Loading...
05/30/1989 - City Council SpecialSPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY MAY 30l 1989 7:00 P.M. I. ROLL CALL @ ADOPTION OF AGENDA II. DIRECTION RE: DANIEL DRIVE TRAIL PROPOSAL III. UPDATE ON SIBLEY HILLS DRIVE) PROJECT 543R IV. STORM WATER UTILITY USER FEE PROPOSAL V. DISCUSSION RE: 1990 BUDGET PROPOSAL VI. OTHER BUSINESS VII. ADJOURNMENT MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: MAY 25l 1989 SUBJECT: SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING/MAY 30v 1989 The Special City Council Meeting was set for the purpose of discussing the 1990 general fund operating budget. The agenda includes an item entitled "Storm Water Utility User Fee Proposal" and "Discussion Regarding 1990 Budget Proposal". The Storm Water Utility User Fee Proposal is a new revenue source that was discussed last fall when the 1989 budget was prepared and adopted and after direction of the City Council, a report has been prepared that addresses this proposed user fee concept. The staff has identified some problems with the proposed financing, mainly the proposed method of assessments, for the Sibley Hills Drive improvement project. Before the staff proceeds further with the project, direction is required on the part of the City Council. Also, an informational meeting is scheduled for June 8 with property owners abutting the location for the proposed Daniel Drive trail, and staff needs a direction by the City Council in preparation for that meeting. It is anticipated that both the Daniel Drive trail and update on the Sibley Hills Drive improvements should take no longer than 40 minutes, allowing for the remainder of the workshop session to be spent on guidelines and discussion regarding the Storm Water Utility User Fee and 1990 budget. DANIEL DRIVE TRAIL PROPOSAL At the May 15 City Council meeting, the Daniel Drive trail proposal was continued to the June 20 City Council meeting. City staff was directed to prepare a new trail alignment from the east side of Daniel Drive and hold an informational meeting to discuss the proposed improvements with the neighborhood. A neighborhood meeting is scheduled for 7:30 p.m. on June S. The Director of Parks & Recreation has received a number of calls from residents in the Northview Meadows Addition, east of Daniel Drive, objecting to the trail being placed adjacent to their property. Ken would like a few minutes to discuss a couple of issues pertaining to the trail alignment and receive proper Council direction prior to the informational meeting. UPDATE ON SIBLEY HILLS DRIVE, PROJECT 543R The Sibley Hills Drive Public Improvement Project, referred to as Project 543R, is one of the more difficult projects the City has had to plan for several years, due to the hodgepodge of existing development along with proposed new development. A public hearing was held, and the project has been ordered in by official City Council action. Our City Engineering Department along with consulting engineers have been preparing the final plans and specifications so the public improvements can proceed during 1989 as originally proposed. However, recently the project was placed on hold due to a legal question regarding the inability to assess certain properties and insure benefit by the public improvement if ever challenged by a group of property owners. At the public hearing the financial plan includes properties that have direct access to roads that are proposed for improvement, as well as properties that do not have direct access but will receive the benefit of the roads at some point in the future when their property is developed. The assessment calls for requalification that was directed by the City Administrator. The City Attorney has raised questions regarding the ability to levy assessments against Properties that do not have direct access or abut the Skyline Road improvements. Also, to compound the issue, a resident has submitted a copy of a restrictive covenants that does not allow lots over subdivisions to be split until the year 2000, which impacts the financial plan that anticipated the collection of special assessments against those properties. In summary, as the staff has reviewed the project in greater detail, it appears that if there is a legal question as to whether the City can assess certain properties, the financial participation on the part of the City could increase substantially. The City Administrator feels that rather than proceed with the project and incur large liability against the street construction, at a latter date, it was better to place the project on temporary hold and discuss the matter with the City Council before proceeding any further. The City Attorney, Director of Public Works and City Administrator will provide a brief update at the meeting on Tuesday, so the Council is aware of the problems the staff has encountered in the past few weeks regarding the proposed improvements. STORM WATER UTILITY USER FEE PROPOSAL The concept of a storm water utility user fee was introduced by staff last year when the 1989 budget document was prepared. The City Administrator was directed to prepare additional information regarding the storm water user fee concept and present a report during 1989. The Director of Public Works, the City's consultant, Jerry Bourdon of the firm Bonestroo, Rosene and Anderlik, Director of Finance and other support staff along with the City Administrator have prepared a report. A copy is attached for your review for consideration by the City Council. The City Attorney has been involved in meetings to insure the legality of implementing this type of user fee. An ordinance was prepared, copies enclosed for your review, which provides the legislative framework to implement the program. As previously stated, the purpose and need for creating a storm water drainage utility was explained in the attached report prepared by Jerry Bourdon with the direction and input of members of the City staff. Included with the information is a mock brochure that can be mailed out to each resident once the billing cycle is established for implementation. 1990 BUDGET PROPOSAL The City.Administrator and Director of Finance are analyzing the amount of property tax and local government aid the City will receive in 1990. The Director of Finance and City Administrator will provide additional comments on Tuesday and also comment on other revenue sources that comprise the remaining 29% of the operating budget. In addition to the projection of revenues, the City Administrator will also provide a draft budget forecast of expenditures which illustrates certain accounts that require adjustments due to inflation or our expanded growth. Following the Tuesday evening discussion and direction from the City Council regarding any adjustment to revenues or expenditures and once the departmental budgets are received on June 6, a draft budget can be compiled during the month of June. For additional information on this item refer to the attached memo. OTHER BUSINESS There are no other items for Other Business at this time. /S/ Thomas L. Hedges City Administrator Report for Storm Water Drainage Utility Plan Eagan, Minnesota April 1989 File No. 49482 Bonestroo NEW Rosene Anderlik & Associates Engineers & Architects St. Paul, Minnesota Sonestroo Rosene U -ILA Anderlik & Associates Engineers & Architects May 17, 1989 Mr. Tom Colbert City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Otto G. Boneumo. P.E. Rooen W. Roane, P.E. Joseph C. Mdedik. P.E. Bradford A, Lemberg. PE, Richard E. Turner, PE. James C. Olson. P.E. Glenn R. Cook. P.E hoE. Tmas . Noyes. P.E. Roden G. Schun¢ht, P.E. Marvin L.Sorvala, PE. Re: Storm Drainage Utility file no. 49482 Dear Tom: Keith A_ Gordon. P.E. Richard W. Fogel. PE. Donald C. Burgardt. P.E. Jerry A. Bourdon, PE. Mark A. Hanlon, P.E. Ted K N.Id, P.E. Micnael T Rautmann. P.E. Robert R. Plellerle, P.E. David O, tnskoa. P.E. Thomas W. Peterson. P.E. Muhael C. Lynch. P.E. James Rr Wand. PE. Kenneth P. Anderson. P.E. faith A. Ofo mann, P.E: Mark R, Rolls, PE. Robert C. Russek. A.LA. Thormas E. Angus, PE. Howard A, Sanford, P.E. Charles A. Erickson Led M. Pa velsky HJllan M, Olson Susan M. Ebeom Mark. A. Sup Enclosed is the Storm Drainage Utility Plan report. This plan outlines the goals, philosophy and approach to establishing a storm drainage utility for the City. We recommend that the City Council review the enclosed information. To proceed with the formation of a storm water utility the advice of legal council is appropriate. We suggest that a public meeting and a mailing brochure be considered as a part of the implementation process. There are facets of this report that will be of interest to various parties. We are available to meet and discuss the details of this report at your convenience. Yours very truly, Jerry Bourdon d: storm f. 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 612-636.4600 CITY OF EAGAN STORM WATER DRAINAGE UTILITY PLAN INTRODUCTION This report discusses the purpose and needs for creating a Storm Water Drainage Utility in Eagan. Included is a proposed budget and a fee schedule for revenue collection. BACKGROUND The purpose of a Storm Water Drainage Utility is to provide dedicated funds necessary to operate, maintain and manage a municipal storm water drainage system. All Minnesota cities, under MSS 444.075, can establish Storm Water Drainage Utilities in a manner similar to Water and Sanitary Sewer Utilities. A Storm Water Drainage Utility allows cities to charge all property an established quarterly charge for storm drainage expenditures. The charges are billed in combination with other utility bills. Similar utilities have recently been established in Roseville, Richfield, Fridley, Shakopee, St. Paul and other communities. Eagan's storm water drainage system consists of an extensive and complicated, system of sewers and drainage facilities. It is estimated that the system comprises: 215 miles of pipes, 3,000 catch basins and drainage structures, 340 ponds, 700 pond inlet and outlet structures, and 20 lift stations. A system of this size and complexity requires active operation and maintenance attention to assure optimum system performance and to protect the City's substantial investment in the basic infrastructure through preventative maintenance designed to prolong the life of the facilities. Traditionally storm drainage systems have not been operated and financed as user benefiting utilities such as a water or sanitary sewer utility. However, a storm water drainage system is similar to a water supply and distribution system or a sanitary sewer collection and treatment system. It has similar operation and maintenance needs and provides a specific user with a benefited service. The basic advantages to operating a storm drainage system as a utility are better operation, maintenance and management of the system. These advantages are derived from the mode of operation and dedicated funded that is provided by the creation of a Storm Water Drainage Utility. BENEFITS OF IMPLEMENTING A STORM WATER DRAINAGE UTILITY Because of the competition for funding among the City's various needs, certain beneficial storm drainage system operation, maintenance and improvement activities are unfunded or under funded. The purpose of creating and d:storm , f;report2b DRAFT implementing a storm water drainage utility in Eagan is to provide for an equitable method of funding needed additional and/or improved storm water drainage services. The proposed additional services will benefit the city by protecting its lakes, ponds and wetlands from the adverse effects of urban storm water runoff and by assuring better performance of the existing system. Eagan's specific additional needs are: * WET LANDS PRESERVATION AND WATER QUALITY CONTROL, * EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL, AND * STORM WATER CONVEYANCE. These needs are described in more detail in the following section. NEEDS WETLANDS PRESERVATION AND WATER QUALITY CONTROL: Eagan has 340 lakes, ponds and wetlands that are valuable natural resources and community assets. Studies show that urban storm water runoff into wetlands can have a detrimental effect upon these resources. Eagan has recognized the need to address this problem and has established- wetlands preservation and storm water runoff quality control as a high priority. Studies have been conducted by the watershed district and Eagan to inventory, classify, set priorities and identify remedies. These studies are in their final stages of development. The final recommendations and conclusions are not yet available. However, the specific initial needs are well enough known that they should be implemented immediately. These needs are: * implementation of the storm water drainage utility, + the implementation of the water quality sampling and monitoring program, and * the implementation of a pond dredging and maintenance program. Soon the specific needs and priorities of water quality improvements will be identified. They will likely include, in addition to the above, public education programs and the construction or implementation of drainage system modifications, such as: * the construction of sedimentation and nutrient traps, * installation of aeration systems, + system modifications to cause pond bypass of first flush runoff, and * system modifications to increased detention time for nutrient removal EROSTON AND SEDIMENTCONTROL: Although the prevention and control of erosion is an integral part of the City's water quality efforts, it is separately addressed in this report because it also causes other benefits and its activities are unique from the water quality program's activities. The primary activities of the prevention and control of erosion and sediment are: * Street sweeping, * Storm sewer pipe and catch basin cleaning, and d:storm , f;report2b DRAFT * Inspections and enforcement of preventative measures. STORM WATER CONVEYANCE: Storm water conveyance needs consist of the essential activities necessary to properly operate and maintain a collection and conveyance system. Routine and systematic operation and maintenance of the system better assures optimum performance of flood protection and water quality control. Some needed operation and maintenance activities are not currently implemented or are only partially implemented due to funding constraints. Specific unfunded or underfunded needs within this category include: * Renewal and replacement: This need consists of repairs and replacement of components of the existing system as they wear out or require rehabilitation. (The electrical and mechanical components of the system's lift stations are a primary' example of this need.) * System improvements: This need consists of the construction of additional drainage facilities not previously contemplated under the trunk or lateral system programs. Improvements such as increased discharge capacities of piping systems due to unforeseen events such as higher density development or new design criteria for storm drainage and rater quality are examples tf this need. * Operation and maintenance: This need consists of a more systematic and routine program of operation and maintenance activities to assure optimum system performance and to protect the City's investment in the system by performing cost effective preventative maintenance. Examples of this need are: routine pipe televising, cleaning and pond inlet and outlet structure maintenance. d:storm , f;report2b DRAFT COSTS OF THE STORM WATER UTILITY Some of the activities of the storm water utility are currently financed through the general fund. Although all of the activities of the Storm Water Utility could be financed by the Utility's billings, the immediate concern is the implementation of a storm water utility to finance the currently unfunded and underfunded needs for wetlands preservation and water quality control and more intensive operation and maintenance programs. Therefore the proposed initial scope of funding through the Utility's billings incorporates to the following activities. TABLE 1 PROPOSED UTILITY BUDGET FOR 1990 ------ee-maaae-asae�sae Gun Club Water shed District Costs ------ $ 20,000 Water Quality Improvement Planning and Implementation -------------------------- 30,000 Sampling and Monitoring ----------------- 15,000 Pond Dredging --------------------------- 25,000 Street Sweeping ------------------------- 75,000 Pond Inlet and Outlet Cleaning ---------- 50,000 Renewal & Replacement -------------------- 130,000 System Improvements ---------------------- 50,000 TOTAL 395,000 PROPOSED CHARGES The charges of the storm water drainage utility are based upon the user's responsible share of the cost of the service. This is an equitable and practical means of financing the services of the Utility. The basic equation for setting the utility charges is: Total annual revenues needed ------------------------------ - Annual Fee Unit Rate Total runoff d:storm , f;report2b DRAFT To most equitably spread the Utility's costs among the users, the following criteria was used as the basis for the hydrologic aspects of the fee structure model. + model storm - 5 frequency, 24 hour event (3.5 " rain as per soil conservation service charts) * hydrologic soil type - Type B * Typical residential unit: 0.5 acres, 26Z impermeable surface. As a practical matter all residential properties will be charged the same based upon the amount of runoff from a typical residential unit for the model criteria previously presented. This runoff amount is defined as the "Residential Equivalent Factor" (REF) and is the basic unit of the fee structure. The rate charged to a non residential property is based upon the number of Residential Equivalent Factors of the property (how many times more run off is caused by the non residential property than is caused by standard residential property). The non residential properties were evaluated individually to determine the number of residential equivalents of the property. The following summarizes the residential equivalent inventory of the city. TABLE 2 RESIDENTIAL EQUIVALENT DETERMINATION SUMMARY, TOTAL RESIDENTIAL LAND USE EQUIVALENTS ----------- ----------- Residential property (low density) 11,153 Apartments/Condominiums 1,508 Schools 598 Commercial/Industrial 8,253 Churches 243 Golf courses/cemeteries 296 TOTAL 22,051 d:storm , f;report2b DRAFT The following equation presents the results of the fee calculation for the Residential Equivalent Factor for the Eagan Storm Drainage Utility. TOTAL ANNUAL UTILITY EXPENSES ----------------------------- TOTAL NUMBER OF RES. UNITS $395,000 22,051 FEE FOR EAGAN REF $ 17.91 < annual cost REF _ $ 4.48 < quarterly bill The following table presents a summary of the typical (average) annual rates proposed to be charged for each category of land use. TABLE 3 LAND USE ---------------------- REF ----- QUARTERLY -------------- RATE Residential 1.00 $ 4.48 / residence Apartments 3.64 16.31 / acre Schools 2.14 9.58 / acre Churches 2.44 10.92 / acre Commercial/Industrial 4.79 21.49 / acre Golf courses 1.14 5.10 / acre CONCLUSION The creation of a storm water utility is an equitable and practical way to finance the unfunded needs of wetlands protection and additional maintenance and operation activities. The recommended actions necessary to proceed with implementation of the Storm Water Drainage Utility are: 1. Set a date for a public meeting, 2. Authorize the preparation and mailing of a brochure on the utility, and 3. Set a Council meeting date to considering adoption of the Utility Ordinance. The attached documents are included as appendices to this report. 1. A sample brochure which could be distributed to the public. 2. A draft of the proposed ordinance prepared by the City attorney. 3. A list of non residential property and their REF's. d:storm , f;report2b DRAFT EDWARD B. McMENOMY LARRS S_ SEVERSON• JAMES F. SHELDON J. PATRICK W'IU'OX• TERENC'E P. DURKIN MICHAEL(;. IM) IGHERTY REID J. HANSEN MICHAEL E.MOLENDA— •ALSO LIC'4:NSF.0 I\ IOWA "ALSO LICF.NSEP IN WI.S( ONSIN tALSU LR ENSKII 16 NEHRASKA May 1, 1989 Tom Hedges City Administrator City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road P.O. Box 21199 Eagan, MN 55121 McMENOMY & SEVERSON A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION ATTORNEYS AT LAW OWREPLY TO: 73M WEST MTTH STREET P.O. BOX 243M APPLE VALLEY, MINNESOTA M124 TELEFAX NUMBER 432-3160 (612) 43531N ❑ REPLY TO: M430 SOUTH ROBERT TRAIL ROSEMOUN . MINNESOTA MM (612).2111M PAUL J. STIRR PATRICK W. STEW'ART KEVIN P. CARROLL KENNETH R. HALL SCOTT D. JOHNSTONt JOSEPH P. EARLES MARLL. GOLIKE MICHAEL C. WCANN OF CUUN44:L: LEONARD F. HIRNAT JOHN E. VUKELICH RE: An Ordinance Adding Sections to the City Code of the City of Eagan Establishing a Storm Water Drainage Utility and a Storm Water Drainage Improvement District Our File No.: 206-5376 Dear Tom: I enclose for your review a proposed ordinance establishing a storm water utility and storm water tax improvement district for the City of Eagan. Statutory authority for the utility and storm water tax improvement district are contained in Minnesota Statutes 5444.1075 through S444.21. Under the terms of the statutes, the City is permitted to adopt an ordinance which allow it to build, construct, reconstruct, repair, enlarge, improve or in any other manner obtain appropriate storm sewer service. (Minnesota Statutes 5444.075, Subd. 1(a)) In addition, pay for the construction, reconstruction, repair, enlargement, improvement or other obtainment and the maintenance, operation, and use of the facilities, the governing body or the municipality may impose just and equitable charges for the use and for the availability of the facilities and for connections with them... (5444.075, Subd. 3) The charges made for the service directly rendered shall be as nearly as possible proportionate to the cost of furnishing the service and sewer charges may be fixed on the basis of water consumed, or by reference to a reasonable classification of the types of premises to which service is furnished, or by reference to the quantity, pollution qualities and difficulty of disposal of sewage and storm water produced, or on any other equitable basis, including, but without limitation, any combination of those referred to above. (S444.075, Subd. 3) McMENOMY & SEVERSON A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION ATTORNEYS AT LAW Tom Hedges May 1, 1989 Page Two In determining the reasonableness of the charges to be imposed, the governing body may give consideration to all costs of establishment, operation, maintenance, depreciation and necessary replacements to the system, and of improvements, enlargements, and extensions necessary to serve adequately the territory of the municipality... (5444.075, Subd. 3) It is my understanding that the City Engineer's office and consulting engineering people have been working up the appropriate numbers and proposed charges for the Council to review. The responsibility and obligation of the City Council is to impose just and equitable charges. The utility portion of the storm sewer drainage ordinance is similar to the City's water utility. The storm sewer would be billed along with the water bills. The tax improvement district is being set up at this time to coordinate this with the utility. Minnesota Statutes S444.17 provides that the Council may by ordinance adopted by two-thirds vote of all of its members establish within in its corporate limits a storm sewer improvement tax district. A public hearing must be held and notice of the public bearing must be published for two successive weeks in the official newspaper of the municipality with the last notice to be at least seven days prior to the date of the bearing. Once adopted, the ordinance shall be filed with the County Auditor and the County Recorder. While no improvement for which a tax would be levied is contemplated at this time, the enabling statutory legislation is less than clear on this matter. Minnesota Statutes 5444.17, requires a two-thirds vote, notice and hearing to establish a tan district.,,The statute does not make clear reference to whether that is also required for utility. Under the circumstances, our advice is that the City would be better off safe than sorry under this scenario. Any challenge to the storm water utility charge would necessarily center on the method of its calculation and the method of City adoption of the utility. While on its face it does not appear that the tax district and the utility are directly connected, at least statutorily, that statute is unclear. It is therefore our advice that the district for tax improvement and the storm water utility be adopted at this time. However, it is not intended that any tax be levied at this time or any improvement for which a tax would be levied would be constructed at this time. „' c. . 'j `1.. McMENOMY & SEVERSON A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION ATTORNEYS AT LAW Tom Hedges May 1, 1989 Page Three Please contact me if you have any questions. Very truly yours, McMENOMY & SEVERSON, P.A. James F. Sheldon J FS/dj k Enclosure cc: Tom Colbert Gene VanOverbeke CITY OF EAGAN ORDINANCE NO. 3.10 AND 3.11 AN ORDINANCE ADDING SECTIONS 3.10 and 3.11 TO THE CITY CODE OF THE CITY OF EAGAN ESTABLISHING A STORM WATER DRAINAGE UTILITY AND A STORM WATER DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT. The City Council of the City of Eagan does hereby ordain: 1. That the City Code of the City of Eagan is amended by adding a new section 3.10 and 3.11 to the City Code of the City of Eagan, to read as follows: Sec. 3.10. Storm Water Drainage Utility. Subd. A. Storm Water Drainage Utility Established. The municipal storm sewer system shall be operated as a public utility pursuafit to Minnesota Statutes §444.075, et seq., from which revenues will be derived subject to the provisions of this Chapter and Minnesota Statutes. The storm water drainage utility will be a part of the City of Eagan Public Works Department and under the administration of the Public Works Director. Subd. B. Storm Water Drainage Fees. Storm water drainage fees for parcels of land shall be determined by resolution of the City Council of the City of Eagan and shall be just and equitable. Subd. C. Exemptions. The following lands are exempt from storm water drainage fees: 1. Public rights-of-way. 2. Vacant, unimproved land with ground cover. 3. City of Eagan owned property. Subd. D. Billings. Bills for charges for the use and service of the storm drainage system shall be made out by the Finance Department in accordance with the usual and customary practice. All bills shall be payable at the office of the City Finance Director. Subd. E. Delinquency and Collection. The charges shall be delinquent if unpaid at the close of business on the due date shown on the billing. A penalty of 108 thereof shall be added, and become a part of, all delinquent charge's. Payment for the service and charges shall be the primary responsibility of the owner of the premises served and shall be billed to the owner unless otherwise contracted for and authorized in writing by the owner and such other person, and consented to by the. City of Eagan. The City may collect the same in a civil action. Each charge is made a lien on the premises served. Any charge more than 45 days past due may, when authorized by resolution of the Council, be certified by the City Clerk -Treasurer, to the County Auditor and in so certifying shall specify the amount thereof together with a certification charge (preparation for certification of taxes of delinquent accounts). Such action may be optional or subsequent to taking legal action to collect delinquent accounts. Subd. G. Revenues. All revenues derived from those rates and charges shall be credited to the storm water drainage utility f un'd. Sec. 3.11. Storm Water Improvement District. The entire geographical City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, is hereby established as the Eagan Storm Water Tax Improvement District. This ordinance shall be in force and effect from and after its passage and publication according to law. ATTEST: By: Its: Clerk Date Ordinance Adopted: CITY OF EAGAN City Council By: Its: Mayor Date Ordinance Published in the Legal Newspaper: -2- How Win My Money be Used? wM lands Pmervedw Ord ww oUOwYCw*d •�an�oaps.,rica� • swa Water sawpft •sc&mcat"nPo" 23 % 32 % Eke" M4 Gmtsol • saau s.ea,s °so=cbwft .,upccfim nd Harot=M" I I Get The Facts On........ W0 �Z �a a� wWF o C rl H Q I 1°rt'iiNd$e pdza QON $t® m j a N U¢ ®rainage Utility I ! I OEr 7HE FACTS OH I I II I'II�.II Ir STORM DRAINAGE UTILITY g 104 l!!Ib': Il Eagan plans to use a'nW G I technique to pay for file costs tJ of managing storinwater s 0 6 I runoff._ A SWMNM er Dralnage Utlllly Thlsieaflet Is prepared to Introduce you to tits new utilityand answer i your questions. I Why Must We Manage Storm Drainage? Storm drainage lac0ides must he bu ft maintained and renewed to control runnifin order Inc. e PrMed people and prop" • Provide forsahtraWe ftw • Rhes ce the envisomme d • Improve psepatyalaea • 1tedueaimmraaoerisb ft is estimated that Baffta%stamewatW dranagoryucincomprimot 215 ... miles of pipe$ 3,000 ... eauldm us and manholes 340 ... pool 700 .. pond structures 20 ... liRstations A system of this sole and oomphn q w quires active operation and maintenance to assure optimum "em perfasmance and to prolong the Lk of the f cAides. Vllhat Is a Storm Drainage Utility? A storm drainage utility provides a service similar to the water and sanitary sewer O d O 'udHdm like the sanitary sewer utility fee, the Storm Drainage Utility fee is band 0n the amount of urates chat L otisehetged roto the gstea. For instaoM a parking lot creates more nmoff than a grass area of the same sere, so it pays a higher rate. This way, the citizens of Eagan will pay for the management of stormwater in proportion to the amount of water they 'contribute.' a fee NOT based on the vaWe of their prop" Why Is a Utility Needed? itagao is facing additional needs to meet the faawiug stormwater ImMu went • Vetiands praeervatioa anal oder quail4 centrd. • 1;80511011 and sesi mmbdm control, and • Operation and Maintenance of Stasstmwfacumiies These additional services will benefit the city by protecting its lakes, ponds, and wettaods from the adverse effects of urban siormwater ru mA Comequentlys the existing draioapfflood control sys- tem will perform better Costs for these additional activities. com- bined with the money spent for on-going storm drainage maintenance each year, represent a major expenditure. Today, most stormwater costs are paid by using property taxes. Once implemented, the Stora Drainage UtWty will tweet these rising costs in a fair and equitable men- mer. without additional burden b the property lax rolls. What is My share of the Costs? A SWrmwafor Drai Utility hill far each pro propeef<y is based upon the relative l amount of rdneff a properly dl0chargea talo the system. More inter sh* developed property such as com- mercial or industrial property generate mac runoff and thereinto para higher rats" The gowIe*dued fain 1959 fora Siople Family Homer;, Duplexes and Toomhouses is $ The average quarterly ffm in 1989 for various types of other propertle s ave .shownbelaw.. • Apartmetu and Cbndas $116311mve • Schook ..........S 9d51111ese • Churches .........$10.9210180 • Golf courses ...... SMOMM • cemmercial/I11dtutrid .$ 2LAIMIneae Your storm dr dsW fee vd0 be ineioded on the swavater and sewer hill y011 e eceive each quarter. • Fees for each type of these properties were determined on a individual basis. The rates shown are average fees. MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCILMEMB ERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: MAY 25, 1989 SUBJECT: 1990 GENERAL FUND BUDGET Due to the uncertainties required of this year's new regulations to conform to truth and taxation legislation, the 1990 budget process began one month earlier than previous years. Department heads were given direction in late April to prepare their departmental budgets during the month of May to be reviewed by the City Administrator.in June. It is expected that total revenues will increase very slightly in 1990. The levy limit base which consists of the allowable tax levy (non -debt service) and local government aid is estimated to be as follows compared to 1989: Increase 1989 19901 Amount Percentage Tax Levy Limit $6,863,370 (87.28) $7,484,422 (87.98) $621,352 9.18 Local Governmental 1.007.917 (12.88) 1.028.075 (12.18) 20.158 2_08 Aid Levy Limit Base 57.871.287(100.08) 58.512.797(100.08) 641 510 8.28 Allocated in Budget: General Fund $7,284,1452 $7,807,847 $523,702 7.28 Major Street Fund 402,625 442,800 40,175 10.08 Equipment Revolving 184.520 262.150 77.630 42.18 Fund $7.871.290 ,$8.512.797 641 510 8.28 Calculations are based on conversation with LMC -contained in tax bill not• signed by Governor Perpich. 2The general fund also utilized the $205,700 special levy making a total of $7,489,845 available from taxes and local government aid. The actual tax related revenue increase from 1989 to 1990 is therefore $7,807,847 - $7,489,845 or $318,002 as opposed to the $523,702 shown. Property taxes and local government aid represent 71.48 of the 1989 General Fund Budget of $10,495,000. ($7,489,845 - $10,495,000 — 71.48) Without significant new revenue sources the 71.48 will probably increase in 1990 as development related revenue projections are reduced. Total 1989 general fund personal services costs are budgeted $6,804,650, a 58 increase in that appropriation to cover step increases, cost of living increases and full year costs for 1989 new employees would require $340,233. Based upon the new program for capital equipment acquisition implemented during the 1989 budget process, the following amounts are available for the purchase of major equipment outside general fund revenues: 1989 Equipment Revolving Fund Tax Levy $184,520 1990 Equipment Certificates 200.000 Total 384 520 You will note that this money is outside the general fund, however it requires a portion of the levy limit as a funding source. In 1989 $400,000 of equipment certificates will be sold as part of this same program. General fund capital equipment purchases in 1989 were financed as follows: Equipment Certificates General Fund Revenues Total $ 400,000 708.270 51.108.270 Approximately $147,200 of the $708,270 could have been purchased through the new revolving equipment fund if revenues had been available. The above table excludes the $75,000 budgeted in the Storm Water Drainage Utility Fund for the street sweeper and the $147,000 for the purchase of recycling containers financed by the County grant. The need for additional revenue sources, such as the storm sewer utility fund that can generate a significant dollar amount, is essential to ensure continued government services at today's level. The situation for 1990 is compared by many metropolitan managers as similar to the 1981 calendar year when the legislature cut local government aid after budgets were adopted by municipalities. Both new and increased user fees for a number of local services should also be considered. All fees including licenses and permits, recreation fees and other functions will need to be analyzed. It is anticipated that there will be no new general fund personnel proposed for 1990 or other large expenditure increases unless additional revenue sources can be utilized. Each department head is reviewing their specific delivery of services and will present 1) a recommendation for the 1990 operating budget and 2) an explanation of personnel and other capital expenses that would have been requested to meet the increase in demand for basic services due to the continued growth. City Council direction regarding both revenue sources and expenditures would be appreciated prior to the City Administrator developing the final budget during June and July. The schedule for truth and taxation is as follows: Truth in Taxation Dates August 1 Revenue Department certification of levy limit, September 15, 1989 Proposed levy certified to Dakota County November 10, 1989 Notice mailed to taxpayers (Not parcel specific - noting change in levy and population) November 10 -December 20,1989 Budget hearing is held - No published notice required unless hearing is recessed to another time. December 28, 1989 Final certification of levy (5 working days after December 20) 'Per conversation with LMC - contained in tax bill not signed by Governor Perpich. /S/ Thomas L. Hedges City Administrator MINUTES OF...V:::6KCi�i::'M T1NG OF THE£. ....... ............................ MA10"UTY COUNCT-]y; .:t:;)Iay 30, 19891:;::;;:;;. A special City Council ftl a6 :iig:ioas held on May 30, 1989 in the Eagan Municipal Center Building. Those present were Mayor Ellison and City Council- members Egan, Gustafson, McCrea and Wachter. Also present were Director of Parks and Recreation Vraa, Director of Public Works Colbert, Director of Community Development Runkle, City Attorney Sheldon and City Administrator Hedges. DANIEL' b.' IVE .'-tl 1YL` PK-O'FDSAL Director of Parks and Recre4tt,ion Vraa;.presented revised drawings for the proposed trail improvements on Dane::. Drive;:;: He stated that a neighborhood meeting is scheduled for 7:30 p bf ;`nri' 31ihii: $;;nnd requested direction on the matter. Steve Sullivan, Parks`and''E(ecreaCion Department Planner, presented a drawing that illustrates the setback requirements for both east and west trail location options. He stated that the boulevard narrows from Braddock Trail west to a two foot to two and one-half foot setback if the trail is designed as an eight foot bituminous width. After further review, it was determined by the City Council that a bituminous trail:.:is more advantageous to both pedestrian and bicycle movement than a five foot::*f4*.walk. Mayor Ellison stated that no formal action is required to Daniel Drive':-Ud:t:::::::::.T. he item will reappear on the June 20, 1989 City Council agenda. SIBLEY HILLS:i:3iRIVK: 'i:YRddECT 543R City Administrator ".41"3s stated that the Sibley Hills Drive public improvement project referenced'as 543R has been placed on hold due to a legal question regarding the inability to assess certain properties and insure benefit for the public improvements if ever challenged by a group of property owners. City Attorney Sheldon stated that there is a legal question regarding the City's ability to levy assessments agalne:t;:.pzgpett£es.;:Ghat did not have direct access or abut the Skyline Road improveiit %'i : ::::DiYpCCOL:: Public Works Colbert reviewed the proposed project and identified sevezai parcels along Lone Oak Road that were proposed to be assessed for "indirect"::binefiG:::essociated with the street and storm sewer improvements. He further stated thafi::�ll properties will be reviewed by an appraiser to verify the proposed a:ssessmeuPI: to sustain any challenge that could be raised against the City for the improdeinents. City Council members questioned whether a new public hearing would be required if the assessments changed for the proposed improvements. City Attorney Sheldon stated that the scope of a .p.roject could not be increased without a new public hearing, however, the eliip"�--iiation of certain parcels or a decrease in the project's size does not require`'a new public hearing. It was suggested that five (5) parcels :::2eiisp:;ACiCg:::? deleted from the project and that this action be placed on the::JLltie::�:::;i9a4:'C:£:ky Council meeting as a consent item for official Council action. City Administrator Hoa.a stated that:::the concept of a storm water utility user fee was introduced by..staff during..preparation of the 1989 budget document. He further commented Cast staff was::4 rected to prepare additional information regarding a storm watdt...9ex... ......! ,present a report during 1989. Director of Public Works Colbert prov:de4T.::$itk&ound on the storm water drainage utility stating that a user fee would 'Of6vide dedicated funds necessary to operate, maintain and manage a municipal storm water drainage system. City Attorney Sheldon stated that all Minnesota cities, under MSS 444.075 can establish storm water drainage utilities in a manner similar to water and sanitary sewer utilities. Public;:Ad:-V 9>:.IirttlExe-,tnt:;;Colbert stated that a number of cities have established simi:ia'isfc9::::F!ich are used for wetlands preservation and water quality control,:::%rosion'*hd sedimentation control and storm water conveyance. He reviewed a proposed utility budget for 1990 explaining various costs proposed for eeeii, of tl'o::three (3) services addressed in the study. The Director of Public:::Wrk4!.$tRte3 that as an example the pond dredging and monitoring would be?-Y,Vokises'C'0,13e:red under wetlands, preservation and quality control while pond inlet and outlet cleaning and street sweeping is ., considered erosion and sedimentation control and renewal and replacement are system improvements to be included under storm water conveyance. He further explained the equation and method in which the calculation was established for the storm drainage utility. City.Councilmember McCrea suggested that a new land use category should be cons idereQ:.mt:quadraminium units stating that the single family residential rate for allriFitl aPBrtmQnt dwelling units could create an inequity. After further discussion it`was.:.:ztermined that a new category be established for dwelling units in greater numb'e;,.:than the traditional duplex but less than an apartment complex. City Councilmembers iuA23e::-'suggestions regarding the necessity to provide good publicity about C}e" proposed storm drainage utility fee and suggested that the sample brochure be rewritten. The staff was directed to proceed ahead with preparation of an ordinance, a revised list of rates and timetable for the public hearing and eventual implementation of the storm water user fees. There was no formal action taken on this item. 1990''''SiJDf:tT"PROM....... City Administrator Hedges p;''sented:::financial information on the forecast of revenues the City will recei�r8 for :its 1990 operating budget. He stated that the actual property tax revenue iAic:rease from 1989 to 1990 is estimated at $318,000. He stated that with a small increase in property tax and a minimum increase in local government aide estimated at $20,000 it will be difficult for the City to meet cost of living and inflationary adjustments without the addition of new revenue sources in 1990. The City Administrator did explain that certain expenditures such as computeY:::9quipment acquisition in 1989 will not be forecast as high in 1990 which wi . provide additional revenue sources available for the general.;;Eund.;:.:.;Howe.Ver,,..it is the suggestion of both the Director of Finance and the Cit .:.A4*ih :Siv:raet ::;that if other revenue sources are to be increased, that increas s'not'be'­'made''to those categories that are development related such as building permits. H6:::stated that it will more than likely be the recommendation of staff that buildi. 4g:permits be reduced by ti small amount each year so the general fund budget is not reliant on a source of funding that will be much less as development decreases during the 1990's. City CouncilmembersSgzesse'a'cutfYl about their restrictions and the ability to raise additional';:;property tax tensed by the Omnibus Tax Bill. City Administrator Hedges further..$tated that the need for increased expenditures in a growth related organization ::. s extreme.ky difficult given the type of restriction that have been placed 'ad::Ch4::City.:::liji: 3% levy limit and essentially no increase in local government aid''i{jg:;eI:�+j'Administrator was commended for the approach used in preparing this year's operating budget by forecasting the revenues and restricting each department to a reasonable level of expenditures. The City Administrator stated that each department is preparing a draft budget and as soon as they are received by the City Administrator and compiled into a city-wide operating budget the for City Council review. There is no action required on There being no Date OTHER ting was adjourned at 9:45 MAI SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY MAY 30l 1989 7:00 P.M. I. ROLL CALL @ ADOPTION OF AGENDA II. DIRECTION RE: DANIEL DRIVE TRAIL PROPOSAL III. UPDATE ON SIBLEY HILLS DRIVE) PROJECT 543R IV. STORM WATER UTILITY USER FEE PROPOSAL V. DISCUSSION RE: 1990 BUDGET PROPOSAL VI. OTHER BUSINESS VII. ADJOURNMENT MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: MAY 25l 1989 SUBJECT: SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING/MAY 30v 1989 The Special City Council Meeting was set for the purpose of discussing the 1990 general fund operating budget. The agenda includes an item entitled "Storm Water Utility User Fee Proposal" and "Discussion Regarding 1990 Budget Proposal". The Storm Water Utility User Fee Proposal is a new revenue source that was discussed last fall when the 1989 budget was prepared and adopted and after direction of the City Council, a report has been prepared that addresses this proposed user fee concept. The staff has identified some problems with the proposed financing, mainly the proposed method of assessments, for the Sibley Hills Drive improvement project. Before the staff proceeds further with the project, direction is required on the part of the City Council. Also, an informational meeting is scheduled for June 8 with property owners abutting the location for the proposed Daniel Drive trail, and staff needs a direction by the City Council in preparation for that meeting. It is anticipated that both the Daniel Drive trail and update on the Sibley Hills Drive improvements should take no longer than 40 minutes, allowing for the remainder of the workshop session to be spent on guidelines and discussion regarding the Storm Water Utility User Fee and 1990 budget. DANIEL DRIVE TRAIL PROPOSAL At the May 15 City Council meeting, the Daniel Drive trail proposal was continued to the June 20 City Council meeting. City staff was directed to prepare a new trail alignment from the east side of Daniel Drive and hold an informational meeting to discuss the proposed improvements with the neighborhood. A neighborhood meeting is scheduled for 7:30 p.m. on June S. The Director of Parks & Recreation has received a number of calls from residents in the Northview Meadows Addition, east of Daniel Drive, objecting to the trail being placed adjacent to their property. Ken would like a few minutes to discuss a couple of issues pertaining to the trail alignment and receive proper Council direction prior to the informational meeting. UPDATE ON SIBLEY HILLS DRIVE, PROJECT 543R The Sibley Hills Drive Public Improvement Project, referred to as Project 543R, is one of the more difficult projects the City has had to plan for several years, due to the hodgepodge of existing development along with proposed new development. A public hearing was held, and the project has been ordered in by official City Council action. Our City Engineering Department along with consulting engineers have been preparing the final plans and specifications so the public improvements can proceed during 1989 as originally proposed. However, recently the project was placed on hold due to a legal question regarding the inability to assess certain properties and insure benefit by the public improvement if ever challenged by a group of property owners. At the public hearing the financial plan includes properties that have direct access to roads that are proposed for improvement, as well as properties that do not have direct access but will receive the benefit of the roads at some point in the future when their property is developed. The assessment calls for requalification that was directed by the City Administrator. The City Attorney has raised questions regarding the ability to levy assessments against Properties that do not have direct access or abut the Skyline Road improvements. Also, to compound the issue, a resident has submitted a copy of a restrictive covenants that does not allow lots over subdivisions to be split until the year 2000, which impacts the financial plan that anticipated the collection of special assessments against those properties. In summary, as the staff has reviewed the project in greater detail, it appears that if there is a legal question as to whether the City can assess certain properties, the financial participation on the part of the City could increase substantially. The City Administrator feels that rather than proceed with the project and incur large liability against the street construction, at a latter date, it was better to place the project on temporary hold and discuss the matter with the City Council before proceeding any further. The City Attorney, Director of Public Works and City Administrator will provide a brief update at the meeting on Tuesday, so the Council is aware of the problems the staff has encountered in the past few weeks regarding the proposed improvements. STORM WATER UTILITY USER FEE PROPOSAL The concept of a storm water utility user fee was introduced by staff last year when the 1989 budget document was prepared. The City Administrator was directed to prepare additional information regarding the storm water user fee concept and present a report during 1989. The Director of Public Works, the City's consultant, Jerry Bourdon of the firm Bonestroo, Rosene and Anderlik, Director of Finance and other support staff along with the City Administrator have prepared a report. A copy is attached for your review for consideration by the City Council. The City Attorney has been involved in meetings to insure the legality of implementing this type of user fee. An ordinance was prepared, copies enclosed for your review, which provides the legislative framework to implement the program. As previously stated, the purpose and need for creating a storm water drainage utility was explained in the attached report prepared by Jerry Bourdon with the direction and input of members of the City staff. Included with the information is a mock brochure that can be mailed out to each resident once the billing cycle is established for implementation. 1990 BUDGET PROPOSAL The City.Administrator and Director of Finance are analyzing the amount of property tax and local government aid the City will receive in 1990. The Director of Finance and City Administrator will provide additional comments on Tuesday and also comment on other revenue sources that comprise the remaining 29% of the operating budget. In addition to the projection of revenues, the City Administrator will also provide a draft budget forecast of expenditures which illustrates certain accounts that require adjustments due to inflation or our expanded growth. Following the Tuesday evening discussion and direction from the City Council regarding any adjustment to revenues or expenditures and once the departmental budgets are received on June 6, a draft budget can be compiled during the month of June. For additional information on this item refer to the attached memo. OTHER BUSINESS There are no other items for Other Business at this time. /S/ Thomas L. Hedges City Administrator Report for Storm Water Drainage Utility Plan Eagan, Minnesota April 1989 File No. 49482 Bonestroo NEW Rosene Anderlik & Associates Engineers & Architects St. Paul, Minnesota Sonestroo Rosene U -ILA Anderlik & Associates Engineers & Architects May 17, 1989 Mr. Tom Colbert City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Otto G. Boneumo. P.E. Rooen W. Roane, P.E. Joseph C. Mdedik. P.E. Bradford A, Lemberg. PE, Richard E. Turner, PE. James C. Olson. P.E. Glenn R. Cook. P.E hoE. Tmas . Noyes. P.E. Roden G. Schun¢ht, P.E. Marvin L.Sorvala, PE. Re: Storm Drainage Utility file no. 49482 Dear Tom: Keith A_ Gordon. P.E. Richard W. Fogel. PE. Donald C. Burgardt. P.E. Jerry A. Bourdon, PE. Mark A. Hanlon, P.E. Ted K N.Id, P.E. Micnael T Rautmann. P.E. Robert R. Plellerle, P.E. David O, tnskoa. P.E. Thomas W. Peterson. P.E. Muhael C. Lynch. P.E. James Rr Wand. PE. Kenneth P. Anderson. P.E. faith A. Ofo mann, P.E: Mark R, Rolls, PE. Robert C. Russek. A.LA. Thormas E. Angus, PE. Howard A, Sanford, P.E. Charles A. Erickson Led M. Pa velsky HJllan M, Olson Susan M. Ebeom Mark. A. Sup Enclosed is the Storm Drainage Utility Plan report. This plan outlines the goals, philosophy and approach to establishing a storm drainage utility for the City. We recommend that the City Council review the enclosed information. To proceed with the formation of a storm water utility the advice of legal council is appropriate. We suggest that a public meeting and a mailing brochure be considered as a part of the implementation process. There are facets of this report that will be of interest to various parties. We are available to meet and discuss the details of this report at your convenience. Yours very truly, Jerry Bourdon d: storm f. 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 612-636.4600 CITY OF EAGAN STORM WATER DRAINAGE UTILITY PLAN INTRODUCTION This report discusses the purpose and needs for creating a Storm Water Drainage Utility in Eagan. Included is a proposed budget and a fee schedule for revenue collection. BACKGROUND The purpose of a Storm Water Drainage Utility is to provide dedicated funds necessary to operate, maintain and manage a municipal storm water drainage system. All Minnesota cities, under MSS 444.075, can establish Storm Water Drainage Utilities in a manner similar to Water and Sanitary Sewer Utilities. A Storm Water Drainage Utility allows cities to charge all property an established quarterly charge for storm drainage expenditures. The charges are billed in combination with other utility bills. Similar utilities have recently been established in Roseville, Richfield, Fridley, Shakopee, St. Paul and other communities. Eagan's storm water drainage system consists of an extensive and complicated, system of sewers and drainage facilities. It is estimated that the system comprises: 215 miles of pipes, 3,000 catch basins and drainage structures, 340 ponds, 700 pond inlet and outlet structures, and 20 lift stations. A system of this size and complexity requires active operation and maintenance attention to assure optimum system performance and to protect the City's substantial investment in the basic infrastructure through preventative maintenance designed to prolong the life of the facilities. Traditionally storm drainage systems have not been operated and financed as user benefiting utilities such as a water or sanitary sewer utility. However, a storm water drainage system is similar to a water supply and distribution system or a sanitary sewer collection and treatment system. It has similar operation and maintenance needs and provides a specific user with a benefited service. The basic advantages to operating a storm drainage system as a utility are better operation, maintenance and management of the system. These advantages are derived from the mode of operation and dedicated funded that is provided by the creation of a Storm Water Drainage Utility. BENEFITS OF IMPLEMENTING A STORM WATER DRAINAGE UTILITY Because of the competition for funding among the City's various needs, certain beneficial storm drainage system operation, maintenance and improvement activities are unfunded or under funded. The purpose of creating and d:storm , f;report2b DRAFT implementing a storm water drainage utility in Eagan is to provide for an equitable method of funding needed additional and/or improved storm water drainage services. The proposed additional services will benefit the city by protecting its lakes, ponds and wetlands from the adverse effects of urban storm water runoff and by assuring better performance of the existing system. Eagan's specific additional needs are: * WET LANDS PRESERVATION AND WATER QUALITY CONTROL, * EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL, AND * STORM WATER CONVEYANCE. These needs are described in more detail in the following section. NEEDS WETLANDS PRESERVATION AND WATER QUALITY CONTROL: Eagan has 340 lakes, ponds and wetlands that are valuable natural resources and community assets. Studies show that urban storm water runoff into wetlands can have a detrimental effect upon these resources. Eagan has recognized the need to address this problem and has established- wetlands preservation and storm water runoff quality control as a high priority. Studies have been conducted by the watershed district and Eagan to inventory, classify, set priorities and identify remedies. These studies are in their final stages of development. The final recommendations and conclusions are not yet available. However, the specific initial needs are well enough known that they should be implemented immediately. These needs are: * implementation of the storm water drainage utility, + the implementation of the water quality sampling and monitoring program, and * the implementation of a pond dredging and maintenance program. Soon the specific needs and priorities of water quality improvements will be identified. They will likely include, in addition to the above, public education programs and the construction or implementation of drainage system modifications, such as: * the construction of sedimentation and nutrient traps, * installation of aeration systems, + system modifications to cause pond bypass of first flush runoff, and * system modifications to increased detention time for nutrient removal EROSTON AND SEDIMENTCONTROL: Although the prevention and control of erosion is an integral part of the City's water quality efforts, it is separately addressed in this report because it also causes other benefits and its activities are unique from the water quality program's activities. The primary activities of the prevention and control of erosion and sediment are: * Street sweeping, * Storm sewer pipe and catch basin cleaning, and d:storm , f;report2b DRAFT * Inspections and enforcement of preventative measures. STORM WATER CONVEYANCE: Storm water conveyance needs consist of the essential activities necessary to properly operate and maintain a collection and conveyance system. Routine and systematic operation and maintenance of the system better assures optimum performance of flood protection and water quality control. Some needed operation and maintenance activities are not currently implemented or are only partially implemented due to funding constraints. Specific unfunded or underfunded needs within this category include: * Renewal and replacement: This need consists of repairs and replacement of components of the existing system as they wear out or require rehabilitation. (The electrical and mechanical components of the system's lift stations are a primary' example of this need.) * System improvements: This need consists of the construction of additional drainage facilities not previously contemplated under the trunk or lateral system programs. Improvements such as increased discharge capacities of piping systems due to unforeseen events such as higher density development or new design criteria for storm drainage and rater quality are examples tf this need. * Operation and maintenance: This need consists of a more systematic and routine program of operation and maintenance activities to assure optimum system performance and to protect the City's investment in the system by performing cost effective preventative maintenance. Examples of this need are: routine pipe televising, cleaning and pond inlet and outlet structure maintenance. d:storm , f;report2b DRAFT COSTS OF THE STORM WATER UTILITY Some of the activities of the storm water utility are currently financed through the general fund. Although all of the activities of the Storm Water Utility could be financed by the Utility's billings, the immediate concern is the implementation of a storm water utility to finance the currently unfunded and underfunded needs for wetlands preservation and water quality control and more intensive operation and maintenance programs. Therefore the proposed initial scope of funding through the Utility's billings incorporates to the following activities. TABLE 1 PROPOSED UTILITY BUDGET FOR 1990 ------ee-maaae-asae�sae Gun Club Water shed District Costs ------ $ 20,000 Water Quality Improvement Planning and Implementation -------------------------- 30,000 Sampling and Monitoring ----------------- 15,000 Pond Dredging --------------------------- 25,000 Street Sweeping ------------------------- 75,000 Pond Inlet and Outlet Cleaning ---------- 50,000 Renewal & Replacement -------------------- 130,000 System Improvements ---------------------- 50,000 TOTAL 395,000 PROPOSED CHARGES The charges of the storm water drainage utility are based upon the user's responsible share of the cost of the service. This is an equitable and practical means of financing the services of the Utility. The basic equation for setting the utility charges is: Total annual revenues needed ------------------------------ - Annual Fee Unit Rate Total runoff d:storm , f;report2b DRAFT To most equitably spread the Utility's costs among the users, the following criteria was used as the basis for the hydrologic aspects of the fee structure model. + model storm - 5 frequency, 24 hour event (3.5 " rain as per soil conservation service charts) * hydrologic soil type - Type B * Typical residential unit: 0.5 acres, 26Z impermeable surface. As a practical matter all residential properties will be charged the same based upon the amount of runoff from a typical residential unit for the model criteria previously presented. This runoff amount is defined as the "Residential Equivalent Factor" (REF) and is the basic unit of the fee structure. The rate charged to a non residential property is based upon the number of Residential Equivalent Factors of the property (how many times more run off is caused by the non residential property than is caused by standard residential property). The non residential properties were evaluated individually to determine the number of residential equivalents of the property. The following summarizes the residential equivalent inventory of the city. TABLE 2 RESIDENTIAL EQUIVALENT DETERMINATION SUMMARY, TOTAL RESIDENTIAL LAND USE EQUIVALENTS ----------- ----------- Residential property (low density) 11,153 Apartments/Condominiums 1,508 Schools 598 Commercial/Industrial 8,253 Churches 243 Golf courses/cemeteries 296 TOTAL 22,051 d:storm , f;report2b DRAFT The following equation presents the results of the fee calculation for the Residential Equivalent Factor for the Eagan Storm Drainage Utility. TOTAL ANNUAL UTILITY EXPENSES ----------------------------- TOTAL NUMBER OF RES. UNITS $395,000 22,051 FEE FOR EAGAN REF $ 17.91 < annual cost REF _ $ 4.48 < quarterly bill The following table presents a summary of the typical (average) annual rates proposed to be charged for each category of land use. TABLE 3 LAND USE ---------------------- REF ----- QUARTERLY -------------- RATE Residential 1.00 $ 4.48 / residence Apartments 3.64 16.31 / acre Schools 2.14 9.58 / acre Churches 2.44 10.92 / acre Commercial/Industrial 4.79 21.49 / acre Golf courses 1.14 5.10 / acre CONCLUSION The creation of a storm water utility is an equitable and practical way to finance the unfunded needs of wetlands protection and additional maintenance and operation activities. The recommended actions necessary to proceed with implementation of the Storm Water Drainage Utility are: 1. Set a date for a public meeting, 2. Authorize the preparation and mailing of a brochure on the utility, and 3. Set a Council meeting date to considering adoption of the Utility Ordinance. The attached documents are included as appendices to this report. 1. A sample brochure which could be distributed to the public. 2. A draft of the proposed ordinance prepared by the City attorney. 3. A list of non residential property and their REF's. d:storm , f;report2b DRAFT EDWARD B. McMENOMY LARRS S_ SEVERSON• JAMES F. SHELDON J. PATRICK W'IU'OX• TERENC'E P. DURKIN MICHAEL(;. IM) IGHERTY REID J. HANSEN MICHAEL E.MOLENDA— •ALSO LIC'4:NSF.0 I\ IOWA "ALSO LICF.NSEP IN WI.S( ONSIN tALSU LR ENSKII 16 NEHRASKA May 1, 1989 Tom Hedges City Administrator City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road P.O. Box 21199 Eagan, MN 55121 McMENOMY & SEVERSON A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION ATTORNEYS AT LAW OWREPLY TO: 73M WEST MTTH STREET P.O. BOX 243M APPLE VALLEY, MINNESOTA M124 TELEFAX NUMBER 432-3160 (612) 43531N ❑ REPLY TO: M430 SOUTH ROBERT TRAIL ROSEMOUN . MINNESOTA MM (612).2111M PAUL J. STIRR PATRICK W. STEW'ART KEVIN P. CARROLL KENNETH R. HALL SCOTT D. JOHNSTONt JOSEPH P. EARLES MARLL. GOLIKE MICHAEL C. WCANN OF CUUN44:L: LEONARD F. HIRNAT JOHN E. VUKELICH RE: An Ordinance Adding Sections to the City Code of the City of Eagan Establishing a Storm Water Drainage Utility and a Storm Water Drainage Improvement District Our File No.: 206-5376 Dear Tom: I enclose for your review a proposed ordinance establishing a storm water utility and storm water tax improvement district for the City of Eagan. Statutory authority for the utility and storm water tax improvement district are contained in Minnesota Statutes 5444.1075 through S444.21. Under the terms of the statutes, the City is permitted to adopt an ordinance which allow it to build, construct, reconstruct, repair, enlarge, improve or in any other manner obtain appropriate storm sewer service. (Minnesota Statutes 5444.075, Subd. 1(a)) In addition, pay for the construction, reconstruction, repair, enlargement, improvement or other obtainment and the maintenance, operation, and use of the facilities, the governing body or the municipality may impose just and equitable charges for the use and for the availability of the facilities and for connections with them... (5444.075, Subd. 3) The charges made for the service directly rendered shall be as nearly as possible proportionate to the cost of furnishing the service and sewer charges may be fixed on the basis of water consumed, or by reference to a reasonable classification of the types of premises to which service is furnished, or by reference to the quantity, pollution qualities and difficulty of disposal of sewage and storm water produced, or on any other equitable basis, including, but without limitation, any combination of those referred to above. (S444.075, Subd. 3) McMENOMY & SEVERSON A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION ATTORNEYS AT LAW Tom Hedges May 1, 1989 Page Two In determining the reasonableness of the charges to be imposed, the governing body may give consideration to all costs of establishment, operation, maintenance, depreciation and necessary replacements to the system, and of improvements, enlargements, and extensions necessary to serve adequately the territory of the municipality... (5444.075, Subd. 3) It is my understanding that the City Engineer's office and consulting engineering people have been working up the appropriate numbers and proposed charges for the Council to review. The responsibility and obligation of the City Council is to impose just and equitable charges. The utility portion of the storm sewer drainage ordinance is similar to the City's water utility. The storm sewer would be billed along with the water bills. The tax improvement district is being set up at this time to coordinate this with the utility. Minnesota Statutes S444.17 provides that the Council may by ordinance adopted by two-thirds vote of all of its members establish within in its corporate limits a storm sewer improvement tax district. A public hearing must be held and notice of the public bearing must be published for two successive weeks in the official newspaper of the municipality with the last notice to be at least seven days prior to the date of the bearing. Once adopted, the ordinance shall be filed with the County Auditor and the County Recorder. While no improvement for which a tax would be levied is contemplated at this time, the enabling statutory legislation is less than clear on this matter. Minnesota Statutes 5444.17, requires a two-thirds vote, notice and hearing to establish a tan district.,,The statute does not make clear reference to whether that is also required for utility. Under the circumstances, our advice is that the City would be better off safe than sorry under this scenario. Any challenge to the storm water utility charge would necessarily center on the method of its calculation and the method of City adoption of the utility. While on its face it does not appear that the tax district and the utility are directly connected, at least statutorily, that statute is unclear. It is therefore our advice that the district for tax improvement and the storm water utility be adopted at this time. However, it is not intended that any tax be levied at this time or any improvement for which a tax would be levied would be constructed at this time. „' c. . 'j `1.. McMENOMY & SEVERSON A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION ATTORNEYS AT LAW Tom Hedges May 1, 1989 Page Three Please contact me if you have any questions. Very truly yours, McMENOMY & SEVERSON, P.A. James F. Sheldon J FS/dj k Enclosure cc: Tom Colbert Gene VanOverbeke CITY OF EAGAN ORDINANCE NO. 3.10 AND 3.11 AN ORDINANCE ADDING SECTIONS 3.10 and 3.11 TO THE CITY CODE OF THE CITY OF EAGAN ESTABLISHING A STORM WATER DRAINAGE UTILITY AND A STORM WATER DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT. The City Council of the City of Eagan does hereby ordain: 1. That the City Code of the City of Eagan is amended by adding a new section 3.10 and 3.11 to the City Code of the City of Eagan, to read as follows: Sec. 3.10. Storm Water Drainage Utility. Subd. A. Storm Water Drainage Utility Established. The municipal storm sewer system shall be operated as a public utility pursuafit to Minnesota Statutes §444.075, et seq., from which revenues will be derived subject to the provisions of this Chapter and Minnesota Statutes. The storm water drainage utility will be a part of the City of Eagan Public Works Department and under the administration of the Public Works Director. Subd. B. Storm Water Drainage Fees. Storm water drainage fees for parcels of land shall be determined by resolution of the City Council of the City of Eagan and shall be just and equitable. Subd. C. Exemptions. The following lands are exempt from storm water drainage fees: 1. Public rights-of-way. 2. Vacant, unimproved land with ground cover. 3. City of Eagan owned property. Subd. D. Billings. Bills for charges for the use and service of the storm drainage system shall be made out by the Finance Department in accordance with the usual and customary practice. All bills shall be payable at the office of the City Finance Director. Subd. E. Delinquency and Collection. The charges shall be delinquent if unpaid at the close of business on the due date shown on the billing. A penalty of 108 thereof shall be added, and become a part of, all delinquent charge's. Payment for the service and charges shall be the primary responsibility of the owner of the premises served and shall be billed to the owner unless otherwise contracted for and authorized in writing by the owner and such other person, and consented to by the. City of Eagan. The City may collect the same in a civil action. Each charge is made a lien on the premises served. Any charge more than 45 days past due may, when authorized by resolution of the Council, be certified by the City Clerk -Treasurer, to the County Auditor and in so certifying shall specify the amount thereof together with a certification charge (preparation for certification of taxes of delinquent accounts). Such action may be optional or subsequent to taking legal action to collect delinquent accounts. Subd. G. Revenues. All revenues derived from those rates and charges shall be credited to the storm water drainage utility f un'd. Sec. 3.11. Storm Water Improvement District. The entire geographical City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, is hereby established as the Eagan Storm Water Tax Improvement District. This ordinance shall be in force and effect from and after its passage and publication according to law. ATTEST: By: Its: Clerk Date Ordinance Adopted: CITY OF EAGAN City Council By: Its: Mayor Date Ordinance Published in the Legal Newspaper: -2- How Win My Money be Used? wM lands Pmervedw Ord ww oUOwYCw*d •�an�oaps.,rica� • swa Water sawpft •sc&mcat"nPo" 23 % 32 % Eke" M4 Gmtsol • saau s.ea,s °so=cbwft .,upccfim nd Harot=M" I I Get The Facts On........ W0 �Z �a a� wWF o C rl H Q I 1°rt'iiNd$e pdza QON $t® m j a N U¢ ®rainage Utility I ! I OEr 7HE FACTS OH I I II I'II�.II Ir STORM DRAINAGE UTILITY g 104 l!!Ib': Il Eagan plans to use a'nW G I technique to pay for file costs tJ of managing storinwater s 0 6 I runoff._ A SWMNM er Dralnage Utlllly Thlsieaflet Is prepared to Introduce you to tits new utilityand answer i your questions. I Why Must We Manage Storm Drainage? Storm drainage lac0ides must he bu ft maintained and renewed to control runnifin order Inc. e PrMed people and prop" • Provide forsahtraWe ftw • Rhes ce the envisomme d • Improve psepatyalaea • 1tedueaimmraaoerisb ft is estimated that Baffta%stamewatW dranagoryucincomprimot 215 ... miles of pipe$ 3,000 ... eauldm us and manholes 340 ... pool 700 .. pond structures 20 ... liRstations A system of this sole and oomphn q w quires active operation and maintenance to assure optimum "em perfasmance and to prolong the Lk of the f cAides. Vllhat Is a Storm Drainage Utility? A storm drainage utility provides a service similar to the water and sanitary sewer O d O 'udHdm like the sanitary sewer utility fee, the Storm Drainage Utility fee is band 0n the amount of urates chat L otisehetged roto the gstea. For instaoM a parking lot creates more nmoff than a grass area of the same sere, so it pays a higher rate. This way, the citizens of Eagan will pay for the management of stormwater in proportion to the amount of water they 'contribute.' a fee NOT based on the vaWe of their prop" Why Is a Utility Needed? itagao is facing additional needs to meet the faawiug stormwater ImMu went • Vetiands praeervatioa anal oder quail4 centrd. • 1;80511011 and sesi mmbdm control, and • Operation and Maintenance of Stasstmwfacumiies These additional services will benefit the city by protecting its lakes, ponds, and wettaods from the adverse effects of urban siormwater ru mA Comequentlys the existing draioapfflood control sys- tem will perform better Costs for these additional activities. com- bined with the money spent for on-going storm drainage maintenance each year, represent a major expenditure. Today, most stormwater costs are paid by using property taxes. Once implemented, the Stora Drainage UtWty will tweet these rising costs in a fair and equitable men- mer. without additional burden b the property lax rolls. What is My share of the Costs? A SWrmwafor Drai Utility hill far each pro propeef<y is based upon the relative l amount of rdneff a properly dl0chargea talo the system. More inter sh* developed property such as com- mercial or industrial property generate mac runoff and thereinto para higher rats" The gowIe*dued fain 1959 fora Siople Family Homer;, Duplexes and Toomhouses is $ The average quarterly ffm in 1989 for various types of other propertle s ave .shownbelaw.. • Apartmetu and Cbndas $116311mve • Schook ..........S 9d51111ese • Churches .........$10.9210180 • Golf courses ...... SMOMM • cemmercial/I11dtutrid .$ 2LAIMIneae Your storm dr dsW fee vd0 be ineioded on the swavater and sewer hill y011 e eceive each quarter. • Fees for each type of these properties were determined on a individual basis. The rates shown are average fees. MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCILMEMB ERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: MAY 25, 1989 SUBJECT: 1990 GENERAL FUND BUDGET Due to the uncertainties required of this year's new regulations to conform to truth and taxation legislation, the 1990 budget process began one month earlier than previous years. Department heads were given direction in late April to prepare their departmental budgets during the month of May to be reviewed by the City Administrator.in June. It is expected that total revenues will increase very slightly in 1990. The levy limit base which consists of the allowable tax levy (non -debt service) and local government aid is estimated to be as follows compared to 1989: Increase 1989 19901 Amount Percentage Tax Levy Limit $6,863,370 (87.28) $7,484,422 (87.98) $621,352 9.18 Local Governmental 1.007.917 (12.88) 1.028.075 (12.18) 20.158 2_08 Aid Levy Limit Base 57.871.287(100.08) 58.512.797(100.08) 641 510 8.28 Allocated in Budget: General Fund $7,284,1452 $7,807,847 $523,702 7.28 Major Street Fund 402,625 442,800 40,175 10.08 Equipment Revolving 184.520 262.150 77.630 42.18 Fund $7.871.290 ,$8.512.797 641 510 8.28 Calculations are based on conversation with LMC -contained in tax bill not• signed by Governor Perpich. 2The general fund also utilized the $205,700 special levy making a total of $7,489,845 available from taxes and local government aid. The actual tax related revenue increase from 1989 to 1990 is therefore $7,807,847 - $7,489,845 or $318,002 as opposed to the $523,702 shown. Property taxes and local government aid represent 71.48 of the 1989 General Fund Budget of $10,495,000. ($7,489,845 - $10,495,000 — 71.48) Without significant new revenue sources the 71.48 will probably increase in 1990 as development related revenue projections are reduced. Total 1989 general fund personal services costs are budgeted $6,804,650, a 58 increase in that appropriation to cover step increases, cost of living increases and full year costs for 1989 new employees would require $340,233. Based upon the new program for capital equipment acquisition implemented during the 1989 budget process, the following amounts are available for the purchase of major equipment outside general fund revenues: 1989 Equipment Revolving Fund Tax Levy $184,520 1990 Equipment Certificates 200.000 Total 384 520 You will note that this money is outside the general fund, however it requires a portion of the levy limit as a funding source. In 1989 $400,000 of equipment certificates will be sold as part of this same program. General fund capital equipment purchases in 1989 were financed as follows: Equipment Certificates General Fund Revenues Total $ 400,000 708.270 51.108.270 Approximately $147,200 of the $708,270 could have been purchased through the new revolving equipment fund if revenues had been available. The above table excludes the $75,000 budgeted in the Storm Water Drainage Utility Fund for the street sweeper and the $147,000 for the purchase of recycling containers financed by the County grant. The need for additional revenue sources, such as the storm sewer utility fund that can generate a significant dollar amount, is essential to ensure continued government services at today's level. The situation for 1990 is compared by many metropolitan managers as similar to the 1981 calendar year when the legislature cut local government aid after budgets were adopted by municipalities. Both new and increased user fees for a number of local services should also be considered. All fees including licenses and permits, recreation fees and other functions will need to be analyzed. It is anticipated that there will be no new general fund personnel proposed for 1990 or other large expenditure increases unless additional revenue sources can be utilized. Each department head is reviewing their specific delivery of services and will present 1) a recommendation for the 1990 operating budget and 2) an explanation of personnel and other capital expenses that would have been requested to meet the increase in demand for basic services due to the continued growth. City Council direction regarding both revenue sources and expenditures would be appreciated prior to the City Administrator developing the final budget during June and July. The schedule for truth and taxation is as follows: Truth in Taxation Dates August 1 Revenue Department certification of levy limit, September 15, 1989 Proposed levy certified to Dakota County November 10, 1989 Notice mailed to taxpayers (Not parcel specific - noting change in levy and population) November 10 -December 20,1989 Budget hearing is held - No published notice required unless hearing is recessed to another time. December 28, 1989 Final certification of levy (5 working days after December 20) 'Per conversation with LMC - contained in tax bill not signed by Governor Perpich. /S/ Thomas L. Hedges City Administrator MINUTES OF...V:::6KCi�i::'M T1NG OF THE£. ....... ............................ MA10"UTY COUNCT-]y; .:t:;)Iay 30, 19891:;::;;:;;. A special City Council ftl a6 :iig:ioas held on May 30, 1989 in the Eagan Municipal Center Building. Those present were Mayor Ellison and City Council- members Egan, Gustafson, McCrea and Wachter. Also present were Director of Parks and Recreation Vraa, Director of Public Works Colbert, Director of Community Development Runkle, City Attorney Sheldon and City Administrator Hedges. DANIEL' b.' IVE .'-tl 1YL` PK-O'FDSAL Director of Parks and Recre4tt,ion Vraa;.presented revised drawings for the proposed trail improvements on Dane::. Drive;:;: He stated that a neighborhood meeting is scheduled for 7:30 p bf ;`nri' 31ihii: $;;nnd requested direction on the matter. Steve Sullivan, Parks`and''E(ecreaCion Department Planner, presented a drawing that illustrates the setback requirements for both east and west trail location options. He stated that the boulevard narrows from Braddock Trail west to a two foot to two and one-half foot setback if the trail is designed as an eight foot bituminous width. After further review, it was determined by the City Council that a bituminous trail:.:is more advantageous to both pedestrian and bicycle movement than a five foot::*f4*.walk. Mayor Ellison stated that no formal action is required to Daniel Drive':-Ud:t:::::::::.T. he item will reappear on the June 20, 1989 City Council agenda. SIBLEY HILLS:i:3iRIVK: 'i:YRddECT 543R City Administrator ".41"3s stated that the Sibley Hills Drive public improvement project referenced'as 543R has been placed on hold due to a legal question regarding the inability to assess certain properties and insure benefit for the public improvements if ever challenged by a group of property owners. City Attorney Sheldon stated that there is a legal question regarding the City's ability to levy assessments agalne:t;:.pzgpett£es.;:Ghat did not have direct access or abut the Skyline Road improveiit %'i : ::::DiYpCCOL:: Public Works Colbert reviewed the proposed project and identified sevezai parcels along Lone Oak Road that were proposed to be assessed for "indirect"::binefiG:::essociated with the street and storm sewer improvements. He further stated thafi::�ll properties will be reviewed by an appraiser to verify the proposed a:ssessmeuPI: to sustain any challenge that could be raised against the City for the improdeinents. City Council members questioned whether a new public hearing would be required if the assessments changed for the proposed improvements. City Attorney Sheldon stated that the scope of a .p.roject could not be increased without a new public hearing, however, the eliip"�--iiation of certain parcels or a decrease in the project's size does not require`'a new public hearing. It was suggested that five (5) parcels :::2eiisp:;ACiCg:::? deleted from the project and that this action be placed on the::JLltie::�:::;i9a4:'C:£:ky Council meeting as a consent item for official Council action. City Administrator Hoa.a stated that:::the concept of a storm water utility user fee was introduced by..staff during..preparation of the 1989 budget document. He further commented Cast staff was::4 rected to prepare additional information regarding a storm watdt...9ex... ......! ,present a report during 1989. Director of Public Works Colbert prov:de4T.::$itk&ound on the storm water drainage utility stating that a user fee would 'Of6vide dedicated funds necessary to operate, maintain and manage a municipal storm water drainage system. City Attorney Sheldon stated that all Minnesota cities, under MSS 444.075 can establish storm water drainage utilities in a manner similar to water and sanitary sewer utilities. Public;:Ad:-V 9>:.IirttlExe-,tnt:;;Colbert stated that a number of cities have established simi:ia'isfc9::::F!ich are used for wetlands preservation and water quality control,:::%rosion'*hd sedimentation control and storm water conveyance. He reviewed a proposed utility budget for 1990 explaining various costs proposed for eeeii, of tl'o::three (3) services addressed in the study. The Director of Public:::Wrk4!.$tRte3 that as an example the pond dredging and monitoring would be?-Y,Vokises'C'0,13e:red under wetlands, preservation and quality control while pond inlet and outlet cleaning and street sweeping is ., considered erosion and sedimentation control and renewal and replacement are system improvements to be included under storm water conveyance. He further explained the equation and method in which the calculation was established for the storm drainage utility. City.Councilmember McCrea suggested that a new land use category should be cons idereQ:.mt:quadraminium units stating that the single family residential rate for allriFitl aPBrtmQnt dwelling units could create an inequity. After further discussion it`was.:.:ztermined that a new category be established for dwelling units in greater numb'e;,.:than the traditional duplex but less than an apartment complex. City Councilmembers iuA23e::-'suggestions regarding the necessity to provide good publicity about C}e" proposed storm drainage utility fee and suggested that the sample brochure be rewritten. The staff was directed to proceed ahead with preparation of an ordinance, a revised list of rates and timetable for the public hearing and eventual implementation of the storm water user fees. There was no formal action taken on this item. 1990''''SiJDf:tT"PROM....... City Administrator Hedges p;''sented:::financial information on the forecast of revenues the City will recei�r8 for :its 1990 operating budget. He stated that the actual property tax revenue iAic:rease from 1989 to 1990 is estimated at $318,000. He stated that with a small increase in property tax and a minimum increase in local government aide estimated at $20,000 it will be difficult for the City to meet cost of living and inflationary adjustments without the addition of new revenue sources in 1990. The City Administrator did explain that certain expenditures such as computeY:::9quipment acquisition in 1989 will not be forecast as high in 1990 which wi . provide additional revenue sources available for the general.;;Eund.;:.:.;Howe.Ver,,..it is the suggestion of both the Director of Finance and the Cit .:.A4*ih :Siv:raet ::;that if other revenue sources are to be increased, that increas s'not'be'­'made''to those categories that are development related such as building permits. H6:::stated that it will more than likely be the recommendation of staff that buildi. 4g:permits be reduced by ti small amount each year so the general fund budget is not reliant on a source of funding that will be much less as development decreases during the 1990's. City CouncilmembersSgzesse'a'cutfYl about their restrictions and the ability to raise additional';:;property tax tensed by the Omnibus Tax Bill. City Administrator Hedges further..$tated that the need for increased expenditures in a growth related organization ::. s extreme.ky difficult given the type of restriction that have been placed 'ad::Ch4::City.:::liji: 3% levy limit and essentially no increase in local government aid''i{jg:;eI:�+j'Administrator was commended for the approach used in preparing this year's operating budget by forecasting the revenues and restricting each department to a reasonable level of expenditures. The City Administrator stated that each department is preparing a draft budget and as soon as they are received by the City Administrator and compiled into a city-wide operating budget the for City Council review. There is no action required on There being no Date OTHER ting was adjourned at 9:45 MAI