costs of service line breaks. In most other communities,
the City owns the service line from the water main to the curb stop and would cover the
costs to make any repairs in this section of the line, with the homeowner still being
responsible for repairs between the curb stop and the house. Splitting the service line in
this manner is done because repair costs for a break between the water main and the curb
stop typically include disrupting the street. The costs are considerably higher than repair
costs between the curb stop and the house, which generally do not require street repair.
Based on projects scheduled to occur in the upcoming years for water main replacement,
staff initially estimated the cost of implementing this program will be approximately
$210,000 per year on average.
In further analysis of all the utility projects scheduled to occur over the next several years
by Engineering and by Utilities Operations, it has been determined that the cost of this
program can be absorbed within the scope of the projects and in the recommended utility
rate increases (as discussed later in the report) for the next two years. In mid-2016, staff
will continue to review actual costs from 2015 construction data and estimates moving
forward to determine whether or not rates will need to be adjusted for this program
during the 2017 budget process.
It is recommended that moving forward from January 1, 2015, we make this program
change to accept partial ownership of residential water service lines from the water main
to the curb stop. Next steps would be to prepare information including changes to the
Ordinance to accurately reflect the change in the program and prepare for this change of
policy starting 2015. This change to our program puts St. Louis Park on par with our
neighboring communities. It also ensures that service line repairs, and any associated
connections to our water main including curb and streets will have proper oversight by
Utilities staff.
Significant 2015 Budget Item That is Not Included in Tax Levy Projection
Residential Sidewalk Snow Removal - Council asked staff to explore this potential change to
take over plowing of all public sidewalks in the city, and to provide cost estimates for this
service. Analysis was completed based on two potential options to achieve this outcome: in-
house staffing or contractual:
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 2) Page 7
Title: 2015 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Discussion
1) In-house - Currently, City staff clear approximately 50 miles of the roughly 110 miles of
the public sidewalk system. An average route is approximately 12 miles long so clearing
an additional 60 miles of sidewalks would require five more staff and purchasing
associated equipment. In 2015, costs are estimated to be approximately $917,000, with
approximately $315,000 for staff and $602,000 for equipment. Beginning in 2016, costs
are estimated to be approximately $408,000 with $333,000 for staffing and $75,000 for
an equipment replacement charge.
2) Contractual - In lieu of hiring additional staff and purchasing the associated equipment,
the City could contract out the service. Annual contract costs are expected to be
approximately $1.13 million per year based on average snowfall amounts. Exact costs
would be dependent on the amount and frequency of snow received each winter.
This in not in the current proposed tax levy projections, if Council would like to add this, it
would increase the proposed property tax levy adjustment by approximately 3.6 – 4.4% in 2015
depending on the option chosen. Unless of course Council chooses to make reductions elsewhere
in the budget to offset this potential new program.
2015 Preliminary Property Tax Levy
In working to develop a 2015 Preliminary Property Tax Levy for the City Council to consider,
there are some important key items to keep in mind:
• Trends in Valuations and Possible Property Tax Implications - For the 2014
assessment that 2015 property taxes are based on, St. Louis Park’s market value
increased by 6.2% with all of the dominant property types increasing in
value. Composition of the change is summarized as +5.6% for single-family homes,
+7.5% for condos and townhomes, +20.2% for apartments (significant new construction
coming on line) and a stable commercial-industrial sector at +0.4%. As can be surmised
by the above figures, there will be a shift of the property tax burden to the residential
owners for the Pay 2015 taxes.
• Fiscal Disparities – The City’s net contribution increased by $208,991 or approximately
5.7% for 2015. The City is a net contributor to the pool of $3,879,478, or approximately
6.2% of the City’s total tax capacity for 2015.
• Funding challenges in several funds impacting long-term sustainability
• As in past years, the 2015 Preliminary Property Tax Levy adopted by the City Council on
September 15, 2014, can be decreased, but cannot be increased after that date.
2014 City Final Levy and 2015 City Preliminary Levy
A synopsis of prior year levy information and the 2015 Proposed Preliminary Levy is shown below:
1. The 2014 Final Levy was $25,577,908, which was 3.50% or $864,967 more than 2013.
2. The 2015 Preliminary Property Tax Levy range staff recommends is proposed at
$26,985,377, which is approximately 5.50% or $1,407,469 more than the 2014 Final
Levy. Unless directed otherwise by the Council, staff will continue to undertake analysis
as the budget review process continues this fall as a means to reduce the property tax levy
from 5.5%
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 2) Page 8
Title: 2015 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Discussion
Staff is recommending the 2015 Preliminary City Property Tax Levy increase of 5.5% to
$26,985,377 be set for approval at the September 15, 2014 Regular City Council meeting. To
assist in this decision, staff will be providing information this evening on the potential City share
of property tax impacts for a residential homesteaded property in 2015.
HRA Levy
Based on current and future infrastructure needs the HRA Levy is recommended to be set at the
maximum allowed of 0.0185% of estimated market value for the 2015 Budget, which is
consistent with previous years. This levy is committed to pay back a loan from the Development
Fund that helped cash flow the City’s obligation for Highway 7 and Louisiana and is expected to
be paid off in 2022. By law these funds could also be used for other housing and redevelopment
purposes but considering the significant infrastructure needs within the City, the proceeds have
not been used for housing. Therefore, staff has calculated the maximum HRA Levy for 2015 to
be $1,006,567 based on valuation data from the City Assessor. This is an increase of $57,208 or
6.03% from 2014. Hennepin County had not provided the final valuation figures that will
determine the actual levy amount, but expects to have the information before preliminary
adoption on September 15th.
Utility Funds: All utility funds will be presented during the budget process as in previous years
with a review of rates in accordance with the City’s Long Range Financial Management Plan
(LRFMP). As in previous years, all utility rates are analyzed and adjusted as needed to meet
operational and capital needs, while working to meet appropriate cash position guidelines.
• Water: For 2015, the City will be in the fifth year of the ten year plan for increasing the
fixed rate charges to reduce volatility in the fund due to seasonality usage fluctuations.
Usage rates will also be increased to meet more aggressive demands for infrastructure
replacement within the City’s aging system. Significant expenses for this fund are
capital, staffing, the Reilly Superfund and debt service.
• Sewer: Rates are also proposed to increase due to the City’s more aggressive
infrastructure replacement plan. Sewer costs are mainly to support the Metropolitan
Council of Environmental Services charge (MCES), staffing and capital costs.
• Solid Waste: Rates for this fund are proposed to remain flat for 2015, which will still
allow the fund to remain in a sustainable healthy cash position. The major expenses for
this fund are the contract charges and staffing
• Storm Water: Based on Council direction to place more emphasis on storm water
management, along with increasing regulations, rates will need to continue to increase
significantly over the next four to five years. These increases will help meet the
increased capital needs and debt service obligations when debt is issued in late 2014 or
early 2015. Significant expenses for this fund currently are capital and staffing.
What do the possible proposed utility rate increases mean to a typical homeowner?
Based on operational and capital needs being anticipated in the utility funds, the increase will be
approximately $45 per year for a typical homeowner. A typical homeowner in this scenario is a
family of four who uses 30 units of water per quarter (22,500 gallons), and has 60 gallon service,
which is consistent with prior year scenarios. This equates to an approximate 4.59% overall
increase in utility rates for 2015 when compared to 2014. If Council approves of the
recommendations, staff will bring back the 2015 utility rates for adoption on October 20, 2014,
and will be in place for consumption or services provided beginning on January 1, 2015.
Detailed information is included in the attachment “2015 Proposed Rates – Impact on a
Property.”
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 2) Page 9
Title: 2015 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Discussion
NEXT STEPS: As the 2015 budget process continues, the following preliminary schedule
snapshot has been developed for Council:
September 15 Council and EDA establish 2015 preliminary property tax levies. City
Council also adopts a franchise fee increase.
(Levies can be reduced, but not increased for final property tax levies.)
October 13 Review and discussion of 2015 budget, CIP, utility rates and LRFMP.
Directors or their designees present as needed.
October 20 Adoption of 2015 Utility Rates.
November 10 (If necessary) Final budget or CIP discussion prior to Truth in Taxation
Public Hearing and budget presentation.
December 1 Truth in Taxation Public Hearing and budget presentation
December 8 (If necessary) Continuation of Public Hearing and any budget discussion.
December 15 Council adopts 2014 Revised Budget, 2015 Budgets, final tax levies (City
and HRA), and 2015 - 2024 CIP.
City of St. Louis Park
2015 Preliminary Budget Calendar
Date Department(s) Description
April 2, 2014 All 2015–2024 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) is available for update.
May 22, 2014 @ 4:30 pm All CIP access restricted by Accounting to Read-Only
June 23 CM/Admin/Acctg. Study Session with Council to discuss 2015 Budget and assumptions.
June 24 @ 11am-noon All
Meet with Departments to discuss any significant changes in business
or staffing after meeting with City Council.
July 1 @ 4:30 pm All
All 2015 Budget worksheets available in Insight to all departments.
All revenues and expenditures are to be budgeted including review of
fee schedule and Utility Rate Analyses.
July 14 – 25 @ 4:30pm All 1st Review/Edit of 2015 – 2024 CIP by Departments
July 21 @ 4:30pm All
Forms for changes in staffing requests and major changes in programs
due to Accounting.
July 21 @ 4:30 pm Inspections Building revenue projections due to Accounting
August 14 @ 4:30 pm All 2015 Proposed Budget worksheets and fees due. Access to Read-Only.
Aug. 21 – Sept. 5 Each Department Individual review of budgets – CM, Dep. CM, Director, and Acctg.
August 25
City Manager,
Dept. Directors and
Accounting
High level 2015 Budget, CIP, Utility Rates discussion by City
Council, with City Manager, Department Directors and Accounting in
attendance. More of a proposed levy discussion.
September 15 C.M./Accounting
Approval of Preliminary 2015 Budgets, Tax Levies and Franchise
Fees by Council and/or EDA.
Sept. 15 – 26 @4:30 pm All 2nd and Final Review/Edit of 2015 – 2024 CIP by Departments
By September 30 Accounting
Certification of 2015 Preliminary Property Tax Levy due to Hennepin
County and levy reports due to State of Minnesota
October 13
C.M., Directors and
Accounting
Review and discussion of 2015 Budget, CIP, Utility Rates and
LRFMP review and discussion by City Council.
October 13 – 30 All
Final review of all 2015 revenues and expenditures for all funds. In
addition, review of the CIP, Utility Rates and LRFMP.
October 20 Accounting Adoption of 2015 Utility Rates
October 30 @ 4:30 pm All Final changes submitted to City Manager/Deputy C.M and Controller
November 10 CM/Admin/Acctg. Final Budget or CIP Discussion with City Council prior to TNT.
December 1, 2014 Accounting Truth in Taxation Public Hearing and Budget Presentation
December 8 (if needed) C.M./Accounting Council discussion of any 2015 Budget related items (if necessary)
December 15, 2014 C.M./Accounting
2015 Budget, Final Property Tax Levies (City and HRA), and 2015 –
2024 CIP approved by Council.
By December 19, 2014 Accounting Certification of tax levy and other required forms – Due 12-30-14
By December 31, 2014 Accounting 2015 Budgets uploaded from Insight into JDE.
January 16, 2015 Admin Services Budget document completed, printed and on City website.
January, 2015 Accounting Summary Budget Report to OSA - due 1/31/2015.
Note: Items in blue are meetings with the City Council
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 2)
Title: 2015 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Discussion Page 10
Capital Improvement ProgramCity of St. Louis Park, MNPROJECTS & FUNDING SOURCES BY DEPARTMENT2015 2024thruTotal2015 2016 2017 2018 2019Department2020 2021 2022 2023 2024Buildings2013PD/CH245,000Police Station/City Hall Fire Alarm Panel45,0002013PD418,000Police Station - HVAC Computer upgrade18,00031140002310,000City Hall 3rd Floor Covering and Furniture310,0003115000130,000City Hall Garage Overhead Doors30,00031150002180,000City Hall 3rd Floor Customer Counter Remodel180,00031160001100,000City Hall Roof Top AC Units (two units)100,0003116000210,000City Hall Chip, Seal, Stripe Main Parking Lot10,0003116000320,000City Hall Garage Unit Heaters20,00031170001City Hall Council Chambers Carpeting/Furnishings70,00070,0003118000230,000City Hall Remodel 2nd and 3rd floor restrooms30,00031200001City Hall Timber Retaining Walls60,00060,00031230001City Hall ITE & Gould Elect Panel Replacement25,00025,0003215000135,000Police Station Seal for Air Infiltration35,000321500026,000Police Station Wall Sign with Lighting6,00032170001Police Station replace boiler system60,00060,00032170002Police Station Concrete Sidewalk15,00015,00032180002180,000Police Station - Replace office furnishings180,0003218000335,000Police- Replace ceiling tiles35,00032190001Police Station Remodel Restrooms75,00075,00032190002Police StationShooting Range Exhaust45,00045,00032200001Police Station Water Heaters7,0007,000Wednesday, August 20, 2014Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 2) Title: 2015 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates DiscussionPage 11
Total2015 2016 2017 2018 2019Department2020 2021 2022 2023 20242,352,000734,000 185,000 165,000 260,000 195,000Capital Replacement Fund210,000 118,000 415,000 70,00063,00063,000Pavement Management Fund2,415,000734,000 248,000 165,000 260,000 195,000Buildings Total210,000 118,000 415,000 70,0003314000145,000MSC - Chip Seal and Re-Stripe parking lot45,0003314000215,00015,000MSC & Fire Stations CO Sensor Replacement60,00015,00015,0003314000340,000MSC Roof Mounted 40kw Photovoltaic Panel System40,0003315000250,000MSC Fencing50,0003316000120,000MSC Bay'sConvert HVAC to Digital Controls20,00033170001MSC Convert Exterior HID to LED20,00020,0003319000115,000MSC Air Compressor Replacement15,00033200001165,000MSC Car Wash Unit Replace with Automatic165,00033200002MSC Interior Parking Bays striping parking bays8,0008,00033200003MSC Service Bays-Sealant75,00075,00033210001MSC Office Carpeting18,00018,00033210002MSC Paint Booth Maintenance25,00025,00033220001MSC Old Bay Roofing400,000400,00033250001MSC Fuel Station Replacement45,00045,000341600014,000FS #1 Chip, seal, stripe both prking lots4,000351600014,000FS #2 Chip, seal, stripe both prking lots4,0003616000150,000Westwood Nature Master Planning50,0003619000115,000Westwood Nature Center Replace Rooftop HVAC Unit15,0002,415,000734,000 248,000 165,000 260,000 195,000Buildings Total210,000 118,000 415,000 70,000Cable TV11151001120,000Van Cameras120,0001115100220,000Van Camera Cases20,0001115100313,000Van Camera Cables13,0001115100415,000LCD monitors15,000111510052,500Hard-Drive Video Recorder2,500Wednesday, August 20, 2014Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 2) Title: 2015 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates DiscussionPage 12
Total2015 2016 2017 2018 2019Department2020 2021 2022 2023 2024111510066,000Converter for Recorder6,0001115100736,000Tripods for On Location36,0001115100816,500Video Switcher16,500111510094,200SD/HD converter4,200111510101,500DVD recorders1,500111510111,500Tripods1,50011151012900Unit pro light kit9001115101328,200Playback systems28,200111520028,500Server for channel 968,500111520031,000DSLR camera1,0001115200445,000Community Room video production equipment45,0001115200523,000Live TV over IP video transport23,00011161001750Announcer Headsets75011161002500Shotgun mics50011161003300Hand-held mics3001116100435,000Replacement edit systems35,00011171001Wireless mic systems2,0002,00011171002CG7,0007,00011171003CD Player25025011172006Announcer intercom,1,0001,000111810012,000300-foot audio snake & reel2,00011181002300Announcer Monitor3001118100340050-foot audio snake400111810041,500Behringer Audio Equipment1,500111810057,500Camcorders7,500111810061,500DVD recorders1,50011181007900Unit pro light kit90011191001500DVD Recorders5001119100230,000Slow-motion replay30,0001119100370012-channel audio mixer70011191004500Shotgun mics50011191005300Hand-held mics3001119100610,200NLE stations10,20011191007900Microphones900111910081,500Tripods1,500Wednesday, August 20, 2014Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 2) Title: 2015 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates DiscussionPage 13
Total2015 2016 2017 2018 2019Department2020 2021 2022 2023 2024768,700177,800 201,550 10,250 14,100 79,600Cable TV - Time Warner Equipment Grant285,400768,700177,800 201,550 10,250 14,100 79,600Cable TV Total285,4001119100935,000Replacement edit systems35,00011201001Van Cameras120,000120,00011201002Van Camera Cases20,00020,00011201003Van Camera Cables13,00013,00011201004LCD monitors15,00015,00011201005Studio cameras15,00015,00011201006Microphones90090011201007Camera monitors90090011201008Hard-Drive Video Recorder2,5002,50011201009Conveter for Recorder6,0006,00011201010Tripods for On Location36,00036,00011201011SD/HD converter4,2004,20011201012Video Switcher16,50016,50011201013DVD recorder1,5001,50011201014Playback systems28,20028,20011201015Production switcher4,5004,50011201016Teleprompter1,2001,200768,700222,800 156,550 10,250 14,100 79,600Cable TV Total285,400Engineering200520002,488,000Street Project - TH 100 Reconstruction2,488,000401440002,666,000 1,450,000Storm Water- Bass Lake Preserve Rehab4,116,000401490005,000Sanitary Sewer - MCES Golden Valley5,000401491005,000Sanitary Sewer - MCES Hopkins Interceptor5,00040150003194,000Concrete Replacement- SW-C&G-CB194,000401510032,900,500Street - Local Street Rehab (Area 3)2,900,500401511001,696,500Street - MSA Street Rehab (Walker/ 36th)1,696,50040151207275,000Street Mt Proj - Sealcoat Streets (Area 7)275,000Wednesday, August 20, 2014Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 2) Title: 2015 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates DiscussionPage 14
Total2015 2016 2017 2018 2019Department2020 2021 2022 2023 202440151208268,518Street Mt Proj - Sealcoat Streets (Area 8)268,51840151600110,000 158,00037,500 5,500Parking Lot Rehabilitation Project443,00010,000120,00002,00040151700316,250Bridge - W 36th St @ Minnehaha Creek316,250401520003,521,000CTP! Sidewalk - Trail - Bikeway Installations 20153,521,00040153004400,000Sanitary Sewer- Mainline Rehab (Area 4)400,00040154000250,000Storm Water- Walker Pond Expansion250,00040154001300,000Storm Water- MCWD Cold Storage Site300,00040160003282,000Concrete Replacement- SW-C&G-CB282,00040161000336,000Street - Reconstruction (Utica Avenue)336,000401610044,801,500Street - Local Street Rehab (Area 4)4,801,50040161100596,700Street - MSA Street Rehab (CLR / Flag)596,70040161201269,388Street Mt Proj - Sealcoat Streets (Area 1)269,3884016130047,50046,500Traffic Signal - Repl Control Cabinets198,00052,50051,50040162000917,000CTP! Sidewalk - Trail - Bikeway Installations 2016917,00040163005420,000Sanitary Sewer- Mainline Rehab (Area 5)420,00040170003Concrete Replacement- SW-C&G-CB198,400198,40040171005Street - Local Street Rehab (Area 5)4,012,0004,012,00040171100Street - MSA Street Rehab (Louisiana Ave)854,100854,10040171101Street - Cedar Lake Road Improvements75,00075,00040171202Street Mt Proj - Sealcoat Streets (Area 2)270,276270,27640171203Street Mt Proj - Sealcoat Streets (Area 3)271,182271,18240171700Bridge - W 37th St @ Minnehaha Creek1,150,0001,150,00040172000CTP! Sidewalk - Trail - Bikeway Installations 20171,223,0001,223,00040173006Sanitary Sewer- Mainline Rehab (Area 6)440,000440,00040174000Storm Water- Louisiana Oaks Pond Rehab450,000450,00040175000Water- Rehab WTP 16 Reservior275,000275,00040180003200,600Concrete Replacement- SW-C&G-CB200,600401810064,349,500Street - Local Street Rehab (Area 6)4,349,50040181100678,600Street - MSA Street Rehab (Beltline 678,600Wednesday, August 20, 2014Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 2) Title: 2015 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates DiscussionPage 15
Total2015 2016 2017 2018 2019Department2020 2021 2022 2023 2024Blvd)40181101535,700Street - MSA Street Rehab (Edgewood/Cambridge)535,70040181102163,800Street - MSA Street Rehab (Ottawa)163,80040181204272,105Street Mt Proj - Sealcoat Streets (Area 4)272,10540181300300,000Traffic Signal - W36th St @ Xenwood Ave300,000401817001,495,000Bridge - Louisiana Ave @ Minnehaha Creek1,495,000401820004,962,000CTP! Sidewalk - Trail - Bikeway Installations 20184,962,00040183007460,000Sanitary Sewer- Mainline Rehab (Area 7)460,00040184000400,000Storm Water- Oregon Pond Basin Rehab400,000401860002,039,051Street- W36th Street Reconstruction2,039,051401860012,000,000Street- Wooddale Ave Reconstruction2,000,00040190003202,800Concrete Replacement- SW-C&G-CB202,800401910074,457,000Street - Local Street Rehab (Area 7)4,457,00040191100327,600Street - MSA Street Rehab (W28th St)327,60040191205278,047Street Mt Proj - Sealcoat Streets (Area 5)278,047401920006,214,000CTP! Sidewalk - Trail - Bikeway Installations 20196,214,00040193008480,000Sanitary Sewer- Mainline Rehab (Area 8)480,00040194000270,000Storm Water- Browndale Pond Rehab270,0004019400190,000Storm Water- Sumter Pond Rehab90,000401970003,000Street - Excelsior Blvd Resurfacing3,00040200003Concrete Replacement- SW-C&G-CB205,000205,00040201008Street - Local Street Rehab (Area 8)4,480,0004,480,00040201100Street - MSA Street Rehab (Shelard Pkwy)678,600678,60040201206Street Mt Proj - Sealcoat Streets (Area 6)284,008284,00840201300Railroad - Whistle Quiet Zones100,000100,00040202000CTP! Sidewalk - Trail - Bikeway Installations 20205,647,0005,647,00040203001Sanitary Sewer- Mainline Rehab (Area 1)510,000510,00040204000Storm Water- Lamplighter Pond Rehab109,000109,000Wednesday, August 20, 2014Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 2) Title: 2015 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates DiscussionPage 16
Total2015 2016 2017 2018 2019Department2020 2021 2022 2023 202440204001Storm Water- Otten Pond Rehab109,000109,00040205000Water - Recoat Reservoir 2 @ WTP #6935,000935,00040210003Concrete Replacement- SW-C&G-CB206,100206,10040211001Street - Local Street Rehab (Area 1)4,587,5004,587,50040211100Street - MSA Street Rehab (TBD)586,700586,70040211207Street Mt Proj - Sealcoat Streets (Area 7)289,989289,98940212000CTP! Sidewalk - Trail - Bikeway Installations 20211,813,0001,813,00040213002Sanitary Sewer- Mainline Rehab (Area 2)520,000520,00040214000Storm Water- Twin Lakes Sed Basin Rehab1,242,0001,242,00040215000Water- Recoat Elevated Water Tower #21,540,0001,540,00040220003Concrete Replacement- SW-C&G-CB209,400209,40040221002Street - Local Street Rehab (Area 2)4,695,0004,695,00040221100Street - MSA Street Rehab (TBD)535,700535,70040221208Street Mt Proj - Sealcoat Streets (Area 8)290,000290,00040222000CTP! Sidewalk - Trail - Bikeway Installations 2022952,500952,50040223003Sanitary Sewer- Mainline Rehab (Area 3)540,000540,00040224000Storm Water- Westdale Sed Basin Rehab248,000248,00040230003Concrete Replacement- SW-C&G-CB211,600211,60040231003Street - Local Street Rehab (Area 3)4,802,5004,802,50040231100Street - MSA Street Rehab (TBD)535,700535,70040231201Street Mt Proj - Sealcoat Streets (Area 1)300,000300,00040233004Sanitary Sewer- Mainline Rehab (Area 4)570,000570,00040234000Storm Water- Cedar Manor Lake Rehab528,000528,00040240003Concrete Replacement- SW-C&G-CB213,800213,80040241004Street - Local Street Rehab (Area 4)4,910,0004,910,00040241100Street - MSA Street Rehab (TBD)535,700535,70040241202Street Mt Proj - Sealcoat Streets (Area 2)300,000300,00040243005Sanitary Sewer- Mainline Rehab (Area 5)580,000580,0005315510050,000Sanitary Sewer- LS Mtce (LS #5)50,000Wednesday, August 20, 2014Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 2) Title: 2015 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates DiscussionPage 17
Total2015 2016 2017 2018 2019Department2020 2021 2022 2023 2024240,000240,000EDA Development Fund25,417,5003,521,000 1,085,000 1,223,000 4,962,000 6,214,000G.O. Bonds5,647,000 1,813,000 952,5001,012,5421,012,542HRA Levy8,012,2002,029,000 596,700 854,100 1,232,400 327,600Municipal State Aid778,600 586,700 535,700 535,700 535,70022,047,8001,970,500 2,646,500 1,979,200 2,042,800 2,106,400Pavement Management Fund2,135,500 2,198,000 2,257,700 2,326,300 2,384,900198,000198,000Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund91,75023,75065,000 3,000PW Engineering Budget1,791,513183,518 186,888 186,458 149,605 195,047PW Operations Budget154,008 144,989 198,500 247,500 145,00017,500Reilly Industries17,5007,320,000820,000 640,000 660,000 680,000 700,000Sanitary Sewer Utility730,000 740,000 760,000 790,000 800,0001,421,700110,000 326,000 350,000 565,700Special Assessments70,0001,260,000220,0001,040,000State of Minnesota11,733,4004,380,000 1,747,000 716,200 667,300 628,400Stormwater Utility487,500 1,512,600 519,700 800,800 273,9003,326,5093,326,509Tax Increment - Elmwood75,00075,000Tax Increment Financing800,000800,000U.S. Government24,829,0001,741,750 3,059,000 1,120,250 1,771,000 954,500Water Utility3,135,000 3,790,000 2,300,000 2,350,000 4,607,500109,594,41415,437,518 10,287,088 7,964,208 17,514,856 11,128,947Engineering Total13,067,608 10,785,289 7,524,100 7,120,300 8,764,50053245500Water Project - WTP #6 GAC Upgrade2,190,0002,190,00053245501Reilly Site - Install Monitor Well (W413)35,00035,000111,472,91415,445,768 9,278,088 9,218,958 17,893,856 12,374,447Engineering Total13,067,608 10,785,289 7,524,100 7,120,300 8,764,500Fire651500016,000Rapid Response Inflatable6,0006516000132,000SCBA Fill Stations32,000659900018,000 8,00016,000 8,000Thermal Imagers80,0008,0008,0008,000 8,0008,0006599000220,00020,000Outside Warning Sirens100,00020,00020,00020,00065990003400,000SCBA Replacement860,000460,00065990004Hydraulic Rescue Tool60,00030,000 30,0006599000532,000Lucas Device64,00032,0001,202,00034,000 440,000 28,000 48,000 28,000Fire Total28,000 8,000 550,000 38,000Wednesday, August 20, 2014Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 2) Title: 2015 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates DiscussionPage 18
Total2015 2016 2017 2018 2019Department2020 2021 2022 2023 20241,202,00034,000 440,000 28,000 48,000 28,000Capital Replacement Fund28,000 8,000 550,000 38,0001,202,00034,000 440,000 28,000 48,000 28,000Fire Total28,000 8,000 550,000 38,000Operations & Recreation20225007Rec Center Arenas Rubber Floor Replacement250,000250,0002115030425,000Aquila Park Tennis Court Resurface25,000211504077,000Court Resurface(tns)-Bass Lake7,00021153609252,000Louisiana Oaks North Parking Lot Addition252,000211540057,500Court Resurface (BB) Minikahda Vista Park7,5002115401011,000Minikahda Vista Park Backstop Replacement11,0002115421160,000Playground Eqpt Repl - Nelson Park60,000211543087,000Court Resurface (tns) - Northside Park7,000211548067,500Court Resurface (BB) Pennsylvania Park7,5002115564985,000Skate Park Equipment Replacement85,00021156422100,000Wolfe Park Boardwalk Replacement (south end)100,0002115992030,000Trail Reconstruction - CLR/Quentin Ave/Ridge Dr30,0002116020117,000Aquila Park Building Locks and Security Camera17,0002116040230,000ADA Trail Conn.-Bass Lake Pk to George Haun Trail30,0002116041913,500Trail Seal Coat - Bass Lake13,5002116070550,000Playground Eqpt Repl - Blackstone Park50,0002116110360,000Carpenter Park Ball Field Fence Replacement60,0002116130412,000Cedar Knoll Park/Carlson Field Scoreboard12,0002116270650,000Playground Eqpt Repl - Jersey Park50,0002116290750,000Playground Eqpt Repl - Justad Park50,0002116442013,500Trail Seal Coat - Oak Hill Park13,50021165218125,000Trail Lights (LED) at Shelard Park125,00021166408100,000Playground Eqpt Repl - Wolfe Park100,0002116642113,500Trail Seal Coat - Wolfe Park13,500Wednesday, August 20, 2014Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 2) Title: 2015 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates DiscussionPage 19
Total2015 2016 2017 2018 2019Department2020 2021 2022 2023 20242116642516,000Trail Lights (LED) at Wolfe Park16,00021170302Aquila Park Fields 1-4 Lights and Poles Upgrade450,000450,00021170507Playground Eqpt Repl - Bass Lake Park60,00060,00021172106Parking Lot Seal Coat - Fern Hill Park17,50017,50021174404Oak Hill Park Splash Pad Feature Replacement60,00060,00021174908Playground Eqpt Repl - Rainbow Park50,00050,00021175220Trail Reconstruction - Shelard Park40,00040,00021175809Playground Eqpt Repl - Twin Lakes Park60,00060,00021175921Victoria Lake Parking Lot50,00050,00021176110Playground Eqpt Repl - Webster Park60,00060,00021176424Wolfe Park Pergola Work10,00010,00021179919Trail Sealcoat - Various Trails30,00030,000211803017,500Court Resurface (BB) Aquila Park7,5002118030535,000Parking Lot Resurface - Aquila Park35,000211803217,000Repaint Park Building - Aquila Park7,0002118061162,500Playground Eqpt Repl - Birchwood Park62,500211806227,000Repaint Park Building - Birchwood Park7,000211810237,000Repaint Park Building - Browndale Park7,000211811246,000Repaint Park Building - Carpenter Park6,000211813068,000Parking Lot Resurface - Cedar Knoll Park8,000211813252,000Repaint Park Building - Cedar Knoll Park2,000211817078,000Parking Lot Resurface - Creekside Park8,000211818264,000Repaint Park Building - Dakota Park4,000211821275,000Repaint Park Building - Fern Hill Park5,000211836287,000Repaint Park Building - Louisiana Oaks Park7,000211842088,000Parking Lot Resurface - Nelson Park8,000211842297,000Repaint Park Building - Nelson Park7,0002118430935,000Parking Lot Resurface - Northside Park35,0002118431262,500Playground Eqpt Repl - Northside Park62,500211843306,000Repaint Park Building - Northside Park6,000211844319,000Repaint Park Building - Oak Hill Park9,000211851022,000Court Resurface (BB) Roxbury Park2,000Wednesday, August 20, 2014Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 2) Title: 2015 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates DiscussionPage 20
Total2015 2016 2017 2018 2019Department2020 2021 2022 2023 20242118511362,500Playground Eqpt Repl - Roxbury Park62,500211852032,000Court Resurface (BB) Shelard Park2,0002118521462,500Playground Eqpt Repl - Shelard Park62,5002118621035,000Parking Lot Resurface - Westwood Hills NC35,000211864043,000Court Resurface (BB) Wolfe Park3,0002119030420,000Parking Lot Seal Coat - Aquila Park20,0002119061310,000Trail Reconstruction - Birchwood Park10,0002119071410,000Trail Reconstruction - Blackstone Park10,0002119100285,000Browndale Park Hockey Rink Lights85,0002119180520,000Parking Lot Seal Coat - Dakota Park20,0002119181575,000Trail Reconstruction - Dakota Park75,0002119211645,000Trail Reconstruction - Fern Hill Park45,0002119540665,000Playground Eqpt Repl - Sunshine Park65,0002119560765,000Playground Eqpt Repl - Texa-Tonka Park65,0002119630865,000Playground Eqpt Repl - Willow Park65,0002119990120,000ADA Connections to Picnic Shelter/Playgrounds20,0002119991730,000Trail Sealcoat - Various Trails30,00021200912Trail Reconstruction - Bronx Park15,00015,00021203013Trail Reconstruction - Keystone Park20,00020,00021204314Trail Reconstruction - Northside Park20,00020,00021204502Playground Eqpt Repl - Oregon Park65,00065,00021205403Playground Eqpt Repl - Sunset Park65,00065,00021206204Playground Eqpt Repl - Westwood Hills NC100,000100,00021209901ADA Compliance Picnic Tables15,00015,00021210411Trail Reconstruction - Bass Lake Park100,000100,00021211712Playground Eqpt Repl - Parkview Park60,00060,00021213614Trail Reconstruction - Louisiana Oaks Park65,00065,00021213801Playground Eqpt Repl - Meadowbrook Manor Park60,00060,00021214002Playground Eqpt Repl - Minikahda Vista Park60,00060,00021214415Trail Reconstruction - Oak Hill Park75,00075,00021214803Playground Eqpt Repl - Pennsylvania Park60,00060,000Wednesday, August 20, 2014Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 2) Title: 2015 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates DiscussionPage 21
Total2015 2016 2017 2018 2019Department2020 2021 2022 2023 202421216416Trail Reconstruction - Wolfe Park85,00085,00021219912Trail Reconstruction - Franklin45,00045,00021219913Trail Reconstruction - Jordan45,00045,00021220902Playground Eqpt Repl - Bronx Park65,00065,00021221403Playground Eqpt Repl - Cedar Manor Park60,00060,00021221604Playground Eqpt Repl - Center Park65,00065,00021222401ADA Trail Compliance - Cedar Manor Park Trail60,00060,00021224109Trail Reconstruction - Minnehaha Creek50,00050,00021230301Playground Eqpt Repl - Aquila Park85,00085,00021231102Playground Eqpt Repl - Carpenter Park65,00065,00021231503Playground Eqpt Repl - Cedarhurst Park65,00065,00021234611Trail Reconstruction - Otten Pond30,00030,00021235112Trail Reconstruction - Roxbury Park10,00010,00021235813Trail Reconstruction - Twin Lakes Park10,00010,00021240101Playground Eqpt Repl - Ainsworth Park65,00065,00021240130Repaint Park Building - Cedar Knoll Park2,0002,00021240306Repaint Park Building - Aquila Park7,0007,00021240317Trail Reconstruction - Aquila Park75,00075,00021240607Repaint Park Building - Birchwood Park7,0007,00021241002Playground Eqpt Repl - Browndale Park65,00065,00021241008Repaint Park Building - Browndale Park7,0007,00021241109Repaint Park Building - Carpenter Park6,0006,00021241118Trail Reconstruction - Carpenter Park50,00050,00021241811Repaint Park Building - Dakota Park4,0004,00021242112Repaint Park Building - Fern Hill Park5,0005,00021242719Trail Reconstruction - Jersey Park30,00030,00021243613Repaint Park Building - Louisiana Oaks Park7,0007,00021244214Repaint Park Building - Nelson Park7,0007,00021244315Repaint Park Building - Northside Park6,0006,00021244416Repaint Park Building - Oak Hill Park9,0009,000219944015,000Oak Hill Park Northern Lights (LED)10,0005,0002199990220,000 20,00020,000 20,000Playground Woodchips200,00020,00020,000 20,00020,000 20,00020,00021999903100,000 100,000100,000 60,000Minnehaha Creek Trail Repayment460,000100,000Wednesday, August 20, 2014Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 2) Title: 2015 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates DiscussionPage 22
Total2015 2016 2017 2018 2019Department2020 2021 2022 2023 202422173203Knollwood Canoe Landing - Dredge and Rebuild25,00025,0002219360310,000Louisiana Canoe Landing Landscape10,00022206115Webster Park Community Garden15,00015,0002299990160,000 60,00060,000 60,000Tree Replacement600,00060,00060,000 60,00060,000 60,00060,0002315622120,000Westwood Hills NC Wildflower Trail Restoration20,0002316622216,000Westwood Hills NC Key Fob for Pavilion16,0002316622360,000Westwood Hills NC Ravine Bridge Replacement60,0002316622455,000Westwood Hills NC Storge Garage (30'x30')55,00023176222Westwood Hills NC North Staircase Overlook10,00010,00023176223Westwood Hills NC-Prairie Deck Rebuild20,00020,0002319621850,000Westwood Hills NC Boardwalk Deck Repl, Phase 250,000231962196,000Westwood Hills NC Brick House Furniture Repl6,00023196220150,000Westwood Hills NC Interpretive Exhibit Repl150,00023206216Westwood Hills NC Staircase Rebuild40,00040,00023216217Westwood Hills NC Furniture Repl10,00010,00023226210Westwood Hills NC Water Garden, Phase 245,00045,00023236214Westwood Hills NC Trail Bench Replacement15,00015,00023246220Westwood Hills NC Boardwalk Deck Repl, Phase 350,00050,00024145018400,000Rec Center Arena Reconstruction Engineering400,0002415501515,000Rec Center Building Re-Keying15,00024155016175,000Rec Center Exterior Building Repair175,000241550175,000Rec Center HVAC Study/Assessment5,0002416501130,000Rec Center Banquet Room Carpet & Floor Replacement30,0002416501255,000Rec Center Fire Alarm System Upgrade55,0002416501335,000Rec Center Gallery & Hallway Flooring35,000241650144,400,000Rec Center Arena Refrigeration Replacement4,400,00024165015110,000Rec Center Parking Lot Resurface110,00024165016105,000Rec Center Rubber Floor 105,000Wednesday, August 20, 2014Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 2) Title: 2015 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates DiscussionPage 23
Total2015 2016 2017 2018 2019Department2020 2021 2022 2023 2024Replacement - East & West2416501710,000Rec Center West Arena Press Area10,00024175013Rec Center Banquet Room/Gallery Furniture Repl15,00015,00024175014Rec Center Boiler Replacement & Pneumatics200,000200,00024175016Rec Center Hot Water Heater Tank Replacement20,00020,00024175017Rec Center Programming Office AC Replacement50,00050,00024175018Rec Center Programming Office Carpet17,00017,0002418501550,000Rec Center Banquet & Gallery Remodel50,00024185016120,000Rec Center Door Replacement (Front & Arena)120,0002418501715,000Rec Center Landscaping15,00024185018400,000Rec Center Roof Rplc-East Arena/Office/Banquet Rm400,00024185019100,000Rec Center Upstairs Bthrm&Ctrng Kitchn Remodel100,0002418502040,000Rec Center West Arena Window Replacement40,0002419501015,000Rec Center Banquet Room & Gallery Chair Repl.15,0002419501150,000Rec Center East Arena Locker Room Remodel50,0002419501275,000Rec Center Front Office AC Replacement75,00024205005Rec Center Aquatic Park Amenity Replacement300,000300,00024205006Rec Center Banquet Room PA Upgrade50,00050,00024205008Rec Center Marquee200,000200,00024205009Parking Lot Seal Coat - Rec Center60,00060,00024205010Rec Center Aquatic Park Sun Shelter Repl75,00075,00024205011Rec Center Rental Skate Replacement (Ph 1)10,00010,00024215006Rec Center Arena Compressor Rebuild15,00015,00024215007Rec Center Arena Rubber Floor250,000250,00024215008Rec Center Dasher Board Repair/Replacement12,00012,00024215009Rec Center Landscaping15,00015,000242150110Rec Center Rental Skate Replacement (Ph 2)10,00010,000Wednesday, August 20, 2014Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 2) Title: 2015 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates DiscussionPage 24
Total2015 2016 2017 2018 2019Department2020 2021 2022 2023 202424225006Rec Center East Arena Painting60,00060,00024225008Rec Center Scoreboard Replacement32,50032,50024235007Rec Center Arena Compressor Rebuild15,00015,00024235008Rec Center Arena Water Treatment Repl75,00075,00024235009Rec Center West Arena Painting75,00075,00024235010Rec Center West Arena Roof Replacement500,000500,00024245003Rec Center East Arena Dehumidification400,000400,00024245004Rec Center Generator Replacement500,000500,00024245005Rec Center Landscaping20,00020,0002515021380,000Rec Center Aquatic Park Landscape Replacement80,0002515021415,000Rec Center Aquatic Park Pumps Rebuild15,0002516020945,000Rec Center Aquatic Park Drp Slide & Dvg Brd Repl45,0002516021020,000Rec Center Aquatic Park Umbrellas20,00025170211Rec Center Aquatic Park Filter Replacement200,000200,00025170212Rec Center Aquatic Park Pump Rebuild20,00020,00025170215Rec Center Concession Eqpt. Replacement5,0005,00025205007Rec Center Concession Eqpt. Replacement5,0005,00025220205Rec Center Aquatic Park Locker Room Remodel100,000100,00025230204Rec Center Concession Eqpt. Replacement5,0005,0002599021225,0005,000Rec Center Aquatic Park Deck Furniture45,0005,00010,00040161103100,000Street - MSA Retaining Wall (Hwy 7 SFR)100,000501500011,800,000 1,800,000Meter Replacement3,600,00050154101150,000Street Light Annual Replacement (2015)150,0005015430114,000Traffic Signal Annual Painting (2015)14,00050164101155,000Street Light Annual Replacement (2016)155,0005016430114,500Traffic Signal Annual Painting (2016)14,50050174101Street Light Annual Replacement (2017)160,000160,00050174301Traffic Signal Annual Painting (2017)15,00015,00050184101165,000Street Light Annual Replacement (2018)165,000Wednesday, August 20, 2014Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 2) Title: 2015 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates DiscussionPage 25
Total2015 2016 2017 2018 2019Department2020 2021 2022 2023 20245018430115,500Traffic Signal Annual Painting (2018)15,50050194101170,000Street Light Annual Replacement (2019)170,0005019430116,000Traffic Signal Annual Painting (2019)16,00050204101Street Light Annual Replacement (2020)175,000175,00050204301Traffic Signal Annual Painting (2020)16,50016,50050214101Street Light Annual Replacement (2021)180,000180,00050214301Traffic Signal Annual Painting (2021)17,00017,00050224101Street Light Annual Replacement (2022)185,000185,00050224301Traffic Signal Annual Painting (2022)17,50017,50050234101Street Light Annual Replacement (2023)190,000190,00050234301Traffic Signal Annual Painting (2023)18,00018,00050244101Street Light Annual Replacement (2024)195,000195,00050244301Traffic Signal Annual Painting (2024)18,50018,5005315500145,000Water Well Rehab (SLP13)45,0005315500240,000Water Well Rehab (SLP15)40,0005315500365,000Water Treatment Plant GAC Replacement (WTP4)65,0005315530120,000Storm Sewer LS Maint (LS #2)20,0005315550160,000Reilly Site - Install Monitor Wells60,0005316500130,000Water Well Rehab (SLP4)30,0005316500267,000Water Treatment Plant GAC Replacement (WTP1)67,0005316510120,000Sanitary Sewer LS Maint (LS #11)20,0005316530121,000Storm Sewer LS Maint (LS #1)21,00053175001Water Well Rehab (SLP8)32,00032,00053175002Water Treatment Plant GAC Replacement (WTP4)68,00068,00053175101Sanitary Sewer LS Maint (LS #13)22,00022,00053175102Sanitary Sewer LS Maint (LS #23)10,00010,00053175301Storm Sewer LS Maint (LS #7)22,00022,0005318500152,000Water Well Rehab (SLP11)52,0005318510140,000Sanitary Sewer LS Maint (LS #9)40,0005318530123,000Storm Sewer LS Maint (LS #8)23,0005319500134,000Water Well Rehab (SLP14)34,0005319500271,000Water Treatment Plant GAC Replacement (WTP4)71,0005319500371,000Water Treatment Plant GAC Replacement (WTP1)71,000Wednesday, August 20, 2014Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 2) Title: 2015 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates DiscussionPage 26
Total2015 2016 2017 2018 2019Department2020 2021 2022 2023 202418,310,9121,400,016 1,874,481 1,364,076 3,157,564 1,253,020Capital Replacement Fund1,834,076 1,288,837 2,593,928 2,129,556 1,415,358100,000100,000Municipal State Aid16,711,0001,507,000 5,676,500 1,654,500 1,365,500 1,011,000Park Improvement Fund1,135,000 1,052,000 867,500 1,040,000 1,402,0001,887,500164,000 169,500 175,000 180,500 186,000PW Operations Budget191,500 197,000 202,500 208,000 213,5002,610,0001,200,000 1,220,000 32,000 40,000 45,000Sanitary Sewer Utility47,000 26,000111,00020,000 21,000 22,000 23,000 25,000Stormwater Utility2,099,000810,000 697,000 100,000 52,000 176,000Water Utility74,000 75,000 77,000 38,00041,829,4125,101,016 9,758,481 3,347,576 4,818,564 2,696,020Operations & Recreation Total3,207,576 2,637,837 3,738,928 3,454,556 3,068,8585319510145,000Sanitary Sewer LS Maint (LS #21)45,0005319530125,000Storm Sewer LS Impr (Add SCADA to Stns 1/5/7/8/9)25,00053205101Sanitary Sewer LS Maint (LS #22)47,00047,00053215001Water Treatment Plant GAC Replacement (WTP4)74,00074,00053215100Sanitary Sewer LS Maint (LS #15)26,00026,00053225002Water Treatment Plant GAC Replacement (WTP1)75,00075,00053235001Water Treatment Plant GAC Replacement (WTP4)77,00077,00053245001Water Well Rehab (SLP10)38,00038,000E - XX011,400,016 1,874,4813,157,564 1,253,020Annual Equipment Replacement Program18,310,9121,364,0761,834,076 1,288,8372,129,556 1,415,3582,593,92841,829,4125,101,016 9,758,481 3,347,576 4,818,564 2,696,020Operations & Recreation Total3,207,576 2,637,837 3,738,928 3,454,556 3,068,858Police79,10010,700 10,700 10,700 26,200 5,200Capital Replacement Fund5,200 5,200 5,200145,00070,000E-911 Funds75,000224,10010,700 10,700 10,700 26,200 75,200Police Total5,200 5,200 5,20075,000PD - 110,700 10,70026,200 5,200Laser/Radar and Message Board79,10010,7005,200 5,200 5,200PD - 270,000911 Server Replacement145,00075,000224,10010,700 10,700 10,700 26,200 75,200Police Total5,200 5,200 5,20075,000Wednesday, August 20, 2014Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 2) Title: 2015 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates DiscussionPage 27
Total2015 2016 2017 2018 2019Department2020 2021 2022 2023 2024Technology1312500125,000IT: Audits - Fiber, Security, PCI 3 Re-Assessment25,0001313500125,000 25,00025,000 25,000IT:Hosted E-Mail/VMWare/Web Relays/Archive/DR250,00025,00025,000 25,00025,000 25,00025,0001313500310,000OR / Utilities: SCADA Solution20,00010,0001313500420,000OR: AVL40,00020,00013145010Police: New CAD/RMS/Mobile Suite550,000550,0001314501130,000OR: Banquet Rm Multiple Monitor / Projector60,00030,0001314501210,000OR: Rec Center Gallery / Prog Office Monitors20,00010,0001315500130,000IT: Fiber Conduit - West End Fr. Rd, Gamble, Utica30,00013155002200,000IR: Fiber - Sidewalks / Highway 100 Relocates200,0001315500330,000IR: Study - Brickhouse Fiber and Wireless30,00013155006160,000 10,00010,000 10,000Admin Serv:Agenda Doc Mgmt System/Microfilm Conver250,00010,00010,000 10,00010,000 10,00010,0001315500713,000 13,00013,000 13,000IR: Public Stuff CRM130,00013,00013,000 13,00013,000 13,00013,0001315500860,000IR: City Hall Floor 2 / 3 Cabling Upgrade60,0001315500920,000IR: Portable Web Cams20,0001315501012,000Insp / Eng: Scanners (2)12,0001315501220,000Insp / OR: BI Field iPads / Printers (11)20,0001315501412,000 2,0002,000 2,000Admin Serv / Utilities: Infinity BI Service30,0002,0002,000 2,0002,000 2,0002,0001315501550,000IT: Fiber Conduit - W. Lake St (west of La. Ave.)50,0001315501615,000Eng: Survey GPS15,0001315501713,00013,000Police: ZuercherTech FBR / GIS Add-On Modules52,00013,00013,0001315501840,000 2,5002,500 2,500Admin: DocuSphere A/P Management62,5002,5002,500 2,5002,500 2,5002,5001315501910,000IR: Microfilm Reader / Printer10,0001316500285,000IR: Study - Park Nicollet Fiber85,00013165003200,000 200,000IR: Complete Fiber Rings / Parks, City Buildings400,00013165004100,000IR: New City Website Platform100,0001316500615,000OR: Aquila Park Building Fiber15,00013175001Insp: Permits / E-Permits System Replacement21,00021,00013175002OR: Rec Banquet Rm 60,00030,00030,000Wednesday, August 20, 2014Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 2) Title: 2015 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates DiscussionPage 28
Total2015 2016 2017 2018 2019Department2020 2021 2022 2023 2024Smartboard/Video Conferencing13185001205,000Admin Serv: Financial / HR/Payroll App Replacement205,00013195001203,000Admin Serv: Utility Billing App Replacement203,00013215001OR: MSC Smartboard15,00015,00013995001150,000 150,000150,000 150,000IT: On-going Software Adds & Replacement1,500,000150,000150,000 150,000150,000 150,000150,00013995002100,000 100,000100,000 100,000IT: On-going Network Adds & Replacement1,000,000100,000100,000 100,000100,000 100,000100,00013995003100,000 100,000100,000 100,000IT: On-going Hardware/Telephone Adds & Replacement1,000,000100,000100,000 100,000100,000 100,000100,00013995004250,000 600,000Police/Fire: 800 MHz Radio/Console Replacements1,750,000900,00013995006100,000125,000Police: Mobile Replacements350,000125,00013995007Fire / Police: Dispatch Voice Recorders155,00075,00080,000139950088,000OR: Square Rigger Mobile Devices16,0008,0001399500915,000 15,00015,000 15,000IR / Communications: Reverse 911 - ParkAlert150,00015,00015,000 15,00015,000 15,00015,00013995010Eng: Engineering Total Station25,00025,00013995011160,000 47,00047,000 47,000OR: Asset Mgmt Software623,00047,00055,000 55,00055,000 55,00055,0001399501210,00010,000Fire: Fire Department Mobile Solutions40,00010,00010,0001399501310,00015,000Fire: EOC Computer / Phone Equipment55,00015,00015,0001399501415,00015,000Admin Serv: Council Tablets70,00020,00020,00013995015230,000 230,000230,000 230,000IT: Tablet / Smartphone Hardware and Services2,300,000230,000230,000 230,000230,000 230,000230,0001399501627,000Facilities: City Hall Cameras54,00027,0001399501716,000 16,00016,000 16,000ACCT- Insight Budgeting Annual Maintenance160,00016,00016,000 16,00016,000 16,00016,0001399501955,000OR: Nature Center Surveillance Cameras110,00055,0001399502025,000 25,00025,000 25,000IT: Network Switches250,00025,00025,000 25,00025,000 25,00025,0001399502123,000Police: Jail Cameras46,00023,0001399502212,000Police: Exterior Cameras24,00012,000139950236,500Police: Booking and Intox Room Cameras (2)13,0006,5001399502455,000Police: Dispatch Camera Viewing Workstations110,00055,0001399502545,000OR: Rec Center Cameras90,00045,0001399502616,000 16,00016,000 16,000IT: Surveillance Camera Maintenance160,00016,00016,000 16,00016,000 16,00016,0001399502710,000OR: Point of Sale Equipment 20,00010,000Wednesday, August 20, 2014Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 2) Title: 2015 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates DiscussionPage 29
Total2015 2016 2017 2018 2019Department2020 2021 2022 2023 20249,306,6671,195,833 843,166 986,666 1,065,166 1,016,666Capital Replacement Fund728,834 793,334 820,834 865,334 990,834155,00075,000E-911 Funds80,000855,000525,000 285,000EDA Development Fund45,0003,025,000283,000 700,000134,500 131,500Police & Fire Pension22,000 38,000 125,000 96,500 1,494,500337,670102,333 16,333 16,333 16,333 31,333Sanitary Sewer Utility64,001 24,001 19,001 19,001 29,001110,00045,00010,000Solid Waste Utility45,00010,000130,00349,000 667 667 667 10,667Stormwater Utility45,667 5,667 667667 15,667352,660102,333 16,332 16,332 26,332 26,332Water Utility63,999 24,000 19,000 29,000 29,00014,272,0002,302,499 1,861,498 1,094,998 1,242,998 1,226,498Technology Total1,014,501 885,002 1,064,502 1,010,502 2,569,002Replacements1399502820,000IR/Facilities: Conference Room A/V Upgrades20,000139950297,5007,500IT: Plotter Replacements37,5007,5007,5007,50013995030OR: Rec Center PA / Sound50,00050,0001399503145,000MSC Cameras90,00045,00013995034225,000IT: Server Farm Tape Lib/UPS/DR/SAN450,000225,00013995035IT: Telephone Handset Upgrade200,000100,000100,0001399503610,000Eng: HP Scanner / Plotter / Copier20,00010,00013995037Fire: Stations Media Package200,000100,000100,000139950398,000Admin Serv: UB Meter Reading Handhelds (if no AMR)8,000139950406,500Police: Interview Room Cameras13,0006,5001399504110,00010,000IT: Wireless Hotspots50,00010,00010,00010,00061990001Police-LPR replacement22,00022,00014,272,0002,302,500 1,861,500 1,095,000 1,243,000 1,226,500Technology Total1,014,500 885,000 1,064,500 1,010,500 2,569,00023,850,784 21,753,319 13,875,484 24,303,720 16,674,767Grand Total172,184,12617,790,284 14,459,326 12,755,728 12,205,356 14,515,358Wednesday, August 20, 2014Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 2) Title: 2015 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates DiscussionPage 30
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
ESTIMATED QUARTERLY UTILITY BILL
ACTUAL 2014 AND PROPOSED 2015 AFTER 2015 - 2024 CIP FIRST DRAFT DATE
Household Size 4
Units per quarter 30
Solid Waste Service 60-gallon
Meter size 3/4 inch
Actual Proposed Dollar Percent
Service Type 2014 2015 Change Change Notes
Water
Per unit rate - Tier 1 1.49$ 1.55$ 0.06$ 4.03%
Service charge 17.47$ 19.91$ 2.44$ 13.97%
State testing fee 1.59$ 1.59$ -$ 0.00%
Consumption 44.70$ 46.50$ 1.80$ 4.03%
Sewer
Service charge 13.83$ 14.52$ 0.69$ 4.99%
Per unit 2.69$ 2.84$ 0.15$ 5.58%
Consumption 80.70$ 85.20$ 4.50$ 5.58%
Storm Drainage
Service charge 17.60$ 19.36$ 1.76$ 10.00%
Bassett Creek Fee*1.93$ 1.93$ -$ 0.00%Bassett Creek fee
Solid Waste (includes tax)68.05$ 68.05$ -$ 0.00%
Total Bill without Bassett*243.94$ 255.13$ 11.19$ 4.59%Not including BCWMC
Increase per quarter (dollars)11.19$
Increase per year (dollars)44.76$
* Since not all property owners would be charged this fee, it is not included in the dollar or percentage change in total bill.
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 2)
Title: 2015 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Discussion Page 31
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: August 25, 2014
Discussion Item: 3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Water Meter Replacement Program
RECOMMENDED ACTION: No formal action required. The purpose of this discussion is to
inform the Council of how the City’s meters are currently read and to begin the discussion on a
program to replace City’s meters.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Is the Council in agreement with the recommendation to move
ahead with a program to replace City’s meters with a fixed network system to collect readings?
SUMMARY: The City has 12,870 residential meters that are currently read on a quarterly basis.
Readings are done under contract by a vendor that walks the City and manually collect the reads.
The City’s 916 commercial, industrial, and irrigation meters are read by City staff using drive-by
technology. The City currently replaces meters on an as needed basis only, meaning a meter is
only replaced when it is no longer providing an accurate reading. The City pays a vendor
approximately $147,000 per year to replace these meters. As we plan for the future, we want to
make sure our replacement program is in line with future service opportunities and data
collection needs. Staff has conducted research and site visits along with review our current
practice as part of planning for the future.
This document provides information and analysis about meter replacement and planning for the
future. Upon review and site visits, staff recommends replacement of all meters with a fixed
network meter reading system to provide higher level of accuracy in data and increased customer
service. The fixed network system could collect daily reads from all of the meters. The financial
implications and benefits of changing the meters to a fixed network are detailed in this report.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Financial implications of changing all of
the City’s meters is discussed in this report and projected into rate calculations.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in environmental
stewardship. We will increase environmental consciousness and responsibility in all areas of city
business.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Prepared by: Steven Heintz, Finance Supervisor
Reviewed by: Brian Swanson, Controller
Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 3) Page 2
Title: Water Meter Replacement Program
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: The City currently replaces meters on an as needed basis only, meaning a
meter is only replaced when it is no longer providing an accurate reading. The City pays a
vendor approximately $147,000 per year to replace these meters. The meters are replaced with
meters allowing for the reading to be collected electronically from a short distance. The current
method to record data from these replacement meters is done by using drive-by technology. The
current pace of replacing meters is approximately 600 meters per year, and at that pace, it will
take 18 years to replace all meters. However, it is most likely that the technology to read those
meters will no longer be supported at the end of 18 years. In the meantime, meters that have not
yet been replaced would need to be read manually.
Staff has analyzed several different options for replacing all of the meters and has had
discussions with several vendors and a variety of other cities that use updated technology for
meters. The various options, financial implications, advantages, and disadvantages of each
option are presented below:
Current Scenario
Under the current scenario of replacing meters on an as needed basis, the City would continue to
incur costs related to reading the meters manually as well as for having the meters installed. The
City would also continue to pay for maintenance and replacement of the current software and
handheld reading devices. It would cost the City approximately $3,312,000 over the 18 years it
would take to complete this replacement option.
Advantages/Disadvantages- The advantage of the current scenario is there would be no need for
the upfront capital cost that a full replacement would require. In this scenario, the City would
continue to incur approximately $184,000 in costs to read meters on an annual basis.
The disadvantages to the current scenario are many. First, the technology necessary to read the
meters would most likely be obsolete after the 18 years it would take to complete replacing the
meters and many of the meters would need to be replaced again because they would be nearing
the end of their useful life.
Second, the City is not be able to provide enhanced customer service regarding leak detection,
move-in/move-outs, final bills, and high usage concerns. Under the current scenario, residential
meters are read on a quarterly basis, and billed approximately a month after each reading.
Current Drive- By Fixed Network
Capital Costs 2,200,000 2,900,000
Operational Costs (annual)
Meter Reading- RMR/Staff 34,000 11,000 -
Meter Installs- Midwest 147,000 - -
Maintenance, Equip, etc 3,000 3,000 8,000
Total Operational Costs 184,000 14,000 8,000
Times Years for Completion 18 yrs 1-2 yrs 1-2 yrs
Total Cost for Timeframe 3,312,000 2,228,000 2,916,000
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 3) Page 3
Title: Water Meter Replacement Program
Approximately four months passes before a customer sees their next reading. If a customer has a
high read due to a leak, that leak could continue for up to four months before the customer
becomes aware of it. Staff encounters this on a weekly basis, with some customers receiving
bills 20 times higher than their normal bill, or more. It has been the practice of the City to work
with these customers and make an adjustment to their bill once there is evidence the leak has
been corrected. This results in a significant amount of wasted and unbilled water. In 2013, the
City pumped over 350 million gallons of unbilled water, or 17% of all the water pumped. Over
100 million gallons of this can be attributed to leaks and meters that are not recording all usage.
The current technology being installed does not allow for any enhanced leak detection. The
current technology also does not allow for readings on an as-needed basis, meaning when a
customer is moving out and needs a final reading, that read cannot be collected right away.
Delays in obtaining final readings result in inaccurate final bills. It is common for staff to be
informed several days after a change in ownership or tenancy, and staff does not have the ability
to go back and collect a reading from the actual date of the change. The aforementioned scenario
requires staff to estimate the final read which can cause complaints from customers. When
answering customer questions regarding water consumption, staff currently only has quarterly
reads on each meter, making it difficult to identify when the water consumption actually took
place.
Finally, the cost to continue the current program is more expensive than either of the other
options presented in this report. The current meter replacement program would cost the City
over $3.3 million dollars, without factoring in inflation during the 18 years it would take to
complete, and after completion the City would continue to pay to have the meters read, either
manually or via a drive-by system, and to have meters replaced that are at or near the end of their
useful life.
Drive- By System
A drive-by meter system would allow the City to speed up the current meter reading program
through the use of better technology. While a drive-by system would provide the City with a
much more efficient way to read the meters, it would not include some of the additional
customer service related benefits associated with a fixed network system. Meter installations for
a drive-by system would be managed and scheduled through a contractor. Staff has received a
quote for installing new meters, and that cost is included in the cost of the drive-by system
provided above. Installation of a drive-by meter system would take approximately 1-2 years to
complete, and would cost the City approximately $2,228,000.
Advantages/ Disadvantages
The advantage of a drive-by system is the smaller upfront capital cost when compared to the
fixed network, along with reduced operating costs going forward when compared to the current
program. Although many of the newer meters would not need to be replaced, the electronic
component of the meter would need to be replaced. The drive-by option would be similar to how
the commercial meters are currently read, however the upgraded technology would allow those
meters to be read much more efficiently because they could be read from a longer distance and
there would be less radio interference.
The biggest disadvantage of the drive-by system would be the lack of improved customer
service. A drive-by system would not allow the City to be more proactive on leak detection;
provide for quicker and more accurate final bills and move-in/ move-outs; or provide greater
customer service on high usage concerns.
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 3) Page 4
Title: Water Meter Replacement Program
Another disadvantage of a drive-by system has to do with when the reads are collected.
Collecting the reads via a drive-by system would be challenging during the winter months after
large snow falls. Staff tries to maintain 91 days between billing cycles, however if the collection
of the reads is delayed, it changes the number of days in a billing cycle, and would affect a
customer’s bill as it could push the customer into the next tier for water consumption.
An additional disadvantage with a drive-by system would be that while the reads would be
collected monthly resulting in more frequent reads, the readings could not be used to determine
when usage actually occurred in order to help with leak detection.
Finally, using a drive-by system to collect readings on a monthly basis would result in additional
costs for reading the entire City each month.
Fixed Network System – recommended by staff
A fixed network system uses a system of data collectors to collect reads from all of the meters in
the system and transmits them to the reading software. The data collectors transmit the
information using radio frequency and operate on a FCC protected frequency. Based on a
vendor study, St. Louis Park would need eight data collectors to collect reads from all of the
meters in the City and to provide redundancy in the event that a data collector fails. The data
collectors are antennas that would be installed on existing City structures, such as water towers
and ball field lighting. Using this technology, the data collectors would be able to collect hourly
data from each meter, and transmit this data to the reading software on a daily basis. The data
collectors and meters would be installed by contractors who would also manage scheduling of
the meter replacements with the customers. This type of system is in place and operating
successfully in a number of cities in our area. It would take approximately 1-2 years to complete
and would cost the City approximately $2,916,000.
Advantages/ Disadvantages
A fixed network would provide all of the advantages of the drive-by system, plus some other
very valuable benefits. First, the City would no longer need to pay staff or a vendor to collect
the readings because staff would receive reads from each meter on a daily basis thereby reducing
the City’s operating costs by approximately $34,000 per year.
Second, collecting meter readings with hourly data would provide an opportunity for greater
customer service because meters that are showing either a continuous leak or an intermittent leak
would be automatically flagged when the reads are transmitted. Staff could run a daily report
showing the flagged accounts and then notify customers of the possible leak along with steps that
could be taken in order to identify where the leak was located so that it could be repaired.
Adopting a proactive approach to leak detection could save over one hundred million gallons of
unbilled water each year, along with the staff time needed to work with customers who receive
high bills as the result of leaks. Currently, staff works with these customers and makes
adjustments to their bills after there is evidence that the issue was resolved. Some of these
adjustments can be quite large, as staff has seen bills up to 20 times higher than the customers
average bill. Hourly readings would also allow staff to show customers when their water usage
occurs when there are usage concerns not related to leaks. Staff would be able to process move
in/ move outs on a more accurate and timely basis. It is common for customers to call after
moving into a home to setup their utilities. At this point, it is impossible to get an accurate
reading as of the date the utilities actually exchanged hands. With a fixed network system, staff
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 3) Page 5
Title: Water Meter Replacement Program
would be able to go back to the reading from that date and process the change and produce an
accurate final bill.
Third, a fixed network system would allow the City to move to monthly billing of utilities in the
future (monthly billing is not recommended at this time, and we may want to make this change in
the future). The idea behind monthly billing is that it is easier for customers to plan for and pay
a smaller monthly bill than it is a larger quarterly bill. The City of St. Louis Park bills for solid
waste, making the utility bills significantly larger than many comparable cities.
Finally, a fixed network system is the newest, yet proven technology available to collect
readings. Staff has been to several cities in the metro area that have recently installed a fixed
network system through a variety of vendors. All cities are receiving an average reading
collection rate of greater than 99% per day. The redundancy in the data collectors is extremely
valuable, as it allows for the entire City to be read if a data collector fails due to a lightning
strike, or other reasons. Some vendors also offer a fixed network system that allows for the
meters to also be read by drive-by technology if needed. The system and meters come with a
warranty fully covering the electronic portion of the meter for 10 years, with a pro-rated
warranty to 20 years. The meter housing is covered under full warranty for 25 years.
The one disadvantage with a fixed network system is the higher up-front capital cost which
would significantly reduce the on-going operational costs associated with replacing meters and
collecting reads.
Recommendation:
Meters continue to be replaced and planning needs to occur to purchase the appropriate meters to
best fit our service delivery for the future. Based on analysis staff recommends planning and
moving ahead with the fixed network system for replacement of meters/meter reading. This
system provides a greater opportunity for enhanced customer service providing more data for use
by the city and our customers. The capital costs for a fixed network system are planned in the
City’s Capital Improvement Program and factored into future utility rates.
NEXT STEPS: If the Council chooses to move forward with the fixed network system, staff
would work with a consultant to draft a request for bids from vendors. There are several
consultants in the metro area that have provided this service for a variety of other cities. Staff
anticipates replacement of water meters would start in the first or second quarter of 2015. If the
Council would like to discuss this further, staff can schedule another study session.
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: August 25, 2014
Written Report: 4
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Study Update
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive report and provide any questions or feedback to staff.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time.
SUMMARY: Over the past several months planning staff has been working with a consultant
and a Council appointed Task Force on a set of Design Guidelines for the South Side of
Excelsior Boulevard. Several meetings have been held and the process and draft parameters for
the guidelines are included in the attached “Interim Report.”
Excelsior Boulevard provides a varied experience and while it may be difficult to have a “one
size fits all” set of guidelines, certain themes have emerged. These themes note that the study
area is: heterogeneous, a place of visible human activity, punctuated by unique highlights,
integrated with the neighborhood, varied in form and pattern, connected at the public realm,
walk-able, bike-able, and park-able, both “stay at” and “go to,” and attractive in all of its
forms.
The Guidelines will address 6 key areas: Boulevard experience; Public realm; Neighborhood
interface; Site design; Building design; Traffic access, and parking.
The Task Force has developed the Guidelines to address a pattern for new buildings and reuse of
existing sites; the summary of the draft items to be included in the Guidelines is attached.
NEXT STEPS: A neighborhood-wide meeting will be held on September 16th at City Hall. A
joint session of the City Council and the Planning Commission will be scheduled in October for
review and input. The Task Force will then meet one additional time to finalize
recommendations to the City Council.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The cost for the consultant engaged in the
study is $70,000 to be paid by the Development Fund.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Interim Report on Design Guidelines for the South Side of
Excelsior Boulevard
Prepared by: Meg McMonigal, Planning and Zoning Supervisor
Julie Grove, Planning and Economic Development Assistant
Reviewed by: Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor
Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 4) Page 2
Title: South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Study Update
DISCUSSION
Excerpt from Interim Report (page 9):
The resulting general patterns for the South Side and development on parcels are reflected in
design guidelines that achieve:
• consistency in development established on key parameters
• buildings pulled forward on sites to reinforce a pedestrian-focused public realm along
Excelsior Boulevard;
• patterns of landscape development that extend the feeling of the Boulevard’s landscape to
the edges of sites;
• parking efficiencies gained through an eventual common access along the rear and/or side
of buildings and limited connections (over time) to Excelsior Boulevard; and
• a continuous zone set aside at the neighborhood interface that results in an attractive
separation feature, one that might become a signature for the south side.
• creativity in site and building design
• a relationship between the street and buildings that focused on human activity;
• building heights greater than one story encouraged;
• building articulation that reveals human activity (or spaces for human activity, even if none
is present);
• highlights at key points along the corridor through site or building feature;
• development of sites that create the sense of a green (landscaped) corridor; and
• buildings designed with attention to all sides.
• orientation of development to the Boulevard and its pedestrian potential
• creation of consistent edges in non-built portions of sites (either architecture compatible
with the building or landscaping that reinforces pedestrian continuity);
• site spaces encouraged in areas that are set back from the street, even with the primary
portion of the building set near the walk;
• entries defined as the highlight of building, with a direct and enhanced connection to
Excelsior Boulevard; and
• parking encouraged on sites, using street parking, sharing of parking resources, but not
directed to neighborhoods, encouraged to not exceed city standards, and designed to keep
parking for and traffic from commercial uses from intruding into the neighborhood.
• relaxation of standards for some aspects of site development
• street parking reinforced as a part of the parking calculation;
• drive aisle widths narrowed in favor of other site or building capacity on the site;
• where practicable, parking that is shared among uses but created as a result of private
initiatives, is encouraged; and
• potential for greater building height if the experience of the corridor is enhanced or other
community objectives are achieved.
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 4) Title: South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Study UpdatePage 3
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 4) Title: South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Study UpdatePage 4
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 4) Title: South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Study UpdatePage 5
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 4) Title: South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Study UpdatePage 6
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 4) Title: South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Study UpdatePage 7
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 4) Title: South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Study UpdatePage 8
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 4) Title: South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Study UpdatePage 9
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 4) Title: South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Study UpdatePage 10
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 4) Title: South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Study UpdatePage 11
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 4) Title: South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Study UpdatePage 12
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 4) Title: South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Study UpdatePage 13
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 4) Title: South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Study UpdatePage 14
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: August 25, 2014
Written Report: 5
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: 2014 Semi-Annual Housing Programs Activity Report
RECOMMENDED ACTION: The purpose of this report is to update Council on housing
programs and activity. This report is informational and no action is required.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time.
SUMMARY: The Semi-Annual Housing Programs Report including the Housing Matrix has
been presented to council since 2005. The Executive Summary provides a quick review of the
detailed report and the report provides historical trends, program descriptions, affordable housing
and additional information on housing programs in St. Louis Park.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a well-maintained and
diverse housing stock.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: 2014 Semi-Annual Housing Programs Report
Prepared by: Marney Olson, Housing Programs Coordinator
Reviewed by: Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor
Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
2014 Semi-Annual Housing Programs Activity Report
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this report is to apprise City policy makers of housing program activity during
the first half of 2014. The report provides historical trends, program descriptions, and additional
information. Below are the key points with details following this summary.
1. Remodeling Activity
a. Housing rehab projects (general remodeling) in the first half of 2014 is on pace
with 2013 activity which was the second highest in the past nine years. The
average cost per alteration permit was $933 more than in 2013. Most projects
were financed without using city loans.
b. Use of the city’s Architect Design Services and Remodeling Advisor Services is
increasing over previous years.
c. 102 home energy visits were conducted through the new Home Energy Squad
Enhanced program. This program began in March 2012 and the number of homes
participating is increasing over the past two years.
d. Major remodeling projects and home additions are on pace with previous years.
e. Discount Loan use the first half of 2014 is relatively low compared to previous
years with only 8 loans; however, an additional 8 loans were processed in July
which is close to last year’s rate.
2. Affordable Home Ownership and Public Housing Update
a. Two homebuyers used the Live Where You Work program so far in 2014. Sixteen
homebuyers have used the program since it began in spring 2009.
b. The SLP Housing Authority affordable rental housing and rental assistance
programs continue to have high occupancy and long waiting lists. Over 500
households received rental assistance in 2014.
c. The SLP Housing Authority is administering a new Stable HOME rental
assistance program for Suburban Hennepin County which provides housing
assistance to homeless or previously homeless individuals and families.
3. Housing Matrix
a. There was a net gain of four detached single family homes in St. Louis Park in the
first half of 2014.
b. Owner occupied (homestead) properties now comprise 54% of the housing market
with rental (non-homestead) at 46%. This is a decrease in overall owner occupied
homes over previous years; however, the single family home ownership rate has
increased to 92%.
c. No new multi-family units were added during the first half of 2014; however,
Gateway Assisted Living and Calhoun Apartment Homes are nearing completion
and in 2013 the following apartments were completed: e2 (Ellipse on Excelsior
II), The Flats at West End, 36 Park Apartments.
4. Foreclosures
a. The 2014 foreclosure rate is relatively low with 33 residential foreclosures the
first half of 2014.
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2014 Semi-Annual Housing Programs Activity Report Page 2
1. REMODELING ACTIVITY
Residential permitted activity measures remodeling and maintenance activity; this section shows
historical trends of remodeling activity.
Permit Trends
• “Alteration Residential” or General Remodeling
The chart below shows the trend line of general remodeling activity over time. This work
includes projects with permit valuations less than $37,500 (the average value per job for
2014 is approximately $8,208, an increase of $933 from 2013) and includes such items as:
o remodeling of bathrooms and kitchens;
o finishing of basement and attic spaces;
o conversion of existing spaces;
o window and door replacements, insulation; and
o drain tile, step, and foundation work.
The trend line below reflects residents’ willingness to preserve and update housing, the
impact of the city’s proactive housing improvement assistance, and the ongoing needs of
older housing stock. General remodeling activity in 2013 exceeded permits for 2012 and had
the second highest number of remodeling permits in the past nine years. The first half of
2014 is off to a solid start with 499 permits.
Chart 1: Trend of Maintenance & Minor Remodeling Permits Since 2005
• Roofing and Siding Activity
Reroofing and residing permits are tracked separately. This chart illustrates the impact of
storm damage in 2008-9 and again in 2011. Almost 60% of the homes in the city had roofs
replaced between 2008 and 2011. It is likely the number of reroofs will remain relatively low
for the next decade or so.
517
785 797
971 869
1129
1011 1091
499
0
500
1000
1500
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 1st
half
2014Number of Permits Issued Year
Maintenance & Minor
Remodeling Permits
Alteration Residential (Minor)
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2014 Semi-Annual Housing Programs Activity Report Page 3
Chart 2: Reroofing and Residing Permits Since 2005
*Spike in reroofing due to 2008 storms.
• Additions and Major Remodeling
The number of Major Remodeling permits (valued at more than $37,500) is on pace with
previous years. The increase in additions beginning in 2012 may be an indication that
homeowners think that the housing market is recovering and recent homebuyers who
purchased at the low end of the market are now investing in their homes.
The average permit valuation for additions during the first half of 2014 is $128,455 and the
average for major additions is $71,467. In addition to the 35 major alterations and 32
additions, two homes were rebuilt on the existing foundation during the first half of 2014.
Chart 3: Number of Addition and Major Remodeling Permits Since 2005
• Permit Valuation, 2005 – first half of 2014
The valuation for single family remodeling activity for 2013 exceeded 2010 and 2012
permits and the first half of 2014 is on track for another good year. The following chart
shows historical remodeling permit valuation for additions, major remodels, remodeling and
maintenance, garages/decks, reroofs, and siding. Additional permits with additional
202 216 355
845
201
761
140 161 48
85 66 84
573
332
117 117 73 83 25 0
500
1000
1500
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 1st
half
2014Number of Permits Issued Year
Reroofing and Residing Permits
Reroof Reside
55
86
102
89
55
40
48
71 67
32 45 50 50 46 50
53
46 44
53 35
0
40
80
120
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 1st
half
2014Number of Permits Issued Year
Addition and Major Remodel Permit Activity
Addition Residential Major Remodels
4828
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2014 Semi-Annual Housing Programs Activity Report Page 4
valuations were issued for plumbing, heating, and electrical work (not shown here). As the
chart illustrates, permit valuation varies significantly from year to year; however, with the
exception of the “year of the hail damage repairs” (2008), valuation has ranged between $14
and $27 million.
Chart 4: Permitted Residential Remodeling Since 2005
City Housing Improvement Services, Loans Trends and Program Descriptions
• Home Improvement Services.
Use of the city’s architectural design service and remodeling remains strong in 2014. The
home energy visits (Home Energy Squad Enhanced) are up over the first half of 2013.
Remodeling Advisor visits are ahead of the 2012 and 2013 level and use of the Architectural
Design service is at ahead of last year which was at a five year high.
Chart 5: Technical, Design and Home Energy Visits Since 2005
• Home Remodeling Fair and Tour Trend
Both the Home Remodeling Fair and Tour continue to be popular events with residents. 200-
400 residents visited each of the six tour homes in May and the attendance at the Annual
Remodeling Fair in February was approximately 1200.
$13.9
$15.2 $22.5
$68.5
$26.6
$17
$26
$16.8 21 12.2
0
20
40
60
80
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 1st
half
2014Permit Valuation - Million $ Year
Residential Remodeling Permit Valuation
68
102
62 48 32 30 29
29 37 21
221
157 179
130 126
89 82
69 69 55
122 153
102
0
50
100
150
200
250
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 1st
half
2014Number of Visits Year
Technical Home Improvement Services
Architect Services Remodeling Advisor Home Energy Visits
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2014 Semi-Annual Housing Programs Activity Report Page 5
• City Loan and Rebate Trends
The following chart shows the number of Move Up Loans, Discount Loans and Energy
Rebates issued in recent years. The number of Discount Loans, eight, is low; however, an
additional eight loans were processed in July. CEE notes that home improvement loan use is
slow in their service area. The number of Move Up loans is exceeding the 2012 and 2013
rate. The first half of 2014 is off to a strong start for the usage of the Energy Rebate program
which included rebates for air sealing and insulation which began in 2013.
Chart 6: Use of City Financial Incentives Since 2005
Summary of Move-Up Activity Loan and Service Costs Since 2005
Through 2012, for every dollar the City invested in move-up and discount loans, technical and
design services, rebate programs, and administrative costs, residents invested five dollars,
resulting in a 1:5 ratio of public to private investment with an increase to 1:5.2 for 2013.
The ratio of public to private investment in the first half of 2014 was 1:5.8 – for every dollar the
city invested, residents invested roughly five dollars and eighty cents. The City invested
approximately $165,000 the first half of 2014 which leveraged just over $956,000 worth of
private investments.
Move-Up in the Park loans are deferred until the sale of the home or forgiven after thirty years.
In 2012, three loans were paid off in the amount of $59,360 and in 2013 an additional three loans
totaling $52,249 were paid off.
7
28 20 17 17 8 10 6 6 5
76
88
50 55 52
64
22 26 22
8
22
42
83 73
113
63
0
25
50
75
100
125
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 1st
half
2014Number Loans - Rebates Year
Loans and Rebates
Move up loans Discount loans Energy Rebates
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2014 Semi-Annual Housing Programs Activity Report Page 6
Table 1: Move-Up Participation and Costs Since 2005
Move-Up Participation and Costs
YEAR
Move-Up
Loans
Discount
Loans
Architectural
Design
Services
Remodeling
Advisor
Services
Remodeling
Tour & Fair
Green
Rebates
Home Energy
Squad
Enhanced
Visits
Total City
Cost
2005 7 $182,806 76 $45,636 68 $15,300 221 $28,730 $272,472
2006 27 $591,264 88 $186,205 102 $22,950 157 $20,410 1 $5,000 $825,829
2007 27 $620,000 50 $74,000 62 $12,400 179 $23,270 1 $5,000 $734,670
2008 18 $330,937 55 $114,129 49 $11,025 130 $16,900 1 $5,000 $477,991
2009 17 $329,650 52 $106,000 12 $7,200 126 $16,380 1 $5,000 22 $4,092 $468,322
2010 9 $209,769 64 $86,263 30 $6,750 89 $11,510 1 $5,000 42 $7,820 $327,112
2011 10 $226,877 22 $29,213 29 $6,525 82 $10,250 1 $5,000 83 $15,465 $293,330
2012* 6 $106,232 26 $31,276 29 $6,525 69 $8,970 1 $5,505 73 $13,748 122 $7,320 $179,576
2013 6 $145,071 22 $33,063 37 $8,325 69 $8,970 1 $8,271 113 $26,000 153 $10,650 $240,350
1st half
2014 5 $111,990 8 $14,098 21 $4725 55 $7150 1 $6729 63 $13,599 102 $7080 $165,792
*Other administrative costs, fees, and expenses totaled $6,256 in 2012.
**2013 Remodeling Tour & Home Remodeling Fair costs reflect the total costs including all marketing, event preparation and event costs.
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2014 Semi-Annual Housing Programs Activity Report Page 7
2. AFFORDABLE HOME OWNERSHIP, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK
GRANTS AND PUBLIC HOUSING UPDATE
Live Where You Work
The Live Where You Work Homebuyer Assistance Program began in spring 2009. The goal is
to promote home ownership within the City among employees of St. Louis Park businesses.
The city provides a deferred loan of $2,500 to an eligible employee and an additional $1,000 is
provided to employees purchasing vacant lender-owned foreclosed properties. Employers are
invited to contribute a matching or lesser amount to the City’s contribution. The deferred loan
will be forgiven after 3 years if the employee continues to work for the employer and meets
other qualification requirements. The City contracts with CEE for loan administration. Two
homebuyers used the program during the first half of 2014. Total participation to date is 16.
Housing Improvement Area (HIA)
The HIA is a finance tool to assist with the preservation of the city’s existing townhome and
condominium housing stock. An HIA is a defined area within a city where housing
improvements are made and the cost of the improvements are paid in whole or in part from fees
imposed on the properties within the area. The Association borrows low interest money from the
City, improvements are completed and unit owners repay the loan through fees imposed on their
properties and collected with property tax payments.
The first HIA, Cedar Trails, was established in 2002 and has been paid off. To date, seven
HIA’s have been established and over twelve million dollars of improvements has been made to
1100 units. Greensboro Condo’s HIA was established in 2011 and improvements totaling nearly
$4,000,000 were completed in 2013. Westwood Villa Association HIA began construction in
July, 2012, targeting $1,400,000 worth of improvements and they expect to be completed with
their improvements this fall.
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
Activity completed in the first half of 2014 was funded with FY2013 CDBG funds. $195,859
funded the following projects: rehab for SLP Housing Authority single family home, the single
family low-income homeowner’s emergency repair and loan programs, Homes Within Reach,
rehab of special needs housing for Community Involvement Partnership, and Park & Rec
Summer Youth Programming.
West Hennepin Affordable Housing Land Trust, aka Homes Within Reach (HWR).
Homes Within Reach is a program of West Hennepin Affordable Housing Land Trust that
purchases properties, rehabilitates and then sells the home to qualified low to moderate income
households. Buyers pay for the cost of the home only and lease the land for 99 years. City funds
are leveraged with CDBG, Hennepin County Affordable Housing Incentive Fund (AHIF),
HOME Partnership, Metropolitan Council, Minnesota Housing and other funds. Since the program
began in 2007 eleven homes have been purchased and sold to low to moderate income families.
Homes Within Reach creates and preserves affordable homeownership opportunities for working
households in the western suburbs of Hennepin County by using the Community Land Trust
practice, which takes the cost of the land out of the real estate transaction, making the home
more affordable. This means that families can more easily purchase a home where they work or
live, retain it for generations, and not over burden their incomes in becoming homeowners. As a
result, both the families and communities can rely on affordable homeownership option, which
expands homeownership, sustains community resources, supports residential stability, preserves
affordability housing and supports a stronger local workforce.
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2014 Semi-Annual Housing Programs Activity Report Page 8
Twin Cities Habitat for Humanity
The city has partnered with Habitat over the years to acquire nine blighted properties for rehab
or tear-down for new construction. In 2011 the city assisted Habitat with the purchase of one
property, construction was completed in the fall 2012 and the home was sold to a low income
family. No Habitat homes were acquired in 2013 or so far in 2014.
3. HOUSING MATRIX
The housing matrix shows at a glance the numbers and percentages of housing types, tenure
(owner or non-homesteaded), affordable units, senior designated units and large single family
homes. The matrix is a guide to evaluate future housing development proposals.
2014 First Half Highlights
• There was a net gain of 4 single family homes.
• The percentage of owner occupied (homesteaded) units is slightly below 2012. The citywide
ratio of homestead to non-homestead property currently stands at 55/45.
• The chart shows percentages of homesteaded residential units over time and the ownership
rate increased in 2014. The first half of 2014 had 92% of single family detached homes were
owner occupied and 68% of condos/townhomes were owner occupied.
Chart 7: Percentage of Owner Occupied Units since 2006
• The May 2013 Maxfield Research Inc. Comprehensive Housing Needs Analysis reports the
overall vacancy rate in St. Louis Park was 3.0% as of May 2013. The overall Metro Area
vacancy rate is also very low at 2.8%.
• Rental of duplexes remains strong and reflects a strong rental market – 66% of the duplex
units are currently rental (non-homestead).
97 97 96 93 93 93 91 89 92 91 92 89 89
80 75 70 67 68
0
50
100
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
first
halfPercentage YEAR
% Owner Occupied (Homesteaded) Units
Single Family Detached Homes Condos & Townhomes
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2014 Semi-Annual Housing Programs Activity Report Page 9
Large Single Family Homes
One of the City’s housing goals is to increase the number of larger homes available in the city.
“Large single family homes” are being defined as exceeding 1,500 square feet of living space,
having 3 or more bedrooms, 2 or more baths, and at minimum a 2 car garage. According to SLP
Assessing Department, 2,124 – or 18% – of SLP single family homes meet this threshold. This
is an increase of 21 homes compared with 2013 (due to new construction and additions).
Although this size home is not considered large when compared to newly constructed housing, it
is when compared to all SLP homes where 75% of single family homes have a foundation size
less than 1,200 square feet. 48% of single family homes have 1,200 square feet above ground.
Affordable Housing
Forty-two percent of the total city housing stock is considered affordable. The Met Council’s
affordable guideline is that housing is affordable to households with incomes at or below 60% of
median area income ($49,400 for a family of four) paying thirty percent of their income for
housing costs whether renting or owning.
Owner Occupied
• The 2014 affordable ownership purchase price is $166,000 or less, $11,500 less than 2013.
• In 2014, 2696 owner occupied homes are considered affordable which is 20% of the owner
occupied housing stock and 9% of the total housing units. This is a decrease of 1388 from
2013; however the affordable price is $11,500 less than 2013. Increasing mortgage interest
rates are driving the decrease in purchase price affordability for 2014 despite a slight increase
in area median income. In addition to the lower purchase price for affordable home
ownership, median home values are increasing.
Rental –
• The 2013 affordable monthly rent including utilities for a 2 bedroom apartment for a family
of four is $1,111 at 60% MAI. In 2014 the affordable rent was increased by $10; however,
we do not have the 2014 rental survey completed yet.
• There were an estimated 5,941 (25%) affordable rental units – including known subsidized
units and estimated market rate units in 2013.
• The estimated number of market rate affordable rental units is based on the SLPHA Rental
Study and the Maxfield Research Inc Study. The Maxfield Research study surveyed
apartment properties with 8 units and larger with an 84% participation rate. The number of
affordable single family detached, duplex, condos and townhome units is from the SLPHA
Rental Study. The overall response rate from the SLPHA Rental Study was 86.7%. Although
the response rate was high this does not represent all rentals in the City.
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2014 Semi-Annual Housing Programs Activity Report Page 10
St. Louis Park Housing Matrix
June 30, 2014
Housing Units by Type Large Single Family Homes, Affordable, and Senior Housing
Housing
Type Housing Units
Net
Units
added
in
2014
Owner
Occupied
(Homestead)
Non
Homesteaded
and/or Rental
Large Single
Family
Homes
2014
Affordable
Market Rate
Owner
Occupied
Units
2013
Reported
Affordable
Market Rate
Rental Units**
Public
Subsidized
Affordable
Units,
Includes
Section 8
Housing
Units
Senior
Designated
Single
Family
Detached 11,638 49% 4 10,659 979 2,124 1,239 58 55 0
Duplex 424 2% 0 146 278
82 0 0
Condos
and
townhomes 3388 14% 0 2251 1137 1,457 111 0 0
Apartments
* 8,503 35% 0 0 8,503 4,557 1,036 923
COOPs 114 <1% 0 114 0 42 106
Totals 24,067 100% 412 13,170 55% 10,897 45% 2,124 18% 2,696 9% 4,808 20% 1,133 5% 1,029 4%
The percentage of owner occupied (homesteaded) units to rental or non-owner occupied (non-homesteaded) units has shifted from the 60 homesteaded/40 non-
homesteaded ratio of the early 2000's. This is due in part to a change in homestead status of approximately 1,200 condominium and townhouse units since the early
2000s and the addition of new multi-family rental units.
In 2011 the Met Council revised the affordable housing income standard. Rather than using 50% MAI for rental and 80% MAI for ownership, the new affordable definition
is that housing is affordable to households with incomes at or below 60% MAI ($49,400 for a family of four in 2014) paying thirty percent of their income for housing costs
whether renting or owning. The 2014 affordable purchase price is $166,000 or less. For 2013, a monthly rent of $1,111 or less for a 2 bedroom apartment for a family of
four is considered affordable.
**Reported Affordable Market Rate Rental Units based on 2012 SLPHA Rental Study and 2013 Maxfield Research Study. This information is only updated annually, and will be
updated for the 2014 Annual report.
Data source: SLP Community Development, Development Activity in St. Louis Park, SLP Inspections and Assessing.
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2014 Semi-Annual Housing Programs Activity Report Page 11
4. RELATED ISSUES
Foreclosures
Foreclosures are measured by the number of sheriff sales. The number of residential foreclosures
in St. Louis Park and throughout Hennepin County has been declining since 2010. The chart
below shows foreclosures since 2006.
Chart 8: St. Louis Park Residential Foreclosures by Year, 2006 –2014
The trend chart below shows foreclosure by housing type over time.
Chart 9: Residential Foreclosures by Housing Type
*Townhome & DB = Townhome and Double Bungalow/Duplex
87
133
92
191
163
122
59
33
0
40
80
120
160
200
240
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 First
Half
2014Number of Sherrif Sales Year
Residential Foreclosures by Year
78
93
63
106 109
82
45
19 9
30 27
54 40 30
9 13
0
10 2
31
8 10
5 1 0
40
80
120
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 First
Half of
2014Number Sherrif Sales Year
Residential Foreclosures by Housing Type
Single Family Detached Condos Townhome & DB
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2014 Semi-Annual Housing Programs Activity Report Page 12
Property Work Group
The City’s Property Watch Team, developed in 2006, monitors foreclosure activity and problem
properties. Staff from all departments track, monitor and respond to issues related to problem
foreclosed homes. The goal of this effort is to ensure that vacant, foreclosed homes do not
become “problem properties.” The Inspections Department follows-up with vacant foreclosed
properties through the Property Maintenance Inspection process and works with bankers,
investors and the managing companies. In addition to the City’s concerted efforts, bankers and
lenders have become far more proactive in ensuring their investments are maintained.
The city continues to promote the foreclosure prevention services provided by Community
Action Partnership of Suburban Hennepin County and Home Ownership Center through direct
mailings, Park Perspective, City’s social media, and staff referrals.
Louisiana Court Update
PPL/Louisiana Court is continuing to maintain close to 100% occupancy and is financially
stable. Metro Plains Management Company assumed property management of PPL’s Louisiana
Court complex in June 2011 and was able to obtain 100% occupancy within a few months.
Metro Plains has continued to meet weekly with the Community Liaison Officer to review police
calls related to tenant disturbances or criminal activity in or around the complex. The Oversight
Committee that includes representatives from the County, MHFA, PPL, Metro Plains, the City
and the tax credit syndicator meet twice a year to review the operational status of the
development including implementations of capital improvements.
Due to the continuing high occupancy at the development, use of the Shallow Rent Subsidy
Program has not been necessary.
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2014 Semi-Annual Housing Programs Activity Report Page 13
5. ST. LOUIS PARK HUD FEDERALLY FUNDED HOUSING PROGRAMS: UPDATE
The Housing Authority administers programs that ensure the availability of safe and desirable
housing options in the St. Louis Park community. These programs include the Public Housing
program, Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher rental assistance program, Shelter Plus Care rental
assistance program, Louisiana Court Max 200 Rental Assistance Program, and TRAILS family
self-sufficiency program. The Authority currently serves over 500 eligible, low-income
households through their housing programs.
Public Housing
The HA owns a low-rise apartment building (108 one-bedroom units and 2 two-bedroom
caretaker units) built in 1975, and 37 scattered site single-family units (3 to 5 bedrooms)
acquired and constructed between 1974 and 1996. Although the low-rise building is designated
for general occupancy, priority is given to elderly and disabled. The single-family scattered units
house families with children. The HA also holds the HUD Annual Contributions Contract (ACC)
and maintains a waiting list for 12 two-bedroom Public Housing apartment units located at
Louisiana Court. These units are owned and managed by Project for Pride in Living. The units
and occupancy rates for the Public Housing units are noted in the table.
Public Housing Total
Units
1-BR 2-BR 3-BR 4-BR 5-BR Occupancy
June 30,
2013
Hamilton House 108 108 99%
Scattered Site Single
Family
37 0 0 17 17 3 99%
Louisiana Court,
Metropolitan Housing
Opportunity (MHOP) Units
12
12
99%
Total (bedroom size) 108 12 17 17 3
Total 157 99%
Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program
The HA is funded to administer up to 268 Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers. The rent
assistance program provides rent subsidies for low-income individuals and families in privately
owned, existing market rate housing units. The rent subsidy is paid directly to the owner of the
rental property by the HA with funds provided by HUD. The HA offers both tenant-based and
project-based vouchers. Forty vouchers of the HA’s allocation are designated for use in three
privately owned developments (Excelsior & Grand, Vail Place, and Wayside) and are referred to
as project-based vouchers.
Shelter Plus Care (Permanent Rental Assistance)
The Shelter Plus Care Program is designed to link rental assistance with supportive services for
hard-to-reach homeless persons with disabilities (primarily those who are seriously mentally ill
or have chronic problems with alcohol, drugs or both) and their families. Grants are provided to
be used for permanent housing which must be matched with supportive services that are equal in
value to the amount of rental assistance and appropriate to the needs of population to be served.
St. Louis Park is the grant recipient and we partner with three sponsor organizations that
administer supportive housing programs. The Housing Authority administers 43 units of Shelter
Plus Care assistance.
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2014 Semi-Annual Housing Programs Activity Report Page 14
Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers
(HUD Approved)
Units Utilization YTD
June 30, 2014
Tenant-Based (65 are Port-Outs) 197 88%*
Tenant-Based Port - Ins 53 Avg./month
Project-Based: 38
Wayside Supportive Housing 13 87%
Excelsior & Grand 18 100%
Vail Place 7 100%
Shelter Plus Care Rental Assistance: 43
Perspectives Inc. 11 100%
Community Involvement Program (CIP) –
Scattered Site
11
81%
CIP- Clear Spring Road 8 80%
Project for Pride In Living (PPL) 8 105%
**Wayside Supportive Housing 5 94%
Total 369
* The Housing Authority can only financially support 88% of the HUD allocation for vouchers.
**Beginning in 2012, CIP and Perspective grants provide funding for up to five units of Shelter Plus Care
Rental Assistance at Wayside House. Wayside House’s Project Based units were decreased by five units to
fifteen.
Waiting Lists
Assisted Housing Waiting List as of December 31, 2013
Public
Housing
1-BR 1-BR
Handicap
2-BR 3-BR 3-BR
Handicap
4-BR 5-BR Total
687 6 342 225 4 132 46 1442
Section 8 450
Excelsior &
Grand
63
MAX 200 79
2034
Stable HOME Rental Assistance Program
The Stable HOME program provides rent assistance throughout suburban Hennepin County to
low income singles and families who were homeless or would otherwise be at risk of
homelessness. This program is funded with federal HOME funds allocated to the county. Single
participants are also participants in the county’s Employment Pays program and families are also
in the Stable Families Initiative program. For both groups the rent assistance participation is
limited to 2 years, during which time they establish good rental histories and relationships and
work with direct assistance from service providers to improve their earnings to the point where
they do not need rent assistance. The program is administered by the St. Louis Park Housing
Authority, but participants are free to choose a rental unit anywhere in suburban Hennepin
County.
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2014 Semi-Annual Housing Programs Activity Report Page 15
6. PROGRAM DESCRIPTIONS
Technical, Design, and Conservation Services
Architectural Design Service
This service provides an architectural consultation for residents to assist with brainstorming
remodeling possibilities and to raise the awareness of design possibilities for expansions.
Residents select an approved architect from a pool developed in conjunction with the MN
Chapter of the American Institute of Architects. All homeowners considering renovations are
eligible for this service regardless of income; however, to ensure committed participants,
residents make a $25 co-pay.
Remodeling/Rehab Advisor
The intention of this service is to help residents improve their homes (either maintenance or
value added improvements) by providing technical help before and during the construction
process. All homeowners are eligible for this service regardless of income. Resident surveys
indicated that homeowners valued the service and would recommend it to others. The City
contracts with the Center for Energy and Environment (CEE) for this service.
Home Energy Squad Enhanced Visit
Home Energy Squad Enhanced program is a comprehensive residential energy program designed
to help residents save money and energy and stay comfortable in their homes. The cost per
resident was decreased to $50 per enhanced visit in 2013. The home energy squad consultant
evaluates energy saving opportunities and installs the energy-efficiency materials the homeowner
choses including: door weather stripping, water heater blanket, programmable thermostat,
compact fluorescent light bulbs, high efficiency shower heads and faucet aerators. They will also
perform diagnostic tests including a blower door test to measure the home for air leaks, complete
an insulation inspection, safety check the home’s heating system and water heater and help with
next steps such as finding insulation contractors. All single family and duplex homeowners are
eligible. Renters qualify for the installed visit ($30) without diagnostic tests. The Home Energy
Squad Enhanced visits qualified residents for CEE’s low interest financing and utility rebates
and they also notify residents of the city loan and rebate opportunities.
The program which began in March, 2012, is administered by the Center for Energy and
Environment (CEE). The city pays $70 per resident visit which is leveraged with funds from
Xcel Energy, Center Point Energy and CEE.
Annual Home Remodeling Fair
The cities and school district community education departments of St. Louis Park, Hopkins,
Minnetonka, and Golden Valley co-sponsor the annual home remodeling fair. The fair provides
residents an opportunity to attend seminars, talk with vendors and city staff about permits,
zoning, home improvement loans, and environmental issues related to remodeling. The fair is a
self-sustaining event and vendor registration fees cover the costs.
Home Remodeling Tour
The annual tour is designed to meet the housing goal to remodel and expand single family owner
occupied homes. The self-guided tour of six homes provides a showcase of a variety of home
remodeling projects to provide ideas, information, and inspiration to other residents considering
remodeling.
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2014 Semi-Annual Housing Programs Activity Report Page 16
Financial Programs
Discount Loan Program
This program encourages residents to improve their homes by “discounting” the interest rate on
the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (MN Housing) home improvement loans. Residents
with incomes of $67,200 or less qualify for a greater discount than those with incomes of
$96,500 or less. Eligible improvements include most home improvement projects with the
exception of luxury items such as pools and spas. The City contracts with CEE for loan
administration. Implementation of discounting of MHFA loans began in late 1999 as a pilot
project.
Move – Up Transformation Loan
The purpose of this loan is to encourage residents with incomes at or below 120% of median area
income ($98,750 for a family of four) to expand their homes. The program provides deferred
loans for 25% of the applicant’s home expansion project cost, with a maximum loan of $25,000.
The revolving loan pool will continue to fund future expansions. Three loans were repaid in 2013
totaling $52,249.48. Three loans were also paid off in 2012 for a total of $59,360.
This loan requires significant upfront work by the residents, from deciding on the scope of the
project to selecting contractors. Loan guidelines are:
• Only residents making significant expansions are eligible. The minimum project cost must
exceed $35,000.
• The maximum loan amount is $25,000.
• The loan has 0% interest with a carrying cost fee of 3% paid by the borrower which covers
the lender’s administrative fee.
Green Remodeling Program & Energy Rebates
The Green Remodeling Program includes the Home Energy Squad Enhanced home visit
program, use of energy rebates, and access to CEE’s Home Energy Loan. The city provides a
match of 50% of gas and electric utility rebates for energy efficient furnaces, water heaters, air
conditioners and qualifying air sealing and insulation. The average rebate in 2014 was $215 for a
total City cost of $13,599. Air sealing and insulation is a new rebate program that began in 2013
and rebates average $500. CEE also provided low interest loans to residents making qualifying
energy improvements. This energy improvement loan has no income restrictions and there is no
cost to the City.
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2014 Semi-Annual Housing Programs Activity Report Page 17
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: August 25, 2014
Written Report: 6
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: July 2014 Monthly Financial Report
RECOMMENDED ACTION: No action required at this time.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time.
SUMMARY: The Monthly Financial Report provides a summary of General Fund revenues
and departmental expenditures and a comparison of budget to actual throughout the year.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: At the end of July, General Fund
expenditures total 55% of the adopted annual budget, which is about 3% under where
expenditures would normally be through July. Please see the attached analysis for more details.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Summary of Revenues & Expenditures
Prepared by: Darla Monson, Senior Accountant
Reviewed by: Brian A. Swanson, Controller
Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 6) Page 2
Title: July 2014 Monthly Financial Report
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: This report is designed to provide summary information of the overall level
of revenues and departmental expenditures in the General Fund and a comparison of budget to
actual throughout the year.
PRESENT CONSIDERATIONS: Actual expenditures should generally run at about 58% of
the annual budget at the end of July. Currently, General Fund expenditures are at approximately
55% of the adopted budget. Revenues tend to be harder to measure in this same way due to the
timing of when they are received, examples of which include property taxes and State aid
payments. A few brief comments on specific variances are noted below.
Revenues:
• License and permit revenues are at 79.5% of budget through July. This is due in part to
that all 2014 business and liquor license revenues that were budgeted have been received,
which is consistent with previous years. Permit revenues are at just under 71% of budget.
July revenues included a large permit for the continued work on Knollwood Mall.
• Fine revenues are exceeding budget by about 12% through July. Liquor violation and
police court fines are running higher than budget and higher than the previous year.
Expenditures:
• The Accounting Division is currently running about 8% over budget because of the
property and liability insurance premium expense. For simplicity, all property and
liability premium expenses for General Fund departments are budgeted under
Accounting. A budget amendment will be proposed later in the year to more accurately
reflect the insurance costs.
• Human Resources expenditures are exceeding budget by about 6% because of
unbudgeted expenses related to the Health in the Park program. These additional
expenses are offset by grant revenues. A budget amendment will be proposed later in the
year to reflect both the revenue and expense for this new program.
• Public Works Administration continues to have a variance of about 1%, which relates to
a staffing allocation and is being partially mitigated by underspending in supplies and
services and other charges. The variance is caused by a budget allocation change for one
of the admin positions splitting time between City Hall and the Municipal Service Center.
The additional payroll expenses in Public Works Administration are offset in the Public
Works Engineering budget, which is well under budget due to this and also the vacant
City Engineer position. A budget amendment will be proposed for these and other
personnel related items later in the year, and adjustments will be made to correct the
salary allocations to more accurately reflect current staffing levels.
• The Organized Recreation Division shows a temporary expenditure variance of about 7%
due to the fact that the full Community Education contribution for 2014 of $187,400 was
paid to the school district early in the year. The timing of this payment is consistent with
prior years, and this division would be right on budget but not for this exception.
• The Vehicle Maintenance Division continues to run a small overage of about 2.8% on
expenditures because of overtime, tires, and repair parts.
NEXT STEPS: None are required at this time.
Summary of Revenues & Expenditures - General Fund As of July 31, 2014 20142014201220122013201320142014 Balance YTD Budget BudgetActual BudgetAudited Budget Jul YTD Remaining to Actual %General Fund Revenues: General Property Taxes20,169,798$ 20,209,604$ 20,657,724$ 21,987,968$ 21,157,724$ 11,118,240$ 10,039,484$ 52.55% Licenses and Permits2,375,399 3,241,812 2,481,603 3,069,088 2,691,518 2,140,806 550,712 79.54% Fines & Forfeits328,150 341,356 335,150 311,882 320,150 225,101 95,049 70.31% Intergovernmental1,232,579 1,365,023 1,300,191 2,031,355 1,282,777 589,756 693,021 45.97% Charges for Services2,341,104 2,169,631 1,837,976 1,779,259 1,857,718 1,073,961 783,757 57.81% Miscellaneous Revenue1,079,550 1,092,234 1,092,381 1,067,210 1,112,369 709,422 402,947 63.78% Transfers In2,023,003 2,066,136 1,816,563 1,805,223 1,837,416 1,057,243 780,173 57.54% Investment Earnings125,000 136,415 150,000 14,180 150,000 - 150,000 0.00% Other Income45,600 276,273 36,650 10,756 17,950 10,207 7,743 56.86%Total General Fund Revenues29,720,183$ 30,898,483$ 29,708,238$ 32,076,921$ 30,427,622$ 16,924,736$ 13,502,886$ 55.62%General Fund Expenditures: General Government: Administration1,012,554$ 977,392$ 877,099$ 890,883$ 939,391$ 529,885$ 409,506$ 56.41% Accounting641,691 639,999 827,320 819,458 767,094 506,688 260,406 66.05% Assessing517,840 518,271 543,855 543,202 559,749 312,960 246,789 55.91% Human Resources667,612 645,357 678,988 731,634 693,598 441,669 251,929 63.68% Community Development1,076,376 1,052,186 1,094,517 1,090,213 1,151,467 623,110 528,357 54.11% Facilities Maintenance1,083,128 972,481 1,074,920 1,058,127 1,053,715 595,988 457,727 56.56% Information Resources1,507,579 1,363,266 1,770,877 1,597,993 1,456,979 838,925 618,054 57.58% Communications & Marketing265,426 244,392 201,322 170,013 566,801 272,833 293,968 48.14% Community Outreach8,185 5,341 8,185 (22,450) 8,185 3,888 4,297 47.50% Engineering927,337 939,425 303,258 296,383 506,996 46,074 460,922 9.09%Total General Government7,707,728$ 7,358,111$ 7,380,341$ 7,175,456$ 7,703,975$ 4,172,020$ 3,531,955$ 54.15% Public Safety: Police7,273,723$ 7,124,784$ 7,443,637$ 7,225,579$ 7,571,315$ 4,332,539$ 3,238,776$ 57.22% Fire Protection3,346,931 3,291,655 3,330,263 3,246,162 3,458,161 1,944,775 1,513,386 56.24% Inspectional Services1,889,340 1,869,616 1,928,446 1,932,021 2,006,200 1,056,751 949,449 52.67%Total Public Safety12,509,994$ 12,286,055$ 12,702,346$ 12,403,762$ 13,035,676$ 7,334,065$ 5,701,611$ 56.26% Operations & Recreation: Public Works Administration389,783$ 378,852$ 393,054$ 288,207$ 222,994$ 132,217$ 90,777$ 59.29% Public Works Operations2,604,870 2,521,463 2,698,870 2,720,563 2,625,171 1,319,780 1,305,391 50.27% Organized Recreation1,305,747 1,352,273 1,280,117 1,256,678 1,290,038 839,752 450,286 65.10% Recreation Center1,466,246 1,516,121 1,449,930 1,501,627 1,543,881 893,474 650,407 57.87% Park Maintenance1,461,645 1,444,448 1,431,825 1,424,139 1,423,011 791,849 631,162 55.65% Westwood515,456 506,404 520,554 503,309 531,853 276,117 255,736 51.92% Environment390,009 382,378 430,876 434,297 433,750 176,264 257,486 40.64% Vehicle Maintenance1,188,705 1,326,153 1,240,325 1,268,559 1,285,489 785,631 499,858 61.12%Total Operations & Recreation9,322,461$ 9,428,091$ 9,445,551$ 9,397,379$ 9,356,187$ 5,215,084$ 4,141,103$ 55.74% Non-Departmental: General -$ 65,292$ -$ 256,627$ 4,000$ 1,126$ 2,874$ 28.16% Transfers Out- 1,160,000 - 60,000 - - - 0.00% Tax Court Petitions180,000 - 180,000 53,345 327,784 - 327,784 0.00%Total Non-Departmental180,000$ 1,225,292$ 180,000$ 369,972$ 331,784$ 1,126$ 330,658$ 0.34%Total General Fund Expenditures29,720,183$ 30,297,549$ 29,708,238$ 29,346,569$ 30,427,622$ 16,722,295$ 13,705,327$ 54.96%Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 6) Title: July 2014 Monthly Financial ReportPage 3
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: August 25, 2014
Written Report: 7
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Delinquent Utility Accounts
RECOMMENDED ACTION: No formal action required. As requested by the Council, this
report and discussion is a follow-up to the 2013 Delinquent Accounts Certification the Council
approved last fall and to provide recommendations on changes for 2014 certification.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the Council agree with the recommended policy changes to 2014 delinquent account
certification:
• New notification fee: A $15 administrative fee would be charged at the beginning of the
certification process to all accounts that are sent notification letters.
• Certification fee: The $30 administrative fee would be charged to all accounts with
balances not paid by the due date and certified to Hennepin County.
• New fee second consecutive year: An additional $75 administrative fee would be
charged starting the second consecutive year of certification.
SUMMARY: At the October 21, 2013 Public Hearing certifying delinquent accounts, the
Council expressed interest in the number of utility accounts that were certified on an annual
basis, and if there was anything that could be done to encourage customers to pay their bills more
timely. Council requested that a study session be scheduled to allow review of the process.
Staff presented information at the July 21, 2014 Council Study Session regarding delinquent
accounts and presented the Council with a number of options to consider. The Council directed
staff to explore charging an administrative fee to all delinquent accounts at the beginning of the
certification process, along with an administrative fee to all delinquent accounts that are
certified. Council also directed staff to explore adding an administrative penalty fee to accounts
that were certified for a second consecutive year. Information regarding these two possibilities is
outlined in this report.
Next steps: If no other questions or information is needed regarding recommended changes to
fees for certification process, staff will bring a resolution to the Council on September 15, 2014
for approval of the fees. The changes would then be implemented for the 2014 certification
process.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: None at this time.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Sample Certification Letter
Prepared by: Steven Heintz, Finance Supervisor
Reviewed by: Brian Swanson, Controller
Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 7) Page 2
Title: Delinquent Utility Accounts
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: On October 21, 2013 the Council certified delinquent accounts and also
requested a study session on certification. On July 21, 2014, Council held a study session
regarding the current certification process and reviewed data from St. Louis Park and other cities.
In the past, fees were set a onetime $30 administrative fee charged only at the end of the
certification process and only to accounts that are certified to Hennepin County. Each year, there
are approximately 1700 accounts that are put into certification at the beginning of the process
and notified via letter of the delinquent balance and pending certification. Approximately half of
these accounts pay the delinquent balance prior to the due date, and are not charged any
administrative fee, even though the City incurs a fair amount of costs related to staff time and
mailing of letters. After review of information and discussion at the study session, Council
requested staff make changes to the fee structure for certification. Staff is recommending the
following changes for 2014 certification based on discussion on this topic at the July 21, 2014
Council Study Session.
• New notification fee: A $15 administrative fee would be charged at the beginning of the
certification process to all accounts that are sent notification letters. This is a new fee
that would be added at the initial stage of the process. If payment is made prior to
starting the certification process, no additional fees are charged.
• Certification fee: The $30 administrative fee would be charged to all accounts with
balances not paid by the due date and certified to Hennepin County. (In the past, this has
been the only administrative fee that has been charged in this process). Those that have
amounts certified would pay a total administrative fee of $45 ($15 initial notice fee plus
$30 certification fee = $45).
• New fee second consecutive year: An additional $75 administrative fee would be
charged starting the second consecutive year of certification. The property owner would
have to pay the standard certification fees stated above of $15 initial fee and $30
certification fee plus an additional $75 starting the second consecutive year for a total of
$120. This is based on Council discussion and data presented on the number of accounts
certified in each of the last three years. The data presented showed that 343 accounts, or
43% of the accounts certified, were certified in each of the past three years. At this time
we are not recommending adding more than one level of administrative penalties for
nonconsecutive payment since it would require a fairly significant amount of additional
City staff time, as well as additional programming by the City’s software vendor.
Therefore, after considering the additional costs, staff recommends adding just one level
of administrative penalty fee of $75 that would start the second consecutive year and
continue. This fee only applies if there are consecutive years of nonpayment.
Staff has received information from the Housing Program Coordinator on resources, such as non-
profits, that customers can contact for assistance if they are having trouble paying their bills.
Utility Billing staff will provide this information to these customers as they receive inquires on
delinquent balances.
NEXT STEPS: If the Council chooses to move forward with these policy changes, staff would
bring a resolution to the Council on September 15, 2014 for approval of the fees. The changes
would then be implemented for the 2014 certification process. An outline of that process is
provided below.
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 7) Page 3
Title: Delinquent Utility Accounts
September 26th- Certification process begins and notification letters are sent to all accounts with
a delinquent balance over $150 ($30 for finalled accounts) as of August 21, 2014. An
administrative fee of $15 would be charged to these accounts. Staff would work on sending
additional information along with the letters to explain these policy changes.
October 20th- Public Hearing before City Council and adoption of Resolution Certifying
Delinquent Accounts.
October 31st- Certification due date. Last day for payments to be made on delinquent accounts.
November 3rd- 7th. The second administrative fee of $30 is applied to all accounts still in
certification. In addition, all accounts being certified for the second consecutive year would
receive an additional $75 administrative penalty fee. After applying these fees, the accounts
would be written off in the utility billing system and sent to Hennepin County for collection with
the 2015 property taxes. These accounts are then charged interest at a rate of 5.85% for 13
months, for an effective interest rate of 6.34%.
Study Session Meeting of August 25, 2014 (Item No. 7) Page 4
Title: Delinquent Utility Accounts
5005 Minnetonka Blvd
St. Louis Park, MN 55416-2216
Date of Notice: October 1, 2014
Mailing Address Line 1
Mailing Address Line 2
Mailing Address Line 3
Mailing Address Line 4
Mailing Address Line 5
Mailing Address Line 6
RE: Charges Owed: For Delinquent Utility Account:
Service Address: Service Address
Delinquent Amount: Current WO Balance
Account Number: Account Number
Customer Number: Customer Number
Property I.D. Number: Tax Roll Numeric
Dear: Customer Name
The City of St. Louis Park encourages its customers to remain current in the payment of their bills. When
accounts become delinquent, according to Minnesota law, they may be certified to Hennepin County to
be collected with property taxes payable in the next year.
City of St. Louis Park records show this account was delinquent as of September 18, 2014. By receiving
this letter, this account has been moved into certification, and has received an administrative charge of
$15.00. The $15 administrative charge is not reflected in the delinquent amount above. In an effort to
avoid the account from being certified to the property taxes, the City is requesting that payment in full plus
the $15 administrative fee be received at City Hall by Friday, October 31, 2014 at 4:30p.m. If payment in
full is not received by that date and time, the outstanding delinquent amount, plus an additional
administrative charge of $30.00, and interest at a rate of 5.85% for 13 months will be sent to Hennepin
County for collection with the property taxes in 2014 (total administrative fee is $45). If this account was
certified in the prior year, a $75 administrative penalty will also be assessed to the account (total
administrative fee is $120).
The City Council will consider final action on all delinquent accounts at a public hearing during the regular
Council meeting on Monday, October 20, 2014 at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers. A written appeal
may be presented to the Council at that time or appeals may be made to Brian Swanson - Controller,
5005 Minnetonka Blvd., St. Louis Park, MN 55416. The City would like to avoid the certification process,
as it adds additional costs to all parties involved in the long run.
Please feel free to contact our office at (952) 924-2111 if you have questions regarding this notice.
Payments may be made via cash, check, or credit card in person at City Hall, by mailing a check to City
Hall, or paying by credit card at https://eub.stlouispark.org. Payments cannot be accepted over the
phone. eBill customers should check their “junk” email folder for any email notifications they did not
receive.
Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.
Brian Swanson
Controller