HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007/08/13 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Study SessionCity Council Study Session
August 13, 2007
6:30 p.m.
Council Chambers
Discussion Items
1. 6:30 p.m. Future Agenda Planning
2. 6:35 p.m. 2006 Consolidated Annual Financial Report (CAFR)/Audit
3. 7:05 p.m. Joint Powers Agreement with Golden Valley for Duke Project
4. 7:35 p.m. 2008 Budget
5. 8:35 p.m. Environmental Update (Verbal)
Written Reports
6. Telecommunications Advisory Commission Mid-Year Report
7. 7200 Cedar Lake Road – Walgreens Proposed Easement Vacation
8. Human Rights Commission Mid-Year Report
8:50 p.m. Adjourn
Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. To make
arrangements, please call the Administrative Services Department at (952) 924-2525 (TDD
(952) 924-2518) at least 96 hours in advance of meeting.
St. Louis Park City Council Study Session
Discussion Item: 081307 - 1 - Future Study Session Agenda
Page 1
1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning Administrative Services
PURPOSE OF DISCUSSION:
To assist the City Council and the City Manager in setting the next study session agenda.
BACKGROUND:
At each study session, approximately five minutes are set aside to discuss the next study session
agenda. For this purpose, attached please find the tentative agenda and proposed discussion
items for the regularly scheduled study session on August 27.
Attachment: Future Study Session Agenda Planning
Prepared by: Marcia Honold, Management Assistant
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
St. Louis Park City Council Study Session
Discussion Item: 081307 - 1 - Future Study Session Agenda
Page 2
Future Study Session Agenda Planning
Tentative Discussion Items
Monday, August 27, 2007 – 6:30 p.m.
A. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – Administrative Services (5 minutes)
B. Anderson Builders Redevelopment Assistance - Community Development (30 minutes)
Staff to discuss Anderson Builders’ proposed redevelopment project on Walker Street
(immediately east of Anderson’s existing building) and their request for TIF. Policy
questions to consider include: Does the Council support using TIF for this project? How
does the Council wish to provide financial assistance for other small redevelopment
projects in the city?
C. Discuss 2008 Budget – Finance (60 minutes)
Staff and Council will discuss the 2008 budget and the proposed tax levy adjustment for
2008.
D. Tobacco Penalties – Administrative Services (30 minutes)
Council and staff will discuss possible changes to the administrative penalties section of
the ordinance.
Reports
Financial Report - Finance
Wireless Update – Information Resources
8:35 p.m. End of Meeting
St. Louis Park City Council Study Session
Discussion Item: 081307 - 2 - 2006 CAFR Audit Presentation
Page 1
2. 2006 Consolidated Annual Financial Report (CAFR)/Audit Finance
PURPOSE OF DISCUSSION:
This presentation will allow Steve McDonald, from Abdo Eick & Meyers, LLP (the City’s
auditor), to discuss the audit, management report, and financial highlights with the City Council.
BACKGROUND:
The City is required to have an independent audit performed annually. The auditors work for the
City Council, not the city management team. By state statute they are required to present their
findings within 30 days of completion of the audit.
The audit was completed without much disruption this year despite the loss of several
accountants and the Assistant Finance Director’s maternity leave. The audit opinion is
“unqualified”, which means that Abdo Eick & Meyers, LLP believe the financial statements, as
presented by city staff, fairly represent the city’s financial condition as of December 31, 2006.
There were no reportable conditions discovered through the audit.
Mr. McDonald will discuss financial highlights in conjunction with his management report.
Supplements: 2006 CAFR
Management Report
Minnesota Legal Compliance Letter
Prepared by: Bruce DeJong, Finance Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Study Session
Discussion Item: 081307 - 3 - Duke Joint Powers Agreement With Golden Valley
Page 1
3. Joint Powers Agreement with Golden Valley for Duke
Project
Community Development
PURPOSE OF DISCUSSION:
The purpose of this discussion is to update the City Council regarding the Joint Powers
Agreement (JPA) proposed for the Duke Realty development project. Earlier draft JPA’s were
discussed with the City Council at a study sessions in August 2006 and February 2007. The
attached revised JPA responds to the comments made by both City Councils, the evolution of the
project and input from the City Attorneys. It is still a work in progress. It is anticipated that a
final version of the JPA will be ready for City Council action in September 2007.
BACKGROUND:
A JPA between the Cities of St. Louis Park and Golden Valley is needed for Duke Realty to
redevelop a portion of the approximately 43.5 acres located in the southwest corner of Highways
394 and 100. The Duke redevelopment site is mostly in St. Louis Park (SLP), but approximately
15 acres of the area straddles the Golden Valley/St. Louis Park boundary line. About 6 acres of
this site is in Golden Valley (GV) and 9 acres is in SLP (see attached map). Redevelopment of
this site will be greatly enhanced if it can be developed as if it were a single parcel wholly within
St. Louis Park.
A Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) has been proposed as a means to treat this site as if it were a
single parcel in SLP. The agreement is constructed from the very significant past efforts by SLP
and GV to prepare a joint powers agreement.
The proposed agreement gives SLP overall authority for the parcel including responsibility for
development approvals, on-going land use regulations and provision of public services. The
agreement gives SLP authority to control the property’s land use. SLP will apply its “official
controls” (zoning ordinance, subdivision ordinance, etc) to the property.
Current JPA Features
Concept Plan Approvals
Attached to the final JPA will be concept plans for the Subject Property (the office development
portion of the project) that shows two alternative development scenarios. One will be a three
office building scenario and the other will be a four building scenario. Inclusion of the proposed
concept plans will make it clear what will be built on the Subject Property. If the developer
wishes to make material changes to the concept plan, the JPA must be amended by the approval
of both SLP and GV. A definition of what constitutes a “material change” is being prepared to
be included in the final version of JPA.
West 16th Street.
A key element issue for the JPA has been the extension of West 16th Street. Duke’s concept
plans call for the extension of West 16th to Utica Avenue; and Utica Avenue connects to
Wayzata Blvd. The proposed JPA accepts this concept plan. It requires any change in the
concept plan that would extend W16th Street directly west through the Subject Property (the 15
acre Duke property covered by the JPA) to be approved by both SLP and GV. It is not
anticipated that this would ever be needed.
City Council Study Session
Discussion Item: 081307 - 3 - Duke Joint Powers Agreement With Golden Valley
Page 2
West 16th Pedestrian/bike connection
The current Duke redevelopment plans include and the proposed JPA requires a pedestrian and
bicycle connections directly to Wayzata Blvd in GV through the Subject Property including the
proposed parking ramps that serve the proposed office development. It is anticipated that specific
design requirements for the connection will be added to the JPA before the final document is
ready for approval.
Traffic Calming on Wayzata Blvd
A key concern from GV residents in the South Tyrol Hills neighborhood has been traffic on
Wayzata Blvd east of Hwy 100 and west of France Avenue. The JPA will address this issue by
requiring the developer to commit to funding a defined level of traffic calming improvements
along Wayzata Blvd. It is likely that the specific improvements will not be decided until after the
JPA is in place. The JPA will define the types of improvements and the extent of commitment
the developer will make toward funding those improvements. The SRF traffic engineers are
preparing suggested improvements and cost estimates at this time. It is expected that acceptable,
cost effective solutions can be found.
Property Taxes
The current proposed JPA will not affect property taxes. The taxable value of the Duke project
will be allocated based on the location of the actual improvements. The previous draft of the JPA
included a specific split of the taxable value between the two cities
Duke’s concept plan proposes to locate the office buildings in SLP and the parking ramps in GV.
The vast majority of the tax value is associated with the actual office buildings and therefore will
accrue to SLP. Preliminary calculations of the projected tax value of SLP and GV portions of
the project are being prepared with the help of each city’s assessors.
TIF District Potential.
The current draft JPA allows each city to decide for itself whether or not to create a TIF district.
It is anticipated that at least some TIF assistance while be needed for the Duke project and that
SLP will create a TIF district. Since the majority of the taxable value of the Subject Property is
expected to be in SLP, we will have the opportunity to capture significant tax increment should
we choose to create a district.
GV is not anticipating creating a TIF district; and, it does not appear that the GV portion of the
Subject Property would qualify as a TIF district. In any case, a relatively small portion of the
Duke project’s taxable value will be located in GV.
General Ordinances
The intent of the JPA is for SLP to have responsibility for issuing building permits, enforcing
general ordinances and collecting the related fees throughout the Subject Property, whether it is
the SLP or GV portion of the site. This is relatively straight forward for things governed by state
statute like building permits which is under the state building code. Details for how this would
work for local ordinances are being worked out.
City Council Study Session
Discussion Item: 081307 - 3 - Duke Joint Powers Agreement With Golden Valley
Page 3
NEXT STEPS:
The JPA is being reviewed and discussed by the Golden Valley City Council also. Comments
from each city will be used to refine and help create a final version of the JPA for each City
Council’s Consideration this fall. The goal is to bring the JPA back in September
Attachments: Draft Joint Powers Agreement
Map of Project Area (Supplement)
Prepared by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Study Session
Discussion Item: 081307 - 3 - Duke Joint Powers Agreement With Golden Valley
Page 4
JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT
AGREEMENT made this ___ day of ____________, 2007, by and between the CITY
OF ST. LOUIS PARK, a Minnesota municipal corporation (“St. Louis Park”), and the CITY
OF GOLDEN VALLEY, a Minnesota municipal corporation (“Golden Valley”).
RECITALS
A. Minn. Stat. § 471.59 et seq. authorizes cities to enter into joint powers
agreements.
B. Highways I-394 and T.H. 100 functionally isolate approximately six (6) acres
within Golden Valley from the remainder of the City of Golden Valley. This property is
legally described on the attached Exhibit “A” (“Subject Property”).
C. The Subject Property presently is occupied by small office buildings, parking lots
and roads.
D. The owner of the Subject Property intends to redevelop the Subject Property as
part of one project which includes approximately nine (9) acres of adjoining property in
St. Louis Park under common ownership (the “Project”). This nine (9) acre property is
legally described on the attached Exhibit “B” (“St. Louis Park Property”). The
development concepts for the Project are in either three building or four building
configurations depicted on Exhibit “C” (“Concept Plan”).
E. The parties desire to achieve efficiency in development approval, on-going land
use regulations, general police power, property tax administration and in providing City
services to the Subject Property.
NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL
COVENANTS, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
1. LAND USE CONTROLS
A. St. Louis Park and Golden Valley hereby approve the Concept Plan depicted on
Exhibit C in a three building or four building configuration. To the extent that the property
owner constructs the project in accordance with the Concept Plan, no further approval will be
required by the City of Golden Valley. However, if the landowner departs in any material way
from the Concept Plans indicated, an amendment to this Agreement approved by both Cities is
required. The Concept Plan shall show at least a site plan, parking ramp accesses to the frontage
road, traffic calming, pedestrian access throughout the Project, and height and mass of structures
and so forth.
B. To the extent provided in this Paragraph 1, St. Louis Park will adopt, administer
and enforce all “official controls” as the term is defined in Minn. Stat. § 462.352, Subd. 15
(2000) for the Subject Property to the same extent as if the Subject Property was within its
corporate limits. Such official controls are intended to be exercised in such a manner as to
extend to the Subject Property the same comprehensive plan designation and official controls as
are applicable to the St. Louis Park Property. 16th Street will not be extended directly easterly
from Utica Avenue through the Subject Property and the St. Louis Park Property without prior
approval of Golden Valley and St. Louis Park in the form of an amendment to this Agreement.
City Council Study Session
Discussion Item: 081307 - 3 - Duke Joint Powers Agreement With Golden Valley
Page 5
Nothing in this Agreement or the Concept Plan, however, shall be construed to be a limitation on
St. Louis Park’s regulatory authority in its application of official controls to the Project.
C. St. Louis Park shall administer and enforce official controls, including without
limitation environmental review, zoning, and subdivision controls, for the Project and all new
buildings and land uses within the Subject Property. Until such time as St. Louis Park has issued
a building permit for a new building within the Subject Property, Golden Valley shall administer
and enforce all official controls for existing buildings and land uses within the Subject Property.
Thereafter, St. Louis Park shall administer and enforce its official controls for all existing and
new buildings and land uses within the Subject Property.
D. If within seven (7) years from the date of this Agreement St. Louis Park has not
granted final approval for a planned unit development for the Project substantially consistent
with the Concept Plan, or any amendment thereto approved by both cities, then this Agreement
shall automatically terminate with no further action required by either party. If a complete
planned unit development application has been submitted to and is under consideration by St.
Louis Park, this seven (7) year period shall toll until such time as the City Council takes final
action on the pending application. St. Louis Park shall notify Golden Valley when/if it has
approved the planned unit development for the Project.
2. ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS. St. Louis Park will conduct all
environmental reviews and enforce environmental laws relating to the Subject Property with
respect to the Project and following its approval to the same extent as if the Subject Property was
within its corporate limits. St. Louis Park will be the Local Governmental Unit (LGU) for
purposes of administration of the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA), Minn. Stat., 103G et seq.,
and Responsible Government Unit (RGU) for purposes of environmental review pursuant to
Minn. Stat. 116D.01, et seq.
3. GENERAL ORDINANCES. At such time as St. Louis Park issues a building
permit for a new building within the Subject Property, St. Louis Park will exercise on behalf of
Golden Valley their common powers to adopt and enforce general policy power ordinances
within the Subject Property to the same kind and extent it applies its general policy power
ordinances within the City of St. Louis Park. Until such time, the Subject Property shall be
subject to municipal authority relating to general police power in the same manner and to the
same extent as presently exists.
4. PUBLIC SAFETY. At such time as St. Louis Park issues a building permit for a
new building within the Subject Property, St. Louis Park will provide police services and enforce
all criminal statutes and St. Louis Park City Ordinances within the Subject Property to the same
kind and extent it provides such overall services and enforcement within the City of St. Louis
Park. Until such time, the Subject Property shall be subject to municipal authority and services
relating to public safety in the same manner and to the same extent as presently exists.
5. FIRE PROTECTION. At such time as St. Louis Park issues a building permit
for a new building within the Subject Property, St. Louis Park will provide fire inspection and
protection services for the Subject Property to the same kind and extent it provides such overall
services within the City of St. Louis Park. Until such time, the Subject Property shall be subject
to municipal authority and services relating to fire protection in the same manner and to the same
extent as presently exists.
City Council Study Session
Discussion Item: 081307 - 3 - Duke Joint Powers Agreement With Golden Valley
Page 6
6. PUBLIC UTILITIES AND REDEVELOPMENT. Subject to the provisions of
paragraph 1.A. hereof, at such time as St. Louis Park issues a building permit for a new building
within the Subject Property, St. Louis Park will provide sanitary sewer, storm sewer, water and
other available public utilities to the Subject Property and collect fees and user chargers for all
such utility services. St. Louis Park may undertake redevelopment activities pursuant to Minn.
Stat. Chapter 469, install public improvements, issue bonds pursuant to Minn. Stat. Chapter 475,
and levy special assessments pursuant to Minn. Stat. Chapter 429. Sanitary sewer and/or water
may be provided by Golden Valley pursuant to further agreement of the parties.429 and impose
charges pursuant to Minn. Stat. Chapter 444. Until such time, the Subject Property shall be
subject to municipal authority with respect to public utilities and redevelopment as described in
this paragraph in the same manner and to the same extent as presently exists. Sanitary sewer
and/or water may be provided by Golden Valley pursuant to further agreement of the parties.
7. BUSINESS AND LIQUOR LICENSES. Subject to the provisions of paragraph
1.A. hereof, at such time as St. Louis Park issues a building permit for a new building within the
Subject Property, St. Louis Park’s business and liquor licensing regulations will apply to the
Subject Property and shall be enforced within the Subject Property by St. Louis Park. Until such
time, the Subject Property shall be subject to municipal authority relating to business and liquor
licensing regulations in the same manner and to the same extent as presently exists.
8. TRAFFIC CALMING. [Language to address traffic calming on Wayzata
Boulevard between France and Highway 100]
9. NO RETAINED AUTHORITY. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 1.A.
hereof, at such time as St. Louis Park issues a building permit for a new building within the
Subject Property, Golden Valley hereby grants to the City of St. Louis Park all of the municipal
powers Golden Valley has with respect to the Subject Property, except for the power to levy and
collect property taxes pursuant to this Agreement. Until such time, Golden Valley shall have
retained such municipal powers except to the extent provided in Paragraphs 1 and 2.
9.10. FEES. All license fees, permit fees, inspection fees, development fees, special
assessments, connection charges, storm water utility fees and the like collected from the Subject
Property will be retained by St. Louis Park, unless Golden Valley provides certain services in
which instance the payments shall be directed to Golden Valley.
10.11. PROPERTY TAXES. The tax capacity of, and the power to levy on and collect
property taxes from, Golden Valley with respect to the Subject Property and by St. Louis Park
with respect to the St. Louis Park Property will be uninfluenced by this Agreement, and shall
remain allocated to the respective City. The owner of the Subject Property and the St. Louis
Park Property expects to construct improvements, constituting not less than thirty percent (30%)
of the assessed value of the Project within the St. Louis Park Property.
11.12. ANNEXATION. Nothing herein precludes the owner(s) of the Subject Property
from exercising rights under Minn. Stat. Ch. 414 or successor statute relating to municipal
boundary adjustments; provided, however, that neither the fact of this Agreement, any facts or
circumstances created by it, nor the altered governmental relationships created by it with respect
to the Subject Property shall be used as grounds for, or to support, any annexation or detachment
concerning the Subject Property.
City Council Study Session
Discussion Item: 081307 - 3 - Duke Joint Powers Agreement With Golden Valley
Page 7
12.13. TERM. This Agreement shall be an initial term of sixty (60) years, commencing
on . with automatic ten (10) year renewals thereafter
unless a written cancellation notice is received by either party on or before two (2) years prior to
the end of any given renewal term. This Agreement shall also terminate at any time upon the
Subject Property being detached from Golden Valley and annexed into the City of St. Louis
Park.
13.14. AMENDMENTS. This Agreement may be amended at any time by agreement
of the parties; provided, however, that, unless waived, the owner(s) of the Subject Property shall
have received three (3) months advance written notice of the proposed amendment prior to the
presentation of the proposed amendment to the governing bodies of each of Golden Valley and
St. Louis Park. For purposes of the address for notice(s) to the owner(s) of the Subject Property,
the Cities shall use the addresses available through then-current property tax records.
14.15. NOTICES. Any notice required hereunder shall be hand delivered or by certified
mail at the following addresses unless the other party is given notice of a change of address by
certified mail:
City of St. Louis Park
Attention: City Clerk
5005 Minnetonka Boulevard
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
City Council Study Session
Discussion Item: 081307 - 3 - Duke Joint Powers Agreement With Golden Valley
Page 8
City of Golden Valley
Attention: City Clerk
7800 Golden Valley Road
Golden Valley, MN 55427
15.16. RECORDING. This document will be recorded against the Subject Property and
the adjoining St. Louis Park Property.
(The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.)
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of St. Louis Park and the City of Golden Valley
have caused this Agreement to be executed by their respective duly authorized officers pursuant
to the authority granted by the attached resolutions adopted by the City Council of St. Louis Park
and the City Council of Golden Valley.
Date: . 2007
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
BY:
Its
AND
Its
Date: . 2007
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
BY:
Its
AND
Its
City Council Study Session
Discussion Item: 081307 - 3 - Duke Joint Powers Agreement With Golden Valley
Page 9
CONSENT OF PROPERTY OWNERS
Duke Realty Corporation, the fee owner of the Subject Property and adjoining St. Louis
Park Property, on behalf of itself, its successors or assigns, acknowledges and consents to the
content of this Joint Powers Agreement dated between St. Louis
Park and Golden Valley.
DUKE REALTY CORPORATION
By:
Its:
")10 0
§¨¦394
St. Louis Park
Golden Valley
Duke Redevelopment Site
Cities of St. Louis Park and Golden Valley, Hennepin Co., MN
0 400 800200
Feet ±Created: August 9, 2006
Prepared by the St. Louis Park Community Development Department
Duke Redevelopment Site
Joint Powers AreaJoint Powers Area
St. Louis Park City Council Study Session
Discussion Item: 081307 - 4 - 2008 Budget
Page 1
4. 2008 Budget Finance
PURPOSE OF DISCUSSION:
This item is intended to begin to provide the City Council with a thorough understanding of the
items included in the 2008 property tax supported preliminary budget requests from the various
City departments. Staff proposes that this matter also be discussed at the August 27 study
session such that the City Council will be able to adopt a preliminary levy at its September 4
meeting. Please note that the CIP and other non-property tax supported budgets (e.g. Utility
budgets, EDA, etc) will be reviewed later this fall.
BACKGROUND:
City staff was asked to bring back a preliminary budget package that highlighted a baseline
budget (no new services or programs and an explanation of those budgets that exceed a 3%
adjustment for inflation). In addition, staff was also asked to identify in the budget new
programs or services being proposed. The attached sheets labeled “Summary of Budgeted
Expenditures by Function and Department” and “Summary of Expenditures by Department and
Category” show how budgeted expenditures have changed in each tax supported department.
The total change in the baseline budget is a 4% increase in expenditures over 2007 budget
amounts. Staff will provide a more detailed explanation of the budget changes during the study
session.
When taking into consideration new program requests and Vision St. Louis Park related items,
the 4% amount is increased by an additional 1.7% for a total expenditure increase of 5.7%. For
ease of discussion, all the Vision requests have been consolidated under Administration rather
than being spread among various departments involved in different Vision related matters.
Some department requests look unusually high or low compared to 2007. This is because of
reallocation of line items or staff. For example, the Communication and Marketing budget has
increased because the Webmaster, Jason Huber, has been transferred into this budget from the IR
budget. This drops the IR personnel budget significantly. The other large change is moving the
Volunteer Coordinator payment made to the school district out of the Community Outreach
budget and into Human Resources. When these items are looked at in combination, the
Communications & IR total budget change is a 4.2% baseline increase. Likewise, the
Community Outreach and HR budget total change is a 5.2% baseline increase.
Budgeted revenues other than property taxes are basically flat. This is based on no expected
change in building permit revenues. The permits projection is subject to fairly large swings
based on the general economy. Since the condo market has hit a lull, several projects have been
put on hold. We have not predicted a decrease in revenues, and we are about on pace to meet
this year’s projection. This implies that that our General Fund surplus will not be as large in
2007 and 2008 as it has been in the past several years.
Staff is looking at increasing license fees and development related charges by about 4% based on
our cost to provide the services. This revenue adjustment is not included in the attached
information and would reduce the amount of the levy increase needed. Those changes could be
accomplished when our fee schedule is updated in the September – October timeframe. Also,
the budget information is still preliminary and there may be ways to shift certain expenses to
St. Louis Park City Council Study Session
Discussion Item: 081307 - 4 - 2008 Budget
Page 2
non-tax supported budgets. For example, specific marketing and branding costs could be shifted
to the EDA budget as they certainly could be considered related to economic development.
Based on the last study session discussion, it was staff’s impression that most of the City Council
would be willing to consider a preliminary tax levy adjustment of around 6%. The attached
revenue and tax levy sheets show that we are able to meet that target with the baseline budget.
When including the new program and Vision requests the necessary tax levy increases up to 8%.
Please note that this is before any further refinements to the budget.
This budget addresses transfers from the Police and Fire pension funds in a modest way. The
cost of the annual radio usage fees are now being paid from the General Fund. The proposed
budget does not include any adjustments to the transfer of $384,000 from the Police and Fire
Pension fund for dispatch services. Long-term the reliance on the Pension Fund needs to end.
Staff does not yet have sufficient information regarding property values to make an estimate of
the impact of this budget on an individual home. We expect to be able to provide a rough guess
by the August 27 work session.
Staff plans on providing the Council a thorough presentation Monday night with additional
discussion scheduled for August 27. Staff asks that Council identify any further information it
may desire to assist with the August 27 meeting. Also, please note that additional discussion on
the tax supported budgets will occur after the preliminary levy is set. However, after the
preliminary levy is set it can be decreased by the time the budget is adopted in December, but it
cannot be increased.
Supplements: Summary of Budgeted Expenditures by Function and Department
Summary of Expenditures by Department and Category
Summary of Budgeted Revenues
Significant Budget Changes and New Programs for 2008
New Program Justification Sheets
Prepared by: Bruce DeJong, Finance Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City of St. Louis Park
General Fund and Park & Rec
Department, Division 2007 2008 New Program 2008
and Activity Adopted Baseline Requested Requested % change
General Government:
Administration/Legislative 982,931 1,050,329 6.9% 132,000 1,182,329 20.3%
Communications & Marketing 218,751 323,564 47.9% 21,530 345,094 57.8%
Community Outreach 116,397 83,983 -27.8% - 83,983 -27.8%
Human Resources 568,372 636,550 12.0% 25,000 661,550 16.4%
Information Resources 1,490,176 1,457,339 -2.2% 3,500 1,460,839 -2.0%
Finance 1,053,482 1,124,366 6.7% - 1,124,366 6.7%
Community Development 1,024,954 1,075,897 5.0% 5,000 1,080,897 5.5%
Facilities Maintenance 1,164,367 1,187,925 2.0% 0 1,187,925 2.0%
Total General Government 6,619,431 6,939,953 4.8% 187,030 7,126,983 7.7%
Public Safety:
Police 6,676,605 6,904,214 3.4% 121,000 7,025,214 5.2%
Fire Protection 2,756,522 2,932,120 6.4% 62,500 2,994,620 8.6%
Inspectional Services 1,793,306 1,844,261 2.8% 12,918 1,857,179 3.6%
Total Public Safety 11,226,433 11,680,595 4.0% 196,418 11,877,013 5.8%
Public Works:
Public Works Administration 799,587 824,083 3.1% 8,500 832,583 4.1%
Engineering 745,302 785,182 5.4% 5,000 790,182 6.0%
Operations 2,295,663 2,372,414 3.3% 40,000 2,412,414 5.1%
Total Public Works 3,840,552 3,981,679 3.7% 53,500 4,035,179 5.1%
Park & Recreation:
Organized Recreation 1,223,354 1,251,104 2.3% - 1,251,104 2.3%
Recreation Center 1,319,600 1,359,796 3.0% - 1,359,796 3.0%
Park Maintenance 1,333,382 1,373,041 3.0% 5,000 1,378,041 3.3%
Westwood 452,085 466,338 3.2% - 466,338 3.2%
Environment 276,598 288,982 4.5% - 288,982 4.5%
Vehicle Maintenance 1,003,119 1,047,039 4.4% 28,300 1,075,339 7.2%
Total Park & Recreation 5,608,137 5,786,300 3.2% 33,300 5,819,600 3.8%
Non-Departmental:
Allowance for Uncollectible Taxes 180,000 180,000 0.0% 180,000 0.0%
Total Non-Departmental 180,000 180,000 0.0% - 180,000 0.0%
Total General & Park Funds 27,474,553$ 28,568,526$ 4.0% 470,248$ 29,038,774$ 5.7%
Summary of Budgeted Expenditures By Function and Department
General Fund and Park & Rec
Department, Division 2007 2008 New Program 2008 Baseline Total
and Activity Adopted Baseline Requested Requested % change % change
General Government:
Legislative
Administration/Legislative
Personal Services 507,732 511,251 0 511,251 0.7% 0.7%
Supplies 3,950 4,350 0 4,350 10.1% 10.1%
Contractual Services 471,249 534,727 132,000 666,727 13.5% 41.5%
Capital Outlay - - - -
Total Administration 982,931 1,050,329 132,000 1,182,329 6.9% 20.3%
Communications & Marketing
Personal Services 99,061 161,014 21,530 182,544 62.5% 84.3%
Supplies 0000
Contractual Services 119,690 162,550 0 162,550 35.8% 35.8%
Capital Outlay - - - -
Total Communications 218,751 323,564 21,530 345,094 47.9% 57.8%
Community Outreach
Personal Services 71,292 73,127 0 73,127 2.6% 2.6%
Supplies 1,100 1,100 0 1,100 0.0% 0.0%
Contractual Services 44,005 9,756 0 9,756 -77.8% -77.8%
Capital Outlay - - - -
Total Comm Outreach 116,397 83,983 - 83,983 -27.8% -27.8%
Human Resources
Personal Services 433,712 466,500 - 466,500 7.6% 7.6%
Supplies 2,000 2,000 - 2,000 0.0% 0.0%
Contractual Services 132,660 168,050 25,000 193,050 26.7% 45.5%
Capital Outlay - - - -
Total Human Resources 568,372 636,550 25,000 661,550 12.0% 16.4%
Information Resources
Personal Services 613,993 566,679 0 566,679 -7.7% -7.7%
Supplies 29,700 33,500 0 33,500 12.8% 12.8%
Contractual Services 846,483 857,160 3,500 860,660 1.3% 1.7%
Capital Outlay - 0 0 0
Total Information Resources 1,490,176 1,457,339 3,500 1,460,839 -2.2% -2.0%
Finance
Personal Services 898,670 953,457 - 953,457 6.1% 6.1%
Supplies 3,600 4,000 - 4,000 11.1% 11.1%
Contractual Services 150,762 166,909 - 166,909 10.7% 10.7%
Capital Outlay - - - -
Total Finance 1,053,032 1,124,366 - 1,124,366 6.8% 6.8%
Community Development
Personal Services 968,204 1,019,147 0 1,019,147 5.3% 5.3%
Supplies 4,000 4,000 - 4,000 0.0% 0.0%
Contractual Services 52,750 52,750 5,000 57,750 0.0% 9.5%
Capital Outlay - - - -
Total Comm Development 1,024,954 1,075,897 5,000 1,080,897 5.0% 5.5%
Facilities Maintenance
Personal Services 484,355 510,783 0 510,783 5.5% 5.5%
Supplies 140,500 140,500 0 140,500 0.0% 0.0%
Contractual Services 539,512 536,642 0 536,642 -0.5% -0.5%
Capital Outlay - - - -
Total Fac Maintenance 1,164,367 1,187,925 - 1,187,925 2.0% 2.0%
Total General Government 6,618,981 6,939,953 187,030 7,126,983 4.8% 7.7%
Summary of Expenditures By Department and Category
General Fund and Park & Rec
Department, Division 2007 2008 New Program 2008 Baseline Total
and Activity Adopted Baseline Requested Requested % change % change
Public Safety:
Police
Personal Services 5,965,982 6,185,321 0 6,185,321 3.7% 3.7%
Supplies 170,050 184,950 5,000 189,950 8.8% 11.7%
Contractual Services 540,573 533,943 19,000 552,943 -1.2% 2.3%
Capital Outlay - 0 97,000 97,000
Total Police 6,676,605 6,904,214 121,000 7,025,214 3.4% 5.2%
Fire Protection
Personal Services 2,494,897 2,667,380 0 2,667,380 6.9% 6.9%
Supplies 62,098 61,648 0 61,648 -0.7% -0.7%
Contractual Services 199,527 203,092 40,000 243,092 1.8% 21.8%
Capital Outlay - 0 22,500 22,500
Total Fire 2,756,522 2,932,120 62,500 2,994,620 6.4% 8.6%
Inspectional Services
Personal Services 1,703,179 1,763,134 12,918 1,776,052 3.5% 4.3%
Supplies 12,500 11,500 - 11,500 -8.0% -8.0%
Contractual Services 77,627 69,627 - 69,627 -10.3% -10.3%
Capital Outlay - - - -
Total Insp 1,793,306 1,844,261 12,918 1,857,179 2.8% 3.6%
Total Public Safety 11,226,433 11,680,595 196,418 11,877,013 4.0% 5.8%
Public Works:
Public Works Administration
Personal Services 766,937 793,133 0 793,133 3.4% 3.4%
Supplies 7,000 6,000 0 6,000 -14.3% -14.3%
Contractual Services 25,650 24,950 8,500 33,450 -2.7% 30.4%
Capital Outlay - - - -
Total Public Works Admin 799,587 824,083 8,500 832,583 3.1% 4.1%
Engineering
Personal Services 660,469 690,511 - 690,511 4.5% 4.5%
Supplies 8,400 9,000 - 9,000 7.1% 7.1%
Contractual Services 76,433 85,671 - 85,671 12.1% 12.1%
Capital Outlay - - 5,000 5,000
Total Engineering 745,302 785,182 5,000 790,182 5.4% 6.0%
Operations
Personal Services 1,189,580 1,219,516 0 1,219,516 2.5% 2.5%
Supplies 305,500 331,000 0 331,000 8.3% 8.3%
Contractual Services 800,583 821,898 40,000 861,898 2.7% 7.7%
Capital Outlay - - - -
Total Operations 2,295,663 2,372,414 40,000 2,412,414 3.3% 5.1%
Total Public Works 3,840,552 3,981,679 53,500 4,035,179 3.7% 5.1%
Park & Recreation:
Personal Services 3,286,328 3,403,853 0 3,403,853 3.6% 3.6%
Supplies 773,332 799,792 0 799,792 3.4% 3.4%
Contractual Services 1,520,731 1,554,674 0 1,554,674 2.2% 2.2%
Capital Outlay 19,000 19,000 28,300 47,300
Total Park & Recreation 5,599,391 5,777,319 28,300 5,805,619 3.2% 3.7%
Summary of Actual & Budgeted Expenditures By Department and Division
City of St. Louis Park
General Fund and Park & Rec
2008 2008
Adopted Requested Requested
AVAILABLE RESOURCES
Revenues:
General Property Taxes 16,711,202$ 16,711,202$ 16,711,202$
Licenses and Permits 2,636,500 2,667,150 2,667,150
Intergovernmental 1,685,206 1,746,652 1,746,652
Charges for Services 2,123,049 2,093,145 2,093,145
Fines, Forfeits, and Penalties 309,600 311,000 311,000
Investment Earnings 309,099 325,000 325,000
Miscellaneous Revenue 945,061 936,161 936,161
Transfers In 2,754,836 2,680,693 2,680,693
Total Revenues 27,474,553$ 27,471,003$ 27,471,003$
Appropriations 27,474,553$ 28,568,526$ 29,038,774$
Net Revenue Over (Under)
Appopriations 0 (1,097,523) (1,567,771)
Total Appropriations 27,474,553$ 28,568,526$ 4.0% 29,038,774$ 5.7%
Less All Revenues except Property Tax (10,763,351) (10,759,801) 0.0% (10,759,801) 0.0%
Property Tax to Balance Budget 16,711,202$ 17,808,725$ 6.6% 18,278,973$ 9.4%
Other Tax Levies:
Park Improvement 1,010,000$ 1,010,000$ 0.0% 1,010,000$ 0.0%
Pavement Management 415,000$ 415,000$ 0.0% 415,000$ 0.0%
Debt Service 1,341,800$ 1,337,300$ -0.3% 1,337,300$ -0.3%
Total Other Tax Levies: 2,766,800$ 2,762,300$ -0.2% 2,762,300$ -0.2%
Total Tax Levy 19,478,002$ 20,571,025$ 5.6% 21,041,273$ 8.0%
2007
Summary of Budgeted Revenues
Significant Budget Changes and New Programs for 2008
One New
Department Time Baseline Programs
Administration
Vision X 118,000
Election Judges 52,000
Survey X 10,000
Council seminars & conferences 2,000
Council organizational development 2,000
Human Resources
Facilities study X 10,000
Succession & leadership study X 10,000
Employee climate survey X 5,000
Community Development
STEP 5,000
Finance
Insurance premium increase 18,000
Fire
Capital Outlay (siren, furniture at station) X 22,500
Radios 40,000
Police
Capital Outlay (refurbish range, Wi-Fi cameras, fiber path )X 97,000
Radios 19,000
New fax X 1,100
Retrofit alarm for 800 Mhz 3,500
Security system maintenance 1,900
Graffiti removal 5,000
Property room supplies 2,000
Inspections
Electrical inspector temp position 12,918
Communications
Printing for marketing & branding initiative 17,000
Postage for Community Handbook & other publications 10,000
Consulting for marketing & branding initiative 17,000
Intern 21,530
Information Resources
ESRI & MNGIS conferences 3,500
Public Works - Admin
Goodpointe pavement mgmt 8,500
PW - Engineering
Capital Outlay X 5,000
Printers & digital duplicator maint 3,300
Training/travel 3,300
PW - Operations
Asphalt 30,000
Street light program 40,000
Electricity 40,000
PR - Org Rec
Graffiti removal 5,000
PR - Vehicle Maintenance
Capital Outlay (hoist & oil pumps) X 28,300
Equipment parts 16,000
PR - Westwood
Tree Trust Crew 2,700
Total changes to 2008 budget 217,800 470,248
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARKPROPERTY TAX LEVY2008 BudgetBaseline Total2006 2007 2008 2008Percent PercentTAX CAPACITY BASED TAX LEVY Levy Levy Baseline Levy Total LevyIncrease IncreaseGeneral Fund and Park & Recreation 15,980,011$ 16,711,202$ 17,808,725$ 18,278,973$ 6.6% 9.4%Park Improvement 1,010,000 1,010,000 1,010,000 1,010,000 0.0% 0.0%Pavement Management 415,000 415,000 415,000 415,000 0.0% 0.0%Debt Service 1,110,200 1,341,800 1,341,800 1,341,800 0.0% 0.0% TOTAL TAX CAPACITY BASED TAX LEVIES $18,515,211 $19,478,002 $20,575,525 $21,045,773 5.6% 8.0%Dollar Increase $962,791 $1,097,523 $1,567,771
5/2007 (Submit to Finance with 2008 budget request)
2008 Budget – Recommended Program or Activity
Activity or Program: VISION Department: Parks and Recreation
Anticipated starting timeframe (ie: January 1, mid year, etc.): January 1, 2008 (beginning in July 2007)
Amount of funding needed: $5,000
Is this a one time expense, multi-year or on-going, please describe:
At this time, the consultant money is a one time expense. I would anticipate addional consultant money would
be necessary if a facility is constructed.
Description of how funds will be used, please include business need for this request:
This money will be used to hire a consultant or consultants if necessary to further our study of a mult-use Civic
Center. Rick Birno is the Action Champion on this strategic direction. In addition,staff expects to do a
number of site visits to facilities with similar situations.
How does this request relate to Vision St. Louis Park?
This request is following the strategic direction set thru the VISION. Exploring expanded civic space for use in
both warm and cold weather was a directive of the City Council.
Other Comments:
This is just the exploration phase. The money does allow for a professional service/consultant to do some of the
work.
Is there another way this work could be done by other means such as (please check as many that may apply):
contract or professional service partner with other department temporary staffing
partner with other city or agency no don’t know other idea:
Submitted by Department Head: Cindy Walsh Date: July 5, 2007
5/2007 (Submit to Finance with 2008 budget request)
2008 Budget – Recommended Program or Activity
Activity or Program: Vision -Environmental Department: Adminstration
Anticipated starting timeframe (ie: January 1, mid year, etc.): January 2008
Amount of funding needed: $100,000
Is this a one time expense, multi-year or on-going, please describe:
On going expense to help with structure, implementation, and strategic direction of the Enviornmental work for
the city.
Description of how funds will be used, please include business need for this request:
At this time it is a guess at what we need to do next. Will need to continue to review the “how” in relation to
taking the work we do in the Environmental area to the next level. It could be used for consulting work,
additional staff or program costs.
As of this time, this money is not placed in any budget.
How does this request relate to Vision St. Louis Park?
It would fit into the Vision area for the Environment.
Other Comments:
Is there another way this work could be done by other means such as (please check as many that may apply):
x contract or professional service x partner with other department x temporary staffing
x partner with other city or agency no x don’t know other idea:
Submitted by Department Head: N. Gohman Date: 6/29/07
5/2007 (Submit to Finance with 2008 budget request)
2008 Budget – Recommended Program or Activity
Activity or Program: Department: HR
Anticipated starting timeframe (ie: January 1, mid year, etc.): spring 2008
Amount of funding needed: $10,000 Budget code: 1150.6410.683
Is this a one time expense, multi-year or on-going, please describe:
One time expenditure. Funds for consultant to work with Management team on succession and leadership study.
This type of study would help us put some expectations in place on what we look for when we replace, promote
and hire new leaders in the organization.
Description of how funds will be used, please include business need for this request:
As we work to replace staff, it would be good for all of us to understand what talents do we want and need in
our managers, supervisors and leaders. To help all of us set expectations and standards for accountability when
we are developing and or selecting staff.
How does this request relate to Vision St. Louis Park?
To carry out activities in Vision, now and in the future, we need to have the right people on the right seats on the
bus.
Other Comments:
Is there another way this work could be done by other means such as (please check as many that may apply):
contract or professional service partner with other department temporary staffing
partner with other city or agency no don’t know other idea:
Submitted by Department Head: N.Gohman Date: 6/29/07
5/2007 (Submit to Finance with 2008 budget request)
2008 Budget – Recommended Program or Activity
Activity or Program: Department: HR
Anticipated starting timeframe (ie: January 1, mid year, etc.): Summer 2008
Amount of funding needed: $5,000 Budget code: 1150.6410.683
Is this a one time expense, multi-year or on-going, please describe:
one time expenditure. Work with consultant to do an employee climate study. This type of study asks specific
questions about how “we” the employer are doing in the workplace. It gives the employer information on how
employees feel about compensation, benefits, policies, programs, evaluations, communications and general
workplace matters.
Description of how funds will be used, please include business need for this request:
Funds will be used to pay for a survey tool to be administered by an independent agency. This type of tool
would be helpful in determining how we want to make adjustments in any of the above. It helps us get the true
“pulse” of what our staff is thinking in how we compare to other employers.
How does this request relate to Vision St. Louis Park?
Staff morale is important and key to performance. To carry out Vision, our staff needs the tools and quality of
workplace to continue moving from good to great which includes carrying out the Vision.
Other Comments:
Is there another way this work could be done by other means such as (please check as many that may apply):
contract or professional service partner with other department temporary staffing
partner with other city or agency no don’t know other idea:
Submitted by Department Head: N. Gohman Date: 6/29/07
5/2007 (Submit to Finance with 2008 budget request)
2008 Budget – Recommended Program or Activity
Activity or Program: Department: HR
Anticipated starting timeframe (ie: January 1, mid year, etc.): spring 2008
Amount of funding needed: $10,000 Budget code: 1150.6410.683
Is this a one time expense, multi-year or on-going, please describe:
One time expense. To hire a consultant to study facility maintenance. We have several positions managing
various facilities in the city. I recommend we hire someone to do an independent review to look at how we do
business. Also, the consultant would look at various options on how we could do business in maintaining all of
our buildings. This would include looking at other cities and organizations on how they do business.
Description of how funds will be used, please include business need for this request:
Funds would be used to pay consultant. We have different ways and some issues with how buildings are
maintained and we should look at how and why we are maintaining facilities. Is there a better business model?
How does this request relate to Vision St. Louis Park?
May help in the consistency of how we deal with our buildings and knowledge base when we get deeper into the
area of expanding energy efficiencies in the City’s operations.
Other Comments:
Is there another way this work could be done by other means such as (please check as many that may apply):
contract or professional service partner with other department temporary staffing
partner with other city or agency no don’t know other idea:
Submitted by Department Head: N. Gohman Date: 6/29/07
5/2007 (Submit to Finance with 2008 budget request)
2008 Budget – Recommended Program or Activity
Activity or Program: Vision Department: Administrative Services
Anticipated starting timeframe (ie: January 1, mid year, etc.): January 2008
Amount of funding needed: $10,000
Is this a one time expense, multi-year or on-going, please describe:
Historically this community survey was budgeted to occur every five years. City Manager is proposing to fund
this statistically valid survey every two years so that we can determine baseline data for Vision and the Strategic
Directions and analyze trends moving forward.
Description of how funds will be used, please include business need for this request:
Staff will contract with Decision Resources, Inc. to conduct a statistically valid and reliable community survey
in 2008 create a baseline for Vision and other city initiatives. The last residential survey was completed in
2005-06, so we have some baseline data on how the community feels about city services and demographic
information about our residents. As staff moves forward with implementing and exploring the action steps
association with the Strategic Directions, we need to ensure that we are moving forward in the right direction
and a survey is a good way to collect feedback from our residents. Five years between surveys is too much time
between surveys to create a trend line and to respond to feedback in a timely manner.
In 2008, staff will work with Decision Resources and review the questions from the last survey, insert those that
are related to Vision and other needs, and create additional questions by which we can "test" ideas or concepts
that are in the Vision documents to ensure that we are making progress. Decision Resources will conduct the
survey, summarize the data and prepare a detailed resport and executive summary. The City Manager will
report back to Council with the findings by late 2008.
How does this request relate to Vision St. Louis Park?
Creates a baseline and outcome measurement for Vision.
Other Comments:
A number of departments conduct survey. Should we check to see what others are spending for surveys and
coordinate this with other departments?
Is there another way this work could be done by other means such as (please check as many that may
apply):
contract or professional service X partner with other department temporary staffing
partner with other city or agency no don’t know other idea:
Submitted by Department Head: N. Gohman Date: 6/29/07
5/2007 (Submit to Finance with 2008 budget request)
2008 Budget – Recommended Program or Activity
Activity or Program: Legislative Services Department: Administrative Services
Anticipated starting timeframe (ie: January 1, mid year, etc.): January 2007
Amount of additional funding needed for 2008: $46,000 over what was originally requested for 2007. After
all the work is done in 2007, we expect that this actual expenditure for legislative services will be closer to
$60,000 (see details below). If that is the case, the funding over 2007 would be $1,000.
Please note:
• Originally for 2007 $15,000 was budgeted for Legislative Services (lobbying) out of Adm. Services.
• January 2007, Council approved an additional $36,000 for legislative services for federal and state
transportation issues. This additional amount was coded to EDA.
• In June 2007, the City Manager approved an additional $3,000 for legislative services for other
legislative initiatives and this was coded to Adm. Services budget.
• We anticipate an additional $6,000 will be needed in 2007 for legislative services for preparation of
state bonding requests for transportation. This will come from the EDA.
• For 2008, we are requesting $61,000 total for legislative expenses. This will be used for Federal, State
and Local issues.
Is this a one time expense, multi-year or on-going, please describe: On-going
Description of how funds will be used, please include business need for this request:
St. Louis Park is seeking funding for major transportation projects that are necessary and need state or federal
funds to proceed.
Projected expenses for 2008 – EDA budget? ($46,000):
• $36,000: Federal lobbying for transportation - Dennis McGrann, Lockridge Grindal Nauen
• $10,000: State lobbying for transportation - Doug Franzen & Vic Moore, Franzen & Assoc. (formerly
Rider Bennett)
Projected expenses for 2008 – Administrative Services ($15,000) 1121.6550.752
• Misc. expenses including travel ($2,000)
• Monthly retainer (between sessions) ($8,000)
• State lobbying (not related to transportation, other local issues) $5,000
How does this request relate to Vision St. Louis Park?
Under Connected and Engaged, tranportation funding is one of the Council's action items. Also, staff meet with
Council in early 2007 to discuss the need to pursue lobbying services if we are secure funding and the Council
approved the increases as well as use of the EDA to funding the transportation related items.
Other Comments: none
Is there another way this work could be done by other means such as (please check as many that may apply):
contract or professional service partner with other department temporary staffing
partner with other city or agency no don’t know other idea:
Submitted by Department Head: N. Gohman Date: 7/10/07
5/2007 (Submit to Finance with 2008 budget request)
2008 Budget – Recommended Program or Activity
Activity or Program: Elections Department: Administrative Services
Anticipated starting timeframe (ie: January 1, mid year, etc.): May 2008
Additional amount of funding needed for 2008: $40,450
Is this a one time expense, multi-year or on-going, please describe:
Ongoing, local elections are in odd years, state and federal offices in even years. 2008 is a presidential election
year. Total funding needed:
Description of how funds will be used, please include business need for this request:
Budget Code 1120 2007 ($) 2008 ($)
Judges 25000 77000
7206.872 Vote tab maintenance 3040 3040
7621.930 election supplies 800 2000
7503.880 precinct rental 250 250
6700.783 postal verification 2200 800
6700.782 courier 100 350
7502.872 truck rental 50 600
7050.822 voter receipts 50 600
7621.930 training/meetings 200 300
6700.785 absentee voting 2500 0
7050.820 ballots 10000 0
6012 overtime (elections) 2000 3000
6410 elections assistance 4000 4000
TOTAL ($) 53,262 94,712
Majority of increase is for additional election judges for nursing homes, general and primary elections and help
for absentee voters/preparation for the election. Election judge number are higher than they were in 2004. Each
precinct has one new voting machine for the disabled, judges received a pay increase in 2006 and we are
expecting a large turnout at the polls. This is a worst case scenario, may be closer to $55,000 or $60,000 for
judges.
How does this request relate to Vision St. Louis Park?
Elections are about people being connected and engaged and this funding will ensure that all eligible voters,
who choose to vote, can do so in a smooth and efficient manner.
Other Comments:
Elections are collaborative and we also partner with other departments such as police, public works, finance and
inspections to assist with signage, precinct set-up and traffic control.
Is there another way this work could be done by other means such as (please check as many that may apply):
contract or professional service partner with other department temporary staffing
partner with other city or agency no don’t know other idea:
Submitted by Department Head: N.Gohman Date: 6/29/07
5/2007 (Submit to Finance with 2008 budget request)
2008 Budget - Staffing Request
Requested Position: Communications Division Intern Department: IR
Requested Hire Date: 1/1/2008 Est. rate of pay: $10 Min. to $12 Max
Is this position full time, part time, temporary or seasonal – please describe:
The position would be part time at an average of no more than 20 hours a week.
General responsibilities of position:
• Assist with production of bi-monthly city newsletter by writing feature articles, editing copy,
proofreading
• Assist with routine updates and additions to city Web site.
• Assist with marketing efforts by developing brochures, writing press releases, writing feature articles or
other types of outreach.
Qualifications:
B.A. degree in Communications, Marketing, English or journalism desired (Juniors or Seniors seeking such degrees
are acceptable). Ability to work independently with minimal supervision. Excellent writing and editing skills; graphic
design skills
Excellent computer skills. Experience with InDesign preferred, but not required. Detail-oriented and
reliable.
Is this request due to (check one): X new program X additional work other
Please describe the need as related to above (attach additional page(s) if needed:
It is the desire of Information Resources, Communications Division to add an intern program at this time. Like many
of our neighboring communities, it is continually evident that the public wants more information and more forms of
communications to carry that information. An intern would supplement the already stretched human resources in the
division, particular the role played by our Web Coordinator and Applications Developer. Further, assigning tasks such
as the production of marketing materials and press releases would be far more affordable at the the intern's rate of pay
than the current rates we pay consultants for this work. There is plenty of lower-level work that we currently utilize
consultants for that could be supplemented. In addition, adding an intern program to the Communications Division
would be in line with the city's commitment to foster a learning organization. The Twin Cities metro area has a number
of institutions of higher education with excellent communications related program so finding talent would not be
difficult. The proposed salary of $10 to $12 is consistent with other cities, non-profit organizations and private
businesses in the metro area.
How does this request relate to Vision St. Louis Park?
Vision St. Louis Park calls for St. Louis Park being a connected and engaged community. One of the best ways for us
to accomplish this is through transparent, fresh communication with our public. Allocating additional resources to this
goal is a great investment to make as it will be retunred in the form of public image collateral.
Is there another way this work could be done by other means such as (please check as many that may apply):
X contract or professional service partner with other department temporary staffing
partner with other city or agency no don’t know other idea:
Submitted by Department Head: Clint Pires, CIO Date: 070707
5/2007 (Submit to Finance with 2008 budget request)
2008 Budget – Recommended Program or Activity
Activity or Program: Graffiti Removal Department: Parks and Recreation
Anticipated starting timeframe (ie: January 1, mid year, etc.): January 1, 2008
Amount of funding needed: $5,000
Is this a one time expense, multi-year or on-going, please describe:
Staff is assuming that this will be an on-going expense as long as we have graffiti problems.
Description of how funds will be used, please include business need for this request:
This money will be used to contract with an independent private business to assist our maintenance staff with
graffiti removal. With the increase in graffiti that we have experienced in the last year, our staff is not able to
clean all areas in a timely fashion. A task force made up of members of the police department, public works
department and others are addressing this issue. Since the biggest deterant (aside from catching the people
doing the vandalism) is to remove the graffiti as quickly as possible, we have been exploring ways to ensure
quick removal. We have found a company who removes tagging and other spray painting in other cities. Staff
has called on them for removal and have found them to be very efficient and responsive to requests. This
money would be used to pay for removal services when staff is not available for timely removal.
How does this request relate to Vision St. Louis Park?
We know from research that people feel safter and keep up their properties when their city is kept clean and
graffiti is removed quickly. Staff belives that is does follow the strategic direction set thru the VISION by
promoting community aesthetics.
Other Comments:
Staff from other departments are working together on this issue. The amount of graffiti in the last year has made
it too overwhelming for maintenance staff to keep up with.
Is there another way this work could be done by other means such as (please check as many that may apply):
X contract or professional service x partner with other department x temporary staffing
partner with other city or agency no don’t know other idea:
Submitted by Department Head: Cindy Walsh Date: July 5, 2007
5/2007 (Submit to Finance with 2008 budget request)
2008 Budget – Recommended Program or Activity
Activity or Program: VISION Department: Parks and Recreation
Anticipated starting timeframe (ie: January 1, mid year, etc.): January 1, 2008 (beginning in July 2007)
Amount of funding needed: $3,000
Is this a one time expense, multi-year or on-going, please describe:
At this time, the consultant money is a one time expense.
Description of how funds will be used, please include business need for this request:
This money will be used to work with FORCAST Public Artworks to develop a strategic arts vision for the City
of St. Louis Park.
How does this request relate to Vision St. Louis Park?
This request is following the strategic direction set thru the VISION. The vision statement relating to this issue
is, "St. Louis Park is commited to promoting and integrating arts, culture, and community aesthetics in all City
initiatives, including implementation where appropriate". Cindy Walsh is the Strategic Directino Leader for this
initiative.
Other Comments:
Is there another way this work could be done by other means such as (please check as many that may apply):
X contract or professional service partner with other department temporary staffing
partner with other city or agency no don’t know other idea:
Submitted by Department Head: Cindy Walsh Date: July 5, 2007
St. Louis Park City Council Study Session
Written Report: 081307 - 6 - Telecommunications Commission Mid-Year Report
Page 1
6. Telecommunications Advisory Commission Mid-Year Report Information Resources
PURPOSE:
To provide the City Council a mid year status report on the activities of the Telecommunications
Advisory Commission.
BACKGROUND:
The Telecommunications Commission has met twice in 2007, is required to meet quarterly and
should be able to meet that requirement with meetings scheduled for August, October and
December.
In February the Commission had updates on Park WiFi, Park TV channel 16, the high school
studio being used for Community TV, Comcast reports and complaints and the FCC rule making
about franchising. (Details about each item are on the attached work plan).
The Commission formerly received detailed subscriber counts from the cable company and
would like to continue receiving that information. Comcast’s Lance Leupold responded that
there is a difference between what Time Warner was comfortable providing and what Comcast
provides. Comcast feels subscriber counts are proprietary. Comcast indicated they would
consider the information the Commission needed, and if it related to the business they
conducted, would provide more general information.
Of 36 Comcast complaints, 10 were about American Movie Classics (AMC) moving from the
standard analog tier to the digital tier, which requires a converter box.
Telephone companies have lobbied the State Legislature and the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) for ways to compete with cable companies without having to meet the same
requirements that the cable companies provide in their franchises, trying to gain a competitive
advantage. On December 20, 2006 the FCC imposed new rules on the local franchising process,
which doesn’t immediately affect St. Louis Park because the rules take effect after a franchise
runs out, which will be in 14 years. Many local government allies (National League of Cities,
National Association of Counties, etc.) are working together on strategy and sharing expenses to
challenge the FCC’s authority to change the rules.
On March 12 three Commissioners attended the Council Study Session to review the 2006
Annual Report and preview the 2007 Work Plan. Chair Ken Huiras asked Council for other
areas of direction, and Council suggested proceeding with a fiber optic ordinance study.
The May 3 meeting addressed the annual School District request for funding from cable TV
franchise funds, and the Commission voted unanimously for an operations grant of $35,000 and
an equipment grant of $9,000 for equipment and Junior High School video club staff support.
Commissioner Kirk Morrow had participated in the Junior High School video club and said it
was a great experience and that it should be continued. Chair Huiras said he’d like to see an
increase in funding for the School District next year.
The Commission also revised their Bylaws, adding the lists of holidays when meetings shouldn’t
occur.
St. Louis Park City Council Study Session
Written Report: 081307 - 6 - Telecommunications Commission Mid-Year Report
Page 2
Clint Pires gave the Commission an update about Council’s imminent decision addressing
residents concerns about locating Park WiFi poles.
John McHugh described using the studio for several recent productions. Reg Dunlap plans to
have a draft of fiber optic ordinance bullet points available for the next meeting.
The meeting originally scheduled for July 12 was postponed to August 2. Reg Dunlap asked to
defer the fiber optic ordinance discussion to the next meeting; demonstrated the web site’s
mapping features; provided a Park WiFi update; and talked about the need for more publicity
about the transition to digital broadcast television on February 19, 2009.
The Commission reviewed the proposal by Mary Jean Overend, who has recently resigned, for a
School District franchise fee policy, and will discuss further at the next meeting.
Attachment: Telecommunications Advisory Commission Work Plan
Prepared by: Reg Dunlap, Civic TV Coordinator
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
St. Louis Park City Council Study Session
Written Report: 081307 - 6 - Telecommunications Commission Mid-Year Report
Page 3
2007 Telecommunications Advisory Commission Work Plan
February 1 Council Chambers
♦ Update on Park WiFi Contracts with the partners were finalized in December. The plans
are to build the City in four quadrants (NE, SE, NW & SW) during March through July and
have it done by end of July. They will install 400 transmitters with 25 main transmitters
with battery back up that will be connected to the fiber network. There will be eight miles of
additional fiber, in addition to the existing fiber shared with the School District. Access
points are powered by solar panels with battery back up. Park WiFi is developing a
marketing plan for MDU’s (multiple dwelling units) because about 7,000 of the 20,000
households in St. Louis Park live in MDU’s.
♦ Fiber optic ordinance update was deferred to the next meeting.
♦ Park TV update The van has been transferred to the City, staff has been hired and
productions continue as before on channel 16, including sports, plays and concerts. NASA
equipment has been installed at City Hall to allow NASA coverage on channel 16 from
midnight to 3 p.m.
♦ Studio update Studio cameras haven’t been replaced yet but the new cameras are due
soon. There haven’t been any changes in the studio yet, which is ready for Community TV
users to make reservations. John McHugh expects the first two programs shot in the studio
to be a Historical Society program and a veterans program produced by Scott Smith. Staff
expects to promote studio use in March after staff had more experience using the equipment.
♦ School District accountability policy proposal was deferred to the May meeting.
♦ Cable company reports and suggested categories to track The Commission formerly
received detailed subscriber numbers and would like to continue receiving that information.
Comcast’s Lance Leupold responded that there is a difference between what Time Warner
was comfortable providing and what Comcast provides. Comcast feels subscriber counts are
proprietary. Comcast could consider the information the Commission needed and if it related
to the business they conducted, they would provide more general information.
♦ FCC rule making update Telephone companies have been lobbying the State Legislature
and the FCC for ways to compete with cable companies without having to meet the same
requirements that the cable companies provide in their franchises, trying to gain a
competitive advantage. On December 20, 2006 the FCC imposed new rules on the local
franchising process, which doesn’t immediately affect St. Louis Park because the rules take
effect after a franchise runs out, which will be in 14 years. Many local government allies
(National League of Cities, National Association of Counties, etc.) are working together on
strategy and sharing expenses to challenge the FCC’s authority to change the rules.
♦ Comcast complaints Of 36 complaints, 10 were about American Movie Classics (AMC)
moving from the standard analog tier to the digital tier, which requires a converter box.
St. Louis Park City Council Study Session
Written Report: 081307 - 6 - Telecommunications Commission Mid-Year Report
Page 4
March 12 Joint meeting at City Council Study Session
♦ Rick Dworsky, Ken Huiras & Kirk Morrow attend with staff
♦ Rick Dworsky reviewed the 2006 Annual Commission Report and highlights from the
NATOA conference in Fairfax, VA
♦ Ken Huiras reviewed the Work Plan for 2007 and asked Council for other areas of direction,
which was to proceed with a fiber optic ordinance study.
♦ FCC rule making update: Local government allies have challenged the FCC ruling in court.
May 3 Council Chambers
♦ Park WiFi update Clint Pires gave an update about the Council’s imminent decision
addressing residents’ concerns about solar panel poles.
♦ School District funding for 2006 Tom Marble requested the same amount for the School
District as in past years, $35,000, and responded to Commission questions about staff’s
suggestion of an additional grant of $9,000 for equipment and Junior High School video club
staff support. The Commission voted unanimously for an operations grant of $35,000 and an
equipment grant of $9,000 for equipment and Junior High School video club staff support.
♦ School District quarterly report
♦ Using High School studio for Community TV productions John McHugh described using
the studio for several recent productions.
♦ Bylaws amendment: adding holidays when meetings shouldn’t occur. Passed unanimously.
♦ FCC rule making update Staff gave a verbal update about the coalition of associations that
are formally opposing the FCC action on video franchising.
♦ Fiber optic ordinance update Staff plans to have a draft of ordinance bullet points available
for the next meeting.
July 12 Council Chambers Postponed to August 2
♦ Update on Park WiFi The new network in Phase 1 is workable, but there have been delays
to fill gaps and complete testing. Customers won’t be charged for service during the time the
new network is being tested, so service charges are expected to begin September 1. Phase 1
pre-registered customers have been contacted with a post card that includes dates when they
can pick up radios at City Hall.
♦ Review draft mid year report There were no changes to the report, which can be sent to
Council.
♦ Fiber optic ordinance update Staff did not deliver a report for this meeting.
♦ Web mapping demonstration Staff demonstrated the city wide map features developed by
webmaster Jason Huber based on Google maps. The Police map should be available soon,
after a few more clearances.
♦ Proposed School District franchise fees policy Chair Huiras asked that this be brought to
the next meeting.
♦ Digital TV transition Staff gave a brief overview of what will happen when analog
broadcast TV ends on February 19, 2009, and will produce an Inside the Park! feature about
this soon.
St. Louis Park City Council Study Session
Written Report: 081307 - 6 - Telecommunications Commission Mid-Year Report
Page 5
♦ Park TV update The Commission reviewed John McHugh’s draft studio brochure.
Commissioner Browning suggested a promotional video about the studio that could be run on
the cable system and posted on the web site, and Commissioner Morrow suggested
purchasing advertising space in the Echo.
October 4 Council Chambers
♦ Update on Park WiFi
♦ Park TV update
♦ Proposed School District franchise fees policy
♦ Fiber optic ordinance update
♦ Possibly a Comcast customer service update
December 6 Council Chambers
♦ Comcast presentation on new cable rates and/or changes in the channel line up
♦ Review School District reports
♦ Wireless update
♦ Set meetings for 2008
♦ Draft Work Plan for 2008
♦ Draft Annual Report for 2007
St. Louis Park City Council Study Session
Written Report: 081307 - 7 - Walgreens Easement Vacation Request
Page 1
7. 7200 Cedar Lake Road – Walgreens Proposed
Easement Vacation
Community Development
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
To inform the City Council about a request by Net Lease Development, LLC on behalf of
Walgreens Stores for the permanent vacation of a parking easement held by the City of St. Louis
Park.
BACKGROUND:
The City currently holds a shared parking, ingress and egress easement north of the existing
motor fuel and service station at 7200 Cedar Lake Road. Currently, there are 51 parking spaces.
Of these, the City has exclusive right to 23 spaces. The remaining 28 spaces may be used by
patrons of the existing motor fuel and service station or by the public as demand requires. The
City entered into this shared parking easement in 1996 during the redevelopment of the motor
fuel and service station.
In early 2007 Staff was approached by Net Lease Development to redevelop the site for a
Walgreens and a small retail building. The Walgreens, an 11,945 square foot structure, would
include a drive-through on the north side of the building, which requires a Conditional Use
Permit. A second 3,800 square foot retail building would be located to the east of the Walgreens.
Net Lease has not specified what type of retailers would locate in that building. A site plan
showing the proposal is attached.
Net Lease’s proposed Walgreens building and drive through encroaches on the City’s parking
easement on the 7200 Cedar Lake Road parcel. For Net Lease to proceed, the easement would
need to be modified. Setback variances would also be required. The proposal is scheduled for a
public hearing before the Planning Commission on September 5th; however, the easement
vacation request is the most critical question.
The City’s Fire Station #2 and Northside Park are directly adjacent to this site. The need for the
shared parking/ingress/egress easement is directly tied to the future of the Fire Station and the
future needs of the park. The future of the Fire Station is being studied now. Until decisions are
made about the station, it is probably inappropriate to make changes to the easement. The fire
station site is zoned C-2 General Commercial, but on the Comprehensive Plan Map the site is
designated for civic uses. The parking easement supports both the potential need for additional
fire station parking, or parking for some other future use, and parking for the adjacent ice-skating
rink and warming room serving Northside Park.
St. Louis Park City Council Study Session
Written Report: 081307 - 7 - Walgreens Easement Vacation Request
Page 2
SUMMARY:
Staff anticipates recommending denial of the vacation request. It would not be prudent to vacate
an easement which could be crucial to the future use of the fire station site. When the future use
of the fire station site is determined, the City will be in a better position to consider changes to
the easement. The future parking needs for the site are undetermined today.
Attachments: Easement Location
Proposed Site Plan
Prepared by: Adam W. Fulton, Planner
Reviewed by: Meg McMonigal, Planning and Zoning Supervisor
Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
St. Louis Park City Council Study Session
Written Report: 081307 - 7 - Walgreens Easement Vacation Request
Page 3
Requested Vacation
of Easement
St. Louis Park City Council Study Session
Written Report: 081307 - 7 - Walgreens Easement Vacation Request
Page 4
Existing
Easement
St. Louis Park City Council Study Session
Written Report: 081307 - 8 - Human Rights Commission Mid-Year Report
Page 1
8. Human Rights Commission Mid-Year Report Police Department
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
The purpose of this report is to share with the City Council the activities of the Human Rights
Commission during the first half of 2007.
BACKGROUND:
The Human Rights Commission Mission: The purpose of the human rights commission shall be
to advise the city council in its efforts to ensure all citizens protection of their human rights and
full and equal opportunity for participation in the affairs of this community. The commission
assists individuals and groups in cultivating a community that embraces principles of equity and
respect for all of its citizens.
The first half of 2007 has been active for the HRC. In April the HRC worked with Community
Education and the ELL classes and had a “mini forum” at Central Community Center with the
ELL students. Each commissioner met with two or three ELL students to discuss things they
like about St. Louis Park, areas for improvement, and other general comments about living in St.
Louis Park. This event was a great way to begin working with the ELL classes and the HRC is
looking forward to partnering with the ELL classes in the future.
The HRC and CEAC (Community Education Advisory Council) held a joint meeting April 17th.
The purpose of the meeting was to discuss ways the HRC and CEAC can work together to reach
their goals. This joint meeting was a great way to connect the HRC with Community Education.
On May 20th the HRC participated in the Children First Ice Cream Social. HRC brochures,
posters, and buttons were available and the ELL classes let us borrow their students’ posters that
told why they moved to America. This year we also provided HRC coloring sheets and this was
a huge hit with the kids, which allowed time to answer questions from parents.
This year the HRC is sponsoring an International Film Series with one film monthly from July
through November. The HRC applied for an Arts & Culture grant and thanks the City of St.
Louis Park, the St. Louis Park Community Foundation, and Friends of the Arts for their support
of this film series. Through this film series, the HRC aims to showcase the amazing diversity of
cultures and experiences woven into the fabric of St. Louis Park. The aim is not only to draw a
diverse group of moviegoers together, but also provide a forum for citizens to openly discuss
issues important and relevant to them. The love of movies is cross-cultural. The HRC hopes to
take advantage of this universal pastime as it launches the series.
St. Louis Park City Council Study Session
Written Report: 081307 - 8 - Human Rights Commission Mid-Year Report
Page 2
The first film in the series, “The Letter”, was a huge success. Nearly every seat in “The Little
Theater” at Lenox was filled and this was a great first choice for the film series. The HRC
purchased this film and several people indicated they would like to use the film as training tools
or to show their group or organization. The second film selected is “The Lost Boys of Sudan”
and will be shown August 16th in “The Little Theater” at the Lenox Community Center. This
film follows two Sudanese refugees on an extraordinary journey from Africa to America. The
HRC is very excited about the International Film Series and the work completed during the first
half of 2007.
Prepared by: Marney Olson
Reviewed by: John Luse, Chief of Police
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager